Coast Guard, DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Coast Guard proposes to change the operating regulations of the Commercial Boulevard bridge (SR 870) across the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, mile 1059.0 in Lauderdale-by-the-Sea, Florida. This proposed rule would require the bridge to open on signal, except that from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. daily, the bridge would be required to open only on the hour, 20 minutes after the hour, and 40 minutes after the hour. This action is intended to improve the movement of vehicular traffic while providing for the reasonable needs of navigation.
Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before April 29, 2003.
You may mail comments and related material to Commander (obr), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 S.E. 1st Avenue, Room 432, Miami, FL 33131. Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of the docket and are available for inspection or copying at Commander (obr), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 S.E. 1st Avenue, Room 432, Miami, FL 33131 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Michael Lieberum, Project Officer, Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, at (305) 415-6744.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental 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 [CGD07-02-147], 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 81/2 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.
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. You may submit a request for a meeting by writing to Bridge Branch, Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 S.E. 1st Avenue, Room 432, Miami, FL 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. Start Printed Page 9610
Background and Purpose
On January 3, 2002, the City of Fort Lauderdale requested that the Coast Guard review the existing regulation of the Commercial Boulevard bridge (SR 870) because the City believed the existing regulations were not meeting the needs of vehicle traffic.
The existing regulation of the Commercial Boulevard bridge (SR 870), mile 1059.0, at Lauderdale-by-the-Sea, published in 33 CFR 117.261(ee), requires the draws to open on signal, except that, from November 1 through May 15, from 8 a.m. to 6 pm., Monday through Friday, the draws need open only on the hour, quarter-hour, half-hour, and three-quarter-hour, and from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays, the draws need open only on the hour, 20 minutes after the hour, and 40 minutes after the hour.
This proposed rule would make the seasonal openings effective year round. Traffic studies have shown that vehicular traffic has increased at this location year round and a seasonal schedule is no longer appropriate.
On March 18, 2002, the Coast Guard issued a temporary deviation published in the Federal Register (67 FR 11919, March 18, 2002). This deviation was effective from April 17, 2002 until July 16, 2002, and from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., allowed the bridge to open on the hour, 20 minutes after the hour, and 40 minutes after the hour. We received 38 comments on this deviation, 31 were in favor of the 20-minute schedule and seven comments requested that the schedule be changed to an hour and half-hour schedule. Based on our evaluation of the comments received and neighboring bridge schedules, the Coast Guard proposes to make the 20-minute schedule permanent. A 20-minute schedule is necessary to keep vessel traffic on the waterway moving because the bridge immediately to the north of this bridge is on a 30-minute schedule and the bridge immediately to the south of this bridge is on a 20-minute schedule. If this bridge were placed on a 30-minute schedule, vessels would experience a greater delay in traversing the waterway.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
This proposed rule would require the Commercial Boulevard bridge (SR 870), mile 1059.0, at Lauderdale-by-the-Sea, to open on signal; except that, from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. daily, the draws need open only on the hour, 20 minutes after the hour, and 40 minutes after the hour.
This proposed rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 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 Transportation (DOT)(44 FR 11040, February 26, 1979). The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this proposal to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 10(e) of the regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary because this proposed rule only slightly modifies the existing bridge schedule and still provides for regular openings.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic effect upon 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.
This proposed rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the Intracoastal Waterway in the vicinity of Commercial Boulevard bridge, persons intending to drive over the bridge, and nearby business owners. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, because this proposed rule would only slightly modify the existing schedule and would still provide for regular openings.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed 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 effect 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 this proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We also have a point of contact for commenting on actions by employees of the Coast Guard. 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. 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 calls for no new collection of information requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 -3520).
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 this rule 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 an 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 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 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 proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, Start Printed Page 9611eliminate 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.
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. 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.
We have considered the environmental impact of this proposed rule and concluded that under figure 2-1, paragraph 32(e) of Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, this proposed rule is categorically excluded from further environmental documentation. A “Categorical Exclusion Determination” is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.Start List of Subjects
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117End List of Subjects
For the reason discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:Start Part
PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for Part 117 continues to read as follows:
2. Revise § 117.261(ee) to read as follows:
(ee) Commercial Boulevard bridge (SR 870), mile 1059.0, at Lauderdale-by-the-Sea. The draws shall open on signal, except that, from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. daily, the draws need open only on the hour, 20 minutes after the hour, and 40 minutes after the hour.
Dated: February 10, 2003.
James S. Carmichael,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 03-4760 Filed 2-27-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P