SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

DHS Department of Homeland Security

FR Federal Register

IFR Interim Final Rule

IGLD85 International Great Lakes Datum of 1985

LWD Low Water Datum based on IGLD85

NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking

PA Public Address System

Pub. L. Public Law

SNPRM Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking

S.S. Steam Powered Ship

TFR Temporary Final Rule

§ Section

U.S.C. United States Code

WISDOT Wisconsin Department of Transportation

II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis

The Eighth Street Bridge, mile 0.29, over the Manitowoc River, is a double leaf bascule bridge that provides a horizontal clearance of 120 feet and a vertical clearance of 12 feet above LWD in the closed position and an unlimited clearance in the open position. The Tenth Street Bridge, mile 0.43, over the Manitowoc River, is a double leaf bascule bridge that provides a horizontal clearance of 120 feet and a vertical clearance of 14 feet above LWD in the closed position and an unlimited clearance in the open position. The Eighth Street Bridge, mile 0.29 and the Tenth Street Bridge, mile 0.43, over the Manitowoc River follow special operations regulations found in 33 CFR 117.1089.

In an attempt to alleviate traffic congestion in downtown Manitowoc, WI, while serving the reasonable needs of navigation, on May 21, 2025, we published an interim rule to allow the public to test an alternative drawbridge schedule and requested comments in the Federal Register ( 90 FR 21694). The interim rule and request for comment did not include remote operations. The city of Manitowoc proposed to operate one of the bridges remotely.

The District Commander has directed a Cybersecurity review of the bridges and found that the owner-provided safeguards appear sufficient for approval for remote operations.

There is a control house at each bridge allowing one drawtender to operate one or both bridges remotely. The bridges will be required to maintain and operate a radiotelephone, and a two-way public address system capable of responding to sound signals or voice communication between the operator and vessels.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

The Coast Guard proposes including a provision authorizing remote operations in the regulations governing the Manitowoc Drawbridge Operations. The Coast Guard has reviewed the city of Manitowoc's proposed operating procedures of the bridge and completed a Cyber Security Assessment. There is a control house at each bridge allowing one drawtender to operate one or both bridges remotely. The bridges will be required to maintain and operate a radiotelephone, and a two-way public address system capable of responding to sound signals or voice communication between the operator and vessels.

V. 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.

A. 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 for the following reasons. This regulatory action determination is based on the ability that vessels can still transit the bridge as if a drawtender was in attendance.

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. ( printed page 66661)

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 proposed 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.

B. 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.).

C. 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 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.

D. 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.

E. 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 et seq.). The Coast Guard has 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 Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1.

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.

VI. 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.

Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments at www.regulations.gov. To do so, go to www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2024-0407 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 www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions.

Viewing material in docket. 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 www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked Questions web page. Also, if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts through the “Subscribe” option, you will be notified when comments/updates are posted, or a final rule is published.

Personal information. We accept anonymous comments. Comments we post to 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).

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:

91 FR 66660