Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Illinois Waterway, Joliet, IL, 51132-51134 [2014-19990]
Download as PDF
51132
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 2014 / Proposed Rules
Table of Acronyms
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
§ Section Symbol
U.S.C. United States Code
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG–2014–0365]
RIN 1625–AA09
A. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Illinois Waterway, Joliet, IL
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard proposes to
modify the operating regulations for six
drawbridges, located between river mile
285.8 and river mile 288.7, across the
Illinois Waterway, at Joliet, Illinois. This
rule proposes to consolidate the current
operating regulation, which includes
five on-site bridge tender control
stations, into one centralized control
point for all five drawbridges. This rule
also proposes to add a sixth drawbridge
that will also operate under the
centralized control point. This proposed
action is intended to improve
navigational safety and operational
efficiency in the Joliet area.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
October 27, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2014–0365 using any one of the
following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202–493–2251.
(3) Mail or delivery: 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. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. The telephone number is 202–
366–9329.
See the ‘‘Public Participation and
Request for Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below for instructions on submitting
comments. To avoid duplication, please
use only one of these three methods.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email Mr. Eric Washburn,
Bridge Administrator, Western Rivers,
(314) 269–2378, email Eric.Washburn@
uscg.mil. If you have questions on
viewing or submitting material to the
docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202–366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:09 Aug 26, 2014
Jkt 232001
We encourage you to participate in
this proposed rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All
comments received will be posted,
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided.
1. Submitting comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG–2014–0365),
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 (https://
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 https://
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 email 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
https://www.regulations.gov, type in the
docket number [USCG–2014–0365] in
the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click
‘‘SEARCH’’. Click on ‘‘Submit a
Comment’’ on the line associated with
this rulemaking. If you submit your
comments by mail or hand delivery,
submit them in an unbound format, no
larger than 81⁄2 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2. Viewing comments and documents
To view comments, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number [USCG–2014–0365] in
the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click
‘‘SEARCH’’. Click on Open Docket
Folder on the line associated with this
rulemaking. 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.
3. Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic
form of comments received into any of
our dockets by the name of the
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).
4. Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting regarding this rulemaking. But
you may submit a request for one using
one of the three 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.
B. Regulatory History and Information
Currently, the Illinois Waterway
drawbridge operation regulations
contained in 33 CFR Part 117, Subpart
B—Specific Requirements, 117.393 (c),
state that ‘‘The draws of the McDonough
Street Bridge, mile 287.3; Jefferson
Street Bridge, Mile 287.9; Cass Street
Bridge, Mile 288.1; Jackson Street
Bridge, Mile 288.4; and Ruby Street
Bridge, Mile 288.7; all of Joliet, shall
open on signal, except that they need
not open from 7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and
from 4:15 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. Monday
through Saturday.’’ Additionally, the
Brandon Road Drawbridge, Mile 285.8,
Illinois Waterway, also in Joliet,
currently operates without a special
operating schedule under Subpart B.
On July 12, 2012, the Illinois
Department of Transportation requested
approval of plans to centralize the
bridge tenders for the five drawbridges
listed in 33 CFR 117.393(c), and also to
include the Brandon Road Drawbridge
as a sixth drawbridge operated under
this centralized plan. The Coast Guard
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 2014 / Proposed Rules
determined that centralizing the bridge
tenders and remotely operating the six
Joliet highway drawbridges will not
impede navigation. This determination
is expected to be proven through a test
period before a final rule is put into
place. Additionally, this proposed rule
change has been discussed with
navigation interests on numerous
occasions.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
C. Basis and Purpose
The Illinois Waterway is a navigable
waterway connecting Chicago, Illinois
and Lake Michigan through a
combination of improved natural
waterways and canals with the Upper
Mississippi River at Grafton, Illinois.
This waterway spans a course of 327
miles. The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers operates nine locks on the
Illinois Waterway that provide a safe
and efficient navigation system, carrying
approximately 24 million tons of cargo
each year.
The goal of centralizing the
drawbridge operations is to improve
safety and operations for river and street
traffic as well as the workers who
conduct the operations. As proposed,
centralizing the bridge tenders is
anticipated to also improve the
operating efficiency for all six
drawbridges.
