Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Raritan River, Arthur Kill and Their Tributaries, Staten Island, NY and Elizabeth, NJ, 45690-45693 [2011-19322]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
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’’ (https://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 (https://
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 (https://www.baltictimes.com/news/
articles/26661/).
8 ‘‘Court Rule for Liquidation of VEF Banka,’’ The
Baltic Course, November 16, 2010 (https://
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 https://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 https://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 https://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
