2019-27175. Safety Zone; Big Foot Tension Leg Platform, Outer Continental Shelf on the Gulf of Mexico

AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard is proposing to establish a permanent safety zone around the Big Foot Tension Leg Platform (TLP), located in Walker Ridge 29 on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) in the Gulf of Mexico. The purpose of this proposed rule is to protect the facility from any dangers associated with vessels operating outside the normal shipping channels and fairways that are not providing service to or working with the facility. Placing a permanent safety zone around the facility will significantly reduce the threat of allisions, collisions, security breaches, oil spills, releases of natural gas, and thereby protect the safety of life, property, and the environment. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.

DATES:

Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before February 18, 2020.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2019-0402 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://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 LCDR Michael Dougherty, District Eight OCS, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone [phone], [e-mail].

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

Under the authority provided in 43 U.S.C. 1333, 46 U.S.C. 70034, and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1(90), Title 33, CFR 147.1, 147.5, and 147.10 permit the establishment of safety zones for facilities located on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) for the purpose of protecting life and property on the facilities, their appurtenances and attending vessels, and on the adjacent waters within the safety zones.

On July 17, 2015, the Coast Guard published an interim rule and request for comments titled Safety Zone; Big Foot TLP, Walker Ridge 29, Outer Continental Shelf on the Gulf of Mexico (80 FR 42385). In response to the rule, we received no comments. The rule established a temporary safety zone for the Big Foot TLP. On May 1, 2019, the Coast Guard received a request from the owner to make the safety zone permanent. This proposed 500-meter safety zone is necessary to protect the platform from inherent hazards associated with maritime traffic and to protect vessel traffic, the facility, and the marine environment.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

The Coast Guard proposes to establish an permanent OCS safety zone extending 500 meters (1,640.4 feet) from the coordinates: Latitude N 26-55 longitude W 90-31-14.952.

Transit into and through this area would be prohibited for any vessels not providing service to or working with the Big Foot Tension Leg Platform at Walker Ridge 29 (TLP) on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). Entry into this OCS safety zone would be prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District (District Commander) or a designated representative. Requests for entry would be considered and reviewed on a case-by-case basis.

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 proposed regulatory action determination is based on safety zone's location and its distance from both land and safety fairways. This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action due to the location of the TLP on the Outer Continental Shelf, and its distance from both land and safety fairways. Vessels traversing waters near the proposed safety zone would be able to safely travel around the zone using alternate routes. An exception to this proposed rule would include attending vessels, as defined by 33 CFR 147.20. The District Commander, or a designated representative, would consider requests to transit through the proposed safety zone on a case-by-case basis.

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 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 permanent safety zone might be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A above, this rule will 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 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 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 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 would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01 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 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 the establishment of a safety zone around an OCS facility to protect life, property and the marine environment. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) in Table 3-1 of U.S. Coast Guard Environmental Planning Implementing Procedures 5090.1. 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 https://www.regulations.gov. 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.

We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the docket, visit https://www.regulations.gov/​privacyNotice.

Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at https://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 147

• Continental shelf
• Marine safety
• Navigation (water)

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 147 as follows:

PART 147—SAFETY ZONES

1. The authority citation for part 147 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 14 U.S.C. 85; 43 U.S.C. 1333; and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

2. Amend 33 CFR 147.861 to read as follows:

§ 147.861

Safety Zone; Big Foot Tension Leg Platform, Outer Continental Shelf on the Gulf of Mexico.

(a) Description. The Big Foot Tension Leg Platform (TLP) is in the deepwater area of the Gulf of Mexico at Walker Ridge 29. The Big Foot TLP is located at latitude N 26-55.308 and longitude W 90-31-14.952, and the area within 500 meters of the Big Foot TLP, is a permanent safety zone.

(b) Regulation. No vessel may enter or remain in this safety zone except for the following:

(1) An attending vessel, as defined by 33 CFR 147.20, or

(2) A vessel authorized by the Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District or a designated representative.

Dated: December 10, 2019.

John P. Nadeau,

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