Centralizing the bridge tenders would
have no impact on the existing
regulations regarding hours or methods
of bridge operations. This proposed rule
change is in accordance with the
provisions under 33 CFR 117.42 for
remotely operated and automated
drawbridges and would centralize the
bridge tenders at one local control
station.
D. Discussion of Proposed Rule
This rule proposes a local centralized
control center, adjacent to Jackson Street
Bridge, and bridge tender operation
manned by three bridge tenders at all
times, continuing to operate the five
draw bridges as currently required
under 33 CFR 117.393(c). Additionally,
a sixth drawbridge, the Brandon Road
Drawbridge, Mile 285.8, Illinois
Waterway, would also be operated
through the proposed centralized
control center. The Brandon Road
Drawbridge does not require a special
operating schedule under Subpart B and
will still open on signal or request, but
it would be remotely operated from the
new centralized location under this
proposed rule. The local centralized
bridge tender operation and control
center will be supported by two
dedicated fiber optic communication
systems (one is redundant) with
wireless backup, closed circuit
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:09 Aug 26, 2014
Jkt 232001
television cameras, thermal cameras,
and boat detection equipment at each
bridge. This centralized control center
network will be equipped with a diesel
powered backup generator.
Through the use of multiple closed
circuit television cameras, thermal
(infrared) cameras, and boat detectors,
the bridge operators will have a more
comprehensive overview of vessel
traffic.
The Coast Guard has determined that
centralizing the bridge tenders to a local
control station will not adversely impact
navigation. Rather, this proposed
centralized plan is intended to improve
navigational safety in the Joliet area by
providing bridge tenders a more
comprehensive view of vessel traffic.
E. 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 or executive
orders.
1. 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, as
supplemented by Executive Order
13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require
an assessment of potential costs and
benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Order
12866 or under section 1 of Executive
Order 13563. The Office of Management
and Budget has not reviewed it under
those Orders.
We expect the economic impact of
this rule on commercial traffic operating
on the Illinois Waterway to be minimal.
The operating procedures affected by
this change will create more efficiency
in vessel movement and proposes no
new restrictions but centralizes the
bridge tender operations. Therefore a
full Regulatory Evaluation is
unnecessary.
2. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(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.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
51133
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.
This action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities for the
following reasons: This proposed action
will provide greater efficiency in vessel
movement by centralizing bridge tender
operations which will reduce wait times
for bride openings. This proposed rule
further imposes no new restrictions on
the waterway but merely changes the
bridge tender operations.
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.
3. 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. 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, above. 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.
4. 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).
5. Federalism
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 does
not have implications for federalism.
6. 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
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
51134
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 2014 / Proposed Rules
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places or vessels.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. 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.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
11. 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.
12. Energy Effects
This proposed rule is not a
‘‘significant energy action’’ under
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:09 Aug 26, 2014
Jkt 232001
13. Technical Standards
This proposed rule does not use
technical standards. Therefore, we did
not consider the use of voluntary
consensus standards.
14. 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. This proposed
rule simply promulgates the operating
regulations or procedures for
drawbridges. This rule is categorically
excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph
(32)(e), of the Instruction.
Under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of
the Instruction, an environmental
analysis checklist and a categorical
exclusion determination are not
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.
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 § 117.393(c) to read as
follows:
■
§ 117.393
Illinois Waterway.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) The draws of the McDonough
Street Bridge, mile 287.3; Jefferson
Street Bridge, Mile 287.9; Cass Street
Bridge, Mile 288.1; Jackson Street
Bridge, Mile 288.4; and Ruby Street
Bridge, Mile 288.7; all of Joliet, shall
open on signal, except that they need
not open from 7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and
from 4:15 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. Monday
through Saturday. These five bridges
along with Brandon Road Drawbridge,
Mile 285.8, Illinois Waterway are all
operated from a local centralized
location adjacent to the Jackson Street
Bridge, Mile 288.4. Each of these six
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
bridges is equipped with closed circuit
television cameras, infrared cameras,
and boat detection equipment.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: August 6, 2014.
