82 FR 18879 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Ashley River, Charleston, SC

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 77 (April 24, 2017)

Page Range		18879-18881
FR Document		2017-08142

The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating schedule that governs the Ashley River Bridges across the Ashley River, miles 2.4 and 2.5 at Charleston, SC. This proposed rule would require a bridge tender to be present during the daytime hours only from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. daily for on signal openings. All other times would require 12 hours advance notification. This modification would provide some relief to vehicle traffic congestion and would have little to no effect on navigation.

Federal Register, Volume 82 Issue 77 (Monday, April 24, 2017)

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 77 (Monday, April 24, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18879-18881]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2017-08142]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2016-0776]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Ashley River, Charleston, SC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating schedule that 
governs the Ashley River Bridges across the Ashley River, miles 2.4 and 
2.5 at Charleston, SC. This proposed rule would require a bridge tender 
to be present during the daytime hours only from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. daily 
for on signal openings. All other times would require 12 hours advance 
notification. This modification would provide some relief to vehicle 
traffic congestion and would have little to no effect on navigation.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before June 23, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2016-0776 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed 
rule, call or email LT John Downing with the Coast Guard; telephone 
843-740-3184, 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
Pub. L. Public Law
SCDOT South Carolina Department of Transportation
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis

    On May 19, 2015, the HDR/ICA contractor for South Carolina 
Department of Transportation requested that the Coast Guard review the 
current bridge operating schedule to determine whether a change could 
be made to improve vehicle traffic flow in the area.

[[Page 18880]]

The bridge owner, South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT) 
was also consulted on this issue and concurred with the recommendation 
to change the current 12 hours advance notice for a bridge opening to 
be extended to include nighttime hours.
    The US 17, Ashley River Bridges, miles 2.4 and 2.5, at Charleston, 
SC are double leaf bascule bridges. Each bridge has a vertical 
clearance of 24 feet in the closed position at mean high water and a 
horizontal clearance of 90 feet.
    Presently, in accordance with 33 CFR 117.915(a), the Ashley River 
bridges (US17) also known as the US17 Highway Bridge at miles 2.4 and 
2.5 at Charleston, SC shall open on signal, except that from 7 a.m. 
until 9 a.m. Monday through Friday and 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. daily, the 
draws need be opened only if at least 12 hours notice is given. The 
draws of either bridge shall open as soon as possible for the passage 
of vessels in an emergency involving danger to life or property.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to change the operation of the Ashley 
River (US17) Bridges, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, miles 2.4 and 
2.5, at Charleston, SC. The proposed regulation would require a bridge 
tender to be present during the daytime hours only from 9 a.m. to 4 
p.m. daily to open the bridge on signal. All other times would require 
at least 12 hours notice. This regulation change should not have a 
significant impact on navigation in this area.
    These proposed changes will still allow vessels to pass through the 
bridge while taking into account the reasonable needs of other modes of 
transportation. Vessels not requiring an opening may pass at any time.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 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. Executive Order 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 limited impact 
that it is anticipated to have on vessel traffic on the Atlantic 
Intracoastal Waterway, while taking in to consideration the needs of 
vehicular traffic. Vessels that can transit under the bridge without an 
opening may do so. Emergency vessels and tugs with tows can still 
request openings at any time.

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 not call for a 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 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 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 
promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. 
Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further

[[Page 18881]]

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 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 proposed rule 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. Amend Sec.  117.915 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec.  117.915  Ashley River.

    (a) The draws of the US17 highway bridges, mile 2.4 and 2.5 at 
Charleston, SC shall open on signal; except that, from 4 p.m. to 9 a.m. 
daily, the draws shall open only if at least 12 hours notice is given. 
The draws of either bridge shall open as soon as possible for the 
passage of vessels in an emergency involving danger to life or 
property.
* * * * *

    Dated: April 7, 2017.
S.A. Buschman,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard 
District.
[FR Doc. 2017-08142 Filed 4-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P

18880 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 77 / Monday, April 24, 2017 / Proposed Rules

