Environmental Impact Statement for Improvements To Enhance the Capacity and Improve the Operation of the Portal Bridge, a Rail Crossing Over the Hackensack River Along the Northeast Corridor Between Kearny, NJ and Secaucus, NJ, 74574-74576 [E6-21015]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
74574
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 238 / Tuesday, December 12, 2006 / Notices
6180.14 and FRA F 6180.47). The new
expiration date for this information
collection is August 31, 2009. (14) OMB
No. 2130–0516, Remotely Controlled
Switch Operations (49 CFR part 218).
The new expiration date for this
information collection is September 30,
2009. (15) OMB No. 2130–0509, State
Safety Participation Regulations and
Remedial Actions (49 CFR part 209)
(Forms FRA F 6180.33/61/67/96/96A/
109/110/111/112). The new expiration
date for this information collection is
September 30, 2009. (16) OMB No.
2130–0005, Hours of Service
Regulations (49 CFR 228). The new
expiration date for this information
collection is November 30, 2009.
Persons affected by the above
referenced information collections are
not required to respond to any
collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number. These approvals by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB)
certify that FRA has complied with the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13) and with
5 CFR 1320.5(b) by informing the public
about OMB’s approval of the
information collection requirements of
the above cited forms and regulations.
Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520.
Issued in Washington, DC on December 6,
2006.
D.J. Stadtler,
Director, Office of Budget, Federal Railroad
Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–21014 Filed 12–11–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
Environmental Impact Statement for
Improvements To Enhance the
Capacity and Improve the Operation of
the Portal Bridge, a Rail Crossing Over
the Hackensack River Along the
Northeast Corridor Between Kearny,
NJ and Secaucus, NJ
Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), U.S. Department
of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: FRA is issuing this notice to
advise the public that it will jointly
prepare an environmental impact
statement (EIS) with the New Jersey
Transit Corporation (NJ TRANSIT) and
in cooperation with the National
Railroad Passenger Corporation
(AMTRAK), to study improvements to
enhance the capacity and improve the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:00 Dec 11, 2006
Jkt 211001
operation of the Portal Bridge, a twotrack moveable swing-span bridge
crossing over the Hackensack River
along AMTRAK’s Northeast Corridor
rail line. AMTRAK and NJ TRANSIT are
proposing to enhance the capacity and
improve the operation of the Portal
Bridge.
FRA is issuing this notice to solicit
public and agency input into the
development of the scope of the EIS and
to advise the public that outreach
activities conducted by NJ TRANSIT
and its representatives will be
considered in the preparation of the EIS.
The Federal Transit Administration
(FTA) is a cooperating agency for the
environmental review. FTA will
contribute information for which it has
special expertise and ensure the EIS is
prepared in compliance with its
environmental regulations. The EIS will
be prepared in accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) of 1969
and the applicable regulations
implementing NEPA as set forth in 64
FR 28545 (May 26, 1999) and 23 CFR
part 771. The EIS will also address as
necessary Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act, Section 4(f) of
the U.S. Department of Transportation
Act of 1966 (49 U.S.C. 303) (DOT Act)
and other applicable Federal, and State
laws and regulations.
The EIS will evaluate a ‘‘No Action
Alternative’’ along with various build
alternatives which could retain, replace,
or modify the existing Portal Bridge.
Alternatives proposing to retain the
existing bridge would include the
rehabilitation of the existing structure to
a state of good repair, along with the
construction of an additional bridge for
added capacity. The new bridge could
be either a moveable or a fixed bridge
and its height above mean high water
(MHW) would vary accordingly. The
new structure may consist of a two- or
three-track bridge. Alternatives
proposing to replace the existing bridge
would require the construction of two
new bridges of varying heights, types,
and number of tracks. The two new
bridges could be built on new parallel
alignments, or one new bridge could be
built on the existing bridge alignment by
use of a staged approach. Each of these
new bridges would have two or three
new tracks. Alternatives proposing to
modify the existing bridge would entail
rehabilitation and raising of the existing
bridge to a new height. The existing
bridge may be fixed in place or may
remain moveable, depending on the
proposed height above MHW. A new
bridge could also be constructed on a
different alignment.
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
A scoping meeting will be held
on January 17, 2007 in the Newark
Public Library, Centennial Hall, 2nd
Floor, 5 Washington Street, Newark, NJ,
07101, (973) 733–7800, from 4 to 8 p.m.
To ensure that all significant issues are
identified and considered, a formal
presentation will be made at 4:30 and 6
p.m. followed by the opportunity for the
public to comment on the scope of the
EIS. Those wishing to speak are
required to register at the meeting
location. At the meeting, comments may
also be submitted in written form, or
orally one-on-one to a stenographer.
Persons interested in providing
written comments on the scope of the
EIS should do so by January 31, 2007.
Written comments sent should be sent
by mail to persons identified below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
further information regarding the
environmental review, please contact:
Mr. John Wilkins, Director, Capital
Planning, The New Jersey Transit
Corporation, One Penn Plaza East,
Newark, NJ 07105–2246, telephone
(973) 491–7846, or Mr. David
Valenstein, Environmental Program
Manager, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1120 Vermont Avenue,
NW., Mail Stop 20, Washington DC
20590, telephone (202) 493–6368.
Information and documents regarding
the environmental review process will
be also made available through
appropriate means, including the
project Web site: https://
www.portalbridgenec.com.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
I. Description of Project Area
AMTRAK owns and operates the
Northeast Corridor rail line from
Pennsylvania Station New York to
Union Station in Washington DC,
including the heavily used ‘‘High Line’’
portion connecting Newark, NJ and New
York, NY across the Portal Bridge. NJ
TRANSIT’s Northeast Corridor Line
operates over AMTRAK’s Northeast
Corridor in portions of Pennsylvania
and in New Jersey from Trenton to New
York’s Pennsylvania Station. NJ
TRANSIT’s North Jersey Coast Line,
certain Montclair-Boonton Line trains,
and certain Morris & Essex Line trains
join AMTRAK’s Northeast Corridor west
of the Hackensack River utilize the
Portal Bridge and subsequently travel
under the Hudson River to their
terminus at New York’s Pennsylvania
Station.
NJ TRANSIT’s commuter rail system
ridership has been growing and will
continue to grow due to population
growth in communities throughout New
Jersey, Orange and Rockland Counties
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 238 / Tuesday, December 12, 2006 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
in New York, and portions of
Pennsylvania. NJ TRANSIT operates 20
trains during the peak morning hour
over the Portal Bridge that serve
approximately 17,700 passengers.
AMTRAK currently operates
approximately 48 scheduled trains in
each direction over this segment of the
Northeast Corridor every weekday,
including 15 time-sensitive premium
Acela Express trains. While Portal
Bridge is clearly a vital river crossing,
the capacity constraints and problems
caused by the existing Portal Bridge
decrease schedule reliability for both
AMTRAK and NJ TRANSIT customers.
Over the past few decades,
improvements to the Northeast
Corridor’s infrastructure have greatly
enhanced rail operations for AMTRAK
and NJ TRANSIT. The Portal Bridge is
an essential yet weak link along the
Northeast Corridor. Planned projects
intended to meet future transportation
demands will place additional
importance on a reliable and efficient
Hackensack River crossing. The FTA
and NJ TRANSIT, in partnership with
the Port Authority of New York and
New Jersey are currently preparing an
EIS for the Access to the Region’s Core
(ARC) project. The ARC EIS will
evaluate a new two-track tunnel under
the Hudson River, a new rail terminal in
Manhattan adjacent to the existing Penn
Station, and new track capacity on the
Northeast Corridor. While the proposed
operating plan for ARC could be
achieved using alternate routes, the
locally preferred alternative results in a
total of 37 NJ TRANSIT and AMTRAK
trains operating over an enhanced Portal
Bridge in the AM peak hour. Currently,
23 trains operate over Portal Bridge in
the AM peak hour. The ARC as well as
other planned projects would therefore
increase the need for Portal Bridge
improvements.
II. Problem Identification
The existing Portal Bridge was
constructed in 1910 and is a two-track,
moveable swing-span bridge that crosses
the Hackensack River in New Jersey
between the City of Kearny and the City
of Secaucus. The Northeast Corridor has
two tracks over the Portal Bridge and
between Swift Interlocking and
Secaucus Junction, which creates two
bottlenecks. Trains must merge from
four tracks to two tracks at Swift
Interlocking, and from four tracks to two
tracks at Secaucus Junction. Because
multiple rail lines are merging onto a
two-track crossing, the window of
opportunity for each train is reduced.
This operational inflexibility means that
a delay on one rail line can cascade to
other rail lines. Portal Bridge is a critical
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:00 Dec 11, 2006
Jkt 211001
infrastructure element for both
AMTRAK and NJ TRANSIT, enabling
movement between east-of-Hudson and
west-of-Hudson destinations, however
the existing bridge, poses safety
concerns, capacity constraints, and
operational inflexibility.
The Portal Bridge was constructed
nearly a century ago. Design standards
for steel railroad bridges anticipate a
typical lifespan of 100 years. Given the
Portal Bridge’s age, the structure is
nearing the end of its useful life. Portal
Bridge presents a considerable ongoing
operation and maintenance expense for
AMTRAK because the mechanical and
structural components are prone to
failure due to age and wear and because
swing bridges are the most complicated
movable rail bridge type. Special rail
connections, known as miter rails, allow
the rails to disengage and the bridge to
swing open and closed. These
connections are automatically
controlled mechanical separations in
the track that move apart for the swing
span to open and then are realigned
after it is closed. Mechanical wedges
must lock the bridge when in the closed
position and special mechanical electric
power catenery joints must separate or
rejoin the continuous contact wire on
either end of the bridge for each
movement. As a result of these features,
while trains can operate at 90 miles per
hour (mph) on adjacent portions of the
Northeast Corridor, speeds over the
Portal Bridge are restricted to 70 mph.
The Hackensack River is a navigable
waterway and marine traffic requires
frequent bridge openings. These
openings increase the likelihood of
mechanical malfunctions, which have
in the past caused the bridge to remain
in the open position for long periods of
time, resulting in train delays. Due to
these types of issues, older swing span
bridges are now being replaced by other
types of moveable bridges such as
vertical lift and single-span bascule
bridges.
The Hackensack River is a navigable
waterway governed by the U.S. Coast
Guard. The existing Portal Bridge has
only 23 feet of clearance between mean
high water (MHW) and the lowest steel
elevation of the bridge. As a result,
marine traffic along this segment of the
Hackensack River requires the frequent
opening of the Portal Bridge and
disruption of Northeast Corridor train
traffic. This conflict is currently
managed by restricting the times during
which the bridge is permitted to open.
Nonetheless, the lengthy time that is
required to open and close the Portal
Bridge for marine traffic continues to be
disruptive to efficient rail operations.
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
74575
To avoid disruption to passenger
service, AMTRAK is forced to conduct
bridge maintenance and inspection
during increasingly limited time
periods, such as at night and on
weekends. As traffic along the Northeast
Corridor increases, fewer suitable time
periods for maintenance and inspection
will be available.
III. Alternatives to be Considered
The EIS will consider a No Action
Alternative and a number of different
build alternatives to improve the
existing Northeast Corridor rail crossing
over the Hackensack River. These
alternatives will consider retention or
removal of the existing Portal Bridge
and construction of one or two new
bridges. Alternatives retaining the Portal
Bridge will, in some cases, include the
modification of certain characteristics of
the existing bridge—such as height and
operation (e.g., a moveable structure
versus a fixed structure). For a new
bridge, alternatives proposed will vary
in bridge height, type (moveable/fixed),
and number of tracks to be constructed
between Swift Interlocking and
Secaucus Junction.
