[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 116 (Thursday, June 17, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33854-33856]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-13608]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD07-04-010]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Palm Beach County Bridges, 
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Palm Beach County, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is changing the operating regulations of most 
of the Palm Beach County bridges across the Atlantic Intracoastal 
Waterway, Palm Beach County, Florida. The schedule will meet the 
reasonable needs of navigation while accommodating increased vehicular 
traffic flow throughout the county. This rule will require these 
bridges to open twice an hour with the Boca Club, Camino Real bridge 
opening three times per hour.

DATES: This rule is effective July 19, 2004.

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 [CGD07-04-010] and are available for inspection or 
copying at Commander (obr), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 SE 1st 
Avenue, 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. Barry Dragon, Project Manager, 
Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, (305) 415-6743.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory History

    On March 10, 2004, the Coast Guard published a Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking (NPRM) entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Palm Beach 
County Bridges, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Palm Beach County, 
Florida, in the Federal Register (68 FR 11351). We received 733 
comments on this NPRM. No public hearing was requested, and none was 
held.

Background and Purpose

    The Coast Guard performed a 90-day test of the proposed schedule on 
the Palm Beach County bridges in the spring of 2003 that was published 
in the Federal Register, March 19, 2003, (68 FR 13227) (CGD07-03-031). 
The purpose of the test was to collect data to determine the 
feasibility of changing the regulations on most of the bridges in Palm 
Beach County to meet the increased demands of vehicular traffic but 
still provide for the reasonable needs of navigation. The test results 
indicated that the proposed schedule would improve vehicular traffic 
flow while still meeting the reasonable needs of navigation. During the 
test period, vessel requests for openings remained at or below an 
average of two per hour with the exception of Camino Real bridge. A 
computer modeling of that bridge prescribed an opening schedule of 
three times per hour as optimal for a combination of vehicular and 
vessel traffic. The schedule allowed both vehicular and vessel traffic 
the opportunity to predict, on a scheduled basis, when the bridges 
would possibly be in the open position.
    In light of the test period and follow-on computer modeling, the 
Coast Guard published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal 
Register on March 10, 2004 (69 FR 11351) (CGD07-04-010) delineating 
this proposed new schedule. We received 733 comments: one form letter 
from 440 commentors in favor of the schedules, 1 petition with 131 
signatures in favor of the schedules, 145 letters from individual 
citizens in favor of the schedules, 4 letters from municipalities in 
favor of the schedules, 8 letters with various recommendations 
regarding different schedules and 5 letters opposing the new schedules. 
In addition, we received 52 e-mails with no identifiable names or 
addresses.
    The change in operating regulations was requested by various Palm 
Beach County public officials to ease vehicular traffic, which has 
overburdened roadways, and to standardize bridge openings throughout 
the county for vessel traffic. The rule will allow most of the bridges 
in Palm Beach County to operate on a standardized schedule, which would 
meet the reasonable needs of navigation and improve vehicular traffic 
movement. The rule will provide for staggered schedules in order to 
facilitate the movement of vessels from bridge to bridge along the 
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    We received 733 comments on the NPRM: 720 were in favor of the 
proposed rule, 5 were against and 8 had alternative recommendations. 
Two commentors recommended that the schedule for Linton Boulevard and 
NE. 8th Street (George Bush) be altered slightly to improve vessel 
traffic without impacting vehicular traffic. This recommendation was 
incorporated into the rule. One municipality requested an exemption for 
commercial vessels in their city and in a neighboring city. Tugs with 
tows will be exempt from this rule.
    There were 440 form letters in favor of the rule which recommended 
a morning and afternoon curfew period. Two of the comments from 
municipalities requested additional curfew periods in their cities. The 
comments regarding morning and afternoon curfew periods were not able 
to be incorporated into this rule. The previous test period and 
extensive study disclosed that the bridges in question opened less than 
twice an hour and that closing the bridges for an hour unnecessarily 
restricts vessel traffic. As a result, the schedule is set for a 
constant twenty-four hours a day, every day of the week.

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

[[Page 33855]]

the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
    We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a 
full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. The rule affects vessel 
traffic through these bridges only in that vessels will need to time 
their passage through these bridges.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we 
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. The rule affects all vessel traffic through these bridges. 
Vessels will need to time their passage through these bridges to meet 
the twice an hour openings and the twenty-minute schedule of the Camino 
Real bridge.

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. The Coast Guard 
offered small businesses, organizations, or governmental jurisdictions 
that believed the rule would affect them, or that had questions 
concerning its provisions or options for compliance, to 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 will 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 will 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 M16475.1D, 
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. 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:

    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 add paragraphs (q), (y), (z-1), (z-2) and (z-3); 
revise paragraphs (r) through (x), (aa) and (aa-1); and remove and 
reserve paragraph (z) to read as follows:


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

* * * * *
    (q) Indiantown Road bridge, mile 1006.2. The draw shall open on the 
hour and half-hour.
    (r) Donald Ross bridge, mile 1009.3, at North Palm Beach. The draw 
shall open on the hour and half-hour.
    (s) PGA Boulevard bridge, mile 1012.6, at North Palm Beach. The 
draw shall open on the hour and half-hour.

[[Page 33856]]

    (t) Parker (US-1) bridge, mile 1013.7, at Riviera Beach. The draw 
shall open on the quarter and three-quarter hour.
    (u) Flagler Memorial (SR A1A) bridge, mile 1020.8, at Palm Beach. 
The draw shall open on the quarter and three-quarter hour.
    (v) Royal Park (SR 704) bridge, mile 1022.6, at Palm Beach. The 
draw shall open on the hour and half-hour.
    (w) Southern Boulevard (SR 700/80) bridge, mile 1024.7, at Palm 
Beach. The draw shall open on the hour and half-hour.
    (x) Ocean Avenue bridge, mile 1031.0, at Lantana. The draw shall 
open on the hour and half-hour.
    (y) Ocean Avenue bridge, mile 1035.0, at Boynton Beach. The draw 
shall open on the hour and half-hour.
    (z) [Reserved]
    (z-1) Atlantic Avenue (SR 806) bridge, mile 1039.6, at Delray 
Beach. The draw shall open on the quarter and three-quarter-hour.
    (z-2) Linton Boulevard bridge, mile 1041.1, at Delray Beach. The 
draw shall open on the hour and half-hour.
    (z-3) Spanish River bridge, mile 1044.9, at Boca Raton. The draw 
shall open on the hour and half-hour.
    (aa) Palmetto Park bridge, mile 1047.5, at Boca Raton. The draw 
shall open on the hour and half-hour.
    (aa-1) Boca Club, Camino Real bridge, mile 1048.2, at Boca Raton. 
The draw shall open on the hour, twenty minutes past the hour and forty 
minutes past the hour.
* * * * *

    Dated: June 4, 2004.
Harvey E. Johnson, Jr.,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard 
District.
[FR Doc. 04-13608 Filed 6-16-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P