Safety Zone; Shore (Belt) Parkway Bridge Construction, Mill Basin; Brooklyn, NY, 11308-11309 [2022-04278]

Agencies

• Coast Guard
• DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 40 (Tuesday, March 1, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11308-11309]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04278]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2021-0848]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone; Shore (Belt) Parkway Bridge Construction, Mill 
Basin; Brooklyn, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is removing the safety zone that was 
established by the Captain of the Port Sector New York on November 24, 
2015, that can be found under Docket Number USCG-2014-1044, titled 
``Safety Zone; Shore (Belt) Parkway Bridge Construction, Mill Basin; 
Brooklyn, NY.'' The safety zone was established to protect persons and 
vessels from potential hazards associated with bridge demolition and 
construction operations. The Coast Guard received confirmation that the 
bridge construction project is complete, and that the safety zone is no 
longer enforced. This action removes the existing regulations related 
to the safety zone.

DATES: This rule is effective March 1, 2022.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being 
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2021-0848 in the search box and click ``Search.'' Next, in the Document 
Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, 
call or email MST1 S. Stevenson, Waterways Management Division, U.S. 
Coast Guard; telephone 719-354-4000, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the New York
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On November 24, 2015, the Coast Guard established the safety zone 
under Docket Number USCG-2014-1044, titled ``Safety Zone; Shore (Belt) 
Parkway Bridge Construction, Mill Basin; Brooklyn, NY.'' The safety 
zone was established to protect people and vessels from the potential 
hazards associated with a bridge demolition and construction project. 
The initial final rule stated that the Coast Guard will disestablish 
the safety zone once the bridge project is complete. The Coast Guard 
received confirmation on September 13, 2019, that the bridge project 
was completed and enforcement of the safety zone was no longer 
necessary.
    The Coast Guard is issuing this final 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), the Coast Guard finds that good 
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 
with respect to this rule. The safety zone has not been enforced since 
the project was completed on September 13, 2019. Sufficient time has 
passed since the completion of the bridge project and the last 
enforcement of this safety zone for the Coast Guard to receive any 
adverse public implications. In addition, during the initial NPRM 
process for the establishment of the safety zone no adverse comments 
were received that pertained to the Coast Guard disestablishing the 
safety zone once the project was complete. Therefore the Coast Guard 
has determined that it is unnecessary and contrary to the public 
interest to publish an NPRM because this action is merely removing a 
regulatory restriction that is no longer needed.
    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. The safety zone is no longer 
needed and has not been enforced since 2019. This rule requires an 
administrative change to the Federal Register, in order to relieve a 
regulatory restriction that is no longer applicable or necessary. 
Therefore, a delayed effective date is unnecessary and contrary to the 
pubic interest.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C. 
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port New York 
(COTP) has determined that the potential hazards associated with the 
Shore (Belt) Parkway Bridge Construction are no longer present. On 
November 13, 2019, the Coast Guard received confirmation that the 
bridge project was complete and the safety zone was no longer enforced.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    On December 8, 2015, the Coast Guard published a final rule 
``Safety Zone; Shore (Belt) Parkway Bridge Construction, Mill Basin; 
Brooklyn, NY'' in the Federal Register (80 FR 76206). The safety zone 
was necessary to protect people and vessels from potential hazards with 
the bridge demolition and construction. The initial final rule that 
established this safety zone stated that the Coast Guard would publish 
a direct final rule once the bridge project is complete. The Coast 
Guard has confirmed that the bridge project is complete and the safety 
zone is no longer needed.

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

[[Page 11309]]

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 actions taken 
to disestablish a safety zone are not considered a significant 
regulatory action.

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 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 
bridge may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A 
above this final rule would 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 
call or email 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 
removing a safety zone that was established for bridge construction 
operations that have since been completed. It is categorically excluded 
from further review under paragraph L60(b) of Appendix A, Table 1 of 
DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. 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 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.

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. 
00170.1, Revision No. 01.2.


Sec.  165.161   [Removed]

0
2. Remove Sec.  165.161.

    Dated: February 15, 2022.
Z. Merchant,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port New York.
[FR Doc. 2022-04278 Filed 2-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P