81 FR 85201 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Youngs Bay, Astoria, OR

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 227 (November 25, 2016)

Page Range		85201-85203
FR Document		2016-28359

The Coast Guard proposes to change the operating schedule that governs the Oregon State highway bridge across Youngs Bay foot of Fifth Street (Old Youngs Bay Bridge), mile 2.4, at Astoria, OR. The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) is proposing to change the operating schedule of the Old Youngs Bay Bridge for several months while work is performed on the north bascule lift. This change would allow ODOT to operate the double bascule draw in single leaf mode, one lift at a time, and reduce the vertical clearance of the non-operable half of the span by five feet.

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 227 (Friday, November 25, 2016)

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 227 (Friday, November 25, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 85201-85203]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28359]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2016-0968]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Youngs Bay, Astoria, OR

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the operating schedule that 
governs the Oregon State highway bridge across Youngs Bay foot of Fifth 
Street (Old Youngs Bay Bridge), mile 2.4, at Astoria, OR. The Oregon 
Department of Transportation (ODOT) is proposing to change the 
operating schedule of the Old Youngs Bay Bridge for several months 
while work is performed on the north bascule lift. This change would 
allow ODOT to operate the double bascule draw in single leaf mode, one 
lift at a time, and reduce the vertical clearance of the non-operable 
half of the span by five feet.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before December 27, 2016. The Coast Guard anticipates that this 
proposed rule will be effective from 7 a.m. on March 1, 2017 to 5 p.m. 
on October 31, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2016-0968 using Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for 
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for 
instructions on submitting comments.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion 
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on 
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed 
rule, call or email Steven M. Fischer, Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth 
Coast Guard District Bridge Program Office, telephone 206-220-7282; 
email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code
ODOT Oregon State Department of Transportation

II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis

    ODOT owns and operates the Old Youngs Bay Bridge, and proposes a 
temporary change to the existing operating regulation. The Coast Guard 
approved a temporary rule change authorizing ODOT to operate the Old 
Youngs Bay Bridge in single leaf mode from May 2016 through October 
2016, document citation 81 FR 28018. No negative impacts were observed 
during that rule change. The subject proposed regulation will allow the 
drawtender to open half the draw span in single leaf mode, from 7 a.m. 
on March 1, 2017 to 5 p.m. on October 31, 2017. ODOT's proposal would 
allow the construction workers to utilize a containment system that 
reduces the non-opening half of the bridge's vertical clearance by five 
feet. Marine traffic on Youngs Bay consists of vessels ranging from 
small pleasure craft, sailboats, small tribal fishing boats, and 
commercial tug and tow, and mega yachts.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    This proposed rule would temporarily amend 33 CFR 117.899 by adding 
the south lift only to open in single leaf

[[Page 85202]]

mode, and suspend a full opening. This proposed rule is necessary to 
accommodate extensive maintenance and restoration efforts on the Old 
Youngs Bay Bridge. This bridge provides a vertical clearance 
approximately 19 feet above mean high water when in the closed-to-
navigation position. One half of the double bascule bridge will have a 
containment system installed on the north half of the span, which will 
reduce the vertical clearance by 5 feet from 19 feet above mean high 
water to 14 feet above mean high water. Adjusting the existing 
drawbridge regulation will allow construction workers to complete 
bridge and highway upgrades before winter of 2017, while having minimal 
impact on maritime navigation, and no alternate routes are on this part 
of Youngs Bay into Youngs River.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes 
and Executive order (s) related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our 
analyses based on these statutes and Executive order (s), and we 
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    E.O. 12866 and E.O. 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. 
E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and 
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting 
flexibility. This NPRM has not been designated a ``significant 
regulatory action,'' under Executive order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM 
has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. This 
regulatory action determination is based on the ability for the Old 
Youngs Bay Bridge to open half the span on signal, and not delay 
passage of any mariner. Vessels not requiring an opening may pass under 
the bridge at any time. The north lift vertical clearance will be 
reduced as explained in paragraph III. No alternate routes are 
available on this part of Youngs Bay.

