[Federal Register: October 3, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 192)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 57356-57358]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr03oc03-15]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD09-03-215]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Milwaukee, Menomonee, and
Kinnickinnic Rivers and South Menomonee and Burnham Canals, Milwaukee,
WI
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has revised the drawbridge operating
regulation for the Canadian Pacific (formerly Chicago, Milwaukee, St.
Paul & Pacific) railroad bridge over the Burnham Canal in Milwaukee,
WI, allowing the bridge to remain closed to navigation due to
infrequent use. This will allow the bridge owners to reduce maintenance
and operation costs at a location where there is no known need for
drawbridge openings.
DATES: This rule is effective November 3, 2003.
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 [CGD09-03-215] and are available for inspection or
copying at the Bridge Administration Branch, Ninth Coast Guard
District, between 7 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Scot Striffler, Bridge
Administration Branch, at the address above or phone (216) 902-6084.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory History
On July 21, 2003, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Milwaukee, Menomonee,
and Kinnickinnic Rivers and South Menomonee and Burnham Canals,
Milwaukee, WI, in the Federal Register (68 FR 43066). We received no
letters commenting on the proposed rule. No public meeting was
requested, and none was held.
[[Page 57357]]
Background and Purpose
The Canadian Pacific Railway bridge at mile 1.74 over Burnham Canal
is a swing type bridge with a vertical clearance of approximately eight
feet in the closed position. In accordance with 33 CFR 117.1093, it is
currently required to open for vessels if at least two-hours advance
notice is provided prior to passing. Canadian Pacific Railway requested
the Coast Guard allow the bridge to be maintained in the closed to
navigation position since there have been no requests from vessels to
open the bridge since June 13, 1997. There are no active marine
facilities along the canal, and the area in Milwaukee Harbor where the
bridge is located is part of a city re-development project. Burnham
Canal is a federal waterway. The waterway is reportedly no longer
actively maintained by the Corps of Engineers. This final rule allows
the bridge to be untended and maintained in the closed to navigation
position as per 33 CFR 117.39. However, the Coast Guard will retain the
authority, should conditions make such an action necessary, to order
the bridge owner to restore the bridge to an operable condition within
12 months of notification from Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
This rule will allow the railroad bridge to remain closed, as it has
been, and still be in compliance with Coast Guard requirements.
In addition to the regulation for the railroad bridge, the current
regulation refers to `all other bridges across the Burnham Canal'. The
only other bridge on the canal that falls within the jurisdiction of
the Coast Guard Bridge Administration Program is the Interstate 94
bridge at mile 1.79, which is a fixed bridge, and should not be
referred to in the drawbridge regulations. Therefore, the Coast Guard
is removing this section from 33 CFR 117.1093.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
The Coast Guard did not receive any comments on the NPRM.
Therefore, no changes were made to the final rule.
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).
There is no known commercial or recreational use of Burnham Canal.
No information was received by the Coast Guard to demonstrate impending
activity on the waterway that would require the drawbridge to be
operable. However, as stated, if these conditions were to change, then
the bridge would be required to be operational again within 12 months
of notification from the Coast Guard.
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.
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. 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 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
[[Page 57358]]
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 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. 117.1093, revise paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 117.1093 Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic Rivers and South
Menomonee and Burnham Canals.
* * * * *
(f) The draw of the Canadian Pacific Railway bridge, mile 1.74 over
Burnham Canal, need not be opened for the passage of vessels.
Dated: September 22, 2003.
R.F. Silva,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 03-25187 Filed 10-2-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P