Kevin S. Cook,
Rear Admiral, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard,
Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2014–19990 Filed 8–26–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
46 CFR Part 7
[Docket No. USCG–2011–0925]
Special Load Line Exemption for the
Gulf of Mexico: Petition for
Rulemaking
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of decision.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
On October 1, 2012, the Coast
Guard published a Notice of Availability
and Request for Public Comment
regarding a petition for a rulemaking
action. The petition requested that the
Coast Guard establish a load lineexempted route in the Gulf of Mexico,
along the western coast of Florida. Upon
review of the comments as well as
analysis of safety considerations and
other factors described in the discussion
section, the Coast Guard has decided
not to proceed with the requested
rulemaking. The public comments, and
the Coast Guard’s reasoning for its
decision, are discussed in this notice.
DATES: This decision was issued on
August 15, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this notice,
contact Mr. Thomas Jordan, Naval
Architecture Division (CG–ENG–2), U.S.
Coast Guard Headquarters, at telephone
202–372–1370, or by email at
thomas.d.jordan@uscg.mil. If you have
questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Cheryl
Collins, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone 202–366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Regulatory History and Background
The purpose of a load line (LL)
assignment is to ensure a vessel is
seaworthy for operation outside the
Boundary Line. Load lines are required
by 46 U.S.C. 5101–5116 and 46 CFR
Subchapter E. In general, the LL
assignment requires that vessels are
robustly constructed, fitted with
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 166 (Wednesday, August 27, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51132-51134]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-19990]
[[Page 51132]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG-2014-0365]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Illinois Waterway, Joliet, IL
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating regulations
for six drawbridges, located between river mile 285.8 and river mile
288.7, across the Illinois Waterway, at Joliet, Illinois. This rule
proposes to consolidate the current operating regulation, which
includes five on-site bridge tender control stations, into one
centralized control point for all five drawbridges. This rule also
proposes to add a sixth drawbridge that will also operate under the
centralized control point. This proposed action is intended to improve
navigational safety and operational efficiency in the Joliet area.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before October 27, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2014-0365 using any one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202-493-2251.
(3) Mail or delivery: 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. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-366-9329.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of these
three methods.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email Mr. Eric Washburn, Bridge Administrator, Western
Rivers, (314) 269-2378, email Eric.Washburn@uscg.mil. If you have
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Cheryl
Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Acronyms
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Sec. Section Symbol
U.S.C. United States Code
A. Public Participation and Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this proposed rulemaking by
submitting comments and related materials. All comments received will
be posted, without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will
include any personal information you have provided.
1. Submitting comments
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2014-0365), 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 (https://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 https://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 email 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 https://www.regulations.gov,
type in the docket number [USCG-2014-0365] in the ``SEARCH'' box and
click ``SEARCH''. Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated
with this rulemaking. 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.
2. Viewing comments and documents
To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number [USCG-2014-0365] in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH''. Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. 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.
3. Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the 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).
4. Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting regarding this
rulemaking. But you may submit a request for one using one of the three
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.
B. Regulatory History and Information
Currently, the Illinois Waterway drawbridge operation regulations
contained in 33 CFR Part 117, Subpart B--Specific Requirements, 117.393
(c), state that ``The draws of the McDonough Street Bridge, mile 287.3;
Jefferson Street Bridge, Mile 287.9; Cass Street Bridge, Mile 288.1;
Jackson Street Bridge, Mile 288.4; and Ruby Street Bridge, Mile 288.7;
all of Joliet, shall open on signal, except that they need not open
from 7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and from 4:15 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. Monday
through Saturday.'' Additionally, the Brandon Road Drawbridge, Mile
285.8, Illinois Waterway, also in Joliet, currently operates without a
special operating schedule under Subpart B.
On July 12, 2012, the Illinois Department of Transportation
requested approval of plans to centralize the bridge tenders for the
five drawbridges listed in 33 CFR 117.393(c), and also to include the
Brandon Road Drawbridge as a sixth drawbridge operated under this
centralized plan. The Coast Guard
[[Page 51133]]
determined that centralizing the bridge tenders and remotely operating
the six Joliet highway drawbridges will not impede navigation. This
determination is expected to be proven through a test period before a
final rule is put into place. Additionally, this proposed rule change
has been discussed with navigation interests on numerous occasions.
