[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