Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Hackensack River, Jersey City, NJ, 69687-69688 [2019-27271]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 244 / Thursday, December 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Dated: November 25, 2019.
G.G. Stump,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting
Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2019–27355 Filed 12–18–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG–2019–0892]
RIN 1625–AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Hackensack River, Jersey City, NJ
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard is proposing
to modify the operating schedules that
govern the Route 1 & 9 Bridge, mile 1.8,
and Route 7 Bridge, mile 3.1, both
crossing the Hackensack River, at Jersey
City, NJ. The bridge owner, the New
Jersey Department of Transportation
(NJDOT), submitted a request to allow
two hours advance notice for nighttime
transits due to infrequent bridge
openings. This proposed rule would
align the advance notice requirement for
the PATH Bridge at mile 3.0.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
February 18, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2019–0892 using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov.
See the ‘‘Public Participation and
Request for Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below for instructions on submitting
comments.
SUMMARY:
If
you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email Judy Leung-Yee,
Project Officer, First Coast Guard
District; telephone 212–514–4336, email
Judy.K.Leung-Yee@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
NJDOT New Jersey Department of
Transportation
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
OMB Office of Management and Budget
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(Advance, Supplemental)
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Dec 18, 2019
Jkt 250001
II. Background, Purpose and Legal
Basis
The Route 1 & 9 Bridge at mile 1.8
over the Hackensack River at Jersey
City, New Jersey, has a vertical
clearance of 35 feet at mean high water
and 40 feet at mean low water.
Horizontal clearance is approximately
200 feet. The waterway users include
recreational and commercial vessels
including tugboat/barge combinations.
The Route 7 Bridge at mile 3.1 over
the Hackensack River at Jersey City,
New Jersey, has a vertical clearance of
35 feet at mean high water and 40 feet
at mean low water. Horizontal clearance
is approximately 158 feet. The waterway
users include recreational and
commercial vessels including tugboat/
barge combinations.
The existing regulation, 33 CFR 117.5,
requires both bridges open on signal at
all times. NJ DOT has requested that
overnight hours between 11 p.m. and 7
a.m. be modified to two hours advance
notice. This rule change will allow for
more efficient and economic operation
of the bridge while meeting the
reasonable needs of navigation. The
Coast Guard is proposing this
rulemaking under authority in 33 U.S.C.
499.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The bridge logs show that between 11
p.m. and 7 a.m., the Route 1 & 9 Bridge
had 27 annual openings in 2017, 12
annual openings in 2018, and 11 annual
openings to date in 2019 (through
October). During the subject hours, the
Route 7 Bridge had 16 annual openings
in 2017, 1 annual opening in 2018, and
0 annual openings to date in 2019. The
Coast Guard proposes to permanently
modify the operating regulation.
The proposed rule would allow that
both Route 1 & 9 and Route 7 Bridges
shall open on signal; except that, from
11 p.m. to 7 a.m., the draw shall open
on signal if at least two hours advance
notice is given by calling the number
posted at the bridge. It is the Coast
Guard’s opinion that the proposed rule
meets reasonable needs of marine
traffic.
IV. 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 and Executive
Orders and we discuss First
Amendment rights of protestors.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess the costs and
benefits of available regulatory
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69687
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits.
Executive Order 13771 directs agencies
to control regulatory costs through a
budgeting process. This NPRM has not
been designated a ‘‘significant
regulatory action,’’ under Executive
Order 12866. Accordingly, the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has not
reviewed the NPRM and pursuant to
OMB guidance, it is exempt from the
requirements of Executive Order 13771.
The Coast Guard believes this rule is
not a significant regulatory action. The
bridges will still open for all vessel
traffic after a two-hour advance notice is
given during overnight periods. The
vertical clearance under both bridges in
the closed position are relatively high
enough to accommodate most vessel
traffic. We believe that this proposed
change to the drawbridge operation
regulations at 33 CFR 117.723 will meet
the reasonable needs of navigation.
