[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 16 (Thursday, January 25, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3368-3370]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-1028]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD07-06-158]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Stickney Point (SR 72) Bridge, 
Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Mile 68.6, Sarasota, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is changing the operating regulation governing 
the operation of the Stickney Point (SR 72) Bridge across the Gulf 
Intracoastal Waterway, mile 68.6, Sarasota, Florida. The rule will 
require the drawbridge to open on the hour, twenty minutes past the 
hour and forty minutes past the hour.

DATES: This rule is effective February 26, 2007.

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 (CGD07-06-130) and are available for inspection or 
copying at Commander (dpb), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 SE. 1st 
Avenue, Room 432, Miami, Florida 33131-3050 between 8 a.m. and 4:30 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Barry Dragon, Seventh Coast Guard 
District, Bridge Branch, telephone number 305-415-6743.

[[Page 3369]]


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory Information

    On October 3, 2006, we published a supplemental notice of proposed 
rulemaking (SNPRM) entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Stickney 
Point (SR 72) Bridge, Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, mile 68.6, Sarasota, 
FL in the Federal Register (71 FR 58334). We received 460 comments on 
the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested and none was held.

Background and Purpose

    The current regulations governing the operation of the Stickney 
Point Bridge, published in 33 CFR 117.5, require the draw to open on 
signal.
    On December 21, 2005, a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published 
in the Federal Register, 70 FR 75767. This proposal was for a schedule 
of an hour and half-hour opening schedule. We received 48 comments from 
the public all which were against changing the regulations to twice an 
hour openings.
    On April 24, 2006, a test of a twenty minute schedule, as published 
in the Federal Register 71 FR 16491, was conducted per the request of 
City officials of Sarasota, because they believed the current 
drawbridge regulation was not meeting the needs of vehicle traffic.
    We received 5 comments during the test. Four of the comments were 
from motorists who were in favor of the twenty minute schedule and one 
was against changing the schedule from an on demand regulation.
    On October 3, 2006, we published a supplemental notice of proposed 
rulemaking (SNPRM) entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Stickney 
Point (SR 72) Bridge, Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, mile 68.6, Sarasota, 
FL in the Federal Register (71 FR 58334).

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    The Coast Guard received 460 responses to the Supplemental Notice 
of Proposed Rulemaking. There were 448 comments in favor of the new 
schedule, 4 comments opposing the schedule and 8 comments recommending 
different schedules. Of the 4 dissenting comments, all were from 
waterway users. One commenter desired the schedule be implemented only 
during weekdays, which it will be. Two commenters cited safety issues 
of holding vessels near the bridge. This can be avoided by vessels 
timing their approach to the bridge. The last dissenting commenter had 
no specific issue regarding the change.
    The bridge logs show the average bridge opening request was less 
than two openings per hour. The new rule allows three openings per 
hour. Therefore, the new rule will meet the reasonable needs of 
navigation and also allow local vehicular traffic the ability to plan 
their crossing of the bridge.

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.

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.
    This rule would affect the following entities, some of which may be 
small entities: the owners or operators of vessels needing to transit 
the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway in the vicinity of the Stickney Point 
bridge. The rule would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities because the rule provides three 
openings per hour for vessel traffic.

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 process.
    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). 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 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 this 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 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

[[Page 3370]]

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. The Administrator of the Office 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 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, 
and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1, 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); Sec.  117.255 also issued 
under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 Stat. 5039.


0
2. Amend Sec.  117.287 by revising paragraph (b-1) and by adding 
paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  117.287  Gulf Intracoastal Waterway.

* * * * *
    (b-1) Stickney Point (SR 72) bridge, mile 68.6, at Sarasota. The 
draw shall open on signal, except that the draw need open only on the 
hour, twenty minutes past the hour, and forty minutes past the hour, 
from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    (c) The draw of the Siesta Drive Bridge, mile 71.6 at Sarasota, 
Florida shall open on signal, except that from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays, the draw need open only on the 
hour, twenty minutes past the hour and forty minutes past the hour. On 
weekends and Federal holidays, from 11 a.m. to 6 p.m., the draw need 
open only on the hour, twenty minutes past the hour and forty minutes 
past the hour.
* * * * *

    Dated: January 5, 2007.
D.W. Kunkel,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard 
District.
 [FR Doc. E7-1028 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P