Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Umpqua River, Reedsport, OR, 25198-25200 [2024-07578]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
25198
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 70 / Wednesday, April 10, 2024 / Proposed Rules
II. Background, Purpose and Legal
Basis
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG–2023–0969]
RIN 1625–AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Umpqua River, Reedsport, OR
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard proposes to
change the name and operating
schedule that governs the Central
Oregon and Pacific railroad bridge
across the Umpqua River, mile 11.5, at
Reedsport, OR. Coos Bay Rail Line, the
bridge owner, requested to change the
name of the bridge to a locally
recognized name and to change the
current operating schedule due to
reduced marine traffic using the
waterway. The modified rule would
change the name of the bridge, allow the
bridge to be maintained in the closed to
navigation position and remove the
requirement for fog signals at the bridge.
We invite your comments on this
proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and relate material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
May 28, 2024.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2023–0969 using Federal Decision
Making 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. This notice of proposed
rulemaking with its plain-language, 100
word or less proposed rule summary
will be available in this same docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email Danny McReynolds,
Bridge Management Specialist
Thirteenth District, Coast Guard;
telephone 206–220–7234, email, d13smb-d13-bridges@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CBRL Coos Bay Rail Line
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(Advance, Supplemental)
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:32 Apr 09, 2024
Jkt 262001
The Coos Bay Rail Line (CBRL) owns
and operates the Central Oregon and
Pacific railroad bridge across the
Umpqua River at mile 11.5. The CBRL
requested to change the subject bridge
name to the Umpqua River railroad
bridge, which is a more recognizable
local name. The Central Oregon and
Pacific railroad bridge will be referred to
as the Umpqua River railroad bridge for
the rest of this NPRM. Umpqua River
railroad bridge is maintained in the
open to navigation position. We are
proposing to change 33 CFR 117.893(b)
to maintain the Umpqua River railroad
bridge in the closed to navigation
position and open to marine vessels
with a minimum of two-hours’ advance
notice. In the closed to navigation
position, the bridge provides 15 feet of
vertical clearance above high water. The
Umpqua River has experienced a
reduction in marine traffic using the
waterway while CBRL has experienced
an increase in rail traffic that requires
the bridge span to be in the closed
position. Vessels that regularly request
draw openings are two fishing vessels
named Pearl J and Pacific Marit. These
vessels transit upriver to a repair
facility, and after repairs, the vessels
transit down river to their normal
moorings. The proposed regulation
change would allow the Umpqua River
railroad bridge to be maintained in the
closed to navigation position to marine
vessels, and the bridge will open with
at least two-hours’ notice via the phone
number posted on the bridge. The
phone number to contact CBRL will be
published in the Local Notice to
Mariners.
Currently the bridge operates fog
signals to warn vessels when the bridge
is cycled closed and open during
reduced visibility. This proposed
regulation change would open the
subject bridge on request from mariners,
and therefore, the mariner would know
the bridge is open and have no need to
be warned of the position of the draw
during fog or any reduced visibility type
of weather.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
This proposed rule would amend the
operating schedule of the Umpqua River
railroad bridge by allowing the bridge to
remain in the closed to navigation
position and would require two-hours’
advance notice for all draw openings.
The rule is necessary to balance the
needs of the railroad by reducing the
need to frequently cycle the draw closed
for rail traffic and back open for marine
traffic, while still maintaining the
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
reasonable needs of navigation. Over the
years the bridge has had multiple
owners, but the bridge name in the Code
of Federal Regulations has not changed.
Changing the bridge name to the
proposed name will alleviate the need
of a future rule change if the railroad
ownership changes. Vessels able to
transit under the bridge without an
opening may do so at any time.
This regulatory action determination
is based on the ability for the Umpqua
River railroad bridge to open on signal
after the CBRL has received at least twohours’ notice by telephone. The Coast
Guard has made this finding
understanding that the proposed change
allows any vessel that needs a
drawbridge opening to transit through
the Umpqua River railroad bridge with
the proper advance notice during clear
visibility or reduced visibility. Changing
the position of the draw to be
maintained closed to mariners, vice
open to mariners, would allow all
mariners to know the draw is always
closed except when a signal is given to
open the draw.
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.
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.
This proposed rule has not been
designated a ‘‘significant regulatory
action,’’ under section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866, as amended by Executive
Order 14094 (Modernizing Regulatory
Review). 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).
