[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 89 (Tuesday, May 9, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26832-26834]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-4322]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD13-06-014]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Lake Washington Ship Canal, WA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is temporarily revising the drawbridge 
operation regulations for the Ballard Bridge, mile 1.1, and the Fremont 
Bridge, mile 2.6, across the Lake Washington Ship Canal at Seattle, 
Washington. The temporary change will increase the two daily closed 
draw periods by one hour each from May 30, 2006 through March 30, 2007. 
This will facilitate road traffic, which will be severely limited by 
lane closures during the rebuilding of the approaches to the Fremont 
Bridge.

DATES: This temporary rule is effective from May 30, 2006 to March 30, 
2007.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in 
the docket are part of docket [CGD13-06-014] and are available for 
inspection or copying at the Waterways Management Branch, 13th Coast 
Guard District, 915 Second Avenue, Seattle, WA 98174-1067 between 7:30 
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Austin Pratt, Chief, Bridge Section, 
(206) 220-7282.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    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. The City of Seattle requested 
this temporary change after first studying traffic signals, lane 
closures and other aspects of the project before concluding that this 
change might significantly mitigate traffic congestion on the affected 
arterials with minimal impact to navigation. The change would affect 
only one or two draw openings per day on average. The city, which owns 
the bridges, has conducted public outreach concerning the project and 
its request to change the operating schedule of the drawspans 
temporarily. This has included several neighborhood meetings in the 
project area. In addition, the

[[Page 26833]]

Coast Guard has consulted directly with the regular commercial users of 
the waterway to determine that significant economic impact will not 
occur. Most recreational and commercial vessel operators are accustomed 
to the existing closed periods and will be able to adjust transit times 
to the temporary increase.

Background and Purpose

    The temporary rule will enable the Seattle Department of 
Transportation (SDOT), the owner of the bridges, to rebuild the 
approaches of the Fremont Bridge and compensate partly during 
construction for the reduced road capacity. Necessary lane closures 
during the project would reduce traffic capacity by half on the Fremont 
Bridge. The Ballard Bridge to the west is an alternate parallel route. 
It is also a bascule bridge like the Fremont Bridge and has the same 
operating regulations. The bridge owner requested that the current 
closed periods of both bridges be extended Monday through Friday from 7 
a.m.-9 a.m. to 7 a.m.-10 a.m. and from 4 p.m.-6 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.-6:30 
p.m.
    The road surface and drawspans receive heavy use. Both bridges are 
on major city arterials that are also commuter routes. The Lake 
Washington Ship Canal is a major commercial and recreational waterway 
in Seattle. Tugs, barges, motor yachts, small freighters, sailboats, 
and government vessels travel the canal. Government vessels include 
those of the Coast Guard, National Oceanographic and Atmospheric 
Administration, University of Washington, Seattle Police and Fire 
Departments, etc. Lake Union Shipyard is located inland of both 
bridges.
    The Coast Guard has examined the number of openings at these 
bridges from May 2004 to May 2005, a period comparable to the one 
affected temporarily. The number of openings in this year of records 
ranges from 159 to 327 in each time segment proposed in this rule. For 
example, in the morning extension from 9 a.m. to 10 a.m. the Ballard 
draw opened 224 times. However, when these openings are averaged for 
the entire period examined, the average number of openings for each 
extension ranges from less than one to less than two per day. In other 
words, the increased duration of the temporary closed periods has 
little effect on the potential openings during the average day of the 
week. For this reason, the temporary operating schedule does not seem 
unreasonably burdensome to mariners already accustomed to closed 
periods at these bridges. It does seem likely that the draws might 
remain open a little longer to pass a few extra vessels at the end of 
these temporary periods of draw closure.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The operating regulations currently in effect for the Ballard and 
Fremont Drawbridge are found at 33 CFR 117.1051. A one-hour extension 
of the morning and afternoon closed periods will help accommodate 
traffic that would already be impeded by lane closures during the 
construction at the Fremont Bridge. The current weekday periods are 
from 7 a.m. to 9 a.m. and from 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. These periods 
approximate the peak commuter traffic hours on these busy arterials. 
The proposed periods would be 7 a.m. to 10 a.m. and from 3:30 p.m. to 
6:30 p.m. These periods would also apply to these Federal holidays, 
which are otherwise exempt from these closed periods: Martin Luther 
King's Birthday, President's Day, and Veteran's Day. These holidays 
continue to have heavy traffic volumes. Vessels of one thousand gross 
tons may receive an opening of the draw at any time. These requests are 
not frequent.

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.
    We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a 
full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures 
of DHS is unnecessary.
    With regards to the temporary changes, we reached this conclusion 
based on the fact that most vessel operators are accustomed to closed 
periods already on these bridges. Furthermore, they should be able to 
plan transits in advance and being locally based for the most part will 
soon adjust to the temporary change.

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 
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities. This is attributed to the small number of potential 
openings that would be affected on a daily basis.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small 
entities in understanding this proposed 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 Austin Pratt, Chief, Bridge 
Section, at (206) 220-7282. 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 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 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 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.

[[Page 26834]]

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 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 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 Information and Regulatory Affairs has 
not designated this 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not 
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

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 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. There are no expected environmental 
consequences of the proposed action that would require further analysis 
and documentation.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

Regulations

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard temporarily 
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; 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.

0
2. From May 30, 2006 to March 30, 2007 amend Sec.  117.1051 by 
suspending paragraph (d)(2) and adding paragraph (d)(4) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  117.1051  Lake Washington Ship Canal.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (4) The draws of the Ballard and Fremont Bridges need not open from 
7 a.m. to 10 a.m. and from 3:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, except on all Federal holidays, but Columbus Day, Martin Luther 
King Day, President's Day, and Veteran's Day. The draw of the 
University Bridge need not open from 7 a.m. to 9 a.m. and from 4 p.m. 
to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. A vessel of 
any size towing another vessel of 1000 gross tons or more shall receive 
an opening on signal at any of these draws at any time.
* * * * *

    Dated: April 28, 2006.
R.R. Houck,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard 
District.
[FR Doc. 06-4322 Filed 5-8-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P