80 FR 24815 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Manitowoc River, Manitowoc, WI

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 84 (May 1, 2015)

Page Range		24815-24816
FR Document		2015-10238

The Coast Guard is removing the existing drawbridge operation regulation for the Wisconsin Central Railroad Bridge, mile 0.91, across Manitowoc River, at Manitowoc, Manitowoc County, Wisconsin. The drawbridge was removed in its entirety in 2012 and the operating regulation is no longer applicable or necessary.

Federal Register, Volume 80 Issue 84 (Friday, May 1, 2015)

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 84 (Friday, May 1, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24815-24816]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2015-10238]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2015-0132]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Manitowoc River, Manitowoc, WI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is removing the existing drawbridge operation 
regulation for the Wisconsin Central Railroad Bridge, mile 0.91, across 
Manitowoc River, at Manitowoc, Manitowoc County, Wisconsin. The 
drawbridge was removed in its entirety in 2012 and the operating 
regulation is no longer applicable or necessary.

DATES: This rule is effective May 1, 2015.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this final rule, [USCG-2015-0132] is 
available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the 
``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the 
line associated with this final rule. You may also visit the Docket 
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the 
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, 
call or email Mr. Lee Soule, Bridge Management Specialist, Ninth Coast 
Guard District; telephone (216) 902-6085, email Lee.D.Soule@uscg.mil. 
If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Cheryl Collins, 
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Regulatory History and Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this final rule without prior notice and 
opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the 
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision 
authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and 
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those 
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public 
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b), the Coast Guard finds that good 
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 
with respect to this rule because the Wisconsin Central Railroad 
bridge, that once required draw operations in 33 CFR 117.1089, was 
removed from the waterway in 2012. Therefore, the regulation is no 
longer applicable and shall be removed from publication. It is 
unnecessary to publish an NPRM because this regulatory action does not 
purport to place any restrictions on mariners but rather removes a 
restriction that has no further use or value. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), 
the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule 
effective in less than 30 days after publication in the Federal 
Register. The bridge has been removed from the waterway for 3 years and 
this rule merely requires an administrative change to the Federal 
Register, in order to omit a regulatory requirement that is no longer 
applicable or necessary. The removal has already taken place and the 
removal of the regulation will not affect mariners currently operating 
on this waterway. Therefore, a delayed effective date is unnecessary.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The Wisconsin Central Railroad Bridge across the Manitowoc River, 
mile 0.91, was removed in 2012. It has come to the attention of the 
Coast Guard that the governing regulation for this drawbridge was never 
removed subsequent to the removal of the bridge. The elimination of 
this drawbridge necessitates the removal of the drawbridge operation 
regulation, 33 CFR 117.1089(b), that pertained to the former 
drawbridge.
    The purpose of this rule is to remove the section of 33 CFR 
117.1089 that refers to the Wisconsin Central Railroad Bridge at mile 
0.91 from the Code of Federal Regulations since it governs a bridge 
that has been removed.

C. Discussion of Rule

    The Coast Guard is changing the regulation in 33 CFR 117.1089 by 
removing restrictions and the regulatory burden related to the draw 
operations for this bridge that is no longer in existence. This Final 
Rule seeks to update the Code of Federal Regulations by removing 
language that governs the operation of the Wisconsin Central Railroad 
Bridge, which in fact no longer exists. This change does not affect 
waterway or land traffic. This change does not affect nor does it alter 
the operating schedules in 33 CFR 117.1089 that governs the remaining 
active drawbridges on the Manitowoc River.

D. Regulatory Analyses

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

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) 
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as 
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and 
Regulatory Review, and

[[Page 24816]]

does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under 
section 6(a)(3) of Order 12866 or under section 1 of Executive Order 
13563. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under 
those Orders.
    The Coast Guard does not consider this rule to be ``significant'' 
under that Order because it is an administrative change and does not 
affect the way vessels operate on the waterway.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as 
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of 
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. 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 effect on small entities since this 
drawbridge has been removed and the regulation governing draw 
operations for this bridge is no longer applicable. There is no new 
restriction or regulation being imposed by this rule; therefore, the 
Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this final rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.

3. 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).

4. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have 
determined that it does not have implications for federalism.

5. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. 
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that 
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or 
security of people, places or vessels.

6. 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 (adjusted for 
inflation) 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.

7. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise 
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental 
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property 
Rights.

8. 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.

9. 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 create an 
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might 
disproportionately affect children.

10. 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.

11. Energy Effects

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive 
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

12. Technical Standards

    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not 
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

13. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security 
Management Directive 023-01 and 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 this action is one of a category of actions that do not 
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human 
environment. This rule involves removing 33 CFR 117.1089(b) from the 
regulations. This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, 
paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction.
    Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an 
environmental analysis checklist 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

0
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.


Sec.  117.1089  [Amended]

0
2. In Sec.  117.1089 remove and reserve paragraph (b).

    Dated: April 20, 2015.
F.M. Midgette,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2015-10238 Filed 4-30-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P

24816 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 84 / Friday, May 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

does not require an assessment of 6. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Management Directive 023–01 and
potential costs and benefits under The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
section 6(a)(3) of Order 12866 or under of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires which guides the Coast Guard in
section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Federal agencies to assess the effects of complying with the National
Office of Management and Budget has their discretionary regulatory actions. In Environmental Policy Act of 1969
not reviewed it under those Orders. particular, the Act addresses actions (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
The Coast Guard does not consider that may result in the expenditure by a have concluded that this action is one
this rule to be ‘‘significant’’ under that State, local, or tribal government, in the of a category of actions that do not
Order because it is an administrative aggregate, or by the private sector of individually or cumulatively have a
change and does not affect the way $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or significant effect on the human
vessels operate on the waterway. more in any one year. Though this rule environment. This rule involves
2. Impact on Small Entities will not result in such an expenditure, removing 33 CFR 117.1089(b) from the
we do discuss the effects of this rule regulations. This rule is categorically
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph
(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, elsewhere in this preamble.
(32)(e), of the Instruction.
requires federal agencies to consider the 7. Taking of Private Property Under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of
potential impact of regulations on small This rule will not cause a taking of the Instruction, an environmental
entities during rulemaking. The term private property or otherwise have analysis checklist and a categorical
‘‘small entities’’ comprises small taking implications under Executive exclusion determination are not
businesses, not-for-profit organizations Order 12630, Governmental Actions and required for this rule.
that are independently owned and Interference with Constitutionally
operated and are not dominant in their List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Protected Property Rights.
fields, and governmental jurisdictions Bridges.
with populations of less than 50,000. 8. Civil Justice Reform For the reasons discussed in the
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. This rule meets applicable standards preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
605(b) that this rule will not have a in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive CFR part 117 as follows:
significant economic impact on a Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to
substantial number of small entities. minimize litigation, eliminate PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE
This rule will have no effect on small ambiguity, and reduce burden. OPERATION REGULATIONS
entities since this drawbridge has been
removed and the regulation governing 9. Protection of Children ■ 1. The authority citation for part 117
draw operations for this bridge is no We have analyzed this rule under continues to read as follows:
longer applicable. There is no new Executive Order 13045, Protection of Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1;
restriction or regulation being imposed Children from Environmental Health Department of Homeland Security Delegation
by this rule; therefore, the Coast Guard Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not No. 0170.1.
certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this an economically significant rule and
final rule will not have a significant § 117.1089 [Amended]
does not create an environmental risk to
economic impact on a substantial health or risk to safety that might ■ 2. In § 117.1089 remove and reserve
number of small entities. disproportionately affect children. paragraph (b).
3. Collection of Information 10. Indian Tribal Governments Dated: April 20, 2015.
This rule calls for no new collection F.M. Midgette,
This rule does not have tribal
of information under the Paperwork Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
implications under Executive Order
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– Ninth Coast Guard District.
13175, Consultation and Coordination
3520). [FR Doc. 2015–10238 Filed 4–30–15; 8:45 am]
with Indian Tribal Governments,
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
4. Federalism because it does not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian
A rule has implications for federalism tribes, on the relationship between the
under Executive Order 13132, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct SECURITY
or on the distribution of power and
effect on the States, on the relationship responsibilities between the Federal
between the national government and Coast Guard
Government and Indian tribes.
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the 11. Energy Effects 33 CFR Part 165
various levels of government. We have This action is not a ‘‘significant [Docket No. USCG–2015–0333]
analyzed this rule under that Order and energy action’’ under Executive Order RIN 1625–AA00
have determined that it does not have 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations
implications for federalism. That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Safety Zone; Floating Construction
5. Protest Activities Distribution, or Use. Platform, Chicago River, Chicago, IL
The Coast Guard respects the First 12. Technical Standards AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
Amendment rights of protesters. This rule does not use technical ACTION: Temporary final rule.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Protesters are asked to contact the standards. Therefore, we did not
person listed in the FOR FURTHER consider the use of voluntary consensus SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is
INFORMATION CONTACT section to standards. establishing a temporary safety zone on
coordinate protest activities so that your the South Branch of the Chicago River,
message can be received without 13. Environment Chicago, Illinois. This temporary safety
jeopardizing the safety or security of We have analyzed this rule under zone is intended to restrict vessels from
people, places or vessels. Department of Homeland Security a designated portion of the South

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Apr 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01MYR1.SGM 01MYR1

Document Created: 2018-02-21 10:20:42
Document Modified: 2018-02-21 10:20:42

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Rules and Regulations
Action		Final rule.
Dates		This rule is effective May 1, 2015.
Contact		If you have questions on this rule, call or email Mr. Lee Soule, Bridge Management Specialist, Ninth Coast Guard District; telephone (216) 902-6085, email [email protected] If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.
FR Citation		80 FR 24815
RIN Number		1625-AA09

80 FR 24815 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Manitowoc River, Manitowoc, WI

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITYCoast Guard

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 84 (May 1, 2015)

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard