Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Hackensack River, Jersey City, NJ, 73667-73669 [2020-25396]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules General Requirements (Group I), dated March 26, 2019; (ii) ANSI/UL 60079–1 Ed. 7, Standard for Explosive Atmospheres—Part 1: Equipment Protection by Flameproof Enclosures ‘‘d’’ (Group I, Level of Protection ‘da’), dated September 18, 2015; (iii) ANSI/UL 60079–11 Ed. 6, Standard for Explosive Atmospheres— Part 11: Equipment Protection by Intrinsic Safety ‘‘i’’ (Group I, Level of Protection ‘ia’), dated February 15, 2013; (iv) ANSI/UL 60079–18, Ed. 4, Standard for Explosive Atmospheres— Part 18: Equipment Protection by Encapsulation ‘‘m’’ (Group I, Level of Protection ‘ma’), dated December 14, 2015; (v) ANSI/UL 60079–25 Ed. 2, Standard for Explosive Atmospheres— Part 25: Intrinsically Safe Electrical Systems (Group I, Level of Protection ‘ia’), dated December 2, 2011; and (vi) ANSI/UL 60079–28 Ed. 2, Standard for Explosive Atmospheres— Part 28: Protection of Equipment and Transmission Systems Using Optical Radiation (Group I, Equipment Protection Level ‘Ma’), dated September 15, 2017. (4) The voluntary consensus standards listed in this paragraph (b) may also be obtained from the American National Standards Institute, 1899 L Street NW, 11th Floor, Washington, DC 20036, Tel: (202) 293–8020 (https:// www.ansi.org). § 18.103 Review and update of applicable voluntary consensus standards. (a) MSHA will review more recent editions of voluntary consensus standards listed in § 18.102 to determine whether they can be used in their entirety and without modification to replace the requirements in subparts B through E of this part. (b) MSHA may review voluntary consensus standards not listed in § 18.102 to determine whether such standards are suitable for gassy mining environments and whether they provide protection against fire or explosion, if substituted in their entirety and without modification to replace the requirements in subparts B through E of this part. (c) Following such review and determination, MSHA will use the appropriate rulemaking process to publish a list of voluntary consensus standards that it accepts in lieu of the requirements in subparts B through E of this part. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:55 Nov 18, 2020 Jkt 253001 I. Table of Abbreviations PART 74—COAL MINE DUST SAMPLING DEVICES 6. The authority citation for part 74 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 30 U.S.C. 957. §§ 74.5 and 74.11 73667 [Amended] 7. In §§ 74.5(b) and 74.11(d), remove ‘‘30 CFR 18.68’’ and add in its place the term ‘‘30 CFR part 18.’’ ■ 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 The Coast Guard is proposing to modify the operating schedules that govern the new Route 7 Bridge, mile 3.1, crossing the Hackensack River, at Jersey City, NJ. The bridge owner, the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT), submitted a request to allow the bridge to require four hours advance notice for bridge openings. It is expected that this change to the regulations will create efficiency in drawbridge operations and better serve the needs of the community while continuing to meet the reasonable needs of navigation. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before January 19, 2021. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG– 2020–0603 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http:// www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public Participation and Request for Comments’’ portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on submitting comments. II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis The new Route 7 Bridge at mile 3.1 over the Hackensack River at Jersey City, New Jersey, is currently under construction and will have a vertical clearance of 70 feet at mean high water in the closed position and 135 feet at mean high water in the open position. Horizontal clearance is approximately 158 feet. The existing Route 7 Bridge over the Hackensack River has a vertical clearance of 35 feet at mean high water in the closed position and 135 feet at mean high water in the open position. Horizontal clearance is approximately 158 feet. The waterway users include recreational and commercial vessels including tugboat/barge combinations. The existing regulation, 33 CFR 117.723(k) published under Federal Register 85 FR 8747, effective April 19, 2020, requires the existing bridge 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. In August of 2020, the owner of the bridge, NJDOT, requested a change to the drawbridge operation regulations to the new bridge anticipating lower volume of bridge openings given that the new bridge vertical clearance in the closed position will be double the clearance of the existing bridge. Under this proposed rule the new draw would open on signal if at least four hours advance notice is given by calling the number posted at the bridge. 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. NJDOT reached out to the maritime stakeholders with the requested change proposed and received no objections. 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: III. Discussion of Proposed Rule The bridge logs show that the Route 7 Bridge had 16 openings in 2018, 10 openings in 2019, and 6 openings in 2020 (through 6/19/2020). The Coast Guard proposes to permanently modify the operating regulation. David G. Zatezalo, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety and Health. [FR Doc. 2020–22589 Filed 11–18–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4520–43–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG–2020–0603] RIN 1625–AA09 Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Hackensack River, Jersey City, NJ Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19NOP1.SGM 19NOP1 73668 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules The proposed rule would allow that the new Route 7 Bridge shall open on signal if at least four hours advance notice is given by calling the number posted at the bridge. Both new and current bridges will operate under the existing operating schedule until the original bridge is demolished/removed at which point this proposed rule will take effect. 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 bridge will still open for all vessel traffic after a four-hour advance notice is given. The vertical clearance under the bridge in the closed position is 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. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:55 Nov 18, 2020 Jkt 253001 The new Route 7 Bridge provides 70 feet of vertical clearance at mean high water that should accommodate most of the present vessel traffic except deep draft vessels. The new bridge will open on signal for any vessel when a four hour advance notice is given. 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), 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, section. 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 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 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. 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, Rev.1, associated implementing instructions, 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). The Coast Guard has determined 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, such actions are 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. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed 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. E:\FR\FM\19NOP1.SGM 19NOP1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules 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 http:// www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using http:// 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:55 Nov 18, 2020 Jkt 253001 without change to http:// www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions in response to this document, see DHS’s eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020). Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in this docket and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://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: PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 73669 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. Revise § 117.723, paragraph (k) to read as follows: ■ § 117.723 Hackensack River. * * * * * (k) The draw of the Route 7 Bridge, mile 3.1, at Jersey City, shall open on signal if at least four hours advance notice is given by calling the number posted at the bridge. Dated: November 12, 2020. T.G. Allan, Jr., Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. 2020–25396 Filed 11–18–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P E:\FR\FM\19NOP1.SGM 19NOP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 224 (Thursday, November 19, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 73667-73669]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-25396]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2020-0603]
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 new Route 7 Bridge, mile 3.1, crossing the Hackensack 
River, at Jersey City, NJ. The bridge owner, the New Jersey Department 
of Transportation (NJDOT), submitted a request to allow the bridge to 
require four hours advance notice for bridge openings. It is expected 
that this change to the regulations will create efficiency in 
drawbridge operations and better serve the needs of the community while 
continuing to meet the reasonable needs of navigation.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before January 19, 2021.

ADDRESSES:  You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2020-0603 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://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 new Route 7 Bridge at mile 3.1 over the Hackensack River at 
Jersey City, New Jersey, is currently under construction and will have 
a vertical clearance of 70 feet at mean high water in the closed 
position and 135 feet at mean high water in the open position. 
Horizontal clearance is approximately 158 feet. The existing Route 7 
Bridge over the Hackensack River has a vertical clearance of 35 feet at 
mean high water in the closed position and 135 feet at mean high water 
in the open position. Horizontal clearance is approximately 158 feet.
    The waterway users include recreational and commercial vessels 
including tugboat/barge combinations.
    The existing regulation, 33 CFR 117.723(k) published under Federal 
Register 85 FR 8747, effective April 19, 2020, requires the existing 
bridge 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.
    In August of 2020, the owner of the bridge, NJDOT, requested a 
change to the drawbridge operation regulations to the new bridge 
anticipating lower volume of bridge openings given that the new bridge 
vertical clearance in the closed position will be double the clearance 
of the existing bridge.
    Under this proposed rule the new draw would open on signal if at 
least four hours advance notice is given by calling the number posted 
at the bridge. 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.
    NJDOT reached out to the maritime stakeholders with the requested 
change proposed and received no objections.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The bridge logs show that the Route 7 Bridge had 16 openings in 
2018, 10 openings in 2019, and 6 openings in 2020 (through 6/19/2020). 
The Coast Guard proposes to permanently modify the operating 
regulation.

[[Page 73668]]

    The proposed rule would allow that the new Route 7 Bridge shall 
open on signal if at least four hours advance notice is given by 
calling the number posted at the bridge. Both new and current bridges 
will operate under the existing operating schedule until the original 
bridge is demolished/removed at which point this proposed rule will 
take effect.
    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 bridge will still open for all vessel traffic after a four-
hour advance notice is given. The vertical clearance under the bridge 
in the closed position is 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 new Route 7 Bridge provides 70 feet of vertical clearance at 
mean high water that should accommodate most of the present vessel 
traffic except deep draft vessels. The new bridge will open on signal 
for any vessel when a four hour advance notice is given. 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), 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, section. 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.

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, Rev.1, associated implementing 
instructions, 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). The 
Coast Guard has determined 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, such 
actions are 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. We seek any comments or 
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant 
environmental impact from this proposed 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.

[[Page 73669]]

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 http://www.regulations.gov. If your material 
cannot be submitted using http://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 http://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and 
submissions in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking System 
of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).
    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in this docket 
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://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. Revise Sec.  117.723, paragraph (k) to read as follows:


Sec.  117.723   Hackensack River.

* * * * *
    (k) The draw of the Route 7 Bridge, mile 3.1, at Jersey City, shall 
open on signal if at least four hours advance notice is given by 
calling the number posted at the bridge.

    Dated: November 12, 2020.
T.G. Allan, Jr.,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2020-25396 Filed 11-18-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P