Alternatives Retaining the Existing
Portal Bridge: These alternatives would
retain the existing Portal Bridge and
include construction of a new two-track
or three-track bridge, either fixed or
moveable.
Alternatives Modifying the Existing
Portal Bridge: These alternatives would
involve physically modifying the
existing Portal Bridge (beyond normal
maintenance), rehabilitating the
structure, and raising it above its
existing height. Some of these
alternatives would raise the existing
bridge so that it could be fixed in a
closed position. Other alternatives
would raise the bridge to a lesser height
and retain its moveable nature. These
alternatives would also include a new
bridge, either fixed or moveable, with
two or three tracks.
Alternatives Removing the Existing
Portal Bridge: These alternatives would
involve the construction of two new
bridges and removal of the existing
Portal Bridge. These alternatives would
include a mix of bridge height,
operation type (moveable or fixed), and
alignment along the Hackensack River.
Some of these alternatives would
include the construction of a new twoor three-track movable bridge with a
second new two-track fixed or moveable
bridge. Other alternatives in this
category would include a new two-track
or three-track fixed bridge and a second
new two-track fixed bridge.
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
74576
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 238 / Tuesday, December 12, 2006 / Notices
IV. Probable Effects
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
The FRA, NJ TRANSIT, and AMTRAK
will evaluate both project-specific and
cumulative changes to the social,
economic and physical environment—
including land use and socioeconomic
conditions, ecology, water resources,
historic and archaeological resources,
visual character and aesthetics,
contaminated and hazardous materials,
transportation, air quality, noise and
vibration, environmental justice, and
cumulative and secondary effects. The
analysis will be undertaken consistent
with NEPA, Council on Environmental
Quality regulations, Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act, FRA
guidance, FTA regulations, DOT
guidance, and Section 4(f) of the DOT
Act, along with other applicable Federal
and State regulations.
Federal Railroad Administration
V. Scoping Process
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
FRA invites all interested individuals,
organizations, and Federal, State, and
local agencies to comment on the scope
of the EIS. Comments are encouraged on
specific social, economic, or
environmental issues to be evaluated,
and on reasonable alternatives that may
be less costly, more cost effective or
have fewer environmental impacts
while achieving similar transportation
objectives.
NJ TRANSIT will be leading the
outreach activities during the public
scoping process, beginning with the
scoping meeting identified under DATES
above. Following the public scoping
process, public outreach activities will
include meetings with the Regional
Citizens’ Liaison Committee (RCLC)
established for the study, as well as
meetings with interested parties or
small groups. Those wishing to
participate in the RCLC may do so by
registering on the project Web site at
https://www.portalbridgenec.com. As
part of the study process, the project
Web site listed will be periodically
updated to reflect the project’s status. In
addition, newsletters will be circulated
to a broad constituency to ensure people
are informed about the project.
Additional opportunities for public
participation will be announced through
mailings, notices, advertisements and
press releases.
Issued in Washington, DC, on December 5,
2006.
Mark E. Yachmetz,
Associate Administrator for Railroad
Development.
[FR Doc. E6–21015 Filed 12–11–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:00 Dec 11, 2006
Jkt 211001
Petition for Waiver of Compliance
In accordance with Part 211 of Title
49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR),
notice is hereby given that the Federal
Railroad Administration (FRA) received
a request for a waiver of compliance
with certain requirements of its safety
standards. The individual petition is
described below, including the party
seeking relief, the regulatory provisions
involved, the nature of the relief being
requested, and the petitioner’s
arguments in favor of relief.
Canadian National Railway Company
[Docket Number FRA–2006–26178]
The Canadian National Railway
Company (CN) requests a waiver of
compliance from certain provisions of
Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) Part 228.9(a)(1), Hours of Service
of Railroad Employees, for CN to utilize
a computerized system of recording
hours of duty data. The CFR requires
that records maintained under Part
228.9(a)(1) be signed by the employee
whose time is being recorded, or in the
case of train and engine crews, signed
by the ranking crewmember. CN seeks
to utilize a computerized system of
recording hours of duty information
which would not comply with the above
requirements for a ‘‘signature’’ of the
employee or ranking crewmember. CN
proposes that each employee will have
his or her own identification number
(ID) and personal identification number
(PIN). The PIN will remain confidential
to the employee. The employee ID and
PIN will be used to restrict access to
jobs or train reporting screens to only
the employee or ranking crew member
of that specific job or train. When an
employee accesses his or her reporting
screens for input of the hours of service
record required by CFR Part 228.11, the
employee’s PIN will not appear on the
computer screen. After entering the
appropriate data, the employee will be
asked to ‘‘certify’’ his or her entries.
When certified, the data entered by the
employee will be date- and timestamped by the computer. The
employee’s certified record will then be
available through the FRA Inspection
Screen and will display the employee’s
ID Number along with the date and time
of certification. CN proposes to replace
the current manually signed paper
record with a printable copy of the
employee’s program-entered data
showing the date, time and ID of
entering employee.
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
CN warrants that FRA will be able to
access each employee’s certified records
through agency-approved selection
criteria. This criteria makes all CN
employee hours of service records in the
program available for review and
printing by an inspector.
CN maintains that the change is in the
best interests of all parties because it
will reduce unnecessary paperwork and
the costs associated therewith while
providing the railroad, its employees,
and the FRA with a superior level of
information on a more timely basis than
is currently available.
Interested parties are invited to
participate in these proceedings by
submitting written data or comments.
FRA does not anticipate scheduling a
public hearing in connection with these
proceedings since the facts do not
appear to warrant a hearing. If any
interested party desires an opportunity
for oral comment, they should notify
FRA in writing before the end of the
comment period and specify the basis
for their request.
All communications concerning these
proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number (FR–2006–
26178) and may be submitted by one of
the following methods:
• Web site: https://dms.dot.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting
comments on the DOT electronic site;
• Fax: 202–493–2251;
• Mail: Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building,
Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590–
0001; or
• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on
the plaza level of the Nassif Building,
400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Communications received within 45
days of the date of this notice will be
considered by FRA before final action is
taken. Comments received after that
date will be considered as far as
practicable. All written communications
concerning these proceedings are
available for examination during regular
business hours (9 a.m.–5 p.m.) at the
above facility. All documents in the
public docket are also available for
inspection and copying on the Internet
at the docket facility’s Web site at
https://dms.dot.gov.
Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 238 (Tuesday, December 12, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74574-74576]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-21015]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
Environmental Impact Statement for Improvements To Enhance the
Capacity and Improve the Operation of the Portal Bridge, a Rail
Crossing Over the Hackensack River Along the Northeast Corridor Between
Kearny, NJ and Secaucus, NJ
AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: FRA is issuing this notice to advise the public that it will
jointly prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) with the New
Jersey Transit Corporation (NJ TRANSIT) and in cooperation with the
National Railroad Passenger Corporation (AMTRAK), to study improvements
to enhance the capacity and improve the operation of the Portal Bridge,
a two-track moveable swing-span bridge crossing over the Hackensack
River along AMTRAK's Northeast Corridor rail line. AMTRAK and NJ
TRANSIT are proposing to enhance the capacity and improve the operation
of the Portal Bridge.
FRA is issuing this notice to solicit public and agency input into
the development of the scope of the EIS and to advise the public that
outreach activities conducted by NJ TRANSIT and its representatives
will be considered in the preparation of the EIS. The Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) is a cooperating agency for the environmental
review. FTA will contribute information for which it has special
expertise and ensure the EIS is prepared in compliance with its
environmental regulations. The EIS will be prepared in accordance with
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) of
1969 and the applicable regulations implementing NEPA as set forth in
64 FR 28545 (May 26, 1999) and 23 CFR part 771. The EIS will also
address as necessary Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act, Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966
(49 U.S.C. 303) (DOT Act) and other applicable Federal, and State laws
and regulations.
The EIS will evaluate a ``No Action Alternative'' along with
various build alternatives which could retain, replace, or modify the
existing Portal Bridge. Alternatives proposing to retain the existing
bridge would include the rehabilitation of the existing structure to a
state of good repair, along with the construction of an additional
bridge for added capacity. The new bridge could be either a moveable or
a fixed bridge and its height above mean high water (MHW) would vary
accordingly. The new structure may consist of a two- or three-track
bridge. Alternatives proposing to replace the existing bridge would
require the construction of two new bridges of varying heights, types,
and number of tracks. The two new bridges could be built on new
parallel alignments, or one new bridge could be built on the existing
bridge alignment by use of a staged approach. Each of these new bridges
would have two or three new tracks. Alternatives proposing to modify
the existing bridge would entail rehabilitation and raising of the
existing bridge to a new height. The existing bridge may be fixed in
place or may remain moveable, depending on the proposed height above
MHW. A new bridge could also be constructed on a different alignment.
DATES: A scoping meeting will be held on January 17, 2007 in the Newark
Public Library, Centennial Hall, 2nd Floor, 5 Washington Street,
Newark, NJ, 07101, (973) 733-7800, from 4 to 8 p.m. To ensure that all
significant issues are identified and considered, a formal presentation
will be made at 4:30 and 6 p.m. followed by the opportunity for the
public to comment on the scope of the EIS. Those wishing to speak are
required to register at the meeting location. At the meeting, comments
may also be submitted in written form, or orally one-on-one to a
stenographer.
Persons interested in providing written comments on the scope of
the EIS should do so by January 31, 2007. Written comments sent should
be sent by mail to persons identified below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information regarding the
environmental review, please contact: Mr. John Wilkins, Director,
Capital Planning, The New Jersey Transit Corporation, One Penn Plaza
East, Newark, NJ 07105-2246, telephone (973) 491-7846, or Mr. David
Valenstein, Environmental Program Manager, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1120 Vermont Avenue, NW., Mail Stop 20, Washington DC
20590, telephone (202) 493-6368. Information and documents regarding
the environmental review process will be also made available through
appropriate means, including the project Web site: https://
www.portalbridgenec.com.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Description of Project Area
AMTRAK owns and operates the Northeast Corridor rail line from
Pennsylvania Station New York to Union Station in Washington DC,
including the heavily used ``High Line'' portion connecting Newark, NJ
and New York, NY across the Portal Bridge. NJ TRANSIT's Northeast
Corridor Line operates over AMTRAK's Northeast Corridor in portions of
Pennsylvania and in New Jersey from Trenton to New York's Pennsylvania
Station. NJ TRANSIT's North Jersey Coast Line, certain Montclair-
Boonton Line trains, and certain Morris & Essex Line trains join
AMTRAK's Northeast Corridor west of the Hackensack River utilize the
Portal Bridge and subsequently travel under the Hudson River to their
terminus at New York's Pennsylvania Station.
NJ TRANSIT's commuter rail system ridership has been growing and
will continue to grow due to population growth in communities
throughout New Jersey, Orange and Rockland Counties
[[Page 74575]]
in New York, and portions of Pennsylvania. NJ TRANSIT operates 20
trains during the peak morning hour over the Portal Bridge that serve
approximately 17,700 passengers. AMTRAK currently operates
approximately 48 scheduled trains in each direction over this segment
of the Northeast Corridor every weekday, including 15 time-sensitive
premium Acela Express trains. While Portal Bridge is clearly a vital
river crossing, the capacity constraints and problems caused by the
existing Portal Bridge decrease schedule reliability for both AMTRAK
and NJ TRANSIT customers.
