This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

28785 

Vol. 83, No. 120 

Thursday, June 21, 2018 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[Docket No. USCG–2017–0911] 

RIN 1625–AA09 

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Red 

River, Shreveport, LA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

change the operating schedule that 

governs the draws of the Union Pacific 

Railroad bridge, mile 227.0, and the 

Midsouth Railroad bridge, mile 228.2, 

across the Red River at Shreveport, LA. 

This proposed rule would allow the 

drawbridges to permanently remain in 

the closed-to-navigation position, no 

longer opening for vessel traffic. While 

there is vessel traffic on the waterway, 

no one has requested that either 

drawbridge open since 2007. Union 

Pacific Railroad and Midsouth Railroad, 

the bridge owners, requested to update 

the operating schedule accordingly. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

July 23, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2017–0911 using 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 Mr. Eric A. 

Washburn, Bridge Administrator, 

Western Rivers, U.S. Coast Guard; 

telephone 314–269–2378, email 

Eric.Washburn@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking 

§ Section 

U.S.C. United States Code 

II. Background, Purpose and Legal 

Basis 

The Coast Guard proposes to change 

the operating schedule that governs the 

draws of the Union Pacific Railroad 

bridge, mile 227.0, and the Midsouth 

Railroad bridge, mile 228.2, across the 

Red River at Shreveport, LA. The Red 

River extends approximately 294.0 

miles from mile marker 304.0 on the 

Lower Mississippi River to Shreveport, 

LA, then through Twelve Mile and 

Cypress Bayous to its head of navigation 

near Daingerfield, TX. Regulations for 

the operation of drawbridges on the Red 

River are contained in 33 CFR 117.491. 

The Union Pacific Railroad bridge, mile 

227.0, and the Midsouth Railroad 

bridge, mile 228.2, are currently the 

only bridges governed by the regulations 

in 33 CFR 117.491(c), which state that, 

‘‘the draws of the bridges above mile 

105.8 through mile 234.4 shall open on 

signal if at least 48 hours notice is 

given.’’ 

Navigation on the Red River in the 

vicinity of these bridges consists 

primarily of recreational craft, and 

commercial use of the waterway is only 

possible during periods of high water. 

Moreover, the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers does not maintain any project 

depth or navigable channel on this 

reach of the Red River, nor does the U.S. 

Coast Guard maintain any aids to 

navigation above mile 211.4. Under 33 

CFR 117.491(d), the bridges above mile 

234.4 need not open for the passage of 

vessels. There are no alternate routes for 

vessels transiting this section of the Red 

River. 

Union Pacific Railroad owns the 

Union Pacific Railroad bridge, mile 

227.0, across the Red River at 

Shreveport, LA, and has requested that 

the drawbridge regulation be amended 

to allow the bridge to remain in the 

permanently closed position. Union 

Pacific provided the Coast Guard with 

bridge logs that indicate that there has 

been no request for a bridge opening 

since 2007. In the closed position, the 

Union Pacific Railroad bridge, mile 

227.0, provides 15.1 feet of vertical 

clearance at mean high water. 

Midsouth Railroad owns the 

Midsouth Railroad bridge, mile 228.2, 

across the Red River at Shreveport, LA, 

and has also requested that the 

drawbridge remain in the permanently 

closed position. Midsouth Railroad 

provided the Coast Guard with bridge 

logs that indicate that there has been no 

request for a bridge opening since 2007. 

In the closed position, the Midsouth 

Railroad bridge, mile 228.2, provides 

37.0 feet of vertical clearance at mean 

high water. 

Under 33 CFR 117.39, the District 

Commander may authorize a 

drawbridge to remain in the closed to 

navigation position and be untended 

when there have been no requests for 

drawbridge openings for two years. Due 

to the lack of significant navigation on 

this portion of the Red River that 

requires draws to open and the fact that 

there has been no request to open the 

draws in over ten years, the Coast Guard 

believes that this proposed rule is 

reasonable, and if implemented, should 

continue to meet the present and future 

needs of navigation. Based on the 

records provided by Union Pacific 

Railroad and Midsouth Railroad, it is 

expected that the proposed change will 

have no known impact to navigation or 

other waterway users. The Coast Guard 

proposes this rulemaking under 

authority of 33 U.S.C. 499. 

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The Coast Guard proposes to amend 

33 CFR 117.491(c), which governs the 

operating schedule of the draws of the 

Union Pacific Railroad bridge, mile 

marker (MM) 227.0 and the Midsouth 

Railroad bridge, MM 228.2, across the 

Red River at Shreveport, LA. The 

regulation currently requires the draws 

of the bridges above mile 105.8 through 

mile 234.4 to open on signal if at least 

48 hours’ notice is given. This proposed 

rule would allow the bridges to remain 

closed to the passage of vessels. 

