
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 163 (Tuesday, August 23, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52602-52604]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-21457]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0591]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Anacostia River, Washington, DC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the regulations governing 
the operation of the CSX Railroad Vertical Lift Bridge across the 
Anacostia River, mile 3.4 at Washington, DC. The proposed change will 
alter the eight hour advance notice requirement for a bridge opening to 
a 48 hour advance notice requirement for a bridge opening. The 
operating regulation change will give more notice for trains and 
vessels to adjust their schedules accordingly to ensure safe and 
efficient transits across and through the bridge.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before December 21, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2011-0591 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 four methods. 
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 e-mail Lindsey Middleton, Coast Guard; telephone 757-398-
6629, e-mail Lindsey.R.Middleton@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.

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-2011-0591), 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 you 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 as having 
been 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-2011-0591'' 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 8\1/2\ 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 rule based on your comments.

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-2011-0591'' and click 
``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column. 
You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on 
the ground floor of the Department of Transportation 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 comments received into any 
of our dockets by the name of the

[[Page 52603]]

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 for one using one of the four methods specified 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.

Basis and Purpose

    The CSX Railroad Company has requested a change in the operating 
regulation for the CSX Railroad Vertical Lift Bridge, across the 
Anacostia River, mile 3.4, at Washington, DC. The change will replace 
the current eight hour advance notice requirement for a bridge opening 
to a 48 hour advance notice requirement for a bridge opening. The 
bridge is part of a rail line that is used for regular passenger 
service and there are 21 train transits a day across this bridge. 
Therefore, it is necessary that ample time is given to maintain an 
accurate schedule for trains and vessels for a safe and efficient 
travel across and through the bridge.
    The current operating schedule for the bridge is set out in 33 CFR 
117.253(b). The regulation was established in August 2004 and allows 
the bridge to be operated from a remote location, the Benning Yard 
office. The draw of the bridge shall open on signal at all times for 
public vessels of the United States, state and local government 
vessels, commercial vessels and any vessels in an emergency involving 
danger to life or property; between 9 a.m. and 12 p.m., and between 1 
p.m. and 6 p.m. from May 15 through September 30; and between 6 p.m. 
and 7 p.m. from May 15 through September 30 if notice is given to the 
controller no later than 6 p.m. on the day for which the opening is 
requested. At all other times the bridge will open if at least 8 hours 
notice is given.
    The vertical clearance of the bridge is 5 feet at Mean High Water 
in the closed position and 29 feet at Mean High Water in the open 
position. There are 21 train transits across this bridge every day. 
There have been two bridge openings in the past two years for vessels 
taller than five feet.
    We are testing the potential operating regulation adjustment for 
180 days in conjunction with this notice of proposed rulemaking to 
discover any impacts on train transit or water navigation as a result 
of the adjustment. During the test deviation period a bridge opening 
count has been requested from the CSX Railroad Company.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to revise 33 CFR 117.253(b) for the CSX 
Railroad Bridge, mile 3.4 at Washington, DC. Paragraph (b)(1)(iv) would 
change to state the following: At all other times, if at least 48 hours 
notice is given to the controller at the Benning Yard Office. The 
remainder of paragraph (1) and paragraphs (2) through (6) would remain 
the same as currently published.
    Vessels that are able to pass through the bridge in the closed 
position may do so at any time. There are no alternate routes for 
vessels that cannot pass through the bridge in the closed position. The 
Coast Guard will inform waterway users through the Local and Broadcast 
Notices to Mariners.

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 proposed change is expected to have only a minimal impact on 
maritime traffic transiting the bridge. Mariners can plan their trips 
in accordance with the scheduled advance notice requirement for a 
bridge opening to minimize delay.

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.
    This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of 
which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels 
needing to transit through the bridge between October 1 and May 14 at 
all times and those needing to transit between the hours of 7 p.m. and 
9 a.m. and from 12 p.m. to 1 p.m. between May 15 and September 30.
    This action will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: the 
rule adds minimal restrictions to the movement of waterway navigation 
by requiring vessels that are not essential public vessels, vessels 
with dangerous emergencies, or vessels transiting through the bridge at 
specified excluded times to give 48 hours of notice when requesting a 
bridge opening. Vessels that can safely transit under the bridge in the 
closed position may do so at any time.
    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 Lindsey Middleton, Bridge 
Management Specialist, Fifth Coast Guard District, (757) 398-6629 or 
Lindsey.R.Middleton@uscg.mil. 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.

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

[[Page 52604]]

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 (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 rule 
elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not cause 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 between 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 the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it 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.

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

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

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

    2. Revise Sec.  117.253(b)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  117.253  Anacostia River.

* * * * *
    (b)(1) * * *
    (iv) At all other times, if at least 48 hours of notice is given to 
the controller at the Benning Yard Office.
* * * * *

    Dated: July 22, 2011.
William D. Lee,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2011-21457 Filed 8-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


