[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 81 (Tuesday, April 27, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 22749-22751]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-9482]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD01-04-027]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Chelsea River, MA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily change the drawbridge 
operating regulations governing the operation of the P.J. McArdle 
Bridge, mile 0.3, across the Chelsea River between East Boston and 
Chelsea, Massachusetts. This proposed rule would allow the bridge to 
need not open for the passage of vessel traffic from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. 
on June 5, 2004, to facilitate the First Annual Chelsea River Revel 5K 
Road Race. Vessels that can pass under the bridge without a bridge 
opening may do so at all times.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before May 17, 2004.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander 
(obr), First Coast Guard District Bridge Branch, One South Street, 
Battery Park Building, New York, New York, 10004, 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 (212) 668-7165. 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: John McDonald, Project Officer, First 
Coast Guard District, (617) 223-8364.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 22750]]

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 (CGD01-04-
027), 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

    The P.J. McArdle Bridge has a vertical clearance of 21 feet at mean 
high water and 30 feet at mean low water in the closed position. The 
existing drawbridge operation regulations listed at 33 CFR 117.593 
require the bridge to open on signal at all times.
    The owner of the bridge, the City of Boston, requested a temporary 
change to the drawbridge operation regulations to allow the bridge to 
need not open for the passage of vessel traffic from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. 
on June 5, 2004, to facilitate the running of the First Annual Chelsea 
River Revel 5K Road Race. Vessels that can pass under the bridge 
without a bridge opening may do so at all times.
    The Chelsea River is predominantly transited by commercial tugs, 
barges, and oil tankers. The Coast Guard coordinated this closure with 
the mariners that normally use this waterway and no objections were 
received.
    The Coast Guard did not receive the request to keep the bridge 
closed to facilitate the scheduled road race until March 16, 2004. A 
shortened comment period is necessary, due the short notice given to 
the Coast Guard, to allow a final rule to be issued in time for the 
start of First Annual Chelsea River Revel 5K Road Race on June 5, 2004.
    The Coast Guard believes this proposed rule is reasonable in order 
to provide for public safety and the safety of the race participants.

Discussion of Proposal

    This proposed change would suspend Sec.  117.593 and temporarily 
add a new Sec.  117.T594.
    Under the new temporary section all drawbridges across the Chelsea 
River would open on signal; except that the P.J. McArdle Bridge, mile 
0.3, need not open for the passage of vessel traffic from 10 a.m. to 5 
p.m. on June 5, 2004.
    The opening signal for each drawbridge would remain as two 
prolonged blasts followed by two short blasts and one prolonged blast. 
The acknowledging signal would remain as three prolonged blasts when 
the draw can be opened immediately and two prolonged blasts when the 
draw cannot be opened or is open and must be closed.

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 Homeland 
Security.
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so 
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation, under the regulatory 
policies and procedures of DHS, is unnecessary.
    This conclusion is based on the fact that the bridge will be closed 
for a relatively short period of time in the interest of public safety 
during the running of the 5K road race.

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 bridge will be closed 
for a relatively short period of time in the interest of public safety 
during the running of the 5K road race.
    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

[[Page 22751]]

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 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.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant 
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to 
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use 
of energy. 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 have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction 
M16475.1D, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and 
have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit 
the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the 
Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under 
figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, from further 
environment documentation because it has been determined that the 
promulgation of operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges are 
categorically excluded.

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; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.1; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); section 117.255 also issued 
under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 Stat. 5039.

    2. On June 5, 2004, Sec.  117.593 is suspended and a new Sec.  
117.T594 is added to read as follows:


Sec.  117.T594  Chelsea River.

    (a) All drawbridges across the Chelsea River shall open on signal; 
except that the P.J. McArdle Bridge, mile 0.3, need not open for the 
passage of vessel traffic from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. on June 5, 2004.
    (b) The opening signal for each drawbridge is two prolonged blasts 
followed by two short blasts and one prolonged blast. The acknowledging 
signal is three prolonged blasts when the draw can be opened 
immediately and two prolonged blasts when the draw cannot be opened or 
is open and must be closed.

    Dated: April 9, 2004.
John L. Grenier,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, First Coast Guard 
District.
[FR Doc. 04-9482 Filed 4-26-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P