Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Bayou Liberty, Mile 2.0, St. Tammany Parish, Slidell, LA, 43226-43230 [2011-18225]
Download as PDF
43226
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This document contains proposed
amendments to the Highway Use Tax
Regulations (26 CFR part 41) under
sections 6001, 6071 and 6151 of the
Internal Revenue Code (Code). The text
of temporary regulations published in
this issue of the Federal Register also
serves as the text of these proposed
regulations. The preamble to the
temporary regulations explains the
temporary regulations.
Proposed Effective Date
These regulations are proposed to
apply to taxable use of highway motor
vehicles occurring on or after July 1,
2011.
Special Analyses
It has been determined that this notice
of proposed rulemaking is not a
significant regulatory action as defined
in Executive Order 12866, as
supplemented by Executive Order
13563. Therefore, a regulatory
assessment is not required. It also has
been determined that section 553(b) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (5
U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply to this
regulation, and because this regulation
does not impose a collection of
information on small entities, the
provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) do not apply.
Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Code,
this regulation has been submitted to
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration for
comment on its impact on small
business.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Comments and Requests for a Public
Hearing
Before these proposed regulations are
adopted as final regulations,
consideration will be given to any
written comments (a signed original and
eight (8) copies) or electronic comments
that are submitted timely to the IRS. All
comments will be available for public
inspection and copying. A public
hearing will be scheduled if requested
in writing by any person that timely
submits written comments. If a public
hearing is scheduled, notice of the date,
time, and place for the hearing will be
published in the Federal Register.
Drafting Information
The principal author of these
regulations is Natalie Payne, Office of
the Associate Chief Counsel
(Passthroughs and Special Industries).
However, other personnel from the IRS
and the Treasury Department
participated in their development.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:45 Jul 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 41
Excise taxes, Motor vehicles,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
through (c)(3) published elsewhere in
this issue of the Federal Register].
Par. 4. Section 41.6151(a)–1 is revised
to read as follows:
Proposed Amendments to the
Regulations
Accordingly, 26 CFR part 41 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
§ 41.6151(a)–1
tax.
PART 41—EXCISE TAX ON USE OF
CERTAIN HIGHWAY MOTOR
VEHICLES
Paragraph 1. The authority citation
for part 41 is amended to read in part
as follows:
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805. * * *
Section 41.6001–2 also issued under 26
U.S.C. 6001. * * *
Section 41.6071(a)–1 also issued under 26
U.S.C. 6071(a). * * *
Section 41.6151(a)–1 also issued under 26
U.S.C. 6151(a). * * *
Par. 2. Section 41.6001–2 is amended
by revising paragraphs (b)(1)(ii),
(b)(4)(ii), (c)(2)(ii) and (c)(2)(iii) to read
as follows:
§ 41.6001–2 Proof of payment for State
registration purposes.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) [The text of this proposed
amendment to § 41.6001–2(b)(1)(ii) is
the same as the text of § 41.6001–
2T(b)(1)(ii) published elsewhere in this
issue of the Federal Register].
*
*
*
*
*
(4) * * *
(ii) [The text of this proposed
amendment to § 41.6001–2(b)(4)(ii) is
the same as the text of § 41.6001–
2T(b)(4)(ii) published elsewhere in this
issue of the Federal Register].
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) [The text of this proposed
amendment to § 41.6001–2(c)(2)(ii) is
the same as the text of § 41.6001–
2T(c)(2)(ii) published elsewhere in this
issue of the Federal Register].
(iii) [The text of this proposed
amendment to § 41.6001–2(c)(iii) is the
same as the text of § 41.6001–
2T(c)(2)(iii) published elsewhere in this
issue of the Federal Register].
*
*
*
*
*
Par. 3. Section 41.6071(a)–1 is
amended by adding paragraph (c) to
read as follows:
§ 41.6071(a)–1
Time for filing returns.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) [The text of this proposed
amendment to § 41.6071(a)–1(c) is the
same as the text of § 41.6071(a)–1T(c)
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Time and place for paying
[The text of this proposed amendment
to § 41.6151(a)–1 is the same as the text
of § 41.6151(a)–1T(a) and (b) published
elsewhere in this issue of the Federal
Register].
Steven T. Miller,
Deputy Commissioner for Services and
Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2011–18250 Filed 7–15–11; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG–2010–0972]
RIN 1625–AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations;
Bayou Liberty, Mile 2.0, St. Tammany
Parish, Slidell, LA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard is proposing
to change the operating schedule for the
State Route 433 (S433) bridge across
Liberty Bayou, mile 2.0, at Slidell, St.
Tammany Parish, Louisiana. The
proposed rule provides for an opening
upon one-hour notice from 7 a.m. to
7 p.m., allowing the Louisiana
Department of Transportation and
Development, owner of the bridge, to
reduce the hours of manned operation
of the bridge in order to make more
efficient use of personnel and operating
resources. This Supplemental Notice
follows a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking published in the Federal
Register [USCG–2010–0972] on
November 22, 2010 (75 FR 71061).
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before September 19, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2010–0972 using any one of the
following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202–493–2251.
(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility
(M–30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\20JYP1.SGM
20JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
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.
If
you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or e-mail Jim Wetherington;
Bridge Administration Branch, Eighth
Coast Guard District, telephone 504–
671–2128, e-mail
james.r.wetherington@uscg.mil. 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:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
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 https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG–2010–0972),
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 (https://
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 https://
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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:45 Jul 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
To submit your comment online, go to
https://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–2010–0972’’ 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 81⁄2 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
https://www.regulations.gov, click on the
‘‘read comments’’ box, which will then
become highlighted in blue. In the
‘‘Keyword’’ box insert ‘‘USCG–2010–
0972’’ 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
In October 2010, the Louisiana
Department of Transportation and
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43227
Development (LDOTD), the owner of the
bridge, replaced the existing S433
pontoon bridge over Bayou Liberty, mile
2.0, St. Tammany Parish, Slidell, LA
with a new modern swing bridge. Due
to the fact that not all vessels would
now require the bridge to open for the
passage of vessels, LDOTD requested a
modification to the existing
requirements for giving notice to open
the bridge. The Coast Guard published
a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the
Federal Register [USCG–2010–0972] on
November 22, 2010 (75 FR 71061). The
proposed rule would have changed the
notice required for an opening of the
bridge from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. from on
signal to two hours notice. The notice
required for an opening from 7 p.m. to
7 a.m. would have remained two hours
as required by the existing regulations.
At the same time, a test deviation was
published in the Federal Register (75
FR 71017) to allow mariners to test the
proposed change for 30 days. Thirteen
comments were received either by email or through the docket but only four
were within the time specified. All 13
comments were considered, and are
discussed and addressed in this
SNPRM.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
As stated above, we received 13
submissions commenting on the NPRM.
Five comments expressed concern with
testing a new opening procedure during
the winter months and relying on
recorded openings during construction
or the recreational boating off season.
One comment specifically stated that
Bayou Liberty is primarily a recreational
waterway and several comments
referenced residential and recreational
use. The Coast Guard agrees that better
results will likely result from a test
period during a season that better
reflects the recreational and residential
use of the waterway and as a result
issued a new temporary deviation to run
from June 1, 2011 through September 9,
2011, to test a revised opening schedule
and it was published in Federal
Register (76 FR 28311) on May 17, 2011.
The current test deviation will provide
a record of openings during the spring
and summer months, including
recreational boating during a couple of
holiday weekends. So, the comparison
between recorded openings during prior
years and recorded openings during the
current test period will provide a better
representation of the bridge’s use and
need, specifically during holidays.
While one comment mentioned a 12
month test period, the Coast Guard feels
that this would be unnecessary and
impracticable. As stated above, the
current test period will be during the
E:\FR\FM\20JYP1.SGM
20JYP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
43228
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
higher traffic season and will be
compared to the prior year’s recorded
openings. Lengthening a test period to
12 months would incorporate lower
traffic months already determined to be
a poor representation of the bridge’s use,
unnecessarily delaying an appropriate
final opening schedule.
Four comments mention concern with
the impact this rule would have on
property value if certain vessels are not
able to easily transit through the bridge.
The Coast Guard understands this
concern and the current test deviation
will provide a record of the type of
traffic using and attempting to use the
bridge during the high use season.
Four comments indicated a concern
with evacuation during threat of a
hurricane or tropical storm. Should
emergency evacuation be necessary, the
bridge would operate under emergency
procedures already in place pursuant to
the Code of Federal Regulations, 33 CFR
part 117. Specifically, 33 CFR 117.59
states that for the duration of
occurrences hazardous to safety or
navigation such as floods, freshets and
damage to the bridge of fender system,
the District Commander may require the
owner of an operational drawbridge
listed in this sub part to have the bridge
attended full time and open on signal.
