[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 27 (Tuesday, February 10, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 6146-6147]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-2730]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 147

[CGD08-03-028]
RIN 1625-AA76


Safety Zone for Outer Continental Shelf Facility in the Gulf of 
Mexico for Green Canyon 645

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone around a 
petroleum and gas production facility in Green Canyon 645 of the Outer 
Continental Shelf in the Gulf of Mexico while the facility is being 
constructed and after the construction is completed. The construction 
site and facility need to be protected from vessels operating outside 
the normal shipping channels and fairways, and placing a safety zone 
around this area will significantly reduce the threat of allisions, oil 
spills and releases of natural gas. This rule prohibits all vessels 
from entering or remaining in the specified area around the facility's 
location except for the following: an attending vessel; a vessel under 
100 feet in length overall not engaged in towing; or a vessel 
authorized by the Eighth Coast Guard District Commander.

DATES: This final rule is effective March 11, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as 
documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, 
are part of docket (CGD08-03-028) and are available for inspection or 
copying at Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District (m), Hale Boggs 
Federal Bldg., 501 Magazine Street, New Orleans, LA, between 8 a.m. and 
3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant (LT) Kevin Lynn, Project 
Manager for Eighth Coast Guard District Commander, Hale Boggs Federal 
Bldg., 501 Magazine Street, New Orleans, LA 70130, telephone (504) 589-
6271.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory History

    On September 26, 2003, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) entitled ``Safety Zone for Outer Continental Shelf Facility in 
the Gulf of Mexico for Green Canyon 645'' in the Federal Register (68 
FR 55557). We received no comments on the proposed rule. No public 
hearing was requested, and none was held.

Background and Purpose

    The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone around a petroleum 
and gas production facility in the Gulf of Mexico: Holstein, Green 
Canyon Block 645 (GC 645), located at position 27<deg<ls-thn-eq>19'17'' 
N, 90<deg<ls-thn-eq>32'08'' W. The safety zone will be in effect while 
the facility is being constructed and after the construction is 
completed.
    This safety zone is in the deepwater area of the Gulf of Mexico. 
For the purposes of this regulation it is considered to be in 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. 
Navigation in the area of the safety zone consists of large commercial 
shipping vessels, fishing vessels, cruise ships, tugs with tows and the 
occasional recreational vessel. The deepwater area of the Gulf of 
Mexico also includes an extensive system of fairways. The fairways 
nearest the safety zone include the East-West Gulf of Mexico Safety 
Fairway and Louisiana Offshore Oil Port (LOOP) Shipping Safety Fairway. 
Significant amounts of vessel traffic occur in or near the various 
fairways in the deepwater area.
    BP Exploration & Production Inc., hereafter referred to as ``BP'' 
requested that the Coast Guard establish a safety zone in the Gulf of 
Mexico around the Holstein construction site and for the zone to remain 
in effect after construction is completed.
    The request for the safety zone was made due to the high level of 
shipping activity around the site of the facility and the safety 
concerns for construction personnel, the personnel on board the 
facility after it is completed, and the environment. BP indicated that 
the location, production level, and personnel levels on board the 
facility make it highly likely that any allision with the facility 
during and after construction would result in a catastrophic event.
    The Coast Guard has evaluated BP's information and concerns against 
Eighth Coast Guard District criteria developed to determine if an Outer 
Continental Shelf facility qualifies for a safety zone. We concluded 
that the risk of allision to the facility and the potential for loss of 
life and damage to the environment resulting from such an accident 
during and following the construction of Holstein warrants the 
establishment of this safety zone. The regulation will significantly 
reduce the threat of allisions, oil spills and natural gas releases and 
increase the safety of life, property, and the environment in the Gulf 
of Mexico. This regulation is issued pursuant to 14 U.S.C. 85 and 43 
U.S.C. 1333 as set out in the authority citation for 33 CFR part 147.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    We received no comments on the proposed rule. Therefore, we have 
not made any change in the final rule.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section 
3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and does not require an assessment of 
potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The 
Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. 
It is not significant under the regulatory policies and procedures of 
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
    We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a 
full regulatory evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures 
of DHS is unnecessary.
    The impacts on routine navigation are expected to be minimal 
because the safety zone will not overlap any of the safety fairways 
within the Gulf of Mexico.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities'' 
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are 
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, 
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. Since the construction site for the

[[Page 6147]]

Holstein is located far offshore, few privately owned fishing vessels 
and recreational boats/yachts operate in the area. This rule will not 
impact an attending vessel or vessels less than 100 feet in length 
overall not engaged in towing. Alternate routes are available for all 
other vessels impacted by this rule. Use of an alternate route may 
cause a vessel to incur a delay of four to ten minutes in arriving at 
their destinations depending on how fast the vessel is traveling. 
Therefore, the Coast Guard expects the impact of this regulation on 
small entities to be minimal.
    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 to what degree 
this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we offered to assist small 
entities in understanding this rule so that they can better evaluate 
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking.
    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).

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local 
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial 
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under 
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for 
federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise 
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental 
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property 
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, 
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule 
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an 
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may 
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    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.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant 
energy action'' under that Order because it is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to 
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use 
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy 
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects 
under Executive Order 13211.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, 
which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and 
have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit 
the use of categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the 
Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under 
figure 2-1 paragraph (34)(g), of the instruction, from further 
environmental documentation because this rule is not expected to result 
in any significant environmental impact as described in NEPA.
    A final ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a final 
``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' are available in the docket 
where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 147

    Continental shelf, Marine safety, Navigation (water).

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 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; Department of Homeland 
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.


0
2. Add Sec. 147.831 to read as follows:


Sec. 147.831  Holstein Truss Spar safety zone.

    (a) Description. Holstein, Green Canyon 645 (GC 645), located at 
position 27<deg<ls-thn-eq>19[min]17[sec]N, 
90<deg<ls-thn-eq>32[min]08[sec]W. The area within 500 meters (1640.4 
feet) from each point on the structure's outer edge is a safety zone. 
These coordinates are based upon North American Datum 1983.
    (b) Regulation. No vessel may enter or remain in this safety zone 
except the following:
    (1) An attending vessel;
    (2) A vessel under 100 feet in length overall not engaged in 
towing; or
    (3) A vessel authorized by the Commander, Eighth Coast Guard 
District.

    Dated: January 23, 2004.
R.F. Duncan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 04-2730 Filed 2-9-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P