Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Cheesequake Creek, NJ, 70563-70564 [05-23028]

Agencies

• Coast Guard
• DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 224 (Tuesday, November 22, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70563-70564]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-23028]



[[Page 70563]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD01-05-096]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Cheesequake Creek, 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 Route 35 Bridge, mile 0.0, 
across Cheesequake Creek at South Amboy, New Jersey. This proposed rule 
would allow the bridge owner to require a two hour notice from 11 p.m. 
to 7 a.m., year round and all day from December 1 through March 31. 
This rule is expected to meet the reasonable needs of navigation.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before January 23, 
2006.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments to Commander (obr), First Coast Guard 
District Bridge Branch, One South Street, Battery Park Building, New 
York, NY 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-
096), 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 Route 35 Bridge has a vertical clearance of 25 feet at mean 
high water and 30 feet at mean low water in the closed position. The 
existing drawbridge operation regulations are listed at 33 CFR 
117.709(a).
    The existing regulations require the bridge to operate as follows:
    From May 1 through October 31, from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m., the draw need 
only open on the hour. From 8 p.m. to 11 p.m. the draw shall open on 
signal. From 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. the draw shall open after at least a 
four hour notice is given. From November 1 through April 30 the draw 
shall open on signal after at least a four hour notice is given.
    On April 20, 2005 the Coast Guard published a final rule changing 
the drawbridge operation regulations for the Route 35 Bridge, to the 
current operation schedule outlined above.
    Subsequent to the publication of that final rule (70 FR 20464), the 
bridge owner and the Coast Guard were contacted by several mariners and 
a local public official advising that the four hour advance notice 
required by the new rule was problematic and that consideration be 
given to revising the rule.
    After conducting an investigation including a meeting of all 
interested parties, the Coast Guard is proposing to change the 
drawbridge operation regulations for the Route 35 Bridge to require a 
two hour notice during the times the bridge is not normally crewed 
instead of the four hour notice presently authorized, and to change the 
all day notice requirement from the existing November 1 through April 
30, to December 1 through March 31.

Discussion of Proposal

    This proposed rule would amend 33 CFR 117.709 by revising paragraph 
(a) to allow the bridge owner to require a two hour notice for bridge 
openings from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m., year round and all day from December 1 
through March 31.

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 (DHS).
    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 bridge will open 
during times when the bridge is not normally crewed after a two hour 
instead of four hour notice which is required by the existing 
regulations.

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 bridge will open 
during times the bridge is not normally crewed after a two hour instead 
of four hour notice which is required by the existing regulations.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have 
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see 
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what 
degree this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121),

[[Page 70564]]

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, One South Street, New York, NY, 10004. The telephone number is 
(212) 668-7165. 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; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); Department of 
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1; section 117.255 also issued 
under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 Stat. 5039.

    2. Section 117.709 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  117.709  Cheesequake Creek.

    (a) The draw of the Route 35 Bridge, at mile 0.0, at South Amboy, 
New Jersey, shall operate as follows:
    (1) From April 1 through November 30 from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m., the 
draw need only open on the hour. From 8 p.m. to 11 p.m. the draw shall 
open on signal. From 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. the draw shall open after a two 
hour notice is given by calling the number posted at the bridge.
    (2) From December 1 through March 31, the draw shall open on signal 
after a two hour notice is given by calling the number posted at the 
bridge.
* * * * *

    Dated: November 4, 2005.
David P. Pekoske,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 05-23028 Filed 11-21-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P