82 FR 49153 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Isthmus Slough, Coos Bay, OR

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 204 (October 24, 2017)

Page Range		49153-49155
FR Document		2017-23052

The Coast Guard proposes to change the operating schedule that governs the Oregon State secondary highway bridge (Isthmus Slough Bridge), across Isthmus Slough, mile 1.0, at Coos Bay, OR. To accommodate Oregon Department of Transportation's (ODOT) preservation, painting and replacement of the bridge equipment, the Coast Guard proposes to operate half the double bascule span (single leaf). Additionally, during the period of this work, the non-functioning leaf of the span's vertical clearance will be reduced.

Federal Register, Volume 82 Issue 204 (Tuesday, October 24, 2017)

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 204 (Tuesday, October 24, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 49153-49155]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23052]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2017-0868]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Isthmus Slough, Coos Bay, 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 secondary highway bridge (Isthmus Slough 
Bridge), across Isthmus Slough, mile 1.0, at Coos Bay, OR. To 
accommodate Oregon Department of Transportation's (ODOT) preservation, 
painting and replacement of the bridge equipment, the Coast Guard 
proposes to operate half the double bascule span (single leaf). 
Additionally, during the period of this work, the non-functioning leaf 
of the span's vertical clearance will be reduced.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before November 24, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2017-0868 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 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
ODOT Oregon Department of Transportation
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis

    The United States Coast Guard proposes the following rulemaking 
change under statutory authority 33 U.S.C. 499. Oregon Department of 
Transportation (ODOT), owns and operates the double bascule Isthmus 
Slough Bridge, across Isthmus Slough, mile 1.0, at Coos Bay, OR, and 
has requested a temporary change to the existing operating regulation 
to accommodate the bridge's painting, and preservation and upgrading of 
the electrical systems. The subject bridge operates in accordance with 
33 CFR 117.879. Isthmus Slough provides no alternate routes to pass 
around the Isthmus Slough Bridge. To facilitate this event, ODOT 
requests the double bascule bridge operate in single leaf mode (half of 
the span), and reduce the vertical clearance of the non-functioning 
leaf. Isthmus Slough Bridge provides a vertical clearance of 28 feet in 
the closed-to-navigation position referenced to the vertical clearance 
above mean high water tide level. Up to ten feet of containment would 
be installed under the closed-to-navigation leaf only, and would reduce 
the vertical clearance to 18 feet. Vessels that do not require an 
opening would be allowed to transit under the bridge at any time. We 
approved a temporary deviation on August 4, 2017 (82 FR 36332), with 
the same change in bridge operations as this NPRM. We have not received 
any reports of problems or complaints with the subject bridge operating 
under the temporary deviation.

[[Page 49154]]

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    We propose a temporary change to 33 CFR 117.879 to be in effect 
from 6 a.m. on February 26, 2018, through 6 p.m. on July 31, 2019. This 
temporary rule would suspend the current paragraph regarding the Oregon 
State secondary highway bridge (Isthmus Slough Bridge), and add a 
temporary new paragraph which would amend the operating schedule of the 
Isthmus Slough Bridge by authorizing one half of the draw to open on 
signal, and would reduce the horizontal clearance and vertical 
clearance of the bridge. The temporary rule is necessary to accommodate 
painting, and preservation and upgrading of its electrical systems. 
This bridge provides a vertical clearance approximately 28 feet above 
mean high water when in the closed-to-navigation position. One half of 
the bascule bridge would have a containment system installed on the 
non-functioning half of the span, which would reduce the vertical 
clearance by ten feet to 18 feet. The horizontal clearance with a full 
opening is 140 feet, therefore, in single leaf operation; a temporary 
rule change would reduce the horizontal clearance to approximately 70 
feet.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes 
and Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our 
analysis based on these statutes and Executive Orders, and we 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 13771 directs agencies to control 
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. 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 (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance, it is exempt 
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771. This regulatory action 
determination is based on the ability for mariners to transit under the 
bridge because the Isthmus Bridge would open half the draw allowing for 
the reasonable needs of navigation.

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 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 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.
    A preliminary Record of Environmental Consideration and a 
Memorandum for the Record are not required for this proposed 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

[[Page 49155]]

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, visit http://www.regulations.gov/privacynotice.
    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in this docket 
and all public comments, will be 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. Suspend Sec.  117.879 from 6 a.m. on February 26, 2018, through 6 
p.m. on July 31, 2019.
0
3. Add a new temporary Sec.  117.T879, from 6 a.m. on February 26, 
2018, through 6 p.m. on July 31, 2019, to read as follows:


Sec.  117.T879  Isthmus Slough.

    The draw of the Oregon State secondary highway bridge, mile 1.0, at 
Coos Bay, shall operate in single leaf, and open half the draw on 
signal if at least 24 hours notice is given. The vertical clearance of 
the non-functioning leaf will be reduced up to ten feet.

