[Federal Register: August 12, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 155)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 49812-49813]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr12au04-11]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD08-04-028]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Terrebonne Bayou, Houma, LA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is removing the existing drawbridge operation
regulation for the draw of the SR 24 bridge across Terrebonne Bayou,
mile 31.3, at Houma, Louisiana. The existing bridge has been modified
by permit from a movable bridge to a fixed bridge. Since the bridge is
no longer a movable bridge, the regulation controlling the opening and
closing of the bridge is no longer necessary.
DATES: This rule is effective August 12, 2004.
ADDRESSES: Documents referred to in this rule are available for
inspection or copying at the office of the Eighth Coast Guard District,
Bridge Administration Branch, 500 Poydras Street, New Orleans,
Louisiana 70130-3310, between 7 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The telephone number is (504) 589-2965. The
Eighth District Bridge Administration Branch maintains the public
docket for this rulemaking.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Frank, Bridge Administration
Branch, at (504) 589-2965.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Good Cause for Not Publishing an NPRM
We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this
regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds good cause
exists for not publishing an NPRM. Public comment is not necessary
since the bridge that the regulation governed has been modified from a
movable bridge to a fixed and does not open for the passage of vessels.
Good Cause for Making Rule Effective in Less Than 30 Days
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds good cause exists
for making this rule effective in less than 30 days after publication
in the Federal Register because this rule removed the regulation used
for the operation of a movable bridge that has been modified to become
a fixed bridge. The modification has already taken place and the
removal of the regulation will not affect mariners.
Background and Purpose
In 1977, LDOTD requested a change to the operating regulations for
the SR 24 vertical lift bridge. The request was to change the
regulations on the bridge that the bridge need not open for the passage
of vessels due to infrequent openings. The basis of the change is that
between 1966 and 1977, the bridge only opened four times. The request
for change was published in the Federal Register and by Public Notice.
On January 1, 1978, the regulation regarding the bridge was approved so
that the bridge need not open for the passage of vessels.
In 1982, LDOTD issued a work order to remove the counterweights,
all of the overhead structural steel and the operator's house without
prior notification to the Coast Guard. This type of modification to the
approved permit plans requires a Coast Guard bridge permit amendment.
However, as a permit was not requested prior to the modification to the
bridge, a permit amendment to change the bridge to a fixed bridge was
applied for and granted after the fact. Since the bridge has been
modified to a fixed bridge, a special operation regulation for a
movable bridge is unnecessary.
This final rule removes the regulation regarding the SR 24 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).
A special operating regulation exists for movable bridges and as
this bridge has been modified to a fixed bridge, the regulation is
unnecessary. We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary.
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 will have no impact on any small entities. No small
entities in the area have been affect by the modification of the bridge
from a movable bridge to a fixed bridge.
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 rule so that they can better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
[[Page 49813]]
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.
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 the 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 does not cause 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. Paragraph (32)(e) excludes the
promulgation of operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges
from the environmental documentation requirements of NEPA.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
Regulations
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Coast Guard is amending
Part 117 of Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations 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.
Sec. 117.505 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 117.505, paragraph (b) is removed and paragraphs (c) and
(d) and (e) are redesignated as (b) and (c) and (d).
Dated: July 28, 2004.
R.F. Duncan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 04-18487 Filed 8-11-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P