B. 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.
The Route 1 & 9 and Route 7 Bridges
provide 35 feet of vertical clearance at
mean high water that should
accommodate all the present vessel
traffic except deep draft vessels. The
bridges will continue to open on signal
for any vessel, except between 11 p.m.
and 7 a.m. when a two-hour advance
notice will be required. While some
owners or operators of vessels intending
to transit the bridge may be small
entities, for the reasons stated in section
IV.A., above, this proposed rule would
not have a significant economic impact
on any vessel owner or operator.
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.
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
69688
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 244 / Thursday, December 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules
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.
C. 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.).
D. Federalism and Indian Tribal
Government
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 the various
levels of government. We have analyzed
this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent
with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements
described in Executive Order 13132.
Also, 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.
If you believe this proposed rule has
implications for federalism or Indian
tribes, please contact the person listed
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section above.
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their discretionary regulatory actions. In
particular, the Act addresses actions
that may result in the expenditure by a
State, local, or tribal government, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Though this
proposed rule will not result in such an
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of
this proposed rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Dec 18, 2019
Jkt 250001
F. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023–01,
and Environmental Planning
COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which
guides the Coast Guard in complying
with the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–
4370f). We have made a preliminary
determination that this action is one of
a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment. This proposed rule
promulgates the operating regulations or
procedures for drawbridges. Normally,
this action is categorically excluded
from further review, under paragraph
L49, of Chapter 3, Table 3–1 of the U.S.
Coast Guard Environmental Planning
Implementation Procedures.
Neither a Record of Environmental
Consideration nor a Memorandum for
the Record are required for this rule.
G. 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.
V. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We view public participation as
essential to effective rulemaking, and
will consider all comments and material
received during the comment period.
Your comment can help shape the
outcome of this rulemaking. If you
submit a comment, please include the
docket number for this rulemaking,
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit
comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. If your material
cannot be submitted using https://
www.regulations.gov, contact the person
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions.
We accept anonymous comments. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and
the docket, visit https://
www.regulations.gov/privacynotice.
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Documents mentioned in this NPRM
as being available in this docket and all
public comments, will be in our online
docket at https://www.regulations.gov
and can be viewed by following that
website’s instructions. Additionally, if
you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified
when comments are posted or a final
rule is published.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:
PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE
OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 117
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1;
and Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. In § 117.223, add paragraphs (j) and
(k) to read as follows:
■
§ 117.723
Hackensack River.
*
*
*
*
*
(j) The draw of the Route 1 & 9 Bridge,
mile 1.8, at Jersey City, shall open on
signal; except that, from 11 p.m. to 7
a.m., the draw shall open on signal if at
least two hours advance notice is given
by calling the number posted at the
bridge.
(k) The draw of the Route 7 Bridge,
mile 3.1, at Jersey City, shall open on
signal; except that, from 11 p.m. to 7
a.m., the draw shall open on signal if at
least two hours advance notice is given
by calling the number posted at the
bridge.
Dated: December 5, 2019.
R.W. Warren,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting
Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2019–27271 Filed 12–18–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
POSTAL SERVICE
39 CFR Part 111
USPS Returns Service
Postal ServiceTM.
ACTION: Proposed rule; revision;
additional comment period.
AGENCY:
The Postal Service is
proposing to amend Mailing Standards
of the United States Postal Service,
Domestic Mail Manual (DMM®) section
505.3.0, and various other sections, to
remove references to the traditional
Merchandise Return Service (MRS)
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 244 (Thursday, December 19, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69687-69688]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-27271]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG-2019-0892]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Hackensack River, Jersey City,
NJ
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to modify the operating schedules
that govern the Route 1 & 9 Bridge, mile 1.8, and Route 7 Bridge, mile
3.1, both crossing the Hackensack River, at Jersey City, NJ. The bridge
owner, the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT), submitted a
request to allow two hours advance notice for nighttime transits due to
infrequent bridge openings. This proposed rule would align the advance
notice requirement for the PATH Bridge at mile 3.0.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before February 18, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2019-0892 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email Judy Leung-Yee, Project Officer, First Coast Guard
District; telephone 212-514-4336, email [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
NJDOT New Jersey Department of Transportation
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
OMB Office of Management and Budget
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Advance, Supplemental)
Sec. Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis
The Route 1 & 9 Bridge at mile 1.8 over the Hackensack River at
Jersey City, New Jersey, has a vertical clearance of 35 feet at mean
high water and 40 feet at mean low water. Horizontal clearance is
approximately 200 feet. The waterway users include recreational and
commercial vessels including tugboat/barge combinations.
