Drawbridge Operation Regulation; New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway, Barnegat Bay, Seaside Heights, NJ, 76255-76257 [2013-29859]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2013 / Proposed Rules In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special conditions, the Model A350–900 series must comply with the fuel vent and exhaust emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34 and the noise certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36 and the FAA must issue a finding of regulatory adequacy under § 611 of Public Law 92– 574, the ‘‘Noise Control Act of 1972.’’ The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, under § 11.38, and they become part of the typecertification basis under § 21.17(a)(2). Novel or Unusual Design Features The Airbus Model A350–900 series will incorporate the following novel or unusual design features: electronic flight control system providing control surface awareness and mode annunciation to the flightcrew. Discussion With a response-command type flight control system and no direct coupling from cockpit controller to control surface, the pilot is not aware of actual surface position utilized to fulfill the requested demand. Some unusual flight conditions, arising from atmospheric conditions and/or airplane or engine failures, may result in full or nearly full surface deflection. Unless the flightcrew is made aware of excessive deflection or impending control surface limiting, piloted or auto-flight system control of the airplane might be inadvertently continued in such a manner to cause loss of control or other unsafe stability or performance characteristics. The Proposed Special Conditions Accordingly, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) proposes the following special conditions as part of the type certification basis for Airbus Model A350–900 series airplanes. ■ 1. Current airworthiness standards do not contain adequate safety standards for the proposed design. In addition to the requirements of §§ 25.143, 25.671 and 25.672, the following proposed special conditions apply: ■ a. The system design must ensure that the flight crew is made suitably aware whenever the primary control means nears the limit of control authority. Note: The term ‘‘suitably aware’’ indicates annunciations provided to the flight crew that are appropriately balanced between nuisance and that are necessary for crew awareness. ■ b. If the design of the flight control system has multiple modes of operation, a means must be provided to indicate to the crew any mode that significantly changes or degrades the normal handling or operational characteristics of the airplane. Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 22, 2013. Stephen P. Boyd, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 2013–29988 Filed 12–16–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard Applicability As discussed above, these proposed special conditions apply to Airbus Model A350–900 series airplanes. Should Airbus apply later for a change to the type certificate to include another model incorporating the same novel or unusual design feature, the proposed special conditions would apply to that model as well. 33 CFR Part 117 RIN 1625–AA09 Drawbridge Operation Regulation; New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway, Barnegat Bay, Seaside Heights, NJ Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Conclusion This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features on the Airbus Model A350–900 series airplanes. It is not a rule of general applicability. SUMMARY: List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25 Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704. VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:27 Dec 16, 2013 Jkt 232001 The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily change the operating schedule that governs the S37 Bridge, at NJICW mile 14.1 over Barnegat Bay, at Seaside Heights, NJ. Over the span of two and half years, the bridge will be closed to navigation for three fourmonth closure periods. Extensive replacement of parts and repairs to the bridge necessitate these closures. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before February 18, 2014. PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG– 2013–0926 using any one of the following methods: (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. (2) Fax: 202–493–2251. (3) Mail or Delivery: 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. Deliveries accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. The telephone number is 202– 366–9329. See the ‘‘Public Participation and Request for Comments’’ portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed rule, call or email Jim Rousseau, District Five Prevention Bridges, the Coast Guard; telephone 757–398–6557, email James.L.Rousseau2@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: ADDRESSES: Table of Acronyms CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking § Section Symbol U.S.C. United States Code NJDOT New Jersey Department of Transportation A. Public Participation and Request for Comments [Docket No. USCG–2013–0926] ACTION: 76255 We encourage you to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted, without change to http:// www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. 1. Submitting Comments If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this proposed rulemaking (USCG–2012– 0926), 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 http:// www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM 17DEP1 76256 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2013 / Proposed Rules comment online via http:// 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 email 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 http://www.regulations.gov, type the docket number [USCG–2013–0926] in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘Search.’’ then click on ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ on the line associated with this rulemaking. 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. wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 2. Viewing Comments and Documents To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the docket number (USCG–2013–0926) in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. 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. 3. 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). 4. 