Document ID: USCG-2022-0303-0001
Agency: uscg
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Trail Creek, Michigan City, IN
Posted Date: 2022-05-25T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 101 (Wednesday, May 25, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31794-31796]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11121]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2022-0303]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Trail Creek, Michigan City, IN

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating schedule that 
governs the Amtrak Railroad Bridge, mile 0.9, over Trail Creek, in 
Michigan City, Indiana, to allow it to operate remotely. The bridge has 
operated remotely since 2003 without inclusion in the CFR and without 
incident or public complaint. We invite your comments on this proposed 
rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before July 25, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2022-0303 using Federal Decision Making 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
Left As viewed from the mouth of the river
LWD Low Water Datum Based on IGLD85
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Advance, Supplemental)
OMB Office of Management and Budget
Right As viewed from the mouth of the river
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis

    The Amtrak Railroad Bridge, mile 0.9, over Trail Creek, in Michigan 
City, Indiana, was authorized to operate remotely by letter during the 
United States Coast Guard's transition from the Department of 
Transportation to the Department of Homeland Security. Inclusion of the 
Amtrak Railroad Bridge, mile 0.9, into the regulations was overlooked 
and this proposed rule will correct that oversight and provide the 
public the opportunity to comment on the bridge operations.
    Trail Creek is 7.3 miles long and used by small powered and 
unpowered recreational vessels, commercial passenger vessels, and 
fishing vessels. Freighters have not utilized the waterway for several 
years. The Amtrak Railroad Bridge, mile 0.9 is a swing railroad bridge 
and provides a horizontal clearance of 41 feet in the right draw and 44 
feet in the left draw and a vertical clearance of 7 feet above

[[Page 31795]]

LWD in the closed position and an unlimited vertical clearance in the 
open position. Each day during the summer, approximately 35 
recreational and commercial fishing vessels transit the Amtrak Railroad 
Bridge, mile 0.9; most of the 35 vessels make daily roundtrips, 
transiting the bridge two times each day.
    In 33 CFR 117.401, the Amtrak Railroad Bridge, mile 0.9, is 
required to open on signal except that, from December 1 through March 
15 the Amtrak Railroad Bridge, mile 0.9, is required to open on signal 
if a 12-hour advance notice is provided.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    This proposed rule will allow the public to comment on how well the 
bridge has been operated remotely for the last 19 years. The drawtender 
will continue to remain in Chicago, Illinois and will be responsible 
for the remote operation of two remote railroad bridges: The Amtrak 
Railroad Bridge, mile 0.9, over Trail Creek and the Amtrak Railroad 
Bridge, mile 3.77, over the South Branch of the Chicago River.
    The Amtrak Railroad Bridge, mile 0.9, will continue to operate a 2-
way public address system to answer calls from: (1) Vessel horn 
signals; (2) a VHF-FM Marine Radio that will monitor channel 16; and 
(3) cameras that will monitor the tracks, the underside of the bridge, 
and the upriver and down river view of the river.

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. 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).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the fact that 
remote operation will not significantly impact a vessel's ability to 
transit the bridge; further, the bridge has operated in said manner 
since 2003 without comment or complaint.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as 
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of 
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small 
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations 
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their 
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this 
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the 
bridge may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A 
above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact 
on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have 
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see 
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what 
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small 
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect 
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you 
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, 
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that 
question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action 
of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132 
(Federalism), if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on 
the relationship between the National 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.

[[Page 31796]]

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 Decision 
Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2022-0303 in the search box and click 
``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the Search Results column, 
and click on it. Then click on the Comment option. 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.
    To view documents mentioned in this proposed rule as being 
available in the docket, find the docket as described in the previous 
paragraph, and then select ``Supporting & Related Material'' in the 
Document Type column. Public comments will also be placed in our online 
docket and can be viewed by following instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked Questions web page. We review all 
comments received, but we will only post comments that address the 
topic of the proposed rule. We may choose not to post off-topic, 
inappropriate, or duplicate comments that we receive.
    We accept anonymous comments. Comments we post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal information you have 
provided. For more about privacy and submissions in response to this 
document, see DHS's eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, 
March 11, 2020).

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. In Sec.  117.401 Trail Creek revise paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  117.401   Trail Creek.

* * * * *
    (b) The draw of the Amtrak Railroad Bridge, mile 0.9, at Michigan 
City shall open on signal; except from December 1 through March 15, the 
draw shall open if at least 12-hours advance notice is given. The 
bridge is authorized to be operated remotely. The bridge shall operate 
and maintain a VHF-FM Marine Radio.
* * * * *

M.J. Johnston,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2022-11121 Filed 5-24-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P