81 FR 76889 - Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Tchefuncta River, Madisonville, LA

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 214 (November 4, 2016)

Page Range		76889-76891
FR Document		2016-26654
The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating schedule that governs the State Route 22 Bridge (Madisonville (SR22) swing span bridge) across the Tchefuncta River, mile 2.5, at Madisonville, St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development requested changes to the present drawbridge operating regulations governing the SR 22 swing span bridge, to enhance the flow of vehicle traffic across the bridge.
Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 214 (Friday, November 4, 2016)
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 214 (Friday, November 4, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 76889-76891]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-26654]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2016-0963]
RIN 1625-AA09


Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Tchefuncta River, Madisonville, 
LA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating schedule that 
governs the State Route 22 Bridge (Madisonville (SR22) swing span 
bridge) across the Tchefuncta River, mile 2.5, at Madisonville, St. 
Tammany Parish, Louisiana. The Louisiana Department of Transportation 
and Development requested changes to the present drawbridge operating 
regulations governing the SR 22 swing span bridge, to enhance the flow 
of vehicle traffic across the bridge.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before January 18, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2016-0963 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. 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 email David Frank, Bridge Administrator, at 504-671-2128, 
email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
SNPRM Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking
Pub. L. Public Law
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code
LTOTD Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development
SR State Route
MHW Mean High Water

II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis

    Local governmental officials from St. Tammany Parish and the City 
of Madisonville, in conjunction with the Louisiana Department of 
Transportation and Development (LDOTD), requested that the operating 
regulation of the SR 22 Bridge, a swing span bridge, be changed in 
order to better accommodate the increased vehicular traffic crossing 
the bridge especially during the peak, weekday rush hours. Currently, 
this bridge is governed under 33 CFR 117.500. The current regulation 
was created to allow for improved vehicular traffic flow during peak 
rush hours due to the increased population of the western portions of 
St. Tammany Parish.
    Based on a recent study of the current vehicle traffic crossing the 
bridge, public officials and LDOTD requested that the operating 
regulation be changed to better meet current bridge use.
    The traffic study conducted by the LDOTD determined that the 
existing vehicular traffic at the intersection of SR 22 and SR 21/SR 
1077 is over capacity at peak hours and causes unacceptable levels of 
delay to roadway traffic. This situation is compounded by the opening 
of the bridge during these peak hours. A combination of modifications 
to the

[[Page 76890]]

operating schedule of the bridge and modifications to the traffic 
controls at this intersection will improve traffic flow and reduce 
traffic delays. As the largest commercial facility upstream of the 
bridge is no longer in service, most of the vessels that request 
openings are recreational powerboats and sailboats that routinely 
transit this waterway and should be able to adjust their schedules to 
coincide with the proposed drawbridge operating schedule. The SR 22 
swing bridge has a vertical clearance of 6.2 feet above Mean High Water 
(MHW) in the closed-to-navigation position and unlimited clearance in 
the open-to-navigation position.
    Concurrent with the publication of the Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking (NPRM), a Test Deviation [USCG-2016-0963] has been issued to 
allow the LDOTD to test the proposed schedule and to obtain data and 
public comments. The test period will be in effect during the entire 
NPRM comment period. The Coast Guard will review the logs of the 
drawbridge, the traffic counts provided by LDOTD, and evaluate public 
comments from this NPRM and the above referenced Temporary Deviation to 
determine if the requested change to the permanent special drawbridge 
operating regulation is warranted.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The rule proposes to amend 33 CFR 117.500. The proposed rule change 
would extend the time between openings from 30 minutes to an hour, 
between 6 a.m. and 7 p.m., and not require the bridge to open for the 
passage of vessels at 8 a.m., 5 p.m. and 6 p.m. during the weekday rush 
hours. This additional time would allow commuters and school buses to 
cross the bridge freely and prevent vehicular traffic from backing up 
for over a mile on SR 22. The bridge will open at any time in the case 
of an emergency.
    Approximately 7,500 vehicles cross the bridge daily between the 
hours of 6 a.m. and 7 p.m. Vessel openings for the month of July 
indicate that the bridge opened to pass vessels 118 times during the 
week and 202 times during the weekend. Vessel openings for the month of 
August dropped to 68 openings during the week and 85 openings during 
the weekend.
    Traffic studies have indicated a significant increase in highway 
traffic delays caused by bridge openings, consisting of mainly 
recreational traffic that presently passes through the bridge on 
scheduled openings, and can adjust their schedules to work with the 
needs of land transportation. There are no alternate routes available 
for vessels that wish to transit the bridge site; however, if vessels 
have a vertical clearance requirement of less than 6.2 feet above MHW, 
they may transit the bridge site at any time.

IV. 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 and we discuss 
First Amendment rights of protestors.

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 13563 emphasizes the importance of 
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing 
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This NPRM has not been designated 
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. 
Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management 
and Budget.
    This regulatory action determination is based on a reduction of 
commercial vessel traffic on this waterway, and the recreational 
powerboats and sailboats that routinely transit this waterway can still 
transit the bridge under the proposed schedule. And, those vessels with 
a vertical clearance requirement of less than 6.2 feet above MHW, they 
may transit the bridge site at any time. This regulatory action takes 
into account the reasonable needs of vessel and vehicular traffic.

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 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. 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 proposed rule would not have 
a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    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.
    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 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. 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.

C. 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).

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 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 above.

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

[[Page 76891]]

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.

F. 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. This proposed rule simply promulgates 
the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. Normally such 
actions are categorically excluded from further review, under figure 2-
1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction.
    Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an 
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion 
determination are not 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.

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.

V. 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.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be 
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate 
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted 
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the 
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal 
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal 
Register (70 FR 15086).
    Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public comments, are in 
our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by 
following that Web site's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the 
online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when 
comments are posted or a final rule is published.

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

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. Revise Sec.  117.500 to read as follows:


Sec.  117.500  Tchefuncta River

    The draw of the SR 22 Bridge, mile 2.5, at Madisonville, shall open 
on signal from 7 p.m. to 6 a.m. From 6 a.m. to 7 p.m., the draw need 
only open on the hour, except that the draw need not open for the 
passage of vessels at 8 a.m., 5 p.m. and 6 p.m. Monday through Friday 
except federal holidays. The bridge will open at any time an emergency.

    Dated: October 31, 2016.
David R. Callahan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2016-26654 Filed 11-3-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 214 / Friday, November 4, 2016 / Proposed Rules 76889

The Proposal PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, DATES: Comments and related material
B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR must reach the Coast Guard on or before
The FAA is considering an TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND January 18, 2017.
amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal REPORTING POINTS ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 to amend identified by docket number USCG–
Class E airspace extending upward from ■ 1. The authority citation for Part 71 2016–0963 using the Federal
700 feet or more above the surface continues to read as follows: eRulemaking Portal at http://
within a 6.5-mile radius of Rostraver Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public
Airport, Monongahela, PA, due to the 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, Participation and Request for
decommissioning of the Allegheny 1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. Comments’’ portion of the
VOR, and to ensure the safety and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
§ 71.1 [Amended]
management of the modified IFR below for instructions on submitting
operations at the airport. ■ 2. The incorporation by reference in comments.
14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11A,
Class E airspace designations are Airspace Designations and Reporting FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Points, dated August 3, 2016, effective you have questions on this proposed
Order 7400.11A, dated August 3, 2016, September 15, 2016, is amended as rule, call or email David Frank, Bridge
and effective September 15, 2016, which follows: Administrator, at 504–671–2128, email
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR david.m.frank@uscg.mil.
71.1. The Class E airspace designation Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
listed in this document will be Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More
Above the Surface of the Earth. I. Table of Abbreviations
published subsequently in the Order.
* * * * * CFR Code of Federal Regulations
Regulatory Notices and Analyses DHS Department of Homeland Security
AEA PA E5 Monongahela, PA [Amended] FR Federal Register
The FAA has determined that this Rostraver Airport, Monongahela, PA NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
proposed regulation only involves an (Lat. 40°12′35″ N., long. 79°49′53″ W.) SNPRM Supplemental notice of proposed
established body of technical That airspace extending upward from 700 rulemaking
regulations for which frequent and feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile Pub. L. Public Law
routine amendments are necessary to radius of Rostraver Airport. § Section
U.S.C. United States Code
keep them operationally current. It,
Issued in College Park, Georgia, on October LTOTD Louisiana Department of
therefore: (1) is not a ‘‘significant 21, 2016. Transportation and Development
regulatory action’’ under Executive Ryan W. Almasy, SR State Route
Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern
MHW Mean High Water
rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies Service Center, Air Traffic Organization. II. Background, Purpose and Legal
and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February [FR Doc. 2016–26436 Filed 11–3–16; 8:45 am] Basis
26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation Local governmental officials from St.
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Tammany Parish and the City of
Since this is a routine matter that will Madisonville, in conjunction with the
only affect air traffic procedures and air DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Louisiana Department of Transportation
navigation, it is certified that this SECURITY and Development (LDOTD), requested
that the operating regulation of the SR
proposed rule, when promulgated, will
Coast Guard 22 Bridge, a swing span bridge, be
not have a significant economic impact
changed in order to better accommodate
on a substantial number of small entities 33 CFR Part 117 the increased vehicular traffic crossing
under the criteria of the Regulatory the bridge especially during the peak,
Flexibility Act. [Docket No. USCG–2016–0963] weekday rush hours. Currently, this
Environmental Review bridge is governed under 33 CFR
RIN 1625–AA09 117.500. The current regulation was
This proposal would be subject to an created to allow for improved vehicular
Drawbridge Operation Regulations;
environmental analysis in accordance traffic flow during peak rush hours due
Tchefuncta River, Madisonville, LA
with FAA Order 1050.1F, to the increased population of the
‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. western portions of St. Tammany
Procedures’’ prior to any FAA final ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. Parish.
regulatory action. Based on a recent study of the current
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to vehicle traffic crossing the bridge,
Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 modify the operating schedule that public officials and LDOTD requested
governs the State Route 22 Bridge that the operating regulation be changed
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
(Madisonville (SR22) swing span bridge) to better meet current bridge use.
Navigation (Air).
across the Tchefuncta River, mile 2.5, at The traffic study conducted by the
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

The Proposed Amendment Madisonville, St. Tammany Parish, LDOTD determined that the existing
Louisiana. The Louisiana Department of vehicular traffic at the intersection of SR
In consideration of the foregoing, the Transportation and Development 22 and SR 21/SR 1077 is over capacity
Federal Aviation Administration requested changes to the present at peak hours and causes unacceptable
proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as drawbridge operating regulations levels of delay to roadway traffic. This
follows: governing the SR 22 swing span bridge, situation is compounded by the opening
to enhance the flow of vehicle traffic of the bridge during these peak hours.
across the bridge. A combination of modifications to the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 11:53 Nov 03, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM 04NOP1
76890 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 214 / Friday, November 4, 2016 / Proposed Rules

