E9-27354. Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Port of Coos Bay Railroad Bridge, Coos Bay, North Bend, OR  

  • Start Preamble

    AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard proposes to modify the drawbridge operation regulation for the Port of Coos Bay Railroad Bridge, Coos Bay, mile 9.0, at North Bend, Oregon by deleting the requirement for special sound signals used in foggy weather and to change the name of the owner. This rule is necessary to make the sound signals used at the bridge consistent with other bridges in the area and to eliminate the unnecessary special sound signals.

    DATES:

    Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before January 15, 2010.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments identified by the Coast Guard docket number USCG-2009-0840 using any one of the following methods:

    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

    (2) Fax: 202-493-2251.

    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.

    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-366-9329.

    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these methods. See the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on submitting comments.

    Start Further Info

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this proposed rule, call Austin Pratt, Chief, Bridge Section, Waterways Management Branch, Thirteenth Coast Guard District, telephone 206-220-7282, e-mail address william.a.pratt@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

    End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided.

    Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking USCG-2009-0840, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online (http://www.regulations.gov), or by fax, mail or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. If submit a comment online via http://www.regulations.gov,, it will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver or mail your comment, it will be considered received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an e-mail address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.

    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,, click on the “submit a comment” box, which will then become highlighted in blue. In the “Document Type” drop down menu select “Proposed Rules” and insert “USCG-2009-0840” in the “Keyword” box. Click “Search” then click on the balloon shape in the “Actions” column. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 81/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period and may change the proposed rule in view of them.

    Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,, click on the “read comments” box, which will then become highlighted in blue. In the “Keyword” box insert “USCG-2009-0840” and click “Search”. Click the “Open Docket Folder” in the “Actions” column. You may also visit either the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket Management Facility.

    Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into any Start Printed Page 58932of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

    Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting, but you may submit a request using one of the four methods under ADDRESSES. Please explain why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

    Background and Purpose

    The proposed rule would remove the requirement at the Port of Coos Bay Railroad Bridge, Coos Bay, mile 9.0, at North Bend, Oregon for a bell to be rung continuously in foggy weather and for a siren to be sounded in foggy weather when the swingspan is closed. The movable span is normally kept in the open position except for the passage of trains or maintenance work. The proposed rule would also change the regulation to reflect the bridge's current owner as the Port of Coos Bay.

    The bell and siren at this drawbridge are not standard requirements at drawbridges and there is nothing specific to the bridge that warrants the continued use of these special sound signals. Vessel traffic through the swingspan includes tugs and tows and a variety of recreational craft. Oceangoing ship traffic has diminished greatly in recent decades.

    The operating regulations currently in effect for the bridge are found at 33 CFR 117.871. These state that the bridge be maintained normally in the open position except for the passage of trains or maintenance. The aforementioned sound signals are also prescribed.

    Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR 117.871 by deleting the requirements for the Coos Bay Railroad Bridge to use the special sound signals noted above. The rule will also change the regulation to reflect that the bridge's new owner is the Port of Coos Bay. The requirement that the bridge be normally maintained in the open position would not be changed.

    Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

    Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. The Coast Guard has made this finding based on the fact that that the rule will have no known impact on the maritime public.

    Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 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 because it will have no known impact on any vessel traffic.

    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.

    Assistance for Small Entities

    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 so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. 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 Austin Pratt, Chief, Bridge Section, Waterways Management Branch, Thirteenth Coast Guard District, at (206) 220-7282. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

    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).

    Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism.

    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 or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

    Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not affect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights.

    Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

    Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children.

    Indian Tribal Governments

    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 Start Printed Page 58933between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

    Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under that order because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated this as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.

    Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies.

    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

    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 because it simply promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.

    Start List of Subjects

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    • Bridges
    End List of Subjects

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:

    Start Part

    PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

    1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Start Authority

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

    End Authority

    2. Amend § 117.871 to read as follows:

    Coos Bay.

    The draw of the Port of Coos Bay railroad bridge, mile 9.0 at North Bend, shall be maintained in the fully open position, except for the crossing of trains or maintenance.

    Start Signature

    Dated: October 15, 2009.

    G.T. Blore,

    Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard District.

    End Signature End Part End Supplemental Information

    [FR Doc. E9-27354 Filed 11-13-09; 8:45 am]

    BILLING CODE 4910-15-P

Document Information

Comments Received:
0 Comments
Published:
11/16/2009
Department:
Coast Guard
Entry Type:
Proposed Rule
Action:
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
Document Number:
E9-27354
Dates:
Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before January 15, 2010.
Pages:
58931-58933 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket No. USCG-2009-0840
RINs:
1625-AA09: Drawbridge Regulations
RIN Links:
https://www.federalregister.gov/regulations/1625-AA09/drawbridge-regulations
Topics:
Bridges
PDF File:
e9-27354.pdf
CFR: (1)
33 CFR 117.871