Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Bear Creek, Dundalk, MD, 5201-5204 [2012-2283]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 22 / Thursday, February 2, 2012 / Proposed Rules tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD. (4) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2007–23–18, amendment 39–15266 (72 FR 65655, November 23, 2007), are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding requirements of paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this AD. environmental assessment by March 5, 2012. ADDRESSES: Submit electronic comments to http:// www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA–305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Celeste Johnston, Center for Food Safety (t) Related Information and Applied Nutrition (HFS–265), Food and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint (1) For more information about this AD, Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740– contact Nathan Weigand, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, 3835, (240) 402–1282. FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 98057–3356; phone: (425) 917–6428; fax: (section 409(b)(5) (21 U.S.C. 348(b)(5))), (425) 917–6590; email: notice is given that a food additive nathan.p.weigand@faa.gov. petition (FAP 2A4785) has been filed by (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Ecolab, Inc., 370 North Wabasha St., St. Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Paul, MN 55102–1390. The petition Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, proposes to amend the food additive Seattle, Washington 98124–2207; telephone regulations in 21 CFR part 173, (206) 544–5000, extension 1; fax (206) 766– Secondary Direct Food Additives 5680; email me.boecom@boeing.com; Internet Permitted in Food for Human https://www.myboeingfleet.com. Consumption, to provide for the safe use (3) You may review copies of the of sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonate as referenced service information at the FAA, an antimicrobial agent in produce wash Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. For water without the requirement of a information on the availability of this potable water rinse. material at the FAA, call (425) 227–1221. The potential environmental impact of this petition is being reviewed. To Issued in Renton, Washington, on January encourage public participation 12, 2012. consistent with regulations issued under Michael J. Kaszycki, the National Environmental Policy Act Acting Manager, Transport Airplane (40 CFR 1501.4(b)), the Agency is Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. placing the environmental assessment [FR Doc. 2012–2301 Filed 2–1–12; 8:45 am] submitted with the petition that is the BILLING CODE 4910–13–P subject of this notice on public display at the Division of Dockets Management (see DATES and ADDRESSES) for public DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND review and comment. HUMAN SERVICES Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management (see Food and Drug Administration ADDRESSES) either electronic or written comments regarding this document. It is 21 CFR Part 173 only necessary to send one set of [Docket No. FDA–2011–F–0853] comments. Identify comments with the docket number found in brackets in the Ecolab, Inc.; Filing of Food Additive heading of this document. Received Petition comments may be seen in the Division AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. HHS. FDA will also place on public display ACTION: Notice of petition. any amendments to, or comments on, SUMMARY: The Food and Drug the petitioner’s environmental Administration (FDA) is announcing assessment without further that Ecolab, Inc., has filed a petition announcement in the Federal Register. proposing that the food additive If, based on its review, the Agency finds regulations be amended to provide for that an environmental impact statement the safe use of sodium is not required, and this petition results dodecylbenzenesulfonate as an in a regulation, the notice of availability antimicrobial agent in produce wash of the Agency’s finding of no significant water without the requirement of a impact and the evidence supporting that potable water rinse. finding will be published with the regulation in the Federal Register in DATES: Submit either electronic or accordance with 21 CFR 25.51(b). written comments on the petitioner’s VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:09 Feb 01, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 5201 Dated: January 19, 2012. Dennis M. Keefe, Director, Office of Food Additive Safety, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. [FR Doc. 2012–2279 Filed 2–1–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160–01–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG–2011–1062] RIN 1625–AA09 Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Bear Creek, Dundalk, MD Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: ACTION: The Coast Guard proposes to change the regulation governing the operation of the Baltimore County highway bridge at Wise Avenue across Bear Creek, mile 3.4, between Dundalk and Sparrows Point, MD. The proposed change will alter the four hour advance notice requirement for a bridge opening to a 48-hour advance notice requirement for a bridge opening. Due to the lack of openings, it is not necessary to have personnel available on a four-hour notice. The operating regulation change will allow Baltimore County to more efficiently utilize the maintenance personnel who are responsible for the operation of the bridge. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before April 2, 2012. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG– 2011–1062 using any one of the following methods: (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. (2) Fax: (202) 493–2251. (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590– 0001. (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is (202) 366–9329. To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods. See the ‘‘Public Participation and Request for Comments’’ portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\02FEP1.SGM 02FEP1 5202 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 22 / Thursday, February 2, 2012 / Proposed Rules below for instructions on submitting comments. If you have questions on this proposed rule, call or e-mail Lindsey Middleton, Fifth Coast Guard District Bridge Administration Division, Coast Guard; telephone (757) 398–6629, email Lindsey.R.Middleton@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone (202) 366–9826. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Public Participation and Request for Comments We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted, without change to http://www. regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Submitting Comments If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG–2011–1062), indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online (http://www.regulations. gov), or by fax, mail or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online via http://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission. To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov, click on the ‘‘submit a comment’’ box, which will then become highlighted in blue. In the ‘‘Document Type’’ drop down menu select ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ and insert ‘‘USCG–2011–1062’’ in the ‘‘Keyword’’ box. Click ‘‘Search’’ then click on the balloon shape in the ‘‘Actions’’ column. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would like to know that they VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:24 Feb 01, 2012 Jkt 226001 reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period and may change the rule based on your comments. Viewing Comments and Documents To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, click on the ‘‘read comments’’ box, which will then become highlighted in blue. In the ‘‘Keyword’’ box insert ‘‘USCG–2011– 1062’’ and click ‘‘Search.’’ Click the ‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ in the ‘‘Actions’’ column. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12–140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket Management Facility. Privacy Act Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316). Public Meeting We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a request for one using one of the four methods specified under ADDRESSES. Please explain why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register. Basis and Purpose Baltimore County has requested a change to the operating regulation for the bascule Baltimore County highway bridge at Wise Avenue across Bear Creek, mile 3.4 between Dundalk and Sparrows Point, MD. This change would require the draw to open if at least 48 hours of notice is given. Draw tender logs provided by the County show that this bridge has had fewer than 12 openings every year since 2008. The majority of these openings have been to test or maintain the bridge. When a request is made, the County contacts the ‘‘on call’’ maintenance contractor who relays the message to their electrical subcontractor. This PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 subcontractor is the person that operates the bridge. The qualified subcontractors are normally at other work locations making it difficult, logistically, to arrive at the bridge site for an opening within the current four hour notice period. This change would allow the County to utilize its maintenance personnel more efficiently. The current regulation, set out in 33 CFR 117.543(b), requires the bridge to open if at least four hours of notice is given. Section 117.543 was last amended on October 20, 2011, which was to remove a bridge operating regulation for a bridge that has been replaced with a fixed bridge. Discussion of Proposed Rule The Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR 117.543(b) for the Baltimore County highway bridge, mile 3.4 at Wise Avenue between Dundalk and Sparrows Point, MD. This regulation would change to allow the bridge to open on signal if at least 48 hours notice is given. There is no alternate route. The majority of vessels that use this waterway are recreational boats that can travel through the bridge without requiring a bridge opening; the vertical clearance of the bridge in the closed position is 14 feet at mean high water. For those vessels, this regulation will not impact their waterway transit because they are able to transit through the bridge at any time. There are few larger vessels that may require a bridge opening. This regulation change should not have an adverse effect on their transit because the bridge is able to open if the mariner provides at least 48 hours of advance notice. Regulatory Analyses We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders. Regulatory Planning and Review This proposed rule is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Order 12866 or under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. The proposed change is expected to have only a minimal impact on maritime traffic transiting the bridge. Most mariners utilizing this waterway E:\FR\FM\02FEP1.SGM 02FEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 22 / Thursday, February 2, 2012 / Proposed Rules do not require a bridge opening. The few mariners that may need a bridge opening can plan their trips in accordance with the 48-hour scheduled advance notice requirement for a bridge opening to minimize delay. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels requiring a bridge opening. This action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because the rule adds minimal restrictions to the movement of navigation by requiring mariners to give at least 48 hours of notice when requesting a bridge opening. The majority of vessels utilizing this waterway is shorter than 14 feet and is able to safely transit under the bridge in the closed position at any time. If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact Lindsey Middleton, Bridge Management Specialist, Fifth Coast Guard District, (757) 398–6629 or Lindsey.R. Middleton@uscg.mil. The Coast Guard VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:24 Feb 01, 2012 Jkt 226001 will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. Collection of Information This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520.). Federalism A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This proposed rule would not cause a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. Civil Justice Reform This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Protection of Children We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 5203 Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Energy Effects We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ‘‘significant energy action’’ under that order because it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. Technical Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023–01, and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment because it simply promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for E:\FR\FM\02FEP1.SGM 02FEP1 5204 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 22 / Thursday, February 2, 2012 / Proposed Rules drawbridges. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 Bridges. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows: PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Revise § 117.543(b) to read as follows: § 117.543 Bear Creek * * * * * (b) The draw of the Baltimore County highway bridge, mile 3.4 at Wise Avenue between Dundalk and Sparrows Point, shall open on signal if at least 48 hours of notice is given. Dated: January 19, 2012. William D. Lee, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. 2012–2283 Filed 2–1–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service 36 CFR Part 242 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 100 [Docket No. FWS–R7–SM–2011–0015; FXFR13350700640L6–123–FF07J00000] RIN 1018–AX64 Subsistence Management Regulations for Public Lands in Alaska—2013–14 and 2014–15 Subsistence Taking of Fish and Shellfish Regulations Forest Service, Agriculture; Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Proposed rule. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS AGENCY: This proposed rule would establish regulations for fish and shellfish seasons, harvest limits, methods and means related to taking of fish and shellfish for subsistence uses during the 2013–2014 and 2014–2015 regulatory years. The Federal SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:24 Feb 01, 2012 Jkt 226001 Subsistence Board (Board) is on a schedule of completing the process of revising subsistence taking of fish and shellfish regulations in odd-numbered years and subsistence taking of wildlife regulations in even-numbered years; public proposal and review processes take place during the preceding year. The Board also addresses customary and traditional use determinations during the applicable cycle. When final, the resulting rulemaking will replace the existing subsistence fish and shellfish taking regulations. This proposed rule would also amend the general regulations on subsistence taking of fish and wildlife. DATES: Public meetings: The Subsistence Regional Advisory Councils (Councils) will hold public meetings to receive comments and make proposals to change this proposed rule on several dates between February 7 and March 23, 2012, and then hold another round of public meetings to discuss and receive comments on the proposals, and make recommendations on the proposals to the Board, on several dates between August 14 and October 17, 2012. The Board will discuss and evaluate proposed regulatory changes during a public meeting in Anchorage, AK, in January 2013. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for specific information on dates and locations of the public meetings. Public comments: Comments and proposals to change this proposed rule must be received or postmarked by March 30, 2012. ADDRESSES: Public meetings: The Federal Subsistence Board and the Subsistence Regional Advisory Councils’ public meetings will be held at various locations in Alaska. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for specific information on dates and locations of the public meetings. Public comments: You may submit comments by one of the following methods: • Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov and search for FWS–R7–SM–2011–0015, which is the docket number for this rulemaking. • By hard copy: U.S. mail or handdelivery to: USFWS, Office of Subsistence Management, 1011 East Tudor Road MS 121, Attn: Theo Matuskowitz, Anchorage, AK 99503– 6199, or hand delivery to the Designated Federal Official attending any of the Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory Council public meetings. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for additional information on locations of the public meetings. PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 We will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see the Public Review Process section below for more information). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chair, Federal Subsistence Board, c/o U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Attention: Peter J. Probasco, Office of Subsistence Management; (907) 786– 3888 or subsistence@fws.gov. For questions specific to National Forest System lands, contact Steve Kessler, Regional Subsistence Program Leader, USDA, Forest Service, Alaska Region; (907) 743–9461 or skessler@fs.fed.us. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Under Title VIII of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) (16 U.S.C. 3111–3126), the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture (Secretaries) jointly implement the Federal Subsistence Management Program. This program provides a preference for take of fish and wildlife resources for subsistence uses on Federal public lands and waters in Alaska. The Secretaries published temporary regulations to carry out this program in the Federal Register on June 29, 1990 (55 FR 27114), and final regulations were published in the Federal Register on May 29, 1992 (57 FR 22940). The Program has subsequently amended these regulations a number of times. Because this program is a joint effort between Interior and Agriculture, these regulations are located in two titles of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR): Title 36, ‘‘Parks, Forests, and Public Property,’’ and Title 50, ‘‘Wildlife and Fisheries,’’ at 36 CFR 242.1–28 and 50 CFR 100.1–28, respectively. The regulations contain subparts as follows: Subpart A, General Provisions; Subpart B, Program Structure; Subpart C, Board Determinations; and Subpart D, Subsistence Taking of Fish and Wildlife. Consistent with subpart B of these regulations, the Secretaries established a Federal Subsistence Board to administer the Federal Subsistence Management Program. The Board is currently made up of: • A Chair appointed by the Secretary of the Interior with concurrence of the Secretary of Agriculture; • The Alaska Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; • The Alaska Regional Director, U.S. National Park Service; • The Alaska State Director, U.S. Bureau of Land Management; • The Alaska Regional Director, U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs; E:\FR\FM\02FEP1.SGM 02FEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 22 (Thursday, February 2, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5201-5204]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-2283]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2011-1062]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Bear Creek, Dundalk, MD

