Drawbridge operations: Massachusetts,
[Federal Register: April 27, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 81)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 22749-22751]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr27ap04-14]
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
-
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.
-
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
