Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Indiana Harbor Canal, East Chicago, IN, 47328-47330 [2020-15887]

Download as PDF 47328 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 151 / Wednesday, August 5, 2020 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG–2020–0235] RIN 1625–AA09 Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Indiana Harbor Canal, East Chicago, IN Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: ACTION: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating schedule that governs the Elgin, Joliet, and Eastern Railroad Bridge, mile 0.68, and the Elgin, Joliet, and Eastern Railroad Bridge, mile 1.89, both over the Indiana Harbor Canal near the town of East Chicago, IN. Canadian National, the owner and operator of these bridges has requested to stop continual drawtender service to both bridges and operate the bridges only while trains are crossing the bridge. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before October 5, 2020. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG– 2020–0235 using 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. SUMMARY: If you have questions on this proposed rule, call or email: Mr. Lee D. Soule, Bridge Management Specialist, Ninth Coast Guard District; telephone 216– 902–6085, email Lee.D.Soule@uscg.mil. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: I. Table of Abbreviations jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register IGLD85 International Great Lakes Datum of 1985 LWD Low Water Datum based on IGLD85 OMB Office of Management and Budget NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Advance, Supplemental) § Section U.S.C. United States Code II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis All drawbridges over the Indiana Harbor Canal are required to open on signal and there are no previous rulemakings to discuss. The Elgin, Joliet, and Eastern Railroad Bridge, mile VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:07 Aug 04, 2020 Jkt 250001 0.68, and the Elgin, Joliet, and Eastern Railroad Bridge, mile 1.89, both over the Indiana Harbor Canal, currently open on signal and are manned by a drawtender at each bridge. The rail traffic at both bridges has decreased to approximately three trains a week and the bridge owner has requested to discontinue continuous drawtender service. The operation of the bridges should remain transparent to the vessels navigating the waterway. The Indiana Harbor Canal is a commercial waterway that serves several industries near the city of East Chicago, IN. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in cooperation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency are currently improving the width and depth of the waterway to allow larger vessels to use the waterway. Currently the waterway is used by commercial tug and barge traffic; however, larger international oil tankers and bulk transfer vessels have shown interest in establishing docks above the Indianapolis Boulevard Bridge, mile 2.59. We have no reports of recreational vessel traffic in this waterway. The Elgin, Joliet, and Eastern Railroad Bridge, mile 0.68, Indiana Harbor Canal is a single leaf bascule bridge that provides a vertical clearance of 7 feet above LWD in the closed position and the Elgin, Joliet, and Eastern Railroad Bridge, mile 1.89, over the Indiana Harbor Canal is a single leaf bascule bridge that provides a vertical clearance of 5 feet above LWD in the closed position. Both bridges provide an unlimited clearance in the open position. III. Discussion of Proposed Rule The proposed rule will establish the procedures to move the bridge to allow rail traffic to cross the bridge while giving notice to the vessels transiting the waterway that the bridge will be lowering. Ten minutes before the bridge is lowered for train traffic a crewmember from the train will initiate a SECURITE call on VHF–FM Marine Channel 16 that the bridge will be lowering for train traffic and invite any concerned mariners to contact the drawtender on VHF–FM Marine Channel 12. The drawtender will also visually monitor for vessel traffic and listen for the standard bridge opening signal of one prolonged blast and one short blast from vessels already transiting the waterway. After the ten minute, warning one last SECURITE will be made that the bridge will be lowering for rail traffic five minutes before lowering. Once the draw tender is satisfied that it is safe the bridge will be lowered for rail traffic. Once the rail PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 traffic has cleared the bridge, the bridge will be raised and locked in the fully open to navigation position. 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 and the only change is the drawtender will only be in attendance to lower the bridge to allow rail traffic to cross and to raise the bridge after rail traffic has cleared the bridge. 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 E:\FR\FM\05AUP1.SGM 05AUP1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 151 / Wednesday, August 5, 2020 / Proposed Rules 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). jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 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 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:07 Aug 04, 2020 Jkt 250001 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 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 47329 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 Correspondence System of Records notice (84 FR 48645, September 26, 2018). 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 1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1; DHS Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add § 117.400 to part 117 to read as follows: ■ § 117.400 Indiana Harbor Canal. (a) Elgin, Joliet, and Eastern Railroad Bridge, 0.68, over the Indiana Harbor Canal need not have a drawtender in continued attendance at the bridge. Ten minutes before the bridge is lowered for train traffic a crewmember from the train will initiate a SECURITE call on VHF–FM Marine Channel 16 that the bridge will be lowering for train traffic and invite any concerned mariners to contact the drawtender on VHF–FM Marine Channel 12. The drawtender will also visually monitor for vessel traffic and listen for the standard bridge opening signal of one prolonged blast and one short blast from vessels already transiting the waterway. After the ten minute warning, another SECURITE shall be made on VHF–FM Marine Channel 16 that the bridge will be lowering for rail traffic, five minutes before lowering. Once the draw tender is satisfied that it is safe, the bridge will be lowered for rail traffic. Once the rail traffic has cleared the bridge, the bridge shall be raised and locked in the fully open to navigation position. (b) Elgin, Joliet, and Eastern Railroad Bridge, mile 1.89, over the Indiana E:\FR\FM\05AUP1.SGM 05AUP1 47330 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 151 / Wednesday, August 5, 2020 / Proposed Rules Harbor Canal need not have a drawtender in continued attendance at the bridge. Ten minutes before the bridge is lowered for train traffic a crewmember from the train will initiate a SECURITE call on VHF–FM Marine Channel 16 that the bridge will be lowering for train traffic and invite any concerned mariners to contact the drawtender on VHF–FM Marine Channel 12. The drawtender will also visually monitor for vessel traffic and listen for the standard bridge opening signal of one prolonged blast and one short blast from vessels already transiting the waterway. After the ten minute warning, another SECURITE shall be made on VHF–FM Marine Channel 16 that the bridge will be lowering for rail traffic, five minutes before lowering. Once the draw tender is satisfied that it is safe, the bridge will be lowered for rail traffic. Once the rail traffic has cleared the bridge, the bridge shall be raised and locked in the fully open to navigation position. Dated: July 17, 2020. D.L. Cottrell, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. 2020–15887 Filed 8–4–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA–HQ–OPP–2020–0053; FRL–10012–32] Receipt of a Pesticide Petition Filed for Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities (June 2020) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Filing of petition and request for comment. AGENCY: This document announces the Agency’s receipt of an initial filing of a pesticide petition requesting the establishment or modification of regulations for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various commodities. DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 4, 2020. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number by one of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: https:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:07 Aug 04, 2020 Jkt 250001 or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. • Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/ DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001. • Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the instructions at https:// www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. Please note that due to the public health emergency the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room was closed to public visitors on March 31, 2020. Our EPA/DC staff will continue to provide customer service via email, phone, and webform. For further information on EPA/DC services, docket contact information and the current status of the EPA/DC and Reading Room, please visit https:// www.epa.gov/dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Goodis, Registration Division (7505P), main telephone number: (703) 305–7090, email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov; or Robert McNally, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), main telephone number: (703) 305–7090, email address: BPPDFRNotices@ epa.gov. The mailing address for each contact person is: Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001. As part of the mailing address, include the contact person’s name, division, and mail code. The division to contact is listed at the end of each pesticide petition summary. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD–ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD–ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting your comments, see the commenting tips at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ comments.html. 3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group, including minority and/or low-income populations, in the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides discussed in this document, compared to the general population. I. General Information II. What action is the Agency taking? A. Does this action apply to me? You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. The following list of North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them. Potentially affected entities may include: • Crop production (NAICS code 111). • Animal production (NAICS code 112). • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311). • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532). EPA is announcing receipt of a pesticide petition filed under section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a, requesting the establishment or modification of regulations in 40 CFR [part 174 and/or part 180] for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various food commodities. The Agency is taking public comment on the request before responding to the petitioner. EPA is not proposing any particular action at this time. EPA has determined that the pesticide petition described in this document contains data or information prescribed in FFDCA section 408(d)(2), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(2); however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at this time or whether the data supports granting of the pesticide petition. After considering the public comments, EPA intends to evaluate whether and what action may be warranted. Additional data may be B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA? 1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\05AUP1.SGM 05AUP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 151 (Wednesday, August 5, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 47328-47330]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-15887]



[[Page 47328]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2020-0235]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Indiana Harbor Canal, East 
Chicago, IN

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating schedule that 
governs the Elgin, Joliet, and Eastern Railroad Bridge, mile 0.68, and 
the Elgin, Joliet, and Eastern Railroad Bridge, mile 1.89, both over 
the Indiana Harbor Canal near the town of East Chicago, IN. Canadian 
National, the owner and operator of these bridges has requested to stop 
continual drawtender service to both bridges and operate the bridges 
only while trains are crossing the bridge.

DATES:  Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before October 5, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2020-0235 using 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: Mr. Lee D. Soule, Bridge Management Specialist, 
Ninth Coast Guard District; telephone 216-902-6085, email 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
IGLD85 International Great Lakes Datum of 1985
LWD Low Water Datum based on IGLD85
OMB Office of Management and Budget
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Advance, Supplemental)
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis

    All drawbridges over the Indiana Harbor Canal are required to open 
on signal and there are no previous rulemakings to discuss. The Elgin, 
Joliet, and Eastern Railroad Bridge, mile 0.68, and the Elgin, Joliet, 
and Eastern Railroad Bridge, mile 1.89, both over the Indiana Harbor 
Canal, currently open on signal and are manned by a drawtender at each 
bridge. The rail traffic at both bridges has decreased to approximately 
three trains a week and the bridge owner has requested to discontinue 
continuous drawtender service. The operation of the bridges should 
remain transparent to the vessels navigating the waterway.
    The Indiana Harbor Canal is a commercial waterway that serves 
several industries near the city of East Chicago, IN. The U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers in cooperation with the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency are currently improving the width and depth of the 
waterway to allow larger vessels to use the waterway. Currently the 
waterway is used by commercial tug and barge traffic; however, larger 
international oil tankers and bulk transfer vessels have shown interest 
in establishing docks above the Indianapolis Boulevard Bridge, mile 
2.59. We have no reports of recreational vessel traffic in this 
waterway.
    The Elgin, Joliet, and Eastern Railroad Bridge, mile 0.68, Indiana 
Harbor Canal is a single leaf bascule bridge that provides a vertical 
clearance of 7 feet above LWD in the closed position and the Elgin, 
Joliet, and Eastern Railroad Bridge, mile 1.89, over the Indiana Harbor 
Canal is a single leaf bascule bridge that provides a vertical 
clearance of 5 feet above LWD in the closed position. Both bridges 
provide an unlimited clearance in the open position.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The proposed rule will establish the procedures to move the bridge 
to allow rail traffic to cross the bridge while giving notice to the 
vessels transiting the waterway that the bridge will be lowering. Ten 
minutes before the bridge is lowered for train traffic a crewmember 
from the train will initiate a SECURITE call on VHF-FM Marine Channel 
16 that the bridge will be lowering for train traffic and invite any 
concerned mariners to contact the drawtender on VHF-FM Marine Channel 
12. The drawtender will also visually monitor for vessel traffic and 
listen for the standard bridge opening signal of one prolonged blast 
and one short blast from vessels already transiting the waterway. After 
the ten minute, warning one last SECURITE will be made that the bridge 
will be lowering for rail traffic five minutes before lowering. Once 
the draw tender is satisfied that it is safe the bridge will be lowered 
for rail traffic. Once the rail traffic has cleared the bridge, the 
bridge will be raised and locked in the fully open to navigation 
position.

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 and the only change is the 
drawtender will only be in attendance to lower the bridge to allow rail 
traffic to cross and to raise the bridge after rail traffic has cleared 
the bridge.

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

[[Page 47329]]

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 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 Correspondence 
System of Records notice (84 FR 48645, September 26, 2018).
    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; DHS Delegation No. 
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  117.400 to part 117 to read as follows:


Sec.  117.400  Indiana Harbor Canal.

    (a) Elgin, Joliet, and Eastern Railroad Bridge, 0.68, over the 
Indiana Harbor Canal need not have a drawtender in continued attendance 
at the bridge. Ten minutes before the bridge is lowered for train 
traffic a crewmember from the train will initiate a SECURITE call on 
VHF-FM Marine Channel 16 that the bridge will be lowering for train 
traffic and invite any concerned mariners to contact the drawtender on 
VHF-FM Marine Channel 12. The drawtender will also visually monitor for 
vessel traffic and listen for the standard bridge opening signal of one 
prolonged blast and one short blast from vessels already transiting the 
waterway. After the ten minute warning, another SECURITE shall be made 
on VHF-FM Marine Channel 16 that the bridge will be lowering for rail 
traffic, five minutes before lowering. Once the draw tender is 
satisfied that it is safe, the bridge will be lowered for rail traffic. 
Once the rail traffic has cleared the bridge, the bridge shall be 
raised and locked in the fully open to navigation position.
    (b) Elgin, Joliet, and Eastern Railroad Bridge, mile 1.89, over the 
Indiana

[[Page 47330]]

Harbor Canal need not have a drawtender in continued attendance at the 
bridge. Ten minutes before the bridge is lowered for train traffic a 
crewmember from the train will initiate a SECURITE call on VHF-FM 
Marine Channel 16 that the bridge will be lowering for train traffic 
and invite any concerned mariners to contact the drawtender on VHF-FM 
Marine Channel 12. The drawtender will also visually monitor for vessel 
traffic and listen for the standard bridge opening signal of one 
prolonged blast and one short blast from vessels already transiting the 
waterway. After the ten minute warning, another SECURITE shall be made 
on VHF-FM Marine Channel 16 that the bridge will be lowering for rail 
traffic, five minutes before lowering. Once the draw tender is 
satisfied that it is safe, the bridge will be lowered for rail traffic. 
Once the rail traffic has cleared the bridge, the bridge shall be 
raised and locked in the fully open to navigation position.

    Dated: July 17, 2020.
D.L. Cottrell,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2020-15887 Filed 8-4-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.