    Dated: October 13, 2017.
Brendan C. McPherson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard 
District.
[FR Doc. 2017-23052 Filed 10-23-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P

49154 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 24, 2017 / Proposed Rules

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule requires federal agencies to consider the Also, this proposed rule does not have
We propose a temporary change to 33 potential impact of regulations on small tribal implications under Executive
CFR 117.879 to be in effect from 6 a.m. entities during rulemaking. The term Order 13175, Consultation and
on February 26, 2018, through 6 p.m. on ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small Coordination with Indian Tribal
July 31, 2019. This temporary rule businesses, not-for-profit organizations Governments, because it would not have
would suspend the current paragraph that are independently owned and a substantial direct effect on one or
regarding the Oregon State secondary operated and are not dominant in their more Indian tribes, on the relationship
highway bridge (Isthmus Slough fields, and governmental jurisdictions between the Federal Government and
Bridge), and add a temporary new with populations of less than 50,000. Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
paragraph which would amend the The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. power and responsibilities between the
operating schedule of the Isthmus 605(b) that this proposed rule would not Federal Government and Indian tribes.
Slough Bridge by authorizing one half of have a significant economic impact on If you believe this proposed rule has
the draw to open on signal, and would a substantial number of small entities. implications for federalism or Indian
reduce the horizontal clearance and While some owners or operators of tribes, please contact the person listed
vertical clearance of the bridge. The vessels intending to transit the bridge in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
temporary rule is necessary to may be small entities, for the reasons CONTACT section above.
accommodate painting, and stated in section IV.A. above, this E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
preservation and upgrading of its proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on any The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
electrical systems. This bridge provides
vessel owner or operator. of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
a vertical clearance approximately 28
If you think that your business, Federal agencies to assess the effects of
feet above mean high water when in the
closed-to-navigation position. One half organization, or governmental their discretionary regulatory actions. In
of the bascule bridge would have a jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity particular, the Act addresses actions
containment system installed on the and that this rule would have a that may result in the expenditure by a
non-functioning half of the span, which significant economic impact on it, State, local, or tribal government, in the
would reduce the vertical clearance by please submit a comment (see aggregate, or by the private sector of
ten feet to 18 feet. The horizontal ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or
clearance with a full opening is 140 feet, qualifies and how and to what degree more in any one year. Though this
therefore, in single leaf operation; a this rule would economically affect it. proposed rule will not result in such
temporary rule change would reduce the expenditure, we do discuss the effects of
Under section 213(a) of the Small
horizontal clearance to approximately this proposed rule elsewhere in this
Business Regulatory Enforcement
70 feet. preamble.
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
IV. Regulatory Analyses we want to assist small entities in F. Environment
understanding this proposed rule. If the We have analyzed this proposed rule
We developed this proposed rule after rule would affect your small business,
considering numerous statutes and under Department of Homeland
organization, or governmental Security Management Directive 023–01
Executive Orders related to rulemaking. jurisdiction and you have questions
Below we summarize our analysis based and Commandant Instruction
concerning its provisions or options for M16475.lD, which guides the Coast
on these statutes and Executive Orders, compliance, please contact the person
and we discuss First Amendment rights Guard in complying with the National
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Environmental Policy Act of 1969
of protestors. CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
A. Regulatory Planning and Review not retaliate against small entities that have made a preliminary determination
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 question or complain about this that this action is one of a category of
direct agencies to assess the costs and proposed rule or any policy or action of actions which do not individually or
benefits of available regulatory the Coast Guard. cumulatively have a significant effect on
alternatives and, if regulation is C. Collection of Information the human environment. This proposed
necessary, to select regulatory rule simply promulgates the operating
approaches that maximize net benefits. This proposed rule would call for no regulations or procedures for
Executive Order 13771 directs agencies new collection of information under the drawbridges. Normally such actions are
to control regulatory costs through a Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 categorically excluded from further
budgeting process. This NPRM has not U.S.C. 3501–3520.). review, under figure 2–1, paragraph
been designated a ‘‘significant D. Federalism and Indian Tribal (32)(e), of the Instruction.
regulatory action,’’ under Executive Government A preliminary Record of
Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM Environmental Consideration and a
has not been reviewed by the Office of A rule has implications for federalism Memorandum for the Record are not
Management and Budget (OMB), and under Executive Order 13132, required for this proposed rule. We seek
pursuant to OMB guidance, it is exempt Federalism, if it has a substantial direct any comments or information that may
from the requirements of Executive effect on the States, on the relationship lead to the discovery of a significant
Order 13771. This regulatory action between the national government and environmental impact from this
determination is based on the ability for the States, or on the distribution of proposed rule.
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS

mariners to transit under the bridge power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. We have G. Protest Activities
because the Isthmus Bridge would open
half the draw allowing for the analyzed this proposed rule under that The Coast Guard respects the First
reasonable needs of navigation. Order and have determined that it is Amendment rights of protesters.
consistent with the fundamental Protesters are asked to contact the
B. Impact on Small Entities federalism principles and preemption person listed in the FOR FURTHER
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 requirements described in Executive INFORMATION CONTACT section to
(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, Order 13132. coordinate protest activities so that your

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:07 Oct 23, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24OCP1.SGM 24OCP1

Document Created: 2018-10-25 10:08:23
Document Modified: 2018-10-25 10:08:23

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 November 24, 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		82 FR 49153
RIN Number		1625-AA09

82 FR 49153 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Isthmus Slough, Coos Bay, OR

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITYCoast Guard

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 204 (October 24, 2017)

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard