[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 165 (Tuesday, August 26, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51179-51181]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-21764]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD11-03-004]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Islais Creek, San Francisco, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard District is temporarily 
changing the regulation governing the Third Street Drawbridge, mile 0.4 
Islais Creek, San Francisco, CA. The drawbridge need not open for 
vessel traffic and may remain in the closed-to-navigation position to 
allow seismic retrofit and rehabilitation of the bridge.

DATES: This temporary rule is effective from 12:01 a.m., September 3, 
2003 until 12:01 a.m., September 2, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Documents referred to in this temporary rule are available 
for inspection and copying at Commander (oan), Eleventh Coast Guard 
District, Building 50-3, Coast Guard Island, Alameda, CA 94501-5100, 
between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David H. Sulouff, Chief, Bridge 
Section, Eleventh Coast Guard District, telephone (510) 437-3516.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Good Cause for Not Publishing an NPRM

    We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this 
regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good 
cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. This rule is being promulgated 
without an NPRM because drawspan openings at this bridge are 
infrequent, the proposal has been thoroughly coordinated with the 
waterway users and it would be impracticable, unnecessary and contrary 
to the public interest to delay the proposed project start date.

Good Cause for Making Rule Effective in Less Than 30 Days

    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 because the event has been 
thoroughly coordinated with waterway users, no objections were received 
and there is no justification to deny the request or delay the proposed 
project.

Background and Purpose

    The City of San Francisco requested a temporary change to the 
operation of the Third Street Bridge, mile 0.4 Islais Creek, in San 
Francisco, California. The bridge provides 4.4 feet minimum vertical 
clearance above mean high water in the closed-to-navigation position. 
Navigation on the waterway consists primarily of recreational 
watercraft. Presently, the draw is required to open on signal if at 
least one hour advance notice is given. The bridge was last opened for 
recreational waterway traffic on July 1, 2001. The City requested the 
drawbridge be allowed to remain closed to navigation from 12:01 a.m., 
September 3, 2003 until 12:01 a.m., September 2, 2004.

[[Page 51180]]

During this time the City would perform seismic upgrades and 
rehabilitation work on the bridge. This temporary drawbridge operation 
amendment has been coordinated with the waterway users. No objections 
to the proposed temporary rule were raised.

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 
temporary rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under 
paragraph 10(e) of the regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is 
unnecessary. This is because drawspan openings at this bridge are 
infrequent and waterway traffic is not likely to be delayed.

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 as none were identified that will be affected by the temporary 
rule.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 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. No small 
entities were identified that will be affected by the temporary rule.

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 will not result in such 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. 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.

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 no factors in this case 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. A Categorical 
Exclusion Determination is available in the docket where indicated 
under ADDRESSES.

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.


Sec.  117.163  [Suspended]

0
2. From 12:01 a.m., September 3, 2003, until 12:01 a.m., September 2, 
2004, Sec.  117.163 is temporarily suspended.

0
3. From 12:01 a.m., September 3, 2003, until 12:01 a.m., September 2, 
2004, Sec.  117.T164 is temporarily added to read as follows:


Sec.  117.T164  Islais Creek.

    The Third Street Drawbridge, Islais Creek mile (0.4), at San 
Francisco, California need not open for vessels from 12:01 a.m., 
September 3, 2003 until 12:01 a.m., September 2, 2004.


[[Page 51181]]


    Dated: August 15, 2003.
Kevin J. Eldridge,
Rear Admiral, Coast Guard, Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 03-21764 Filed 8-25-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P