Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Hackensack River, NJ, 43812-43814 [05-15065]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
43812
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 145 / Friday, July 29, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Donnell M. Rini-Swyers, (202) 622–
4910; concerning submissions of
comments, or to request a hearing,
Richard Hurst, (202) 622–7180 (not tollfree numbers).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Under existing regulations, all
cooperatives to which subchapter T
applies (Subchapter T cooperatives) are
required to make income tax returns.
Except in the case of farmers’
cooperatives, the regulations require
that the return be made on Form 1120.
In the case of farmers’ cooperatives, the
regulations require that the return be
made on Form 990–C.
Most taxpayers required to make an
income tax return on Form 1120 must
file their return on or before the 15th
day of the third month following the
close of the taxpayer’s taxable year (21⁄2
month deadline). Some Subchapter T
cooperatives that make their returns on
Form 1120 are required to file by the 21⁄2
month deadline, but others are not
required to file their returns until the
15th day of the ninth month following
the close of the taxpayer’s taxable year
(81⁄2 month deadline). Because the Form
1120 does not distinguish between
Subchapter T cooperatives that must file
by the 21⁄2 month deadline and those
that must file by the 81⁄2 month
deadline, the IRS has difficulty
determining which filing deadline
applies and deciding whether to assert
delinquency and failure to pay penalties
in the case of returns filed after the 21⁄2
month deadline.
Explanation of Provisions
The proposed regulations provide that
all Subchapter T cooperatives must
make their income tax returns on Form
1120–C, ‘‘U.S. Income Tax Return for
Cooperative Associations,’’ or such
other form as may be designated by the
Commissioner. The information that
Subchapter T cooperatives will be
required to provide on new Form 1120–
C will assist taxpayers and the IRS in
determining the appropriate filing
deadline. Having that information will
reduce the burden on taxpayers and will
help the IRS avoid asserting penalties in
inappropriate cases. Having all
Subchapter T cooperatives make their
income tax returns on Form 1120–C will
also eliminate confusion over which
form to file and will promote efficiency
in addressing income tax issues
common to Subchapter T cooperatives.
Effect on Other Documents
The following publication is obsolete
as of [DATE THIS DOCUMENT IS
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:15 Jul 28, 2005
Jkt 205001
PUBLISHED AS A FINAL RULE IN
FEDERAL REGISTER].
Announcement 84–26 (1984–11 I.R.B.
42).
Special Analyses
It has been determined that this notice
of proposed rulemaking is not a
significant regulatory action as defined
in Executive Order 12866. Therefore, a
regulatory assessment is not required. It
also has been determined that section
553(b) of the Administrative Procedure
Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply
to these regulations, and because these
regulations do not impose a collection
of information on small entities, the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
chapter 6) does not apply. Pursuant to
section 7805(f) of the Internal Revenue
Code, this notice of proposed
rulemaking will be submitted to the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration for comment
on its impact on small business.
Comments and Requests for a Public
Hearing
Before these proposed regulations are
adopted as final regulations,
consideration will be given to any
written (a signed original and eight (8)
copies) or electronic comments that are
submitted timely to the IRS. The IRS
and Treasury Department request
comments on the clarity of the proposed
rules and how they can be made easier
to understand. All comments will be
available for public inspection and
copying. A public hearing will be
scheduled if requested in writing by any
person that timely submits written
comments. If a public hearing is
scheduled, notice of the date, time, and
place for the public hearing will be
published in the Federal Register.
Drafting Information
The principal author of these
regulations is Donnell M. Rini-Swyers,
Office of Assistant Chief Counsel
(Procedure & Administration).
List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1
Income taxes, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Proposed Amendments to the
Regulations
Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 1—INCOME TAXES, REPORTING
AND RECORDKEEPING
REQUIREMENTS
Paragraph 1. The authority citation
for part 1 continues to read, in part, as
follows:
PO 00000
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * * .
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Par. 2. Section 1.6012–2 is amended
by revising paragraph (f) to read as
follows:
§ 1.6012–2 Corporations required to make
returns of income.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Subchapter T cooperatives—(1) In
general. For taxable years ending on or
after December 31, 2006, a cooperative
organization described in section 1381
(including a farmers’ cooperative
exempt from tax under section 521) is
required to make a return, whether or
not it has taxable income and regardless
of the amount of its gross income, on
Form 1120–C, ‘‘U.S. Income Tax Return
for Cooperative Associations,’’ or such
other form as may be designated by the
Commissioner.
(2) Farmers’ cooperatives. For taxable
years ending before December 31, 2006,
a farmers’ cooperative organization
described in section 521(b)(1) (including
a farmers’ cooperative that is not exempt
from tax under section 521) is required
to make a return on Form 990–C,
‘‘Farmers’’ Cooperative Association
Income Tax Return.’’
*
*
*
*
*
Mark E. Matthews,
Deputy Commissioner for Services and
Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 05–15060 Filed 7–28–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD01–05–061]
RIN 1625–AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations;
Hackensack River, NJ
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
change the drawbridge operating
regulations governing the operation of
the Willis Amtrak Portal Bridge, mile
5.0, across the Hackensack River at
Little Snake Hill, New Jersey. This
notice of proposed rulemaking would
allow the bridge owner to expand the
two time periods in the morning and in
the afternoon, Monday through Friday,
when the bridge may remain closed to
vessel traffic.
DATES: Comments must reach the Coast
Guard on or before August 29, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments to
Commander (obr), First Coast Guard
E:\FR\FM\29JYP1.SGM
29JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 145 / Friday, July 29, 2005 / Proposed Rules
District Bridge Branch, One South
Street, Battery Park Building, New York,
New York, 10004, or deliver them to the
same address between 7 a.m. and 3
p.m., Monday through Friday, except,
Federal holidays. The telephone number
is (212) 668–7165. The First Coast
Guard District, Bridge Branch,
maintains the public docket for this
rulemaking. Comments and material
received from the public, as well as
documents indicated in this preamble as
being available in the docket, will
become part of this docket and will be
available for inspection or copying at
the First Coast Guard District, Bridge
Branch, 7 a.m. to 3 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Joe Arca, Project Officer, First Coast
Guard District, (212) 668–7165.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
comments or related material. If you do
so, please include your name and
address, identify the docket number for
this rulemaking (CGD01–05–061),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and give the reason for each
comment. Please submit all comments
and related material in an unbound
format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches,
suitable for copying. If you would like
to know if they reached us, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed
postcard or envelope. We will consider
all comments and material received
during the comment period. We may
change this proposed rule in view of
them.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for a meeting by writing to the First
Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, at
the address under ADDRESSES explaining
why one would be beneficial. If we
determine that one would aid this
rulemaking, we will hold one at a time
and place announced by a later notice
in the Federal Register.
Background and purpose
The Amtrak Portal Bridge has a
vertical clearance of 23 feet at mean
high water and 28 feet at mean low
water in the closed position. The
existing operating regulations are listed
at 33 CFR 117.723(c).
The owner of the bridge, National
Railroad Passenger Corporation
(AMTRAK), requested a change to the
drawbridge operation regulations that
would expand the two time periods in
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:15 Jul 28, 2005
Jkt 205001
the morning and afternoon, Monday
through Friday, when the bridge may
remain closed to vessel traffic.
Rail traffic during the morning and
afternoon commuter periods has
increased. Bridge openings during the
two commuter time periods have caused
delays to rail traffic prompting the
bridge owner to request the expansion
of the bridge closure periods Monday
through Friday.
The Coast Guard decided to conduct
a test to help determine if the proposed
drawbridge operation schedule changes
would not cause undue delays to vessel
traffic.