This regulatory action determination
is based on the ability that vessels can
still transit the bridge given advanced
notice.
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
E:\FR\FM\10APP1.SGM
10APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 70 / Wednesday, April 10, 2024 / Proposed Rules
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 section. 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.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
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
Governments
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:32 Apr 09, 2024
Jkt 262001
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 will not result in such an
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of
this proposed rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023–01, Rev.1,
associated implementing instructions,
and Environmental Planning Policy
COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which
guide the Coast Guard in complying
with the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–
4370f). The Coast Guard has determined
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 promulgates the operating
regulations or procedures for
drawbridges. Normally such actions are
categorically excluded from further
review, under paragraph L49, of Chapter
3, Table 3–1 of the U.S. Coast Guard
Environmental Planning
Implementation Procedures.
Neither a Record of Environmental
Consideration nor a Memorandum for
the Record are 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.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
25199
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation.
Submitting comments. We encourage
you to submit comments through the
Federal Decision Making Portal at
https://www.regulations.gov. To do so,
go to https://www.regulations.gov, type
USCG–2023–0969 in the search box and
click ‘‘Search.’’ Next, look for this
document in the Search Results column,
and click on it. Then click on the
Comment option. 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.
Viewing material in docket. To view
documents mentioned in this proposed
rule as being available in the docket,
find the docket as described in the
previous paragraph, and then select
‘‘Supporting & Related Material’’ in the
Document Type column. Public
comments will also be placed in our
online docket and can be viewed by
following instructions on the https://
www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked
Questions web page. Also, 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 of any posting or updates to
the docket.
We review all comments received, but
we will only post comments that
address the topic of the proposed rule.
We may choose not to post off-topic,
inappropriate, or duplicate comments
that we receive.
Personal information. We accept
anonymous comments. Comments we
post to https://www.regulations.gov will
include any personal information you
have provided. For more about privacy
and submissions in response to this
document, see DHS’s eRulemaking
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226,
March 11, 2020).
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;
and DHS Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision
No. 01.3.
2. Amend § 117.893 by revising
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
■
§ 117.893
*
E:\FR\FM\10APP1.SGM
*
Umpqua River.
*
10APP1
*
*
25200
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 70 / Wednesday, April 10, 2024 / Proposed Rules
(b) The draw of the Umpqua River
railroad bridge, mile 11.5 at Reedsport,
shall open on signal if at least twohours’ notice is given via telephone.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: April 4, 2024.
Charles E. Fosse,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2024–07578 Filed 4–9–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R08–OAR–2022–0536; FRL–11829–
01–R8]
Air Plan Approval; Wyoming;
Revisions to Regional Haze State
Implementation Plan
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of
Wyoming on December 30, 2022, and
supplemented on August 31, 2023, and
November 16, 2023, addressing regional
haze (Wyoming 2022 SIP revision). The
Wyoming 2022 SIP revision replaces
Wyoming’s previously approved sourcespecific nitrogen oxide (NOX)
determination for PacifiCorp’s Jim
Bridger power plant (Jim Bridger) Units
1 and 2 of 0.07 lb/MMBtu for each unit
associated with the installation of
selective catalytic reduction (SCR)
controls to address the long-term
strategy. Specifically, the Wyoming
2022 SIP revision finds that conversion
from coal-firing to natural gas-firing,
together with NOX emission and heat
input limits of 0.12 lb/MMBtu (30-day
rolling average), 1,314 tons/year, and
21,900,000 MMBtu/year, respectively,
allows for identical reasonable progress
during the first planning period as the
installation SCR controls. Separately,
we are also proposing to approve
Wyoming’s monthly and annual NOX
and sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions
limits for Jim Bridger Units 1–4. The
EPA is proposing this action pursuant to
sections 110 and 169A of the Clean Air
Act (CAA).
DATES: Comments: Written comments
must be received on or before May 10,
2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08–
OAR–2022–0536, to the Federal
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:32 Apr 09, 2024
Jkt 262001
Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from https://
www.regulations.gov. The EPA may
publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information 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://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
will be publicly available only in hard
copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available electronically in
https://www.regulations.gov. Please
email or call the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section if
you need to make alternative
arrangements for access to the docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jaslyn Dobrahner, Air and Radiation
Division, EPA, Region 8, Mailcode 8P–
ARD, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver,
Colorado 80202–1129, telephone
number: (303) 312–6252, email address:
dobrahner.jaslyn@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document wherever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
the EPA.