But, 33 CFR 117.33 provides that
‘‘[d]raw bridges need not open for the
passage of vessels during periods of
natural disasters or civil disorders
declared by the appropriate authorities
unless otherwise provided for or
directed to do so by the District
Commander.’’
Four comments expressed a concern
that the two-hour request time was
excessive during the day. The Coast
Guard agrees and the bridge owner
agreed to the new test deviation and this
SNPRM proposing a one-hour request
time during the day, cutting the request
time during the day in half.
Two comments expressed difficulty
with reaching the point of contact to
request an opening. The Coast Guard
contacted the bridge owner, confirming
that accurate contact information is
posted. The bridge owner also stated
that they do periodic tests of the phone
system and have never had an issue.
One comment expressed concern that
the majority of comments submitted
were concerned with large boats and
that smaller boat owners are not as
concerned about a change in opening
procedures because the replacement
bridge is high enough to go under. The
new test period during a higher traffic
season is expected to provide a better
representation of the waterway use by
boats requiring the bridge to open.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:45 Jul 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
Finally, two comments proposed
combining bridge-tender duties with
other bridges operating in the vicinity of
this bridge and stated that a full-time
tender was represented as part of the
new bridge. The Coast Guard contacted
LDOTD, the bridge owner, and
confirmed that LTOTD is considering a
solution regarding bridge-tender duties
and if they may be combined.
In summary, the time of year that the
original NPRM and deviation were
issued did not capture a true
representation of the bridge’s use and
how a new operating schedule may
impact such use. The original test
period was during the winter when
vessel traffic was considerably less than
the summer months which the new test
and comment period will cover.
Based on the limited data received
and the aforementioned comments,
LDOTD changed their request to modify
the requirements for giving notice to
open the bridge. Specifically, LDOTD
lessened the request time required for
opening during the day. This
supplemental notice proposes to have
the bridge open on signal if at least onehour notice is given from 7 a.m. to 7
p.m. and two-hour notice is given from
7 p.m. to 7 a.m.
As previously stated, the Coast Guard
issued a new temporary deviation to test
the newly proposed schedule and it was
published in Federal Register (76 FR
28311) on May 17, 2011. The test
deviation is scheduled to run from June
1, 2011 through September 9, 2011.
During and following completion of the
test deviation, the Coast Guard will
analyze the data collected from the
tender logs and vehicular transits and
review the comments received to this
SNPRM to determine if the requested
modifications to the operating schedule
can be made permanent.
The replacement bridge has a vertical
clearance of 7.59 feet above the 2%
flowline, elevation 2.5 feet (NAVD 1988)
in the closed-to-navigation position and
unlimited in the open-to-navigation
position. In accordance with 33 CFR
117.469, the draw of the S433 Bridge,
mile 2.0, at Slidell, shall open on signal,
except that between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m.,
the draw shall open on signal if at least
a two-hour notice is given.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
LDOTD is requesting a new regulation
to open the bridge on signal with onehour notice from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. and
with two-hour notice from 7 p.m. to
7 a.m. Presently, the bridge opens on
signal, except that between 7 p.m. to
7 a.m., the draw shall open on signal if
at least a two-hour notice is given. This
rule proposes to change the requirement
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
that a bridge tender open the bridge on
signal during the day. The proposed
change is to require that the bridge be
opened with a one-hour notice during
the 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. time period each
day. So, the bridge would open within
one hour of a mariner calling the
number posted at the bridge rather than
having a bridge tender present from
7 a.m. to 7 p.m. each day. The area
above the bridge site is an area normally
transited by local mariners. It is
believed that these mariners will be able
to contact the bridge owner before their
planned departure from their docks. The
reason for the requested change in the
operation schedule is that a new swing
bridge has been constructed with a
vertical clearance of 7.59 feet above the
2% flowline, elevation 2.5 feet (NAVD
1988) in the closed-to-navigation
position and unlimited in the open-tonavigation. This new bridge replaces a
pontoon bridge that required bridge
openings for all vessels. LDOTD has
indicated that bridge opening requests
have decreased significantly and the
bridge owner feels that they can
maintain a quality level of service
without keeping a tender on the bridge
at all times.
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 rule is not a significant
regulatory action under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review, as supplemented
by Executive Order 13563, Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review, and
does not require an assessment of
potential costs and benefits under
section 6(a)(3) of that Executive Order
12866 or under section 1 of Executive
Order 13563. The Office of Management
and Budget has not reviewed it under
that those Orders.
We expect the economic impact of
this proposed rule to be so minimal that
a full Regulatory Evaluation is
unnecessary.
The public would need to notify the
bridge owner of a required opening one
hour in advance from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.,
rather than on signal. From 7 p.m. to
7 a.m., two-hour notice will be required.
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
E:\FR\FM\20JYP1.SGM
20JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
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, some of which
might be small entities: The owners or
operators of vessels needing to transit
the bridge between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m.
with less than one-hour advance notice.
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 call or e-mail Jim
Wetherington; Bridge Administration
Branch, Eighth Coast Guard District,
telephone 504–671–2128, e-mail
james.r.wetherington@uscg.mil. 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 will not call for a
new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520).
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:45 Jul 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43229
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. § 117.469 is revised to read as
follows:
E:\FR\FM\20JYP1.SGM
20JYP1
43230
§ 117.469
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Liberty Bayou.
The draw of the S433 Bridge, mile 2.0,
at Slidell, shall open on signal with a
one hour notice from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
and from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m., two-hour
notice will be required, seven days a
week.
Dated: March 25, 2011.
Mary E. Landry,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2011–18225 Filed 7–19–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 55
[EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0140; FRL–9434–6 ]
Outer Continental Shelf Air
Regulations Consistency Update for
Virginia
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA proposes to update a
portion of the Outer Continental Shelf
(OCS) Air Regulations. Requirements
applying to OCS sources located within
25 miles of States’ seaward boundaries
must be updated periodically to remain
consistent with the requirements of the
corresponding onshore area (COA), as
mandated by section 328(a)(1) of the
Clean Air Act (CAA). The portion of the
OCS air regulations that is being
updated pertains to the requirements
that would apply to OCS sources
located within 25 miles of the seaward
boundary of the Commonwealth of
Virginia. EPA is taking this action as a
direct final rule without prior proposal
because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial action and anticipates
no adverse comments. If no adverse
comments are received in response to
this action, no further activity is
contemplated. If EPA receives adverse
comments, the direct final rule will be
withdrawn and all public comments
received will be addressed in a
subsequent final rule based on this
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a
second comment period. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action
should do so at this time.
DATES: Written comments must be
received by August 19, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R03–OAR–2011–0140 by one of the
following methods:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:45 Jul 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail: cox.kathleen@epa.gov.
3. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0140,
Kathleen Cox, Associate Director, Office
of Permits and Air Toxics, Mailcode
3AP10, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
4. Hand Delivery or Courier. At the
previously-listed EPA Region III
address. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket’s normal
hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2011–
0140. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit through https://
www.regulations.gov, or e-mail,
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The https://
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
https://www.regulations.gov index.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
Air Protection Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
´
Emlyn Velez-Rosa, (215) 814–2038 or by
e-mail at velez-rosa.emlyn@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For
further information, please see the
information provided in the direct final
action, with the same title, located in
the Rules and Regulations section of this
Federal Register publication.
Dated: June 3, 2011.
W. C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2011–18130 Filed 7–19–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 122 and 125
[EPA–HQ–OW–2008–0667, FRL–9441–8]
RIN 2040–AE95
National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System—Cooling Water
Intake Structures at Existing Facilities
and Phase I Facilities
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening public
comment period.
AGENCY:
On April 20, 2011, EPA
proposed requirements under section
316(b) of the Clean Water Act for all
existing power generating facilities and
existing manufacturing and industrial
facilities. EPA requested that public
comments on the proposal be submitted
on or before July 19, 2011. Since
publication, the Agency has received
several requests for additional time to
submit comments. EPA is re-opening
the comment period and will accept
public comments on the proposal
through August 18, 2011.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule,
which was published April 20, 2011, at
76 FR 22174, must be received on or
before August 18, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OW–2008–0667, by one of the following
methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: OW–Docket@epa.gov.
• Mail: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency; EPA Docket Center
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\20JYP1.SGM
20JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 139 (Wednesday, July 20, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43226-43230]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-18225]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG-2010-0972]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Bayou Liberty, Mile 2.0, St.
