[Federal Register: October 10, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 197)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 58642-58644]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr10oc03-24]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD07-03-141]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Biscayne Bay, Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, Miami River, Miami-Dade County, FL
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily change the regulations
governing the operation of the East and West Spans of the Venetian
Causeway bridges across the Miami Beach Channel on the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, and the Brickell Avenue and Miami Avenue bridges
across the Miami River, Miami-Dade County. This proposed rule would
allow these bridges to remain in the closed position during the running
of the Miami Tropical Marathon on February 1, 2004.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before November 10, 2003.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander
(obr), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 SE. 1st Ave, Room 432, Miami,
FL 33131, which maintains the public docket for this rulemaking.
Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents
indicated in the preamble as being available in the docket, are part of
[CGD07-03-141] and are available for inspection or copying at Commander
(obr), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 SE. 1st Avenue, Room 432,
Miami, FL 33131 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, 909 SE. 1st Ave Miami, FL 33131, telephone
number 305-415-6743.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you
[[Page 58643]]
do so, please include your name and address, identify the docket number
for this rulemaking [CGD07-03-141], 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 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 rule in view of them.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. However, you may
submit a request for a meeting by writing to Bridge Branch, Seventh
Coast Guard District, 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.
Background and Purpose
The Miami Tropical Marathon Director has requested that the Coast
Guard temporarily change the existing regulations governing the
operation of the East and West Spans of the Venetian Causeway bridges,
and the Brickell Avenue and Miami Avenue bridges to allow them to
remain in the closed position during the running of the Miami Tropical
Marathon on February 1, 2004. The marathon route passes over these four
bridges and any bridge opening would disrupt the race. Based on the
limited time the bridges would be closed, the Coast Guard believes it
can accommodate the request while still providing for the reasonable
needs of navigation.
The East and West Spans of the Venetian Causeway bridges are
located between Miami and Miami Beach. The current regulation governing
the operation of the East Span of the Venetian Causeway bridge is
published in 33 CFR 117.269 and requires the bridge to open on signal;
except that, from November 1 through April 30 from 7:15 a.m. to 8:45
a.m. and from 4:45 p.m. to 6:15 p.m. Monday through Friday, the draw
need not be opened. However, the draw shall open at 7:45 a.m., 8:15
a.m., 5:15 p.m., and 5:45 p.m., if any vessels are waiting to pass. The
draw shall open on signal on Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day, New
Year's Day, and Washington's Birthday. Moreover, the bridge must open
for public vessels of the United States, tugs with tows, regularly
scheduled cruise vessels, and vessels in distress.
The regulation governing the West Span of the Venetian Causeway
bridge is published in 33 CFR 117.5 and requires the bridge to open on
signal.
The operating schedule of the Brickell Avenue and Miami Avenue
bridges is published in 33 CFR 117.305 and requires each bridge to open
on signal; except that, from 7:30 a.m. to 9 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. to 6
p.m. Monday through Friday except Federal holidays, the draws need not
be opened for the passage of vessels. Public vessels of the United
States and vessels in an emergency involving danger to life or property
are allowed to pass at any time.
We believe that this proposed rule would not adversely affect the
reasonable needs of navigation due to the limited time the bridges
would be in the closed position.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily change the operating
regulations of the East and West Spans of the Venetian Causeway
bridges, and the Brickell Avenue and Miami Avenue bridges on February
1, 2004. This proposed rule would allow the East Span of the Venetian
Causeway bridge to remain closed from 6:05 a.m. to 8:40 a.m. on
February 1, 2004. The proposed rule would allow the West Span of the
Venetian Causeway to remain closed from 6:15 a.m. to 9:20 a.m. on
February 1, 2004. The Brickell Avenue bridge would be allowed to remain
closed from 7:10 a.m. to 11:59 a.m. on February 1, 2004. The Miami
Avenue bridge would be allowed to remain closed from 6:25 a.m. to 10
a.m. on February 1, 2004. Public vessels of the United States and
vessels in distress shall be passed at anytime.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed 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). The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of
this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation
under the policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland
Security is unnecessary. The short duration of time during the morning
of February 4, 2004 that the bridges will remain in the closed position
to facilitate the running of the marathon will have little, if any,
economic impact.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed 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 proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities because the proposed rule will only be in
effect for a limited period of time and race committee officials are
working with affected parties to minimize the impact of this proposed
rule.
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.
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 rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If this
proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its
provisions or options for compliance, please consult the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
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.).
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 rule
under that Order and
[[Page 58644]]
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 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 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 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 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 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 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 proposed 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.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
Regulations
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; 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.
2. From 6:15 a.m. until 9:20 a.m. on February 1, 2004, in Sec.
117.261, suspend paragraph (nn) and add temporary paragraph(vv) to read
as follows:
Sec. 117.261 Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway from St. Marys River to
Key Largo.
* * * * *
(vv) West Span of the Venetian Causeway, mile 1088.6 at Miami. The
draw need not open from 6:15 a.m. until 9:20 a.m. on February 1, 2004.
Public vessels of the United States and vessels in distress shall be
passed at anytime.
Sec. 117.269 [Suspended]
3. From 6:05 a.m. until 8:40 a.m. on February 1, 2004, temporarily
suspend Sec. 117.269.
4. From 6:05 a.m. until 8:40 a.m. on February 1, 2004, add a new
Sec. 117.T270 to read as follows:
Sec. 117.T270 Biscayne Bay.
The draw of the East Span of the Venetian Causeway bridge across
Miami Beach Channel need not open from 6:05 a.m. to 8:40 a.m. on
February 1, 2004. Public vessels of the United States and vessels in
distress shall be passed at anytime.
Sec. 117.305 [Suspended]
5. From 6:25 a.m. until 11:59 a.m. on February 1, 2004, temporarily
suspend Sec. 117.305.
6. From 6:25 a.m. until 11:59 a.m. on February 1, 2004, add a new
Sec. T117.306 to read as follows:
Sec. 117.T306 Miami River.
(a) The draw of each bridge from the mouth to and including the NW.
27th Avenue bridge, mile 3.7 at Miami, except the Miami Avenue and
Brickell Avenue bridges, shall open on signal: except that, from 7:30
a.m. to 9 a.m. and from 4:30 p.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday
except Federal holidays, the draws need not be opened for the passage
of vessels.
(b) The Miami Avenue bridge, across the Miami River, need not open
from 6:25 a.m. to 10 a.m. on February 1, 2004 and the Brickell Avenue
bridge, across the Miami River, need not open from 7:10 a.m. to 11:59
a.m. on February 1, 2004. Public vessels of the United States and
vessels in an emergency involving danger to life or property shall be
passed at any time.
Dated: September 18, 2003.
H.E. Johnson, Jr.,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 03-25682 Filed 10-9-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P