![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Drawbridge Operation Regulation; 63rd Street Bridge, Indian Creek, Miami, Miami-Dade County, FL
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: February 13, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 29)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 6692-6694]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr13fe07-3]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD07-06-041]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation; 63rd Street Bridge, Indian
Creek, Miami, Miami-Dade County, FL
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Temporary final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is temporarily changing the operating
regulations governing the 63rd Street Drawbridge across Indian Creek,
mile 4.0 in Miami-Dade County, Florida. This rule will allow the
Drawbridge to open a single-leaf on the top of the hour from 8 a.m. to
5:59 p.m. and a double-leaf on the top of the hour between 6 p.m. and
12:10 a.m. At all other times this bridge will be closed to navigation.
DATES: This rule is effective from March 15, 2007 until June 19, 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 (CGD07-06-041) and are available for inspection or
copying at Commander (dpb), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 S.E. 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. Michael Lieberum, Seventh Coast
Guard District, Bridge Branch, telephone number 305-415-6744.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
On April 3, 2006, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulations; 63rd Street Bridge,
Indian Creek, Miami, Miami-Dade County, FL in the Federal Register (71
FR 16529). We received two comments on the proposed rule. No public
meeting was requested, and none was held.
The NPRM proposed an effective period of 8 a.m. on June 19, 2006
through 6 p.m. on February 5, 2007. Thus, this temporary final rule is
effective from March 15, 2007 until June 19, 2007 because of contractor
and the City of Miami Beach requests to balance the reasonable needs of
vehicles and vessels while the bridge undergoes rehabilitation.
Publishing another NPRM before this temporary rule would further delay
meeting the immediate
[[Page 6693]]
safety concerns needed to protect local vessel and vehicle traffic from
the temporary change in drawbridge operations.
Background and Purpose
The existing regulation of the 63rd Street Drawbridge, Indian Creek
mile 4.0, Miami-Dade County, Florida, requires the draw to open
promptly and fully for the passage of vessels when a request or signal
to open is given.
The contractor representing the bridge owner (Florida Department of
Transportation) requested that this drawbridge be placed on a
restricted schedule to allow for the least amount of time that this
work would influence both vehicle and vessel traffic. The contractor
has been working directly with the City of Miami Beach and the local
marina to balance the reasonable needs of both entities. The Coast
Guard had reviewed the drawbridge logs for the 63rd Street Drawbridge
and determined that there were limited nighttime openings.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
The Coast Guard received one response to the notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) and one response after the closure date of the NPRM.
One comment requested that this bridge be closed to navigation during
the daytime hours and one comment requested an exemption to the
regulation or to allow no changes to the regulation so the drawbridge
would open on demand. The request to close this bridge to navigation
during daytime hours was determined to be unreasonable as this
drawbridge is the only access for the local vessel owners and a marina
located on the south side of the bridge. The request to leave this
bridge on an on-signal schedule would unreasonably delay rehabilitating
this bridge. For this reason the recommendation for an on-signal
request was not approved.
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 needed to
transit Indian Creek, persons intending to drive over the bridge, and
nearby business owners. The revision to the openings schedule would not
have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities,
although bridge openings will be restricted, vessel traffic will still
be able to transit Indian Creek pursuant to the revised opening schedule.
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 the 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 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
[[Page 6694]]
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.
? For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 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); Sec. 117.255 also issued
under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 Stat. 5039.
? 2. Add Section 117.T293 to read as follows:
Sec. 117.T293 Indian Creek.
(a) The Drawspan of the 63rd Street Drawbridge, mile 4.0 across
Indian Creek, Miami-Dade County, Florida will open a single-leaf on the
hour from 8 a.m. to 5:59 p.m. and a double-leaf on the hour from 6 p.m.
to 12:10 a.m. This Drawbridge will be closed to navigation at all other
times.
(b) Effective date: This temporary rule is effective until June 19,
2007.
Dated: February 1, 2007.
D.W. Kunkel,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E7-2345 Filed 2-12-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P