Tammany Parish, Slidell, LA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to change the operating schedule
for the State Route 433 (S433) bridge across Liberty Bayou, mile 2.0,
at Slidell, St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana. The proposed rule provides
for an opening upon one-hour notice from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., allowing the
Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development, owner of the
bridge, to reduce the hours of manned operation of the bridge in order
to make more efficient use of personnel and operating resources. This
Supplemental Notice follows a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published
in the Federal Register [USCG-2010-0972] on November 22, 2010 (75 FR
71061).
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before September 19, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2010-0972 using any one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202-493-2251.
(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground
[[Page 43227]]
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 Jim Wetherington; Bridge Administration Branch,
Eighth Coast Guard District, telephone 504-671-2128, e-mail
james.r.wetherington@uscg.mil. 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:
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 https://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-2010-0972), 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 (https://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 https://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 https://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-2010-0972'' 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 https://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``read comments'' box, which will then become highlighted
in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2010-0972'' 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
In October 2010, the Louisiana Department of Transportation and
Development (LDOTD), the owner of the bridge, replaced the existing
S433 pontoon bridge over Bayou Liberty, mile 2.0, St. Tammany Parish,
Slidell, LA with a new modern swing bridge. Due to the fact that not
all vessels would now require the bridge to open for the passage of
vessels, LDOTD requested a modification to the existing requirements
for giving notice to open the bridge. The Coast Guard published a
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal Register [USCG-2010-0972]
on November 22, 2010 (75 FR 71061). The proposed rule would have
changed the notice required for an opening of the bridge from 7 a.m. to
7 p.m. from on signal to two hours notice. The notice required for an
opening from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. would have remained two hours as required
by the existing regulations.
At the same time, a test deviation was published in the Federal
Register (75 FR 71017) to allow mariners to test the proposed change
for 30 days. Thirteen comments were received either by e-mail or
through the docket but only four were within the time specified. All 13
comments were considered, and are discussed and addressed in this
SNPRM.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
As stated above, we received 13 submissions commenting on the NPRM.
Five comments expressed concern with testing a new opening procedure
during the winter months and relying on recorded openings during
construction or the recreational boating off season. One comment
specifically stated that Bayou Liberty is primarily a recreational
waterway and several comments referenced residential and recreational
use. The Coast Guard agrees that better results will likely result from
a test period during a season that better reflects the recreational and
residential use of the waterway and as a result issued a new temporary
deviation to run from June 1, 2011 through September 9, 2011, to test a
revised opening schedule and it was published in Federal Register (76
FR 28311) on May 17, 2011. The current test deviation will provide a
record of openings during the spring and summer months, including
recreational boating during a couple of holiday weekends. So, the
comparison between recorded openings during prior years and recorded
openings during the current test period will provide a better
representation of the bridge's use and need, specifically during
holidays. While one comment mentioned a 12 month test period, the Coast
Guard feels that this would be unnecessary and impracticable. As stated
above, the current test period will be during the
[[Page 43228]]
higher traffic season and will be compared to the prior year's recorded
openings. Lengthening a test period to 12 months would incorporate
lower traffic months already determined to be a poor representation of
the bridge's use, unnecessarily delaying an appropriate final opening
schedule.
Four comments mention concern with the impact this rule would have
on property value if certain vessels are not able to easily transit
through the bridge. The Coast Guard understands this concern and the
current test deviation will provide a record of the type of traffic
using and attempting to use the bridge during the high use season.
Four comments indicated a concern with evacuation during threat of
a hurricane or tropical storm. Should emergency evacuation be
necessary, the bridge would operate under emergency procedures already
in place pursuant to the Code of Federal Regulations, 33 CFR part 117.
Specifically, 33 CFR 117.59 states that for the duration of occurrences
hazardous to safety or navigation such as floods, freshets and damage
to the bridge of fender system, the District Commander may require the
owner of an operational drawbridge listed in this sub part to have the
bridge attended full time and open on signal. But, 33 CFR 117.33
provides that ``[d]raw bridges need not open for the passage of vessels
during periods of natural disasters or civil disorders declared by the
appropriate authorities unless otherwise provided for or directed to do
so by the District Commander.''
Four comments expressed a concern that the two-hour request time
was excessive during the day. The Coast Guard agrees and the bridge
owner agreed to the new test deviation and this SNPRM proposing a one-
hour request time during the day, cutting the request time during the
day in half.
Two comments expressed difficulty with reaching the point of
contact to request an opening. The Coast Guard contacted the bridge
owner, confirming that accurate contact information is posted. The
bridge owner also stated that they do periodic tests of the phone
system and have never had an issue.