I. What action is the EPA proposing?
II. Background
A. Requirements of the Clean Air Act and
the EPA’s Regional Haze Rule
B. Best Available Retrofit Technology
(BART)
C. Long-Term Strategy and Reasonable
Progress Requirements
D. Consultation With Federal Land
Managers (FLMs)
E. Monitoring, Recordkeeping, and
Reporting
III. Wyoming’s Regional Haze SIP Submittals
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
A. Background and Wyoming’s Initial
Regional Haze SIP
B. November 2017 Regional Haze Progress
Report
C. May 2020 Regional Haze SIP Revision
D. December 2022 Regional Haze SIP
Revision
E. Wyoming’s Reassessment of Reasonable
Progress Under Long-Term Strategy
1. Costs of Compliance
2. Time Necessary for Compliance
3. Energy and Non-Air Quality
Environmental Impacts of Compliance
4. Remaining Useful Life
5. Reasonable Progress Demonstration
F. Summary of Wyoming’s Additional
Proposed Revisions to the Emission
Limits for Jim Bridger
IV. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed
Approval of Wyoming’s Regional Haze
SIP Revisions
A. The EPA’s Proposed Approval of
Wyoming’s Reasonable Progress
Determination for Jim Bridger Units 1
and 2
1. Basis for the EPA’s Proposed Approval
a. Costs of Compliance
b. Other Statutory Factors
c. Analysis of Projected Emissions
Reductions Achievable
2. Summary of the EPA’s Evaluation of
Wyoming’s Reasonable Progress
Demonstration
B. The EPA’s Proposed Approval of
Wyoming’s Long-Term Strategy for Jim
Bridger Units 1 and 2
C. Monthly and Annual NOX and SO2
Emission Limits for Jim Bridger Units 1–
4
D. Monitoring, Recordkeeping, and
Reporting
E. Consultation With Federal Land
Managers
V. Clean Air Act Section 110(l)
VI. Summary of the EPA’s Proposed Action
VII. Incorporation by Reference
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What action is the EPA proposing?
The Jim Bridger power plant is
located in Sweetwater County,
Wyoming, and is owned in part, and
operated, by PacifiCorp. The power
plant is composed of four 530 megawatt
(MW) tangentially fired boilers burning
pulverized coal for a total net generating
capacity of 2,120 MW.
On January 30, 2014, the EPA
promulgated a final rule titled,
‘‘Approval, Disapproval and
Promulgation of Implementation Plans;
State of Wyoming; Regional Haze State
Implementation Plan; Federal
Implementation Plan for Regional
Haze,’’ approving, in part, a regional
haze SIP revision submitted by the State
of Wyoming on January 12, 2011 (2014
final rule).1 In the 2014 final rule, the
EPA approved Wyoming’s
determination to require low-NOX
burners (LNB) and separated overfire air
(SOFA) at Jim Bridger Units 1–4, with
1 79
E:\FR\FM\10APP1.SGM
FR 5032 (January 30, 2014).
