2011-16245. Safety Zone; Hylebos Bridge Restoration, Hylebos Waterway, Tacoma, WA

AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Temporary final rule.

SUMMARY:

The U.S. Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone extending 50 yards to the north and south of the Hylebos Bridge, Tacoma, WA in both directions along the entire length of the Hylebos Bridge to ensure the safety of the boating public during the Hylebos Bridge restoration project. This safety zone is necessary to protect vessels transiting in the vicinity of the Hylebos Bridge from falling debris resulting from concrete removal performed as part of the bridge restoration.

DATES:

This rule is effective from 6 a.m. on August 20, 2011 through 6 p.m. on August 22, 2011. The rule will be enforced daily from 6 a.m. until 6 p.m. from August 20, 2011 through August 22, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of docket USCG-2011-0114 and are available online by going to http://www.regulations.gov,, inserting USCG-2011-0114 in the “Keyword” box, and then clicking “Search.” This material is also available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this temporary rule, call or e-mail Ensign Anthony P. LaBoy, USCG Sector Puget Sound Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard; telephone [phone], e-mail [e-mail]. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone [phone].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

On March 18, 2011, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled Safety Zone; 2011 Hylebos Bridge Restoration, Hylebos Waterway, Tacoma, WA in the Federal Register (76 FR 14829). We received 0 comments on the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was held.

Background and Purpose

The Hylebos Bridge restoration involves removal of deteriorated concrete from the Hylebos Bridge and refinishing the bridge's surface. The project poses a safety risk to any vessel traffic in the vicinity below the bridge due to potential falling debris. The hydro demolition machine that will be used can remove up to 16 inches of concrete in a single pass presenting a major safety hazard to vessels, persons, or property below. This safety zone will be enforced daily from 6 a.m. until 6 p.m. from August 20, 2011 through August 22, 2011, unless canceled sooner by the Captain of the Port.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

The notice of proposed rulemaking for this rule did not receive any comments.

Regulatory Analyses

We developed this 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, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order.

The Coast Guard bases this finding on the fact that the safety zone is small in size, short in duration, and maritime traffic will be able to transit this area during times when the zone is not enforced. Maritime traffic may also request permission to transit through the zone from the Captain of the Port, Puget Sound or Designated Representative.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact on a 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 rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in a portion of the Hylebos Waterway from 6 a.m. until 6 p.m. from August 20, 2011 through August 22, 2011. This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, because the safety zone is short in duration, is minimal in size, and maritime traffic will be allowed to transit through the safety zone with the permission of the Captain of the Port, Puget Sound or Designated Representative.

Assistance for Small Entities

Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), in the NPRM we offered to assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. 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.

Collection of Information

This rule calls for no 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 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 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 rule will not effect 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 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 rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and does not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

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.

Energy Effects

We have analyzed this 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

We have analyzed this 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 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule involves the establishment of a temporary safety zone. An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

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

1. The authority citation for Part 165 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1

2. Add § 165.T13-177 to read as follows:

§ 165.T13-177

Safety Zone; 2011 Hylebos Bridge Restoration, Hylebos Waterway, Tacoma, Washington.

(a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters extending 50 yards to the north and south, along the entire length of the Hylebos Bridge in Tacoma, WA.

(b) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations in 33 CFR Part 165, Subpart C, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the safety zone without permission of the Captain of the Port or Designated Representative. See 33 CFR Part 165, Subpart C, for additional requirements. Vessel operators wishing to enter the zone during the enforcement period must request permission for entry by contacting Vessel Traffic Service Puget Sound on VHF channel 14, or the Sector Puget Sound Joint Harbor Operations Center at [phone].

(c) Authorization. All vessel operators who desire to transit through or remain in the safety zone must obtain permission from the Captain of the Port or Designated Representative. The Captain of the Port may be assisted by federal, state, or local agencies as needed.

(d) Enforcement Period. This rule is enforced daily from 6 a.m. until 6 p.m. from August 20, 2011 through August 22, 2011 unless canceled sooner by the Captain of the Port.

Dated: June 3, 2011.

S.J. Ferguson,

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Puget Sound.