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 
proposed rule would 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 proposed rule would not have 
a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have 
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see 
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what 
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    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 proposed 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. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small 
entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any 
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call 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 E.O. 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 proposed 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 proposed 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. If 
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or 
Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

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 proposed rule will not 
result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this proposed 
rule elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed 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 preliminary 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 proposed rule simply 
promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. 
Normally such actions are 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. We seek any comments or 
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant 
environmental impact from this proposed 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.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, 
and

[[Page 85203]]

will consider all comments and material received during the comment 
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If 
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which 
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or 
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be 
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate 
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted 
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the 
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal 
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal 
Register (70 FR 15086).
    Documents mentioned in this notice and all public comments, are in 
our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by 
following that Web site's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the 
online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when 
comments are posted or a final rule is published.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes 
to amend 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. In Sec.  117.899, from 7 a.m. on March 1, 2017 through 5 p.m. on 
October 31, 2017, suspend paragraph (b) and add paragraph (d) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  117.899  Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Youngs Bay, Astoria, OR

* * * * *
    (d) The draw of the Oregon State (Old Youngs Bay) Highway Bridge, 
mile 2.4, across Youngs Bay foot of Fifth Street, shall open the south 
half of the double bascule span on signal for the passage of vessels, 
if at least one half-hour notice is given to the drawtender, at the 
Lewis and Clark River Bridge by marine radio, telephone, or other 
suitable means from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday and from 8 
a.m. to 4 p.m. Saturday and Sunday from March 1, 2017 to October 31, 
2017. At all other times, including all Federal holidays, but Columbus 
Day, at least a two-hour notice by telephone is required. The opening 
signal is two prolonged blasts followed by one short blast.

    Dated: November 16, 2016.
Brendan McPherson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard 
District.
[FR Doc. 2016-28359 Filed 11-23-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P

85202 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 227 / Friday, November 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules

mode, and suspend a full opening. This fields, and governmental jurisdictions power and responsibilities between the
proposed rule is necessary to with populations of less than 50,000. Federal Government and Indian tribes.
accommodate extensive maintenance The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. If you believe this proposed rule has
and restoration efforts on the Old 605(b) that this proposed rule would not implications for federalism or Indian
Youngs Bay Bridge. This bridge have a significant economic impact on tribes, please contact the person listed
provides a vertical clearance a substantial number of small entities. in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
approximately 19 feet above mean high While some owners or operators of CONTACT section above.
water when in the closed-to-navigation vessels intending to transit the bridge
position. One half of the double bascule may be small entities, for the reasons E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
bridge will have a containment system stated in section IV.A above, this The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
installed on the north half of the span, proposed rule would not have a of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
which will reduce the vertical clearance significant economic impact on any Federal agencies to assess the effects of
by 5 feet from 19 feet above mean high vessel owner or operator. their discretionary regulatory actions. In
water to 14 feet above mean high water. If you think that your business, particular, the Act addresses actions
Adjusting the existing drawbridge organization, or governmental that may result in the expenditure by a
regulation will allow construction jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity State, local, or tribal government, in the
workers to complete bridge and and that this rule would have a aggregate, or by the private sector of
highway upgrades before winter of significant economic impact on it, $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or
2017, while having minimal impact on please submit a comment (see more in any one year. Though this
maritime navigation, and no alternate ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it proposed rule will not result in such
routes are on this part of Youngs Bay qualifies and how and to what degree expenditure, we do discuss the effects of
into Youngs River. this rule would economically affect it. this proposed rule elsewhere in this
Under section 213(a) of the Small preamble.
IV. Regulatory Analyses Business Regulatory Enforcement
We developed this proposed rule after Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), F. Environment
considering numerous statutes and we want to assist small entities in We have analyzed this proposed rule
Executive order (s) related to understanding this proposed rule. If the under Department of Homeland
rulemaking. Below we summarize our rule would affect your small business, Security Management Directive 023–01
analyses based on these statutes and organization, or governmental and Commandant Instruction
Executive order (s), and we discuss First jurisdiction and you have questions M16475.lD, which guides the Coast
Amendment rights of protestors. concerning its provisions or options for Guard in complying with the National
A. Regulatory Planning and Review compliance, please contact the person Environmental Policy Act of 1969
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
E.O. 12866 and E.O. 13563 direct CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will have made a preliminary determination
agencies to assess the costs and benefits not retaliate against small entities that that this action is one of a category of
of available regulatory alternatives and, question or complain about this actions which do not individually or
if regulation is necessary, to select proposed rule or any policy or action of cumulatively have a significant effect on
regulatory approaches that maximize the Coast Guard. the human environment. This proposed
net benefits. E.O. 13563 emphasizes the rule simply promulgates the operating
importance of quantifying both costs C. Collection of Information
regulations or procedures for
and benefits, of reducing costs, of This proposed rule would call for no drawbridges. Normally such actions are
harmonizing rules, and of promoting new collection of information under the categorically excluded from further
flexibility. This NPRM has not been Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 review, under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)
designated a ‘‘significant regulatory U.S.C. 3501–3520.). (e), of the Instruction.
action,’’ under Executive order 12866. Under figure 2–1, paragraph (32) (e),
Accordingly, the NPRM has not been D. Federalism and Indian Tribal
Government of the Instruction, an environmental
reviewed by the Office of Management analysis checklist and a categorical
and Budget. This regulatory action A rule has implications for federalism exclusion determination are not
determination is based on the ability for under E.O. 13132, Federalism, if it has required for this rule. We seek any
the Old Youngs Bay Bridge to open half a substantial direct effect on the States, comments or information that may lead
the span on signal, and not delay on the relationship between the national to the discovery of a significant
passage of any mariner. Vessels not government and the States, or on the environmental impact from this
requiring an opening may pass under distribution of power and proposed rule.
the bridge at any time. The north lift responsibilities among the various
vertical clearance will be reduced as levels of government. We have analyzed G. Protest Activities
explained in paragraph III. No alternate this proposed rule under that Order and The Coast Guard respects the First
routes are available on this part of have determined that it is consistent Amendment rights of protesters.
Youngs Bay. with the fundamental federalism Protesters are asked to contact the
principles and preemption requirements person listed in the FOR FURTHER
B. Impact on Small Entities described in Executive order 13132. INFORMATION CONTACT section to
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 Also, this proposed rule does not have coordinate protest activities so that your
(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, tribal implications under Executive
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

message can be received without
requires federal agencies to consider the order 13175, Consultation and jeopardizing the safety or security of
potential impact of regulations on small Coordination with Indian Tribal people, places or vessels.
entities during rulemaking. The term Governments, because it would not have
‘‘small entities’’ comprises small a substantial direct effect on one or V. Public Participation and Request for
businesses, not-for-profit organizations more Indian tribes, on the relationship Comments
that are independently owned and between the Federal Government and We view public participation as
operated and are not dominant in their Indian tribes, or on the distribution of essential to effective rulemaking, and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:01 Nov 23, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25NOP1.SGM 25NOP1

Document Created: 2016-11-23 23:18:16
Document Modified: 2016-11-23 23:18:16

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		Proposed Rules
Action		Notice of proposed rulemaking.
Dates		Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before December 27, 2016. The Coast Guard anticipates that this proposed rule will be effective from 7 a.m. on March 1, 2017 to 5 p.m. on October 31, 2017.
Contact		If you have questions on this proposed rule, call or email Steven M. Fischer, Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District Bridge Program Office, telephone 206-220-7282; email [email protected]
FR Citation		81 FR 85201
RIN Number		1625-AA09

81 FR 85201 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Youngs Bay, Astoria, OR

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITYCoast Guard

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 227 (November 25, 2016)

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard