Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Back Bay of Biloxi, Biloxi, MS, 26414-26416 [06-4261]

Agencies

• Coast Guard
• DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 87 (Friday, May 5, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26414-26416]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-4261]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD08-06-015]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Back Bay of Biloxi, Biloxi, MS

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is removing the existing drawbridge operation 
regulation for the draw of the U.S. 90 bascule bridge across the Back 
Bay of Biloxi, mile 0.4, between Biloxi and Ocean Springs, Mississippi. 
The bridge was destroyed by Hurricane Katrina and will be replaced with 
a fixed bridge. Since the movable span of the bridge has been removed, 
the regulation controlling the opening and closing of the bridge is no 
longer necessary.

DATES: This rule is effective May 5, 2006.

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,

[[Page 26415]]

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 that good 
cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. Public comment is not 
necessary since the bridge that the regulation governed is out of 
service and mariners are no longer required to request an opening to 
transit through the bridge.

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. There is no need to delay the implementation 
of this rule because the bridge it governs is already out of service 
and mariners are no longer required to request an opening.

Background and Purpose

    The U.S. 90 bascule bridge across the Back Bay of Biloxi, mile 0.4, 
was destroyed by Hurricane Katrina and rendered unusable. The State of 
Mississippi determined that replacement of the movable bridge, instead 
of returning it into service, was necessary. The State of Mississippi 
received a permit to construct a new bridge on February 17, 2006. The 
movable spans of the bridge were removed following the hurricane to 
provide access to the Back Bay of Biloxi for mariners. Other portions 
of the bridge will be removed as part of the bridge replacement 
project. Since the movable span has been removed, mariners are no 
longer required to request openings for the bridge. The regulation 
governing the operation of the bridge is found in 33 CFR 117.675(a). 
The purpose of this rule is to remove 33 CFR 117.675(a) from the Code 
of Federal Regulations since it governs a bridge that is no longer in 
service and the movable span has been removed.

Discussion of Rule

    The Coast Guard is changing the regulation in 33 CFR 117 without 
publishing a NPRM. The change removes the regulation governing the 
bridge since the bridge is no longer in service and the movable span 
has been removed. This change does not affect vessel operators using 
the waterway. Thus, it is not necessary to publish a NPRM.

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). The Coast Guard does not consider this rule to be 
``significant'' under that Order because it does not affect the way 
vessels operate on the waterway.

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 because 
it does not change the operation of the drawbridge, and it will not 
adversely affect the owners and operators of vessels needing to transit 
the 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.
    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

[[Page 26416]]

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. 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.

Regulations

0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Coast Guard is amending 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.  117.675, remove paragraph (a) and redesignate paragraphs 
(b) and (c) as paragraphs (a) and (b).

    Dated: April 27, 2006.
R.F. Duncan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 06-4261 Filed 5-4-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P