[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 183 (Friday, September 22, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65323-65325]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20461]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2023-0741]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Southern Command Dive Operation, Gulf of Mexico, Key
West, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the
waterways surrounding Key West, Florida, during the Southern Command's
(SOCOM) Dive operation. The safety zone is necessary to ensure the
safety of event participants. Entry of vessels or persons into this
zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the
Port (COTP) Key West or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 6 a.m. until 9 p.m. on September 26
and September 27, 2023.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2023-0741 in the search box and click ``Search.'' Next, in the Document
Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this rule,
call or email Lieutenant Hailye Wilson, Waterways Management Division,
Sector Key West, FL, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

COTP Captain of the Port
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because the Coast Guard did not receive final
details from the U.S. Army operations department within the time
required to publish an NPRM. Therefore, the Coast Guard lacks
sufficient time to provide a reasonable comment period and then
consider those comments before issuing the rule. It is impracticable
and contrary to the public interest to delay issuing this rule because
it is necessary to protect the safety of participants, the public, and
vessels transiting the waters adjacent to Key West, FL.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable because the event is taking place
September 26 and 27, 2023, and immediate action is needed to respond to
the potential safety hazards associated with this event.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under the authority in 46
U.S.C. 70034. The Captain of the Port Key West (COTP) has determined
that potential hazards associated with this dive operation will be a
safety concern for persons and vessels in the regulated area. This rule
is needed to ensure the safety of the event participants, the general
public, vessels and the marine environment in the navigable waters
within the safety zone during the Southern Command's Dive operation.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone on certain navigable waters of
Key West, Florida, during the SOCOM's Dive operation. The safety zone
will be enforced from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m. on September 26 and 27, 2023.
The safety zone will cover all waters within the following coordinates:
Latitude 24[deg]35.724' N, longitude 081[deg]47.561' W, thence east to
latitude 24[deg]35.960' N, longitude 081[deg]46.811' W, thence south to
latitude 24[deg]34.802' N, longitude 081[deg]47.376' W, thence west to
latitude 24[deg]34.952' N, longitude 081[deg]46.858' W, located within
the county of Monroe, FL.
    No person or vessel will be permitted to enter, transit through,
anchor in, or remain within the safety zone without first obtaining
permission from the COTP or a designated representative. If

authorization to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within
the safety zone is granted by the COTP or a designated representative,
all persons and vessels receiving such authorization must comply with
the instructions of the COTP or a designated representative. The Coast
Guard will provide notice of the safety zone by Broadcast Notice to
Mariners, and/or by on-scene designated representatives.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

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 rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as
amended by Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing Regulatory Review).
Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on following reasons:
(1) the temporary safety zone will only be enforced for a total of 15
hours per day; (2) although persons and vessels may not enter, transit
through, anchor in, or remain within the safety zone without
authorization from the COTP or a designated representative, they may
operate in the surrounding area during the enforcement period; (3)
persons and vessels may still enter, transit through, anchor in, or
remain within the areas during the enforcement period if authorized by
the COTP or a designated representative.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 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 rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    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 rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a 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 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 rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does 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.

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 rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have 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 rule involves small,
designated areas of the Gulf of Mexico around Key West, Florida, for
only 10 hours per day and thus is limited in time and scope. It is
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of
Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A
Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is
available in the docket. For instructions on locating the docket, see
the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so
that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places, or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051, 70124; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-
1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.3.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T07-0741 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T07-0741  Safety Zone; Southern Command Dive Operation, Gulf
of Mexico, Key West, FL.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters within the following coordinates: Latitude 24[deg]35.724' N,
longitude 081[deg]47.561' W, thence east to latitude 24[deg]35.960' N,
longitude 081[deg]46.811' W, thence south to latitude 24[deg]34.823' N,
longitude 081[deg]47.376' W, thence west to latitude 24[deg]34.952' N,
longitude 081[deg]46.858' W, located within the county of Monroe, FL.
These coordinates are based on North American Datum.
    (b) Definition. As used in this section, the term ``designated
representative'' means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a
Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast
Guard vessel and a Federal, State, and local officer designated by or
assisting the Captain of the Port Key West (COTP) in the enforcement of
the safety zone.
    (c) Regulations. (1) All persons and vessels are prohibited from
entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the
regulated area described in paragraph (a) of this section unless
authorized by the COTP Key West or a designated representative.
    (2) Persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit through, anchor
in, or remain within the regulated area may contact the COTP Key West
by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a designated representative via VHF-
FM radio on channel 16 to request authorization. If authorization is
granted, all persons and vessels receiving such authorization must
comply with the instructions of the COTP Key West or a designated
representative.
    (3) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated area by
Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM
channel 16, or the COTP's designated representative.
    (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 6 a.m.
until 9 p.m. on September 26 and 27, 2023.

