Safety Zone; Explosive Arc at Military Ocean Terminal Concord, Suisun Bay, Concord, CA, 28273-28275 [2021-11159]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 26, 2021 / Rules and Regulations Dated: April 28, 2021. Jason P. Tama, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port New York. II. Background Information and Regulatory History [FR Doc. 2021–11103 Filed 5–25–21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG–2021–0349] RIN 1625–AA00 Safety Zone; Explosive Arc at Military Ocean Terminal Concord, Suisun Bay, Concord, CA Coast Guard, DHS. Temporary final rule. AGENCY: ACTION: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone in the navigable waters of the Suisun Bay, off Concord, CA, in support of explosive on-loading to Military Ocean Terminal Concord (MOTCO). This safety zone is necessary to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential explosion within the explosive arc. Unauthorized persons or vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or remaining in the safety zone without permission of the Captain of the Port San Francisco or a designated representative. SUMMARY: This rule is effective without actual notice from May 26, 2021 through 11:59 p.m. on June 4, 2021. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from 12:01 a.m. May 24, 2021 until May 26, 2021. ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to https:// www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2021– 0349 in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, call or email Lieutenant Anthony Solarees, Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (415) 399–7443, email SFWaterways@uscg.mil. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DATES: I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations COTP Captain of the Port San Francisco DHS Department of Homeland Security § Section U.S.C. United States Code VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:33 May 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are ‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking with respect to this rule because it is impracticable. The Coast Guard received the initial report of larger explosive arc on May 18, 2021. It is impracticable to go through the full notice and comment rulemaking process because the Coast Guard must establish this temporary safety zone by May 24, 2021 and lacks sufficient time to provide a reasonable comment period and consider those comments before issuing the rule. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of this rule would be contrary to public interest because immediate action is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters around the potentially hazardous explosive on-loading. III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority 46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port San Francisco has determined that potential hazards associated with the explosive onloading will exist between May 24, 2021 and June 4, 2021. There will be a safety concern for anyone within a 4,000-ft radius of the explosive on-load. For this reason, this temporary safety zone is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters surrounding the potentially hazardous on-loading operations. IV. Discussion of the Rule This rule establishes a temporary safety zone in the navigable waters around the explosives on-loading occurring at Military Ocean Terminal Concord (MOTCO), off Concord, CA for a five-day cargo operation period conducted between May 24, 2021 and June 4, 2021. The temporary safety zone will encompass the navigable waters of PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 28273 Suisun Bay, from surface to bottom, within a circle formed by connecting all points 4,000 feet out from the location of the explosive material at approximate position 38°3.46″ N, 122°0.90″ W or as announced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners. The projected explosive arc presents the need for a 4,000 foot radius, which is larger than the safety zone already established in 33 CFR 165.1198. This regulation is necessary to keep persons and vessels away from the immediate vicinity of the explosive materials during cargo operations, to ensure the safety of personnel, vessels, and the marine environment. Except for persons or vessels authorized by the COTP or the COTP’s designated representative, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the restricted area. A ‘‘designated representative’’ means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel or a Federal, State, or local officer designated by or assisting the COTP in the enforcement of the safety zone. V. Regulatory Analyses We developed this 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 rule has not been designated a ‘‘significant regulatory action,’’ under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This regulatory action determination is based on the limited duration and narrowly tailored geographic area of the safety zone. Although this rule restricts access to the water encompassed by the safety zone, the effect of this rule will not be significant because the local waterway users will be notified to ensure the safety zone will result in minimum impact. The vessels desiring to transit through or around the temporary safety zone may do so upon express permission from the COTP or the COTP’s designated representative. B. Impact on Small Entities The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, E:\FR\FM\26MYR1.SGM 26MYR1 28274 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 26, 2021 / Rules and Regulations requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the temporary safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A. above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator. Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency’s responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. C. Collection of Information This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:33 May 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132. Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. F. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security 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 determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a temporary safety zone in the navigable waters around the explosives on-loading occurring at Military Ocean Terminal Concord (MOTCO), off Concord, CA. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023–01–001–01, Rev. 1. A 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. 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. PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 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 amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 46 U.S.C 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add § 165.T11–054 to read as follows: ■ § 165.T11–054 Safety Zone; Explosive arc at Military Ocean Terminal Concord, Suisun Bay, Concord, CA (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable waters of Suisun Bay, from surface to bottom, within a circle formed by connecting all points 4,000 feet out from the location of the explosive material at approximate position 38°3.46″ N, 122°0.90″ W or as announced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners. (b) Definitions. As used in this section, ‘‘designated representative’’ means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel or a Federal, State, or local officer designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port San Francisco (COTP) in the enforcement of the safety zone. (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the COTP’s designated representative. (2) The safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may be permitted by the COTP or the COTP’s designated representative. (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety zone must contact the COTP or the COTP’s designated representative to obtain permission to do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP’s designated representative. Persons and vessels may request permission to enter the safety zone on VHF–23A or through the 24-hour Command Center at telephone (415) 399–3547. (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from May 24, 2021 at E:\FR\FM\26MYR1.SGM 26MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 26, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 12:01 a.m. until June 4, 2021 at 11:59 p.m. or as announced via marine information broadcast. (e) Information broadcasts. The COTP or the COTP’s designated representative will notify the maritime community of periods during which this zone will be enforced in accordance with 33 CFR 165.7. Dated: May 21, 2021 Jordan M. Baldueza, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Alternate Captain of the Port, San Francisco. [FR Doc. 2021–11159 Filed 5–25–21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R03–OAR–2020–0319; FRL–10023– 71–Region 3] Air Plan Approval; Pennsylvania; 1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard Second Maintenance Plan for the York-Adams Area the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Keila M. Paga´n-Incle, Planning & Implementation Branch (3AD30), Air & Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. The telephone number is (215) 814–2926. Ms. Paga´n-Incle can also be reached via electronic mail at paganincle.keila@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background On February 9, 2021 (86 FR 8736), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). In the NPRM, EPA proposed approval of Pennsylvania’s plan for maintaining the 1997 ozone NAAQS in the York-Adams Area through February 13, 2028, in accordance with CAA section 175A. The formal SIP revision was submitted by PADEP on March 10, 2020. II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis On January 14, 2008 (73 FR 2163, AGENCY: Environmental Protection effective February 13, 2008), EPA Agency (EPA). approved a redesignation request (and ACTION: Final rule. maintenance plan) from PADEP for the SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection York-Adams Area. Per CAA section 175A(b), at the end of the eighth year Agency (EPA) is approving a state after the effective date of the implementation plan (SIP) revision redesignation, the state must also submitted by the Commonwealth of submit a second maintenance plan to Pennsylvania. This revision pertains to the Commonwealth’s plan, submitted by ensure ongoing maintenance of the standard for an additional 10 years, and the Pennsylvania Department of in South Coast Air Quality Management Environmental Protection (PADEP), for District v. EPA,1 the D.C. Circuit held maintaining the 1997 8-hour ozone that this requirement cannot be waived national ambient air quality standard for areas, like the York-Adams Area, (NAAQS) (referred to as the ‘‘1997 that had been redesignated to ozone NAAQS’’) for the York-Adams Area of Pennsylvania. EPA is approving attainment for the 1997 ozone NAAQS prior to revocation and that were these revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP designated attainment for the 2008 in accordance with the requirements of ozone NAAQS. CAA section 175A sets the Clean Air Act (CAA). forth the criteria for adequate DATES: This final rule is effective on maintenance plans. In addition, EPA June 25, 2021. has published longstanding guidance ADDRESSES: EPA has established a that provides further insight on the docket for this action under Docket ID content of an approvable maintenance Number EPA–R03–OAR–2020–0319. All plan, explaining that a maintenance documents in the docket are listed on plan should address five elements: (1) the https://www.regulations.gov An attainment emissions inventory; (2) website. Although listed in the index, a maintenance demonstration; (3) a some information is not publicly commitment for continued air quality available, e.g., confidential business monitoring; (4) a process for verification information (CBI) or other information of continued attainment; and (5) a whose disclosure is restricted by statute. contingency plan.2 PADEP’s March 10, Certain other material, such as 2020 SIP submittal fulfills copyrighted material, is not placed on 1 882 F.3d 1138 (D.C. Cir. 2018). the internet and will be publicly 2 ‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to available only in hard copy form. Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’ Memorandum Publicly available docket materials are from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality available through https:// Management Division, September 4, 1992 (Calcagni Memo). www.regulations.gov, or please contact VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:33 May 25, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 28275 Pennsylvania’s obligation to submit a second maintenance plan and addresses each of the five necessary elements. As discussed in the February 9, 2021 NPRM, consistent with longstanding EPA’s guidance,3 areas that meet certain criteria may be eligible to submit a limited maintenance plan (LMP) to satisfy one of the requirements of CAA section 175A. Specifically, states may meet CAA section 175A’s requirements to ‘‘provide for maintenance’’ by demonstrating that the area’s design value 4 are well below the NAAQS and that it has had historical stability attaining the NAAQS. EPA evaluated PADEP’s March 10, 2020 submittal for consistency with all applicable EPA guidance and CAA requirements. EPA found that the submittal met CAA section 175A and all CAA requirements, and proposed approval of the LMP for the York-Adams Area as a revision to the Pennsylvania SIP. The effect of this action makes certain commitments related to the maintenance of the 1997 ozone NAAQS federally enforceable as part of the Pennsylvania SIP. Other specific requirements of PADEP’s March 10, 2020 submittal and the rationale for EPA’s proposed action are explained in the NPRM and will not be restated here. III. EPA’s Response to Comments Received EPA received one comment on the February 9, 2021 NPRM and a summary of the comment and EPA’s response is provided herein. The comment received is in the docket for this rulemaking action. Comment: The commenter asserts that the LMP should not be approved because ‘‘Pennsylvania identifies no actual contingency measures.’’ According to the commenter, a ‘‘contingency measure is supposed to be a known measure that can be quickly implemented by a state in order to prevent the violation of the NAAQS.’’ The comment asserts that current contingency measures are defective because they allegedly will not be evaluated and determined until after an exceedance of the NAAQS has occurred. 3 See ‘‘Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable Ozone Nonattainment Areas’’ from Sally L. Shaver, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), dated November 16, 1994; ‘‘Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment Areas’’ from Joseph Paisie, OAQPS, dated October 6, 1995; and ‘‘Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Moderate PM10 Nonattainment Areas’’ from Lydia Wegman, OAQPS, dated August 9, 2001. 4 The ozone design value for a monitoring site is the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations. The design value for an ozone nonattainment area is the highest design value of any monitoring site in the area. E:\FR\FM\26MYR1.SGM 26MYR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 26, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28273-28275]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-11159]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2021-0349]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone; Explosive Arc at Military Ocean Terminal Concord, 
Suisun Bay, Concord, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone in the 
navigable waters of the Suisun Bay, off Concord, CA, in support of 
explosive on-loading to Military Ocean Terminal Concord (MOTCO). This 
safety zone is necessary to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine 
environment from potential explosion within the explosive arc. 
Unauthorized persons or vessels are prohibited from entering into, 
transiting through, or remaining in the safety zone without permission 
of the Captain of the Port San Francisco or a designated 
representative.

DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from May 26, 2021 
through 11:59 p.m. on June 4, 2021. For the purposes of enforcement, 
actual notice will be used from 12:01 a.m. May 24, 2021 until May 26, 
2021.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being 
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2021-0349 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open 
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, 
call or email Lieutenant Anthony Solarees, Waterways Management, U.S. 
Coast Guard; telephone (415) 399-7443, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port San Francisco
DHS Department of Homeland Security
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice 
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of 
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This 
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and 
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those 
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public 
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good 
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking with 
respect to this rule because it is impracticable. The Coast Guard 
received the initial report of larger explosive arc on May 18, 2021. It 
is impracticable to go through the full notice and comment rulemaking 
process because the Coast Guard must establish this temporary safety 
zone by May 24, 2021 and lacks sufficient time to provide a reasonable 
comment period and consider those comments before issuing the rule.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause 
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after 
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of 
this rule would be contrary to public interest because immediate action 
is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in 
the navigable waters around the potentially hazardous explosive on-
loading.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority 46 U.S.C. 
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port San 
Francisco has determined that potential hazards associated with the 
explosive on-loading will exist between May 24, 2021 and June 4, 2021. 
There will be a safety concern for anyone within a 4,000-ft radius of 
the explosive on-load. For this reason, this temporary safety zone is 
needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the 
navigable waters surrounding the potentially hazardous on-loading 
operations.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a temporary safety zone in the navigable 
waters around the explosives on-loading occurring at Military Ocean 
Terminal Concord (MOTCO), off Concord, CA for a five-day cargo 
operation period conducted between May 24, 2021 and June 4, 2021. The 
temporary safety zone will encompass the navigable waters of Suisun 
Bay, from surface to bottom, within a circle formed by connecting all 
points 4,000 feet out from the location of the explosive material at 
approximate position 38[deg]3.46'' N, 122[deg]0.90'' W or as announced 
via Broadcast Notice to Mariners. The projected explosive arc presents 
the need for a 4,000 foot radius, which is larger than the safety zone 
already established in 33 CFR 165.1198.
    This regulation is necessary to keep persons and vessels away from 
the immediate vicinity of the explosive materials during cargo 
operations, to ensure the safety of personnel, vessels, and the marine 
environment. Except for persons or vessels authorized by the COTP or 
the COTP's designated representative, no person or vessel may enter or 
remain in the restricted area. A ``designated representative'' means a 
Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty 
officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel or a Federal, 
State, or local officer designated by or assisting the COTP in the 
enforcement of the safety zone.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this 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 rule has not been designated a ``significant 
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this 
rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the limited 
duration and narrowly tailored geographic area of the safety zone. 
Although this rule restricts access to the water encompassed by the 
safety zone, the effect of this rule will not be significant because 
the local waterway users will be notified to ensure the safety zone 
will result in minimum impact. The vessels desiring to transit through 
or around the temporary safety zone may do so upon express permission 
from the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as 
amended,

[[Page 28274]]

requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of 
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small 
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations 
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their 
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule 
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the 
temporary safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in 
section V.A. above, this rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small 
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your 
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have 
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please 
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal 
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal 
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory 
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory 
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and 
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to 
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR 
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small 
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or 
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under 
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have 
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism 
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive 
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on 
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary 
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may 
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for 
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in 
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere 
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security 
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 determined that this action is one of 
a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a 
significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a 
temporary safety zone in the navigable waters around the explosives on-
loading occurring at Military Ocean Terminal Concord (MOTCO), off 
Concord, CA. It is categorically excluded from further review under 
paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-
01-001-01, Rev. 1. A 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.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. 
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that 
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or 
security of people, places, or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.


0
2. Add Sec.  165.T11-054 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.T11-054  Safety Zone; Explosive arc at Military Ocean 
Terminal Concord, Suisun Bay, Concord, CA

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable 
waters of Suisun Bay, from surface to bottom, within a circle formed by 
connecting all points 4,000 feet out from the location of the explosive 
material at approximate position 38[deg]3.46'' N, 122[deg]0.90'' W or 
as announced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, ``designated 
representative'' means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a 
Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast 
Guard vessel or a Federal, State, or local officer designated by or 
assisting the Captain of the Port San Francisco (COTP) in the 
enforcement of the safety zone.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in 
subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in 
paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the 
COTP's designated representative.
    (2) The safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may 
be permitted by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.
    (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety 
zone must contact the COTP or the COTP's designated representative to 
obtain permission to do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter 
or operate in the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or 
directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated 
representative. Persons and vessels may request permission to enter the 
safety zone on VHF-23A or through the 24-hour Command Center at 
telephone (415) 399-3547.
    (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from May 24, 
2021 at

[[Page 28275]]

12:01 a.m. until June 4, 2021 at 11:59 p.m. or as announced via marine 
information broadcast.
    (e) Information broadcasts. The COTP or the COTP's designated 
representative will notify the maritime community of periods during 
which this zone will be enforced in accordance with 33 CFR 165.7.

    Dated: May 21, 2021
Jordan M. Baldueza,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Alternate Captain of the Port, San 
Francisco.
[FR Doc. 2021-11159 Filed 5-25-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P