[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 142 (Thursday, July 23, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44494-44496]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-15385]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG-2020-0137]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Middle River, Near Discovery
Bay, CA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the operating schedule that
governs the Woodward Island Bridge across Middle River, mile 11.8, near
Discovery Bay, CA. The proposed operating schedule change will require
the removable span to open for vessels engaged in emergency levee
repairs. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before October 21, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2020-0137 using Federal e-Rulemaking 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email Carl T. Hausner, Chief, Bridge
Section, Eleventh Coast Guard District; telephone 510-437-3516, email
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
OMB Office of Management and Budget
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Sec. Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis
On September 20, 2017 the U.S. Coast Guard issued San Joaquin
County a permit to construct the new removable span Woodward Island
Bridge across Middle River, mile 11.8, near Discovery Bay, CA.
Construction was completed on January 23, 2020. The new bridge provides
30 feet of vertical clearance in the closed-to-navigation position,
unlimited vertical clearance when the span is removed, and 83 feet of
horizontal clearance, dolphin to dolphin, measured normal to the
centerline of the channel. The opening requirement for the newly
constructed Woodward Island Bridge over Middle River is currently
governed by 33 CFR 117.5, which requires prompt and full opening for
the passage of vessels when a request or signal to open is given.
A three-year navigational analysis of that portion of Middle River
was conducted between 2000 and 2003. The results of the analysis
indicated the newly constructed bridge would meet the reasonable needs
of recreational vessels that normally use the waterway. Vessels which
cannot transit the bridge in the closed position have an alternate
route to reach the opposite side of the bridge.
The Woodward Island Bridge was designed with a removable span to
allow emergency vessels engaged in levee repair to request an opening
when necessary. Since most recreational vessels can transit the new
Woodward Island Bridge and there is an alternate route around the
bridge, there is no need for an ``open on demand'' regulation as
prescribed in 33 CFR 117.5.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes to change the operating schedule that
governs the Woodward Island Bridge across Middle River, mile 11.8, near
Discovery Bay, CA. This proposed rule change would implement
regulations for the bridge to only open for vessels engaged in
emergency levee repairs. The regulatory text we are proposing appears
at the end of this document.
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
[[Page 44495]]
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.
This regulatory action determination is based on the ability of
vessels to still transit underneath the bridge while the removable span
is in place.
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.
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 (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
Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1.
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.
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 https://www.regulations.gov. 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.
We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and 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).
Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in this docket
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at https://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.
[[Page 44496]]
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; DHS Delegation No.
0170.1.
0
2. Amend Sec. 117.171 by revising paragraph (c) and adding paragraph
(d) to read as follows:
Sec. 117.171 Middle River.
* * * * *
(c) The removable span of the Woodward Island Bridge, mile 11.8
near Discovery Bay, shall be removed as soon as possible upon
notification by the District Commander that an emergency exists which
requires its removal.
(d) The California Route 4 Bridge, mile 15.1, between Victoria
Island and Drexler Tract need not open for the passage of vessels.
Dated: July 9, 2020.
Joseph R. Buzzella,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2020-15385 Filed 7-22-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P