Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Skidaway Bridge (SR 204), Intracoastal Waterway, Mile 592.9, Savannah, Chatham County, GA, 50972-50974 [05-17095]

Agencies

• Coast Guard
• DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 166 (Monday, August 29, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50972-50974]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-17095]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD07-04-124]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Skidaway Bridge (SR 204), 
Intracoastal Waterway, Mile 592.9, Savannah, Chatham County, GA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is changing the operating regulations of the 
Skidaway Bridge (SR 204) across the Intracoastal Waterway, mile 592.9, 
in Savannah, Georgia. This rule allows the bridge to open on signal, 
except that from Monday through Friday, not including Federal holidays, 
the bridge need only open on the hour between 6:31 a.m. and 8:59 a.m. 
and on the hour and half hour between 4:31 p.m. and 6:29 p.m.

DATES: This rule is effective September 28, 2005.

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 (CGD07-04-124) and are available for inspection or 
copying at Commander (obr), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 SE 1st 
Avenue, Suite 432, 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. Gwin Tate, Project Manager, 
Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, (305) 415-6747.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory History

    On December 3, 2004, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Skidaway Bridge (SR 
204), Intracoastal Waterway, Mile 592.9, Savannah, Chatham County, GA 
in the Federal Register (69 FR 70209). We received 8 letters commenting 
on the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was 
held.

Background and Purpose

    On January 7, 2004, the General Manager of the Landings 
Association, a residential development with over 8500 residents that 
comprises approximately

[[Page 50973]]

90% of the Skidaway Island population, contacted the Chatham County 
Department of Public Works regarding traffic problems caused by the 
current bridge schedule. On April 22, 2004, the Department of Public 
Works, which operates and maintains the bridge, contacted the Coast 
Guard and requested assistance in creating a bridge openings schedule 
to help ease vehicular congestion on the Skidaway Bridge. The Skidaway 
Bridge is the only roadway between Skidaway Island and the mainland. 
Its operation is governed by 33 CFR 117.5, which requires the bridge to 
open on signal. Bridge tender logs indicate that the openings schedule 
will improve vehicular traffic flow while still meeting the reasonable 
needs of navigation. During a twelve-month time period, vessel requests 
for openings remained at or below an average of two per hour, and below 
three during each restricted opening period in the morning and 
afternoon.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    This Final Rule is less restrictive than the proposal in the 
original NPRM. The NPRM provided for weekday closures of the Skidaway 
Bridge between 6:30 a.m. and 9 a.m., and 4:30 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. This 
Final Rule allows for openings on each hour between 6:31 a.m. and 8:59 
a.m., and openings on each hour and half hour between 4:31 p.m. and 
6:29 p.m. This revision enables both boaters and motorists to plan 
their respective crossings of the Skidaway Bridge pursuant to this 
Final Rule, thereby improving vehicular traffic flow without 
unreasonably interfering with vessel traffic.
    This Final Rule allows for hourly openings during the designated 
time period in the morning, and openings each half-hour during the 
designated time period in the evening. The frequency of scheduled 
openings in the evening is higher than the frequency in the morning 
because peak evening vehicular traffic is less concentrated than peak 
morning vehicular traffic.
    The Coast Guard received a total of 8 written comments in response 
to the NPRM:
    (1) Five were in favor of the proposed rule as written.
    (2) One commenter recommended that the schedule be altered 
slightly, opening every half hour during the designated morning and 
evening time periods.
    The Coast Guard agrees that the original schedule proposed in the 
NPRM was too restrictive in that it did not provide for any openings 
during the morning and evening time periods. Accordingly, this Final 
Rule provides for openings pursuant to a schedule, thereby enabling 
boaters and motorists to plan their trips accordingly. This revision 
will help reduce vehicular congestion without unreasonably interfering 
with vessel traffic.
    (3) One commenter recommended that the bridge adopt a half hour 
schedule between 9 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. during the prescribed time 
period.
    Test results indicated a small number of openings during this time 
period. Because the Coast Guard believes that scheduled openings 
throughout the day would not help ease vehicular congestion in the 
vicinity of the Skidaway Bridge, this Final Rule requires openings 
pursuant to a schedule only during peak hours of vehicular traffic in 
the morning and evening.
    (4) One commenter was unable to determine why a change in the 
current operating schedule was needed if there were few openings during 
the designated time periods.
    Although the Skidaway Bridge averaged fewer than three openings 
during the designated periods, putting the bridge on a defined schedule 
enables motorists to plan their trips accordingly. This should reduce 
the amount of vehicles waiting at the Skidaway Bridge during openings 
at times of peak vehicular traffic, thereby helping to ease vehicular 
congestion. The Coast Guard believes that this Final Rule achieves the 
most equitable compromise between the needs of boaters and motorists 
transiting beneath or across the Skidaway Bridge.

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).
    We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal on 
vessel traffic that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. 
Boaters may mitigate impact of this Final Rule by planning their 
passage through the Skidaway Bridge in accordance with scheduled 
openings. The vehicular traffic crossing this bridge is now in excess 
of 9,000 vehicles per day. This rule will have a positive impact on 
vehicular traffic due to its establishment of scheduled bridge openings 
during the designated time periods.

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 will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.

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 process. The 
Coast Guard offered small businesses, organizations, or governmental 
jurisdictions that had questions about the rule's provisions or 
believed the rule would affect them to contact Mr. Gwin Tate, Project 
Manager, Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, (305) 415-6747.
    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.

[[Page 50974]]

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 this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This 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 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 would 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. 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.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 Instruction, from further 
environmental documentation.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

Regulations

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 the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 Stat. 5039.

0
2. In Sec.  117.353, add paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  117.353  Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Savannah River to St. 
Marys River.

* * * * *
    (c) Skidaway, SR 204, mile 592.9 near Savannah. The draw shall open 
on signal, except that from 6:31 a.m. to 8:59 a.m. Monday through 
Friday except Federal holidays, the draw need open only on the hour, 
and from 4:31 p.m. to 6:29 p.m. Monday through Friday except Federal 
holidays, the draw need open only on the hour and half hour.
* * * * *

    Dated: August 9, 2005.
D.B. Peterman,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard 
District.
[FR Doc. 05-17095 Filed 8-26-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P