Safety Zone; Pleasure Beach Piers, Bridgeport, CT

AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Temporary final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the navigable waters of Pleasure Beach, Bridgeport, CT for the Pleasure Beach Piers. This temporary final rule is necessary to provide for the safety of life on navigable waters. Entry into, transit through, mooring, or anchoring within the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by Captain of the Port (COTP) Long Island Sound.

DATES:

This rule is effective without actual notice from August 1, 2017 until June 30, 2018. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from July 1, 2017 until August 1, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,, type USCG-2015-1088 and USCG-2015-1123 in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this rule, contact Petty Officer Katherine Linnick, Prevention Department, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Long Island Sound, telephone (203) 468-4565, email Katherine.E.Linnick@uscg.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

COTP Captain of the Port

DHS Department of Homeland Security

FR Federal Register

LIS Long Island Sound

NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

NAD83 North American Datum 1983

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

This rulemaking establishes a safety zone for the waters around the Pleasure Beach Piers, Bridgeport, CT. Corresponding regulatory history is discussed below.

The Coast Guard was made aware on December 9, 2015, of damage to Pleasure Beach Bridge, the result of which created a hazard to navigation. On December 22, 2015, the Coast Guard published a temporary final rule entitled, “Safety Zone; Pleasure Beach Bridge, Bridgeport, CT” in the Federal Register (80 FR 79480). On June 23, 2016, the Coast Guard published a second temporary final rule entitled, “Safety Zone; Pleasure Beach Bridge, Bridgeport, CT” in the Federal Register (81 FR 40814). On July 25, 2016, the Coast Guard published a third temporary final rule entitled, “Safety Zone; Pleasure Beach Bridge, Bridgeport, CT” in the Federal Register (81 FR 48329). On January 19, 2017, the Coast Guard published a fourth temporary final rule entitled, “Safety Zone; Pleasure Beach Bridge, Bridgeport, CT” in the Federal Register (82 FR 6250).

The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary 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)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM with respect to this rule because doing so would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest. A solution to remedy the safety hazards associated with this structure was initially projected to be completed prior to the expiration of the current safety zone, but has been delayed. It would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest to delay promulgating this rule, as it is necessary to protect the safety of waterway users.

We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), and for the same reasons stated in the preceding paragraph, the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

The legal basis for this temporary rule is 33 U.S.C. 1231.

On December 9, 2015, the Coast Guard was made aware of damage sustained to Pleasure Beach Bridge, Bridgeport, CT that has created a hazard to navigation. After further analysis of the bridge structure, the Coast Guard concluded that the overall condition of the structure restricts, endangers, and interferes with navigation. The COTP LIS has determined that the safety zone established by this temporary final rule is necessary to provide for the safety of life on navigable waterways.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

The safety zone established by this rule will cover all navigable waters of the entrance channel to Johnsons Creek in the vicinity of the Pleasure Beach Piers, Bridgeport, CT. This safety zone will be bound inside an area that starts at a point on land at position 41-10.2 N., 073-10.7 W. and then east along the shoreline to a point on land at position 41-9.57 N., 073-9.54 W. and then south across the channel to a point on land at position 41-9.52 N., 073-9.58 W. and then west along the shoreline to a point on land at position 41-9.52 N., 073-10.5 W. and then north across the channel back to the point of origin.

This rule prohibits vessels from entering, transiting, mooring, or anchoring within the area specifically designated as a safety zone unless authorized by the COTP or designated representative.

The Coast Guard will notify the public and local mariners of this safety zone through appropriate means, which may include, but are not limited to, publication in the Federal Register, the Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

V. Regulatory Analyses

We developed this 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. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.

The Coast Guard determined that this rulemaking is not a significant regulatory action for the following reasons: (1) Persons or vessels desiring to enter the safety zone may do so with permission from the COTP LIS or a designated representative; and (2) the Coast Guard will notify the public of this rule via appropriate means, such as via Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners to increase public awareness of this safety zone.

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 safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.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 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.

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 proposed 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. If you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

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 Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 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 temporary rule involves the establishment of a safety zone of limited duration. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. A Record of Environmental Consideration (REC) for Categorically Excluded Actions will be available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this 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.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

• Harbors
• Marine safety
• Navigation (water)
• Reporting and record keeping 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; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

2. Add § 165.T01-1088 to read as follows: