Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Raritan River, Arthur Kill and Their Tributaries, Staten Island, NY and Elizabeth, NJ, 45690-45693 [2011-19322]

Download as PDF 45690 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2011 / Rules and Regulations accounts for, or on behalf of, VEF Banka, and to apply due diligence reasonably designed to guard against indirect use of their correspondent or payable-through accounts by VEF Banka. taken by VEF Banka, but are the result of the revocation of VEF Banka’s Latvian banking license and the non-appealable decision by the Riga District Court to liquidate the bank.9 B. VEF Banka’s Subsequent Developments On May 26, 2010, VEF Banka’s Latvian banking regulator, the Financial and Capital Market Commission (the ‘‘FCMC’’), revoked VEF Banka’s operating license on the grounds that the shareholders of the bank had not received authorization from the FCMC for the acquisition of qualifying holdings and the bank failed to ensure compliance with provisions of the Credit Institution Law.6 As a result, the shareholders had no decision-making rights and were unable to ‘‘ensure prudent bank operations.’’ The FCMC’s decision to revoke VEF Banka’s license was confirmed by the Senate of Latvia’s Supreme Court on July 22, 2010 and terminated VEF Banka’s ability to operate as a financial institution under Latvian law.7 On November 15, 2010, the Riga District Court issued a nonappealable order to begin liquidating the bank.8 The liquidation process is expected to be complete in one to two years and will result in the disposition of all of VEF Banka’s assets, including ¯ its subsidiary, Veiksmes lızings. A. Executive Order 12866 It has been determined that this rulemaking is not a significant regulatory action for purposes of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, a regulatory impact analysis is not required. III. Withdrawal of the Finding of Primary Money Laundering Concern Against VEF Banka and Repeal of the Final Rule For the reasons set forth above, FinCEN hereby withdraws the finding of primary money laundering concern against VEF Banka, as published in the Federal Register on April 26, 2005 (70 FR 21369) and finalized on July 13, 2006 (71 FR 39554), as of August 1, 2011. As a result, FinCEN is also repealing the final rule, as published in the Federal Register on July 13, 2006 (71 FR 39554) as 31 CFR 103.192 (now 31 CFR 1010.654), that was based upon the finding. FinCEN’s withdrawal of the finding of primary money laundering concern against VEF Banka and the repeal of the related final rule do not acknowledge any remedial measure IV. Regulatory Matters B. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), Public Law 104–4 (March 22, 1995), requires that an agency prepare a budgetary impact statement before promulgating a rule that may result in expenditure by state, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. If a budgetary impact statement is required, section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Act also requires an agency to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives before promulgating a rule. FinCEN has determined that it is not required to prepare a written statement under Section 202 and has concluded that on balance the rule provides the most costeffective and least burdensome alternative to achieve the objectives of the rule. C. Regulatory Flexibility Act Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), FinCEN certifies that this final regulation likely will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The regulatory changes in this final rule merely remove the current obligations for financial institutions under 31 CFR 103.192 (now 31 CFR 1010.654). D. Paperwork Reduction Act This regulation discontinues the Office of Management and Budget Control Number 1506–0041 assigned to the final rule and, as a result, reduces the estimated average burden of one hour per affected financial institution, totaling 5,000 hours. This regulation contains no new information collection requirements subject to review and approval by the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d) et seq.). List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 1010 Administrative practice and procedure, Banks, banking, Brokers, Currency, Foreign banking, Foreign currencies, Gambling, Investigations, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities, Terrorism. Authority and Issuance For the reasons set forth above, 31 CFR part 1010 is amended as follows: PART 1010—GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. The authority citation for 31 CFR part 1010 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1829b and 1951– 1959; 31 U.S.C. 5311–5314 and 5316–5332; title III, sec. 314, Pub. L. 107–56, 115 Stat. 307. § 1010.654 2. Part 1010 is amended by removing § 1010.654. ■ Dated: July 22, 2011. James H. Freis, Jr., Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. [FR Doc. 2011–19118 Filed 7–29–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810–02–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG–2010–1117] RIN 1625–AA09 Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Raritan River, Arthur Kill and Their Tributaries, Staten Island, NY and Elizabeth, NJ emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:27 Jul 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 9 The ‘‘Republic of Latvia’’ was described at length in the April 26, 2005 notice of proposed rulemaking, 70 FR 21369, and July 13, 2006 final rule, 71 FR 39554. Today’s repeal of the final rule and withdrawal of the finding of primary money laundering concern against VEF Banka do not provide updates on jurisdictional developments. Further discussion of jurisdictional developments can be found at the U.S. Department of State’s ‘‘2011 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report’’ (http://www.state.gov/p/inl/rls/nrcrpt/ 2011/vol2/156375.htm#latvia). PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Coast Guard, DHS. Final rule. AGENCY: ACTION: 6 ‘‘On Withdrawal of the JSC ‘VEF Banka’s’ Operating Licence,’’ Financial Capital Market Commission press release, May 26, 2010 (http:// www.fktk.lv/en/publications/press_releases/201005-29_on_withdrawal_of_the_jsc/) 7 ‘‘VEF Bank Loses License,’’ The Baltic Times, July 28, 2010 (http://www.baltictimes.com/news/ articles/26661/). 8 ‘‘Court Rule for Liquidation of VEF Banka,’’ The Baltic Course, November 16, 2010 (http:// www.baltic-course.com/eng/finances/ ?doc=33962&underline=vef+banka). [Removed] The Coast Guard has changed the drawbridge operation regulations that govern the operation of the Arthur Kill (AK) Railroad Bridge at mile 11.6, across Arthur Kill between Staten Island, New York and Elizabeth, New Jersey. This final rule provides relief to the bridge owner from crewing their bridge by allowing the bridge to be SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\01AUR1.SGM 01AUR1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2011 / Rules and Regulations operated from a remote location while continuing to meet the present and future needs of navigation. DATES: This rule is effective August 31, 2011. ADDRESSES: Comments and related materials received from the public, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of docket USCG–2010– 1117 and are available online by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG–2010–1117 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and then clicking ‘‘Search.’’ This material is also available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, call or e-mail Mr. Joe Arca, Project Officer, First Coast Guard District Bridge Branch, 212–668–7165, joe.m.arca@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– 9826. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES Regulatory Information On March 25, 2011, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulations Raritan River, Arthur Kill and their tributaries, in the Federal Register (76 FR 16715). We received one comment in response to the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was held. Basis and Purpose The Arthur Kill (AK) Railroad Bridge at mile 11.6, across Arthur Kill, has a vertical clearance of 31 feet at mean high water, and 35 feet at mean low water in the closed position. The existing drawbridge operating regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.702. Beginning in 2009, Consolidated Rail Corporation (Conrail) conducted a year of successful remote operation tests of the AK Railroad Bridge without any objections from marine users. A draw operator was on scene at all times to ensure compliance with drawbridge operating regulations cited above. In September 2010, Conrail formally requested that the drawbridge operating regulation be revised to permit remote operation of the AK Railroad Bridge. Conrail, on October 20, 2010 and at the request of the Coast Guard, presented its proposal to remotely VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:27 Jul 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 operate the bridge to the New York Harbor Operations Committee. Discussions between Conrail, the Coast Guard, and the New York Harbor Operations Committee ensued with no objections to the remote operation raised by the committee members. Discussion of Comments and Changes The Coast Guard received one comment in response to the notice of proposed rulemaking. A comment letter was received from the Tug and Barge Committee of the Port of New York/New Jersey in opposition to operating the AK Bridge from a remote location. They stated that without bridge control and crewing on scene, the safe transport of products by the marine industry would be at risk if the remote control malfunctioned. The AK Bridge is normally maintained in the full open position except for the passage of rail traffic which occurs approximately four times each day. Should the remote operation fail a repair crew will be dispatched to the bridge within 45 minutes of the reported failure to repair the bridge. Prior to publishing the notice of proposed rulemaking, the Coast Guard had discussions with the New York Harbor Operations Committee and Conrail. No objections to the remote operation were voiced at that time. Subsequently, the remote operation was then successfully tested for a year with a draw tender present at all times. During the one year test period there were no failures or complaints received from mariners. Based on the successful testing of the remote operation system, the Coast Guard believes that operating the AK Bridge remotely should safely meet the present and future needs of navigation. Should the remote operation fail a repair crew will be dispatched to the bridge within 45 minutes of the reported failure to repair the bridge. As a result, no changes have been made to this final rule as far as the remote operation is concerned. In drafting this final rule we noted a typographical error that was made in our notice of proposed rulemaking in the Basis and Background Section. We stated that the existing regulations were listed at 33 CFR 117.72, which was in error. The existing regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.702. We corrected that error in this final rule. Regulatory Analyses We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 45691 based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders. Regulatory Planning and Review This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. This conclusion is based on the fact that the bridge will continue to operate according to the existing regulations except that it will be controlled from either a remote location or locally. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered whether this 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 rule will 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 reason. The bridge will continue to operate according to existing regulations except that it will be controlled from either a remote location or locally. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), in the NPRM we offered to assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. Collection of Information This rule calls for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– 3520). 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 E:\FR\FM\01AUR1.SGM 01AUR1 45692 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2011 / Rules and Regulations impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this 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 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 rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. Civil Justice Reform This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Protection of Children We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might 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 does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES 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 VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:27 Jul 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023–01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have concluded that this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule is related to the promulgation of operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges and therefore is categorically excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction. Under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion determination are not required for this rule. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 Bridges. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 117 as follows: PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows: ■ PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. ■ 2. Revise § 117.702 to read as follows: § 117.702 Arthur Kill. (a) The draw of the Arthur Kill (AK) Railroad Bridge shall be maintained in the full open position for navigation at all times, except during periods when it is closed for the passage of rail traffic. (b) The bridge owner/operator shall maintain a dedicated telephone hot line for vessel operators to call the bridge in advance to coordinate anticipated bridge closures. The telephone hot line number shall be posted on signs at the bridge clearly visible from both the up and downstream sides of the bridge. (c) Tide constrained deep draft vessels shall notify the bridge operator, daily, of their expected times of vessel transits through the bridge, by calling the designated telephone hot line. (d) The bridge shall not be closed for the passage of rail traffic during any predicted high tide period if a tide constrained deep draft vessel has provided the bridge operator with an advance notice of their intent to transit through the bridge. For the purposes of this regulation, the predicted high tide period shall be considered to be from two hours before each predicted high tide to a half-hour after each predicted high tide taken at the Battery, New York. (e) The bridge operator shall issue a manual broadcast notice to mariners of the intent to close the bridge for a period of up to 30 minutes for the passage of rail traffic, on VHF–FM channels 13 and 16 (minimum range of 15 miles) 90 minutes before and again at 75 minutes before each bridge closure. (f) Beginning at 60 minutes prior to each bridge closure, automated or manual broadcast notice to mariners must be repeated at 15 minute intervals and again at 10 and 5 minutes prior to each bridge closure and once again as the bridge begins to close, at which point the appropriate sound signal will be given. (g) Two 15 minute bridge closures may be provided each day for the passage of multiple rail traffic movements across the bridge. Each 15 minute bridge closure shall be separated by at least a 30 minute period when the bridge is returned to and remains in the full open position. Notification of the two 15 minute closures shall follow the same procedures outlined in paragraphs (e) and (f) above. (h) A vessel operator may request up to a 30 minute delay for any bridge closure in order to allow vessel traffic to E:\FR\FM\01AUR1.SGM 01AUR1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2011 / Rules and Regulations meet tide or current requirements; however, the request to delay the bridge closure must be made within 30 minutes following the initial broadcast for the bridge closure. Requests received after the initial 30 minute broadcast will not be granted. (i) In the event of a bridge operational failure, the bridge operator shall immediately notify the Coast Guard Captain of the Port New York. The bridge owner/operator must provide and dispatch a bridge repair crew to be on scene at the bridge no later than 45 minutes after the bridge fails to operate. A repair crew must remain on scene during the operational failure until the bridge has been fully restored to normal operations or until the bridge is raised and locked in the fully open position. (j) When the bridge is not tended locally it must be operated from a remote location. A sufficient number of closed circuit TV cameras, approved by the Coast Guard, shall be operated and maintained at the bridge site to enable the remotely located bridge tender to have full view of both river traffic and the bridge. (k) VHF–FM channels 13 and 16 shall be maintained and monitored to facilitate communication in both the remote and local control locations. The bridge shall also be equipped with directional microphones and horns to receive and deliver signals to vessels. (l) Whenever the remote control system equipment is disabled or fails to operate for any reason, the bridge operator shall immediately notify the Captain of the Port New York. The bridge shall be physically tended and operated by local control as soon as possible, but no more than 45 minutes after malfunction or disability of the remote system. (m) Mechanical bypass and override capability of the remote operation system shall be provided and maintained at all times. Dated: July 6, 2011. James B. McPherson, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, First Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. 2011–19322 Filed 7–29–11; 8:45 am] emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES BILLING CODE 9110–04–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG–2011–0567] RIN 1625–AA00 Safety Zone; San Diego POPS Fireworks, San Diego, CA Coast Guard, DHS. Temporary final rule. AGENCY: ACTION: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the navigable waters of San Diego Bay in support of the San Diego POPS Fireworks. This safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the participants, crew, spectators, participating vessels, and other vessels and users of the waterway during scheduled fireworks events. Persons and vessels will be prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within this safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or his designated representative. DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective in the CFR from August 1, 2011 until 10 p.m., September 4, 2011. This rule is effective with actual notice for purposes of enforcement beginning 9 p.m. July 1, 2011. ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket are part of docket USCG–2011– 0567 and are available online by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG–2011–0567 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and then clicking ‘‘Search.’’ They are also available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this temporary rule, call or e-mail Petty Officer Shane Jackson, Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, CA; telephone (619) 278–7262, e-mail Shane.E.Jakcson@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– 9826. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: Regulatory Information The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:27 Jul 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 45693 pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are ‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because immediate action is necessary to ensure the safety of vessels, spectators, participants, and others in the vicinity of the marine event on the dates and times this rule will be in effect and delay would be impracticable. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register because delaying the effective date would be impracticable, since immediate action is needed to ensure the public’s safety. Basis and Purpose The San Diego Symphony Orchestra and Copley Symphony Hall are sponsoring the San Diego POPS Fireworks, which will include a fireworks presentation conducted from a barge in San Diego Bay. The barge will be located near the navigational channel in the vicinity of North Embarcadero. The temporary safety zone will be a 400foot radius around the firing barge. The sponsor will provide a chase boat to patrol the safety zone and inform vessels of the safety zone. This temporary safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the crew, spectators, and other vessels and users of the waterway. Discussion of Rule The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone that will be enforced from 9 p.m. to 10 p.m. on the following dates: July 1–3, July 8–9, July 15–16, July 22–23, July 29–30, August 5–6, August 12–13, August 19–20, August 26–27, and September 2–4, 2011. The limits of the safety zone will be a 400-foot radius around the anchored firing barge in approximate position 32°42.13′ N, 117°10.01′ W. The temporary safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the crews, spectators, and other vessels and users of the waterway. Persons and vessels will be prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated representative. E:\FR\FM\01AUR1.SGM 01AUR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 147 (Monday, August 1, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45690-45693]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-19322]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2010-1117]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Raritan River, Arthur Kill and 
Their Tributaries, Staten Island, NY and Elizabeth, NJ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has changed the drawbridge operation 
regulations that govern the operation of the Arthur Kill (AK) Railroad 
Bridge at mile 11.6, across Arthur Kill between Staten Island, New York 
and Elizabeth, New Jersey. This final rule provides relief to the 
bridge owner from crewing their bridge by allowing the bridge to be

[[Page 45691]]

operated from a remote location while continuing to meet the present 
and future needs of navigation.

DATES: This rule is effective August 31, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Comments and related materials received from the public, as 
well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the 
docket, are part of docket USCG-2010-1117 and are available online by 
going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2010-1117 in the 
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' This material is also 
available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility 
(M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, 
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, 
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, 
call or e-mail Mr. Joe Arca, Project Officer, First Coast Guard 
District Bridge Branch, 212-668-7165, joe.m.arca@uscg.mil. If you have 
questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, 
Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    On March 25, 2011, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulations Raritan River, Arthur 
Kill and their tributaries, in the Federal Register (76 FR 16715). We 
received one comment in response to the proposed rule. No public 
meeting was requested, and none was held.

Basis and Purpose

    The Arthur Kill (AK) Railroad Bridge at mile 11.6, across Arthur 
Kill, has a vertical clearance of 31 feet at mean high water, and 35 
feet at mean low water in the closed position. The existing drawbridge 
operating regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.702.
    Beginning in 2009, Consolidated Rail Corporation (Conrail) 
conducted a year of successful remote operation tests of the AK 
Railroad Bridge without any objections from marine users. A draw 
operator was on scene at all times to ensure compliance with drawbridge 
operating regulations cited above. In September 2010, Conrail formally 
requested that the drawbridge operating regulation be revised to permit 
remote operation of the AK Railroad Bridge.
    Conrail, on October 20, 2010 and at the request of the Coast Guard, 
presented its proposal to remotely operate the bridge to the New York 
Harbor Operations Committee. Discussions between Conrail, the Coast 
Guard, and the New York Harbor Operations Committee ensued with no 
objections to the remote operation raised by the committee members.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    The Coast Guard received one comment in response to the notice of 
proposed rulemaking.
    A comment letter was received from the Tug and Barge Committee of 
the Port of New York/New Jersey in opposition to operating the AK 
Bridge from a remote location. They stated that without bridge control 
and crewing on scene, the safe transport of products by the marine 
industry would be at risk if the remote control malfunctioned.
    The AK Bridge is normally maintained in the full open position 
except for the passage of rail traffic which occurs approximately four 
times each day.
    Should the remote operation fail a repair crew will be dispatched 
to the bridge within 45 minutes of the reported failure to repair the 
bridge.
    Prior to publishing the notice of proposed rulemaking, the Coast 
Guard had discussions with the New York Harbor Operations Committee and 
Conrail. No objections to the remote operation were voiced at that 
time.
    Subsequently, the remote operation was then successfully tested for 
a year with a draw tender present at all times. During the one year 
test period there were no failures or complaints received from 
mariners.
    Based on the successful testing of the remote operation system, the 
Coast Guard believes that operating the AK Bridge remotely should 
safely meet the present and future needs of navigation. Should the 
remote operation fail a repair crew will be dispatched to the bridge 
within 45 minutes of the reported failure to repair the bridge.
    As a result, no changes have been made to this final rule as far as 
the remote operation is concerned.
    In drafting this final rule we noted a typographical error that was 
made in our notice of proposed rulemaking in the Basis and Background 
Section. We stated that the existing regulations were listed at 33 CFR 
117.72, which was in error. The existing regulations are listed at 33 
CFR 117.702. We corrected that error in this final rule.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this 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 rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) 
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as 
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and 
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential 
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of 
Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. This 
conclusion is based on the fact that the bridge will continue to 
operate according to the existing regulations except that it will be 
controlled from either a remote location or locally.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this 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 rule will 
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 reason. The 
bridge will continue to operate according to existing regulations 
except that it will be controlled from either a remote location or 
locally.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), in the NPRM we offered to 
assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could 
better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking 
process.

Collection of Information

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

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

[[Page 45692]]

impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have 
analyzed this 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 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 rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise 
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental 
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property 
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, 
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule 
is not an economically significant rule and would not create an 
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might 
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 does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more 
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and 
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

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

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security 
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which 
guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded 
that this action is one of a category of actions which do not 
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human 
environment. This rule is related to the promulgation of operating 
regulations or procedures for drawbridges and therefore is 
categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the 
Instruction. Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, 
an environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion 
determination are not required for this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 
33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland 
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Revise Sec.  117.702 to read as follows:


Sec.  117.702  Arthur Kill.

    (a) The draw of the Arthur Kill (AK) Railroad Bridge shall be 
maintained in the full open position for navigation at all times, 
except during periods when it is closed for the passage of rail 
traffic.
    (b) The bridge owner/operator shall maintain a dedicated telephone 
hot line for vessel operators to call the bridge in advance to 
coordinate anticipated bridge closures. The telephone hot line number 
shall be posted on signs at the bridge clearly visible from both the up 
and downstream sides of the bridge.
    (c) Tide constrained deep draft vessels shall notify the bridge 
operator, daily, of their expected times of vessel transits through the 
bridge, by calling the designated telephone hot line.
    (d) The bridge shall not be closed for the passage of rail traffic 
during any predicted high tide period if a tide constrained deep draft 
vessel has provided the bridge operator with an advance notice of their 
intent to transit through the bridge. For the purposes of this 
regulation, the predicted high tide period shall be considered to be 
from two hours before each predicted high tide to a half-hour after 
each predicted high tide taken at the Battery, New York.
    (e) The bridge operator shall issue a manual broadcast notice to 
mariners of the intent to close the bridge for a period of up to 30 
minutes for the passage of rail traffic, on VHF-FM channels 13 and 16 
(minimum range of 15 miles) 90 minutes before and again at 75 minutes 
before each bridge closure.
    (f) Beginning at 60 minutes prior to each bridge closure, automated 
or manual broadcast notice to mariners must be repeated at 15 minute 
intervals and again at 10 and 5 minutes prior to each bridge closure 
and once again as the bridge begins to close, at which point the 
appropriate sound signal will be given.
    (g) Two 15 minute bridge closures may be provided each day for the 
passage of multiple rail traffic movements across the bridge. Each 15 
minute bridge closure shall be separated by at least a 30 minute period 
when the bridge is returned to and remains in the full open position. 
Notification of the two 15 minute closures shall follow the same 
procedures outlined in paragraphs (e) and (f) above.
    (h) A vessel operator may request up to a 30 minute delay for any 
bridge closure in order to allow vessel traffic to

[[Page 45693]]

meet tide or current requirements; however, the request to delay the 
bridge closure must be made within 30 minutes following the initial 
broadcast for the bridge closure. Requests received after the initial 
30 minute broadcast will not be granted.
    (i) In the event of a bridge operational failure, the bridge 
operator shall immediately notify the Coast Guard Captain of the Port 
New York. The bridge owner/operator must provide and dispatch a bridge 
repair crew to be on scene at the bridge no later than 45 minutes after 
the bridge fails to operate. A repair crew must remain on scene during 
the operational failure until the bridge has been fully restored to 
normal operations or until the bridge is raised and locked in the fully 
open position.
    (j) When the bridge is not tended locally it must be operated from 
a remote location. A sufficient number of closed circuit TV cameras, 
approved by the Coast Guard, shall be operated and maintained at the 
bridge site to enable the remotely located bridge tender to have full 
view of both river traffic and the bridge.
    (k) VHF-FM channels 13 and 16 shall be maintained and monitored to 
facilitate communication in both the remote and local control 
locations. The bridge shall also be equipped with directional 
microphones and horns to receive and deliver signals to vessels.
    (l) Whenever the remote control system equipment is disabled or 
fails to operate for any reason, the bridge operator shall immediately 
notify the Captain of the Port New York. The bridge shall be physically 
tended and operated by local control as soon as possible, but no more 
than 45 minutes after malfunction or disability of the remote system.
    (m) Mechanical bypass and override capability of the remote 
operation system shall be provided and maintained at all times.

    Dated: July 6, 2011.
James B. McPherson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, First Coast Guard 
District.
[FR Doc. 2011-19322 Filed 7-29-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P