Over the past few decades, improvements to the Northeast Corridor's
infrastructure have greatly enhanced rail operations for AMTRAK and NJ
TRANSIT. The Portal Bridge is an essential yet weak link along the
Northeast Corridor. Planned projects intended to meet future
transportation demands will place additional importance on a reliable
and efficient Hackensack River crossing. The FTA and NJ TRANSIT, in
partnership with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey are
currently preparing an EIS for the Access to the Region's Core (ARC)
project. The ARC EIS will evaluate a new two-track tunnel under the
Hudson River, a new rail terminal in Manhattan adjacent to the existing
Penn Station, and new track capacity on the Northeast Corridor. While
the proposed operating plan for ARC could be achieved using alternate
routes, the locally preferred alternative results in a total of 37 NJ
TRANSIT and AMTRAK trains operating over an enhanced Portal Bridge in
the AM peak hour. Currently, 23 trains operate over Portal Bridge in
the AM peak hour. The ARC as well as other planned projects would
therefore increase the need for Portal Bridge improvements.
II. Problem Identification
The existing Portal Bridge was constructed in 1910 and is a two-
track, moveable swing-span bridge that crosses the Hackensack River in
New Jersey between the City of Kearny and the City of Secaucus. The
Northeast Corridor has two tracks over the Portal Bridge and between
Swift Interlocking and Secaucus Junction, which creates two
bottlenecks. Trains must merge from four tracks to two tracks at Swift
Interlocking, and from four tracks to two tracks at Secaucus Junction.
Because multiple rail lines are merging onto a two-track crossing, the
window of opportunity for each train is reduced. This operational
inflexibility means that a delay on one rail line can cascade to other
rail lines. Portal Bridge is a critical infrastructure element for both
AMTRAK and NJ TRANSIT, enabling movement between east-of-Hudson and
west-of-Hudson destinations, however the existing bridge, poses safety
concerns, capacity constraints, and operational inflexibility.
The Portal Bridge was constructed nearly a century ago. Design
standards for steel railroad bridges anticipate a typical lifespan of
100 years. Given the Portal Bridge's age, the structure is nearing the
end of its useful life. Portal Bridge presents a considerable ongoing
operation and maintenance expense for AMTRAK because the mechanical and
structural components are prone to failure due to age and wear and
because swing bridges are the most complicated movable rail bridge
type. Special rail connections, known as miter rails, allow the rails
to disengage and the bridge to swing open and closed. These connections
are automatically controlled mechanical separations in the track that
move apart for the swing span to open and then are realigned after it
is closed. Mechanical wedges must lock the bridge when in the closed
position and special mechanical electric power catenery joints must
separate or rejoin the continuous contact wire on either end of the
bridge for each movement. As a result of these features, while trains
can operate at 90 miles per hour (mph) on adjacent portions of the
Northeast Corridor, speeds over the Portal Bridge are restricted to 70
mph. The Hackensack River is a navigable waterway and marine traffic
requires frequent bridge openings. These openings increase the
likelihood of mechanical malfunctions, which have in the past caused
the bridge to remain in the open position for long periods of time,
resulting in train delays. Due to these types of issues, older swing
span bridges are now being replaced by other types of moveable bridges
such as vertical lift and single-span bascule bridges.
The Hackensack River is a navigable waterway governed by the U.S.
Coast Guard. The existing Portal Bridge has only 23 feet of clearance
between mean high water (MHW) and the lowest steel elevation of the
bridge. As a result, marine traffic along this segment of the
Hackensack River requires the frequent opening of the Portal Bridge and
disruption of Northeast Corridor train traffic. This conflict is
currently managed by restricting the times during which the bridge is
permitted to open. Nonetheless, the lengthy time that is required to
open and close the Portal Bridge for marine traffic continues to be
disruptive to efficient rail operations.
