81 FR 11118 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Saginaw River, Bay City, MI

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 42 (March 3, 2016)

Page Range		11118-11120
FR Document		2016-04743

The Coast Guard is amending its regulations regarding drawbridge operations in Saginaw River, Bay City, MI. In a final rule entitled, ``Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Saginaw River, Bay City, MI'' that appeared in the Federal Register on April 12, 2012, the Coast Guard revised the drawbridge opening schedules for the Saginaw River and inadvertently excluded the CSX Railroad Bridge and the Grand Trunk Western Railroad Bridge. This document amends the regulations by adding these two bridges back into the regulations.

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 42 (Thursday, March 3, 2016)

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 42 (Thursday, March 3, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11118-11120]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-04743]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2015-0934]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Saginaw River, Bay City, MI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is amending its regulations regarding 
drawbridge operations in Saginaw River, Bay City, MI. In a final rule 
entitled, ``Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Saginaw River, Bay City, 
MI'' that appeared in the Federal Register on April 12, 2012, the Coast 
Guard revised the drawbridge opening schedules for the Saginaw River 
and inadvertently excluded the CSX Railroad Bridge and the Grand Trunk 
Western Railroad Bridge. This document amends the regulations by adding 
these two bridges back into the regulations.

DATES: This rule is effective March 3, 2016.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being 
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type [USCG-
2015-0934] in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open 
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking.

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].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
E.O. Executive Order
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
SNPRM Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking
Pub. L. Public Law
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    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 publishing of the original final 
rule [Docket No. USCG-2011-1013] omitted regulatory language that was 
published in the previous rulemaking NPRM, but was inadvertently left 
out of the final rule published on April 12, 2012. Therefore, it is 
unnecessary to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to 
comment because the public was already provided an opportunity to 
comment on these provisions, had no objections during the previous 
comment period, and the operation of the bridges is consistent with 
this rule. 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 regulation change has already 
taken place and the correction of the regulation will not affect 
mariners currently operating on this waterway. Therefore, a delayed 
effective date is unnecessary.
    The NPRM for the regulations, published on December 8, 2011 (76 FR 
76637), proposed to revise Sec.  117.647. At the end of the rule, the 
following characters were included in the NPRM: ``* * * * *.'' These 
characters indicated the Coast Guard's intention to retain paragraphs 
(c) and (d) which were included in the regulations at the time of the 
NPRM regarding the CSX Railroad Bridge located at mile 18.0 over the 
Saginaw River and the Grand Trunk Western Railroad Bridge located at 
mile 19.2 of the Saginaw River. However, the final rule, which was 
published on April 24, 2012 (77 FR 21864), did not preserve these 
paragraphs. The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the 
regulation accurately reflects the original intention and inclusion of 
these inadvertently omitted paragraphs.

III. Discussion of Final Rule

    The purpose of this rule is to correct 33 CFR 117.647 in the Code 
of Federal Regulations.
    As noted above, this rule restores language that was previously 
excluded. This rule is correcting the regulation in 33 CFR 117.647 by 
restoring the listing of drawbridges allowed to remain closed. The CSX 
Railroad Bridge located at mile 18.0 of the Saginaw River and the Grand 
Trunk Western Railroad Bridge located on mile 19.2 of the Saginaw River 
will retain their current operating schedule. This rule will not affect 
waterway traffic or land transportation needs because the status of the 
two drawbridges has been in effect since 1994.

[[Page 11119]]

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and 
Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses 
based on a number of these statutes and Executive Orders, and we 
discuss First Amendment rights of protesters.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the 
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if 
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize 
net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of 
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing 
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated 
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. 
Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and 
Budget. The Coast Guard does not consider this rule to be 
``significant'' under that Order because it is an administrative change 
that corrects inadvertently omitted language that is consistent with 
the current operation of the bridges. Therefore, this rule does not 
affect the way vessels operate on the waterway.

B. 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. While some owners or operators of vessels intending to 
transit the bridge may be small entities, for the reasons stated in 
section IV.A above, this final rule would not have a significant 
economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    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. 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 the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, 
above. 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). 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.

C. 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).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Government

    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 is consistent with the fundamental federalism 
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 
13132.
    Also, 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.

E. 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.

F. 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 made a 
determination that this action is one of a category of actions which do 
not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human 
environment. This rule simply promulgates the operating regulations or 
procedures for drawbridges. This action is categorically excluded from 
further review, 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.

G. 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.

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.


0
2. In Sec.  117.647, add paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as follows:


Sec.  117.647  Saginaw River.

* * * * *
    (c) The draw of the CSX railroad bridge, mile 18.0, need not be 
opened for the passage of vessels. The owner shall return the draw to 
an operable condition within a reasonable time when directed by the 
District Commander to do so.
    (d) The draw of the Grand Trunk Western railroad bridge, mile 19.2, 
need not be opened for the passage of vessels.


[[Page 11120]]


    Dated: February 10, 2016.
J.E. Ryan,
Rear Admiral, U. S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2016-04743 Filed 3-2-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 11119

IV. Regulatory Analyses listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION F. Environment
CONTACT, above. Small businesses may
We developed this rule after We have analyzed this rule under
considering numerous statutes and send comments on the actions of
Federal employees who enforce, or Department of Homeland Security
Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Management Directive 023–01 and
Below we summarize our analyses otherwise determine compliance with,
Federal regulations to the Small Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
based on a number of these statutes and which guides the Coast Guard in
Executive Orders, and we discuss First Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the complying with the National
Amendment rights of protesters. Environmental Policy Act of 1969
Regional Small Business Regulatory
A. Regulatory Planning and Review Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
evaluates these actions annually and have made a determination that this
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 action is one of a category of actions
direct agencies to assess the costs and rates each agency’s responsiveness to
small business. If you wish to comment which do not individually or
benefits of available regulatory cumulatively have a significant effect on
alternatives and, if regulation is on actions by employees of the Coast
Guard, call 1–888–REG–FAIR (1–888– the human environment. This rule
necessary, to select regulatory simply promulgates the operating
approaches that maximize net benefits. 734–3247). The Coast Guard will not
retaliate against small entities that regulations or procedures for
Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the drawbridges. This action is categorically
importance of quantifying both costs question or complain about this rule or
any policy or action of the Coast Guard. excluded from further review, under
and benefits, of reducing costs, of figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of the
harmonizing rules, and of promoting C. Collection of Information Instruction.
flexibility. This rule has not been
Under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of
designated a ‘‘significant regulatory This rule calls for no new collection
the Instruction, an environmental
action,’’ under Executive Order 12866. of information under the Paperwork
analysis checklist and a categorical
Accordingly, it has not been reviewed Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–
exclusion determination are not
by the Office of Management and 3520).
required for this rule.
Budget. The Coast Guard does not
consider this rule to be ‘‘significant’’ D. Federalism and Indian Tribal G. Protest Activities
under that Order because it is an Government
administrative change that corrects The Coast Guard respects the First
A rule has implications for federalism Amendment rights of protesters.
inadvertently omitted language that is under Executive Order 13132,
consistent with the current operation of Protesters are asked to contact the
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct person listed in the FOR FURTHER
the bridges. Therefore, this rule does not effect on the States, on the relationship INFORMATION CONTACT section to
affect the way vessels operate on the between the national government and
waterway. coordinate protest activities so that your
the States, or on the distribution of message can be received without
B. Impact on Small Entities power and responsibilities among the jeopardizing the safety or security of
various levels of government. We have people, places or vessels.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 analyzed this rule under that Order and
(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, have determined that it is consistent List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
requires federal agencies to consider the with the fundamental federalism
potential impact of regulations on small Bridges.
principles and preemption requirements
entities during rulemaking. The term described in Executive Order 13132. For the reasons discussed in the
‘‘small entities’’ comprises small preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
businesses, not-for-profit organizations Also, this rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order CFR part 117 as follows:
that are independently owned and
operated and are not dominant in their 13175, Consultation and Coordination PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with Indian Tribal Governments, OPERATION REGULATIONS
with populations of less than 50,000. because it does not have a substantial
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. direct effect on one or more Indian ■ 1. The authority citation for part 117
605(b) that this rule will not have a tribes, on the relationship between the continues to read as follows:
significant economic impact on a Federal Government and Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1;
substantial number of small entities. and Department of Homeland Security
While some owners or operators of responsibilities between the Federal
Delegation No. 0170.1.
vessels intending to transit the bridge Government and Indian tribes.
may be small entities, for the reasons ■ 2. In § 117.647, add paragraphs (c) and
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
stated in section IV.A above, this final (d) to read as follows:
rule would not have a significant The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act § 117.647 Saginaw River.
economic impact on any vessel owner of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
or operator. Federal agencies to assess the effects of * * * * *
Under section 213(a) of the Small their discretionary regulatory actions. In (c) The draw of the CSX railroad
Business Regulatory Enforcement particular, the Act addresses actions bridge, mile 18.0, need not be opened
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), that may result in the expenditure by a for the passage of vessels. The owner
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

we want to assist small entities in State, local, or tribal government, in the shall return the draw to an operable
understanding this rule. If the rule aggregate, or by the private sector of condition within a reasonable time
would affect your small business, $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or when directed by the District
organization, or governmental more in any one year. Though this rule Commander to do so.
jurisdiction and you have questions will not result in such an expenditure, (d) The draw of the Grand Trunk
concerning its provisions or options for we do discuss the effects of this rule Western railroad bridge, mile 19.2, need
compliance, please contact the person elsewhere in this preamble. not be opened for the passage of vessels.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:47 Mar 02, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\03MRR1.SGM 03MRR1

11120 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

Dated: February 10, 2016. DATES: This rule is effective on April 4, Maricopa Association of Governments’
J.E. Ryan, 2016. (MAG) plan titled ‘‘MAG 2013 Carbon
Rear Admiral, U. S. Coast Guard, ADDRESSES: The EPA has established Monoxide Maintenance Plan for the
Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District. docket number EPA–R09–OAR–2015– Maricopa County Area’’ (hereinafter,
[FR Doc. 2016–04743 Filed 3–2–16; 8:45 am] 0645 for this action. Generally, ‘‘2013 Maintenance Plan’’) into the
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P documents in the docket for this action Arizona SIP.
are available electronically at http:// We also proposed to find adequate
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
and to approve into the SIP the CO
EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION San Francisco, California 94105–3901. MVEB for the year 2025 and beyond.
AGENCY While all documents in the docket are We proposed to approve this plan and
listed at http://www.regulations.gov, the CO MVEB because we determined
40 CFR Part 52
some information may be publicly that they complied with the relevant
[EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0645; FRL–9942–17– available only at the hard copy location CAA requirements. Our proposed action
Region 9] (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps, contains more information on the plan
multi-volume reports), and some may and MVEB and our evaluation.
Approval of Arizona Air Plan not be available in either location (e.g.,
Revisions; Phoenix, Arizona; Second confidential business information II. Public Comments and EPA
10-Year Carbon Monoxide Maintenance (CBI)). To inspect the hard copy Responses
Plan materials, please schedule an The EPA’s proposed action provided
appointment during normal business a 30-day public comment period. During
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
Agency (EPA). this period, we received no comments.
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
ACTION: Final rule.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John III. EPA Action
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Kelly, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–4151,
kelly.johnj@epa.gov. No comments were submitted.
Agency (EPA) is taking final action to Therefore, as authorized in section
approve a revision to the Arizona State SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA is fully
Implementation Plan (SIP). This
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. approving this plan into the Arizona
revision is the second ten-year
maintenance plan for carbon monoxide SIP. The EPA is also finding adequate
Table of Contents and approving the motor vehicle
(CO) for the Phoenix metropolitan area
in Maricopa County, Arizona. We are I. Proposed Action emissions budgets in the plan (see Table
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses 1) because we find they meet the
also finding adequate and approving III. EPA Action
transportation conformity motor vehicle applicable transportation conformity
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
emissions budgets (MVEB) for the year requirements under 40 CFR 93.118(e).
2025 and beyond. We are taking these I. Proposed Action Table 1 shows the approved and
actions under the Clean Air Act (CAA On October 19, 2015 (80 FR 63185), previously approved MVEBs for the
or the Act). the EPA proposed to approve the Phoenix CO Maintenance Area.

TABLE 1—APPROVED AND PREVIOUSLY APPROVED TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS
FOR THE PHOENIX CO MAINTENANCE AREA, IN METRIC TONS PER DAY (MTPD)

Previously Previously Approved
approved approved

Year ............................................................................................................................................. 2006 2015 2025

CO MVEB .................................................................................................................................... 699.7 662.9 559.4

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
Reviews October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 1999);
Under the CAA, the Administrator is January 21, 2011); • is not an economically significant
required to approve a SIP submission • does not impose an information regulatory action based on health or
that complies with the provisions of the collection burden under the provisions safety risks subject to Executive Order
Act and applicable federal regulations. of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); • is not a significant regulatory action
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the • is certified as not having a subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
EPA’s role is to approve state choices, significant economic impact on a 28355, May 22, 2001);
provided that they meet the criteria of substantial number of small entities • is not subject to requirements of
the Act. Accordingly, this action merely under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 Section 12(d) of the National
approves state law as meeting federal U.S.C. 601 et seq.); Technology Transfer and Advancement
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

requirements and does not impose • does not contain any unfunded Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
additional requirements beyond those mandate or significantly or uniquely application of those requirements would
imposed by state law. For that reason, affect small governments, as described be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
this action: in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and
• Is not a significant regulatory action of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); • does not provide the EPA with the
subject to review by the Office of • does not have Federalism discretionary authority to address, as
Management and Budget under implications as specified in Executive appropriate, disproportionate human

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:16 Mar 02, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\03MRR1.SGM 03MRR1

Document Created: 2016-03-03 03:50:56
Document Modified: 2016-03-03 03:50:56

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 March 3, 2016.
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]
FR Citation		81 FR 11118
RIN Number		1625-AA09

81 FR 11118 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Saginaw River, Bay City, MI

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITYCoast Guard

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 42 (March 3, 2016)

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard