Security Zone: Electric Boat Shipyard, Groton, CT, 19171-19173 [2021-07651]
Download as PDF
19171
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 13, 2021 / Proposed Rules
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100
2. Amend Table 1 in § 100.100 by
adding item 7.8 in numerical order to
read as follows:
■
PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON
NAVIGABLE WATERS
Marine safety, Navigation (water),
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Waterways.
1. The authority citation for part 100
continues to read as follows:
■
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing
to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows:
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70041; 33 CFR 1.05–
1.
§ 100.100 Special Local Regulations;
Regattas and Boat Races in the Coast
Guard Sector Long Island Sound Captain of
the Port Zone.
*
*
*
*
*
TABLE 1 TO § 100.100
*
*
7 ............................................................
7.8
*
*
Mystic Sharkfest Swim .................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
• Date: A single day during July.
• Time: To be determined annually.
• Location: All waters of the Mystic River in Mystic, CT from Mystic Seaport, down the Mystic River,
under the Bascule Drawbridge at 41°21′17.046″ N, 071°58′8.742″ W, to finish at the boat launch
ramp at the north end of Seaport Marine.
*
*
Dated: April 8, 2021
E.J. Van Camp,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Long Island Sound.
*
*
*
*
[Docket Number USCG–2021–0062]
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 Marine
Science Technician 3rd Class Ashley
Dodd, Waterways Management
Division, Sector Long Island Sound; Tel:
(203) 468–4469; Email: Ashley.M.Dodd@
uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
construction facility and floating dry
dock. Therefore, Electric Boat is
requesting a modification to expand the
currently existing security zone.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to
modify the location of the existing
security zone listed in 33 CFR
165.154(a)(2). Captain of the Port Long
Island Sound proposes to add a new
point in the definition of the security
zone and replace two turning points.
This would allow the zone to
encompass the new building for
construction of submarines and floating
dry dock.
RIN 1625–AA87
I. Table of Abbreviations
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
Security Zone: Electric Boat Shipyard,
Groton, CT
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
[FR Doc. 2021–07650 Filed 4–12–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard is proposing
to modify the security zone boundaries
surrounding the Electric Boat Shipyard
in Groton, Connecticut. The proposed
amendment to the Security Zone is due
to the expanding operations at Electric
Boat Shipyard. We invite your
comments on this proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before May 13, 2021.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2021–0062 using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
SUMMARY:
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
*
July
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Apr 12, 2021
Jkt 253001
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal
Basis
Electric Boat Shipyard has a history of
constructing vessels for the United
States Navy. For this reason a security
zone is established to safeguard from
destruction, loss, or injury from
sabotage or other submersive acts, or
other causes of a similar nature to its
waterfront facility and its vessels that
they construct. In order for Electric Boat
Shipyard to assemble and launch the
Columbia Class Submarine for the U.S.
Navy they are building a new submarine
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Part 165 of 33 CFR contains specific
regulated navigation areas and limited
access areas to prescribe general
regulations for different types of limited
or controlled access areas and regulated
navigation areas and list specific areas
and their boundaries. Section 165.154
establishes Safety and Security Zones:
Captain of the Port Long Island Sound
Zone Safety and Security Zones.
The Coast Guard proposes to modify
the location of the existing security zone
listed in 33 CFR 165.154(a)(2)(i) Safety
and Security Zones: Captain of the Port
Zone Safety and Security Zones, to
expand the zone, as indicate in the
illustration below, to protect a new
submarine construction facility and
floating dry dock being built adjacent to
the current facility.
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
19172
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 13, 2021 / Proposed Rules
Illustration showing current and proposed security zone.
B. Impact on Small Entities
We developed this proposed rule after
considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and
Executive orders, and we discuss First
Amendment rights of protestors.
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 security
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.
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
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
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.
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).
This regulatory action determination
is based on the size, location, and
duration of the security zone. Vessel
traffic would be able to safely transit
around the security zone which would
impact a small designated area of the
Thames River.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Apr 12, 2021
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 call or email 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
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
EP13AP21.031
IV. Regulatory Analyses
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 13, 2021 / Proposed Rules
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 call or email the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
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
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 Directive 023–01, Rev. 1,
associated implementing instructions,
and Environmental Planning
COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), 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 a security zone to limit
access near Electric Boat Shipyard.
Normally such actions are categorically
excluded from further review under
paragraph L60a of Appendix A, Table 1
of DHS Instruction Manual 023–01–
001–01, Rev. 1. A preliminary Record of
Environmental Consideration
supporting this determination is
available in the docket. For instructions
on locating the docket, see the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Apr 12, 2021
Jkt 253001
ADDRESSES section of this preamble. 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 call or email 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, call or email the
person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions.
We accept anonymous comments.
Comments we post to https://
www.regulations.gov will include any
personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and
submissions in response to this
document, see DHS’s eRulemaking
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226,
March 11, 2020).
Documents mentioned in this NPRM
as being available in the docket, and
public comments, will be in our online
docket at https://www.regulations.gov
and can be viewed by following that
website’s instructions. We review all
comments received, but we will only
post comments that address the topic of
the proposed rule. We may choose not
to post off-topic, inappropriate, or
duplicate comments that we receive.
