80 FR 34055 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Grand River, Grand Haven, MI

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 114 (June 15, 2015)

The Coast Guard is removing the existing drawbridge operation regulation for the Grand Trunk Western Railroad drawbridge at the mouth of Spring Lake, mile 0.2, at Grand Haven, Ottawa County, Michigan. The bridge was removed in 1982 and the operating regulation is no longer applicable or necessary.

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 114 (Monday, June 15, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34055-34056]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2015-14638]



[[Page 34055]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2015-0373]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Grand River, Grand Haven, MI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is removing the existing drawbridge operation 
regulation for the Grand Trunk Western Railroad drawbridge at the mouth 
of Spring Lake, mile 0.2, at Grand Haven, Ottawa County, Michigan. The 
bridge was removed in 1982 and the operating regulation is no longer 
applicable or necessary.

DATES: This rule is effective June 15, 2015.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this final rule, [USCG-2015-0373] 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 [email protected]. 
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 Grand Trunk Western Railroad 
bridge, that once required draw operations in 33 CFR 117.633, was 
removed from the waterway in 1982. 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 33 years 
and this rule merely requires an administrative change to the Code of 
Federal Regulations, 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 Grand Trunk Western Railroad drawbridge at the mouth of Spring 
Lake, mile 0.2, was removed in 1982. 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 117.633(d), that pertained to the former drawbridge.
    The purpose of this rule is to remove the section of 33 CFR 117.633 
that refers to the Grand Trunk Western Railroad drawbridge at the mouth 
of Spring Lake, mile 0.2, from the Code of Federal Regulations since it 
governs a bridge that has been removed.

C. Discussion of Rule

    The Coast Guard is amending the regulation in 33 CFR 117.633 by 
removing restrictions and the regulatory burden related to the draw 
operations for this bridge that is no longer in existence. The 
amendment removes the paragraph of the regulation governing the Grand 
Trunk Western Railroad drawbridge since the bridge has been removed 
from the waterway. This Final Rule seeks to update the Code of Federal 
Regulations by removing language that governs the operation of the 
Grand Trunk Western Railroad drawbridge, 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 117.633 that governs the remaining active drawbridges on the Grand 
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 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,

[[Page 34056]]

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 amending 33 CFR 117.633 in the 
regulations to remove a drawbridge operating regulation for a 
drawbridge that no longer exists. 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; and Department of 
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.


Sec.  117.633  [Amended]

0
2. In Sec.  117.633, remove paragraph (d).

    Dated: June 2, 2015.
F.M. Midgette,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2015-14638 Filed 6-12-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P