Safety Zone; Appomattox FPS, Mississippi Canyon 437, Outer Continental Shelf on the Gulf of Mexico, 12144-12146 [2018-05605]

Agencies

• Coast Guard
• DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 54 (Tuesday, March 20, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12144-12146]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-05605]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 147

[Docket Number USCG-2017-0446]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone; Appomattox FPS, Mississippi Canyon 437, Outer 
Continental Shelf on the Gulf of Mexico

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a safety zone around the 
Appomattox Floating Production System (FPS) facility located in 
Mississippi Canyon Block 437 on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) in 
the Gulf of Mexico. The purpose of the safety zone is to protect the 
facility from all vessels operating outside the normal shipping 
channels and fairways that are not providing services to or working 
with the facility. Placing a safety zone around the facility will 
significantly reduce the threat of allisions, collisions, oil spills, 
and releases of natural gas, and thereby protect the safety of life, 
property, and the environment. We invite your comments on this proposed 
rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast 
Guard on or before April 19, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2017-0446 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for 
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further 
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this 
proposed rulemaking, call or email Ms. Laura Knoll, U.S. Coast Guard, 
District Eight Waterways Management Branch; telephone 504-671-2139, 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FPS Floating production system
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
OCS Outer Continental Shelf
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    Under the authority provided in 14 U.S.C. 85, 43 U.S.C. 1333, and 
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1(90), Title 33, 
CFR 147.1, 147.5, and 147.10 permit the establishment of safety zones 
for facilities located on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) for the 
purpose of protecting life and property on the facilities, their 
appurtenances and attending vessels, and on the adjacent waters within 
the safety zones.
    The safety zone proposed by this rulemaking is on the OCS in the 
deepwater area of the Gulf of Mexico at Mississippi Canyon Block 437. 
The area for the safety zone would be 500 meters (1640.4 feet) from 
each point on the facility, which is located at 28[deg]34'25.47'' N, 
87[deg]56'03.11'' W. The deepwater area would be considered to be 
waters of 304.8 meters (1,000 feet) or greater depth extending to the 
limits of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) contiguous to the 
territorial sea of the United States and extending to a distance up to 
200 nautical miles from the baseline from which the breadth of the sea 
is measured. The deepwater area would also include an extensive system 
of fairways. Navigation in the vicinity of the safety zone consists of 
large commercial shipping vessels, fishing vessels, cruise ships, tugs 
with tows and the occasional recreational vessels. The establishment of 
this safety zone will not interfere with these vessels' navigation in 
the area.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    Shell Exploration and Production Co. requested that an OCS safety 
zone extending 500 meters from each point on the Appomattox Floating 
Production System (FPS) facility structure's outermost edge be 
established. There are safety concerns for both the personnel aboard 
the facility and the environment. The District Commander has determined 
that it was highly likely that any allision with the facility would 
result in a catastrophic event. Placing a safety zone around the 
facility will significantly reduce the threat of allisions, oil spills, 
and releases of natural gas, and thereby protect the safety of life, 
property, and the living marine resources.
    In evaluating this request, the Coast Guard explored relevant 
safety factors and considered several criteria, including but not 
limited to (1) the level of the existing and foreseeable shipping 
activity, the presence of unusually harmful or hazardous substances and 
obstructions within 500 meters of the

[[Page 12145]]

facility, (2) safety concerns for personnel aboard the facility, (3) 
concerns for the environment, (4) the likelihood that an allision would 
result in a catastrophic event based on the proximity to shipping 
fairways, offloading operations, production levels, and size of the 
crew, (5) the volume of traffic in the vicinity of the proposed safety 
zone, (6) the types of vessels navigating in the vicinity of the 
proposed area, and (7) the structural configuration of the facility.
    Results from a thorough and comprehensive examination of the 
criteria, International Maritime Organization (IMO)'s guidelines, and 
existing regulations, warrant the establishment of a safety zone of 500 
meters around the facility. The proposed safety zone would 
significantly reduce the threat of allisions, oil spills, and releases 
of natural gas, and increase the safety of life, property, and the 
environment in the Gulf of Mexico by prohibiting entry into the zone. 
Only vessels measuring less than 100 feet in length overall and not 
engaged in towing, attending vessels as defined in 33 CFR 147.20, or 
those vessels specifically authorized by the Eighth Coast Guard 
District Commander or a designated representative would be permitted to 
enter the proposed safety zone.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes 
and Executive Orders related to rulemaking, and we considered the First 
Amendment rights of protestors. Below we summarize our analyses based 
on a number of these statutes or Executive Orders.

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 13771 directs agencies to control 
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This NPRM has not been 
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 
12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt 
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the safety zone's 
location and its distance from both land and safety fairways. This 
proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action due to the 
location of the Appomattox FPS, on the Outer Continental Shelf, and its 
distance from both land and safety fairways. Vessels traversing waters 
near the proposed safety zone would be able to safely travel around the 
zone using alternate routes. Exceptions to this proposed rule would 
include vessels measuring less than 100 feet in length overall and not 
engaged in towing. The Eighth Coast Guard District Commander, or a 
designated representative, would consider requests to transit through 
the proposed safety zone on a case-by-case basis.

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 
proposed rule would 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 
IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic 
impact on any vessel owner or operator. This proposed safety zone would 
not have a significant economic impact or a substantial number of small 
entities for the following reasons. Vessel traffic can pass safely 
around the safety zone using alternate routes. Based on the limited 
scope of the safety zone, any delay resulting from using an alternate 
route is expected to be minimal depending on vessel traffic and speed 
in the area. Additionally, exceptions to this proposed rule would 
include vessels measuring less than 100 feet in length overall and not 
engaged in towing, as well as any attending vessel, as defined in 33 
CFR 147.20. Entry into and transit through the proposed safety zone 
could be requested. Such requests would be considered on a case-by-case 
basis and may be authorized by the Eighth Coast Guard District 
Commander or a 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.
    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. 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. 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 proposed rule would 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 proposed 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 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. If 
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or 
Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

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

[[Page 12146]]

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

F. 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 (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. This proposed rule involves 
establishing a safety zone around an offshore deepwater facility. 
Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review 
under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 
023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A preliminary Record of Environmental 
Consideration supporting this determination is 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 proposed 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.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, 
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment 
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If 
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which 
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or 
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be 
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate 
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted 
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the 
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal 
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal 
Register (70 FR 15086).
    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, 
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's 
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up 
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a 
final rule is published.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 147

    Continental shelf, Marine safety, Navigation (water).
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes 
to amend 33 CFR part 147 as follows:

PART 147--SAFETY ZONES

0
1. The authority citation for part 147 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 14 U.S.C. 85; 43 U.S.C. 1333; and Department of 
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  147.869 to read as follows:


Sec.  147.869   Safety Zone; Appomattox FPS Facility, Outer Continental 
Shelf on the Gulf of Mexico

    (a) Description. The Appomattox Floating Production System (FPS) 
system is in the deepwater area of the Gulf of Mexico at Mississippi 
Canyon Block 437. The facility is located at 28[deg]34'25.47'' N, 
87[deg]56'03.11'' W (NAD 83), and the area within 500 meters (1640.4 
feet) from each point on the facility structure's outer edge is a 
safety zone.
    (b) Regulation. No vessel may enter or remain in this safety zone 
except the following:
    (1) An attending vessel, as defined by 33 CFR 147.20;
    (2) A vessel under 100 feet in length overall not engaged in 
towing; or
    (3) A vessel authorized by the Eighth Coast Guard District 
Commander.

    Dated: March 9, 2018.
Paul F. Thomas,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2018-05605 Filed 3-19-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P