The bridge owner, South Carolina action,’’ under Executive Order 12866. D. Federalism and Indian Tribal
Department of Transportation (SCDOT) Accordingly, the NPRM has not been Government
was also consulted on this issue and reviewed by the Office of Management
concurred with the recommendation to and Budget. A rule has implications for federalism
change the current 12 hours advance This regulatory action determination under Executive Order 13132,
notice for a bridge opening to be is based on the limited impact that it is Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
extended to include nighttime hours. anticipated to have on vessel traffic on effect on the States, on the relationship
The US 17, Ashley River Bridges, the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, between the national government and
miles 2.4 and 2.5, at Charleston, SC are while taking in to consideration the the States, or on the distribution of
double leaf bascule bridges. Each bridge needs of vehicular traffic. Vessels that power and responsibilities among the
has a vertical clearance of 24 feet in the can transit under the bridge without an various levels of government. We have
closed position at mean high water and opening may do so. Emergency vessels analyzed this proposed rule under that
a horizontal clearance of 90 feet. and tugs with tows can still request order and have determined that it is
Presently, in accordance with 33 CFR openings at any time. consistent with the fundamental
117.915(a), the Ashley River bridges federalism principles and preemption
B. Impact on Small Entities requirements described in Executive
(US17) also known as the US17
Highway Bridge at miles 2.4 and 2.5 at The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 Order 13132.
Charleston, SC shall open on signal, (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, Also, this proposed rule does not have
except that from 7 a.m. until 9 a.m. requires federal agencies to consider the tribal implications under Executive
Monday through Friday and 4 p.m. to 7 potential impact of regulations on small Order 13175, Consultation and
p.m. daily, the draws need be opened entities during rulemaking. The term Coordination with Indian Tribal
only if at least 12 hours notice is given. ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small Governments, because it would not have
The draws of either bridge shall open as businesses, not-for-profit organizations a substantial direct effect on one or
soon as possible for the passage of that are independently owned and more Indian tribes, on the relationship
vessels in an emergency involving operated and are not dominant in their between the Federal Government and
danger to life or property. fields, and governmental jurisdictions Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
with populations of less than 50,000. power and responsibilities between the
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule The Coast Guard certifies, under 5 Federal Government and Indian tribes.
The Coast Guard proposes to change U.S.C. 605(b), that this proposed rule If you believe this proposed rule has
the operation of the Ashley River (US17) would not have a significant economic implications for federalism or Indian
Bridges, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, impact on a substantial number of small tribes, please contact the person listed
miles 2.4 and 2.5, at Charleston, SC. The entities. While some owners or in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
proposed regulation would require a operators of vessels intending to transit CONTACT section above.
bridge tender to be present during the the bridge may be small entities, for the
daytime hours only from 9 a.m. to 4 reasons stated in section IV.A above this E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
p.m. daily to open the bridge on signal. proposed rule would not have a
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
All other times would require at least 12 significant economic impact on any
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
hours notice. This regulation change vessel owner or operator.
If you think that your business, Federal agencies to assess the effects of
should not have a significant impact on their discretionary regulatory actions. In
navigation in this area. organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity particular, the Act addresses actions
These proposed changes will still
and that this rule would have a that may result in the expenditure by a
allow vessels to pass through the bridge
significant economic impact on it, State, local, or tribal government, in the
while taking into account the reasonable
please submit a comment (see aggregate, or by the private sector of
needs of other modes of transportation.
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or
Vessels not requiring an opening may
qualifies and how and to what degree more in any one year. Though this
pass at any time.
this rule would economically affect it. proposed rule will not result in such
IV. Regulatory Analyses Under section 213(a) of the Small expenditure, we do discuss the effects of
We developed this proposed rule after Business Regulatory Enforcement this proposed rule elsewhere in this
considering numerous statutes and Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), preamble.
Executive orders related to rulemaking. we want to assist small entities in F. Environment
Below we summarize our analyses understanding this proposed rule. If the
based on these statutes and Executive rule would affect your small business, We have analyzed this proposed rule
orders and we also discuss First organization, or governmental under Department of Homeland
Amendment rights of protestors. jurisdiction and you have questions Security Management Directive 023–01
concerning its provisions or options for and Commandant Instruction
A. Regulatory Planning and Review M16475.lD, which guides the Coast
compliance, please contact the person
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Guard in complying with the National
direct agencies to assess the costs and CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will Environmental Policy Act of 1969
benefits of available regulatory not retaliate against small entities that (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
alternatives and, if regulation is have made a preliminary determination
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

question or complain about this
necessary, to select regulatory proposed rule or any policy or action of that this action is one of a category of
approaches that maximize net benefits. the Coast Guard. actions which do not individually or
Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the cumulatively have a significant effect on
importance of quantifying both costs C. Collection of Information the human environment. This proposed
and benefits, of reducing costs, of This proposed rule would not call for rule promulgates the operating
harmonizing rules, and of promoting a new collection of information under regulations or procedures for
flexibility. This NPRM has not been the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 drawbridges. Normally such actions are
designated a ‘‘significant regulatory (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). categorically excluded from further

VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:03 Apr 21, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24APP1.SGM 24APP1

Document Created: 2017-04-22 00:11:12
Document Modified: 2017-04-22 00:11:12

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 June 23, 2017.
Contact		If you have questions on this proposed rule, call or email LT John Downing with the Coast Guard; telephone 843-740-3184, email [email protected]
FR Citation		82 FR 18879
RIN Number		1625-AA09

82 FR 18879 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Ashley River, Charleston, SC

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITYCoast Guard

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 77 (April 24, 2017)

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard