[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 158 (Tuesday, August 18, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41632-41633]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19703]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2009-0101]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Sabine River, Echo, TX

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is changing the regulation governing the 
operation of the Union Pacific Railroad Swing Span Bridge across the 
Sabine River, mile 19.3, at Echo, Orange County, TX. The bridge 
currently opens on signal with 24 hours advance notice but because of 
the limited number of requests for openings, the bridge owner requested 
an increase in the length of notification time required to open the 
bridge.

DATES: This rule is effective September 17, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Comments and related materials received from the public, as 
well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the 
docket, are part of docket USCG-2009-0101 and are available online by 
going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2009-0101 in the 
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' This material is also 
available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility 
(M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, 
Room W12-140, 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 e-mail Kay Wade, Bridge Administration Branch, Coast Guard; 
telephone 504-671-2128, e-mail [email protected]. If you have 
questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, 
Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    On March 26, 2009, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Sabine River, Echo, TX 
in the Federal Register (74 FR 13164). We received 2 comments on the 
proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was held.

Background and Purpose

    Due to a lack of bridge openings requested by mariners, Union 
Pacific Railroad Company, the bridge owner, requested a change in the 
operating regulation governing the Union Pacific railroad swing span 
bridge across the Sabine River, mile 19.3 at Echo, Texas from 24 hours 
advance notice to open the bridge to 14 days advance notice to open the 
bridge. This change allows the bridge owner to open the bridge for the 
passage of vessels while minimizing his requirements to staff and 
maintain the bridge. The bridge has a vertical clearance of 7.9 feet 
above Mean High Water (MHW), elevation 2.18 feet NGVD in the closed-to-
navigation position and unlimited in the open-to-navigation position. 
In accordance with 33 CFR 117.493(a), the bridge is currently required 
to open on signal for the passage of marine vessels if at least 24 
hours of advanced notice is given. Bridge tender logs indicate no 
requests for bridge openings in several years.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    The Coast Guard received a total of two comments in response to the 
NPRM. The comments were from Federal and State agencies having no 
objections to the proposal. Therefore, no change was made to the 
regulatory text.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and 
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses 
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    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.
    We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a 
full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
    The public will need to notify the bridge owner of a required 
opening 14 days in advance rather than 24 hours in advance. There is no 
change in the regulatory text published in the NPRM.

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.

[[Page 41633]]

    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which might 
be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels needing to 
transit the bridge with less than 14 days advance notice. There have 
been no requests for bridge openings in several years so this rule will 
not affect a substantial number of small entities. Vessels that can 
safely transit under the bridge may do so at any time. Before the 
effective period, we will issue maritime advisories widely available to 
users of the river.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), in the NPRM we offered to 
assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could 
better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking 
process.

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 this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not effect 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 would not create 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 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 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 which do not 
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human 
environment. 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.

0
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; Department of Homeland 
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Section 117.493(a) is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  117.493  Sabine River.

    (a) The draw of the Union Pacific railroad bridge, mile 19.3 near 
Echo shall open on signal if at least 14 days notice is given.
* * * * *

    Dated: August 4, 2009.
Mary E. Landry,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E9-19703 Filed 8-17-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P