Safety Zone; 2011 Hylebos Bridge Restoration, Hylebos Waterway, Tacoma, WA, 14829-14831 [2011-6337]

Agencies

• Coast Guard
• DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 53 (Friday, March 18, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14829-14831]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-6337]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0114]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone; 2011 Hylebos Bridge Restoration, Hylebos Waterway, 
Tacoma, WA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Coast Guard is proposing to establish 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: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast 
Guard on or before May 17, 2011. Requests for public meetings must be 
received by the Coast Guard on or before April 18, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2011-0114 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax: 202-493-2251.
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of 
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone 
number is 202-366-9329.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods. 
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of 
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on 
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed 
rule, call or e-mail Ensign Anthony P. LaBoy, USCG Sector Puget Sound 
Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard; telephone 206-217-6323, e-
mail SectorPugetSoundWWM@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing or 
submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program 
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted 
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking (USCG-2011-0114), indicate the specific section of this 
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each 
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material 
online (via https://www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or hand 
delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a 
comment online via https://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered 
received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. 
If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be considered 
as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the 
Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and 
a mailing address, an e-mail address, or a telephone number in the body 
of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions 
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to https://www.regulations.gov, 
click on the ``submit a comment'' box, which will then become 
highlighted in blue. In the ``Document Type'' drop down menu select 
``Proposed Rule'' and insert ``USCG-2011-0114'' in the ``Keyword'' box. 
Click ``Search'' then click on the balloon shape in the ``Actions'' 
column. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit 
them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable 
for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and 
would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a 
stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all 
comments and material received during the comment period and may change 
the rule based on your comments.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble 
as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, 
click on the ``read comments'' box, which will then become highlighted 
in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2011-0114'' and click 
``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column. 
You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on 
the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an 
agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket 
Management Facility.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any 
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or 
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, 
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice 
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the 
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a 
request for one using one of the four methods specified under 
ADDRESSES. Please explain why you believe a public meeting would be 
beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will 
hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal 
Register.
    For information on facilities or services for individuals with 
disabilities or to request special assistance at the public meeting, 
contact Ensign Anthony P. LaBoy at the telephone number or e-mail 
address indicated under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 
this notice.

Basis and Purpose

    The Hylebos Bridge restoration involves removal of deteriorated

[[Page 14830]]

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 would 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 Proposed Rule

    The City of Tacoma Public Works has requested a closure of the 
waterway to prevent property damage and/or personal injury to the 
maritime public during concrete removal portions of the Hylebos Bridge 
restoration. The Coast Guard is proposing this safety zone to ensure 
the safety of the maritime public during concrete removal and will do 
so by prohibiting any person or vessel from entering or remaining in 
the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, Puget 
Sound or Designated Representative.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed 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 proposed 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 proposed 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 proposed 
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. This proposed rule would affect the following 
entities, some of which might 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.
    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 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 so that they can better 
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. 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 Ensign Anthony P. LaBoy at the 
telephone number or e-mail address indicated under the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice.
    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.

Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call 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 proposed 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 proposed rule would not 
result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule 
elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not cause 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 proposed 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 proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, 
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks. This proposed rule is not an economically significant rule and 
would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that 
might disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    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.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, 
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. We have

[[Page 14831]]

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 proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we 
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed 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 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. A preliminary 
environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination will be 
made available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. This 
proposed rule involves the establishment of a safety zone. We seek any 
comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant 
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

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 proposes 
to amend 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 1226, 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 Sec.  165.T13-177 to read as follows:


Sec.  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 (206) 217-6001.
    (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: March 1, 2011.
S.J. Ferguson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Puget Sound.
[FR Doc. 2011-6337 Filed 3-17-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P