Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the waters of Tampa Bay, Florida in the vicinity of the Gandy Bridge, while bridge repairs are made. This rule is necessary to ensure the safety of the construction workers and mariners on the navigable waters of the United States.Start Printed Page 20012
This rule is effective from 2:30 p.m. on March 30, 2006 through 12 a.m. on May 1, 2006.
Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket are part of docket [COTP 06-063] and are available for inspection or copying at Coast Guard Sector St. Petersburg, Prevention Department, 155 Columbia Drive, Tampa, Florida 33606-3598 between 7:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Waterways Management Division at Coast Guard Sector St. Petersburg (813) 228-2191 Ext 8307.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. The information regarding the damage to the bridge was not received with sufficient time to publish an NPRM. Publishing an NPRM and delaying its effective date would be contrary to the public interest since immediate action is needed to minimize potential danger to the construction workers and mariners transiting the area. The Coast Guard will issue a broadcast notice to mariners to advise mariners of the restriction.
For the same reasons, 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 Coast Guard will issue a broadcast notice to mariners to advise mariners of the restriction.
Background and Purpose
On March 30, 2006 at approximately 12:20 p.m. local time, the tug CROSBY SKIPPER and an LPG barge collided with the Gandy Bridge. Damage to the bridge included pieces of concrete debris falling into the water. Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) will need to make emergency repairs to the bridge that will include having divers in the water. The repairs to the bridge will require vessels to be located in the area to effect repairs. The nature of the damage also presents a hazard to mariners transiting under the bridge due to falling debris. This work presents a hazard to the construction workers and mariners transiting the area. This safety zone is being established to ensure the safety of life on the navigable waters of the United States.
Discussion of Rule
The safety zone encompasses the following waters of Tampa Bay, Florida: all waters from surface to bottom, within a 50 yard radius of the following coordinates: 27°53′24″ N, 082°32′36″ W. Vessels are prohibited from anchoring, mooring, or transiting within this zone, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port St. Petersburg or his designated representative. The zone is effective from 2:30 p.m. on March 30, 2006 through 12 a.m. on May 1, 2006.
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. It is not “significant” under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. The location of this regulated area is expected to have minimal vessel traffic. Moreover, vessels may still enter the safety zone with the express permission of the Captain of the Port St. Petersburg or his designated representative.
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 may affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to transit near the Gandy Bridge from 2:30 p.m. on March 30, 2006 through 12 a.m. on May 1, 2006. This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This rule will be enforced in an area where marine traffic is expected to be minimal. Additionally, traffic will be allowed to enter the zone with the permission of the Captain of the Port St Petersburg 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), 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 entities may contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT for assistance in understanding and participating in this rulemaking. We also have a point of contact for commenting on actions by employees of the Coast Guard. 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).
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).
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 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. Start Printed Page 20013
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 may 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.
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.
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.
We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. A final “Environmental Analysis Check List” and a final “Categorical Exclusion Determination” are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.Start List of Subjects
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
- Marine safety
- Navigation (water)
- Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
- Security measures
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amendsEnd Amendment Part Start Part
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREASEnd Part Start Amendment Part
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:End Amendment Part Start Amendment Part
2. A new temporary § 165.T07-063 is added to read as follows:End Amendment Part
(a) Regulated area. The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the waters of Tampa Bay, Florida, in the vicinity of the Gandy bridge, that includes all the waters from surface to bottom, within a 50 yard radius of the following coordinates: 27°53′24″ N, 082°32′36″ W. All coordinates referenced use datum: NAD 83.
(b) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section:
Designated representative means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port (COTP) St. Petersburg, Florida, in the enforcement of regulated navigation areas and safety and security zones.
(c) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.23 of this part, no person or vessel may anchor, moor or transit the Regulated Area without the prior permission of the Captain of the Port St Petersburg, Florida, or his designated representative.
(d) Date. This rule is effective from 2:30 p.m. on March 30, 2006 through 12 a.m. on May 1, 2006.
Dated: March 30, 2006.
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, St. Petersburg, Florida.
[FR Doc. 06-3716 Filed 4-18-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P