Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Mile 1012.6, North Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, FL, 33349-33351 [05-11320]

Agencies

• Coast Guard
• DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 109 (Wednesday, June 8, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33349-33351]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-11320]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD07-05-044]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, 
Mile 1012.6, North Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is temporarily changing the regulations 
governing the operation of the PGA Boulevard bridge, Intracoastal 
Waterway mile 1012.6, North Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida. 
This rule is needed to provide for workman and mariner safety during 
repairs to the bridge. The bridge will be on single and double-leaf 
operations during the repair period and several waterway closures will 
be needed to ensure personal safety.

DATES: This rule is effective from June 8, 2005 until May 15, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in 
the docket are part of docket CGD07-05-044 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 7:30 a.m. and 4 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chief Petty Officer Terrell, Sector 
Miami at (305) 535-4317 or Mr. Michael Lieberum, Project Officer, 
Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, at (305) 415-6744.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NRPM) for this 
regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good 
cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. Publishing an NPRM is contrary 
to the public interest because the rule provides for workman and public 
safety during repairs to the bridge. The repairs are needed as sections 
of the bridge will be completely replaced due to safety concerns. It 
will be necessary to use dynamite in order to destroy those portions of 
the bridge and it is in the public interest to protect them from the 
associated safety risks.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause 
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after 
publication in the Federal Register for the same reasons noted above.

Background and Purpose

    The PGA Boulevard bridge, Intracoastal Waterway mile 1012.6, North 
Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida is being repaired. The Florida 
Department of Transportation notified the Coast Guard that the bridge's 
current schedule of operation must be changed to effectuate the 
repairs. The changes will require single-leaf bridge openings on the 
hour and half-hour although double-leaf openings will continue to be 
available on most dates. Additionally, the waterway will be closed for 
short periods to allow for the safe repair of the bridge. More specific 
times and dates will be published in the Local Notice to Mariners and 
Broadcast Notice to Mariners. In cases of emergency, the bridge will be 
opened as soon as possible.

Discussion of Rule

    The rule will require single-leaf bridge openings of the PGA 
Boulevard Bridge on the hour and half-hour. Double-leaf openings will 
continue to be available on most dates. Waterway closures shall be 
authorized by the Captain of the Port Miami and will be published in 
the Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners. The draw 
shall open as soon as practicable for tugs with tows, public vessels of 
the United States and vessels in dangerous situations.

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 the Department of Homeland 
Security (DHS). The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this 
rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary 
because the rule will allow for bridge openings while bridge repairs 
are ongoing so long

[[Page 33350]]

as it is safe. Also, all closure times will be published in advance so 
that mariners may plan accordingly.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
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 
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities because the regulations provide for bridge openings, 
short closure periods and for the reasonable needs of navigation.

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 this rule so that they can better evaluate 
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process by 
providing contact information for those personnel that can address 
questions regarding this regulation. If this 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 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 would 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 does not create an 
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may 
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. 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not 
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

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 because this is a drawbridge operation 
regulation. 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:


[[Page 33351]]


    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, from June 8, 2005 through May 15, 2006, suspend 
paragraph (s) and add paragraph (tt) to read as follows:


Sec.  117.261  Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway from St. Marys River to 
Key Largo.

* * * * *
    (tt) PGA Boulevard bridge, mile 1012.6 at North Palm Beach. The 
draw need not open except to provide on signal a single-leaf opening on 
the hour and half-hour. Vessels may request double-leaf operations, 
which will be provided as repair work permits, and notice of the 
availability of double-leaf openings will be published in the Local 
Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
* * * * *

    Dated: May 20, 2005.
D.B. Peterman,
RADM, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 05-11320 Filed 6-7-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P