|
|---|
|
Safety Zone; Shore (Belt) Parkway Bridge Construction, Mill Basin; Brooklyn, NY Publication: Federal Register Agency: Coast Guard Byline: Captain Zeita Merchant Date: 1 March 2022 Subjects: American Government  , Roads & Highways
|
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 40 (Tuesday, March 1, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11308-11309]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04278]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG-2021-0848]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; Shore (Belt) Parkway Bridge Construction, Mill
Basin; Brooklyn, NY
AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is removing the safety zone that was
established by the Captain of the Port Sector New York on November 24,
2015, that can be found under Docket Number USCG-2014-1044, titled
``Safety Zone; Shore (Belt) Parkway Bridge Construction, Mill Basin;
Brooklyn, NY.'' The safety zone was established to protect persons and
vessels from potential hazards associated with bridge demolition and
construction operations. The Coast Guard received confirmation that the
bridge construction project is complete, and that the safety zone is no
longer enforced. This action removes the existing regulations related
to the safety zone.
DATES: This rule is effective March 1, 2022.
ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2021-0848 in the search box and click ``Search.'' Next, in the Document
Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email MST1 S. Stevenson, Waterways Management Division, U.S.
Coast Guard; telephone 719-354-4000, email D01-SMB-SecNY-Waterways@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the New York
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec. Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background Information and Regulatory History
On November 24, 2015, the Coast Guard established the safety zone
under Docket Number USCG-2014-1044, titled ``Safety Zone; Shore (Belt)
Parkway Bridge Construction, Mill Basin; Brooklyn, NY.'' The safety
zone was established to protect people and vessels from the potential
hazards associated with a bridge demolition and construction project.
The initial final rule stated that the Coast Guard will disestablish
the safety zone once the bridge project is complete. The Coast Guard
received confirmation on September 13, 2019, that the bridge project
was completed and enforcement of the safety zone was no longer
necessary.
The Coast Guard is issuing this final rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision
authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule. The safety zone has not been enforced since
the project was completed on September 13, 2019. Sufficient time has
passed since the completion of the bridge project and the last
enforcement of this safety zone for the Coast Guard to receive any
adverse public implications. In addition, during the initial NPRM
process for the establishment of the safety zone no adverse comments
were received that pertained to the Coast Guard disestablishing the
safety zone once the project was complete. Therefore the Coast Guard
has determined that it is unnecessary and contrary to the public
interest to publish an NPRM because this action is merely removing a
regulatory restriction that is no longer needed.
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. The safety zone is no longer
needed and has not been enforced since 2019. This rule requires an
administrative change to the Federal Register, in order to relieve a
regulatory restriction that is no longer applicable or necessary.
Therefore, a delayed effective date is unnecessary and contrary to the
pubic interest.
III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule
The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port New York
(COTP) has determined that the potential hazards associated with the
Shore (Belt) Parkway Bridge Construction are no longer present. On
November 13, 2019, the Coast Guard received confirmation that the
bridge project was complete and the safety zone was no longer enforced.
IV. Discussion of the Rule
On December 8, 2015, the Coast Guard published a final rule
``Safety Zone; Shore (Belt) Parkway Bridge Construction, Mill Basin;
Brooklyn, NY'' in the Federal Register (80 FR 76206). The safety zone
was necessary to protect people and vessels from potential hazards with
the bridge demolition and construction. The initial final rule that
established this safety zone stated that the Coast Guard would publish
a direct final rule once the bridge project is complete. The Coast
Guard has confirmed that the bridge project is complete and the safety
zone is no longer needed.
V. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this 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
[[Page 11309]]
alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
This regulatory action determination is based on the actions taken
to disestablish a safety zone are not considered a significant
regulatory action.
B. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 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 rule
will 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 V.A
above this final rule would not have a significant economic impact on
any vessel owner or operator.
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 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
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.
C. Collection of Information
This rule will not call for a 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 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 rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does 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.
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 rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have 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 rule involves
removing a safety zone that was established for bridge construction
operations that have since been completed. It is categorically excluded
from further review under paragraph L60(b) of Appendix A, Table 1 of
DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. For instructions on
locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email 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.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.2.
Sec. 165.161 [Removed]
0
2. Remove Sec. 165.161.
Dated: February 15, 2022.
Z. Merchant,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port New York.
[FR Doc. 2022-04278 Filed 2-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P