On February 26, 2004, the Coast
Guard published a temporary 90-day
deviation, with request for comment,
(69 FR 8817) to test changes to the
drawbridge operation regulations for the
Amtrak Portal Bridge identical to those
proposed in this notice of proposed
rulemaking. That temporary deviation
was in effect from March 1, 2004,
through May 29, 2004. We received nine
comment letters in response to the
temporary deviation and request for
comment. All the comment letters were
in favor of making the tested drawbridge
operation schedule a permanent rule
change.
On November 23, 2004, we published
a second 90-day deviation (69 FR 68079)
to test the same drawbridge operation
schedule as above during the winter
months of the year. The second test
deviation was in effect from December
13, 2004 through March 12, 2005. We
received eight comment letters in
response to our second test deviation.
All eight letters were in favor of the
proposed rule change.
The existing drawbridge operation
regulations allow the bridge to remain
closed to vessel traffic, Monday through
Friday, from 7:20 a.m. to 9:20 a.m. and
from 4:30 p.m. to 6:50 p.m., daily.
Under this proposed rule the Amtrak
Portal Bridge would not open for vessel
traffic, Monday through Friday, from 6
a.m. to 10 a.m. and from 4 p.m. to 8
p.m., daily. Additional bridge openings
would be provided for commercial
vessels from 6 a.m. to 7:20 a.m., from
9:20 a.m. to 10 a.m., from 4 p.m. to 4:30
p.m. and from 6:50 p.m. to 8 p.m., if at
least a one-hour advance notice is given
by calling the number posted at the
bridge.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
This proposed rule would amend 33
CFR 117.723 by revising paragraph (c),
which details the Amtrak Portal Bridge
operation schedule. Under this
proposed rule the Amtrak Portal Bridge
may remain closed for vessel traffic,
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43813
Monday through Friday, from 6 a.m. to
10 a.m. and from 4 p.m. to 8 p.m.
Additional bridge openings would be
provided for commercial vessels from 6
a.m. to 7:20 a.m., 9:20 a.m. to 10 a.m.,
4 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. and from 6:50 p.m.
to 8 p.m., provided at least a one-hour
advance notice is given by calling the
number posted at the bridge.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed rule is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866,
Regulatory Planning and Review, and
does not require an assessment of
potential costs and benefits under
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of
Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order. It is not
‘‘significant’’ under the regulatory
policies and procedures of the
Department of Homeland Security.
We expect the economic impact of
this proposed rule to be so minimal that
a full Regulatory Evaluation, under the
regulatory policies and procedures of
DHS, is unnecessary.
This conclusion is based on the fact
that the expansion of the existing bridge
closures were previously tested
successfully with no objections from the
marine facilities or operators that use
this waterway.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we considered
whether this proposed rule would have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises
small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations that are independently
owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and
governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under
section 5 U.S.C. 605(b), that this
proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This conclusion is based on the fact
that the expansion of the existing bridge
closures were previously tested
successfully with no objections from the
marine facilities or operators that use
this waterway.
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.
E:\FR\FM\29JYP1.SGM
29JYP1
43814
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 145 / Friday, July 29, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–
121), we want to assist small entities in
understanding this proposed rule so that
they can better evaluate its effects on
them and participate in the rulemaking.
If the rule would affect your small
business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please contact us in writing
at, Commander (obr), First Coast Guard
District, Bridge Branch, 408 Atlantic
Avenue, Boston, MA 02110–3350. The
telephone number is (617) 223–8364.
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.
Collection of Information
This proposed rule would call for no
new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520.).
Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
effect on State or local governments and
would either preempt State law or
impose a substantial direct cost of
compliance on them. We have analyzed
this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it does not have
implications for federalism.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their discretionary regulatory actions. In
particular, the Act addresses actions
that may result in the expenditure by a
State, local, or tribal government, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 or more in any one year.
Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not effect a
taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under E.O.
12630, Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable
standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform, to minimize litigation,
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:15 Jul 28, 2005
Jkt 205001
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce
burden.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically
significant rule and would not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to
safety that may disproportionately affect
children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it would not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have
determined that it is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under that order because
it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under Executive Order 12866 and is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy. The Administrator of the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs
has not designated it as a significant
energy action. Therefore, it does not
require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use
voluntary consensus standards in their
regulatory activities unless the agency
provides Congress, through the Office of
Management and Budget, with an
explanation of why using these
standards would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are
technical standards (e.g., specifications
of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling
procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This proposed rule does not use
technical standards. Therefore, we did
not consider the use of voluntary
consensus standards.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Commandant Instruction
M16475.1D, 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 there are no factors
in this case that would limit the use of
a categorical exclusion under section
2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this
rule is categorically excluded, under
figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of the
Instruction, from further environment
documentation because it has been
determined that the promulgation of
operating regulations or procedures for
drawbridges are categorically excluded.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
Regulations
For the reasons set out 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; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1; 33
CFR 1.05–1(g); section 117.255 also issued
under the authority of Pub. L. 102–587, 106
Stat. 5039.
2. Section 117.723 is amended by
revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
§ 117.723
Hackensack River.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Except as provided in paragraph
(a)(1) of this section, the draw of the
Amtrak Portal Bridge, mile 5.0, at Little
Snake Hill, need not open for the
passage of vessel traffic Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays, from 6
a.m. to 10 a.m. and from 4 p.m. to 8 p.m.
Additional bridge openings shall be
provided for commercial vessels from 6
a.m. to 7:20 a.m.; 9:20 a.m. to 10 a.m.;
4 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. and from 6:50 p.m.
to 8 p.m., if at least a one-hour advance
notice is given by calling the number
posted at the bridge.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: July 12, 2005.
David P. Pekoske,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 05–15065 Filed 7–28–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
E:\FR\FM\29JYP1.SGM
29JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 145 (Friday, July 29, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43812-43814]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-15065]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD01-05-061]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Hackensack River, NJ
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the drawbridge operating
regulations governing the operation of the Willis Amtrak Portal Bridge,
mile 5.0, across the Hackensack River at Little Snake Hill, New Jersey.
This notice of proposed rulemaking would allow the bridge owner to
expand the two time periods in the morning and in the afternoon, Monday
through Friday, when the bridge may remain closed to vessel traffic.
DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before August 29,
2005.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments to Commander (obr), First Coast Guard
[[Page 43813]]
District Bridge Branch, One South Street, Battery Park Building, New
York, New York, 10004, or deliver them to the same address between 7
a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except, Federal holidays. The
telephone number is (212) 668-7165. The First Coast Guard District,
Bridge Branch, maintains the public docket for this rulemaking.
Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents
indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, will
become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or
copying at the First Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, 7 a.m. to 3
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Joe Arca, Project Officer, First
Coast Guard District, (212) 668-7165.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments or related material. If you do so, please include your name
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (CGD01-05-
061), indicate the specific section of this document to which each
comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit
all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than
8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know if
they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during
the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to the First Coast Guard District,
Bridge Branch, at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would
be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we
will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the
Federal Register.
Background and purpose
The Amtrak Portal Bridge has a vertical clearance of 23 feet at
mean high water and 28 feet at mean low water in the closed position.
The existing operating regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.723(c).
The owner of the bridge, National Railroad Passenger Corporation
(AMTRAK), requested a change to the drawbridge operation regulations
that would expand the two time periods in the morning and afternoon,
Monday through Friday, when the bridge may remain closed to vessel
traffic.
Rail traffic during the morning and afternoon commuter periods has
increased. Bridge openings during the two commuter time periods have
caused delays to rail traffic prompting the bridge owner to request the
expansion of the bridge closure periods Monday through Friday.
The Coast Guard decided to conduct a test to help determine if the
proposed drawbridge operation schedule changes would not cause undue
delays to vessel traffic.