10APP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 70 (Wednesday, April 10, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25198-25200]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-07578]
[[Page 25198]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG-2023-0969]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Umpqua River, Reedsport, OR
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the name and operating
schedule that governs the Central Oregon and Pacific railroad bridge
across the Umpqua River, mile 11.5, at Reedsport, OR. Coos Bay Rail
Line, the bridge owner, requested to change the name of the bridge to a
locally recognized name and to change the current operating schedule
due to reduced marine traffic using the waterway. The modified rule
would change the name of the bridge, allow the bridge to be maintained
in the closed to navigation position and remove the requirement for fog
signals at the bridge. We invite your comments on this proposed
rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and relate material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before May 28, 2024.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2023-0969 using Federal Decision Making 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. This notice of proposed rulemaking with its plain-
language, 100 word or less proposed rule summary will be available in
this same docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email Danny McReynolds, Bridge Management Specialist
Thirteenth District, Coast Guard; telephone 206-220-7234, email, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CBRL Coos Bay Rail Line
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Advance, Supplemental)
Sec. Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis
The Coos Bay Rail Line (CBRL) owns and operates the Central Oregon
and Pacific railroad bridge across the Umpqua River at mile 11.5. The
CBRL requested to change the subject bridge name to the Umpqua River
railroad bridge, which is a more recognizable local name. The Central
Oregon and Pacific railroad bridge will be referred to as the Umpqua
River railroad bridge for the rest of this NPRM. Umpqua River railroad
bridge is maintained in the open to navigation position. We are
proposing to change 33 CFR 117.893(b) to maintain the Umpqua River
railroad bridge in the closed to navigation position and open to marine
vessels with a minimum of two-hours' advance notice. In the closed to
navigation position, the bridge provides 15 feet of vertical clearance
above high water. The Umpqua River has experienced a reduction in
marine traffic using the waterway while CBRL has experienced an
increase in rail traffic that requires the bridge span to be in the
closed position. Vessels that regularly request draw openings are two
fishing vessels named Pearl J and Pacific Marit. These vessels transit
upriver to a repair facility, and after repairs, the vessels transit
down river to their normal moorings. The proposed regulation change
would allow the Umpqua River railroad bridge to be maintained in the
closed to navigation position to marine vessels, and the bridge will
open with at least two-hours' notice via the phone number posted on the
bridge. The phone number to contact CBRL will be published in the Local
Notice to Mariners.
Currently the bridge operates fog signals to warn vessels when the
bridge is cycled closed and open during reduced visibility. This
proposed regulation change would open the subject bridge on request
from mariners, and therefore, the mariner would know the bridge is open
and have no need to be warned of the position of the draw during fog or
any reduced visibility type of weather.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
This proposed rule would amend the operating schedule of the Umpqua
River railroad bridge by allowing the bridge to remain in the closed to
navigation position and would require two-hours' advance notice for all
draw openings. The rule is necessary to balance the needs of the
railroad by reducing the need to frequently cycle the draw closed for
rail traffic and back open for marine traffic, while still maintaining
the reasonable needs of navigation. Over the years the bridge has had
multiple owners, but the bridge name in the Code of Federal Regulations
has not changed. Changing the bridge name to the proposed name will
alleviate the need of a future rule change if the railroad ownership
changes. Vessels able to transit under the bridge without an opening
may do so at any time.
This regulatory action determination is based on the ability for
the Umpqua River railroad bridge to open on signal after the CBRL has
received at least two-hours' notice by telephone. The Coast Guard has
made this finding understanding that the proposed change allows any
vessel that needs a drawbridge opening to transit through the Umpqua
River railroad bridge with the proper advance notice during clear
visibility or reduced visibility. Changing the position of the draw to
be maintained closed to mariners, vice open to mariners, would allow
all mariners to know the draw is always closed except when a signal is
given to open the draw.
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.
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. This proposed rule has not been designated a
``significant regulatory action,'' under section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing
Regulatory Review). 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).
This regulatory action determination is based on the ability that
vessels can still transit the bridge given advanced notice.
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
[[Page 25199]]
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
section. 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 Governments
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.
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 an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this
proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01, Rev.1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning Policy COMDTINST 5090.1
(series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f). The
Coast Guard has determined 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 promulgates the
operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. Normally such
actions are categorically excluded from further review, under paragraph
L49, of Chapter 3, Table 3-1 of the U.S. Coast Guard Environmental
Planning Implementation Procedures.
Neither a Record of Environmental Consideration nor a Memorandum
for the Record are 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.
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.
Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through
the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To
do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2023-0969 in the
search box and click ``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the
Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment
option. 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.
Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this
proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as
described in the previous paragraph, and then select ``Supporting &
Related Material'' in the Document Type column. Public comments will
also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following
instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked
Questions web page. Also, 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 of any posting or updates to the docket.
We review all comments received, but we will only post comments
that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may choose not to post
off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that we receive.
Personal information. We accept anonymous comments. Comments we
post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal
information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions
in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking System of Records
notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).
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; and DHS Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.3.
0
2. Amend Sec. 117.893 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 117.893 Umpqua River.
* * * * *
[[Page 25200]]
(b) The draw of the Umpqua River railroad bridge, mile 11.5 at
Reedsport, shall open on signal if at least two-hours' notice is given
via telephone.
* * * * *
Dated: April 4, 2024.
Charles E. Fosse,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2024-07578 Filed 4-9-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
