Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Coast Guard

          - 33 CFR Part 117
          - [Docket No. USCG-2010-0200]
          - RIN 1625-AA09

# AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice of proposed rulemaking.

# SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard proposes to change the drawbridge operating regulations governing the operation of the Route 3 Bridge, mile 11.8, across the Passaic River at Clifton, New Jersey. Under this proposed rule the Route 3 Bridge need not open for the passage of vessel traffic.

# DATES:

Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before June 23, 2010.

# ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2010-0200 using any one of the following methods:

                        (1)                         *Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov*.                    

                        (2)                         *Fax:*                         202-493-2251.                    

                        (3)                         *Mail:*                         Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.                    

                        (4)                         *Hand delivery:*                         Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-366-9329.                    

                        To avoid duplication, please use only one of these methods.                         *See*                         the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the                         **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION**                         section below for instructions on submitting comments.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        If you have questions on this proposed rule, call or e-mail Mr. Joe Arca, Project Officer, First Coast Guard District, telephone 212-668-7165, e-mail                         *joe.arca@uscg.mil*. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Public Participation and Request for Comments

                    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting                           ( print page 28767)                        comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted, without change to                     *http://www.regulations.gov*                     and will include any personal information you have provided.                

## Submitting Comments

                    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG-2010-0200), indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online (                    *http://www.regulations.gov*), or by fax, mail or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online via                     *http://www.regulations.gov*, it will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax, hand delivery, or mail your comment, it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an e-mail address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.                

                    To submit your comment online, go to                     *http://www.regulations.gov*, click on the “submit a comment” box, which will then become highlighted in blue. In the “Document Type” drop down menu select “Proposed Rules” and insert “USCG-2010-0200” in the “Keyword” box. Click “Search” then click on the balloon shape in the “Actions” column. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8                    1/2                     by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period and may change the rule based on your comments.                

## Viewing Comments and Documents

                    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to                     *http://www.regulations.gov*, click on the “read comments” box, which will then become highlighted in blue. In the “Keyword” box insert “USCG-2010-0200” and click “Search.” Click the “Open Docket Folder” in the “Actions” column. You may also visit either the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket Management Facility.                

## Privacy Act

                    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the                     **Federal Register**                     (73 FR 3316).                

## Public Meeting

                    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a request for one using one of the four methods specified under                     **ADDRESSES**                    . Please explain 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 and Purpose 

The Route 3 Bridge has a vertical clearance of 35 feet at mean high water, and 40 feet at mean low water in the closed position. The existing drawbridge operating regulations listed at 33 CFR 117.739(n), require the bridge to open on signal after at least a 24 hour advance notice is given by calling the number posted at the bridge.

The existing Route 3 Bridge will soon be replaced with a new fixed highway bridge on a different alignment because it is in poor condition and must be replaced as soon as possible. A submarine utility communication cable is presently located on the proposed alignment of the new replacement bridge and will need to be temporarily relocated during the construction of the new Route 3 highway bridge.

The best alternative and least disruptive impact to the environment is to temporarily relocate the communication cable to the underside of the existing Route 3 Bridge. As a result of that temporary installation of the communication cable the existing Route 3 Bridge will not be able to be opened for vessel traffic.

The Route 3 Bridge has not received a request to open since 1998.

On September 10, 2009, the bridge owner, New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT), requested a change to the drawbridge operation regulations to allow the existing Route 3 Bridge to not open for the passage of vessel traffic in order to facilitate the temporary installation of the communication cable and permit the new bridge construction to commence.

Once the new bridge construction is completed and the new bridge is opened for vehicular traffic the old existing Route 3 Bridge will be removed.

## Discussion of Proposed Rule

The existing regulation for the Route 3 Bridge requires it to open on signal after at least a 24 hour advance notice is given by calling the number posted at the bridge.

The Route 3 Bridge has not received a request to open since 1998, and no requests to open are anticipated.

The bridge is scheduled to be demolished due to the construction of a new replacement bridge. A communications cable must be attached temporarily in order to facilitate the new bridge construction. It was decided that since the Route 3 Bridge has not opened since 1998, that relocating the communications cable on to the old bridge should not impact navigation.

## Regulatory Analyses

We developed this proposed 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 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 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 the Route 3 Bridge has not opened since 1998, and no requests to open are anticipated before its removal.

## Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 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 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule                           ( print page 28768)                        would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This conclusion is based upon the fact that the Route 3 Bridge has not opened since 1998, and no requests to open are anticipated before its removal.                

                    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.                

## Assistance for Small Entities

Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact Commander (dpb), First Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, One South Street, New York, NY, 10004. The telephone number is (212) 668-7165. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

## 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 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed 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 proposed rule would not cause 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 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 might disproportionately affect children.

## Indian Tribal Governments

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

## Environment

We have analyzed this proposed 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 made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment because it simply promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.

# List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

      - Bridges

For the reasons discussed 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; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

2. Section 117.739 is amended by revising paragraph (n) to read as follows:

§ 117.739 

* * * * *

(n) The draw of the Route 3 Bridge, mile 11.8, need not be opened for the passage of vessel traffic.

* * * * *

      ( print page 28769)    
Dated: May 3, 2010.

Joseph L. Nimmich,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 2010-12344 Filed 5-21-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-04-P