[Federal Register: July 17, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 137)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 42331-42333]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr17jy03-27]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD07-03-072]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Gulf Intracoastal Waterway,
Boca Grande, Charlotte County, FL
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the operating regulations
and the name of the Gasparilla Island Causeway bridge, across the Gulf
Intracoastal Waterway, mile 34.3, in Boca Grande, Florida. The proposed
rule would require the bridge to open only two times an hour during the
weekdays and four times an hour during certain times on the weekends
and Federal holidays. This change would improve the flow of vehicular
traffic while not significantly impacting navigation.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before September 15, 2003.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander
(obr), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 SE. 1st Ave, Room 432, Miami,
Florida, 33131. Comments and material received from the public, as well
as documents indicated in the preamble as being available in the
docket, will become part of this docket and are available for
inspection or copying at Commander (obr), Seventh Coast Guard District,
909 SE. 1st Avenue, Room 432, Miami, Florida, 33131, between 8 a.m. and
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Barry Dragon, Seventh Coast Guard
District, Bridge Branch, 909 SE. 1st Ave Miami, Florida, 33131,
telephone number 305-415-6743.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking [CGD07-03-
072], 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
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. However, you may
submit a request for a meeting by writing to Bridge Branch, Seventh
Coast Guard District, 909 SE. 1st Ave, Room 432, Miami, Florida, 33131,
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 and Purpose
The Gasparilla Island Causeway bridge across the Gulf Intracoastal
Waterway, mile 34.3, is a swingbridge with a vertical clearance of 9
feet at mean high water and a horizontal clearance of 81 feet. The
current operating regulations published in 33 CFR 117.287(a-1), require
the bridge to open on signal; except that, from January 1 to May 31,
from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m., the bridge need open only on the hour, quarter
hour, half hour and three quarter hour. The bridge owner requested a
change to the bridge operating schedule so that the bridge must open on
signal, except that from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays, the bridge need open only on the hour and half
hour, and, from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. on weekends and Federal holidays, the
bridge need open only on the hour, quarter hour, half hour and three
quarter hour. This regulatory proposal would ease vehicular traffic
congestion while providing for the reasonable needs of navigation. The
bridge currently opens less than two times per hour on both weekdays
and weekends.
In addition, the owner requested that the name of the bridge be
changed to the Boca Grande Swingbridge, as it is known locally. The
local name is more
[[Page 42332]]
descriptive of the bridge's swingbridge design.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed rule would require the bridge to open on signal,
except that, from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays, the bridge need open only on the hour and half hour,
and from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. on weekends and Federal holidays, the bridge
need open only on the hour, quarter hour, half hour and three quarter
hour. This proposed rule would also change the name of the bridge to
the Boca Grande Swingbridge.
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 section 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 (DHS).
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 because the proposed rule provides
for regular openings that will accommodate the reasonable needs of
navigation.
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 would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities because the proposed rule allows for regular
bridge openings and would meet the reasonable needs of navigation.
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 proposed rule would economically affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 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 the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Small businesses may send comments on the
actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine
compliance with Federal regulations, to the Small Business and
Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small
Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these
actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small
business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast
Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247).
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. Although 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 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 proposed 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.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under 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 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
[[Page 42333]]
Instruction from further environmental documentation. Under figure 2-1,
paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an ``Environmental Analysis
Check List'' and a ``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' are not
required for this rule. Comments on this section will be considered
before we make the final decision on whether to categorically exclude
this rule from further environmental review.
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; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); Section 117.255 also issued
under authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 Stat. 5039.
2. Section 117.287 (a-1) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 117.287 Gulf Intracoastal Waterway.
* * * * *
(a-1) The draw of the Boca Grande Swingbridge, mile 34.3, shall
open on signal; except that, from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays, the draw need open only on the hour
and half hour. On Saturday, Sunday and Federal holidays from 7 a.m. to
6 p.m., the draw need open only on the hour, quarter hour, half hour
and three quarter hour.
* * * * *
Dated: July 3, 2003.
Harvey Johnson Jr.,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 03-18136 Filed 7-16-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P