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 VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:27 Dec 16, 2013 Jkt 232001 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. B. Basis and Purpose Parsons Brinkerhoff, a design consultant on behalf of NJDOT, requested a temporary change to the existing regulations for the S37 Bridge to facilitate necessary repairs. The repairs consist of extensive structural rehabilitation, decking replacement, bearing replacement, electrical repairs, gate replacement and improvements to necessitate this closure. To facilitate repairs, the bascule span would be maintained in the closed position to navigation on three four-month closure periods beginning at 8 a.m., December 1, 2015 until 8 p.m., March 31, 2016; from 8 a.m., December 1, 2016 until 8 p.m., March 31, 2017; and from 8 a.m., December 1, 2017 until 8 p.m. March 31, 2018. The Coast Guard has reviewed the bridge data provided by NJDOT. The data, from years 2004 to 2013, shows a substantial decrease in the number of bridge openings and vessel traffic transiting the area between December and March. Spring and fall average openings are approximately 100 per month. Winter months average approximately 6 vessel openings per month. A survey was conducted with nine local commercial marinas also indicating minimal impact to their customers and operations. The S37 Bridge, also known locally as the Thomas A. Mathis Bridge, is a doubleleaf bascule bridge with a vertical clearance of approximately 30 feet, above mean high water. Based on the data provided, the proposed closure dates will have minimal impact on vessel traffic. C. Discussion of Proposed Rule The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily amend 33 CFR 117.733(c)(1) governing the S37 Bridge, at NJICW mile 14.1, over Barnegat Bay, at Seaside Heights, NJ. The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily suspend 33 CFR 117.733(c)(1) and insert this new regulation at 33 CFR 117.733(c)(4). Paragraph (c)(4) would allow the draw to be maintained in the closed position to vessels during the extensive rehabilitation project on three fourmonth closure periods beginning 8 a.m., December 1, 2015 until 8 p.m., March 31, 2016; from 8 a.m., December 1, 2016 until 8 p.m., March 31, 2017; and from 8 a.m., December 1, 2017 until 8 p.m., March 31, 2018. Vessels with a mast height less than 30 feet can pass PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 underneath the bridge in the closed position at anytime. The Atlantic Ocean is the only alternate route available for vessels unable to pass underneath the bridge and the bridge will be unable to open during the closure period. D. Regulatory Analyses We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on these statutes or executive orders. 1. 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, 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 Order 12866 or under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. The proposed change is expected to have minimal impact on mariners due to slow down of users in the winter months with no anticipated change to vessel traffic. 2. Impact on Small Entities The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. 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 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. There have been minimal vessel requests requiring openings for the past 9 years in the winter months. Vessels that can safely transit under the bridge may do so at any time. 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. E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM 17DEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2013 / Proposed Rules 3. 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. 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 the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, above. 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. 4. 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). Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. 9. 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. 10. Protection of Children We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This proposed 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. 11. 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. 6. Protest Activities The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the ‘‘FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT’’ section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels. wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 5. Federalism A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among various levels of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism. This proposed rule is not a ‘‘significant energy action’’ under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. 7. 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 expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble. 8. 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 VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:27 Dec 16, 2013 Jkt 232001 12. Energy Effects 13. Technical Standards 14. 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. This proposed rule simply promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction. Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 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. 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 temporarily 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; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. From December 1, 2015 through March 31, 2018 in § 117.733, suspend paragraph (c)(1) and add paragraph (c)(4), to read as follows: ■ § 117.733 New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway. * * * * * (c) * * * (4) From every December 1 through March 31, beginning in 2015 until 2018, the draw may remain closed to navigation. * * * * * Dated: November 18, 2013. Steven H. Ratti, Rear Admiral, United States Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. 2013–29859 Filed 12–16–13; 8:45 am] This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. PO 00000 76257 BILLING CODE 9110–04–P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 64 [WC Docket No. 13–39; FCC 13–135] Rural Call Completion Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: In this document the FCC seeks comments on additional measures that may help the Commission ensure a reasonable and nondiscriminatory level of service for completing long-distance calls to rural areas. This document also; seeks to improve the Commission’s ability to monitor problems with completing calls to rural areas, and SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\17DEP1.SGM 17DEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 17, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 76255-76257]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29859]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0926]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; New Jersey Intracoastal 
Waterway, Barnegat Bay, Seaside Heights, NJ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily change the operating 
schedule that governs the S37 Bridge, at NJICW mile 14.1 over Barnegat 
Bay, at Seaside Heights, NJ. Over the span of two and half years, the 
bridge will be closed to navigation for three four-month closure 
periods. Extensive replacement of parts and repairs to the bridge 
necessitate these closures.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before February 18, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2013-0926 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax: 202-493-2251.
    (3) Mail or Delivery: 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. Deliveries 
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 
federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-366-9329.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion 
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on 
submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of these 
four methods.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed 
rule, call or email Jim Rousseau, District Five Prevention Bridges, the 
Coast Guard; telephone 757-398-6557, email James.L.Rousseau2@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: 

Table of Acronyms

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Sec.  Section Symbol
U.S.C. United States Code
NJDOT New Jersey Department of Transportation

A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this proposed rulemaking by 
submitting comments and related materials. All comments received will 
be posted, without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will 
include any personal information you have provided.

1. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
proposed rulemaking (USCG-2012-0926), 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 http://www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail or hand 
delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a

[[Page 76256]]

comment online via http://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 email 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 http://www.regulations.gov, 
type the docket number [USCG-2013-0926] in the ``SEARCH'' box and click 
``Search.'' then click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated 
with this rulemaking. 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.

2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble 
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, 
type the docket number (USCG-2013-0926) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click 
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with 
this rulemaking. 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.

3. 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).

4. 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.

B. Basis and Purpose

    Parsons Brinkerhoff, a design consultant on behalf of NJDOT, 
requested a temporary change to the existing regulations for the S37 
Bridge to facilitate necessary repairs. The repairs consist of 
extensive structural rehabilitation, decking replacement, bearing 
replacement, electrical repairs, gate replacement and improvements to 
necessitate this closure. To facilitate repairs, the bascule span would 
be maintained in the closed position to navigation on three four-month 
closure periods beginning at 8 a.m., December 1, 2015 until 8 p.m., 
March 31, 2016; from 8 a.m., December 1, 2016 until 8 p.m., March 31, 
2017; and from 8 a.m., December 1, 2017 until 8 p.m. March 31, 2018.
    The Coast Guard has reviewed the bridge data provided by NJDOT. The 
data, from years 2004 to 2013, shows a substantial decrease in the 
number of bridge openings and vessel traffic transiting the area 
between December and March. Spring and fall average openings are 
approximately 100 per month. Winter months average approximately 6 
vessel openings per month. A survey was conducted with nine local 
commercial marinas also indicating minimal impact to their customers 
and operations. The S37 Bridge, also known locally as the Thomas A. 
Mathis Bridge, is a double-leaf bascule bridge with a vertical 
clearance of approximately 30 feet, above mean high water. Based on the 
data provided, the proposed closure dates will have minimal impact on 
vessel traffic.

C. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily amend 33 CFR 117.733(c)(1) 
governing the S37 Bridge, at NJICW mile 14.1, over Barnegat Bay, at 
Seaside Heights, NJ. The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily suspend 33 
CFR 117.733(c)(1) and insert this new regulation at 33 CFR 
117.733(c)(4). Paragraph (c)(4) would allow the draw to be maintained 
in the closed position to vessels during the extensive rehabilitation 
project on three four-month closure periods beginning 8 a.m., December 
1, 2015 until 8 p.m., March 31, 2016; from 8 a.m., December 1, 2016 
until 8 p.m., March 31, 2017; and from 8 a.m., December 1, 2017 until 8 
p.m., March 31, 2018. Vessels with a mast height less than 30 feet can 
pass underneath the bridge in the closed position at anytime. The 
Atlantic Ocean is the only alternate route available for vessels unable 
to pass underneath the bridge and the bridge will be unable to open 
during the closure period.

D. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes 
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our 
analyses based on these statutes or executive orders.

1. 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, 
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 Order 12866 or under 
section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and Budget 
has not reviewed it under those Orders. The proposed change is expected 
to have minimal impact on mariners due to slow down of users in the 
winter months with no anticipated change to vessel traffic.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as 
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of 
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. 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 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. There 
have been minimal vessel requests requiring openings for the past 9 
years in the winter months. Vessels that can safely transit under the 
bridge may do so at any time.
    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.

[[Page 76257]]

3. 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. 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 the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT, above. 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.

4. 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).

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among various levels of 
government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and 
have determined that it does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. 
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the ``FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT'' section to coordinate protest activities so that 
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or 
security of people, places or vessels.

7. 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 expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this proposed 
rule elsewhere in this preamble.

8. 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.

9. 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.

10. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, 
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks. This proposed 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.

11. 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.

12. Energy Effects

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under 
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

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

14. 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. This proposed rule simply 
promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. 
This rule 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. 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 temporarily amend 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. From December 1, 2015 through March 31, 2018 in Sec.  117.733, 
suspend paragraph (c)(1) and add paragraph (c)(4), to read as follows:


Sec.  117.733  New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (4) From every December 1 through March 31, beginning in 2015 until 
2018, the draw may remain closed to navigation.
* * * * *

    Dated: November 18, 2013.
Steven H. Ratti,
Rear Admiral, United States Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard 
District.
[FR Doc. 2013-29859 Filed 12-16-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P