
[Federal Register: July 24, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 143)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 43178-43180]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr24jy08-20]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2008-0648]
RIN 1625-AA09

 
Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Islais Creek, San Francisco, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the operating regulation 
for the Illinois Street drawbridge, mile 0.3, and the 3rd Street 
drawbridge, mile 0.4, over Islais Creek to open on signal if at least 
72 hours notice is given. This action is proposed due to the minimal 
amount of vessels requiring drawbridge openings on the waterway.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before September 22, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket 
number USCG-2008-0648 to the Docket Management Facility at the U.S. 
Department of Transportation. To avoid duplication, please use only one 
of the following methods:
    (1) Online: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of 
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (3) Hand delivery: Room W12-140 on the Ground Floor of the West 
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The 
telephone number is 202-366-9329.
    (4) Fax: 202-493-2251.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed 
rule, call David H. Sulouff, Chief, Bridge Section, Eleventh Coast 
Guard District, telephone (510) 437-3516. If you have questions on 
viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, 
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted, 
without change, to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided. We have an agreement with the 
Department of Transportation (DOT) to use the Docket Management 
Facility. Please see DOT's ``Privacy Act'' paragraph below.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking (USCG-2008-0648), indicate the specific section of this 
document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each 
comment. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, 
an e-mail address, or a phone number in the body of your document so we 
can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission. You may 
submit your comments and material by electronic means, mail, fax, or 
delivery to the Docket Management Facility at the address under 
ADDRESSES; but please submit your comments and material by only one 
means. If you submit them by mail or delivery, submit them in an 
unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for 
copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would 
like to know they reached the Facility, 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.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble 
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov at 
any time. Enter the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG-2008-0648) 
in the Search box, and click ``Go>>.'' You may also visit either the 
Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the 
DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, 
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays or Commander (dpw), Eleventh Coast Guard District, Building 
50-2, Coast Guard Island, Alameda, CA 94501-5100, between 8 a.m. and 4 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into 
any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment 
(or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, 
business, labor union, etc.). You may review the Department of 
Transportation's Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register 
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit http://
DocketsInfo.dot.gov.

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a 
request for one to the Docket Management Facility 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 Port of San Francisco (POSF) Illinois Street drawbridge, mile 
0.3, over Islais Creek, in the City and County of San Francisco, CA, is 
required to open on signal per 33 CFR 117.5. The drawbridge provides 5 
feet of vertical clearance for vessels above Mean High Water (MHW) in 
the closed-to-navigation position and unlimited vertical clearance when 
open.
    The San Francisco Department of Public Works (SFDPW) 3rd Street

[[Page 43179]]

drawbridge, mile 0.4, over Islais Creek is required to open for vessels 
if at least one hour notice is given, per 33 CFR 117.163. The 
drawbridge provides 4 feet of vertical clearance above MHW.
    Islais Creek is one mile in length from its mouth to its navigable 
terminus, an outfall culvert. It is located in an industrial section of 
southeast San Francisco with no marinas on the waterway. There have 
been no requests for openings of the 3rd Street drawbridge and no 
complaints from waterway users since construction of the Illinois 
Street drawbridge in 2003.
    Due to infrequent calls for drawbridge openings, the POSF requested 
at least 72 hour notification. A 72 hour notification will allow the 
POSF to use personnel more efficiently and meet the reasonable needs of 
present navigation on the waterway.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The proposed regulation would amend the Illinois Street drawbridge, 
mile 0.3, operation regulation from opening ``on signal'' to opening 
``on signal, if at least 72 hours notice is given.'' The proposed 
regulation would amend the 3rd Street drawbridge, mile 0.4, operation 
regulation from opening ``on signal, if at least one hour notice is 
given'' to open ``on signal, if at least 72 hours notice is given.''
    This amendment would maintain uniformity on the waterway and allow 
the bridge owners to manage their personnel more efficiently while 
meeting the reasonable needs of navigation.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes 
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our 
analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    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.
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so 
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
    From 1990-2000, the existing 3rd Street drawbridge, mile 0.4, 
annually averaged 8 openings for State, Federal, and local vessels, 2.3 
openings for recreational vessels, and 1.3 openings for tugs and 
barges. There has been an average of 15.8 lifts, including testing of 
the drawspan, per year from 1990 to 2000. There are no marinas on the 
waterway and none are currently planned. The last commercial vessel to 
request a drawspan opening did so to remove an abandoned vessel from 
Islais Creek. Economic impact to commercial vessels is expected to be 
minimal. Impacts to recreational vessels are also expected to be 
minimal.

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.
    This action will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. Vessel 
traffic on this waterway has been minimal since 1990. Recreational 
vessels that transit close to the shoreline, i.e. kayaks, canoes, and 
other personal water craft, can safely transit under these drawbridges 
at any time.
    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 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small 
entities in understanding this proposed rule so 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 David H. Sulouff, Chief, Bridge 
Section, Eleventh Coast Guard District, telephone (510) 437-3516. 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

[[Page 43180]]

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. 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.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 made a preliminary determination that this action is not likely to 
have a significant effect on the human environment because it simply 
promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. We 
seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a 
significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.

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

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

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland 
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

    2. Revise Sec.  117.163 to read as follows:


Sec.  117.163  Islais Creek (Channel).

    (a) The draw of the Illinois Street Bridge, mile 0.3 at San 
Francisco, shall open on signal if at least 72 hours notice is given to 
the Port of San Francisco.
    (b) The draw of the 3rd Street Bridge, mile 0.4 at San Francisco, 
shall open on signal if at least 72 hours notice is given to the San 
Francisco Department of Public Works.

    Dated: July 10, 2008.
J. E. Long,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard 
District.
[FR Doc. E8-16896 Filed 7-23-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
