[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 238 (Tuesday, December 12, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74574-74576]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-21015]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration


Environmental Impact Statement for Improvements To Enhance the 
Capacity and Improve the Operation of the Portal Bridge, a Rail 
Crossing Over the Hackensack River Along the Northeast Corridor Between 
Kearny, NJ and Secaucus, NJ

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), U.S. Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.

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

SUMMARY: FRA is issuing this notice to advise the public that it will 
jointly prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) with the New 
Jersey Transit Corporation (NJ TRANSIT) and in cooperation with the 
National Railroad Passenger Corporation (AMTRAK), to study improvements 
to enhance the capacity and improve the operation of the Portal Bridge, 
a two-track moveable swing-span bridge crossing over the Hackensack 
River along AMTRAK's Northeast Corridor rail line. AMTRAK and NJ 
TRANSIT are proposing to enhance the capacity and improve the operation 
of the Portal Bridge.
    FRA is issuing this notice to solicit public and agency input into 
the development of the scope of the EIS and to advise the public that 
outreach activities conducted by NJ TRANSIT and its representatives 
will be considered in the preparation of the EIS. The Federal Transit 
Administration (FTA) is a cooperating agency for the environmental 
review. FTA will contribute information for which it has special 
expertise and ensure the EIS is prepared in compliance with its 
environmental regulations. The EIS will be prepared in accordance with 
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) of 
1969 and the applicable regulations implementing NEPA as set forth in 
64 FR 28545 (May 26, 1999) and 23 CFR part 771. The EIS will also 
address as necessary Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation 
Act, Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966 
(49 U.S.C. 303) (DOT Act) and other applicable Federal, and State laws 
and regulations.
    The EIS will evaluate a ``No Action Alternative'' along with 
various build alternatives which could retain, replace, or modify the 
existing Portal Bridge. Alternatives proposing to retain the existing 
bridge would include the rehabilitation of the existing structure to a 
state of good repair, along with the construction of an additional 
bridge for added capacity. The new bridge could be either a moveable or 
a fixed bridge and its height above mean high water (MHW) would vary 
accordingly. The new structure may consist of a two- or three-track 
bridge. Alternatives proposing to replace the existing bridge would 
require the construction of two new bridges of varying heights, types, 
and number of tracks. The two new bridges could be built on new 
parallel alignments, or one new bridge could be built on the existing 
bridge alignment by use of a staged approach. Each of these new bridges 
would have two or three new tracks. Alternatives proposing to modify 
the existing bridge would entail rehabilitation and raising of the 
existing bridge to a new height. The existing bridge may be fixed in 
place or may remain moveable, depending on the proposed height above 
MHW. A new bridge could also be constructed on a different alignment.

DATES: A scoping meeting will be held on January 17, 2007 in the Newark 
Public Library, Centennial Hall, 2nd Floor, 5 Washington Street, 
Newark, NJ, 07101, (973) 733-7800, from 4 to 8 p.m. To ensure that all 
significant issues are identified and considered, a formal presentation 
will be made at 4:30 and 6 p.m. followed by the opportunity for the 
public to comment on the scope of the EIS. Those wishing to speak are 
required to register at the meeting location. At the meeting, comments 
may also be submitted in written form, or orally one-on-one to a 
stenographer.
    Persons interested in providing written comments on the scope of 
the EIS should do so by January 31, 2007. Written comments sent should 
be sent by mail to persons identified below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information regarding the 
environmental review, please contact: Mr. John Wilkins, Director, 
Capital Planning, The New Jersey Transit Corporation, One Penn Plaza 
East, Newark, NJ 07105-2246, telephone (973) 491-7846, or Mr. David 
Valenstein, Environmental Program Manager, Federal Railroad 
Administration, 1120 Vermont Avenue, NW., Mail Stop 20, Washington DC 
20590, telephone (202) 493-6368. Information and documents regarding 
the environmental review process will be also made available through 
appropriate means, including the project Web site: http://www.portalbridgenec.com.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Description of Project Area

    AMTRAK owns and operates the Northeast Corridor rail line from 
Pennsylvania Station New York to Union Station in Washington DC, 
including the heavily used ``High Line'' portion connecting Newark, NJ 
and New York, NY across the Portal Bridge. NJ TRANSIT's Northeast 
Corridor Line operates over AMTRAK's Northeast Corridor in portions of 
Pennsylvania and in New Jersey from Trenton to New York's Pennsylvania 
Station. NJ TRANSIT's North Jersey Coast Line, certain Montclair-
Boonton Line trains, and certain Morris & Essex Line trains join 
AMTRAK's Northeast Corridor west of the Hackensack River utilize the 
Portal Bridge and subsequently travel under the Hudson River to their 
terminus at New York's Pennsylvania Station.
    NJ TRANSIT's commuter rail system ridership has been growing and 
will continue to grow due to population growth in communities 
throughout New Jersey, Orange and Rockland Counties

[[Page 74575]]

in New York, and portions of Pennsylvania. NJ TRANSIT operates 20 
trains during the peak morning hour over the Portal Bridge that serve 
approximately 17,700 passengers. AMTRAK currently operates 
approximately 48 scheduled trains in each direction over this segment 
of the Northeast Corridor every weekday, including 15 time-sensitive 
premium Acela Express trains. While Portal Bridge is clearly a vital 
river crossing, the capacity constraints and problems caused by the 
existing Portal Bridge decrease schedule reliability for both AMTRAK 
and NJ TRANSIT customers.
    Over the past few decades, improvements to the Northeast Corridor's 
infrastructure have greatly enhanced rail operations for AMTRAK and NJ 
TRANSIT. The Portal Bridge is an essential yet weak link along the 
Northeast Corridor. Planned projects intended to meet future 
transportation demands will place additional importance on a reliable 
and efficient Hackensack River crossing. The FTA and NJ TRANSIT, in 
partnership with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey are 
currently preparing an EIS for the Access to the Region's Core (ARC) 
project. The ARC EIS will evaluate a new two-track tunnel under the 
Hudson River, a new rail terminal in Manhattan adjacent to the existing 
Penn Station, and new track capacity on the Northeast Corridor. While 
the proposed operating plan for ARC could be achieved using alternate 
routes, the locally preferred alternative results in a total of 37 NJ 
TRANSIT and AMTRAK trains operating over an enhanced Portal Bridge in 
the AM peak hour. Currently, 23 trains operate over Portal Bridge in 
the AM peak hour. The ARC as well as other planned projects would 
therefore increase the need for Portal Bridge improvements.

II. Problem Identification

    The existing Portal Bridge was constructed in 1910 and is a two-
track, moveable swing-span bridge that crosses the Hackensack River in 
New Jersey between the City of Kearny and the City of Secaucus. The 
Northeast Corridor has two tracks over the Portal Bridge and between 
Swift Interlocking and Secaucus Junction, which creates two 
bottlenecks. Trains must merge from four tracks to two tracks at Swift 
Interlocking, and from four tracks to two tracks at Secaucus Junction. 
Because multiple rail lines are merging onto a two-track crossing, the 
window of opportunity for each train is reduced. This operational 
inflexibility means that a delay on one rail line can cascade to other 
rail lines. Portal Bridge is a critical infrastructure element for both 
AMTRAK and NJ TRANSIT, enabling movement between east-of-Hudson and 
west-of-Hudson destinations, however the existing bridge, poses safety 
concerns, capacity constraints, and operational inflexibility.
    The Portal Bridge was constructed nearly a century ago. Design 
standards for steel railroad bridges anticipate a typical lifespan of 
100 years. Given the Portal Bridge's age, the structure is nearing the 
end of its useful life. Portal Bridge presents a considerable ongoing 
operation and maintenance expense for AMTRAK because the mechanical and 
structural components are prone to failure due to age and wear and 
because swing bridges are the most complicated movable rail bridge 
type. Special rail connections, known as miter rails, allow the rails 
to disengage and the bridge to swing open and closed. These connections 
are automatically controlled mechanical separations in the track that 
move apart for the swing span to open and then are realigned after it 
is closed. Mechanical wedges must lock the bridge when in the closed 
position and special mechanical electric power catenery joints must 
separate or rejoin the continuous contact wire on either end of the 
bridge for each movement. As a result of these features, while trains 
can operate at 90 miles per hour (mph) on adjacent portions of the 
Northeast Corridor, speeds over the Portal Bridge are restricted to 70 
mph. The Hackensack River is a navigable waterway and marine traffic 
requires frequent bridge openings. These openings increase the 
likelihood of mechanical malfunctions, which have in the past caused 
the bridge to remain in the open position for long periods of time, 
resulting in train delays. Due to these types of issues, older swing 
span bridges are now being replaced by other types of moveable bridges 
such as vertical lift and single-span bascule bridges.
    The Hackensack River is a navigable waterway governed by the U.S. 
Coast Guard. The existing Portal Bridge has only 23 feet of clearance 
between mean high water (MHW) and the lowest steel elevation of the 
bridge. As a result, marine traffic along this segment of the 
Hackensack River requires the frequent opening of the Portal Bridge and 
disruption of Northeast Corridor train traffic. This conflict is 
currently managed by restricting the times during which the bridge is 
permitted to open. Nonetheless, the lengthy time that is required to 
open and close the Portal Bridge for marine traffic continues to be 
disruptive to efficient rail operations.
    To avoid disruption to passenger service, AMTRAK is forced to 
conduct bridge maintenance and inspection during increasingly limited 
time periods, such as at night and on weekends. As traffic along the 
Northeast Corridor increases, fewer suitable time periods for 
maintenance and inspection will be available.

III. Alternatives to be Considered

    The EIS will consider a No Action Alternative and a number of 
different build alternatives to improve the existing Northeast Corridor 
rail crossing over the Hackensack River. These alternatives will 
consider retention or removal of the existing Portal Bridge and 
construction of one or two new bridges. Alternatives retaining the 
Portal Bridge will, in some cases, include the modification of certain 
characteristics of the existing bridge--such as height and operation 
(e.g., a moveable structure versus a fixed structure). For a new 
bridge, alternatives proposed will vary in bridge height, type 
(moveable/fixed), and number of tracks to be constructed between Swift 
Interlocking and Secaucus Junction.
    Alternatives Retaining the Existing Portal Bridge: These 
alternatives would retain the existing Portal Bridge and include 
construction of a new two-track or three-track bridge, either fixed or 
moveable.
    Alternatives Modifying the Existing Portal Bridge: These 
alternatives would involve physically modifying the existing Portal 
Bridge (beyond normal maintenance), rehabilitating the structure, and 
raising it above its existing height. Some of these alternatives would 
raise the existing bridge so that it could be fixed in a closed 
position. Other alternatives would raise the bridge to a lesser height 
and retain its moveable nature. These alternatives would also include a 
new bridge, either fixed or moveable, with two or three tracks.
    Alternatives Removing the Existing Portal Bridge: These 
alternatives would involve the construction of two new bridges and 
removal of the existing Portal Bridge. These alternatives would include 
a mix of bridge height, operation type (moveable or fixed), and 
alignment along the Hackensack River. Some of these alternatives would 
include the construction of a new two-or three-track movable bridge 
with a second new two-track fixed or moveable bridge. Other 
alternatives in this category would include a new two-track or three-
track fixed bridge and a second new two-track fixed bridge.

[[Page 74576]]

IV. Probable Effects

    The FRA, NJ TRANSIT, and AMTRAK will evaluate both project-specific 
and cumulative changes to the social, economic and physical 
environment--including land use and socioeconomic conditions, ecology, 
water resources, historic and archaeological resources, visual 
character and aesthetics, contaminated and hazardous materials, 
transportation, air quality, noise and vibration, environmental 
justice, and cumulative and secondary effects. The analysis will be 
undertaken consistent with NEPA, Council on Environmental Quality 
regulations, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, FRA 
guidance, FTA regulations, DOT guidance, and Section 4(f) of the DOT 
Act, along with other applicable Federal and State regulations.

V. Scoping Process

    FRA invites all interested individuals, organizations, and Federal, 
State, and local agencies to comment on the scope of the EIS. Comments 
are encouraged on specific social, economic, or environmental issues to 
be evaluated, and on reasonable alternatives that may be less costly, 
more cost effective or have fewer environmental impacts while achieving 
similar transportation objectives.
    NJ TRANSIT will be leading the outreach activities during the 
public scoping process, beginning with the scoping meeting identified 
under DATES above. Following the public scoping process, public 
outreach activities will include meetings with the Regional Citizens' 
Liaison Committee (RCLC) established for the study, as well as meetings 
with interested parties or small groups. Those wishing to participate 
in the RCLC may do so by registering on the project Web site at http://www.portalbridgenec.com. As part of the study process, the project Web 
site listed will be periodically updated to reflect the project's 
status. In addition, newsletters will be circulated to a broad 
constituency to ensure people are informed about the project. 
Additional opportunities for public participation will be announced 
through mailings, notices, advertisements and press releases.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 5, 2006.
Mark E. Yachmetz,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Development.
[FR Doc. E6-21015 Filed 12-11-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P