To avoid disruption to passenger service, AMTRAK is forced to
conduct bridge maintenance and inspection during increasingly limited
time periods, such as at night and on weekends. As traffic along the
Northeast Corridor increases, fewer suitable time periods for
maintenance and inspection will be available.
III. Alternatives to be Considered
The EIS will consider a No Action Alternative and a number of
different build alternatives to improve the existing Northeast Corridor
rail crossing over the Hackensack River. These alternatives will
consider retention or removal of the existing Portal Bridge and
construction of one or two new bridges. Alternatives retaining the
Portal Bridge will, in some cases, include the modification of certain
characteristics of the existing bridge--such as height and operation
(e.g., a moveable structure versus a fixed structure). For a new
bridge, alternatives proposed will vary in bridge height, type
(moveable/fixed), and number of tracks to be constructed between Swift
Interlocking and Secaucus Junction.
Alternatives Retaining the Existing Portal Bridge: These
alternatives would retain the existing Portal Bridge and include
construction of a new two-track or three-track bridge, either fixed or
moveable.
Alternatives Modifying the Existing Portal Bridge: These
alternatives would involve physically modifying the existing Portal
Bridge (beyond normal maintenance), rehabilitating the structure, and
raising it above its existing height. Some of these alternatives would
raise the existing bridge so that it could be fixed in a closed
position. Other alternatives would raise the bridge to a lesser height
and retain its moveable nature. These alternatives would also include a
new bridge, either fixed or moveable, with two or three tracks.
Alternatives Removing the Existing Portal Bridge: These
alternatives would involve the construction of two new bridges and
removal of the existing Portal Bridge. These alternatives would include
a mix of bridge height, operation type (moveable or fixed), and
alignment along the Hackensack River. Some of these alternatives would
include the construction of a new two-or three-track movable bridge
with a second new two-track fixed or moveable bridge. Other
alternatives in this category would include a new two-track or three-
track fixed bridge and a second new two-track fixed bridge.
[[Page 74576]]
IV. Probable Effects
The FRA, NJ TRANSIT, and AMTRAK will evaluate both project-specific
and cumulative changes to the social, economic and physical
environment--including land use and socioeconomic conditions, ecology,
water resources, historic and archaeological resources, visual
character and aesthetics, contaminated and hazardous materials,
transportation, air quality, noise and vibration, environmental
justice, and cumulative and secondary effects. The analysis will be
undertaken consistent with NEPA, Council on Environmental Quality
regulations, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, FRA
guidance, FTA regulations, DOT guidance, and Section 4(f) of the DOT
Act, along with other applicable Federal and State regulations.
V. Scoping Process
FRA invites all interested individuals, organizations, and Federal,
State, and local agencies to comment on the scope of the EIS. Comments
are encouraged on specific social, economic, or environmental issues to
be evaluated, and on reasonable alternatives that may be less costly,
more cost effective or have fewer environmental impacts while achieving
similar transportation objectives.
NJ TRANSIT will be leading the outreach activities during the
public scoping process, beginning with the scoping meeting identified
under DATES above. Following the public scoping process, public
outreach activities will include meetings with the Regional Citizens'
Liaison Committee (RCLC) established for the study, as well as meetings
with interested parties or small groups. Those wishing to participate
in the RCLC may do so by registering on the project Web site at https://
www.portalbridgenec.com. As part of the study process, the project Web
site listed will be periodically updated to reflect the project's
status. In addition, newsletters will be circulated to a broad
constituency to ensure people are informed about the project.
Additional opportunities for public participation will be announced
through mailings, notices, advertisements and press releases.
Issued in Washington, DC, on December 5, 2006.
Mark E. Yachmetz,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Development.
[FR Doc. E6-21015 Filed 12-11-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P
