[Federal Register: August 16, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 157)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 48091-48092]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr16au05-13]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD07-05-097]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Gulf Intracoastal Waterway,
Anna Maria, FL
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the operating regulations
governing the Cortez (SR 684) bridge and the Anna Maria (SR 64) bridge
across the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, mile 89.2 in Anna Maria, Manatee
County, Florida. This proposed rule would require the drawbridges to
open on a 30-minute schedule if vessels are present. However, the
drawbridges are not required to open during the morning and afternoon
rush hours. This proposed action may improve the movement of vehicular
traffic while not unreasonably interfering with the movement of vessel
traffic.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before October 17, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander
(obr), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 SE. 1st Avenue, Room 432,
Miami, FL, 33131, who 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 are available for inspection or copying
at the Seventh Coast Guard District Bridge Branch, between 7:30 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael Lieberum, Project Officer,
Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, at (305) 415-6744.
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 (CGD07-05-
097), 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. But you may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to the Seventh 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.
Background and Purpose
The existing regulations of the Cortez (SR 684) bridge, mile 87.4,
and Anna Maria (SR 64) bridge, mile 89.2 at Anna Maria, published in 33
CFR 117.287(d)(1) and (2) require the draw to open on signal, except
that from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., the draw need open only on the hour, twenty
minutes past the hour and forty minutes past the hour if vessels are
present.
On June 1, 2005, the City officials of Holmes Beach in cooperation
with the cities of Anna Maria and Bradenton Beach and the Town of
Longboat Key requested that the Coast Guard review the existing
regulations governing the operation of the Cortez and Anna Maria
bridges, because they think the current drawbridge regulations are not
meeting the needs of vehicle traffic.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
This proposed rule would require the Cortez (SR 684) and Anna Maria
(SR 64) bridges, miles 87.4 and 89.2, at Anna Maria to open on the hour
and half-hour if vessels are present, except that the draws need not
open from 7:35 a.m. to 8:29 a.m. and from 4:35 p.m. to 5:29 p.m. The
objective of this revision is to improve vehicle traffic flow on SR 684
and SR 64, especially during peak periods of increased road congestion.
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. This proposed rule would revise
the existing bridge schedule to allow for improved vehicle traffic
flow, while still providing ample scheduled openings for vessel
traffic.
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 business, 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. This proposed rule would affect the following
entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners or operators
of vessels needing to transit the Intracoastal Waterway in the vicinity
of the Cortez and Anna Maria bridges, persons intending to drive over
the bridge, and nearby business owners. The revision to the openings
schedule would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of
small entities for the following reasons. Vehicle traffic and small
business owners in the area might benefit from the improved traffic
flow that regularly scheduled openings will offer this area. Although
bridge openings will be less frequent, vessel traffic will still be
able to transit the Intracoastal Waterway in the vicinity of the Cortez
and Anna Maria bridges pursuant to the revised openings schedule.
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,
[[Page 48092]]
please submit a comment to the Seventh Coast Guard District Bridge
Branch at the address under 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 (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 the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against
small entities that question or complain about this 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 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 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 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 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 proposed rule is categorically excluded,
under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e) of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
Regulations
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; section 117.255 also issued
under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 Stat. 5039.
2. Revise Sec. 117.287(d)(1) and (2) to read as follows:
Sec. 117.287 Gulf Intracoastal Waterway.
* * * * *
(d)(1) The draw of the Cortez (SR 684) bridge, mile 87.4, need open
only on the hour and half-hour; except that from 7:35 a.m. to 8:29 a.m.
and 4:35 p.m. and 5:29 p.m. the draw need not open.
(2) The draw of the Anna Maria (SR 64) bridge, mile 89.2, need open
only on the hour and half-hour; except that from 7:35 a.m. to 8:29 a.m.
and 4:35 p.m. to 5:29 p.m. the draw need not open.
* * * * *
Dated: August 3, 2005.
D.B. Peterman,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 05-16229 Filed 8-15-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P