[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 176 (Tuesday, September 11, 2001)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 47123-47125]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-22778]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD01-01-142]
RIN 2115-AE47


Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Dorchester Bay, MA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily change the drawbridge 
operating regulations governing the operation of the William T. 
Morrisey Boulevard Bridge, at mile 0.0, across Dorchester Bay at 
Boston, Massachusetts. This proposed temporary change to the drawbridge 
operation regulations would allow the bridge to remain in the closed 
position from November 1, 2001 through May 10, 2002. This action is 
necessary to facilitate rehabilitation construction at the bridge.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before October 11, 
2001.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments to Commander (obr), First Coast Guard 
District, Bridge Branch, at 408 Atlantic Avenue, Boston, MA. 02110-
3350, or deliver them to the same address between 7 a.m. and 3 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is 
(617) 223-8364. The First Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, 
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 will be available for inspection or copying at the First 
Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, 7 a.m. to 3 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. John W. McDonald, Project Officer, 
First Coast Guard District, (617) 223-8364.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments or related material. If you do so, please include your name 
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (CGD01-01-
142), 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 if 
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 First 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.

[[Page 47124]]

Regulatory Information

    Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) is 
being published with a shortened comment period of thirty days instead 
of the normal sixty day comment period because the bridge owner held a 
meeting with the members of the Dorchester Yacht Club, the sole marine 
facility upstream from the bridge, and the members of the yacht club 
agreed upon the time period that the bridge will be allowed to remain 
closed.
    The Coast Guard anticipates that any temporary final rule enacted 
following public notice and comment may be effective in less than 30 
days after publication.
    Any delay encountered in this regulation's effective date would be 
unnecessary and contrary to the public interest because the 
rehabilitation construction is necessary in order to assure continued 
reliable operation of the bridge.

Background

    The William T. Morrisey Boulevard Bridge, at mile 0.0, across 
Dorchester Bay has a vertical clearance of 12 feet at mean high water 
and 22 feet at mean low water. The existing regulations at 33 CFR 
117.597 require the draw to open on signal from April 16 through 
October 14; except that, the draw need not open for vessel traffic from 
7:30 a.m. to 9 a.m. and from 4:30 p.m. to 6 p.m. except on Saturdays, 
Sundays, or holidays observed in the locality. From October 15 through 
April 15, the draw shall open on signal if at least twenty-four hours 
notice is given.
    The bridge owner, the Metropolitan District Commission (MDC), asked 
the Coast Guard to temporarily change the drawbridge operation 
regulations to allow the bridge to remain in the closed position from 
November 1, 2001 through May 10, 2002, to facilitate rehabilitation 
construction at the bridge. The bridge owner and the Coast Guard 
contacted all known waterway users to advise them of the proposed 
closure. No objections or negative comments were received in response 
to this proposal.

Discussion of Proposal

    This proposed temporary change to the drawbridge operation 
regulations would allow the William T. Morrisey Boulevard Bridge to 
remain in the closed position from November 1, 2001 through May 10, 
2002. The bridge normally operates on a twenty-four hour advance notice 
from October 15 through April 15, during the winter months.

Regulatory Evaluation

    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 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, Feb. 
26, 1979).
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so 
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation, under paragraph 10e of the 
regulatory policies and procedures of DOT, is unnecessary. This 
conclusion is based on the fact that the only marine facility effected 
by this proposal has agreed to the closure dates for the bridge.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we 
considered whether this proposed 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 section 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 conclusion is based upon the 
fact that the only marine facility effected by this proposal has agreed 
to the closure date for the bridge.
    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, please submit a comment (see 
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what 
degree this rule would economically affect it.

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

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under E.O. 13132 and have 
determined that this rule does not have implications for federalism 
under that Order.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
governs the issuance of Federal regulations that require unfunded 
mandates. An unfunded mandate is a regulation that requires a State, 
local, or tribal government or the private sector to incur direct costs 
without the Federal Government's having first provided the funds to pay 
those costs. This proposed rule would not impose an unfunded mandate.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not effect a taking of private property or 
otherwise have taking implications under E.O. 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 E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, 
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under E.O. 13045, Protection of 
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is 
not an economically significant rule and does not concern an 
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may 
disproportionately affect children.

Environment

    We considered the environmental impact of this proposed rule and 
concluded that, under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of Commandant 
Instruction M16475.1C, this proposed rule is categorically excluded 
from further environmental documentation because promulgation of 
drawbridge regulations have been found not to have a significant effect 
on the environment. A written ``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' 
is not required for this rule.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This final rule does not have tribal implications under Executive 
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments, because it does not have 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.

[[Page 47125]]

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. 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.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

Regulations

    For the reasons set out 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; 49 CFR 1.46; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); section 
117.255 also issued under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 
Stat. 5039.


Sec. 117.597  [Suspended]

    2. From November 1, 2001, through May 10, 2002, Sec. 117.597 is 
suspended.
    3. From November 1, 2001 through May 10, 2002, Sec. 117.T602 is 
temporarily added to read as follows:


Sec. 117.T602  Dorchester Bay.

    The draw of the William T. Morrisey Boulevard Bridge, mile 0.0, at 
Boston, need not open for the passage of vessel traffic.

    Dated: August 28, 2001.
G.N. Naccara,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 01-22778 Filed 9-10-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-U