[Federal Register: August 21, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 161)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 48498-48500]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr21au06-27]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD08-06-021]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations; St. Croix River, Prescott, WI
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the regulation governing
the Prescott Highway Bridge, across the St. Croix River, Mile 0.3, at
Prescott, Wisconsin. Under our proposed rule, the drawbridge need not
open for river traffic and may remain in the closed-to-navigation
position from November 1, 2006 to April 1, 2007. This proposed rule
would allow the bridge owners to make necessary repairs to the bridge.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before September 20, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander
(dwb), Eighth Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, 1222 Spruce Street,
St. Louis, MO 63103-2832. Commander (dwb) maintains the public docket
for this rulemaking. Comments and material received from the public, as
well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the
docket, will become part of this docket and will be available for
inspection or copying at room 2.107f in the Robert A. Young Federal
Building at Eighth Coast Guard District, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Roger K. Wiebusch, Bridge
Administrator, (314) 269-2378.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (CGD08-06-
021), indicate the specific section of this document to which each
comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit
all comments and related material in a unbound format, no larger than
8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know
they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during
the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to the Eighth Coast Guard District,
Bridge Branch, at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would
be beneficial. If we determine that a meeting would aid this
rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later
notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
On March 26, 2005, the Wisconsin Department of Transportation
requested a temporary change to the operation of the Prescott Highway
Bridge across the St. Croix River, Mile 0.3 at Prescott, Wisconsin, to
allow the drawbridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position for
a 5-month period while the electrical and hydraulic systems are
overhauled. Navigation on the waterway in vicinity of the bridge
consists of excursion boats and recreational watercraft, neither of
which will be impacted by the closure due to winter weather and frozen
river conditions. Currently, the draw opens on signal for passage of
river traffic from April 1 to October 31, 8 a.m. to midnight; from
midnight to 8 a.m. the draw shall open on signal if notification is
made prior to 11 p.m. From November 1 to March 31, the draw shall open
on signal if at least 24 hours notice is given. The Wisconsin
Department of Transportation requested the drawbridge be permitted to
remain closed to navigation from November 1, 2006, to April 1, 2007.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed rule requires the draw span to be closed to navigation
for five months, November 1, 2006 to April 1, 2007. This closure will
enable workers to rehabilitate critical electrical and hydraulic
systems which control draw span operation. This temporary change will
not cause navigation problems because the closure is only in effect
during the winter months when the river is frozen and vessels are
absent.
Regulatory Evaluation
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.
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
This proposed rule would only be in effect during the coldest
months of the year when ice prevents vessel movements. The impacts on
routine navigation are expected to be minimal.
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 rule
would not
[[Page 48499]]
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This proposed rule would be in effect for 5 months during the
early winter months when the river is frozen over and navigation is
practically at a standstill. The Coast Guard expects the impact of this
action to be minimal.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed 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 proposed 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 could better
evaluate its effect 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 Mr. Roger K. Wiebusch, Bridge
Administrator, Eighth Coast Guard District Bridge Branch, at (314) 269-
2378. 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 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 or more in any
one year. Though this proposed rule will not result in such
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule will not affect 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 proposed rule is not an economically significant rule and
does not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that
may 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 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 Commandant Instruction
M16475.1D, and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive
5100.1, which guide 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 there are no factors in this
case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section
2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, we believe that this rule should
be categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e) of the
Instruction, from further environmental documentation. Under figure 2-
1, paragraph (32)(e) of the Instruction, an ``Environmental Analysis
Check List'' is not required for this rule. Comments on this section
will be considered before we make the final decision on whether to
categorically exclude this rule from further environmental review.
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; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); section 117.255 also issued
under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 Stat. 5039.
2. From November 1, 2006, to April 1, 2007, in Sec. 117.667,
suspend paragraph (a) and add paragraphs (d) and (e) to read as
follows:
Sec. 117.667 St. Croix River.
* * * * *
[[Page 48500]]
(d) The draws of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Bridge,
Mile 0.2, and the Hudson Railroad Bridge, Mile 17.3, shall operate as
follows:
(1) From April 1 to October 31:
(i) 8 a.m. to midnight, the draws shall open on signal;
(ii) Midnight to 8 a.m., the draws shall open on signal if
notification is made prior to 11 p.m.,
(2) From November 1 through March 31, the draw shall open on signal
if at least 24 hours notice is given.
(e) The draw of the Prescott Highway Bridge, Mile 0.3, need not
open for river traffic and may be maintained in the closed-to-
navigation position from November 1, 2006 to April 1, 2007.
Dated: August 7, 2006.
J.R. Whitehead,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6-13777 Filed 8-18-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P