[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 134 (Thursday, July 12, 2001)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36525-36527]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-17393]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD08-01-003]
RIN 2115-AE47


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Terrebonne Bayou, LA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to change the operating schedules 
for the Howard Avenue bridge across Terrebonne Bayou, mile 35.0, at 
Houma, Terrebonne Parish, LA. The proposed rule would place this bridge 
on the same operating schedule as the Daigleville Bridge, mile 35.5, to 
facilitate the flow of vehicular traffic during rush hours while still 
meeting the reasonable needs of navigation. The new schedule will 
provide a safe, continuous vessel passage through the draws. This 
action is expected to relieve the bridge owner from the requirement to 
separately man each bridge by using roving drawtenders to operate the 
bridges when necessary.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before September 10, 2001.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments to Commander (obc), Eighth Coast Guard 
District, 501 Magazine Street, New Orleans, Louisiana 70130-3396, or 
deliver them to room 1313 at the same address above between 7 a.m. and 
4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Commander, 
Eighth Coast Guard District, Bridge Administration Branch maintains the 
public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and material received from 
the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being 
available in the docket, will become part of this docket and will be 
available for inspection or copying at the Bridge Administration 
Branch, Eighth Coast Guard District between 7 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David Frank, Bridge Administration 
Branch, at the address given above, or telephone (504) 589-2965.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

    The Coast Guard encourages interested parties to participate in 
this rulemaking by submitting written data, views, or arguments. 
Persons submitting comments should include their names and addresses, 
identify this rulemaking (CGD08-01-003), and the specific section of 
this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for 
each comment. Please submit all comments and attachments in an unbound 
format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and 
electronic filing. If you would like confirmation of receipt of your 
comments, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or 
envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during 
the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of 
comments received.

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. You may submit a 
request for a public meeting by writing to the Commander, Eighth Coast 
Guard District, Bridge Administration Branch at the address under 
ADDRESSES explaining why a public meeting would be beneficial. If we 
determine that a public meeting would aid this rulemaking, we will hold 
one at a time and place to be announced by notice in the Federal 
Register.

Background and Purpose

    The Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking on March 
19, 2001 (66 FR 15373). The proposed rule would have permitted the 
draws of the S3087 bridge, the Howard Avenue bridge, and the 
Daigleville bridge to open on signal if at least four hours notice is 
given, except that, the draw need not open for the passage of vessels 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, from 6 a.m. to 8 a.m. 
and 4 p.m. to 6 p.m.
    Comments received prompted the Coast Guard to reevaluate the 
proposal. Two letters were received in response to the public notice. 
The Louisiana Department of Agriculture offered no comments. Mr. 
Richard Block of the Gulf Coast Mariners Association stated that the 
changes requested were unacceptable as proposed. These letters were 
forwarded to the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development 
(LDOTD) for their reevaluation.
    LDOTD responded to the Coast Guard with a new proposal. They 
determined that the special operating regulations for the S3087 bridge 
and the Daigleville bridge would remain unchanged and they would only 
request a change to the operation of the Howard Avenue Bridge. They 
requested that the Howard Avenue bridge be operated on a similar 
schedule to the Daigleville bridge which is 0.5 miles upstream of the 
Howard Avenue bridge. As the Howard Avenue bridge is

[[Page 36526]]

located between the Daigleville bridge and the S3087 bridge, the 
requirement for opening the bridge on signal is not needed as the 
bridge is located between two bridges with special operating 
regulations.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    Currently, all three drawbridges, the S3087 Bridge (33 CFR 
117.505(c)), the Howard Avenue Bridge, and the Daigleville Bridge (33 
CFR 117.505(d)) across Terrebonne Bayou are required to open on signal 
during the day. However, both the S3087 Bridge and Daigleville Bridge 
have drawbridge operation regulations that require a four-hour advance 
notice be given. The S3087 Bridge will open on signal if at least four 
hours notice is given from 5 p.m. to 9 a.m. The Daigleville Bridge will 
open on signal if at least four hours notice is given from 10 p.m. to 6 
a.m. The Daigleville Bridge is also allowed to remain closed-to-
navigation Monday through Friday, except holidays, from 7 a.m. to 8:30 
a.m. and 4:30 p.m. to 6 p.m.
    The Coast Guard proposes to change the regulation in 33 CFR 117.505 
to require the draw of the Howard Avenue bridge to open on signal; 
except that, the draw need not open for the passage of vessels Monday 
through Friday except holidays from 7 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. 
to 6 p.m. From 10 p.m. to 6 a.m., the draw shall open on signal if at 
least four hours notice is given.
    The Howard Avenue bridge is located between the Daigleville bridge 
and the S3087 bridge. These bridges have existing special operating 
regulations that are more restrictive than the open on signal 
requirement imposed upon the Howard Avenue bridge. LDOTD now wishes to 
have the operating schedule of the Howard Avenue bridge conform to the 
requirement of the Daigleville bridge. The Coast Guard has determined 
that the request by the bridge owner, to have the Howard Avenue bridge 
operate on the same schedule as the Daigleville bridge is reasonable 
and meets the needs of navigation.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 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. It is not significant under the regulatory policies 
and procedures of the Department of Transportation (DOT)(44 FR 11040, 
February 26, 1979).
    The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this proposed rule 
to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 
10(e) of the regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary.
    This proposed rule allows commercial fishing vessels ample 
opportunity to transit this waterway before and after the peak 
vehicular traffic period which occurs between 7 a.m. and 8:30 a.m. and 
4:30 p.m. and 6 p.m. according to the vehicle traffic surveys.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we 
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 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 rule has considered the needs of 
the local commercial fishing vessels and it has been determined that, 
under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), it would not have a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed 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 proposed rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 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 
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 Bridge 
Administration Branch, Eighth Coast Guard District at the address 
above.

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

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13132 and 
have determined that this proposed rule would not have implications for 
federalism under that Order.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
governs the issuance of Federal regulations that require unfunded 
mandates. An unfunded mandate is a regulation that requires a State, 
local, or tribal government or the private sector to incur direct costs 
without the Federal Government's having first provided the funds to pay 
those costs. This proposed rule would not impose an unfunded mandate.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not effect 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 proposed rule is not economically significant and does not 
cause an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may 
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

[[Page 36527]]

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. It has not been designated by the Administrator of the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy 
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects 
under Executive Order 13211.

Environment

    The Coast Guard considered the environmental impact of this 
proposed rule and concluded that, under figure 2-1, paragraph 32(e), of 
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, this proposed rule is categorically 
excluded from further environmental documentation. A ``Categorical 
Exclusion Determination'' is available in the docket where indicated 
under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes 
to amend Part 117 of Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations, 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; 49 CFR 1.46; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); section 
117.255 also issued under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 
Stat. 5039.

    2. In Sec. 117.505, paragraph (d) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 117.505  Terrebonne Bayou.

* * * * *
    (d) The draws of the Howard Avenue bridge, mile 35.0, and the 
Daigleville bridge, mile 35.5, at Houma, shall open on signal; except 
that, the draws need not open for the passage of vessels Monday through 
Friday, except holidays from 7 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. to 6 
p.m. From 10 p.m. to 6 a.m., the draws shall open on signal if at least 
four hours notice is given.
* * * * *

    Dated: June 28, 2001.
Roy J. Casto,
RADM, USCG, Commander, 8th CG District.
[FR Doc. 01-17393 Filed 7-11-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-U