
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 247 (Monday, December 27, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 81176-81179]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32381]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2010-1055]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Rainey River, Rainer, MN

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish drawbridge operating 
procedures for the Canadian National Railway Bridge across the Rainey 
River at Mile 85.0 at Rainer, Minnesota. This proposed rule is intended 
to establish standard bridge operating conditions for the drawbridge, 
including dates of operation.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before January 26, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2010-1055 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax: 202-493-2251.
    (3) Mail: 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.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone 
number is 202-366-9329.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods. 
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 e-mail Mr. Lee D. Soule, Bridge Management Specialist, 
U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 216-902-6085, e-mail lee.d.soule@uscg.mil, 
or fax 216-902-6088. If you have questions on viewing or submitting 
material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket 
Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 81177]]

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted, 
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking (USCG-2010-1055), 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 (http://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 http://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 e-mail 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 http://www.regulations.gov, 
click on the ``submit a comment'' box, which will then become 
highlighted in blue. In the ``Document Type'' drop down menu select 
``Proposed Rules'' and insert ``USCG-2010-1055'' in the ``Keyword'' 
box. Click ``Search'' then click on the balloon shape in the 
``Actions'' column. 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.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble 
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, 
click on the ``read comments'' box, which will then become highlighted 
in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2010-1055'' and click 
``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column. 
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. We have an 
agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket 
Management Facility.

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).

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a 
request for one using one of the four 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.

Basis and Purpose

    The drawbridge has been remotely operated for numerous years, but 
does not have explicit approval by the Commander, Ninth Coast Guard 
District, to be operated from a remote location. The Coast Guard has 
recently been informed that the drawbridge is routinely unresponsive to 
signals from vessels for bridge openings. The unreliability of the 
bridge for vessel traffic may have a direct effect on the development 
of business and commerce in the cities of Rainer and International 
Falls, Minnesota. In addition, the presence of government and public 
vessels operating between Rainey River and Rainey Lake have magnified 
the need for the drawbridge to be responsive and reliable for all 
vessel traffic so the Coast Guard will not currently consider remote 
operation. Rainey River and Rainey Lake serve as the border between the 
United States of America and Canada. This bridge is a single leaf 
bascule type railroad bridge that provides a horizontal clearance of 
125 feet. The water level on Rainey Lake and under the bridge is 
controlled by a hydro-electric dam facility at International Falls, 
Minnesota, thus charted datum is based on the water level surface of 
Rainey Lake when the gauge at Fort Frances, Canada reads 1107.0 feet 
resulting in a variable vertical clearance of 6 to 10 feet in the 
closed position. The railroad bridge carries significant train traffic 
across the international border. Rainer is a customs port-of-entry.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    Between May 1 and October 15 each year, the proposed regulation 
would require the bridge to be manned by a drawtender and open on 
signal, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Significant rail traffic may 
require the bridge to remain closed for periods, but shall be expected 
to be opened to vessel traffic within reasonable times, as needed, 
after rail traffic has passed. The bridge shall open on signal as soon 
as practicable for all Federal, State, local government vessels, 
commercial vessels, vessels seeking shelter from severe weather, and 
vessels in distress. The proposed regulation also establishes a 
permanent winter operating schedule by requiring vessels to provide at 
least 12 hours' advance notice for a bridge opening during winter, or 
during the traditional non-boating season, between October 16 and April 
30 each year. Additionally, a clearance gauge would be required to 
indicate to vessels the water levels and clearance while the bridge is 
in the closed position.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes 
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our 
analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

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, 
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits 
under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and 
Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. This determination is 
expected to improve intermodal transportation at the bridge crossing 
and does not exclude either vessel or train traffic.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small 
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations 
that are independently

[[Page 81178]]

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. The proposed regulation is expected to 
increase availability of the drawbridge for vessel traffic and 
potentially increase access by, and to, small entities on the waterway.
    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.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small 
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better 
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. 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 Mr. Lee D. Soule, Bridge 
Management Specialist, U. S. Coast Guard; telephone 216-902-6085, e-
mail lee.d.soule@uscg.mil, or fax 216-902-6088. 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.

Collection of Information

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

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local 
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial 
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule 
under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications 
for federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary 
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may 
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or Tribal government, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (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.

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.

Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize 
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, 
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks. This 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.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have Tribal implications under 
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on 
one or more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal 
Government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, 
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant 
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to 
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use 
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy 
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects 
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards 
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, 
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why 
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or 
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management 
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus 
standards bodies.
    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we 
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have 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 because it simply 
promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. 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. Add Sec.  117.664 to read as follows:


Sec.  117.664  Rainey River, Rainey Lake and their tributaries.

    The draw of the Canadian National Bridge, mile 85.0, at Rainer, 
shall open on signal; except that, from October 16 to April 30, the 
draw shall open on signal if at least 12-hours advance notice is 
provided. The commercial phone

[[Page 81179]]

number to provide advance notice shall be posted on the bridge so that 
it is plainly visible to vessel operators approaching the up or 
downstream side of the bridge. The owners of the bridge shall provide 
and keep in good legible condition two board gauges painted white with 
black figures to indicate the vertical clearance under the closed draw 
at all water levels. The gauges shall be so placed on the bridge that 
they are plainly visible to operators of vessels approaching the bridge 
either up or downstream.

    Dated: November 23, 2010.
M.N. Parks,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2010-32381 Filed 12-23-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