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the regulation governing 
the operation of the Baltimore County highway bridge at Wise Avenue 
across Bear Creek, mile 3.4, between Dundalk and Sparrows Point, MD. 
The proposed change will alter the four hour advance notice requirement 
for a bridge opening to a 48-hour advance notice requirement for a 
bridge opening. Due to the lack of openings, it is not necessary to 
have personnel available on a four-hour notice. The operating 
regulation change will allow Baltimore County to more efficiently 
utilize the maintenance personnel who are responsible for the operation 
of the bridge.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before April 2, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2011-1062 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax: (202) 493-2251.
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of 
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone 
number is (202) 366-9329.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods. 
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of 
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section

[[Page 5202]]

below for instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed 
rule, call or e-mail Lindsey Middleton, Fifth Coast Guard District 
Bridge Administration Division, Coast Guard; telephone (757) 398-6629, 
email Lindsey.R.Middleton@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing or 
submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program 
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone (202) 366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted, 
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking (USCG-2011-1062), indicate the specific section of this 
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each 
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material 
online (http://www.regulations.gov), or by fax, mail or hand delivery, 
but please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online 
via http://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered received by the 
Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax, 
hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be considered as having 
been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the Docket 
Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and a 
mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of 
your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding 
your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov, 
click on the ``submit a comment'' box, which will then become 
highlighted in blue. In the ``Document Type'' drop down menu select 
``Proposed Rules'' and insert ``USCG-2011-1062'' in the ``Keyword'' 
box. Click ``Search'' then click on the balloon shape in the 
``Actions'' column. If you submit your comments by mail or hand 
delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 
inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them 
by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please 
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will 
consider all comments and material received during the comment period 
and may change the rule based on your comments.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble 
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, 
click on the ``read comments'' box, which will then become highlighted 
in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2011-1062'' and click 
``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column. 
You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on 
the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an 
agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket 
Management Facility.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any 
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or 
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, 
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice 
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the 
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a 
request for one using one of the four methods specified under 
ADDRESSES. Please explain why one would be beneficial. If we determine 
that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and 
place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

Basis and Purpose

    Baltimore County has requested a change to the operating regulation 
for the bascule Baltimore County highway bridge at Wise Avenue across 
Bear Creek, mile 3.4 between Dundalk and Sparrows Point, MD. This 
change would require the draw to open if at least 48 hours of notice is 
given.
    Draw tender logs provided by the County show that this bridge has 
had fewer than 12 openings every year since 2008. The majority of these 
openings have been to test or maintain the bridge. When a request is 
made, the County contacts the ``on call'' maintenance contractor who 
relays the message to their electrical subcontractor. This 
subcontractor is the person that operates the bridge. The qualified 
subcontractors are normally at other work locations making it 
difficult, logistically, to arrive at the bridge site for an opening 
within the current four hour notice period. This change would allow the 
County to utilize its maintenance personnel more efficiently.
    The current regulation, set out in 33 CFR 117.543(b), requires the 
bridge to open if at least four hours of notice is given. Section 
117.543 was last amended on October 20, 2011, which was to remove a 
bridge operating regulation for a bridge that has been replaced with a 
fixed bridge.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR 117.543(b) for the 
Baltimore County highway bridge, mile 3.4 at Wise Avenue between 
Dundalk and Sparrows Point, MD. This regulation would change to allow 
the bridge to open on signal if at least 48 hours notice is given. 
There is no alternate route. The majority of vessels that use this 
waterway are recreational boats that can travel through the bridge 
without requiring a bridge opening; the vertical clearance of the 
bridge in the closed position is 14 feet at mean high water. For those 
vessels, this regulation will not impact their waterway transit because 
they are able to transit through the bridge at any time. There are few 
larger vessels that may require a bridge opening. This regulation 
change should not have an adverse effect on their transit because the 
bridge is able to open if the mariner provides at least 48 hours of 
advance notice.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes 
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our 
analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, 
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and 
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential 
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Order 12866 or under 
section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and Budget 
has not reviewed it under that Order. The proposed change is expected 
to have only a minimal impact on maritime traffic transiting the 
bridge. Most mariners utilizing this waterway

[[Page 5203]]

do not require a bridge opening. The few mariners that may need a 
bridge opening can plan their trips in accordance with the 48-hour 
scheduled advance notice requirement for a bridge opening to minimize 
delay.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small 
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations 
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their 
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 
50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed 
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities.
    This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of 
which might be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels 
requiring a bridge opening.
    This action will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities because the rule adds minimal 
restrictions to the movement of navigation by requiring mariners to 
give at least 48 hours of notice when requesting a bridge opening. The 
majority of vessels utilizing this waterway is shorter than 14 feet and 
is able to safely transit under the bridge in the closed position at 
any time.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have 
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see 
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what 
degree this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small 
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better 
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the 
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or 
options for compliance, please contact Lindsey Middleton, Bridge 
Management Specialist, Fifth Coast Guard District, (757) 398-6629 or 
Lindsey.R.Middleton@uscg.mil. The Coast Guard will not retaliate 
against small entities that question or complain about this proposed 
rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local 
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial 
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule 
under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications 
for federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary 
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may 
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for 
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule will not 
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule 
elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not cause a taking of private property or 
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, 
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected 
Property Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize 
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, 
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not 
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might 
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under 
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on 
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, 
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant 
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to 
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use 
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy 
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects 
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards 
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, 
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why 
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or 
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management 
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus 
standards bodies.
    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we 
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland 
Security Management Directive 023-01, and Commandant Instruction 
M16475.lD which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and 
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a 
category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a 
significant effect on the human environment because it simply 
promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for

[[Page 5204]]

drawbridges. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the 
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed 
rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes 
to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

    1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland 
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

    2. Revise Sec.  117.543(b) to read as follows:


Sec.  117.543  Bear Creek

* * * * *
    (b) The draw of the Baltimore County highway bridge, mile 3.4 at 
Wise Avenue between Dundalk and Sparrows Point, shall open on signal if 
at least 48 hours of notice is given.

    Dated: January 19, 2012.
William D. Lee,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2012-2283 Filed 2-1-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P