Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Passaic River, Clifton, NJ, 28766-28769 [2010-12344]
Download as PDF
28766
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 99 / Monday, May 24, 2010 / Proposed Rules
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Administration, room 210, 1701
Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia
30337.
Persons interested in being placed on
a mailing list for future NPRM’s should
contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking,
(202) 267–9677, to request a copy of
Advisory Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking Distribution
System, which describes the application
procedure.
The Proposal
The FAA is considering an
amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to amend
Class E airspace at Pine Mountain, GA
to provide controlled airspace required
to support the SIAPs for Harris County
Airport. The existing Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface would be modified for the
safety and management of IFR
operations.
Class E airspace designations are
published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA
order 7400.9T, signed 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 will 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
proposed rule, when promulgated,
would 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 United States Code.
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. This proposed
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
12:33 May 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
airspace. This proposed regulation is
within the scope of that authority as it
would amend Class E airspace at Harris
County Airport, Pine Mountain, GA.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
33 CFR Part 117
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).
[Docket No. USCG–2010–0200]
The Proposed Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,
B, C, D, AND CLASS 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.
§ 71.1
[Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9T, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points,
signed August 27, 2009, 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.
*
*
*
ASO GA E5
*
*
Pine Mountain, GA [Amended]
Harris County Airport, GA
(Lat. 32°50′26″ N., long. 84°52′57″ W.)
Pine Mountain NDB, GA
(Lat. 32°50′34″ N., long. 84°52′22″ W.)
That airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface within an 8-mile radius
of the Harris County Airport and within 8
miles north and 4 miles south of the 267°
bearing from the Pine Mountain NDB
extending from the 8-mile radius of the
Harris County Airport to 16 miles from the
Harris County Airport.
Issued in College Park, Georgia, on May 14,
2010.
Mark D. Ward,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern
Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2010–12360 Filed 5–21–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
PO 00000
Coast Guard
RIN 1625–AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations;
Passaic River, Clifton, 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 Route 3 Bridge, mile 11.8, across the
Passaic River at Clifton, New Jersey.
Under this proposed rule the Route 3
Bridge need not open for the passage of
vessel traffic.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before June 23, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2010–0200 using any one of the
following methods:
(1) Federal Rulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202–493–2251.
(3) Mail: 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–
0001.
(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail
address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The telephone number
is 202–366–9329.
To avoid duplication, please use only
one of these methods. See the ‘‘Public
Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below for instructions on submitting
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or e-mail Mr. Joe Arca, Project
Officer, First Coast Guard District,
telephone 212–668–7165, e-mail
joe.arca@uscg.mil. If you have questions
on viewing or submitting material to the
docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202–366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\24MYP1.SGM
24MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 99 / Monday, May 24, 2010 / Proposed Rules
comments and related materials. All
comments received will be posted,
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG–2010–0200),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You
may submit your comments and
material online (https://
www.regulations.gov), or by fax, mail or
hand delivery, but please use only one
of these means. If you submit a
comment online via https://
www.regulations.gov, it will be
considered received by the Coast Guard
when you successfully transmit the
comment. If you fax, hand delivery, or
mail your comment, it will be
considered as having been received by
the Coast Guard when it is received at
the Docket Management Facility. We
recommend that you include your name
and a mailing address, an e-mail
address, or a phone number in the body
of your document so that we can contact
you if we have questions regarding your
submission.
To submit your comment online, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, click on the
‘‘submit a comment’’ box, which will
then become highlighted in blue. In the
‘‘Document Type’’ drop down menu
select ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ and insert
‘‘USCG–2010–0200’’ in the ‘‘Keyword’’
box. Click ‘‘Search’’ then click on the
balloon shape in the ‘‘Actions’’ column.
If you submit your comments by mail or
hand delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by
11 inches, suitable for copying and
electronic filing. If you submit them by
mail and would like to know that they
reached the Facility, please enclose a
stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all
comments and material received during
the comment period and may change
the rule based on your comments.
Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, click on the
‘‘read comments’’ box, which will then
become highlighted in blue. In the
‘‘Keyword’’ box insert ‘‘USCG–2010–
0200’’ and click ‘‘Search.’’ Click the
‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ in the ‘‘Actions’’
column. You may also visit either the
Docket Management Facility in Room
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:42 May 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
W12–140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. We have an
agreement with the Department of
Transportation to use the Docket
Management Facility.
Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic
form of 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 a Privacy
Act notice regarding our public dockets
in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for one using one of the four methods
specified under ADDRESSES. Please
explain 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 3 Bridge has a vertical
clearance of 35 feet at mean high water,
and 40 feet at mean low water in the
closed position. The existing
drawbridge operating regulations listed
at 33 CFR 117.739(n), require the bridge
to open on signal after at least a 24 hour
advance notice is given by calling the
number posted at the bridge.
The existing Route 3 Bridge will soon
be replaced with a new fixed highway
bridge on a different alignment because
it is in poor condition and must be
replaced as soon as possible. A
submarine utility communication cable
is presently located on the proposed
alignment of the new replacement
bridge and will need to be temporarily
relocated during the construction of the
new Route 3 highway bridge.
The best alternative and least
disruptive impact to the environment is
to temporarily relocate the
communication cable to the underside
of the existing Route 3 Bridge. As a
result of that temporary installation of
the communication cable the existing
Route 3 Bridge will not be able to be
opened for vessel traffic.
The Route 3 Bridge has not received
a request to open since 1998.
On September 10, 2009, the bridge
owner, New Jersey Department of
Transportation (NJDOT), requested a
change to the drawbridge operation
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
28767
regulations to allow the existing Route
3 Bridge to not open for the passage of
vessel traffic in order to facilitate the
temporary installation of the
communication cable and permit the
new bridge construction to commence.
Once the new bridge construction is
completed and the new bridge is opened
for vehicular traffic the old existing
Route 3 Bridge will be removed.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The existing regulation for the Route
3 Bridge requires it to open on signal
after at least a 24 hour advance notice
is given by calling the number posted at
the bridge.
The Route 3 Bridge has not received
a request to open since 1998, and no
requests to open are anticipated.
The bridge is scheduled to be
demolished due to the construction of a
new replacement bridge. A
communications cable must be attached
temporarily in order to facilitate the
new bridge construction. It was decided
that since the Route 3 Bridge has not
opened since 1998, that relocating the
communications cable on to the old
bridge should not impact navigation.
Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after
considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or
executive orders.
Regulatory Planning and Review
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
section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office
of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order. This
conclusion is based upon the fact that
the Route 3 Bridge has not opened since
1998, and no requests to open are
anticipated before its removal.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have 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 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule
E:\FR\FM\24MYP1.SGM
24MYP1
28768
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 99 / Monday, May 24, 2010 / Proposed Rules
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This action will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for
the following reasons. This conclusion
is based upon the fact that the Route 3
Bridge has not opened since 1998, and
no requests to open are anticipated
before its removal.
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),
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 Commander
(dpb), 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
proposed 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).
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
12:33 May 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Though this
proposed rule will not result in such an
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of
this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would 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.
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 might disproportionately
affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have
Tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have
a substantial direct effect on one or
more Indian Tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian Tribes.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed 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
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 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 made a preliminary determination
that this action is one of a category of
actions which do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment because it
simply promulgates the operating
regulations or procedures for
drawbridges. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental
impact from this proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:
PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE
OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 117
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1(g);
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
2. Section 117.739 is amended by
revising paragraph (n) to read as
follows:
§ 117.739
Passaic River.
*
*
*
*
*
(n) The draw of the Route 3 Bridge,
mile 11.8, need not be opened for the
passage of vessel traffic.
*
*
*
*
*
E:\FR\FM\24MYP1.SGM
24MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 99 / Monday, May 24, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Dated: May 3, 2010.
Joseph L. Nimmich,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2010–12344 Filed 5–21–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG–2010–0059]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; Osage River, Mile 016.8 to
017.2
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes
establishing a temporary safety zone for
all waters of the Osage River, Mile 016.8
to 017.2, extending the entire width of
the river. This safety zone is needed to
protect persons and vessels from safety
hazards associated with a fireworks
display occurring on the Osage River.
Entry into this zone would be
prohibited unless specifically
authorized by the Captain of the Port
Upper Mississippi River or a designated
representative.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before June 8, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2010–0059 using any one of the
following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202–493–2251.
(3) Mail: 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–
0001.
(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail
address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The telephone number
is 202–366–9329.
To avoid duplication, please use only
one of these four methods. See the
‘‘Public Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below for instructions on submitting
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or e-mail Lieutenant
Commander (LCDR) Matthew Barker,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
12:33 May 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
Sector Upper Mississippi River
Response Department at telephone 314–
269–2540, e-mail
Matthew.P.Barker@uscg.mil. If you have
questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Renee V.
Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone 202–366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided.
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG–2010–0059),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You
may submit your comments and
material online (via https://
www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or
hand delivery, but please use only one
of these means. If you submit a
comment online via https://
www.regulations.gov, it will be
considered received by the Coast Guard
when you successfully transmit the
comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or
mail your comment, it will be
considered as having been received by
the Coast Guard when it is received at
the Docket Management Facility. We
recommend that you include your name
and a mailing address, an e-mail
address, or a telephone number in the
body of your document so that we can
contact you if we have questions
regarding your submission.
To submit your comment online, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, click on the
‘‘submit a comment’’ box, which will
then become highlighted in blue. In the
‘‘Document Type’’ drop down menu
select ‘‘Proposed Rule’’ and insert
‘‘USCG–2010–0059’’ in the ‘‘Keyword’’
box. Click ‘‘Search’’ then click on the
balloon shape in the ‘‘Actions’’ column.
If you submit your comments by mail or
hand delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by
11 inches, suitable for copying and
electronic filing. If you submit
comments by mail and would like to
know that they reached the Facility,
please enclose a stamped, self-addressed
postcard or envelope. We will consider
all comments and material received
during the comment period and may
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
28769
change the rule based on your
comments.
Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, click on the
‘‘read comments’’ box, which will then
become highlighted in blue. In the
‘‘Keyword’’ box insert ‘‘USCG–2010–
0059’’ and click ‘‘Search.’’ Click the
‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ in the ‘‘Actions’’
column. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12–140
on the ground floor of the Department
of Transportation West Building, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. We have an agreement with
the Department of Transportation to use
the Docket Management Facility.
Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic
form of 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 a Privacy
Act notice regarding our public dockets
in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for one on or before June 8, 2010, using
one of the four methods specified under
ADDRESSES. Please explain why you
believe a public meeting 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.
For information on facilities or
services for individuals with disabilities
or to request special assistance at the
public meeting, contact LCDR Matthew
Barker at the telephone number or email address indicated under the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this notice.
Background and Purpose
On July 4, 2010 Scott Barnes will be
sponsoring a fireworks display between
mile 016.8 and 017.2 on the Osage
River. This event presents safety
hazards to the navigation of vessels
between 016.8 and 017.2, extending the
entire width of the river. This safety
zone is necessary to provide for the
safety of the crew, spectators, and other
users and vessels of the Osage River.
E:\FR\FM\24MYP1.SGM
24MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 99 (Monday, May 24, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28766-28769]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-12344]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG-2010-0200]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Passaic River, Clifton, 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 3 Bridge, mile 11.8,
across the Passaic River at Clifton, New Jersey. Under this proposed
rule the Route 3 Bridge need not open for the passage of vessel
traffic.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before June 23, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2010-0200 using any one of the following methods:
(1) Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202-493-2251.
(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is 202-366-9329.
To avoid duplication, please use only one of these methods. See the
``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on submitting
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or e-mail Mr. Joe Arca, Project Officer, First Coast Guard
District, telephone 212-668-7165, e-mail joe.arca@uscg.mil. If you have
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee
V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Participation and Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
[[Page 28767]]
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted,
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2010-0200), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material
online (https://www.regulations.gov), or by fax, mail or hand delivery,
but please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online
via https://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered received by the
Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax,
hand delivery, or mail your comment, it will be considered as having
been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the Docket
Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and a
mailing address, an e-mail address, or a phone number in the body of
your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding
your submission.
To submit your comment online, go to https://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``submit a comment'' box, which will then become
highlighted in blue. In the ``Document Type'' drop down menu select
``Proposed Rules'' and insert ``USCG-2010-0200'' in the ``Keyword''
box. Click ``Search'' then click on the balloon shape in the
``Actions'' column. If you submit your comments by mail or hand
delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11
inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them
by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will
consider all comments and material received during the comment period
and may change the rule based on your comments.
Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``read comments'' box, which will then become highlighted
in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2010-0200'' and click
``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column.
You may also visit either the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-
140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We
have an agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the
Docket Management Facility.
Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic form of 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 a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one using one of the four methods specified under
ADDRESSES. Please explain 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 3 Bridge has a vertical clearance of 35 feet at mean high
water, and 40 feet at mean low water in the closed position. The
existing drawbridge operating regulations listed at 33 CFR 117.739(n),
require the bridge to open on signal after at least a 24 hour advance
notice is given by calling the number posted at the bridge.
The existing Route 3 Bridge will soon be replaced with a new fixed
highway bridge on a different alignment because it is in poor condition
and must be replaced as soon as possible. A submarine utility
communication cable is presently located on the proposed alignment of
the new replacement bridge and will need to be temporarily relocated
during the construction of the new Route 3 highway bridge.
The best alternative and least disruptive impact to the environment
is to temporarily relocate the communication cable to the underside of
the existing Route 3 Bridge. As a result of that temporary installation
of the communication cable the existing Route 3 Bridge will not be able
to be opened for vessel traffic.
The Route 3 Bridge has not received a request to open since 1998.
On September 10, 2009, the bridge owner, New Jersey Department of
Transportation (NJDOT), requested a change to the drawbridge operation
regulations to allow the existing Route 3 Bridge to not open for the
passage of vessel traffic in order to facilitate the temporary
installation of the communication cable and permit the new bridge
construction to commence.
Once the new bridge construction is completed and the new bridge is
opened for vehicular traffic the old existing Route 3 Bridge will be
removed.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The existing regulation for the Route 3 Bridge requires it to open
on signal after at least a 24 hour advance notice is given by calling
the number posted at the bridge.
The Route 3 Bridge has not received a request to open since 1998,
and no requests to open are anticipated.
The bridge is scheduled to be demolished due to the construction of
a new replacement bridge. A communications cable must be attached
temporarily in order to facilitate the new bridge construction. It was
decided that since the Route 3 Bridge has not opened since 1998, that
relocating the communications cable on to the old bridge should not
impact navigation.
Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.
Regulatory Planning and Review
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 section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. This conclusion is based
upon the fact that the Route 3 Bridge has not opened since 1998, and no
requests to open are anticipated before its removal.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
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 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed
rule
[[Page 28768]]
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. This action will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons.
This conclusion is based upon the fact that the Route 3 Bridge has not
opened since 1998, and no requests to open are anticipated before its
removal.
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), 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 Commander (dpb), 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
proposed 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 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule will not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would 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.
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 might
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have Tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed 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 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 made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment because it simply
promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. We
seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a
significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:
PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Section 117.739 is amended by revising paragraph (n) to read as
follows:
Sec. 117.739 Passaic River.
* * * * *
(n) The draw of the Route 3 Bridge, mile 11.8, need not be opened
for the passage of vessel traffic.
* * * * *
[[Page 28769]]
Dated: May 3, 2010.
Joseph L. Nimmich,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2010-12344 Filed 5-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P