Safety Zone; Wantagh Parkway 3 Bridge Over the Sloop Channel, Town of Hempstead, NY, 30635-30638 [05-10591]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 102 / Friday, May 27, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
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 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 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
VerDate jul<14>2003
19:56 May 26, 2005
Jkt 205001
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.
30635
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
I 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:
I
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR
1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Pub. L.
107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
I 2. Add § 165.T07–147 to read as
follows:
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.
§ 165.T07–147
Florida.
Environment
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. This rule is a safety
zone and therefore fits the category
described in paragraph (34)(g). Under
figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(g), of the
Instruction, an ‘‘Environmental Analysis
Check List’’ and a ‘‘Categorical
Exclusion Determination’’ are not
required for this rule.
Dated: May 11, 2005.
J.M. Farley,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, Tampa, Florida.
[FR Doc. 05–10588 Filed 5–26–05; 8:45 am]
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Safety Zone; Tampa Bay,
(a) Regulated area. The following area
is a safety zone: The waters of Garrison
Channel east of an imaginary line
connecting point 1: 27°56′32″ N,
082°27′58″ W; south to point 2:
27°56′27″ N, 082°27′58″ W; and
including Ybor Turning Basin, Ybor
Channel, and all waters in Sparkman
Channel north of an imaginary line
connecting point 3: 27°55′32″ N,
082°26′55″ W, east to point 4: 27°55′32″
N, 082°26′47″ W.
(b) Regulations. In accordance with
the general regulations in § 165.23 of
this part, entry into this zone is
prohibited to all vessels and persons
without the prior permission of the
Coast Guard Captain of the Port Tampa
or designated representative.
(c) Date. This rule is effective from
8:30 p.m. until 9:20 p.m. on May 29,
2005.
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD01–05–050]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; Wantagh Parkway 3
Bridge Over the Sloop Channel, Town
of Hempstead, NY
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\27MYR1.SGM
Coast Guard, DHS.
27MYR1
30636
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 102 / Friday, May 27, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
Temporary final rule; change in
effective period.
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is extending
the effective period of a safety zone in
the waters surrounding the Wantagh
Parkway Number 3 Bridge across the
Sloop Channel in Town of Hempstead,
New York. This change will extend the
effective period of the temporary final
rule until December 31, 2005, allowing
time for the completion of the bascule
bridge being constructed over the Sloop
Channel. This rule will continue to
prevent vessels from transiting the
Sloop Channel within 300 yards of the
Wantagh Parkway Number 3 Bridge and
continues to be necessary in order to
protect vessels transiting in the area
from hazards imposed by construction
barges and equipment. Entry into this
zone is prohibited unless authorized by
the Captain of the Port Long Island
Sound, New Haven, Connecticut.
DATES: The extended period of
§ 165.T01–155 is effective from 12 a.m.
on June 1, 2005 until 11:59 p.m. on
December 31, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this
preamble as being available in the
docket are part of docket CGD01–05–
050 and will be available for inspection
or copying at Group/MSO Long Island
Sound, New Haven, CT, between 9 a.m.
and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lieutenant A. Logman, Chief,
Waterways Management Division, Coast
Guard Group/Marine Safety Office Long
Island Sound at (203) 468–4429.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory History
On January 12, 2005 we published a
temporary final rule (TFR entitled
‘‘Safety Zone: Wantagh Parkway 3
Bridge Over the Sloop Channel, Town of
Hempstead, NY’’ in the Federal Register
(70 FR 2017). The effective period for
this rule was from 12:01 a.m. on January
1, 2005 until 11:59 p.m. on May 31,
2005. We did not publish a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this
regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3) and
553 (d)(3) the Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists for not publishing an
NPRM and for making this regulation
effective less than 30 days after Federal
Register publication.
Any delay encountered in this
regulation’s effective date would be
impracticable and contrary to public
interest since immediate action is
needed to restrict and control maritime
traffic transiting in the vicinity of the
Sloop Channel under the Wantagh
Parkway Number 3 Bridge in the Town
VerDate jul<14>2003
19:56 May 26, 2005
Jkt 205001
of Hempstead, Nassau County, Long
Island, New York. In 2003, the Coast
Guard approved bridge construction and
issued a permit for bridge construction
for the Wantagh Parkway Number 3
Bridge over the Sloop Channel.
