[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 207 (Friday, October 27, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 73808-73810]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23757]



[[Page 73808]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2023-0658]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Okeechobee Waterway, Stuart, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating schedule that 
governs the Roosevelt (US1) Bridge, across the Okeechobee Waterway, 
mile 7.5, at Stuart, FL. This action is necessary to allow the 
drawbridge to operate on demand as outlined in the Record of Decision 
for the high-level fixed US1 Roosevelt Bridge which was constructed in 
1997. Additionally, with the anticipated increase in railway activity 
on the adjacent railroad bridge, this proposed modification will allow 
the bridges to operate in concert. The drawbridge name in the 
regulation is incorrect and will be changed. We invite your comments on 
this proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before November 27, 2023.

ADDRESSES:  You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2023-0658 using Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion 
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on 
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed 
rule, call or e- mail Ms. Jennifer Zercher, Bridge Management 
Specialist, Seventh Coast Guard District; telephone 305-415-6740, email 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
OMB Office of Management and Budget
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Advance, Supplemental)
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code
FL Florida
FDOT Florida Department of Transportation

II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis

    The Roosevelt (US1) Bridge, across the OWW, mile 7.5, at Stuart, 
Florida, is a double-leaf bascule bridge with a 14-foot vertical 
clearance at mean high water in the closed position. The normal 
operating schedule for the bridge is found in 33 CFR 117.317(d). 
Navigation on the waterway is commercial and recreational.
    The Coast Guard is proposing to modify the drawbridge operating 
schedule to allow the drawbridge to operate on demand as outlined in 
the Record of Decision for the high-level fixed US1 Roosevelt Bridge 
which was constructed in 1997. Additionally, with the anticipated 
increase in railway activity on the adjacent railroad bridge, this 
proposed modification will allow the bridges to operate in concert. The 
drawbridge name in the regulation, Roosevelt (US1) Bridge, is incorrect 
and will be permanently changed in the CFR and referred to for the 
remainder of the NPRM as SR 707 (Dixie Highway) Bridge.
    The SR 707 (Dixie Highway) Bridge was included in previously 
published notices and a general deviation with a request for comments 
in the Federal Register, under docket number USCG-2022-0222. These 
actions were taken to gather comments on waterway usage and the 
operation of the Florida East Coast Railroad Bridge and the SR 707 
(Dixie Highway) Bridge at Stuart, FL.
    On May 3, 2022, the Coast Guard published a Notification of Inquiry 
entitled, ``Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Okeechobee Waterway, 
Stuart, FL'' in the Federal Register (87 FR 26145). On June 10, 2022, a 
Supplemental Notification of Inquiry entitled, ``Drawbridge Operation 
Regulation; Okeechobee Waterway, Stuart, FL'' was published in the 
Federal Register (87 FR 35472). We received a total 2358 comments on 
those publications.
    The Coast Guard asked the public if the SR 707 (Dixie Highway) 
Bridge opening schedule should mirror the operating schedule of the FEC 
Railroad Bridge. 172 comments were received regarding this question. 97 
comments stated the SR 707 (Dixie Highway) Bridge and the FEC Railroad 
Bridge should have similar coordinated scheduled openings. We have 
determined that placing the highway bridge on demand will allow the 
bridges to coordinate openings given the unique operation of the 
railroad bridge. The difference in navigational clearances requires the 
railroad bridge to be open for specific lengths of times and when 
trains are not crossing. The highway bridge is not as restrictive to 
navigation and does not require a stricter operating schedule. 52 
comments stated the highway bridge should operate on demand with the 
railroad bridge operating the same. Railway operations are dynamic and 
on demand openings are not sustainable for the rail industry. The 
anticipated increase in railway activity necessitates this proposed 
change in the operating schedule for the highway bridge to allow the 
bridges to operate in concert. Seven comments recommended the highway 
bridge remain unchanged and the railroad bridge should operate per the 
highway bridge regulation. The highway bridge no longer requires the 
published operating schedule since the US1 Roosevelt Bridge was 
constructed and open to vehicle traffic. Again, railway operations are 
dynamic and on demand openings are not sustainable for the rail 
industry. The remaining comments were not considered as the responses 
included the highway bridge should be permanently removed, the 
operating schedules should be the same if the railroad bridge was 
rebuilt at a higher vertical clearance and the operating schedule of 
either bridge was not known so a response could not be provided.
    On June 8, 2023, the Coast Guard published a Temporary Deviation 
entitled, ``Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Okeechobee Waterway, 
Stuart, FL'' in the Federal Register (88 FR 37470). The comment period 
ended on August 4, 2023, with 342 comments received.
    The comments received were not specific to the SR 707 (Dixie 
Highway) Bridge but directed toward the operation of the railroad 
bridge. Given the dynamic and uncertain nature of the operation of the 
railroad bridge, the SR 707 (Dixie Highway) Bridge has been removed 
from docket number USCG-2022-0222 to allow separate rulemaking for the 
highway bridge to operate on demand.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    Under this proposed rule, the SR 707 (Dixie Highway) Bridge will 
open on demand except when the adjacent railroad bridge is in the 
closed position, the drawbridge need not open. The draw must open 
immediately upon opening of the railroad bridge to pass all accumulated 
vessels which request an opening. Vessels that can pass beneath the 
bridge without an opening may do so at any time.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes 
and