One comment expressed concern that the majority of comments
submitted were concerned with large boats and that smaller boat owners
are not as concerned about a change in opening procedures because the
replacement bridge is high enough to go under. The new test period
during a higher traffic season is expected to provide a better
representation of the waterway use by boats requiring the bridge to
open.
Finally, two comments proposed combining bridge-tender duties with
other bridges operating in the vicinity of this bridge and stated that
a full-time tender was represented as part of the new bridge. The Coast
Guard contacted LDOTD, the bridge owner, and confirmed that LTOTD is
considering a solution regarding bridge-tender duties and if they may
be combined.
In summary, the time of year that the original NPRM and deviation
were issued did not capture a true representation of the bridge's use
and how a new operating schedule may impact such use. The original test
period was during the winter when vessel traffic was considerably less
than the summer months which the new test and comment period will
cover.
Based on the limited data received and the aforementioned comments,
LDOTD changed their request to modify the requirements for giving
notice to open the bridge. Specifically, LDOTD lessened the request
time required for opening during the day. This supplemental notice
proposes to have the bridge open on signal if at least one-hour notice
is given from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. and two-hour notice is given from 7 p.m.
to 7 a.m.
As previously stated, the Coast Guard issued a new temporary
deviation to test the newly proposed schedule and it was published in
Federal Register (76 FR 28311) on May 17, 2011. The test deviation is
scheduled to run from June 1, 2011 through September 9, 2011. During
and following completion of the test deviation, the Coast Guard will
analyze the data collected from the tender logs and vehicular transits
and review the comments received to this SNPRM to determine if the
requested modifications to the operating schedule can be made
permanent.
The replacement bridge has a vertical clearance of 7.59 feet above
the 2% flowline, elevation 2.5 feet (NAVD 1988) in the closed-to-
navigation position and unlimited in the open-to-navigation position.
In accordance with 33 CFR 117.469, the draw of the S433 Bridge, mile
2.0, at Slidell, shall open on signal, except that between 7 p.m. and 7
a.m., the draw shall open on signal if at least a two-hour notice is
given.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
LDOTD is requesting a new regulation to open the bridge on signal
with one-hour notice from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. and with two-hour notice
from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. Presently, the bridge opens on signal, except
that between 7 p.m. to 7 a.m., the draw shall open on signal if at
least a two-hour notice is given. This rule proposes to change the
requirement that a bridge tender open the bridge on signal during the
day. The proposed change is to require that the bridge be opened with a
one-hour notice during the 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. time period each day. So,
the bridge would open within one hour of a mariner calling the number
posted at the bridge rather than having a bridge tender present from 7
a.m. to 7 p.m. each day. The area above the bridge site is an area
normally transited by local mariners. It is believed that these
mariners will be able to contact the bridge owner before their planned
departure from their docks. The reason for the requested change in the
operation schedule is that a new swing bridge has been constructed with
a vertical clearance of 7.59 feet above the 2% flowline, elevation 2.5
feet (NAVD 1988) in the closed-to-navigation position and unlimited in
the open-to-navigation. This new bridge replaces a pontoon bridge that
required bridge openings for all vessels. LDOTD has indicated that
bridge opening requests have decreased significantly and the bridge
owner feels that they can maintain a quality level of service without
keeping a tender on the bridge at all times.
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 rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Executive Order 12866
or under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management
and Budget has not reviewed it under that those Orders.
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
The public would need to notify the bridge owner of a required
opening one hour in advance from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., rather than on
signal. From 7 p.m. to 7 a.m., two-hour notice will be required.
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
[[Page 43229]]
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, some of which might be small entities: The owners or
operators of vessels needing to transit the bridge between 7 a.m. and 7
p.m. with less than one-hour advance notice.
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 call or e-mail Jim Wetherington; Bridge
Administration Branch, Eighth Coast Guard District, telephone 504-671-
2128, e-mail james.r.wetherington@uscg.mil. 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 will not call for a 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. Sec. 117.469 is revised to read as follows:
[[Page 43230]]
Sec. 117.469 Liberty Bayou.
The draw of the S433 Bridge, mile 2.0, at Slidell, shall open on
signal with a one hour notice from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. and from 7 p.m. to
7 a.m., two-hour notice will be required, seven days a week.
Dated: March 25, 2011.
Mary E. Landry,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2011-18225 Filed 7-19-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P