Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Youngs Bay, Astoria, OR, 85201-85203 [2016-28359]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 227 / Friday, November 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules
classified, OGC will work with the party
who made the litigation demand and/or
the court and DOJ to identify an
individual who can provide responsive
information or testimony while
protecting classified information in
accordance with legal requirements, or
will move for other appropriate relief as
necessary to protect classified
information.
(h) If any NRO person is sued or
summoned in a foreign court, that
person shall provide full documentation
of the matter securely to the cognizant
Commander or Chief of Facility. The
Commander or Chief of Facility will
immediately email a scanned copy of
the service of process to OGC, and shall
send the document securely via an
information system approved to handle
classified information, marking the
email to indicate attorney-client
privilege protections as applicable. The
person sued or summoned will not
complete any return of service forms for
the foreign court without first obtaining
approval from NRO OGC to the
cognizant Commander or Chief of
Facility in writing, and shall follow
instructions from OGC regarding how to
complete the return of service form.
OGC will coordinate with DOJ to
determine whether service is effective
and whether the NRO person is entitled
to be represented at Government
expense.
(i) The Commander or Chief of
Facility will establish procedures at the
NRO facility, including a provision for
liaison with local staff judge advocates,
if any, to ensure that service of process
on persons in their individual capacities
is accomplished in accordance with
local law, relevant treaties, and Status of
Forces Agreements. Such procedures
must be approved by the General
Counsel. Commanders or Chiefs of
Facility will designate a point of contact
to conduct liaison with the OGC.
(j) Acceptance of service of any
summons or complaint by OGC ‘‘on
behalf of the organization in official
capacity only’’ shall not constitute an
official acknowledgement or
confirmation by NRO that any
individual named in the summons or
complaint is, in fact, a current or former
employee of NRO. Acceptance of service
of process shall not constitute waiver
with respect to jurisdiction, propriety or
validity of service, improper venue, or
any other defense in law or equity
available under the laws or rules
applicable to the service of process.
§ 267.6
Fees.
(a) Consistent with the guidelines in
DoD 7000.14–R, Vol. 11A, Chap. 4,
‘‘User Fees’’ (available at https://
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:01 Nov 23, 2016
Jkt 241001
comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/
documents/fmr/Volume_11a.pdf), NRO
may charge reasonable fees, as
established by regulation and to the
extent not prohibited by law, to parties
seeking, by request or demand, official
information not otherwise available
under the DoD Freedom of Information
Act, 5 U.S.C. 552. Such fees are
calculated to reimburse the Government
for the expense of providing such
information, and may include:
(1) The costs of time expended by
NRO personnel to process and respond
to the request or demand;
(2) Attorney time for reviewing the
request or demand and any information
located in response thereto, and for
related legal work in connection with
the request or demand; and
(3) Expenses generated by materials
and equipment used to search for,
produce, and copy the responsive
information See Oppenheimer Fund,
Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340 (1978).
(b) [Reserved]
Dated: November 18, 2016.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2016–28221 Filed 11–23–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
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
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
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
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
85201
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 https://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 d13-pfd13bridges@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
§ 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
E:\FR\FM\25NOP1.SGM
25NOP1
85202
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 227 / Friday, November 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules
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.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:01 Nov 23, 2016
Jkt 241001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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
E:\FR\FM\25NOP1.SGM
25NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 227 / Friday, November 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules
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 https://
www.regulations.gov. If your material
cannot be submitted using https://
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 https://
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 https://
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
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.
2. In § 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:
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
■
§ 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,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:01 Nov 23, 2016
Jkt 241001
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
85203
you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R10–OAR–2016–0591; FRL–9955–47–
Region 10]
Air Plan Approval: AK; Permitting Fees
Revision
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) proposes to approve state
implementation plan (SIP) revisions
submitted by the State of Alaska (state)
Department of Environmental
Conservation on February 1, 2016. The
revisions implement changes to permit
administration and compliance fees
based on the state’s fee study results.
Changes include: The addition of
definitions, restructuring of fee
categories, rearranging and renumbering
of certain fee rules, and updating cross
references to align with the restructured
fee rules.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before December 27,
2016.
SUMMARY:
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10–
OAR–2016–0591 at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
The EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
Randall Ruddick at (206) 553–1999, or
ruddick.randall@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, it is
intended to refer to the EPA. For further
information, please see the direct final
action, of the same title, which is
located in the Rules section of this
Federal Register. The EPA is approving
the State’s SIP revision as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the
EPA views this as a noncontroversial
SIP revision and anticipates no adverse
comments. A detailed rationale for the
approval is set forth in the preamble to
the direct final rule. If the EPA receives
no adverse comments, the EPA will not
take further action on this proposed
rule.
If the EPA receives adverse
comments, the EPA will withdraw the
direct final rule and it will not take
effect. The EPA will address all public
comments in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed rule. The EPA
will not institute a second comment
period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action
should do so at this time. Please note
that if we receive adverse comment on
an amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be
severed from the remainder of the rule,
the EPA may adopt as final those
provisions of the rule that are not the
subject of an adverse comment.
Dated: November 14, 2016.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2016–28276 Filed 11–23–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\25NOP1.SGM
25NOP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 227 (Friday, November 25, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 85201-85203]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[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 https://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 d13-pf-d13bridges@uscg.mil.
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 https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://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 https://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 https://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
