[Federal Register: April 5, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 65)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 17616-17618]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05ap04-22]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD01-04-021]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Harlem River, NY
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 Triborough (125th
Street) Bridge, mile 1.3, across the Harlem River at New York City, New
York. This proposed rule would allow the bridge owner to require a
forty-eight hour notice for bridge openings from June 1, 2004 through
January 31, 2005. This action is necessary to facilitate structural
rehabilitation at the bridge.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before May 5, 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: 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 or related material. If you do so, please include your name
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (CGD01-04-
021), 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 Triborough (125th Street) Bridge has a vertical clearance of 54
feet at mean high water and 59 feet at mean low water in the closed
position.
The existing drawbridge operation regulations listed at 33 CFR
Sec. 117.789(d) require the bridge to open on signal from 10 a.m. to 5
p.m. after at least a four-hour notice is given.
The owner of the bridge, the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority
(TBTA), requested a temporary change to the drawbridge operation
regulations to allow the bridge owner to require a forty-eight hour
notice for bridge openings from June 1, 2004 through January 31, 2005,
to facilitate structural rehabilitation at the bridge.
The owner of the Triborough (125th Street) Bridge has not received
any requests to open the bridge for the past three years.
The bridge owner plans to replace the structural steel deck system
at the bridge between June 1, 2004 and January 31, 2005. Temporary
concrete roadway barriers will be used to redirect vehicular traffic
over the bridge to facilitate lane closures required to structurally
rehabilitate sections of the bridge roadway steel decking.
Under the existing drawbridge operation regulations, which require
a four-hour advance notice, unscheduled bridge opening requests would
be impossible to grant because the time necessary to safely remove
construction equipment, concrete barriers, and construction workers
from the lift span would be considerably longer than four hours.
The Coast Guard believes the requested forty-eight hour advance
notice requirement is reasonable based upon the lack of bridge opening
requests over the past three years and the fact that the bridge will
continue to open on signal provided a forty-eight hour notice is given.
It is expected that this rule, by requiring a forty-eight hour
notice for bridge openings, will provide adequate notification to the
contractor to facilitate the safe removal of equipment and personnel
from the bridge in order to provide any requested bridge openings.
A shortened comment period of 30 days is necessary to allow this
rule to become effective in time for the start of the necessary
construction at the bridge on June 1, 2004.
The Coast Guard believes this shortened comment period is
reasonable because the bridge repairs are necessary repairs that must
be performed without delay in order to assure the continued
[[Page 17617]]
safe reliable operation of the bridge and prevent an unscheduled
closure due to component failure.
Discussion of Proposal
This proposed change would amend 33 CFR 117.789 by suspending
paragraph (d) and adding a new temporary paragraph (h) from June 1,
2004 through January 31, 2005.
Under this proposed rule the Triborough (125th Street) Bridge would
open on signal from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. if at least a forty-eight hour
notice is given.
A forty-eight hour advance notice for bridge openings would allow
sufficient time for the contractor to safely remove construction
equipment, personnel, and concrete barriers from the bridge in order to
provide any requested bridge openings.
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 continue
to open for vessel traffic at all times after a forty-eight hour notice
is given.
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 continue
to open for vessel traffic at all times after a forty-eight hour notice
is given.
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 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; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); section 117.255 also issued
under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 Stat. 5039.
[[Page 17618]]
2. In Sec. 117.789, from June 1, 2004 through January 31, 2005,
paragraph (d) is temporarily suspended and a new temporary paragraph
(g) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 117.789 Harlem River.
* * * * *
(g) The draw of the Triborough (125th Street) Bridge, mile 1.3,
shall open on signal from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. if at least a forty-eight
hour notice is given.
Dated: March 25, 2004.
John L. Grenier,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, First Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 04-7625 Filed 4-2-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P