[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 203 (Friday, October 20, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 61924-61926]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-17578]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD01-06-109]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Cheesequake Creek, Morgan, NJ

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 New Jersey Transit 
Rail Operations (NJTRO) railroad bridge, mile 0.2, at Morgan, New 
Jersey. This proposed rule would allow the NJTRO railroad bridge to 
remain in the closed position from January 1, 2007 through March 31, 
2007. This rule is necessary to facilitate structural bridge 
rehabilitation.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before November 20, 2006.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander 
(dpb), 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, 
between 7 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Joe Arca, Project Officer, First 
Coast Guard District, (212) 668-7165.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name 
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking CGD01-06-
109, 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; however, 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 NJTRO railroad bridge has a vertical clearance of 3 feet at 
mean high water, and 8 feet at mean low water in the closed position. 
The existing drawbridge operating regulations, listed at 33 CFR 
117.709(b), require the bridge to open on signal; except that, at least 
a four-hour notice for bridge openings is required from January 1 
through March 31 from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m.
    The bridge owner, New Jersey Transit Rail Operations (NJTRO), 
requested a temporary rule to facilitate structural and mechanical 
rehabilitation at the NJTRO railroad bridge.
    Under this temporary rule, the NJTRO railroad bridge may remain 
closed to navigation from January 1, 2007 through March 31, 2007. 
Vessels that can pass under the bridge without an opening may do so at 
all times.
    A small number of fishing boats are docked upstream from the NJTRO 
railroad bridge; however, Cheesequake Creek is predominantly a 
recreational waterway. From January through March, the recreational 
vessels are in winter storage and the waterway is normally not 
transited. The Coast Guard met with the mariners in June and July 2006, 
to discuss this bridge project and related closure. The mariners agreed 
with the

[[Page 61925]]

closure dates since that is the time period the bridge seldom opens and 
the waterway is frozen.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    This proposed change would amend 33 CFR 117.709(b) by suspending 
paragraph (b) and adding a new temporary paragraph (c) that would list 
the temporary bridge opening schedule for the NJTRO railroad bridge.
    This temporary rule is necessary to facilitate the structural 
rehabilitation construction at the bridge, since the bridge will not be 
able to open for vessel traffic during the prosecution of these 
repairs.
    This proposed change would allow the NJTRO railroad bridge to 
remain in the closed position from January 1, 2007 through March 31, 
2007.

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 section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and 
Budget has not reviewed it under that Order.
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so 
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
    This conclusion is based on the fact that the bridge seldom opens 
January through March since the recreational vessels that use this 
waterway are in winter storage during that time period.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
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.
    The proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of 
which may be small entities: recreational vessels not in winter storage 
and fishing vessels that make infrequent transits of the bridge in the 
winter months.
    This conclusion is based on the fact that the recreational vessels 
that predominantly use this waterway are in winter storage January 
through March and the few fishing boat operators that may use the 
bridge at that time of the year have agreed to the closure dates.
    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.

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 so that they can better 
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. 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, Commander (dpb), First Coast 
Guard District, Bridge Branch, One South Street, New York, NY, 10004. 
The telephone number is (212) 668-7165. The Coast Guard will not 
retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this 
rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

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 affect a taking of private property or 
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 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 might 
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 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. The Administrator of the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy 
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects 
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards 
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, 
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why 
using these

[[Page 61926]]

standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise 
impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards 
(e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; 
test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems 
practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus 
standards bodies.
    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we 
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction 
M16475.1D and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 
5100.1, which guide 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 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, we believe that this rule should 
be categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e) of the 
Instruction, from further environmental documentation as this action 
relates to the promulgation of operating regulations or procedures for 
drawbridges. Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e) of the Instruction, an 
``Environmental Analysis Checklist'' is not required for this rule. 
Comments on this section will be considered before we make the final 
decision on whether to categorically exclude this rule from further 
environmental review.

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; 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. From January 1, 2007 through March 31, 2007, Sec.  117.709 is 
amended by suspending paragraph (b) and adding a temporary paragraph 
(c) to read as follows:


Sec.  117.709  Cheesequake Creek.

* * * * *
    (c) The draw of the New Jersey Transit Rail Operations railroad 
bridge at mile 0.2, need not open for the passage of vessel traffic 
from January 1, 2007 through March 31, 2007.

    Dated: October 3, 2006.
Timothy S. Sullivan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6-17578 Filed 10-19-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P