Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 114 / Tuesday, June 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 35939 

extended to include all required 

restatements made to correct an error in 

previously issued financial statements; 

and (iii) briefly discusses some potential 

implications for the costs and benefits of 

the proposed rules. 

We believe that the information 

presented in the memorandum has the 

potential to be informative for 

evaluating the proposed rules. We are, 

therefore, reopening the comment 

period for an additional 30 days to 

permit interested parties to comment on 

the staff memorandum, which has been 

included in the comment file. 

By the Commission. 

Dated: June 8, 2022. 

Vanessa A. Countryman, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2022–12792 Filed 6–13–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[Docket No. USCG–2022–0226] 

RIN 1625–AA09 

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; 

Milford Haven, Hudgins, VA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

modify the operating schedule that 

governs the SR223 (Gwynn’s Island) 

Bridge, across Milford Haven, mile 0.1, 

at Hudgins, Virginia. This proposed 

temporary modification will allow the 

drawbridge to be maintained in the 

closed-to-navigation position and is 

necessary to accommodate bridge 

maintenance. We invite your comments 

on this proposed rulemaking. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

July 1, 2022. The Coast Guard 

anticipates that this proposed rule will 

be effective from 2 a.m. on August 19, 

2022, through 11 p.m. on April 15, 

2023. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2022–2026 using Federal Decision 

Making Portal at https://

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 Ms. Crystal Tucker, 

Bridge Administration Branch Fifth 

District, Coast Guard telephone 757– 

398–6422, email Crystal.k.tucker@

uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(Advance, Supplemental) 

§ Section 

U.S.C. United States Code 

II. Background, Purpose and Legal 

Basis 

The Virginian Department of 

Transportation, who owns and operates 

the SR223 (Gwynn’s Island) Bridge, 

across Milford Haven, mile 0.1, at 

Hudgins, Virginia, has requested this 

modification to allow the drawbridge to 

be maintained in the closed-tonavigation position to facilitate 

maintenance of the drawbridge. 

The SR223 (Gwynn’s Island) Bridge, 

across Milford Haven, mile 0.1, at 

Hudgins, Virginia has a vertical 

clearance of 12 feet above mean high 

water in the closed position and 

unlimited vertical clearance above mean 

high water in the open position. The 

current operating schedule for the 

drawbridge is published in 33 CFR 

117.5. 

This proposed rule is necessary to 

facilitate safe and effective bridge 

maintenance of the drawbridge, while 

providing for the reasonable needs of 

navigation. Vessels that can safely 

transit through the bridge in the closed 

position with the reduced clearance 

may do so, if at least a thirty-minute 

notice is given, to allow for navigation 

safety. The SR223 (Gwynn’s Island) 

Bridge is the only land-based method 

for access on and off Gwynn’s Island, 

therefore, placing the bridge in the open 

position to perform extensive bridge 

maintenance would adversely affect 

residents on the island. 

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule 

Under this proposed rule, the 

drawbridge will be maintained in the 

closed-to-navigation position twentyfour hours a day, seven days a week 

from 2 a.m. on August 19, 2022, through 

11 p.m. on April 15, 2023. This 

proposed rule is necessary to 

accommodate extensive maintenance on 

the SR223 (Gwynn’s Island) Bridge. 

The bridge will not be able to open for 

emergencies and there is no immediate 

alternative route for vessels unable to 

pass through the bridge in the closed 

position. Vessels that can safely transit 

through the bridge in the closed 

position with the reduced vertical 

clearance may do so, if at least a thirtyminute notice is given, to allow for 

navigation safety. 

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. 

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). 

This regulatory action determination 

is a result of pre rulemaking 

coordination with maritime 

stakeholders including federal agencies. 

This proposed rule effectively balances 

the competing interests of land and 

maritime transportation. 

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 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
35940 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 114 / Tuesday, June 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

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 section. 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 

Governments 

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. 

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 rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 023–01, Rev.1, 

associated implementing instructions, 

and Environmental Planning Policy 

COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which 

guide the Coast Guard in complying 

with the National Environmental Policy 

Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321– 

4370f). The Coast Guard has determined 

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 promulgates the operating 

regulations or procedures for 

drawbridges. Normally such actions are 

categorically excluded from further 

review, under paragraph L49, of Chapter 

3, Table 3–1 of the U.S. Coast Guard 

Environmental Planning 

Implementation Procedures. 

Neither a Record of Environmental 

Consideration nor a Memorandum for 

the Record are 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. 

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 Decision 

Making Portal at https:// 

www.regulations.gov. To do so, go to 

https://www.regulations.gov, type 

USCG–2022–0226 in the search box and 

click ‘‘Search.’’ Next, look for this 

document in the Search Results column, 

and click on it. Then click on the 

Comment option. If your material 

cannot be submitted using https://

www.regulations.gov, contact the person 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section of this document for 

alternate instructions. 

To view documents mentioned in this 

proposed rule as being available in the 

docket, find the docket as described in 

the previous paragraph, and then select 

‘‘Supporting & Related Material’’ in the 

Document Type column. Public 

comments will also be placed in our 

online docket and can be viewed by 

following instructions on the https://

www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked 

Questions web page. We review all 

comments received, but we will only 

post comments that address the topic of 

the proposed rule. We may choose not 

to post off-topic, inappropriate, or 

duplicate comments that we receive. 

We accept anonymous comments. 

Comments we post to https://

www.regulations.gov will include any 

personal information you have 

provided. For more about privacy and 

submissions in response to this 

document, see DHS’s eRulemaking 

System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, 

March 11, 2020). 

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. Add § 117.1017T to read as follows: 

§ 117. 1017T Milford Haven. 

The draw of the SR223 (Gwynn’s 

Island) Bridge, mile 0.1, in Hudgins, 

need not be open for vessels from 2 a.m. 

on July 19, 2022, through 11 p.m. on 

April 15, 2023. 

Dated: June 8, 2022. 

S.N. Gilreath, 

Rear Admiral U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

Fifth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 2022–12783 Filed 6–13–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Part 367 

[Docket No. FMCSA–2022–0001] 

RIN 2126–AC51 

Fees for the Unified Carrier 

Registration Plan and Agreement 

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA), Department 

of Transportation (DOT). 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1