This site displays a prototype of a “Web 2.0” version of the daily Federal Register. It is not an official legal edition of the Federal Register, and does not replace the official print version or the official electronic version on GPO’s govinfo.gov.
The documents posted on this site are XML renditions of published Federal Register documents. Each document posted on the site includes a link to the corresponding official PDF file on govinfo.gov. This prototype edition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov will remain an unofficial informational resource until the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register (ACFR) issues a regulation granting it official legal status. For complete information about, and access to, our official publications and services, go to About the Federal Register on NARA's archives.gov.
The OFR/GPO partnership is committed to presenting accurate and reliable regulatory information on FederalRegister.gov with the objective of establishing the XML-based Federal Register as an ACFR-sanctioned publication in the future. While every effort has been made to ensure that the material on FederalRegister.gov is accurately displayed, consistent with the official SGML-based PDF version on govinfo.gov, those relying on it for legal research should verify their results against an official edition of the Federal Register. Until the ACFR grants it official status, the XML rendition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov does not provide legal notice to the public or judicial notice to the courts.
Coast Guard, DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily change the drawbridge operating regulations governing the operation of the Long Beach Bridge, at mile 4.7, across Reynolds Channel, New York. This proposed temporary change to the drawbridge operation regulations would allow the bridge to operate only one lift span for openings to be granted at specific times after a one-hour notice is given. The bridge also would be closed at night from 11 p.m. to 5 a.m., daily. Two five-day bridge closures between September 30, 2002 and April 30, 2003, will also be required. This action is necessary to facilitate structural repairs at the bridge.
Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before July 29, 2002.
You may mail comments to Commander (obr), First Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, at 408 Atlantic Avenue, Boston, MA. 02110-3350, 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 (617) 223-8364. 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.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joseph Schmied, Project Officer, First Coast Guard District, (212) 668-7165.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:Start Printed Page 37745
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 (CGD01-02-054), 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 81/2 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.
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.
The Long Beach Bridge has a vertical clearance of 20 feet at mean high water and 24 feet at mean low water. The existing regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.799(g).
The bridge owner, Nassau County Department of Public Works, asked the Coast Guard to temporarily change the drawbridge operation regulations to facilitate structural repairs at the bridge. The bridge will not be able to open both spans at all times for vessel traffic during these repairs and will be closed to marine traffic during other periods. Single-leaf openings will occur on the even hours 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., daily, after a one-hour notice is given and the bridge will be closed daily from 11 p.m. and 5 a.m. Additionally, two Monday through Friday, five day closures will be required between September 30, 2002 and April 30, 2003, to perform several phases of the bridge structural repairs. The single span, timed opening schedule, advance notice and closure periods are necessary in order to perform the required repair work.
Discussion of Proposal
This proposed temporary change to the drawbridge operation regulations would allow the bridge to operate, from September 3, 2002 through June 30, 2003, as follows:
Only one span need be opened for vessel traffic on the even hour from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., daily, after at least a one-hour advance notice is given.
The draw need not open from 11 p.m. to 5 a.m., daily.
The draw need not open for vessel traffic for two Monday through Friday five-day periods between September 30, 2002 and April 30, 2003, each to be announced in the Local Notice to Mariners as well as in a Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
The total number of bridge openings indicated in the bridge opening logs show two or less openings daily on weekdays with a small increase on weekends.
The Coast Guard believes this rulemaking is reasonable based upon the relatively low number of bridge openings at this bridge during past years and the fact that this work is vital, necessary maintenance required to assure continued safe operation of the bridge.
This proposed rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 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 Transportation (DOT) (44 FR 11040, Feb. 26, 1979).
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation, under paragraph 10e of the regulatory policies and procedures of DOT, is unnecessary. This conclusion is based on the fact that there have been few requests to open the bridge historically.
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 upon the fact that there have been few requests historically.
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.).
We have analyzed this proposed rule under E.O. 13132 and have determined that this rule does not have implications for federalism under that Order.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) governs the issuance of Federal regulations that require unfunded mandates. An unfunded mandate is a regulation that requires a State, local, or tribal government or the private sector to incur direct costs without the Federal Government having first provided the funds to pay those costs. This proposed rule would not impose an unfunded mandate.
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 E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule under E.O. 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and does not concern an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may disproportionately affect children.
We considered the environmental impact of this proposed rule and concluded that, under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of Commandant Start Printed Page 37746Instruction M16475.1C, this proposed rule is categorically excluded from further environmental documentation because promulgation of drawbridge regulations have been found not to have a significant effect on the environment. A written “Categorical Exclusion Determination” is not required for this rule.
Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have 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.
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.Start List of Subjects
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:Start Part
PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:
2. From September 3, 2002 through June 30, 2003, § 117.799 is amended by suspending paragraph (g) and adding a new paragraph (j) to read as follows:
(j) The Long Beach Bridge, mile 4.7, across Reynolds Channel, shall open on signal; except that:
(1) Only one lift span need be opened for vessel traffic, on the even hour, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., daily, after at least a one-hour advance notice is given by calling the number posted at the bridge.
(2) The draw need not open for vessel traffic from 11 p.m. to 5 p.m., daily.
(3) The draw need not open for vessel traffic for two periods of five consecutive days between September 30, 2002 and April 30, 2003, to be announced in the Local Notice to Mariners and in a Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
Dated: May 13, 2002.
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 02-13512 Filed 5-29-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-U