operating schedule of the bridge and wish to transit the bridge site; however, If you think that your business,
modifications to the traffic controls at if vessels have a vertical clearance organization, or governmental
this intersection will improve traffic requirement of less than 6.2 feet above jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
flow and reduce traffic delays. As the MHW, they may transit the bridge site and that this rule would have a
largest commercial facility upstream of at any time. significant economic impact on it,
the bridge is no longer in service, most please submit a comment (see
IV. Regulatory Analyses
of the vessels that request openings are ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it
recreational powerboats and sailboats We developed this proposed rule after qualifies and how and to what degree
that routinely transit this waterway and considering numerous statutes and this rule would economically affect it.
should be able to adjust their schedules Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Under section 213(a) of the Small
to coincide with the proposed Below we summarize our analyses Business Regulatory Enforcement
drawbridge operating schedule. The SR based on these statutes and Executive Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
22 swing bridge has a vertical clearance Orders and we discuss First we want to assist small entities in
of 6.2 feet above Mean High Water Amendment rights of protestors. understanding this proposed rule. If the
(MHW) in the closed-to-navigation A. Regulatory Planning and Review rule would affect your small business,
position and unlimited clearance in the organization, or governmental
open-to-navigation position. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 jurisdiction and you have questions
Concurrent with the publication of direct agencies to assess the costs and concerning its provisions or options for
the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking benefits of available regulatory compliance, please contact the person
(NPRM), a Test Deviation [USCG–2016– alternatives and, if regulation is listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
0963] has been issued to allow the necessary, to select regulatory CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will
LDOTD to test the proposed schedule approaches that maximize net benefits. not retaliate against small entities that
and to obtain data and public Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the question or complain about this
comments. The test period will be in importance of quantifying both costs proposed rule or any policy or action of
effect during the entire NPRM comment and benefits, of reducing costs, of the Coast Guard.
period. The Coast Guard will review the harmonizing rules, and of promoting
logs of the drawbridge, the traffic counts flexibility. This NPRM has not been C. Collection of Information
provided by LDOTD, and evaluate designated a ‘‘significant regulatory This proposed rule would call for no
public comments from this NPRM and action,’’ under Executive Order 12866. new collection of information under the
the above referenced Temporary Accordingly, the NPRM has not been Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
Deviation to determine if the requested reviewed by the Office of Management U.S.C. 3501–3520).
change to the permanent special and Budget.
This regulatory action determination D. Federalism and Indian Tribal
drawbridge operating regulation is
warranted. is based on a reduction of commercial Government
vessel traffic on this waterway, and the A rule has implications for federalism
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule recreational powerboats and sailboats under Executive Order 13132,
The rule proposes to amend 33 CFR that routinely transit this waterway can Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
117.500. The proposed rule change still transit the bridge under the effect on the States, on the relationship
would extend the time between proposed schedule. And, those vessels between the national government and
openings from 30 minutes to an hour, with a vertical clearance requirement of the States, or on the distribution of
between 6 a.m. and 7 p.m., and not less than 6.2 feet above MHW, they may power and responsibilities among the
require the bridge to open for the transit the bridge site at any time. This various levels of government. We have
passage of vessels at 8 a.m., 5 p.m. and regulatory action takes into account the analyzed this proposed rule under that
6 p.m. during the weekday rush hours. reasonable needs of vessel and vehicular Order and have determined that it is
This additional time would allow traffic. consistent with the fundamental
commuters and school buses to cross federalism principles and preemption
B. Impact on Small Entities
the bridge freely and prevent vehicular requirements described in Executive
traffic from backing up for over a mile The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 Order 13132.
on SR 22. The bridge will open at any (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, Also, this proposed rule does not have
time in the case of an emergency. requires federal agencies to consider the tribal implications under Executive
Approximately 7,500 vehicles cross potential impact of regulations on small Order 13175, Consultation and
the bridge daily between the hours of 6 entities during rulemaking. The term Coordination with Indian Tribal
a.m. and 7 p.m. Vessel openings for the ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small Governments, because it would not have
month of July indicate that the bridge businesses, not-for-profit organizations a substantial direct effect on one or
opened to pass vessels 118 times during that are independently owned and more Indian tribes, on the relationship
the week and 202 times during the operated and are not dominant in their between the Federal Government and
weekend. Vessel openings for the month fields, and governmental jurisdictions Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
of August dropped to 68 openings with populations of less than 50,000. power and responsibilities between the
during the week and 85 openings during The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. Federal Government and Indian tribes.
the weekend. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not If you believe this proposed rule has
Traffic studies have indicated a have a significant economic impact on implications for federalism or Indian
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

significant increase in highway traffic a substantial number of small entities. tribes, please contact the person listed
delays caused by bridge openings, While some owners or operators of in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
consisting of mainly recreational traffic vessels intending to transit the bridge CONTACT section above.
that presently passes through the bridge may be small entities, for the reasons
on scheduled openings, and can adjust stated in section IV.A above, this E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
their schedules to work with the needs proposed rule would not have a The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of land transportation. There are no significant economic impact on any of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
alternate routes available for vessels that vessel owner or operator. Federal agencies to assess the effects of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 11:53 Nov 03, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM 04NOP1
Document Created: 2018-02-14 08:26:24
Document Modified: 2018-02-14 08:26:24
Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Proposed Rules
Action		Notice of proposed rulemaking.
Dates		Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before January 18, 2017.
Contact		If you have questions on this proposed rule, call or email David Frank, Bridge Administrator, at 504-671-2128, email [email protected]
FR Citation		81 FR 76889
RIN Number		1625-AA09
81 FR 76889 - Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Tchefuncta River, Madisonville, LA

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITYCoast Guard

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 214 (November 4, 2016)

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