On February 26, 2004, the Coast Guard published a temporary 90-day
deviation, with request for comment, (69 FR 8817) to test changes to
the drawbridge operation regulations for the Amtrak Portal Bridge
identical to those proposed in this notice of proposed rulemaking. That
temporary deviation was in effect from March 1, 2004, through May 29,
2004. We received nine comment letters in response to the temporary
deviation and request for comment. All the comment letters were in
favor of making the tested drawbridge operation schedule a permanent
rule change.
On November 23, 2004, we published a second 90-day deviation (69 FR
68079) to test the same drawbridge operation schedule as above during
the winter months of the year. The second test deviation was in effect
from December 13, 2004 through March 12, 2005. We received eight
comment letters in response to our second test deviation. All eight
letters were in favor of the proposed rule change.
The existing drawbridge operation regulations allow the bridge to
remain closed to vessel traffic, Monday through Friday, from 7:20 a.m.
to 9:20 a.m. and from 4:30 p.m. to 6:50 p.m., daily. Under this
proposed rule the Amtrak Portal Bridge would not open for vessel
traffic, Monday through Friday, from 6 a.m. to 10 a.m. and from 4 p.m.
to 8 p.m., daily. Additional bridge openings would be provided for
commercial vessels from 6 a.m. to 7:20 a.m., from 9:20 a.m. to 10 a.m.,
from 4 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. and from 6:50 p.m. to 8 p.m., if at least a
one-hour advance notice is given by calling the number posted at the
bridge.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
This proposed rule would amend 33 CFR 117.723 by revising paragraph
(c), which details the Amtrak Portal Bridge operation schedule. Under
this proposed rule the Amtrak Portal Bridge may remain closed for
vessel traffic, Monday through Friday, from 6 a.m. to 10 a.m. and from
4 p.m. to 8 p.m.
Additional bridge openings would be provided for commercial vessels
from 6 a.m. to 7:20 a.m., 9:20 a.m. to 10 a.m., 4 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. and
from 6:50 p.m. to 8 p.m., provided at least a one-hour advance notice
is given by calling the number posted at the bridge.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits
under 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has
not reviewed it under that Order. It is not ``significant'' under the
regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland
Security.
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation, under the regulatory
policies and procedures of DHS, is unnecessary.
This conclusion is based on the fact that the expansion of the
existing bridge closures were previously tested successfully with no
objections from the marine facilities or operators that use this
waterway.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under section 5 U.S.C. 605(b), that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This conclusion is based on the fact that the expansion of the
existing bridge closures were previously tested successfully with no
objections from the marine facilities or operators that use this
waterway.
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.
[[Page 43814]]
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact us in writing at, Commander
(obr), First Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, 408 Atlantic Avenue,
Boston, MA 02110-3350. The telephone number is (617) 223-8364. 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.
Collection of Information
This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.).
Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule
under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications
for federalism.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any
one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not effect a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under E.O. 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction
M16475.1D, 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 there are no factors in this case that would limit
the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the
Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under
figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, from further
environment documentation because it has been determined that the
promulgation of operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges are
categorically excluded.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
Regulations
For the reasons set out 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; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); section 117.255 also issued
under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 Stat. 5039.
2. Section 117.723 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 117.723 Hackensack River.
* * * * *
(c) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, the
draw of the Amtrak Portal Bridge, mile 5.0, at Little Snake Hill, need
not open for the passage of vessel traffic Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays, from 6 a.m. to 10 a.m. and from 4 p.m. to 8
p.m. Additional bridge openings shall be provided for commercial
vessels from 6 a.m. to 7:20 a.m.; 9:20 a.m. to 10 a.m.; 4 p.m. to 4:30
p.m. and from 6:50 p.m. to 8 p.m., if at least a one-hour advance
notice is given by calling the number posted at the bridge.
* * * * *
Dated: July 12, 2005.
David P. Pekoske,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 05-15065 Filed 7-28-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
