[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