[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 249 (Friday, December 27, 2002)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 79012-79014]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-32688]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD01-02-143]-
RIN 2115-AE47


Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Jamaica Bay and Connecting 
Waterways, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily change the drawbridge 
operating regulations governing the operation of the New York City 
highway bridge, at mile 0.8, across Mill Basin on Belt Parkway at New 
York City, New York. This temporary rule would allow the bridge to 
remain closed to vessel traffic from 7 a.m. on February 24, 2003 
through 5 p.m. on April 14, 2003. This action is necessary to 
facilitate the installation of median safety barriers at the bridge.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before January 27, 
2003.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments to Commander (obr), First Coast Guard 
District Bridge Branch, at 408 Atlantic Avenue, Boston, MA. 02110-3350, 
or deliver them to the same address between 7 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except, Federal holidays. The telephone number is (617) 
223-8364. The First Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, maintains the 
public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and material received from 
the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being 
available in the docket, will become part of this docket and will be 
available for inspection or copying at the First Coast Guard District, 
Bridge Branch, 7 a.m. to 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph Schmied, Project Officer, First 
Coast Guard District, (212) 668-7165.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard has determined that good cause exists under the 
Administrative Procedure Act 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) for a shortened comment 
period of thirty days and for making this rule effective less than 
thirty days after publication in the Federal Register. The Coast Guard 
believes this is reasonable because the work scheduled at the bridge 
should be conducted between February and April to take advantage of the 
time period when the bridge has the fewest number of opening requests. 
The Coast Guard believes that any delay encountered in this 
regulation's effective date would be unnecessary and contrary to the 
public interest because the work to be performed under this temporary 
rule is necessary safety modifications that are scheduled to be 
performed when the bridge receives the fewest number of opening 
requests.

Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments or related material. If you do so, please include your name 
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (CGD01-02-
143), indicate the specific section of this document to which each 
comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit 
all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than 
8 \1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know 
if they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard 
or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during 
the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them.

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a 
request for a meeting by writing to the First Coast Guard District, 
Bridge Branch, at the address under ADDRESSES explaining 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.

Background and Purpose

    The New York City highway bridge has a vertical clearance of 34 
feet at mean high water, and 39 feet at mean low water in the closed 
position. The existing drawbridge operating regulations are listed at 
33 CFR Sec.  117.795(b).
    The bridge owner, New York City Department of Transportation, 
requested a temporary bridge closure to install median safety barriers 
between the vehicular travel lanes at the bridge.
    The bridge presently has no median safety barriers between the 
vehicular travel lanes that pass over the moveable lift spans at the 
bridge. There have been many serious head on automobile accidents at 
this bridge as a result of the absence of median safety barriers.
    The average traffic count is 140,000 vehicles a day. There have 
been seven (7) head-on travel lane crossover accidents over the past 
several years, four (4) resulting in fatalities. These accidents 
resulted from the absence of a median safety barrier separating the 
opposite vehicular travel lanes.
    The installation of the median safety barriers is considered 
necessary safety repairs that should be performed without delay.
    In order to facilitate this structural work the bridge must remain 
in the closed position for the passage of vessel traffic from 7 a.m. on 
February 24, 2003 through 5 p.m. on April 14, 2003.
    The time frame requested to perform this necessary safety work, 
February 24, 2003 through April 14, 2003, is the best time to perform 
this work because the bridge has historically had very few requests to 
open during that time period. In 2001 only one commercial vessel 
transit required a bridge opening and in 2002 only three commercial 
vessel transits required bridge openings between February 24 and April 
14.
    During the last ten days of the above closure the bridge will be 
balanced and tested. A limited number of bridge openings would be 
available for the passage of vessel traffic during the time period the 
bridge will be balanced and tested.
    The Coast Guard believes this proposed closure is reasonable 
because this work is essential for public safety and will be performed 
when the bridge has the fewest number of requests to open.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    Under this temporary rule in Sec.  117.795, paragraph (b) will be 
temporarily suspended and a new temporary paragraph (d) will be added 
to allow the New York City highway

[[Page 79013]]

bridge, mile 0.8, across Mill Basin, to remain closed to vessel traffic 
from 7 a.m. on February 24, 2003 through 5 p.m. on April 14, 2003.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, 
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits 
under 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has 
not reviewed it under that Order. It is not ``significant'' under the 
regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Transportation 
(DOT) (44 FR 11040, Feb. 26, 1979).
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so 
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation, under paragraph 10e of the 
regulatory policies and procedures of DOT, is unnecessary.
    This conclusion is based on the fact that the waterway users who 
normally navigate Mill Basin are predominantly recreational vessels. 
There are four commercial facilities, two recreational vessel marinas, 
and two recreational/commercial vessel repair yards upstream from the 
bridge.
    The proposed time period is historically the time period during 
which the fewest requests are made to open the bridge. Between February 
24 and April 14, 2001, only one commercial vessel transit required the 
bridge to open. Only three commercial vessel transits required bridge 
openings during the same period in 2002.
    Vessels that can pass under the bridge without a bridge opening may 
do so at all times.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we 
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small 
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations 
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their 
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 
50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under section 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 conclusion is based on the fact that the waterway users who 
normally navigate Mill Basin are predominantly recreational vessels. 
There are four commercial facilities, two recreational vessel marinas, 
and two recreational/commercial vessel repair yards upstream from the 
bridge.
    The proposed time period is historically the time period during 
which the fewest requests are made to open the bridge. Between February 
24 and April 14, 2001, only one commercial vessel transit required the 
bridge to open. Only three commercial vessel transits required bridge 
openings during the same period in 2002.
    Vessels that can pass under the bridge without a bridge opening may 
do so at all times.
    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.

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.).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local 
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial 
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule 
under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications 
for federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary 
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may 
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any 
one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an 
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this 
preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not effect a taking of private property or 
otherwise have taking implications under E.O. 12630, Governmental 
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property 
Rights.

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.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, 
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not 
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may 
disproportionately affect children.

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.
    To help the Coast Guard establish regular and meaningful 
consultation and collaboration with Indian and Alaskan Native tribes, 
we published a notice in the Federal Register (66 FR 36361, July 11, 
2001) requesting comments on how to best carry out the Order. We invite 
your comments on how this proposed rule might impact tribal 
governments, even if that impact may not constitute a ``tribal 
implication'' under the Order.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, 
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant 
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to 
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use 
of energy. It has not been designated by the Administrator of the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy 
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects 
under Executive Order 13211.

Environment

    We considered the environmental impact of this proposed rule and 
concluded that, under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of Commandant 
Instruction M16475.1d, this proposed rule is categorically excluded 
from further environmental documentation because promulgation of 
drawbridge regulations have been found not to have

[[Page 79014]]

a significant effect on the environment. A written ``Categorical 
Exclusion Determination'' is not required for this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

Regulations

    For the reasons set out 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; 49 CFR 1.46; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); section 
117.255 also issued under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 
Stat. 5039.

    2. From February 24, 2003 through April 14, 2003, in Sec.  117.795, 
paragraph (b) is temporarily suspended, and a new temporary paragraph 
(d) is added, to read as follows:


Sec.  117.795  Jamaica Bay and Connecting Waterways.

* * * * *
    (d) The draw of the New York City highway bridge, mile 0.8, across 
Mill Basin on Belt Parkway, need not open for the passage of vessel 
traffic from 7 a.m. on February 24, 2003 through 5 p.m. on April 14, 
2003.

    Dated: December 18, 2002.
J.L. Grenier,
Captain, Coast Guard, Acting Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 02-32688 Filed 12-23-02; 2:42 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P