[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 170 (Friday, September 2, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52343-52345]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-17510]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD08-05-046]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, West 
Larose, LA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the regulation governing 
the operation of the SR 1 (West Larose) vertical lift bridge across the 
Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, mile 35.6 west of Harvey Lock, at Larose, 
Louisiana. The Lafourche Parish Council has requested that the bridge 
remain closed to navigation at various times on weekdays during the 
school year. These closures will facilitate the safe, efficient 
movement of staff, students and other residents within the parish.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before November 1, 2005.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander 
(obc), Eighth Coast Guard District, 500 Poydras Street, New Orleans, 
Louisiana 70130-3310. 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 office between 7 a.m. and 3 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Frank, Bridge Administration 
Branch, telephone 504-589-2965.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name 
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (CGD08-05-
046), indicate the specific section of this document to which each 
comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit 
all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than 
8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know 
they reached us, 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 them.

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. You may submit a 
request for a meeting by writing to Commander, Eighth Coast Guard 
District, Bridge Administration Branch at the address under ADDRESSES 
explaining 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.

Background and Purpose

    The U. S. Coast Guard, at the request of the Lafourche Parish 
Council, proposes to modify the existing operating schedule of the SR 1 
(West Larose) vertical lift bridge across the Gulf Intracoastal 
Waterway, mile 35.6 west of Harvey Lock, at Larose, Louisiana. The 
modification of the existing regulations will allow the bridge to 
remain closed to navigation from 7 a.m. to 8 a.m.; from 2 p.m. to 4 
p.m.; and from 4:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday during the 
school year. Currently, the bridge opens on signal pursuant to 33 CFR 
117.5.
    Approximately 11,600 vehicles cross the bridge daily, 25% of which 
cross the bridge during the requested closure times. The bridge 
averages 976 openings a month. Approximately 25% of the bridge openings 
occur during the requested closure times. The average length of a 
bridge opening is approximately 10 to 12 minutes.
    Navigation at the site of the bridge consists primarily of tugboats 
with barges. Alternate routes east and west through the bridge are not 
readily accessible; however, the bridge, in the closed-to-navigation 
position provides a vertical clearance of 35 feet above high water.
    It should be noted that there have been two previous requests by 
the Lafourche Parish to establish special operating regulations for 
this bridge. On December 7, 1994, the Coast Guard published a notice of 
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register (59 FR 63068). The 
proposed change to the regulation would have required that from 7 a.m. 
to 8:30 a.m. and from 4:30 p.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday, except 
Federal holidays, the draw of the bridge would remain closed to 
navigation for passage of vehicular traffic during peak traffic 
periods. At all other times the draw

[[Page 52344]]

would open on signal for passage of vessels.
    The Coast Guard received 10 letters in response to the NPRM 
objecting to the proposed rule. Many of the objectors, who were 
associated with a local school, stated that the bridge would reopen 
after an extended closure 30 minutes before the start of school 
possibly affecting the ability of students to arrive at school on time. 
The applicant was given an opportunity to address the objections. The 
applicant modified their proposal and resubmitted a new request for a 
proposed rule.
    A second NPRM was published in the Federal Register (60 FR 40139) 
on August 7, 1995, instead of a Supplementary Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking (SNPRM).
    The second NPRM proposed to change the regulation to require that 
from 7 a.m. to 9 a.m. and from 4:30 p.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through 
Friday, except Federal holidays, the draw of the bridge would remain 
closed to navigation for passage of vehicular traffic during peak 
traffic periods. At all other times the draw would open on signal for 
the passage of vessels.
    Two letters of objection were received in response to the second 
NPRM. These objections were from waterway interests stating that the 
closure would increase the risk of accidents by vessels having to wait 
for bridge openings, while vehicles have an alternate route across the 
waterway. These concerns were forwarded to the applicant to attempt to 
reach an acceptable solution. The applicant did not address the 
concerns of these objectors or offer an alternative proposal.
    The Coast Guard, therefore, withdrew the notices of proposed 
rulemaking and terminated further rulemaking on the proposals.
    The Lafourche Parish Council submitted another request in 1998. 
When the Coast Guard requested additional information regarding the 
closure, no further information was submitted and the request was 
suspended.
    It has been approximately seven years since the last formal 
request. The Coast Guard is interested in obtaining comments in 
response to this current request from all interested parties with 
regard to how the proposed changes to the regulations will affect them.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The proposed rule would modify the existing regulation in 33 CFR 
117.5 to facilitate the movement of high volumes of vehicular traffic 
across the bridge during periods of increased transit during the school 
year. These closures would allow for vehicles and school busses to 
transit across the bridge unimpeded both before and after school hours. 
The change would allow the SR 1 (West Larose) vertical lift bridge 
across the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, mile 35.6 west of Harvey Lock, 
at Larose, to remain closed to navigation from 7 a.m. to 8 a.m.; from 2 
p.m. to 4 p.m.; and from 4:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday 
from August 15 to May 31. At all other times, the bridge would open on 
signal for the passage of vessels.

Regulatory Evaluation

    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. It is not ``significant'' 
under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of 
Homeland Security. We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule 
to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory 
policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary.
    This proposed rule would allow vessels to transit this waterway 
with proper notification before and after the peak vehicular traffic 
periods. According to the information provided by the applicant, the 
public at large is better served by the closure times.

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 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. This proposed rule would affect the following 
entities: the owners and operators of vessels needing to transit the 
bridge during the requested closure periods.
    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 (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 the Eighth Coast Guard District 
Bridge Administration Branch at the address above. 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.

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 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.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not affect a taking of private property or 
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, 
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected 
Property Rights.

[[Page 52345]]

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 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 Commandant Instruction 
M16475.1D, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and 
have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit 
the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the 
Instruction. Therefore, this proposed rule is categorically excluded, 
under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, from further 
environmental documentation.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

Regulations

    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; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.1; 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.  117.451, paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) are redesignated 
paragraphs (d), (e), and (f) and a new paragraph (c) is added to read 
as follows:


Sec.  117.451  Gulf Intracoastal Waterway.

* * * * *
    (c) The draw of the SR 1 (West Larose) Bridge, mile 35.6 west of 
Harvey Lock, at Larose, shall open on signal; except that, from August 
15 through May 31, the draw need not open for the passage of vessels 
Monday through Friday except Federal holidays from 7 a.m. to 8 a.m.; 
from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m.; and from 4:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.
* * * * *

    Dated: August 26, 2005.
Kevin L. Marshall,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, 8th Coast Guard Dist.
[FR Doc. 05-17510 Filed 9-1-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P