Contractors began work constructing the
two bascule piers for the new bridge in
early June 2004. A safety zone was not
deemed necessary at the inception of
the construction, as this channel is
primarily used by smaller recreational
vessels, which could maneuver outside
of the channel. However, bridge
construction equipment that remains
under the Wantagh Parkway Number 3
Bridge poses a potential hazard greater
than originally anticipated. A safety
zone was deemed necessary and was
established on October 9, 2004 through
December 31, 2004, the date when
construction impacting the navigable
channel was estimated to be complete.
A second safety zone was implemented
from January 1, 2005 until May 31,
2005, after the New York State
Department of Transportation advised
the Coast Guard that construction of the
Wantagh Parkway Number 3 Bridge was
experiencing delays, requiring
equipment to be in the channel in a
manner that would leave the waterway
unsafe to marine traffic until May 31,
2005. In a letter dated April 8, 2005, the
New York State Department of
Transportation (NYSDOT) again
requested an extension of the safety
zone surrounding in the Sloop Channel
until December 31, 2005. The contractor
for this project has experienced
significant delays in bridge
construction. In order to continue
construction in a more rapid and safe
manner, barges will need to
continuously block the channel under
the bridge.
The delay inherent in the NPRM
process is contrary to the public interest
and impracticable, because immediate
action is needed to extend this safety
zone to continue to prevent accidents by
vessels transiting the area with the
construction equipment. This is acutely
necessary during the summer months,
when recreational traffic will
significantly increase in this area.
Background and Purpose
Currently, there is a fixed bridge, the
Wantagh Parkway Number 3 Bridge over
the Sloop Channel in the Town of
Hempstead, New York. New York
Department of Transportation
determined that a moveable bridge
would benefit the boating community.
In 2003, the Coast Guard approved
bridge construction and issued a permit
for bridge construction for the Wantagh
Parkway Number 3 Bridge over the
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Sloop Channel. Contractors began work
constructing the two-bascule piers for
the new bridge in early June 2004. The
equipment necessary for the
construction of the bridge occupies the
entire navigable channel. While there
are side channels, which can be
navigated, the equipment in the channel
is extensive and poses a hazard to
recreational vessels attempting to transit
the waterway via the side channels
under the bridge. Construction,
requiring equipment in the navigable
channel, was originally scheduled to
end on December 31, 2004. A second
safety zone was established until May
31, 2005 after the Coast Guard was
notified that the project had
experienced delays in construction.
Significant additional delays in
construction require this equipment to
occupy the navigable channel until
December 31, 2005. To ensure the
continued safety of the boating
community, the Coast Guard is
extending the safety zone in place in all
waters of the Sloop Channel within 300
yards of the bridge. This safety zone is
necessary to protect the safety of the
boating community who wish to utilize
the Sloop Channel. Marine traffic may
transit safely outside of the safety zone
during the effective dates of the safety
zone, allowing navigation in the Sloop
Channel, except the portion delineated
by this rule.
Discussion of Rule
This regulation extends the effective
period of a temporary safety zone on the
waters of the Sloop Channel within 300yards of the Wantagh Parkway Bridge.
This action is intended to prohibit
vessel traffic in a portion of the Sloop
Channel in the Town of Hempstead,
New York to provide for the safety of
the boating community due to the
hazards posed by significant
construction equipment and barges
located in the waterway for the
construction of a new bascule bridge.
The safety zone is being extended until
11:59 p.m. on December 31, 2005.
Marine traffic may continue to transit
safely outside of the safety zone during
the effective dates of the safety zone,
allowing navigation in the Sloop
Channel, except the portion delineated
by this rule. Vessels may utilize the
Goose Neck Channel as an alternative
route to using the Sloop Channel,
adding minimal additional transit time.
Entry into this zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port,
Long Island Sound.
Any violation of the safety zone
described herein is punishable by,
among others, civil and criminal
E:\FR\FM\27MYR1.SGM
27MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 102 / Friday, May 27, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
penalties, in rem liability against the
offending vessel, and license sanctions.
Regulatory Evaluation
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 will be so minimal that a full
Regulatory Evaluation under the
regulatory policies and procedures of
DHS is unnecessary. This regulation
may have some impact on the public,
but the potential impact will be
minimized for the following reasons:
Vessels may transit in all areas of the
Sloop Channel and other than the area
of the safety zone, and may utilize other
routes with minimal increased transit
time.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this rule will 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 or anchor in
those portions of the Sloop Channel in
the Town of Hempstead, New York
covered by the safety zone. For the
reasons outlined in the Regulatory
Evaluation section above, this rule will
not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule would have a
significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it
qualifies and how and to what degree
this rule would economically affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under subsection 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
VerDate jul<14>2003
19:56 May 26, 2005
Jkt 205001
Fairness Act of 1996 [Pub. L. 104–121],
the Coast Guard wants to assist small
entities in understanding this rule so
that they can better evaluate its effects
on them and participate in the
rulemaking. If this rule will affect your
small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please call
Lieutenant A. Logman, Waterways
Management Officer, Group/Marine
Safety Office Long Island Sound, at
(203) 468–4429.