[[Page 73809]]

Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses 
based on these statutes and Executive Orders.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the 
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if 
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize 
net benefits. This proposed rule has not been designated a 
``significant regulatory action,'' under section 3(f) of Executive 
Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing 
Regulatory Review). This NPRM has not been designated a ``significant 
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM 
has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the ability that 
vessels can transit the bridge on demand and vessels able to pass 
without an opening may do so at any time.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as 
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of 
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. 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 
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the 
bridge may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A 
above this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact 
on any vessel owner or operator.
    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 rule would economically affect it.
    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. If the proposed 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 in the FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate 
against small entities that question or complain about this proposed 
rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132 
(Federalism), if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on 
the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on 
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels 
of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and 
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism 
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 
13132.
    Also, this proposed 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. If 
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or 
Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. 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 (adjusted for 
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule will not 
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this 
proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security 
Management Directive 023-01, Rev.1, associated implementing 
instructions, and Environmental Planning Policy COMDTINST 5090.1 
(series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f). The 
Coast Guard has determined that this action is one of a category of 
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant 
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule promulgates the 
operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. Normally such 
actions are categorically excluded from further review, under paragraph 
L49, of Chapter 3, Table 3-1 of the U.S. Coast Guard Environmental 
Planning Implementation Procedures.
    Neither a Record of Environmental Consideration nor a Memorandum 
for the Record are required for this rule. We seek any comments or 
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant 
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking 
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment 
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If 
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which 
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or 
recommendation.
    Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through 
the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To 
do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2023-0658 in the 
search box and click ``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the 
Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment 
option. If your material cannot be submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions.
    Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this 
proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as 
described in the previous paragraph, and then select ``Supporting & 
Related Material'' in the Document Type column. Public comments will 
also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following 
instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked 
Questions web page. Also, if you go to the online docket and sign up 
for email alerts, you will be notified when

[[Page 73810]]

comments are posted, or a final rule is published of any posting or 
updates to the docket.
    We review all comments received, but we will only post comments 
that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may choose not to post 
off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that we receive.
    Personal information. We accept anonymous comments. Comments we 
post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal 
information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions 
in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking System of Records 
notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).

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

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; and DHS Delegation No. 
00170.1, Revision No.01.3

0
2. Amend Sec.  117.317 by revising paragraph (d) to read as follows:


Sec.  117.317  Okeechobee Waterway

* * * * *
    (d) The SR 707 (Dixie Highway) Bridge, mile 7.5 at Stuart, shall 
open on signal; except when the adjacent railroad bridge is in the 
closed position, the draw need not open. The draw must open immediately 
upon opening of the railroad bridge to pass all accumulated vessels 
requesting an opening.
* * * * *

    Dated: October 13, 2023.
Douglas M. Schofield,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Coast Guard Seventh 
District.
[FR Doc. 2023-23757 Filed 10-26-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P