J. Ingram,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Key West.
[FR Doc. 2023-20461 Filed 9-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


         CORRECTED*

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on July 11, 2006

   NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2006-25251

________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of   NORTHWEST AIRLINES, INC.,  filed  6/27/06 for:

XX  Exemption for two years under 49 U.S.C. 40109 to provide the
following service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between (1) Memphis, Tennessee, and Cozumel, Mexico; and (2) Detroit,
Michigan, and Zihuatanejo/Ixtapa, Mexico.  Northwest states that it will
serve these markets on a seasonal basis, beginning January 20, 2007.

Applicant rep: Alexander Van der Bellen<PHONE_NUMBER>  DOT Analyst:
Linda Lundell<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted (subject to conditions, see below)

The above action was effective when taken: July 10, 2006,  through July
10, 2008.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

   		      Office of International Aviation

XX  The authority granted is consistent with the aviation agreement
between the United States and Mexico.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

XX Holder’s certificates of public convenience and necessity

XX Standard exemption conditions (attached)

- see next page -

Remarks:  We have acted on this application without awaiting expiration
of the 15-day period with the consent of all parties served with a copy
of this application.

Conditions:  The U.S.-Mexico exemption authority granted is subject to
the dormancy notice requirements set forth in condition 7 of Appendix A
of Order 88-10-2.  Regarding the issue of the start-up deadline, we have
determined that, in the circumstances presented, we will require
Northwest to institute the proposed service no later than January 20,
2007.

- see next page -

________________________________________________________________________
_____________________

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department's regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the exemption services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted, we denied all requests in the referenced
Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted in this
Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

  HYPERLINK "http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp"
http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

U.S. Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the U.S. carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

(5)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 203, concerning
waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(6)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1544.
To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing any new service
(including charter flights) to or from a foreign airport, contact its
International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise the IPSI of
its plans and to find out whether the Transportation Security
Administration has determined that security is adequate to allow such
airport(s) to be served; and

(7)  Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department of Transportation, with all applicable orders and regulations
of other U.S. agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the
United States.

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

05/2004

   By letter dated July 6, 2006, Northwest advises the Department that
it proposes commencement of these services on January 20, 2007, rather
than February 17, 2007, as originally proposed.

*  Corrected Notice of Action Taken reflects the modified startup date
for the subject services.

 PAGE

 PAGE   2


[Federal Register: December 4, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 232)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 63565-63568]
[DOCID:fr04de09-7]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0778; Directorate Identifier 2009-CE-040-AD;
Amendment 39-16119; AD 2009-25-02]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Twin Commander Aircraft LLC Models 690,
690A, and 690B Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Twin Commander Aircraft LLC Models 690, 690A, and 690B airplanes. This
AD requires you to inspect between the surface of the left-hand (LH)
and right-

hand (RH) upper wing skins and the engine mount beam support straps for
any signs of corrosion, replace the upper steel straps with parts of
improved design, and modify both wings. This AD results from reports
that corrosion was found between the mating surfaces of the wing upper
skin surface and the engine mount beam support straps. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct corrosion on the engine mount beam
support straps and the upper wing skins, which could result in failure
of the engine mount beam support straps. This failure could lead to
loss of the engine and possible loss of control of the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective on January 8, 2010.
    On January 8, 2010, the Director of the Federal Register approved
the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this
AD.

