[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 131 (Monday, July 8, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35702-35703]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-17301]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD 11-90-03]
RIN-2115-AE47
Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Cerritos Channel, CA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: At the request of the Port of Los Angeles, the Coast Guard is
proposing a temporary change to the regulations for the Henry Ford
Avenue Railroad Bridge (Ford Bridge), across Cerritos Channel of Los
Angeles/Long Beach Harbor, mile 4.8, at Long Beach, California, to
authorize a five month (150 day) closure of the bridge to replace the
movable span and erect the support towers. The proposed closure would
start November 7, 1996 and conclude on April 7, 1997. If these dates
change, the actual 5 month closure dates will be advertised in the
Local Notice to Mariners. The bridge, also known as the Badger Avenue
Bridge, currently remains open to navigation except for the passage of
trains. This proposal is being made because the bridge needs to be
replaced to preserve rail access to Terminal Island and to insure
reliable service to vessel traffic.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 7, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Commander (oan-br), Eleventh Coast
Guard District, Building 50-6, Coast Guard Island, Alameda, CA 94501-
5100, or may be delivered to the same address between 7 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is number is (510) 437-3514. Commander (oan-br) maintains the
public docket for this rulemaking. Comments will become part of this
docket and will be available for inspection or copying at Bldg. 10,
Room 214, Coast Guard Island, Alameda.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Worden, Bridge Section, Eleventh
Coast Guard District, at (501) 437-3461.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Additional Comments
The Coast Guard encourages interested persons to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting written data, views, or arguments.
Persons submitting comments should include their names and addresses,
identify this rulemaking (CGD 11-90-03) and the specific section of
this proposal to which each comment applies, and give the reason for
each comment. Persons wanting acknowledgement of receipt of comments
should enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. Comments
previously submitted have been entered into the record and need not be
resubmitted.
The Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard district will evaluate all
communications received and determine a final course of action on this
proposal. The proposed regulations may be changed in light of the
comments received.
The Cost Guard plans no public hearing, but one may be held if
written requests for a hearing are received, and it is determined that
the opportunity to make oral presentations will add to the rulemaking
process.
Discussion of the Proposal
Regulatory History
This supplements a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking dated August 28,
1990 (55 FR 35154), which discussed a six and one-half month closure of
the bridge draw for bridge rehabilitation, from February 1, 1991
through August 15, 1991. The Ford Bridge provides the only rail access
to port facilities on Terminal Island. The bridge is over 70 years old
and no longer meets California seismic standards or Federal Railroad
Administration clearance standards. The bridge owner determined that
the bridge could not be rehabilitated economically, and in 1993 applied
for a permit to replace the bridge. In 1995, the Coast Guard issued a
permit for its replacement. The new bridge is currently under
construction, and it is anticipated that the work can be accomplished
with a slightly shorter closure period. Since more than five years has
elapsed since the publication of the NPRM, an additional opportunity
for public comment is being provided. The four comments received on the
previous NPRM will be considered part of the record.
The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in 1990 was for the
earlier plan to rehabilitate the bridge, a plan that is no longer
feasible. That NPRM, which involved a slightly longer closure,
generated only four comments: Pacific Towing Company requested one leaf
operation of the bridge; Jacobson Pilot Service requested the closure
period to be kept to a minimum; Dow Chemical expressed concern about
land access during construction; and the Port of Long Beach wrote
supporting the proposal.
Because of the change from rehabilitation to reconstruction, it is
not possible to have the bridge in partial service during the
construction of the towers and lift span for which the closure is
necessary. The Coast Guard has reviewed the construction plans and
determined that the proposed closure is the shortest feasible time
period consistent with safety and good engineering practice. The bridge
construction will only cause brief interruptions to rail service or
land access to nearby facilities.
The revised bridge plan has been advertised in the Federal Register
on three occasions: a Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) (58 F.R. 28087); a Notice of Availability of the
Draft EIS (59 F.R. 6639); and a Notice of Availability of the final EIS
(59 F.R. 60631).
The circulation of the Coast Guard Environmental Impact Statement
for the Ford Bridge Replacement Project provided additional
opportunities for public comment on the bridge closure. No comments
were received addressing the closure. Because the revised plan has been
advertised extensively and no opposition has thus far been expressed,
the Coast Guard for good cause believes that a 30 day comment period is
adequate to solicit any remaining comments on this supplemental notice
of proposed rulemaking.
Current Proposal
The Port of Los Angeles has requested the bridge span closure to
allow them to safely construct the replacement bridge. The proposed
closure of the span would start November 7, 1996, and conclude on April
7, 1997. If these dates change, the actual 5 month closure dates will
be advertised in the Local Notice to Mariners.
The Ford Avenue Railroad Bridge provides vertical clearance of 14
feet above Mean Lower Low Water (9 feet above Mean High Water) when
closed. The waterway is a connecting channel in the Los Angeles/Long
Beach Harbor complex and is used by oceangoing cargo ships, tugs and
barges, tour boats,
[[Page 35703]]
commercial fishing vessels and recreational boats. The alternate route
past the bridge site is through the outer harbor, with a maximum detour
of 10 miles.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposal is not a significant regulatory action under Section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and does not require an assessment of
costs under section 6(a)(3) of that order. It has not been reviewed by
the Office of Management and Budget under that order. It is not
significant under the Department of Transportation Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11040, February 26, 1979). The draft regulatory
evaluation prepared for the NPRM has been superceded by the economic
analysis in the Coast Guard Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)
for the Ford Bridge Replacement dated November 25, 1994. A copy of the
FEIS has been placed in the rulemaking docket, and may be inspected and
copied at the address listed under ADDRESSES.
Replacement of the existing bridge was determined to be the most
feasible and prudent alternative. This replacement cannot be
accomplished without closing the bridge span for a period of months. To
minimize the impact on the maritime community, the applicant plans to
work an accelerated schedule to complete the work requiring the bridge
closure in five months. Increased costs to the marine industry are
estimated to be $1 million due to detours during a five month closure.
The overtime work schedule increases overall project costs
approximately $2.2 million. The applicant estimates that if the
contractor were required to work only a standard 40 hour work week,
they would need a closure of eleven months to complete work. Thus, the
impact to the maritime industry has been minimized. On balance, the
short term costs due to the detour will be offset by the long-term
benefits gained by the operation of a new, more reliable bridge. The
new bridge will ensure uninterrupted rail service to Terminal Island,
and timely, reliable openings of the bridge for waterborne traffic.
Construction of a new bridge will minimize the possibility of
congestion or delays in transit times, which would occur if the
existing bridge malfunctioned, or was damaged by seismic activity.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the
Coast Guard must consider whether this proposal will have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. ``Small
entities'' include independently owned and operated small businesses
that are not dominant in their field and that otherwise qualify as
``small business concerns'' under section 3 of the Small Business Act
(15 U.S.C. 632). During the environmental review process, the Coast
Guard determined that the economic impact to navigation would be
approximately $1 million. Almost half of that impact was on the towing
and tour boat operations of one company who does not qualify as a
``small business concern''. The remaining economic impact was on
recreational mariners berthed at nearby marinas and two other towing
companies. Recreational mariners would have small additional costs to
travel as much as 5 miles further to fuel docks, pumpout stations, etc.
The cost per recreational vessel is estimated to be less than $100. the
towing companies would have additional costs for personnel and fuel to
travel as much as 5 miles further to towing assignments. The cost per
towing company is estimated to be less than $100 thousand. These
companies will all benefit from the reliable operation of the new
bridge span for many years to come. Since there are only a few small
entities affected by the 5 month closure, and the effect is short-time,
the Coast Guard certifies under section 605(b) of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) that this rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Federalism
The Coast Guard has analyzed this proposal under the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 12612 and has determined that
this rule does not raise sufficient federalism implications to warrant
the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
Environment
The Coast Guard considered the environmental impact of this
proposal together with the overall impacts of the replacement project
in their FEIS for the Henry Ford (Badger Avenue) Bridge Replacement
Project dated November 25, 1994. The principal environmental impact of
the project was the loss of the existing, historic bridge. The
environmental impacts of this rule were marine transportation
disruptions, economic impacts to waterway users, and minor increases in
air pollution from detouring marine vessels. The Coast Guard determined
that there was no feasible and prudent alternative to the loss of the
historic bridge to meet the needs of future transportation and safety.
A new bridge will allow for increased carriage of goods to and from the
port by rail, rather than by truck, resulting in a net decrease in air
pollution. On balance, the short-term impacts to navigation will be
offset by long-term benefits to navigation from construction of a new,
more reliable bridge. The FEIS supercedes the draft Environmental
Assessment prepared for the NPRM. The FEIS is available for review at
the address under ADDRESSES.
Collection of Information
This proposal contains no collection of information requirements
under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges
Regulation: For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Coast
Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR Part 117 as follows:
1. The authority citation for Part 117 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 49 CFR 1.46; and 33 CFR 1.05-1(g);
section 117.255 also issued under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587,
106 Stat. 5039.
2. Section 117.147 is amended by suspending paragraph (b) and
adding a new paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 117.147 Cerritos Channel.
* * * * *
(c) During the period November 7, 1996 through April 7, 1997 the
Henry Ford Avenue railroad bridge, mile 4.4 at Long Beach, will be
undergoing reconstruction and the draw need not open for the passage of
vessels.
Dated: June 20, 1996.
D.D. Polk,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard District
Acting.
[FR Doc. 96-17301 Filed 7-5-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-14-M