[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 198 (Thursday, October 15, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52887-52888]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-24744]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2009-0348]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; East River, New York City, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has temporarily changed the drawbridge 
operating regulations governing the operation of the Roosevelt Island 
Bridge, mile 6.4, across the East River at New York City, New York. 
This temporary final rule allows the Roosevelt Island Bridge to remain 
in the closed position for eleven months to facilitate a major 
rehabilitation of the bridge.

DATES: This rule is effective October 15, 2009 through August 31, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Comments and related materials received from the public, as 
well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the 
docket, are part of docket USCG-2009-0348 and are available online by 
going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2009-0348 in the 
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' This material is also 
available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility 
(M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, 
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, 
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this 
temporary rule, call or e-mail Mr. Joe Arca, Project Officer, First 
Coast Guard District Bridge Branch, 212-668-7165, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ec868389c281c28d9e8f8dac999f8f8bc2818580"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a9c3c6cc87c487c8dbcac8e9dcdacace87c4c0c5">[email protected]</span></a>. 
If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, 
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory Information

    On August 13, 2009, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulation; East River, New York 
City, NY, in the Federal Register (74 FR 40802). We received no 
comments on the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and 
none was held.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause 
exists for making this rule effective in less than 30 days after 
publication in the Federal Register. A delay or cancellation of this 
ongoing bridge rehabilitation project is not in the public interest and 
would further disrupt the flow of vehicular and maritime traffic. The 
rehabilitation project is necessary to ensure the continued safe and 
reliable operation of the bridge.

Background and Purpose

    The Roosevelt Island Bridge has a vertical clearance of 40 feet at 
mean high water, and 47 feet at mean low water in the closed position. 
The existing drawbridge operating regulations listed at 33 CFR 117.781, 
require the bridge to open on signal if at least a two hour advance 
notice is given.
    The bridge owner, New York City Department of Transportation, has 
requested a temporary rule to facilitate electrical and mechanical 
rehabilitation at the Roosevelt Island Bridge.
    Under this temporary final rule the Roosevelt Island Bridge will 
remain in the closed position from October 1, 2009 through August 31, 
2010. Vessel traffic may transit the East River utilizing the alternate 
route around the other side of the island.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    The Coast Guard received no comment letters in response to the 
notice of proposed rulemaking. As a result, no changes have been made 
to this temporary final rule.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and 
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses 
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This 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. This conclusion is based upon the fact 
that vessel traffic will still be able to transit the East River using 
the alternate route around the island.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this 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 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. This conclusion is based upon the fact that vessel traffic 
will still be able to transit the East River using the alternate route 
round the island.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), in the NPRM we offered to 
assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could 
better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking 
process.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

[[Page 52888]]

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 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 rule will not result in such an expenditure, we 
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will 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 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 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 does 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. 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 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not 
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security 
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 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 this action is one of a category of actions which do not 
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human 
environment. This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, 
paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction.
    Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an 
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion 
determination are not required for this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 
CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland 
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. From, October 15, 2009 through August 31, 2010, Sec.  117.781 is 
amended by suspending paragraph (c) and adding a temporary paragraph 
(d) to read as follows:


Sec.  117.781  East River.

* * * * *
    (d) The draw of the Roosevelt Island Bridge at mile 6.4, at New 
York City, need not open for the passage of vessel traffic from October 
1, 2009 through August 31, 2010.

    Dated: September 28, 2009.
Joseph L. Nimmich,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E9-24744 Filed 10-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>