The Route 7 Bridge at mile 3.1 over the Hackensack River at Jersey
City, New Jersey, has a vertical clearance of 35 feet at mean high
water and 40 feet at mean low water. Horizontal clearance is
approximately 158 feet. The waterway users include recreational and
commercial vessels including tugboat/barge combinations.
The existing regulation, 33 CFR 117.5, requires both bridges open
on signal at all times. NJ DOT has requested that overnight hours
between 11 p.m. and 7 a.m. be modified to two hours advance notice.
This rule change will allow for more efficient and economic operation
of the bridge while meeting the reasonable needs of navigation. The
Coast Guard is proposing this rulemaking under authority in 33 U.S.C.
499.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The bridge logs show that between 11 p.m. and 7 a.m., the Route 1 &
9 Bridge had 27 annual openings in 2017, 12 annual openings in 2018,
and 11 annual openings to date in 2019 (through October). During the
subject hours, the Route 7 Bridge had 16 annual openings in 2017, 1
annual opening in 2018, and 0 annual openings to date in 2019. The
Coast Guard proposes to permanently modify the operating regulation.
The proposed rule would allow that both Route 1 & 9 and Route 7
Bridges shall open on signal; except that, from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m., the
draw shall open on signal if at least two hours advance notice is given
by calling the number posted at the bridge. It is the Coast Guard's
opinion that the proposed rule meets reasonable needs of marine
traffic.
IV. 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 and Executive Orders and we discuss
First Amendment rights of protestors.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This NPRM has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not
reviewed the NPRM and pursuant to OMB guidance, it is exempt from the
requirements of Executive Order 13771.
The Coast Guard believes this rule is not a significant regulatory
action. The bridges will still open for all vessel traffic after a two-
hour advance notice is given during overnight periods. The vertical
clearance under both bridges in the closed position are relatively high
enough to accommodate most vessel traffic. We believe that this
proposed change to the drawbridge operation regulations at 33 CFR
117.723 will meet the reasonable needs of navigation.
B. 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.
The Route 1 & 9 and Route 7 Bridges provide 35 feet of vertical
clearance at mean high water that should accommodate all the present
vessel traffic except deep draft vessels. The bridges will continue to
open on signal for any vessel, except between 11 p.m. and 7 a.m. when a
two-hour advance notice will be required. While some owners or
operators of vessels intending to transit the bridge may be small
entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A., above, this proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner
or operator.
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.
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121),
[[Page 69688]]
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.
C. 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.).
D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Government
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 the various levels
of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
Also, 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. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section above.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule will not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this
proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01, and Environmental Planning
COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guides the Coast Guard in complying
with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C.
4321-4370f). We have made a preliminary determination that this action
is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
proposed rule promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for
drawbridges. Normally, this action is categorically excluded from
further review, under paragraph L49, of Chapter 3, Table 3-1 of the
U.S. Coast Guard Environmental Planning Implementation Procedures.
Neither a Record of Environmental Consideration nor a Memorandum
for the Record are required for this rule.
G. 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.
V. Public Participation and Request for Comments
We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal e-
Rulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material
cannot be submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the
person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document
for alternate instructions.
We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, visit https://www.regulations.gov/privacynotice.
Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in this docket
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:
PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; and Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
0
2. In Sec. 117.223, add paragraphs (j) and (k) to read as follows:
Sec. 117.723 Hackensack River.
* * * * *
(j) The draw of the Route 1 & 9 Bridge, mile 1.8, at Jersey City,
shall open on signal; except that, from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m., the draw
shall open on signal if at least two hours advance notice is given by
calling the number posted at the bridge.
(k) The draw of the Route 7 Bridge, mile 3.1, at Jersey City, shall
open on signal; except that, from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m., the draw shall
open on signal if at least two hours advance notice is given by calling
the number posted at the bridge.
Dated: December 5, 2019.
R.W. Warren,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, First Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2019-27271 Filed 12-18-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P