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).
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 or more in any one year.
Though this rule will not result in such
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of
this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This rule will not affect a taking of
private property or otherwise have
taking implications under Executive
Order 12630, Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
30637
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
will not concern 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 will 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.
To help the Coast Guard establish
regular and meaningful consultation
and collaboration with Indian and
Alaskan Native tribes, we published a
notice in the Federal Register (66 FR
36361, July 11, 2001) requesting
comments on how to best carry out the
Order. We invite your comments on
how this rule might impact tribal
governments, even if that impact may
not constitute a ‘‘tribal implication’’
under the Order.
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. It has not been designated by the
Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs 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
E:\FR\FM\27MYR1.SGM
27MYR1
30638
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 102 / Friday, May 27, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
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.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Environment
The Coast Guard considered the
environmental impact of this rule and
concluded that, under figure 2–1,
paragraph 34(g), of Commandant
Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is
categorically excluded from further
environmental documentation. A
Categorical Exclusion Determination is
available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES.
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is
establishing a safety zone surrounding
the El Segundo offshore marine terminal
near Los Angeles, California. This action
is necessary to ensure public safety and
reduce the likelihood of a collision or
other casualty involving a tank vessel
moored at the offshore marine terminal.
Entry into this zone will be prohibited
unless specifically authorized by the
Captain of the Port Los Angeles-Long
Beach.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
DATES:
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:
I
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226 and 1231; 46
U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33
CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department
of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Revise temporary § 165.T01–155(b)
to read as follows:
I
§ 165.T01–155 Safety Zone: Wantagh
Parkway Number 3 Bridge over the Sloop
Channel, Town of Hempstead, NY.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Effective date. This section is
effective from 12:01 a.m. on January 1,
2005 until 11:59 p.m. on December 31,
2005.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: May 18, 2005.
Peter J. Boynton,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, Long Island Sound.
[FR Doc. 05–10591 Filed 5–26–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
VerDate jul<14>2003
19:56 May 26, 2005
Jkt 205001
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[COTP Los Angeles-Long Beach 03–002]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; Offshore Marine Terminal,
El Segundo, CA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
This rule is effective June 27,
2005.
Comments and material
received from the public, as well as
documents indicated in this preamble as
being available in the docket, are part of
docket COTP Los Angeles-Long Beach
03–002 and are available for inspection
or copying at U.S. Coast Guard Marine
Safety Office/Group Los Angeles-Long
Beach, Waterways Management
Division, 1001 South Seaside Avenue,
Building 20, San Pedro, California,
90731 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lieutenant Peter Gooding, Chief of
Waterways Management Division, (310)
732–2020.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
Regulatory Information
On July 10, 2003, we published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
entitled ‘‘Safety Zone; Offshore Marine
Terminal, El Segundo, CA’’ in the
Federal Register (68 FR 41091). We
received nine letters commenting on the
proposed rule. No public meeting was
requested, and none was held.
Background and Purpose
The Chevron Texaco Shipping
Company requested that the Coast
Guard establish a safety zone around the
El Segundo offshore marine terminal
near Los Angeles, California, to promote
the safety of life and property at the
facility and on the adjacent waters
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
within the safety zone—including tank
vessels and their crews, their
apparatuses, and attending vessels and
their crews.
El Segundo offshore marine terminal
is located approximately 1 nautical mile
offshore El Segundo in Santa Monica
Bay, between Marina Del Rey and
Redondo Beach, California. The offshore
marine terminal consists of several
tanker mooring buoys and seafloor
pipelines connected to the mainland
terminal. Large tank vessels are secured
to tanker mooring buoys using multiple
sets of mooring lines. Underwater
pipelines that extend seaward from the
mainland terminal rise up from the
ocean bottom and are secured to both
the buoys and the tankers. As a result,
there are numerous mooring lines,
pipelines, and other critical apparatuses
that exist above, below, and on the
surface of the water presenting an
especially hazardous condition for other
vessels transiting through this area. The
hazards have contributed to vessel
casualties resulting in pollution and in
at least one case, a fatality. These
conditions are present at all times,
whether or not a tanker is in the
offshore marine terminal.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
The Coast Guard received a total of
nine letters in response to the notice of
proposed rulemaking. What follows is a
review of, and the Coast Guard’s
response to, the issues and questions
that were presented by these
commenters concerning the proposed
regulations.
(1) Four commenters indicated that
buoys should be placed at the corners of
the safety zone to give a visual
indication to boaters passing nearby.
The National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
publishes charts of this area. A notation
of the safety zone will be placed on the
chart to advise mariners of the safety
zone. In addition, NOAA is publishing
a new chart for the El Segundo area that
will show much greater detail of the
surrounding area. This chart should
provide sufficient aid for boaters to
identify the safety zone without the
placement of buoys which may interfere
with vessels permitted to enter the zone.
(2) Two commenters indicated that
publication of the safety zone needed to
be widespread to ensure boaters are
aware of the new zone.
In addition to appearing in the
Federal Register, news of this safety
zone will be published in the Notice to
Mariners, Coast Pilot, and local boating
publications to ensure wide
dissemination of information about this
safety zone.
E:\FR\FM\27MYR1.SGM
27MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 102 (Friday, May 27, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30635-30638]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-10591]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD01-05-050]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; Wantagh Parkway 3 Bridge Over the Sloop Channel,
Town of Hempstead, NY
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
[[Page 30636]]
ACTION: Temporary final rule; change in effective period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is extending the effective period of a safety
zone in the waters surrounding the Wantagh Parkway Number 3 Bridge
across the Sloop Channel in Town of Hempstead, New York. This change
will extend the effective period of the temporary final rule until
December 31, 2005, allowing time for the completion of the bascule
bridge being constructed over the Sloop Channel. This rule will
continue to prevent vessels from transiting the Sloop Channel within
300 yards of the Wantagh Parkway Number 3 Bridge and continues to be
necessary in order to protect vessels transiting in the area from
hazards imposed by construction barges and equipment. Entry into this
zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Long
Island Sound, New Haven, Connecticut.
DATES: The extended period of Sec. 165.T01-155 is effective from 12
a.m. on June 1, 2005 until 11:59 p.m. on December 31, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket CGD01-05-050 and will be available for
inspection or copying at Group/MSO Long Island Sound, New Haven, CT,
between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant A. Logman, Chief, Waterways
Management Division, Coast Guard Group/Marine Safety Office Long Island
Sound at (203) 468-4429.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory History
On January 12, 2005 we published a temporary final rule (TFR
entitled ``Safety Zone: Wantagh Parkway 3 Bridge Over the Sloop
Channel, Town of Hempstead, NY'' in the Federal Register (70 FR 2017).
The effective period for this rule was from 12:01 a.m. on January 1,
2005 until 11:59 p.m. on May 31, 2005. We did not publish a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this regulation. Under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3) and 553 (d)(3) the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists
for not publishing an NPRM and for making this regulation effective
less than 30 days after Federal Register publication.
Any delay encountered in this regulation's effective date would be
impracticable and contrary to public interest since immediate action is
needed to restrict and control maritime traffic transiting in the
vicinity of the Sloop Channel under the Wantagh Parkway Number 3 Bridge
in the Town of Hempstead, Nassau County, Long Island, New York. In
2003, the Coast Guard approved bridge construction and issued a permit
for bridge construction for the Wantagh Parkway Number 3 Bridge over
the Sloop Channel. Contractors began work constructing the two bascule
piers for the new bridge in early June 2004. A safety zone was not
deemed necessary at the inception of the construction, as this channel
is primarily used by smaller recreational vessels, which could maneuver
outside of the channel. However, bridge construction equipment that
remains under the Wantagh Parkway Number 3 Bridge poses a potential
hazard greater than originally anticipated. A safety zone was deemed
necessary and was established on October 9, 2004 through December 31,
2004, the date when construction impacting the navigable channel was
estimated to be complete. A second safety zone was implemented from
January 1, 2005 until May 31, 2005, after the New York State Department
of Transportation advised the Coast Guard that construction of the
Wantagh Parkway Number 3 Bridge was experiencing delays, requiring
equipment to be in the channel in a manner that would leave the
waterway unsafe to marine traffic until May 31, 2005. In a letter dated
April 8, 2005, the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT)
again requested an extension of the safety zone surrounding in the
Sloop Channel until December 31, 2005. The contractor for this project
has experienced significant delays in bridge construction. In order to
continue construction in a more rapid and safe manner, barges will need
to continuously block the channel under the bridge.
The delay inherent in the NPRM process is contrary to the public
interest and impracticable, because immediate action is needed to
extend this safety zone to continue to prevent accidents by vessels
transiting the area with the construction equipment. This is acutely
necessary during the summer months, when recreational traffic will
significantly increase in this area.
