[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 182 (Tuesday, September 21, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 56379-56381]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-21136]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD08-04-018]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; St. Croix River, Wisconsin, 
Minnesota

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, 2005, to April 1, 2006. 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 October 21, 2004.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander, 
Eighth Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, 1222 Spruce Street, St. 
Louis, MO 63103-2832. Commander (obr) 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) 539-3900, extension 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 (CGD08-04-
018), 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 an 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

[[Page 56380]]

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 one 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 May 3, 2004, 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 consists of both commercial 
(excursion boat) and recreational watercraft, which may be minimally 
impacted by the closure period. Currently, the draw opens on signal for 
passage of river traffic from April 1 to October 31, 8 a.m. to 
midnight, except that 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, 
2005, to April 1, 2006.

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. It is not ``significant'' 
under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of 
Homeland Security (DHS).
    The Coast Guard expects that this temporary change to operation of 
the Prescott Highway Bridge will have such a minimal economic impact on 
commercial traffic operating on the St. Croix River that a full 
regulatory evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures of 
DHS is unnecessary. This temporary change will only cause minimal 
interruption of the drawbridge's regular operation, since the change is 
only in effect during the winter months while the river is frozen.

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 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 effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the 
proposed 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) 539-3900, extension 2378.

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 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

[[Page 56381]]

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. It has not been designated a 
significant energy action by the Administrator of the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs. 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 considered the environmental impact of this proposed rule 
and concluded that under figure 2-1, paragraph 32(e), of Commandant 
Instruction M16475.1D, this proposed rule is categorically excluded 
from further environmental documentation. Paragraph 32(e) excludes the 
promulgation of operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges 
from the environmental documentation requirements of the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Since this proposed regulation would 
alter the normal operating conditions of the drawbridge, it falls 
within this exclusion. A ``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' is 
available in the docket for inspection or copying where indicated under 
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

Regulations

    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, 2005, to April 1, 2006, in Sec.  117.667, 
suspend paragraph (a) and add new paragraphs (d) and (e) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  117.667  St. Croix River.

* * * * *
    (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, 2005 to April 1, 2006.

    Dated: September 3, 2004.
R.F. Duncan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 04-21136 Filed 9-20-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P