[Federal Register: August 29, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 166)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 50972-50974]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr29au05-9]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD07-04-124]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Skidaway Bridge (SR 204),
Intracoastal Waterway, Mile 592.9, Savannah, Chatham County, GA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is changing the operating regulations of the
Skidaway Bridge (SR 204) across the Intracoastal Waterway, mile 592.9,
in Savannah, Georgia. This rule allows the bridge to open on signal,
except that from Monday through Friday, not including Federal holidays,
the bridge need only open on the hour between 6:31 a.m. and 8:59 a.m.
and on the hour and half hour between 4:31 p.m. and 6:29 p.m.
DATES: This rule is effective September 28, 2005.
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 (CGD07-04-124) and are available for inspection or
copying at Commander (obr), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 SE 1st
Avenue, Suite 432, Miami, Florida 33131, between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Bridge Branch (obr),
Seventh Coast Guard District, maintains the public docket for this
rulemaking.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Gwin Tate, Project Manager,
Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, (305) 415-6747.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory History
On December 3, 2004, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Skidaway Bridge (SR
204), Intracoastal Waterway, Mile 592.9, Savannah, Chatham County, GA
in the Federal Register (69 FR 70209). We received 8 letters commenting
on the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was
held.
Background and Purpose
On January 7, 2004, the General Manager of the Landings
Association, a residential development with over 8500 residents that
comprises approximately
[[Page 50973]]
90% of the Skidaway Island population, contacted the Chatham County
Department of Public Works regarding traffic problems caused by the
current bridge schedule. On April 22, 2004, the Department of Public
Works, which operates and maintains the bridge, contacted the Coast
Guard and requested assistance in creating a bridge openings schedule
to help ease vehicular congestion on the Skidaway Bridge. The Skidaway
Bridge is the only roadway between Skidaway Island and the mainland.
Its operation is governed by 33 CFR 117.5, which requires the bridge to
open on signal. Bridge tender logs indicate that the openings schedule
will improve vehicular traffic flow while still meeting the reasonable
needs of navigation. During a twelve-month time period, vessel requests
for openings remained at or below an average of two per hour, and below
three during each restricted opening period in the morning and
afternoon.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
This Final Rule is less restrictive than the proposal in the
original NPRM. The NPRM provided for weekday closures of the Skidaway
Bridge between 6:30 a.m. and 9 a.m., and 4:30 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. This
Final Rule allows for openings on each hour between 6:31 a.m. and 8:59
a.m., and openings on each hour and half hour between 4:31 p.m. and
6:29 p.m. This revision enables both boaters and motorists to plan
their respective crossings of the Skidaway Bridge pursuant to this
Final Rule, thereby improving vehicular traffic flow without
unreasonably interfering with vessel traffic.
This Final Rule allows for hourly openings during the designated
time period in the morning, and openings each half-hour during the
designated time period in the evening. The frequency of scheduled
openings in the evening is higher than the frequency in the morning
because peak evening vehicular traffic is less concentrated than peak
morning vehicular traffic.
The Coast Guard received a total of 8 written comments in response
to the NPRM:
(1) Five were in favor of the proposed rule as written.
(2) One commenter recommended that the schedule be altered
slightly, opening every half hour during the designated morning and
evening time periods.
The Coast Guard agrees that the original schedule proposed in the
NPRM was too restrictive in that it did not provide for any openings
during the morning and evening time periods. Accordingly, this Final
Rule provides for openings pursuant to a schedule, thereby enabling
boaters and motorists to plan their trips accordingly. This revision
will help reduce vehicular congestion without unreasonably interfering
with vessel traffic.
(3) One commenter recommended that the bridge adopt a half hour
schedule between 9 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. during the prescribed time
period.
Test results indicated a small number of openings during this time
period. Because the Coast Guard believes that scheduled openings
throughout the day would not help ease vehicular congestion in the
vicinity of the Skidaway Bridge, this Final Rule requires openings
pursuant to a schedule only during peak hours of vehicular traffic in
the morning and evening.
(4) One commenter was unable to determine why a change in the
current operating schedule was needed if there were few openings during
the designated time periods.
Although the Skidaway Bridge averaged fewer than three openings
during the designated periods, putting the bridge on a defined schedule
enables motorists to plan their trips accordingly. This should reduce
the amount of vehicles waiting at the Skidaway Bridge during openings
at times of peak vehicular traffic, thereby helping to ease vehicular
congestion. The Coast Guard believes that this Final Rule achieves the
most equitable compromise between the needs of boaters and motorists
transiting beneath or across the Skidaway 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. It is not ``significant'' under the
regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS).
We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal on
vessel traffic that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
Boaters may mitigate impact of this Final Rule by planning their
passage through the Skidaway Bridge in accordance with scheduled
openings. The vehicular traffic crossing this bridge is now in excess
of 9,000 vehicles per day. This rule will have a positive impact on
vehicular traffic due to its establishment of scheduled bridge openings
during the designated time periods.
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.
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. The
Coast Guard offered small businesses, organizations, or governmental
jurisdictions that had questions about the rule's provisions or
believed the rule would affect them to contact Mr. Gwin Tate, Project
Manager, Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, (305) 415-6747.
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).
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.
[[Page 50974]]
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.
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 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,
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
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); section 117.255 also issued
under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 Stat. 5039.
0
2. In Sec. 117.353, add paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 117.353 Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Savannah River to St.
Marys River.
* * * * *
(c) Skidaway, SR 204, mile 592.9 near Savannah. The draw shall open
on signal, except that from 6:31 a.m. to 8:59 a.m. Monday through
Friday except Federal holidays, the draw need open only on the hour,
and from 4:31 p.m. to 6:29 p.m. Monday through Friday except Federal
holidays, the draw need open only on the hour and half hour.
* * * * *
Dated: August 9, 2005.
D.B. Peterman,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 05-17095 Filed 8-26-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P