[Federal Register: June 17, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 116)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 33854-33856]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr17jn04-10]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD07-04-010]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Palm Beach County Bridges,
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Palm Beach County, FL
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is changing the operating regulations of most
of the Palm Beach County bridges across the Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway, Palm Beach County, Florida. The schedule will meet the
reasonable needs of navigation while accommodating increased vehicular
traffic flow throughout the county. This rule will require these
bridges to open twice an hour with the Boca Club, Camino Real bridge
opening three times per hour.
DATES: This rule is effective July 19, 2004.
ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as
documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket,
are part of docket [CGD07-04-010] and are available for inspection or
copying at Commander (obr), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 SE 1st
Avenue, Miami, Florida 33131, between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays. Bridge Branch (obr), Seventh
Coast Guard District, maintains the public docket for this rulemaking.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Barry Dragon, Project Manager,
Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, (305) 415-6743.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory History
On March 10, 2004, the Coast Guard published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Palm Beach
County Bridges, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Palm Beach County,
Florida, in the Federal Register (68 FR 11351). We received 733
comments on this NPRM. No public hearing was requested, and none was
held.
Background and Purpose
The Coast Guard performed a 90-day test of the proposed schedule on
the Palm Beach County bridges in the spring of 2003 that was published
in the Federal Register, March 19, 2003, (68 FR 13227) (CGD07-03-031).
The purpose of the test was to collect data to determine the
feasibility of changing the regulations on most of the bridges in Palm
Beach County to meet the increased demands of vehicular traffic but
still provide for the reasonable needs of navigation. The test results
indicated that the proposed schedule would improve vehicular traffic
flow while still meeting the reasonable needs of navigation. During the
test period, vessel requests for openings remained at or below an
average of two per hour with the exception of Camino Real bridge. A
computer modeling of that bridge prescribed an opening schedule of
three times per hour as optimal for a combination of vehicular and
vessel traffic. The schedule allowed both vehicular and vessel traffic
the opportunity to predict, on a scheduled basis, when the bridges
would possibly be in the open position.
In light of the test period and follow-on computer modeling, the
Coast Guard published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal
Register on March 10, 2004 (69 FR 11351) (CGD07-04-010) delineating
this proposed new schedule. We received 733 comments: one form letter
from 440 commentors in favor of the schedules, 1 petition with 131
signatures in favor of the schedules, 145 letters from individual
citizens in favor of the schedules, 4 letters from municipalities in
favor of the schedules, 8 letters with various recommendations
regarding different schedules and 5 letters opposing the new schedules.
In addition, we received 52 e-mails with no identifiable names or
addresses.
The change in operating regulations was requested by various Palm
Beach County public officials to ease vehicular traffic, which has
overburdened roadways, and to standardize bridge openings throughout
the county for vessel traffic. The rule will allow most of the bridges
in Palm Beach County to operate on a standardized schedule, which would
meet the reasonable needs of navigation and improve vehicular traffic
movement. The rule will provide for staggered schedules in order to
facilitate the movement of vessels from bridge to bridge along the
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
We received 733 comments on the NPRM: 720 were in favor of the
proposed rule, 5 were against and 8 had alternative recommendations.
Two commentors recommended that the schedule for Linton Boulevard and
NE. 8th Street (George Bush) be altered slightly to improve vessel
traffic without impacting vehicular traffic. This recommendation was
incorporated into the rule. One municipality requested an exemption for
commercial vessels in their city and in a neighboring city. Tugs with
tows will be exempt from this rule.
There were 440 form letters in favor of the rule which recommended
a morning and afternoon curfew period. Two of the comments from
municipalities requested additional curfew periods in their cities. The
comments regarding morning and afternoon curfew periods were not able
to be incorporated into this rule. The previous test period and
extensive study disclosed that the bridges in question opened less than
twice an hour and that closing the bridges for an hour unnecessarily
restricts vessel traffic. As a result, the schedule is set for a
constant twenty-four hours a day, every day of the week.
Regulatory Evaluation
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. It is not ``significant'' under the
regulatory policies and procedures of
[[Page 33855]]
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a
full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. The rule affects vessel
traffic through these bridges only in that vessels will need to time
their passage through these bridges.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we
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. The rule affects all vessel traffic through these bridges.
Vessels will need to time their passage through these bridges to meet
the twice an hour openings and the twenty-minute schedule of the Camino
Real bridge.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), 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. The Coast Guard
offered small businesses, organizations, or governmental jurisdictions
that believed the rule would affect them, or that had questions
concerning its provisions or options for compliance, to contact the
person listed in 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 rule calls 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 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 the preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This rule will 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 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 will 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. 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 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
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.
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; 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.
0
2. In Sec. 117.261 add paragraphs (q), (y), (z-1), (z-2) and (z-3);
revise paragraphs (r) through (x), (aa) and (aa-1); and remove and
reserve paragraph (z) to read as follows:
Sec. 117.261 Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway from St. Marys River to
Key Largo.
* * * * *
(q) Indiantown Road bridge, mile 1006.2. The draw shall open on the
hour and half-hour.
(r) Donald Ross bridge, mile 1009.3, at North Palm Beach. The draw
shall open on the hour and half-hour.
(s) PGA Boulevard bridge, mile 1012.6, at North Palm Beach. The
draw shall open on the hour and half-hour.
[[Page 33856]]
(t) Parker (US-1) bridge, mile 1013.7, at Riviera Beach. The draw
shall open on the quarter and three-quarter hour.
(u) Flagler Memorial (SR A1A) bridge, mile 1020.8, at Palm Beach.
The draw shall open on the quarter and three-quarter hour.
(v) Royal Park (SR 704) bridge, mile 1022.6, at Palm Beach. The
draw shall open on the hour and half-hour.
(w) Southern Boulevard (SR 700/80) bridge, mile 1024.7, at Palm
Beach. The draw shall open on the hour and half-hour.
(x) Ocean Avenue bridge, mile 1031.0, at Lantana. The draw shall
open on the hour and half-hour.
(y) Ocean Avenue bridge, mile 1035.0, at Boynton Beach. The draw
shall open on the hour and half-hour.
(z) [Reserved]
(z-1) Atlantic Avenue (SR 806) bridge, mile 1039.6, at Delray
Beach. The draw shall open on the quarter and three-quarter-hour.
(z-2) Linton Boulevard bridge, mile 1041.1, at Delray Beach. The
draw shall open on the hour and half-hour.
(z-3) Spanish River bridge, mile 1044.9, at Boca Raton. The draw
shall open on the hour and half-hour.
(aa) Palmetto Park bridge, mile 1047.5, at Boca Raton. The draw
shall open on the hour and half-hour.
(aa-1) Boca Club, Camino Real bridge, mile 1048.2, at Boca Raton.
The draw shall open on the hour, twenty minutes past the hour and forty
minutes past the hour.
* * * * *
Dated: June 4, 2004.
Harvey E. Johnson, Jr.,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 04-13608 Filed 6-16-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P