Document ID: USCG-2021-0099-0002
Agency: uscg
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Okeechobee Waterway, Indiantown, FL
Posted Date: 2021-04-12T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 68 (Monday, April 12, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18929-18932]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-07434]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2021-0099]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Okeechobee Waterway, Indiantown, 
FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

[[Page 18930]]

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating schedule that 
governs the Seaboard System Railroad Bridge, across the Okeechobee 
Waterway, mile 28.2, at Indiantown, Florida. This proposed change would 
allow the swing bridge to be remotely operated, change the start and 
end times for advance notification for an opening during the overnight 
hours and update the name of the bridge. The Coast Guard is seeking 
comments from the public regarding the proposed changes.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before June 11, 2021.

ADDRESSES:  You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2021-0099 using the 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 on this proposed 
rule, call or email LT Samuel Rodriguez-Gonzalez, U.S. Coast Guard, 
Sector Miami Waterways Management Division; telephone 305-535-4307, 
email Samuel.Rodriguez-Gonzalez@uscg.mil.

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 (Advance, Supplemental)
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code
FL Florida

II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis

    The Seaboard System Railroad Bridge across the Okeechobee Waterway, 
mile 28.2, at Indiantown, Florida is a swing bridge with a seven foot 
vertical clearance at mean high water in the closed position. 
Navigation on the waterway is commercial and recreational. The 
operating schedule for the bridge is set forth in 33 CFR 117.317(e).
    The bridge owner, CSX Transportation, requested the Coast Guard 
consider allowing the railroad swing bridge to be remotely operated, 
and modify the hours when the three hour advance notice is required for 
an opening. Additionally, the name of the swing bridge would be updated 
to reflect the current bridge owner.
    On March 5, 2021, the Coast Guard published a Test Deviation 
entitled ``Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Okeechobee Waterway, 
Indiantown, FL'' in the Federal Register (86 FR 12821). The comment 
period for the Test Deviation expires on or before April 29, 2021. Zero 
comments have been received as of March 26, 2021.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The proposed rule will allow the swing bridge to be remotely 
monitored and operated. The swing bridge will remain in the open to 
navigation position during daylight hours and close only for the 
passage of rail traffic. The start of the three hour advance notice for 
an opening will begin earlier each evening and end one hour later each 
morning. The time changes for the three hour advance notice would align 
with the operating schedule of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 
Locks along this portion of the Okeechobee Waterway. The proposed 
changes will allow for the swing bridge to operate more efficiently 
while taking into account the reasonable needs of navigation. 
Additionally, the name of the swing bridge would be updated to reflect 
the current bridge owner.
    This proposed change would still allow vessels that are capable of 
transiting under the bridge, without an opening, to do so at any time 
and vessels can still transit the bridge when advanced notice is given. 
Vessels in distress and public vessels of the United States must be 
allowed to pass at any time.

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.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the ability that 
vessels can still transit the bridge given advanced notice and 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.
    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

[[Page 18931]]

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.

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.

    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 Department of 
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Amend Sec.  117.317 by revising paragraph (e) to read as follows:

Sec.  117.317  Okeechobee Waterway.

* * * * *
    (e) Seaboard System Railroad bridge, mile 28.2 at Indiantown. The 
draw of the CSX Railroad Bridge, mile 28.2 at Indiantown, FL, shall 
operate as follows:
    (1) The swing bridge is not tendered locally, but will be monitored 
and operated by a remote operator.
    (2) Marine radio communication shall be maintained, by the remote 
operator, with mariners near the bridge for the safety of navigation. 
Visual monitoring of the waterway shall be maintained with the use of 
cameras. Detection sensors shall be installed for the detection of 
vessels entering the radius of the swing span of the bridge while in 
operation.
    (3) From 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., the bridge will be maintained in the 
open to navigation position and will display green lights to indicate 
that the span is fully open.
    (4) When a train approaches, the remote operator shall monitor for 
vessels in the vicinity of the bridge. Provided the sensors do not 
detect a vessel entering the swing radius of the bridge, the operator 
shall initiate the closing sequence, which includes the sounding of a 
horn. The span will remain in the closed position for the entire time 
the track circuit is occupied displaying red lights.
    (5) After the train has cleared the track circuit, the span shall 
open and green lights will be displayed.
    (6) From 7 p.m. to 7 a.m., the bridge will be in the closed to 
navigation position and will open if at least a three hour advance 
notice is requested via marine radio channel 9 VHF or telephone (813) 
677-3974.
    (7) The bridge shall not be operated from the remote location in 
the following events: Failure or obstruction of the detection sensors, 
remote actuation systems, cameras, or marine radio communications, or 
when directed by the Coast Guard. In these situations, a bridge 
operator must be on-site and locally operate the bridge.
* * * * *

[[Page 18932]]

    Dated: April 6, 2021.
Eric C. Jones,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander Seventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2021-07434 Filed 4-9-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P