Document ID: USCG-2019-0178-0007
Agency: uscg
Document Type: Rule
Title: Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Fox River, Green Bay, WI
Posted Date: 2020-02-06T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 25 (Thursday, February 6, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 6806-6808]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-01767]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2019-0178]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Fox River, Green Bay, WI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is modifying the operating schedule that 
governs the Main Street Bridge, mile 1.58, the Walnut Street Bridge, 
mile 1.81, and the Tilleman Memorial Bridge, mile 2.27, all over the 
Fox River at Green Bay, WI to allow them to operate remotely.

DATES: This rule is effective March 9, 2020.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being 
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Type USCG-
2019-0178 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open 
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this 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: 

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
HDCCTV High Definition Closed Circuit Television
IGLD85 International Great Lakes Datum of 1985
IRCCTV Infrared Closed Circuit Television
LWD Low Water Datum based on IGLD 85
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Advance, Supplemental)
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PLC Programmable Logic Control
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code
WI-FI Wireless Fidelity
WISDOT Wisconsin Department of Transportation

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On April 29, 2019, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking 
entitled: Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Fox River, Green Bay, WI in 
the Federal Register (84 FR 17979). We received five comments on this 
rule.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority 33 U.S.C. 499.
    There are three bascule bridges operated by WISDOT and the City of 
Green Bay: Main Street Bridge, mile 1.58, provides 120 feet horizontal 
and 12 feet vertical clearance in the closed position; the Walnut 
Street Bridge, mile 1.81, provides 124 feet horizontal and 11 feet 
vertical clearance in the closed position; and the Tilleman Memorial 
Bridge, mile 2.27, provides 124 feet horizontal and 32 feet vertical 
clearance in the closed position.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes and the Final Rule

    The Coast Guard provided a 180 day comment period and received five 
comments. During the comment period the bridges were managed by WISDOT 
with city of Green Bay personnel operating the three bridges. As of 
December 1, 2019 Brown County began operating the bridges with 
personnel from the snow plow division. This prevented snow plow drivers 
from being laid off in the summer and drawtenders from being laid off 
in the winter. The current drawtenders lost their jobs unless they 
could obtain a commercial driver's license to operate a snow plow in 
the winter. We believe this may have influenced some of the comments we 
received; however, below we address each comment provided:
    The first comment: ``The Main Street Bridge was renamed the Ray 
Nitschke Memorial Bridge in 1998''. We reached out to the State of 
Wisconsin and the City of Green Bay and asked them to send us a letter 
requesting the name change to be made and they have declined to do so.
    The second comment addressed several factors: ``As long as vehicles 
are still crashing through the gates there should be a live presence, 
i.e., a Bridge Tender, on every bridge that is being operated.'' We 
asked WISDOT for the last three years of vehicle incidents. There were 
zero incidents in 2017, two in 2018, and two in 2019. All three years 
indicated live drawtenders manning the bridges. We do not have any data 
from other remotely operated bridges to support the claim that remote 
bridges have a higher incidents of vehicles hitting barriers during the 
opening cycle of the bridge or that responses to vehicles hitting the 
barriers have been lessened. ``Instead of the risk and cost of an 
experimental wireless remote operation, just establish a call-in 
period. By making Tilleman bridge a 4 hour call-in, 24-7, and by making 
Walnut and Nitschke bridges a 4 hour call-in from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m., 
you could reduce the number of Bridge Tenders to 6 (half of what they 
have now). You would still have a live Bridge Tender on each bridge 
when they require an opening.'' This suggested schedule would place an 
additional burden on the mariners. The wireless equipment is not 
experimental. It is a commercial grade wireless system developed for 
city wide municipal use with a 20 mile range.
    The third comment: ``As a tour boat company we feel it is in the 
best interest of auto, pedestrian and boat traffic to keep 
bridgetenders at Main Street

[[Page 6807]]

Bridge, Walnut Street Bridge and the Tilleman Memorial Bridge. We have 
seen firsthand the need for a bridgetender to keep a pedestrian from 
walking over the bridge as it was going up. In addition, a recent 
incident in Menasha with a bicyclist attempting to cross the open doors 
made national news (as it was videotaped). This may save money, but it 
won't offer the safety required at these drawbridges.'' The 
bridgetenders rely on physical barriers along with visual and audible 
alarms to keep pedestrians from accessing the bridge span while in 
motion. These same devices will be employed during remote operations. 
The bicyclist incident occurred in Menasha, WI at a bridge with a 
drawtender in attendance and the bicyclist was arrested for 
intoxication. This was an isolated incident. The remotely operated 
bridges will have enough cameras to monitor every pedestrian, and 
vehicular approach.
    The fourth comment provided copies of the Remote Bridge Study 
provided in 2009 with additional notes concerning upgrades made up 
until 2019. This study provided the basis on why remote operations were 
not authorized prior to 2019 by the U.S. Coast Guard. The older analog 
camera systems and basic bridge controls were not adequate to perform 
as if a drawtender was on the bridge. The equipment that has been 
installed on the bridges has been represented by WISDOT to be state of 
the art and ready to meet the challenges of these bridges. WISDOT does 
intend to have additional drawtenders available during special events 
and heavy pedestrian and vehicle attendance at the bridges. The 
wireless equipment has a 20 mile range and is a capable unit designed 
for city service and not a wireless service a person may have in their 
home. Even with a large freighter between the wireless units the units 
continue to communicate to each other. We do not intend to diminish 
this comment but the materials provided have been vetted through 
various meetings and the equipment currently on the bridge meets the 
same benchmarks as defined by the Coast Guard on other successful 
remotely operated bridges in the Great Lakes.
    The fifth comment: ``Having operated the Green Bay bridges remotely 
through the summer, I believe the Ray Nitschke Memorial Bridge (Main 
Street) is not ready for Full Remote Operation (no Bridge Tender on the 
remotely operated bridge). The equipment and programming are still 
being troubleshot and the camera placements were influenced by 
convenience (existing poles) instead of desired results.
    My major concern about going Full Remote is the recent decision by 
WISDOT to replace the current Green Bay City Bridge Tenders with Brown 
County Snow Plow Operators. The plan calls for no overlap. Therefore, 
100 years of Bridge Tender experience will be replaced with 45 minutes 
if a lift needs to be done on any of the three bridges in Green Bay at 
midnight on December 1, 2019. Making such a drastic personnel change 
this far into the process and on the tail end of the NPRM is 
irresponsible with respect to the public and maritime safety, and shows 
a certain disregard towards the Coast Guards approval process. The four 
senior City Bridge Tenders were moved to Walnut Street Bridge in March, 
2019 to facilitate and prepare for future Full Remote Operations. The 
Tilleman Memorial and Ray Nitschke Memorial bridges have been operated 
remotely through the summer without major incidents. There were a 
couple of gate crashes but that is a normal, infrequent occurrence. 
Now, new operators, who have been trained in Sturgeon Bay and not Green 
Bay, will be responsible for all openings as of midnight on December 1, 
2019. As a current City Bridge Tender and a retired Coast Guard 
Officer, I strongly recommend that Full Remote Operations be delayed at 
least one more summer so these new operators can gain some experience. 
Openings on a foggy morning, a dark rainy night, or a crowded Farmers 
Market evening are all situations the new operators should not be 
required or allowed to do alone for the first time.'' This was a 
serious concern and WISDOT requested we allow the bridges to operate 
remotely with tenders present to allow the drawtenders adequate time to 
learn how to operate the new system. This delayed the remote operations 
until the end of 2019. WISDOT intends to continue training the new 
drawtenders through the winter of 2019-2020 and they remain confident 
the drawtenders will be ready for the 2020 navigation season. Because 
WISDOT has done an excellent job at the three remotely operated bridges 
in Sturgeon Bay, WI, we do not see any reasons to delay another year.

IV. Discussion of Final Rule

    The bridges will continue to operate as they have been except this 
rule will allow them to be operated remotely.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and 
Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses 
based on a number of these statutes and Executive Orders, and we 
discuss First Amendment rights of protesters.

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 rule has not been 
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 
12866. Accordingly, it 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 rule allows the drawtender to operate the bridge remotely and 
will not affect the schedule of the bridge and therefore is not a 
significant regulatory action.

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 did not receive any comments from the Small 
Business Administration on this rule. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 
U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will 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 final rule would not have a significant economic impact 
on any vessel owner or operator.
    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 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.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal 
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal 
regulations to

[[Page 6808]]

the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and 
the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman 
evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness 
to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of 
the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard 
will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain 
about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Government

    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 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 rule does not have tribal implications under Executive 
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments, because it does 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.
    We did not receive any comments from Indian Tribes.

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 rule will not result in 
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere 
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security 
Management Directive 023-01, U.S. Coast Guard Environmental Planning 
Policy COMDTINST 5090.1 (series) and U.S. Coast Guard Environmental 
Planning Implementation Procedures (series) which guide the Coast Guard 
in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) 
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f). We have made a determination 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 
rule promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for 
drawbridges. This action is 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.

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.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 
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. Amend Sec.  117.1087 by adding paragraph (a)(4) to read as follows:

Sec.  117.1087   Fox River.

    (a) * * *
    (4) The Main Street Bridge, mile 1.58, the Walnut Street Bridge, 
mile 1.81, and the Tilleman Memorial Bridge, mile 2.27, are operated 
remotely.
* * * * *

    Dated: January 24, 2020.
D.L. Cottrell,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2020-01767 Filed 2-5-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P