ADDRESSES: To get the service information identified in this AD,
contact Twin Commander Aircraft LLC, 18933-59th Avenue, NE., Suite 115,
Arlington, WA 98223, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
Internet: http://www.twincommander.com.
    To view the AD docket, go to U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, or on the Internet at
http://www.regulations.gov. The docket number is FAA-2009-0778;
Directorate Identifier 2009-CE-040-AD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vince Massey, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    On August 21, 2009, we issued a proposal to amend part 39 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an AD that
would apply to certain Twin Commander Aircraft LLC Models 690, 690A,
and 690B airplanes. This proposal was published in the Federal Register
as a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on August 28, 2009 (74 FR
44308). The NPRM proposed to require you to inspect between the surface
of the LH and RH upper wing skins and the engine mount beam support
straps for any signs of corrosion, replace the upper steel straps with
parts of improved design, and modify both wings.

Comments

    We provided the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal
and FAA's response to each comment:

Comment Issue: Extend Compliance Time

    Michael Curtis Pidek, William I. Smith, and Tom Bayer all state
that with 275 airplanes affected by this AD and only 15 service centers
available to do the actions required in this AD, there is not enough
time to comply with the AD.
    All three commenters request an extension of the compliance time to
allow enough time for the service centers to schedule the work without
grounding airplanes until the work can be done.
    We do not agree with the commenters. Over 65 airplanes are already
in compliance with this AD. We have consulted with Twin Commander
Aircraft LLC and they have covered this issue with the service centers.
The service centers know how much work is required since they have
already done the work on over 65 of the affected airplanes. The service
centers plan on using multiple teams to work on several airplanes at
the same time. They have confirmed they can perform the actions
required in this AD in the compliance time as proposed.
    Part of the alternative method of compliance (AMOC) provisions of
14 CFR 39.19 is an extension of the compliance time provided a level of
safety acceptable to the FAA is met. The FAA will review any AMOCs of
this nature on a case-by-case basis. If we determine the proposal
presents an acceptable level of safety, we will approve it as an AMOC
to the AD.
    We are not changing the final rule AD action based on these
comments.

Conclusion

    We have carefully reviewed the available data and determined that
air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD as proposed
except for minor editorial corrections. We have determined that these
minor corrections:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 275 airplanes in the U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to do the inspection:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Total cost per   Total cost on
                  Labor cost                              Parts cost                airplane      U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
80 work-hours x $80 per hour = $6,400........  Not applicable.................          $6,400       $1,760,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     We estimate the following costs to do any necessary repairs/
replacements that will be required based on the results of the
inspection. We have no way of determining the number of airplanes that
may need this repair/replacement:

                     Short Modification--Option A *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Total cost per
            Labor cost                  Parts cost         airplane per
                                                               side
------------------------------------------------------------------------
250 work-hours x $80 per hour =    $9,170 per kit per           $29,170
 $20,000 per side.                  side.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     Middle Modification--Option B *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Total cost per
            Labor cost                  Parts cost         airplane per
                                                               side
------------------------------------------------------------------------
280 work-hours x $80 per hour =    $9,170 per kit per           $31,570
 $22,400 per side.                  side.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      Long Modification--Option C *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Total cost per
            Labor cost                  Parts cost         airplane per
                                                               side
------------------------------------------------------------------------
320 work-hours x $80 per hour =    $9,170 per kit per           $34,770
 $25,600 per side.                  side.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Note: * Depending on airplane configuration, airplanes with
rectangular plates will need the Plate and Hardware Kit (SB237-4) at
$2,090 per side. Labor to install this kit is included in Options A,
B, and C.

                    Strap Only Replacement--Option D
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Total cost per
            Labor cost                  Parts cost         airplane per
                                                               side
------------------------------------------------------------------------
75 work-hours x $80 per hour =     $6,190 per strap per         $12,190
 $6,000 per side.                   side.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do the installation of access
holes:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Total cost per   Total cost on
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        airplane      U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30 work-hours x $80 per hour = $2,400........................          $1,293           $3,693       $1,015,575
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do the wing fastener
modification:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Total cost per   Total cost on
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        airplane      U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8.5 work-hours x $80 per hour = $680.........................            $250             $930         $255,750
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this AD.

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a summary of the costs to comply with this AD (and
other information as included in the Regulatory Evaluation) and placed
it in the AD Docket. You may get a copy of this summary by sending a
request to us at the address listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket
No. FAA-2009-0778; Directorate Identifier 2009-CE-040-AD'' in your
request.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,

the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding a new AD to read as follows:

2009-25-02 Twin Commander Aircraft LLC: Amendment 39-16119; Docket
No. FAA-2009-0778; Directorate Identifier 2009-CE-040-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This AD becomes effective on January 8, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to the following airplane models and serial
numbers that are certificated in any category:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Models                         Serial Nos. (S/Ns)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
690...............................  All S/Ns
690A..............................  All S/Ns except 11195 and 11279.
690B..............................  All S/Ns except 11361, 11383, 11527,
                                     and 11536.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from reports that corrosion was found
between the mating surfaces of the wing upper skin surface and the
engine mount beam support straps. We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct corrosion on the engine mount beam support straps and
upper wing skins, which could result in failure of the engine mount
beam support straps. This failure could lead to loss of the engine
and possible loss of control of the airplane.

Compliance

    (e) To address this problem, you must do the following, unless
already done:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Actions                 Compliance            Procedures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Inspect between the       Within the next 150   Follow Twin
 surface of the left-hand      hours time-in-        Commander Aircraft
 (LH) and right-hand (RH)      service after         LLC Alert Service
 upper wing skins and the      January 8, 2010       Bulletin No. 237,
 engine mount beam support     (the effective date   dated May 13, 2005,
 straps for any signs of       of this AD) or        pages 1 through 14.
 corrosion and determine the   within the next 12
 extent of any corrosion       months after
 found.                        January 8, 2010
                               (the effective date
                               of this AD),
                               whichever occurs
                               first.
(2) Install modification      Before further        Follow the
 access holes in the LH and    flight after the      Accomplishment
 RH lower wing skins.          inspection required   Instructions, steps
                               in paragraph (e)(1)   1 through 4 and 6
                               of this AD.           through 9, of Twin
                                                     Commander Aircraft
                                                     Corporation Custom
                                                     Kit No. 150, dated
                                                     July 8, 1994, as
                                                     specified in Twin
                                                     Commander Aircraft
                                                     LLC Alert Service
                                                     Bulletin No. 237,
                                                     dated May 13, 2005.
(3) If corrosion damage is    Before further        Follow Twin
 found during the inspection   flight after the      Commander Aircraft
 required in paragraph         inspection required   LLC Alert Service
 (e)(1) of this AD, perform    in paragraph (e)(1)   Bulletin No. 237,
 necessary modification.       of this AD.           dated May 13, 2005,
                                                     Part II, Options A,
                                                     B, or C, on pages
                                                     15 through 29 and
                                                     31.
(4) If corrosion damage is    Before further        Follow Twin
 not found during the          flight after the      Commander Aircraft
 inspection required in        inspection required   LLC Alert Service
 paragraph (e)(1) of this      in paragraph (e)(1)   Bulletin No. 237,
 AD, do the upper steel        of this AD.           dated May 13, 2005,
 strap replacements.                                 Part II, Option D,
                                                     on pages 30 and 31.
(5) Install additional wing   Before further        Follow Gulfstream
 fasteners on the LH and RH    flight after the      American
 wing.                         inspection required   Corporation Service
                               in paragraph (e)(1)   Bulletin No. 182,
                               of the AD.            dated March 2,
                                                     1981.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Note: Although not required by this AD, we highly recommend
compliance with Twin Commander Aircraft Corporation Service Bulletin
No. 217, Revision No. 1, dated May 26, 1993, Engine Nacelle Firewall
Reinforcement; and Twin Commander Aircraft LLC Alert Service
Bulletin No. 239, dated February 13, 2006, Outboard Flap--Inboard
Hinge Inspection & Reinforcement.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (f) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to
ATTN: Vince Massey, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW, Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone: (425) 917-
6475; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using
any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify
your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight
Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (g) You must use Twin Commander Aircraft LLC Alert Service
Bulletin No. 237, dated May 13, 2005; Twin Commander Aircraft
Corporation Custom Kit No. 150, dated July 8, 1994; and Gulfstream
American Corporation Service Bulletin No. 182, dated March 2, 1981,
to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies
otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Twin
Commander Aircraft LLC, 18933--59th Avenue, NE., Arlington, WA
98223, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet:
http://www.twincommander.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information
incorporated by reference for this AD at the FAA, Central Region,
Office of the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri
64106. For information on the availability of this material at the
Central Region, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information
incorporated by reference for this AD at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability
of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on November 20, 2009.
Margaret Kline,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-28548 Filed 12-3-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: May 17, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 94)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 27493-27494]
[DOCID:fr17my10-27]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0181; Airspace Docket No. 10-ASW-3]

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Center, TX

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E airspace at Center, TX
adding additional controlled airspace necessary to accommodate new
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) at Center Municipal
Airport, Center, TX. Adjustments also would be made to the geographic
coordinates of the Amason nondirectional beacon (NDB). The FAA is
taking this action to enhance the safety and management of Instrument
Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 1, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001. You
must identify the docket number FAA-2010-0181/Airspace Docket No. 10-
ASW-3, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments
through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the
public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any
final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office
(telephone 1-800-647-5527), is on the ground floor of the building at
the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone: 817-321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2010-0181/
Airspace Docket No. 10-ASW-3.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://
www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_
amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. An
informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at
the office of the Central Service Center, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort
Worth, TX 76137.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRM's should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking<PHONE_NUMBER>, to
request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    This action proposes to amend Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR), Part 71 by adding additional Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface for SIAPs at Center Municipal
Airport, Center, TX. Adjustments to the geographic coordinates of the 9
NDB would be made in accordance with the FAA's National Aerospace
Charting Office. Controlled airspace is needed for the safety and
management of IFR operations at the airport.
    Class E airspace areas are published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9T, dated August 27, 2009, and effective September 15, 2009, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designation listed in this document would be published subsequently in
the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air

navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would add additional controlled airspace at Center Municipal
Airport, Center, TX.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

    1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order
7400.9T, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, signed August 27,
2009, and effective September 15, 2009, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

ASW TX E5 Center, TX [Amended]

Center Municipal Airport, TX
    (Lat. 31[deg]49'54'' N., long. 94[deg]09'23'' W.)
Amason NDB
    (Lat. 31[deg]49'58'' N., long. 94[deg]09'14'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.5-mile radius of Center Municipal Airport and within 2.5
miles each side of the 341[deg] bearing from the Amason NDB
extending from the 6.5-mile radius to 7.5 miles northwest of the
airport, and within 3.3 miles each side of the 171[deg] bearing from
the airport extending from the 6.5-mile radius to 9.8 miles south of
the airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on May 7, 2010.
Anthony D. Roetzel,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2010-11709 Filed 5-14-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4901-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 164 (Friday, August 25, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 40621]
[FR Doc No: 2017-18007]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Competition
Plans, Passenger Facility Charges

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew a previously approved
information collection. Title 49, United States Code, Sections 40117
(k) and 47106 (f) require that a covered airport submit a written
competition plan to the Secretary/Administrator in order to receive
approval to impose a Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) or to receive a
grant under the Airport Improvement Program (AIP).

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by September 25, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on
the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be
addressed to the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of
Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>, or mailed to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Hall at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0661.
    Title: Competition Plans, Passenger Facility Charges.
    Form Numbers: There are no FAA forms associated with this
collection.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period soliciting comments on the following collection of information
was published on June 19, 2017 (82 FR 27950). There were no comments.
The DOT/FAA will use any information submitted in response to this
requirement to carry out the intent of Title 49, Sections 40117(k) and
47106(f), which is to assure that a covered airport has, and
implements, a plan that affects its business practices to provide
opportunities for competitive access by new entrant carriers or
carriers seeking to expand. The affected public includes public
agencies controlling medium or large hub airports.
    Respondents: 5 affected airports annually.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 136 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 680 hours.

    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.

    Issued in Washington, DC on August 21, 2017.
Ronda L. Thompson,
FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, Performance, Policy &
Records Management Branch, ASP-110.
[FR Doc. 2017-18007 Filed 8-24-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 191 (Monday, October 3, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68023-68024]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23820]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID: FEMA-2016-0017; OMB No. 1660-0022]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB
Review; Comment Request; Community Rating System (CRS) Program--
Application Worksheets and Commentary

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will submit the
information collection abstracted below to the Office of Management and
Budget for review and clearance in accordance with the requirements of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The submission will describe the
nature of the information collection, the categories of respondents,
the estimated burden (i.e., the time, effort and resources used by
respondents to respond) and cost, and the actual data collection
instruments FEMA will use.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before November 2, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments on the proposed information
collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office
of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the Desk
Officer for the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, and sent via electronic mail to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill Lesser, Program Specialist,
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration,<PHONE_NUMBER>. You
may contact the Records Management Division for copies of the proposed
collection of information at email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This proposed information collection
previously published in the Federal Register on July 14, 2016, at 81 FR
45517, with a 60 day public comment period. No comments were received.
The purpose of this notice is to notify the public that FEMA will
submit the information collection abstracted below to the Office of
Management and Budget for review and clearance.

Collection of Information

    Title: Community Rating System (CRS) Program--Application
Worksheets and Commentary.
    Type of Information Collection: Extension, without change, of a
currently approved information collection.
    OMB Number: 1660-0022.
    FEMA Forms: FEMA Form 086-0-35, Community Rating System Application
Letter and Quick Check; FEMA Form 086-0-35A, Community Annual
Recertifications, and FEMA Form 086-0-35B, Environmental and Historic
Preservation Certifications.
    Abstract: The CRS Application Letter & Quick Check, the CRS
certification forms, and accompanying guidance are used by communities
that participate in the National Flood Insurance Program's (NFIP)
Community Rating System (CRS). The CRS is a voluntary program where
flood insurance costs are reduced in communities that implement
practices, such as building codes and public awareness activities,
which are considered to reduce the risks of flooding and promote the
purchase of flood insurance.
    Affected Public: State, local, or Tribal government.
    Number of Respondents: 1,579.
    Number of Responses: 1,579.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 41,936 hours.
    Estimated Cost: The estimated annual cost to respondents for the
hour burden is $2,442,795.30. There are no annual costs to respondents'
operations and maintenance costs for technical services. There are no
annual start-up or capital costs. The cost to the Federal Government is
$5,425,600.00.

Comments

    Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption
above. Comments are solicited to (a) evaluate whether the proposed data
collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency,
including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b)
evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden
of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Dated: September 22, 2016.
Richard W. Mattison,
Records Management Program Chief, Mission Support, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2016-23820 Filed 9-30-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-52-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 145 (Friday, July 27, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44140-44142]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18405]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2011-1109]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Sturgeon Bay Ship Canal,
Sturgeon Bay, WI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is changing the drawbridge operating schedule
for the Maple-Oregon and Michigan Street Bridges across the Sturgeon
Bay Ship Canal, at miles 4.17 and 4.3, in Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin. The
establishment of this schedule is necessary due to the construction of
the Maple-Oregon Street Bridge and the completed rehabilitation of the
Michigan Street Bridge. This final rule also confirms the winter
drawbridge schedules for all three drawbridges over Sturgeon Bay Ship
Canal, including the two previously mentioned bridges as well as the
Bayview Bridge at mile 3.0.

DATES: This rule is effective August 27, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Comments and related materials received from the public, as
well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the
docket, are part of docket USCG-2011-1109 and are available online by
going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2011-1109 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' This material is also
available for inspection or copying at the 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, between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Mr. Lee D. Soule, Bridge Management Specialist, U.S.
Coast Guard, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or fax
216-902-6088. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee
V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

 A. Regulatory History and Information

    On April 12, 2012, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Sturgeon Bay Ship
Canal, Sturgeon Bay, WI, in the Federal Register (77 FR 21890). We did
not receive any comments on the proposed rule. No public meeting was
requested, and none was held.

B. Basis and Purpose

    This rule establishes drawbridge schedules following the
construction of the new Maple-Oregon Street Bridge and the extensive
rehabilitation of the existing Michigan Street Bridge. This final rule
is expected to provide for the safe and efficient passage of vessels
requiring drawbridge openings, as well as the efficient movement of
vehicular traffic in Sturgeon Bay.
    The Sturgeon Bay Ship Canal is approximately 8.6 miles long and
provides a navigable connection between Lake Michigan and Green Bay.
The area experiences a significant increase in vehicular and vessel
traffic during the peak tourist and navigation season between Memorial
Day and Labor Day each year. There are a total of three highway
drawbridges across the waterway. The Michigan Street Bridge provides
unlimited vertical clearance in the open position and 14 feet in the
closed position. Maple-Oregon Bridge provides unlimited vertical
clearance in the open position and 25 feet in the closed position.
Bayview Bridge also provides unlimited vertical clearance in the open
position and 42 feet in the closed position. Both Michigan Street and
Maple-Oregon Bridges serve the downtown Sturgeon Bay area and are
located approximately 750 feet apart on the canal.
    A final rule was published on October 24, 2005 in the Federal
Register (70 FR 61380) to allow for one opening per hour at the
Michigan Street Bridge for recreational vessels while the Maple-Oregon
Bridge was constructed and the Michigan Street Bridge was

rehabilitated. The final rule also included a requirement to open at
any time if 20 or more vessels gathered waiting for bridge openings. A
temporary final rule was published on June 5, 2009 in the Federal
Register (74 FR 26954), effective from June 1, 2009 to November 15,
2010 that essentially shifted the one bridge opening per hour at
Michigan Street Bridge to the Maple-Oregon Bridge while the
rehabilitation of Michigan Street was completed and the bridge was kept
in the open-to-navigation position. With both Michigan Street and
Maple-Oregon Bridges operational, the one opening per hour schedule for
Michigan Street is considered too restrictive for vessels and could
create an unsafe condition for vessel traffic that may be between the
two closely located drawbridges while waiting for bridge openings.
    The Coast Guard issued a notice of temporary deviation from
regulations that was published on May 17, 2011 in the Federal Register
(76 FR 28309) with request for comments to implement a test drawbridge
schedule for Michigan Street and Maple-Oregon Street Bridges between
May 27, 2011 and September 16, 2011. The test schedule required the
Michigan Street Bridge to open for recreational vessels twice an hour,
on the hour and half-hour, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and required
the Maple-Oregon Bridge to open for recreational vessels twice an hour,
on the quarter hour and three-quarter hour, during the same times. The
test schedule also included a change to the current regulation that
required the bridge to open if 20 or more vessels gathered at the
bridge waiting for a scheduled opening. Local opinion was that an
opening if at least 10 vessels were gathered would be a safer maximum
number of vessels.
    The Coast Guard coordinated with all local stakeholders before,
during, and after the test drawbridge schedule and did not receive any
adverse comments to the test schedule.
    The Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WDOT) requested
scheduled drawbridge openings for both Michigan Street and Maple-Oregon
Bridges so vehicular traffic congestion would not develop on downtown
Sturgeon Bay streets due to unscheduled bridge openings. This rule
provides at least two bridge openings per hour for both Michigan Street
and Maple-Oregon Street bridges, compared to the one bridge opening per
hour that was in place during the construction and rehabilitation of
the two highway bridges. It also retains the requirement during the
test schedule to open if at least 10 vessels have accumulated at either
bridge waiting for an opening. This rule also establishes the winter
operating date for Maple-Oregon Bridge (January 1 through March 14) and
rearranges the order of the three drawbridges to be presented
geographically in the regulatory language.

C. Discussion of Comments, Changes and the Final Rule

    The Coast Guard provided a 30-day comment period in conjunction
with the NPRM and no comments were received. The regulatory text
published in the NPRM has not changed in this final rule.

D. Regulatory Analyses

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

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This 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. This rule is expected to improve
traffic congestion and safety in the vicinity of the drawbridge and
does not exclude bridge openings for vessel traffic.

2. 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 Coast Guard did
not receive any comments from the Small Business Administration on this
rule. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.

3. 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 rule. 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 the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

    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 rule under that Order and have
determined that it does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INTFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

7. 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 rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will 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.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This 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.

10. Protection of Children

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

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does 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.

12. Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this 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.

13. Technical Standards

    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this 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 concluded
that this action is one of a category of actions which do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1,
paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction. Under figure 2-1, paragraph
(32)(e) of the Instruction an environmental analysis checklist and a
categorical exclusion determination are not required for this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
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; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Revise Sec.  117.1101 to read as follows:

Sec.  117.1101  Sturgeon Bay.

    (a) The Bayview (State Route 42/57) Bridge, mile 3.0 at Sturgeon
Bay, shall open on signal, except from December 1 through March 14, the
draw shall open on signal if notice is given at least 12 hours in
advance of intended passage.
    (b) The draw of the Maple-Oregon Bridge, mile 4.17 at Sturgeon Bay,
shall open on signal, except as follows:
    (1) From March 15 through December 31, need open on signal for
recreational vessels only on the quarter hour and three-quarter hour,
24 hours a day, if needed. However, if more than 10 vessels have
accumulated at the bridge, or vessels are seeking shelter from severe
weather, the bridge shall open on signal. This drawbridge, along with
the Michigan Street drawbridge, shall open simultaneously for larger
commercial vessels, as needed.
    (2) From January 1 through March 14, the draw shall open on signal
if notice is given at least 12 hours in advance of intended passage.
    (c) The draw of the Michigan Street Bridge, mile 4.3 at Sturgeon
Bay, shall open on signal, except as follows:
    (1) From March 15 through December 31, need open on signal for
recreational vessels only on the hour and half-hour, 24 hours a day, if
needed. However if more than 10 vessels have accumulated at the bridge,
or vessels are seeking shelter from severe weather, the bridge shall
open on signal. This drawbridge, along with the Maple-Oregon Street
drawbridge, shall open simultaneously for larger commercial vessels, as
needed.
    (2) From January 1 through March 14, the draw shall open on signal
if notice is given at least 12 hours in advance of intended passage.

    Dated: July 18, 2012.
M.N. Parks,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2012-18405 Filed 7-26-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: December 15, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 240)]
[Notices]
[Page 74309]
[DOCID:fr15de05-54]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP99-518-081]

Gas Transmission Northwest Corporation; Notice of Negotiated
Rates

December 7, 2005.
    Take notice that on November 30, 2005, Gas Transmission Northwest
Corporation (GTN) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff,
Third Revised Volume No. 1-A, the following tariff sheets, to become
effective December 1, 2005:

Twenty-Eighth Revised Sheet No. 15, Seventh Revised Sheet No. 17.

    GTN states that a copy of this filing has been served on GTN's
jurisdictional customers and interested state regulatory agencies.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible online at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5-7351 Filed 12-14-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P