However, pursuant to 33 CFR 117.39, 

this rulemaking would include a 

provision that requires the owner or 

agency controlling the bridge to the 

draw to full operation within three 

months if the District Commander 

provides a notification that needs of 

navigation require resumed operation of 

the spans. The regulatory text and 

changes we are proposing appear at the 

end of this document. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
28786 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 120 / Thursday, June 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

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 13771 directs agencies 

to control regulatory costs through a 

budgeting process. 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 (OMB) and 

pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt 

from the requirements of Executive 

Order 13771. 

This regulatory action determination 

is based on the fact that these 

drawbridges do not currently open for 

the passage of vessels due to the lack of 

navigation on the river. The last 

recorded opening of the drawbridges 

was in 2007. Consultation with the 

bridge owners indicated that currently 

no bridge tender positions are assigned 

to the bridges. 

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 

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 guide the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 

U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have made a 

preliminary determination that this 

action is one of a category of actions that 

do not individually or cumulatively 

have a significant effect on the human 

environment. This proposed rule 

involves changing the operating 

schedule that governs the draws of two 

bridges on the Red River near 

Shreveport, LA to remain permanently 

closed to navigation. Normally such 

actions are categorically excluded from 

further review, under paragraph L49 of 

Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction 

Manual 023–01–001–01, Rev. 01. A 

preliminary Record of Environmental 

Consideration is not required for this 

proposed 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. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 120 / Thursday, June 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules 28787 

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, visit http://

www.regulations.gov/privacynotice. 

Documents mentioned in this NPRM 

as being available in this docket and all 

public comments, will be in our online 

docket at http://www.regulations.gov 

and can be viewed by following that 

website’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 

■ 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. In § 117.491, revise paragraph (c) to 

read as follows: 

§ 117.491 Red River. 

* * * * * 

(c) The draws of the bridges above 

mile 105.8 through mile 234.4 need not 

open for passage of vessels. The owner 

or agency controlling the bridge must 

restore the draw to full operation within 

three months if notified by the District 

Commander that the needs of navigation 

require resumed operation of the spans. 

* * * * * 

Dated: June 12, 2018. 

P.F. Thomas, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

Eighth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13321 Filed 6–20–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket Number USCG–2018–0463] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone; Beaufort Water Festival 

Air Show, Beaufort, SC 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

establish a temporary safety zone on the 

waters of the Beaufort River in Beaufort, 

SC. The safety zone is needed to ensure 

safety of life on navigable waters of the 

United States during the Beaufort Water 

Festival Air Show. This proposed 

regulation will prohibit persons and 

vessels from entering, transiting 

through, anchoring in, or remaining 

within the regulated area unless 

authorized by the Captain of the Port 

Charleston (COTP) or a designated 

representative. We invite your 

comments on this proposed rulemaking. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before July 23, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2018–0463 using the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at http://

www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public 

Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for 

further instructions on submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions about this proposed 

rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant 

Justin Heck, Sector Charleston Office of 

Waterways Management, Coast Guard; 

telephone (843) 740–3184, email 

Justin.C.Heck@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking 

Pub. L. Public Law 

§ Section 

U.S.C. United States Code 

COTP Captain of the Port 

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal 

Basis 

On April 27, 2018, the Coast Guard 

received a marine event application for 

the 2018 Beaufort Water Festival Air 

Show that will take place from 12 p.m. 

until 5 p.m. on July 21, 2018. The safety 

zone is necessary to ensure the safety of 

life on the navigable waters of the 

United States during the Beaufort Water 

Festival Air Show. The COTP has 

determined that potential hazards 

associated with the airshow would be a 

safety concern for anyone within the 

regulated area. 

The purpose of this rulemaking is to 

ensure the safety of vessels and the 

navigable waters within the regulated 

area before, during, and after the 

scheduled event. The Coast Guard 

proposes this rulemaking under 

authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. 

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The COTP proposes to establish a 

safety zone from 12 p.m. until 5 p.m. on 

July 21, 2018. The safety zone would 

encompass a portion of the waterway 

that is 700 feet wide by 2600 feet in 

length on the waters of the Beaufort 

River in Beaufort, SC. No vessel or 

person would be permitted to enter, 

transit through, anchor in, or remain 

within the safety zone without obtaining 

permission from the COTP or a 

designated representative. The Coast 

Guard would provide notice of the 

safety zone by Local Notice to Mariners, 

Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and onscene designated representatives. The 

regulatory text we are proposing appears 

at the end of this document. 

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 a number of 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 13771 directs agencies 

to control regulatory costs through a 

budgeting process. 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 (OMB), and 

pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt 

from the requirements of Executive 

Order 13771. 

This regulatory action determination 

is based on the size, location, duration, 

and time-of-day of the safety zone. The 

safety zone will only be enforced for 5 

hours, vessel traffic will be able to safely 

operate in the surrounding area during 

the enforcement period, and the rule 

will allow vessels to seek permission to 

enter the zone. Moreover, the Coast 

Guard will provide advance notification 

of the safety zone to the local maritime 

community by Local Notice to Mariners 

and Broadcast Notice to Mariners via 

VHF–FM marine channel 16. 

B. Impact on Small Entities 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 

1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1