C. Basis and Purpose
The Illinois Waterway is a navigable waterway connecting Chicago,
Illinois and Lake Michigan through a combination of improved natural
waterways and canals with the Upper Mississippi River at Grafton,
Illinois. This waterway spans a course of 327 miles. The U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers operates nine locks on the Illinois Waterway that
provide a safe and efficient navigation system, carrying approximately
24 million tons of cargo each year.
The goal of centralizing the drawbridge operations is to improve
safety and operations for river and street traffic as well as the
workers who conduct the operations. As proposed, centralizing the
bridge tenders is anticipated to also improve the operating efficiency
for all six drawbridges.
Centralizing the bridge tenders would have no impact on the
existing regulations regarding hours or methods of bridge operations.
This proposed rule change is in accordance with the provisions under 33
CFR 117.42 for remotely operated and automated drawbridges and would
centralize the bridge tenders at one local control station.
D. Discussion of Proposed Rule
This rule proposes a local centralized control center, adjacent to
Jackson Street Bridge, and bridge tender operation manned by three
bridge tenders at all times, continuing to operate the five draw
bridges as currently required under 33 CFR 117.393(c). Additionally, a
sixth drawbridge, the Brandon Road Drawbridge, Mile 285.8, Illinois
Waterway, would also be operated through the proposed centralized
control center. The Brandon Road Drawbridge does not require a special
operating schedule under Subpart B and will still open on signal or
request, but it would be remotely operated from the new centralized
location under this proposed rule. The local centralized bridge tender
operation and control center will be supported by two dedicated fiber
optic communication systems (one is redundant) with wireless backup,
closed circuit television cameras, thermal cameras, and boat detection
equipment at each bridge. This centralized control center network will
be equipped with a diesel powered backup generator.
Through the use of multiple closed circuit television cameras,
thermal (infrared) cameras, and boat detectors, the bridge operators
will have a more comprehensive overview of vessel traffic.
The Coast Guard has determined that centralizing the bridge tenders
to a local control station will not adversely impact navigation.
Rather, this proposed centralized plan is intended to improve
navigational safety in the Joliet area by providing bridge tenders a
more comprehensive view of vessel traffic.
E. 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 or executive orders.
1. 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,
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Order 12866 or under
section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and Budget
has not reviewed it under those Orders.
We expect the economic impact of this rule on commercial traffic
operating on the Illinois Waterway to be minimal. The operating
procedures affected by this change will create more efficiency in
vessel movement and proposes no new restrictions but centralizes the
bridge tender operations. Therefore a full Regulatory Evaluation is
unnecessary.
2. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (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.
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.
This action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: This
proposed action will provide greater efficiency in vessel movement by
centralizing bridge tender operations which will reduce wait times for
bride openings. This proposed rule further imposes no new restrictions
on the waterway but merely changes the bridge tender operations.
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.
3. 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. 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, above. 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.
4. 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).
5. Federalism
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 does not have implications for federalism.
6. 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
[[Page 51134]]
coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received
without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or
vessels.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. Energy Effects
This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.
13. Technical Standards
This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
14. 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. This proposed rule simply
promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph
(32)(e), of the Instruction.
Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are not 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.
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; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
0
2. Revise Sec. 117.393(c) to read as follows:
Sec. 117.393 Illinois Waterway.
* * * * *
(c) The draws of the McDonough Street Bridge, mile 287.3; Jefferson
Street Bridge, Mile 287.9; Cass Street Bridge, Mile 288.1; Jackson
Street Bridge, Mile 288.4; and Ruby Street Bridge, Mile 288.7; all of
Joliet, shall open on signal, except that they need not open from 7:30
a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and from 4:15 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. Monday through
Saturday. These five bridges along with Brandon Road Drawbridge, Mile
285.8, Illinois Waterway are all operated from a local centralized
location adjacent to the Jackson Street Bridge, Mile 288.4. Each of
these six bridges is equipped with closed circuit television cameras,
infrared cameras, and boat detection equipment.
* * * * *
Dated: August 6, 2014.
Kevin S. Cook,
Rear Admiral, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2014-19990 Filed 8-26-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P