Background and Purpose
Currently, there is a fixed bridge, the Wantagh Parkway Number 3
Bridge over the Sloop Channel in the Town of Hempstead, New York. New
York Department of Transportation determined that a moveable bridge
would benefit the boating community. In 2003, the Coast Guard approved
bridge construction and issued a permit for bridge construction for the
Wantagh Parkway Number 3 Bridge over the Sloop Channel. Contractors
began work constructing the two-bascule piers for the new bridge in
early June 2004. The equipment necessary for the construction of the
bridge occupies the entire navigable channel. While there are side
channels, which can be navigated, the equipment in the channel is
extensive and poses a hazard to recreational vessels attempting to
transit the waterway via the side channels under the bridge.
Construction, requiring equipment in the navigable channel, was
originally scheduled to end on December 31, 2004. A second safety zone
was established until May 31, 2005 after the Coast Guard was notified
that the project had experienced delays in construction. Significant
additional delays in construction require this equipment to occupy the
navigable channel until December 31, 2005. To ensure the continued
safety of the boating community, the Coast Guard is extending the
safety zone in place in all waters of the Sloop Channel within 300
yards of the bridge. This safety zone is necessary to protect the
safety of the boating community who wish to utilize the Sloop Channel.
Marine traffic may transit safely outside of the safety zone during the
effective dates of the safety zone, allowing navigation in the Sloop
Channel, except the portion delineated by this rule.
Discussion of Rule
This regulation extends the effective period of a temporary safety
zone on the waters of the Sloop Channel within 300-yards of the Wantagh
Parkway Bridge. This action is intended to prohibit vessel traffic in a
portion of the Sloop Channel in the Town of Hempstead, New York to
provide for the safety of the boating community due to the hazards
posed by significant construction equipment and barges located in the
waterway for the construction of a new bascule bridge. The safety zone
is being extended until 11:59 p.m. on December 31, 2005. Marine traffic
may continue to transit safely outside of the safety zone during the
effective dates of the safety zone, allowing navigation in the Sloop
Channel, except the portion delineated by this rule. Vessels may
utilize the Goose Neck Channel as an alternative route to using the
Sloop Channel, adding minimal additional transit time. Entry into this
zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, Long
Island Sound.
Any violation of the safety zone described herein is punishable by,
among others, civil and criminal
[[Page 30637]]
penalties, in rem liability against the offending vessel, and license
sanctions.
Regulatory Evaluation
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 will be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. This regulation may have some
impact on the public, but the potential impact will be minimized for
the following reasons: Vessels may transit in all areas of the Sloop
Channel and other than the area of the safety zone, and may utilize
other routes with minimal increased transit time.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule will 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 or anchor in those portions of the Sloop Channel in the Town of
Hempstead, New York covered by the safety zone. For the reasons
outlined in the Regulatory Evaluation section above, this rule will not
have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under subsection 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 [Pub. L. 104-121], the Coast Guard
wants to assist small entities in understanding this rule so that they
can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the
rulemaking. If this rule will affect your small business, organization,
or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its
provisions or options for compliance, please call Lieutenant A. Logman,
Waterways Management Officer, Group/Marine Safety Office Long Island
Sound, at (203) 468-4429.
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).
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 or more in any
one year. Though this rule will not result in such expenditure, we do
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This rule will not affect 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 will not concern 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 will 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.
To help the Coast Guard establish regular and meaningful
consultation and collaboration with Indian and Alaskan Native tribes,
we published a notice in the Federal Register (66 FR 36361, July 11,
2001) requesting comments on how to best carry out the Order. We invite
your comments on how this rule might impact tribal governments, even if
that impact may not constitute a ``tribal implication'' under the
Order.
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. It has not been designated by the Administrator of the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 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
[[Page 30638]]
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
The Coast Guard considered the environmental impact of this rule
and concluded that, under figure 2-1, paragraph 34(g), of Commandant
Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is categorically excluded from further
environmental documentation. A Categorical Exclusion Determination is
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.
0
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: 33 U.S.C. 1226 and 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
0
2. Revise temporary Sec. 165.T01-155(b) to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T01-155 Safety Zone: Wantagh Parkway Number 3 Bridge over
the Sloop Channel, Town of Hempstead, NY.
* * * * *
(b) Effective date. This section is effective from 12:01 a.m. on
January 1, 2005 until 11:59 p.m. on December 31, 2005.
* * * * *
Dated: May 18, 2005.
Peter J. Boynton,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Long Island Sound.
[FR Doc. 05-10591 Filed 5-26-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P