Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Ebey Slough, Marysville, WA, 12305-12307 [2018-05701]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules 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. 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 would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. F. Environment We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023–01, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves a regulated area lasting less than 10 days that would limit entry within approximately 500 yards of the USS PORTLAND. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L61 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023–01–001–01, Rev. 01. A preliminary Memorandum for Record supporting this determination is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100 Marine Safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows: PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS 1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233; 33 CFR 1.05–1. navigable waters bounded by the following points: 45°33.34′ N, 122°42.34′ W; 45°33.12′ N, 122°42.51′ W; 45°32.71′ N, 122°41.37′ W; and 45°32.58′ N, 122°41.54′ W. (b) Special local regulations. (1) The Coast Guard may patrol the regulated area under the direction of a designated Coast Guard Patrol Commander (PATCOM). PATCOM may be contacted on Channel 16 VHF–FM (156.8 MHz) by the call sign ‘‘PATCOM.’’ Official patrol vessels may consist of any Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, state, or local law enforcement vessels assigned or approved by the Captain of the Port, Sector Columbia River. (2) Entrance into the regulated area is prohibited unless authorized by the PATCOM. The PATCOM may control the movement of all vessels in the regulated area. When hailed or signaled to stop by an official patrol vessel, a vessel must come to an immediate stop and comply with the lawful directions issued. Failure to comply with a lawful direction may result in expulsion from the area, citation for failure to comply, or both. (3) All vessels permitted to transit the regulated area must maintain a separation of at least 100 yards away from the USS PORTLAND. (c) Enforcement period. This regulated area is subject to enforcement from 11:59 p.m. on April 14, 2018 to 11:59 p.m. on April 23, 2018. D.G. Throop, RADM, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. 2018–05685 Filed 3–20–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG–2018–0128] RIN 1625–AA09 Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Ebey Slough, Marysville, WA Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. 2. Add § 100.T13–0154 to read as follows: 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. 17:00 Mar 20, 2018 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 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, visit https:// www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice. Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website’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. AGENCY: § 100.T13–0154 Special Local Regulations; USS PORTLAND Commissioning, Portland, OR. SUMMARY: ■ G. Protest Activities VerDate Sep<11>2014 V. Public Participation and Request for Comments Jkt 244001 12305 (a) Regulated area. The following area is designated as a regulated area: All navigable waters of the Willamette River within 500 yards of the USS PORTLAND while moored at the Port of Portland Terminal 2, specifically the PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 ACTION: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating schedule that governs the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Bridge 38.3 across Ebey Slough, mile 1.5, at Marysville, WA. The modified schedule would change the operating schedule of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF) Railroad Bridge 38.3 from on-demand E:\FR\FM\21MRP1.SGM 21MRP1 12306 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules opening to a four hours advance notice for an opening. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before May 7, 2018. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG– 2018–0128 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 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 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 BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 499. BNSF has requested a change to the operating schedule of the BNSF Railroad Bridge 38.3 across Ebey Slough, mile 1.5, in order to save on operating costs for the bridge. The proposed regulation will allow BNSF to not have a bridge operator attending the bridge until an opening request has been received. BNSF’s proposal would allow a bridge operator to be able to open the swing span within four hours after receiving a request for an opening. Marine traffic on Ebey Slough consists of vessels ranging from small pleasure craft, small tribal fishing boats and occasionally medium size pleasure motor vessels. There has been a reduction in waterway usage following the City of Maryville’s closure of the only upriver marina on Ebey Slough with very few bridge opening requests within the past three years. Only two marine vessel opening requests were received in 2017 and both were received longer than four hours prior to needing an opening. The subject bridge currently operates in accordance in 33 CFR 117.5. This VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:00 Mar 20, 2018 Jkt 244001 bridge provides a vertical clearance approximately 5 feet above mean high water and approximately 16 feet above mean low water when in the closed-tonavigation position. III. Discussion of Proposed Rule This proposed rule would amend 33 CFR 117.1059 to provide specific requirements for the operation of BNSF Railroad Bridge 38.3. These specific requirements are in addition to or vary from the general requirements that apply to all drawbridges across the navigable waters of the United States. This proposed rule reasonably accommodates waterway users while reducing BNSF’s burden in operating the bridge. We have not identified any impacts on marine navigation with this proposed rule. An alternate route is available into Steamboat Slough via Union Slough at high tide. IV. Regulatory Analyses We developed this proposed rule 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 bridge to open on signal after receiving at least four hours advanced notice and not delay passage of any mariner. Vessels not requiring an opening may pass under the bridge at any time. An alternate route is available into Steamboat Slough via Union Slough at high tide. 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 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 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 E:\FR\FM\21MRP1.SGM 21MRP1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules 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. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 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 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 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:00 Mar 20, 2018 Jkt 244001 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, visit https:// 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 https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website’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: 12307 open on signal when so ordered by the District Commander. David G. Throop, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. 2018–05701 Filed 3–20–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG–2018–0198] RIN 1625–AA00 Safety Zones; Recurring Safety Zones in Captain of the Port Sault Sainte Marie Zone Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: ACTION: The Coast Guard proposes to amend its recurring safety zones regulations in the Captain of the Port Sault Sainte Marie Zone. This proposed rule would update eighteen safety zone locations, dates, and sizes, add three safety zones, remove two established safety zones, and reformat the regulations into an easier to read table format. These proposed amendments will protect spectators, participants, and vessels from the hazards associated with annual marine events and firework shows, and improve the clarity and readability of the regulation. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before April 20, 2018. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG– 2018–0198 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https:// www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number (USCG–2018–0198) in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’ See the ‘‘Public Participation and Request for Comments’’ portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments. DATES: 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 § 117.1059 add paragraph (i) to read as follows: ■ § 117.1059 Snohomish River, Steamboat Slough, and Ebey Slough; Marysville, WA. * * * * * (i) The draw of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Bridge across Ebey Slough, mile 1.5, near Marysville, shall open on signal if at least a four hour notice is given. The opening signal is one prolonged blast followed by one short blast. During freshets, a drawtender shall be in constant attendance, and the draw shall PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 If you have questions on this rule, call or email Lieutenant Junior Grade Sean V. Murphy, Chief of Waterways Management, Coast Guard Sector Sault Sainte Marie, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 906–635–3223, email Sean.V.Murphy@uscg.mil. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: E:\FR\FM\21MRP1.SGM 21MRP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 55 (Wednesday, March 21, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12305-12307]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-05701]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2018-0128]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Ebey Slough, Marysville, WA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating schedule that 
governs the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Bridge 38.3 across 
Ebey Slough, mile 1.5, at Marysville, WA. The modified schedule would 
change the operating schedule of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe 
Railway (BNSF) Railroad Bridge 38.3 from on-demand

[[Page 12306]]

opening to a four hours advance notice for an opening.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before May 7, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2018-0128 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 [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
BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway

II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 
499. BNSF has requested a change to the operating schedule of the BNSF 
Railroad Bridge 38.3 across Ebey Slough, mile 1.5, in order to save on 
operating costs for the bridge. The proposed regulation will allow BNSF 
to not have a bridge operator attending the bridge until an opening 
request has been received. BNSF's proposal would allow a bridge 
operator to be able to open the swing span within four hours after 
receiving a request for an opening. Marine traffic on Ebey Slough 
consists of vessels ranging from small pleasure craft, small tribal 
fishing boats and occasionally medium size pleasure motor vessels. 
There has been a reduction in waterway usage following the City of 
Maryville's closure of the only upriver marina on Ebey Slough with very 
few bridge opening requests within the past three years. Only two 
marine vessel opening requests were received in 2017 and both were 
received longer than four hours prior to needing an opening.
    The subject bridge currently operates in accordance in 33 CFR 
117.5. This bridge provides a vertical clearance approximately 5 feet 
above mean high water and approximately 16 feet above mean low water 
when in the closed-to-navigation position.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    This proposed rule would amend 33 CFR 117.1059 to provide specific 
requirements for the operation of BNSF Railroad Bridge 38.3. These 
specific requirements are in addition to or vary from the general 
requirements that apply to all drawbridges across the navigable waters 
of the United States. This proposed rule reasonably accommodates 
waterway users while reducing BNSF's burden in operating the bridge. We 
have not identified any impacts on marine navigation with this proposed 
rule. An alternate route is available into Steamboat Slough via Union 
Slough at high tide.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule 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 bridge 
to open on signal after receiving at least four hours advanced notice 
and not delay passage of any mariner. Vessels not requiring an opening 
may pass under the bridge at any time. An alternate route is available 
into Steamboat Slough via Union Slough at high tide.

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

[[Page 12307]]

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 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 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 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, visit https://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 https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website'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.  117.1059 add paragraph (i) to read as follows:


Sec.  117.1059  Snohomish River, Steamboat Slough, and Ebey Slough; 
Marysville, WA.

* * * * *
    (i) The draw of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Bridge 
across Ebey Slough, mile 1.5, near Marysville, shall open on signal if 
at least a four hour notice is given. The opening signal is one 
prolonged blast followed by one short blast. During freshets, a 
drawtender shall be in constant attendance, and the draw shall open on 
signal when so ordered by the District Commander.

David G. Throop,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard 
District.
[FR Doc. 2018-05701 Filed 3-20-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.