Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Miami River, North Fork, Miami, FL, 57379-57381 [2024-15233]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 135 / Monday, July 15, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Requirements Bulletin 767–32A0253 RB,
dated February 6, 2024, uses the phrase ‘‘the
Original Issue date of Requirements Bulletin
767–32A0253 RB,’’ this AD requires using
the effective date of this AD.
(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, AIR–520, Continued
Operational Safety Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector
or responsible Flight Standards Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the manager of the certification office,
send it to the attention of the person
identified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to: AMOC@
faa.gov.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC,
notify your appropriate principal inspector,
or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable
level of safety may be used for any repair,
modification, or alteration required by this
AD if it is approved by The Boeing Company
Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the
Manager, AIR–520, Continued Operational
Safety Branch, FAA, to make those findings.
To be approved, the repair method,
modification deviation, or alteration
deviation must meet the certification basis of
the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
(j) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Stefanie Roesli, Aviation Safety
Engineer, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA 98198; phone: 206–231–3964;
email: Stefanie.N.Roesli@faa.gov.
(2) Service information identified in this
AD that is not incorporated by reference is
available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (k)(3) and (4) of this AD.
(k) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference of
the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51.
(2) You must use this service information
as applicable to do the actions required by
this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin
767–32A0253 RB, dated February 6, 2024.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd.,
MC 110–SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740–5600;
telephone 562–797–1717; website
myboeingfleet.com.
(4) You may view this material at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational
Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call
206–231–3195.
(5) You may view this material at the
National Archives and Records
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:24 Jul 12, 2024
Jkt 262001
Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at NARA,
visit www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/
ibr-locations or email fr.inspection@nara.gov.
Issued on July 8, 2024.
Peter A. White,
Deputy Director, Integrated Certificate
Management Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2024–15308 Filed 7–12–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG–2024–0379]
RIN 1625–AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Miami River, North Fork, Miami, FL
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard proposes to
remove the operating schedule that
governs the FDOT Railroad Bridge,
across the Miami River, North Fork,
mile 5.3, at Miami, FL. The railroad
bridge is being replaced with a fixed
bridge. We invite your comments on
this proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
August 14, 2024.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2024–0379 using Federal Decision
Making Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov.
See the ‘‘Public Participation and
Request for Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below for instructions on submitting
comments. This notice of proposed
rulemaking with its plain-language, 100word-or-less proposed rule summary
will be available in this same docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email Ms. Jennifer Zercher,
Bridge Management Specialist, Seventh
Coast Guard District; telephone 571–
607–5951, email Jennifer.N.Zercher@
uscg.mil.
SUMMARY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
OMB Office of Management and Budget
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(Advance, Supplemental)
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
57379
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
FL Florida
FDOT Florida Department of
Transportation
II. Background, Purpose and Legal
Basis
The FDOT Railroad Bridge, across the
Miami River, North Fork, mile 5.3, at
Miami, FL, is a single bascule bridge
with a 6-foot vertical clearance at mean
high water in the closed position. The
normal operating schedule is set forth in
33 CFR 117.307.
FDOT applied for and received a
Coast Guard Bridge Permit to replace
the existing moveable railroad bridge
with a fixed railroad bridge. FDOT has
requested the drawbridge operation
regulation be removed and the bridge be
allowed to remain closed to navigation
in anticipation of phase one of the
bridge replacement project, converting
the moveable bridge to a fixed bridge,
beginning August 2024.
The Miami River, under the
jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, is a federal navigation project
channel. On December 21, 2020, the
U.S. Congress approved the
deauthorization of navigational rights
for the portion of the Miami River
between the FDOT Railroad Bridge and
the S–26 SFWMD structure with the
Miami Rivel Canal provision of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021
(12/21/2020).
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
Under this proposed rule, the FDOT
Railroad Bridge would be allowed to
remain closed to navigation until the
bridge replacement project is
completed. The waterway from the
railroad bridge to the water control
structure has been deauthorized of
navigational rights, therefore, impacts to
navigation are not expected. Vessels that
can pass beneath the bridge without an
opening would be able to so at any time.
IV. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after
considering numerous statutes and
Executive Orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
based on these statutes and Executive
Orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess the costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits.
This proposed rule has not been
designated a ‘‘significant regulatory
action,’’ under section 3(f) of Executive
E:\FR\FM\15JYP1.SGM
15JYP1
57380
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 135 / Monday, July 15, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Order 12866, as amended by Executive
Order 14094 (Modernizing Regulatory
Review). Accordingly, the NPRM has
not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
This regulatory action determination
is based on the ability that vessels able
to transit the bridge without an opening
may do so at any time.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
B. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended,
requires Federal agencies to consider
the potential impact of regulations on
small entities during rulemaking. 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.
While some owners or operators of
vessels intending to transit the bridge
may be small entities, for the reasons
stated in section IV.A above this
proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
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.
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. If the
proposed rule would affect your small
business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section. 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.
C. 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.).
D. Federalism and Indian Tribal
Governments
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:24 Jul 12, 2024
Jkt 262001
(Federalism), if it has a substantial
direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the National
Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. We have analyzed
this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent
with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements
described in Executive Order 13132.
Also, 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.
If you believe this proposed rule has
implications for federalism or Indian
tribes, please contact the person listed
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
E. 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 proposed rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023–01, Rev.1,
associated implementing instructions,
and Environmental Planning Policy
COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which
guide the Coast Guard in complying
with the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321–
4370f). The Coast Guard has determined
that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. This proposed
rule promulgates the operating
regulations or procedures for
drawbridges. Normally such actions are
categorically excluded from further
review, under paragraph L49, of Chapter
3, Table 3–1 of the U.S. Coast Guard
Environmental Planning
Implementation Procedures.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Neither a Record of Environmental
Consideration nor a Memorandum for
the Record are required for this rule. We
seek any comments or information that
may lead to the discovery of a
significant environmental impact from
this proposed rule.
V. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We view public participation as
essential to effective rulemaking and
will consider all comments and material
received during the comment period.
Your comment can help shape the
outcome of this rulemaking. If you
submit a comment, please include the
docket number for this rulemaking,
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation.
Submitting comments. We encourage
you to submit comments through the
Federal Decision Making Portal at
https://www.regulations.gov. To do so,
go to https://www.regulations.gov, type
USCG–2024–0379 in the search box and
click ‘‘Search.’’ Next, look for this
document in the Search Results column,
and click on it. Then click on the
Comment option. If your material
cannot be submitted using https://
www.regulations.gov, contact the person
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions.
Viewing material in docket. To view
documents mentioned in this proposed
rule as being available in the docket,
find the docket as described in the
previous paragraph, and then select
‘‘Supporting & Related Material’’ in the
Document Type column. Public
comments will also be placed in our
online docket and can be viewed by
following instructions on the https://
www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked
Questions web page. Also, if you go to
the online docket and sign up for email
alerts, you will be notified when
comments are posted, or a final rule is
published of any posting or updates to
the docket.
We review all comments received, but
we will only post comments that
address the topic of the proposed rule.
We may choose not to post off-topic,
inappropriate, or duplicate comments
that we receive.
Personal information. We accept
anonymous comments. Comments we
post to https://www.regulations.gov will
include any personal information you
have provided. For more about privacy
and submissions in response to this
document, see DHS’s eRulemaking
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226,
March 11, 2020).
E:\FR\FM\15JYP1.SGM
15JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 135 / Monday, July 15, 2024 / Proposed Rules
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;
and DHS Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision
No. 01.3.
§ 117.307
■
[Removed]
2. Remove § 117.307.
Dated: July 07, 2024.
Douglas M. Schofield,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Coast Guard Seventh District.
[FR Doc. 2024–15233 Filed 7–12–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[EPA–R04–RCRA–2024–0116; FRL–11972–
01–R4]
North Carolina: Final Authorization of
State Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revisions
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
North Carolina has applied to
the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) for final authorization of changes
to its hazardous waste program under
the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended. The
EPA has reviewed North Carolina’s
application and has determined, subject
to public comment, that these changes
satisfy all requirements needed to
qualify for final authorization.
Therefore, in the ‘‘Rules and
Regulations’’ section of this Federal
Register, we are authorizing North
Carolina for these changes as a final
action without a prior proposed rule. If
we receive no adverse comment, we will
not take further action on this proposed
rule.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 14, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
RCRA–2024–0116, at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:24 Jul 12, 2024
Jkt 262001
www.regulations.gov. The EPA may
publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points
you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or
comment contents located outside of the
primary submission (i.e., on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
The EPA encourages electronic
submittals, but if you are unable to
submit electronically or need other
assistance, please contact Leah Davis,
the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. Please
also contact Leah Davis if you need
assistance in a language other than
English or if you are a person with
disabilities who needs a reasonable
accommodation at no cost to you.
All documents in the docket are listed
in the www.regulations.gov index.
Publicly available docket materials are
available electronically in
www.regulations.gov. For alternative
access to docket materials, please
contact Leah Davis, the contact listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Leah Davis; RCRA Programs and
Cleanup Branch; Land, Chemicals and
Redevelopment Division; U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency;
Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth
Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960;
telephone number: (404) 562–8562; fax
number: (404) 562–9964; email address:
davis.leah@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
document proposes to take action on
North Carolina’s changes to its
hazardous waste management program
under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended. We
have published a final action
authorizing these changes in the ‘‘Rules
and Regulations’’ section of this Federal
Register because we view this as a
noncontroversial action and anticipate
no adverse comment. We have
explained our reasons for this action in
the preamble to the final action.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
57381
If we receive no adverse comment, we
will not take further action on this
proposed rule. If we receive adverse
comment, we will withdraw the final
action and it will not take effect. We
would then address all public
comments in a subsequent final action
and base any further decision on the
authorization of the State program
changes after considering all comments
received during the comment period.
We do not intend to institute a second
comment period on this action. Any
parties interested in commenting must
do so at this time. For further
information, please see the information
provided in the ADDRESSES section of
this document.
Dated: June 28, 2024.
Jeaneanne Gettle,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2024–15116 Filed 7–12–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA–2024–0034]
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards; Rear Impact Guards; Rear
Impact Protection; Denial of Petition
for Rulemaking
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Denial of petitions for
rulemaking.
AGENCY:
This document denies a
petition for rulemaking from Jerry and
Marianne Karth, Eric Hein, and Lois
Durso-Hawkins, requesting that NHTSA
amend Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards (FMVSS) No. 223, ‘‘Rear
impact guards,’’ and FMVSS No. 224,
‘‘Rear impact protection,’’ to include
additional requirements. The agency is
denying the petition because it does not
provide new or different information
that would warrant initiation of a
rulemaking at this time. This document
also discusses NHTSA’s consideration
of a similar petition from the same
petitioners submitted to the docket of
the July 15, 2022 final rule amending
FMVSS Nos. 223 and 224.
DATES: July 15, 2024.
ADDRESSES: National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, West Building, Washington,
DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\15JYP1.SGM
15JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 135 (Monday, July 15, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57379-57381]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-15233]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG-2024-0379]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Miami River, North Fork, Miami,
FL
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to remove the operating schedule that
governs the FDOT Railroad Bridge, across the Miami River, North Fork,
mile 5.3, at Miami, FL. The railroad bridge is being replaced with a
fixed bridge. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before August 14, 2024.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2024-0379 using Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments. This notice of proposed rulemaking with its plain-
language, 100-word-or-less proposed rule summary will be available in
this same docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email Ms. Jennifer Zercher, Bridge Management Specialist,
Seventh Coast Guard District; telephone 571-607-5951, email
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
OMB Office of Management and Budget
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Advance, Supplemental)
Sec. Section
U.S.C. United States Code
FL Florida
FDOT Florida Department of Transportation
II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis
The FDOT Railroad Bridge, across the Miami River, North Fork, mile
5.3, at Miami, FL, is a single bascule bridge with a 6-foot vertical
clearance at mean high water in the closed position. The normal
operating schedule is set forth in 33 CFR 117.307.
FDOT applied for and received a Coast Guard Bridge Permit to
replace the existing moveable railroad bridge with a fixed railroad
bridge. FDOT has requested the drawbridge operation regulation be
removed and the bridge be allowed to remain closed to navigation in
anticipation of phase one of the bridge replacement project, converting
the moveable bridge to a fixed bridge, beginning August 2024.
The Miami River, under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, is a federal navigation project channel. On December 21,
2020, the U.S. Congress approved the deauthorization of navigational
rights for the portion of the Miami River between the FDOT Railroad
Bridge and the S-26 SFWMD structure with the Miami Rivel Canal
provision of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (12/21/2020).
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
Under this proposed rule, the FDOT Railroad Bridge would be allowed
to remain closed to navigation until the bridge replacement project is
completed. The waterway from the railroad bridge to the water control
structure has been deauthorized of navigational rights, therefore,
impacts to navigation are not expected. Vessels that can pass beneath
the bridge without an opening would be able to so at any time.
IV. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on these statutes and Executive Orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This proposed rule has not been designated a
``significant regulatory action,'' under section 3(f) of Executive
[[Page 57380]]
Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing
Regulatory Review). Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
This regulatory action determination is based on the ability that
vessels able to transit the bridge without an opening may do so at any
time.
B. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. 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.
While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
bridge may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A
above this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact
on any vessel owner or operator.
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.
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. If the proposed rule
would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 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.
C. 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.).
D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism), if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on
the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
Also, 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. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
E. 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
proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01, Rev.1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning Policy COMDTINST 5090.1
(series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f). The
Coast Guard has determined that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule promulgates the
operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. Normally such
actions are categorically excluded from further review, under paragraph
L49, of Chapter 3, Table 3-1 of the U.S. Coast Guard Environmental
Planning Implementation Procedures.
Neither a Record of Environmental Consideration nor a Memorandum
for the Record are required for this rule. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed rule.
V. Public Participation and Request for Comments
We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through
the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To
do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2024-0379 in the
search box and click ``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the
Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment
option. If your material cannot be submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions.
Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this
proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as
described in the previous paragraph, and then select ``Supporting &
Related Material'' in the Document Type column. Public comments will
also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following
instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked
Questions web page. Also, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted, or a
final rule is published of any posting or updates to the docket.
We review all comments received, but we will only post comments
that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may choose not to post
off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that we receive.
Personal information. We accept anonymous comments. Comments we
post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal
information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions
in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking System of Records
notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).
[[Page 57381]]
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
0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; and DHS Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.3.
Sec. 117.307 [Removed]
0
2. Remove Sec. 117.307.
Dated: July 07, 2024.
Douglas M. Schofield,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Coast Guard Seventh
District.
[FR Doc. 2024-15233 Filed 7-12-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
