Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Titusville, FL, 29677-29678 [2014-11956]

Agencies

• Coast Guard
• DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 100 (Friday, May 23, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29677-29678]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11956]



[[Page 29677]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2014-0279]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, 
Titusville, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is removing the existing drawbridge operation 
regulation for the drawbridge across the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway 
mile 878.9, Titusville, Florida. The drawbridge was replaced with a 
fixed bridge in 2011 and the operating regulation is no longer 
applicable or necessary.

DATES: This rule is effective May 23, 2014.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this final rule [USCG-2014-0279], is 
available at https://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. Michael Lieberum, Coast Guard; telephone 305-415-
6744, email michael.b.lieberum@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 SR 402/Max Brewer Bridge, that 
once required draw operations in 33 CFR 117.261(k), was removed from 
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway mile 878.9 and replaced with a fixed 
bridge in 2011. 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 place any restrictions on 
mariners. It removes a regulation that has no further use or value.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), a rule that relieves a restriction is not 
required to provide the 30 day notice period before its effective date. 
This rule removes the SR 402/Max Brewer Bridge draw operation 
requirements under 33 CFR 117.261(k), thus removing a regulatory 
restriction on the public. 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 a fixed bridge 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.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The SR 402/Max Brewer Bridge across the Atlantic Intracoastal 
Waterway mile 878.9 was removed and replaced with a fixed bridge in 
2011. It has come to the attention of the Coast Guard that the 
governing regulation for this drawbridge was never removed subsequent 
to the completion of the fixed bridge that replaced it. The elimination 
of this drawbridge necessitates the removal of the drawbridge operation 
regulation, 33 CFR 117.261(k), that pertaining to the former 
drawbridge.
    The purpose of this rule is to remove the section (k) of 33 CFR 
117.261 that refers to the SR 402/Max Brewer Bridge at mile 878.9, from 
the Code of Federal Regulations because it governs a bridge that is no 
longer able to be opened.

C. Discussion of Rule

    The Coast Guard is changing the regulation in 33 CFR 117.261(k) by 
removing restrictions and the regulatory burden related to the draw 
operations for this bridge that no longer exists. The change removes 
the section (k) of the regulation governing the SR 402/Max Brewer 
Bridge because the bridge has been replaced with a fixed bridge and the 
old bascule bridge was removed from the waterway. This Final Rule seeks 
to update the Code of Federal Regulations by removing language that 
governs the operation of the SR 402/Max Brewer Bridge, which in fact no 
longer exists as a drawbridge. This change does not affect waterway or 
land traffic. This change does not affect nor does it alter the 
operating schedules in 33 CFR 117.261 that govern the remaining active 
drawbridges on the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway.

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 and 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 replaced with a fixed bridge 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

[[Page 29678]]

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 because it removes a regulation that applied to 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. 491; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland 
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.


Sec.  117.261  [Amended]

0
2. In Sec.  117.261, remove and reserve paragraph (k).

    Dated: May 7, 2014.
J.H. Korn,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard 
District.
[FR Doc. 2014-11956 Filed 5-22-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P