[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 5, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7842-7844]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-03904]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2017-0857]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; St. Johns River, Putnam County, 
FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating schedule that 
governs the Buffalo Bluff CSX Railroad Bridge across the St. Johns 
River, mile 94.5, at Satsuma, Putnam County, FL. The proposed 
rulemaking would allow the bridge to be remotely monitored and operated 
from the CSX Railroad Bridge across the Ortega River (McGirts Creek) 
located at mile 1.1 on the Ortega River. The proposed rule would also 
allow the draw to remain in the full, open position unless a train is 
in the circuit.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before May 6, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2017-0857 using Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for 
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for 
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed 
rule, call or email LT Emily T. Sysko, Sector Jacksonville, Waterways 
Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 904-714-7616, 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 (Advance, Supplemental)
Pub. L. Public Law
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis

    The bridge owner, CSX Transportation, requested the Coast Guard 
consider allowing remote operation of the Buffalo Bluff CSX Railroad 
Bridge across the St. Johns River, mile 94.5, at Satsuma, Putnam 
County, Florida. On April 27, 2017, the Coast Guard published a notice 
of temporary deviation from drawbridge regulation with request for 
comments in the Federal Register (82 FR 08886) to test proposed 
changes. No comments were received during the test period.
    The Buffalo Bluff CSX Railroad Bridge across the St. Johns River is 
a bascule bridge. The bridge is currently manned and maintained in the 
open position. It has a vertical clearance of 7 feet at mean high water 
in the closed position and a horizontal clearance of 90 feet.
    The Coast Guard is issuing this NPRM under authority 33 U.S.C. 499.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating schedule that 
governs the Buffalo Bluff CSX Railroad Bridge across St. Johns River, 
mile 94.5, at Satsuma, Putnam County, FL. The bridge is currently 
manned and maintained in the open position.
    This proposed rule would allow the bridge to be remotely monitored 
and operated. Visual monitoring of the waterway shall be maintained 
with the use of cameras and the detection of vessels under the span 
shall be accomplished with detection sensors. Marine radio 
communication shall be maintained with mariners near the bridge for the 
safety of navigation. The remote tender may also be contacted via 
telephone at (386) 649-8538. The span is normally in the fully open 
position and will display green lights to indicate that the span is 
fully open. When a train approaches, the remote tender shall monitor 
for vessels approaching the bridge. The remote tender shall warn 
approaching vessels via marine radio, channel 9 VHF of a bridge 
lowering. Provided the sensors do not detect a vessel under the span, 
the tender shall initiate the span lowering sequence, which includes 
the sounding of a horn and the displaying of red lights. The span will 
remain in the down position for a minimum of eight minutes or for the 
entire time the approach track circuit is occupied. After the train has 
cleared the bridge track circuit, the span shall open and the green 
lights will be displayed. This proposed rule would allow vessels to 
pass through the bridge while taking into account the reasonable needs 
of other modes of transportation.

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 and we discuss 
First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the 
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if 
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize 
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control 
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This NPRM has not been 
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 
12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt 
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    The economic impact of this proposed rule is not significant for 
the following reasons: (1) The draw will remain open

[[Page 7843]]

for vessel traffic except when trains are passing; and (2) vessels that 
can transit under the bridge without an opening may do so at anytime.

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.
    We have considered the impact of this proposed rule on small 
entities. While some owners or operators of vessels intending to 
transit the bridge may be small entities, for the reasons stated in 
section IV.A above this proposed rule would not have a significant 
economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have 
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see 
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what 
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small 
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect 
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you 
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, 
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small 
entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any 
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Government

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and 
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism 
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 
13132.
    Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under 
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on 
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If 
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or 
Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary 
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may 
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for 
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule will not 
result in such an 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 paragraph L 49 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 
023-01-001-01, Rev. 01.
    A preliminary Record of Environmental Consideration and a 
Memorandum for the Record are not required for this proposed rule. We 
seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a 
significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. 
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that 
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or 
security of people, places or vessels.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, 
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment 
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If 
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which 
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or 
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be 
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate 
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted 
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the 
docket, visit http://www.regulations.gov/privacynotice.
    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in this docket 
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that 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:


[[Page 7844]]


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

0
2. Amend Sec.  117.325 by adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  117.325   St. Johns River.

* * * * *
    (c) The draw for the Buffalo Bluff CSX automated Railroad Bridge, 
St. Johns River, mile 94.5 at Satsuma, Putnam County, FL shall operate 
as follows:
    (1) The bridge is not tendered locally, but will be operated and 
monitored by a remote tender;
    (2) The bridge shall have local and mechanical override 
capabilities over the remote operation;
    (3) Marine radio communication shall be maintained with mariners 
near the bridge for the safety of navigation. Visual monitoring of the 
waterway shall be maintained with the use of cameras and the detection 
of vessels under the span shall be accomplished with detection sensors;
    (4) The span is normally in the fully open position and will 
display green lights to indicate that the span is fully open;
    (5) When a train approaches, the remote tender shall monitor for 
vessels approaching the bridge. The remote tender shall warn 
approaching vessels via marine radio, channel 9 VHF of a bridge 
lowering. The remote tender may also be contacted via telephone at 
(386) 649-8538;
    (6) Provided the sensors do not detect a vessel under the span, the 
tender shall initiate the span lowering sequence, which includes the 
sounding of a horn and the displaying of red lights. The span will 
remain in the down position for a minimum of eight minutes or for the 
entire time the approach track circuit is occupied; and
    (7) After the train has cleared the bridge track circuit, the span 
shall open and the green lights will be displayed.

    Dated: February 20, 2019.
Peter J. Brown,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard 
District.
[FR Doc. 2019-03904 Filed 3-4-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P