E6-19457. Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Outer Clam Bay Boardwalk Bridge, Mile 0.3, Near North Naples, Collier County, FL  

  • Start Preamble

    AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard proposes to change the operating regulations of the Outer Clam Bay boardwalk bridge, mile 0.3, near North Naples in Collier County, Florida. This proposed rule would require the draw to open on signal, with at least 30 minutes advance notice. This proposed action will allow the unrestricted movement of pedestrian traffic while not unreasonably interfering with the movement of vessel traffic.

    DATES:

    Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before January 16, 2007.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may mail comments and related material to Commander (dpb), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 SE. 1st Avenue, Room 432, Miami, FL, 33131, who maintains the public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, will become part of this docket and are available for inspection or copying at the Seventh Coast Guard District Bridge Branch, between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    Start Further Info

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Barry Dragon, Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, at (305) 415-6743.

    End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking [CGD07-06-237], 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 81/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like Start Printed Page 66896to 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. But you may submit a request for a meeting by writing to the Bridge Branch 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 existing regulations of the Outer Clam Bay boardwalk bridge, mile 0.3, near North Naples, at Collier County, published in 33 CFR 117.323 require the draw to open on signal between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., if at least one-hour advance notice is given. Between 5 p.m. and 9 a.m., the draw will be left in the open position.

    On October 19, 2006, the officials of Collier County requested that the Coast Guard review the existing regulations governing the operation of the Outer Clam Bay boardwalk bridge, because they contended that the regulation is not meeting the needs of pedestrian traffic.

    County records indicate that the owner has had one request for an opening since 1986 and the vessel did not show up for the requested opening. Night time vessel traffic is negligible. The boardwalk provides access to a recreational beachfront area 24 hours a day and to leave the bridge in the open position prevents beachgoers from accessing the recreational area by foot and golf cart between the hours of 5 p.m. and 9 a.m.

    Discussion of Proposed Rule

    This proposed rule would require the Outer Clam Bay boardwalk bridge, mile 0.3, near North Naples at Collier County to open on signal with 30 minutes advance notice. This schedule will allow unrestricted pedestrian and golf cart traffic to cross to the recreation area while providing for the reasonable needs of navigation. Local personnel will be available to open and close the bridge during night time hours.

    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).

    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. This proposed rule would modify the existing bridge schedule to allow pedestrian and vehicle traffic unrestricted access to the recreation area while providing for the reasonable needs of navigation.

    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 business, 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. This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels needing to transit through Outer Clam Bay in the vicinity of the Outer Clam Bay boardwalk bridge, persons intending to cross over the bridge and nearby business owners. 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 proposed rule would economically affect it.

    Assistance for Small Entities

    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 so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the 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 under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 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 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 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 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 Start Printed Page 66897Governments, 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. 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 proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

    Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, 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 proposed 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 proposed rule.

    Start List of Subjects

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    • Bridges
    End List of Subjects

    Regulations

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:

    Start Part

    PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

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

    Start Authority

    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.

    End Authority

    2. Revise § 117.323 to read as follows:

    Outer Clam Bay.

    The draw of the Outer Clam Bay boardwalk shall open on signal if at least 30 minutes advance notice is given.

    Start Signature

    Dated: October 31, 2006.

    D.W. Kunkel,

    Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard District.

    End Signature End Part End Supplemental Information

    [FR Doc. E6-19457 Filed 11-16-06; 8:45 am]

    BILLING CODE 4910-15-P

Document Information

Published:
11/17/2006
Department:
Coast Guard
Entry Type:
Proposed Rule
Action:
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
Document Number:
E6-19457
Dates:
Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before January 16, 2007.
Pages:
66895-66897 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
CGD07-06-237
RINs:
1625-AA09: Drawbridge Regulations
RIN Links:
https://www.federalregister.gov/regulations/1625-AA09/drawbridge-regulations
Topics:
Bridges
PDF File:
e6-19457.pdf
CFR: (1)
33 CFR 117.323