Drawbridge Operation Regulation; St. Croix River, Wisconsin, MN

AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Temporary final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard is changing the regulation governing the Prescott Highway Bridge, across the St. Croix River at Mile 0.3, at Prescott, Wisconsin. Under the rule, the drawbridge need not open for river traffic and may remain in the closed-to-navigation position from November 1, 2005, to April 1, 2006. This rule allows the bridge owners to make necessary repairs to the bridge.

DATES:

This rule is effective November 1, 2005, to April 1, 2006.

ADDRESSES:

Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of the docket [CGD08-04-018] and are available for inspection or copying at room 2.107f in the Robert A. Young Federal Building at Eighth Coast Guard District, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Roger K. Wiebusch, Bridge Administrator, (314) 539-3900, extension 2378.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

On September 21, 2004, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulation; St. Croix River, Wisconsin and Minnesota in the Federal Register (69 FR 56379). We received no comment letters on the proposed rule. No public hearing was requested, and none was held.

Background and Purpose

On May 3, 2004, the Wisconsin Department of Transportation requested a temporary change to the operation of the Prescott Highway Bridge across the St. Croix River, Mile 0.3, at Prescott, Wisconsin, to allow the drawbridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position for a 5-month period while the electrical and hydraulic systems are overhauled. Navigation on the waterway consists of both commercial (excursion boat) and recreational watercraft, which may be minimally impacted by the closure period. Currently, the draw opens on signal for passage of river traffic from April 1 to October 31, 8 a.m. to midnight, except that from midnight to 8 a.m. the draw shall open on signal if notification is made prior to 11 p.m. From November 1 to March 31, the draw shall open on signal if at least 24 hours notice is given. The Wisconsin Department of Transportation requested the drawbridge be permitted to remain closed to navigation from November 1, 2005, to April 1, 2006.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

The Coast Guard received no comment letters. No changes will be made to this final rule.

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 expects this temporary change to operation of the Prescott Highway Bridge to have minimal economic impact on commercial traffic operating on the St. Croix River such that a full regulatory evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. This temporary change will cause minimal interruption of the drawbridge's regular operation, since the change is only in effect during the winter months while the river is frozen.

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 would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule would be in effect for 5 months during the early winter months when the river is frozen over and navigation is practically at a standstill. The Coast Guard expects the impact of this action to be minimal.

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 could better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. 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 1-800-REG-FAIR (1-800-734-3247).

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 expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this 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 create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may 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 would 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.

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. It has not been designated a significant energy action by the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. 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 considered the environmental impact of this rule and concluded that under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is categorically excluded from further environmental documentation. Paragraph 32(e) excludes the promulgation of operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges from the environmental documentation requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Since this regulation would alter the normal operating conditions of the drawbridge, it falls within this exclusion.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

• Bridges

Regulations

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

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.

2. From November 1, 2005, to April 1, 2006, in § 117.667, suspend paragraph (a) and add new paragraphs (d) and (e) to read as follows: