[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 63 (Monday, April 3, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16529-16531]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-4786]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD07-06-041]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulations; 63rd Street Bridge, Indian 
Creek, Miami, Miami-Dade County, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily change the operating 
regulation of the 63rd Street Bridge across Indian Creek, mile 4.0 in 
Miami-Dade County, Florida. This proposed rule will allow the bridge to 
remain closed during certain periods. This proposed temporary 
regulation is needed while the bridge undergoes rehabilitation. It will 
require the bridge to open on a regulated schedule during the 
rehabilitation project.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before May 15, 2006.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander 
(dpb), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 SE 1st Avenue, Room 432, 
Miami, FL, 33131, who 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 are available for inspection or copying 
at the Seventh Coast Guard District Bridge Branch, between 7:30 a.m. 
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael Lieberum, Project Officer, 
Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, at (305) 415-6744.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name 
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking [CGD07-06-
041], 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 temporary 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 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 16530]]

Background and Purpose

    The existing regulations of the 63rd Street bridge, mile 4.0, 
Miami-Dade County is published in 33 CFR 117.5 and requires the span to 
open on signal.
    On January 17, 2006, the owner of the bridge requested that the 
Coast Guard temporarily change the existing regulations of the 63rd 
Street Bridge to allow for rehabilitation in a safe and efficient 
manner. The bridge closure dates detailed below have been staggered to 
allow for the movement of navigation before and after each closure 
period.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    This proposed temporary rule would require the draw of the 63rd 
Street bridge, mile 4.0 across Indian Creek, Miami-Dade County, Florida 
to open as necessary a single-leaf on the hour from 8 a.m. to 12:10 
a.m. and to remain closed from 12:11 a.m. to 7:59 a.m. except that from 
July 14 to July 17, 2006, August 1 to August 4, 2006, January 10 to 
January 13, 2007, and January 29 to February 1, 2007, the bridge will 
be closed to navigation.
    From June 19 to June 24, July 5 to July 10, December 4 to December 
9, and December 18 to December 23, 2006 the waterway will remain closed 
to navigation except for hourly openings as necessary between 8 a.m. to 
6 p.m.
    The bridge closure dates have been staggered to allow for the 
movement of navigation before and after each closure period.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This proposed temporary 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 proposed rule to be so 
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies 
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. This proposed temporary rule 
would modify the existing bridge schedule to allow for the 
rehabilitation of the bridge and provide scheduled openings for vessel 
traffic.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this proposed temporary rule would have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
The term ``small entities'' comprises small business, 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 proposed 
temporary rule would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. This proposed temporary rule 
would affect the following entities, some of which may be small 
entities: the owners or operators of vessels needing to transit from 
the marinas on the south of the bridge to the Intracoastal Waterway, 
persons intending to drive over the bridge and nearby business owners.
    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 proposed rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small 
entities in understanding this proposed temporary rule so that they can 
better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. 
If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or 
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its 
provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed 
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. The Coast Guard will not 
retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this 
rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This proposed temporary rule would call 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 proposed 
temporary 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 proposed temporary 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 proposed temporary rule would 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 proposed temporary 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 proposed temporary 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 proposed temporary rule does not have tribal implications 
under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian 
Tribal Governments, because it would 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 proposed temporary 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

[[Page 16531]]

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 proposed temporary rule does not use technical standards. 
Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus 
standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed temporary 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 proposed temporary 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 proposed temporary rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.
    For the reasons discussed 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; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); Department of 
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1; section 117.255 also issued 
under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 Stat. 5039.

    2. Add Sec.  117.T293 to read as follows:


Sec.  117.T293  Indian Creek.

    (a) The draw of the 63rd Street bridge, mile 4.0 across Indian 
Creek, Miami-Dade County, Florida will open a single-leaf as necessary 
on the hour from 8 a.m. to 12:10 a.m. and will remain closed from 12:11 
a.m. to 7:59 a.m. except that the bridge will be closed to navigation 
on the following dates: July 14 to July 17, 2006; August 1 to August 4, 
2006; January 10 to January 13, 2007; and January 29 to February 1, 
2007.
    (b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this section, from June 19 to 
June 24, July 5 to July 10, December 4 to December 9, and December 18 
to December 23, 2006 the waterway will be closed to navigation except 
for hourly openings as necessary between 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
    (c) Effective date: This temporary rule is effective from 8 a.m. on 
June 19, 2006 through 6 p.m. on February 5, 2007.

    Dated: March 15, 2006.
D.B. Peterman,
RADM, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6-4786 Filed 3-31-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P