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 165
Marine safety, Navigation (water),
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Waterways.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
19173
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing
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: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6 and 160.5;
Departmemt of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1
2. In § 165.154, revise paragraphs
(a)(2)(i) and (ii) to read as follows:
■
§ 165.154 Safety and Security Zones;
Captain of the Port Long Island Sound Zone
Safety and Security Zones.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) Location. All navigable waters of
the Thames River, from surface to
bottom, West of the Electric Boat
Corportation Shipyard enclosed by a
line beginning at a point on the
shoreline 41°20′16″ N, 72°04′47″ W;
then running West to 41°20′16.2″ N,
72°04′58.0″ W; then running North to
41°20′28.7″ N, 72°05′01.7″ W; then
North-Northwest to 41°20′53.3″ N,
72°05′04.8″ W; then North-Northeast to
41°21′02.9″ N, 72°05′04.9″ W; then
running to shoreline at 41°21′02.9″ N,
72°04′58.2″ W (NAD 83).
(ii) Application. Paragraphs (a), (e), (f)
of § 165.33 do not apply to public
vessels or to vessels owned by, under
hire to, or performing work for the
Electric Boat Division when operating in
the security zone.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: April 8, 2021
E.J. Van Vamp,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Long Island Sound.
[FR Doc. 2021–07651 Filed 4–12–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
39 CFR Part 3030
[Docket No. RM2021–2; Order No. 5862]
Market Dominant Products
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Commission is initiating
a review seeking input from the public
about what additional regulations
promulgated by the Commission may be
necessary to achieve the objectives of
the Postal Accountability and
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 13, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19171-19173]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-07651]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG-2021-0062]
RIN 1625-AA87
Security Zone: Electric Boat Shipyard, Groton, CT
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to modify the security zone
boundaries surrounding the Electric Boat Shipyard in Groton,
Connecticut. The proposed amendment to the Security Zone is due to the
expanding operations at Electric Boat Shipyard. We invite your comments
on this proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before May 13, 2021.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2021-0062 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 Marine Science Technician 3rd Class
Ashley Dodd, Waterways Management Division, Sector Long Island Sound;
Tel: (203) 468-4469; Email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec. Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis
Electric Boat Shipyard has a history of constructing vessels for
the United States Navy. For this reason a security zone is established
to safeguard from destruction, loss, or injury from sabotage or other
submersive acts, or other causes of a similar nature to its waterfront
facility and its vessels that they construct. In order for Electric
Boat Shipyard to assemble and launch the Columbia Class Submarine for
the U.S. Navy they are building a new submarine construction facility
and floating dry dock. Therefore, Electric Boat is requesting a
modification to expand the currently existing security zone.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to modify the location of the
existing security zone listed in 33 CFR 165.154(a)(2). Captain of the
Port Long Island Sound proposes to add a new point in the definition of
the security zone and replace two turning points. This would allow the
zone to encompass the new building for construction of submarines and
floating dry dock.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
Part 165 of 33 CFR contains specific regulated navigation areas and
limited access areas to prescribe general regulations for different
types of limited or controlled access areas and regulated navigation
areas and list specific areas and their boundaries. Section 165.154
establishes Safety and Security Zones: Captain of the Port Long Island
Sound Zone Safety and Security Zones.
The Coast Guard proposes to modify the location of the existing
security zone listed in 33 CFR 165.154(a)(2)(i) Safety and Security
Zones: Captain of the Port Zone Safety and Security Zones, to expand
the zone, as indicate in the illustration below, to protect a new
submarine construction facility and floating dry dock being built
adjacent to the current facility.
[[Page 19172]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13AP21.031
IV. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of 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. 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).
This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, and duration of the security zone. Vessel traffic would be
able to safely transit around the security zone which would impact a
small designated area of the Thames River.
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
security 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.
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 call or email 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
[[Page 19173]]
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 call or email 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 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 Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
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 a security
zone to limit access near Electric Boat Shipyard. Normally such actions
are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60a of
Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A
preliminary Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this
determination is available in the docket. For instructions on locating
the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble. 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 call or email 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, call or email the person
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions.
We accept anonymous comments. Comments we post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and submissions in response to this
document, see DHS's eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226,
March 11, 2020).
Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket,
and public comments, will be in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's
instructions. We review all comments received, but we will only post
comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may choose not
to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that we
receive. 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 165
Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard is
proposing to amend 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: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6 and 160.5; Departmemt of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1
0
2. In Sec. 165.154, revise paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (ii) to read as
follows:
Sec. 165.154 Safety and Security Zones; Captain of the Port Long
Island Sound Zone Safety and Security Zones.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) Location. All navigable waters of the Thames River, from
surface to bottom, West of the Electric Boat Corportation Shipyard
enclosed by a line beginning at a point on the shoreline 41[deg]20'16''
N, 72[deg]04'47'' W; then running West to 41[deg]20'16.2'' N,
72[deg]04'58.0'' W; then running North to 41[deg]20'28.7'' N,
72[deg]05'01.7'' W; then North-Northwest to 41[deg]20'53.3'' N,
72[deg]05'04.8'' W; then North-Northeast to 41[deg]21'02.9'' N,
72[deg]05'04.9'' W; then running to shoreline at 41[deg]21'02.9'' N,
72[deg]04'58.2'' W (NAD 83).
(ii) Application. Paragraphs (a), (e), (f) of Sec. 165.33 do not
apply to public vessels or to vessels owned by, under hire to, or
performing work for the Electric Boat Division when operating in the
security zone.
* * * * *
Dated: April 8, 2021
E.J. Van Vamp,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Long Island Sound.
[FR Doc. 2021-07651 Filed 4-12-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P