[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 16 (Wednesday, January 25, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4043-4045]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-677]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD 13-06-002]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone: North Portland Harbor Dredging Operations; Portland, 
OR

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the 
Columbia River, in the vicinity of Hayden Island at North Portland 
Harbor. The Captain of the Port, Portland, Oregon is taking this action 
to safeguard individuals and vessels from safety hazards associated 
with dredging operations. Entry into this safety zone is prohibited 
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port.

DATES: This rule is effective from January 17, 2005 8 a.m. (PST) 
through March 15, 2005 at 5 p.m. (PST).

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in 
the docket are part of docket [CGD13-06-002] and are available for 
inspection or copying at U. S. Coast Guard Sector Portland, 6767 North 
Basin Ave. Portland, Oregon 97217 between 7 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Petty Officer Charity Keuter, c/o 
Captain of the Port Portland, 6767 N. Basin Ave. Portland, Oregon 97217 
at 503-240-9301.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this 
regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) and 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast 
Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM and for 
making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the 
Federal Register. The Coast Guard did not receive notice of this 
operation until 7 days prior to the beginning of the operation. The 
dredging operation will have a floating pipeline that will stretch from 
Port of Portland Terminal 6 to the lower end of Hayden Island and on to 
Kelly Point Park. This pipeline will be a hazard to navigation due to 
location and vessel traffic in the area.
    If normal notice and comment procedures were followed, this rule 
would not become effective until after the dates of the event. For this 
reason, following normal rulemaking procedures in this case would be 
impracticable and contrary to the public interest.

Background and Purpose

    The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone regulation 
to allow for safe dredging operation. This operation is necessary for 
the improvement of the Port of Portland Terminal 6, since in the coming 
months a new crane will be brought in to allow the Port to accompany 
larger vessels and more containers. This safety zone will be in effect 
during the time of January 17, 2006 to March 15, 2006 while the 
floating pipeline is in the water. This safety zone will be enforced by 
representatives of the Captain of the Port, Portland, Oregon. The 
Captain of the Port may be assisted by other Federal and local 
agencies.

Discussion of Rule

    This rule, for safety concerns, will control individuals and vessel 
movement in a regulated area surrounding the dredging operation. Due to 
safety concerns and likely delays, entry into this zone is prohibited 
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, Portland or his 
designated representative. Those boaters transiting between the 
Columbia River and North Portland Harbor are requested to use the 
upriver end of Hayden Island. The Captain of the Port may be assisted 
by other Federal and local agencies.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section 
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, 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). The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this 
rule to be so minimal that a full regulatory evaluation under the 
regulatory policies and procedures of the DHS is unnecessary. This 
expectation is based on the fact that this rule will be in effect for 
the minimum time necessary to safely conduct the dredging operation. 
While this rule is in effect, traffic will be allowed to pass through 
the zone with the permission of the Captain of the Port or his 
designated representatives on-scene, if safe to do so and that traffic 
can be rerouted to another entrance into the Oregon Slough at the 
upriver end of Hayden Island.

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. This rule will affect the following entities, some of which 
may be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to 
transit the designated area at the corresponding time as drafted in 
this rule. This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. 
Traffic will be allowed to pass through the zone at selected times with 
the permission of the Captain of the Port or his designated 
representative on scene, if safe to do so and that boaters transiting 
the Oregon Slough can gain access to it by the upriver end of Hayden 
Island on the Columbia River. Before the effective period, we will 
issue maritime advisories widely available to users of the river. 
Because the impacts of this proposal are expected to be so minimal, the 
Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this final rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity 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 what 
degree this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement

[[Page 4044]]

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small 
entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate 
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. If the 
rule will 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).

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 an expenditure, we 
do 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.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards 
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, 
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why 
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or 
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management 
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus 
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not 
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 
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 a 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. A final ``Environmental Analysis Check 
List'' and a final ``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' will be 
available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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


0
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: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. 
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.1.


0
2. A temporary Sec.  165.T13-001 is added to read as follows:


Sec.  165.T13-001  Safety Zones: Oregon Slough Dredging Operations in 
the Captain of the Port Portland Zone.

    (a) Safety Zones. The following area is designated a safety zone
    (1) Location: All water of the Columbia River enclosed by the 
following points: 45[deg]37[min]53[sec] N 122[deg]44[min]03[sec] W 
following the shoreline southwest to 45[deg]38[min]54[sec] N 
122[deg]45[min]28[sec] W continuing west to 45[deg]39[min]05[sec] N 
122[deg]45[min]36[sec] W turning north to 45[deg]39[min]12[sec] N 
122[deg]45[min]28[sec] W then northeast 45[deg]38[min]58[sec] N 
122[deg]45[min]03[sec] W then east to 45[deg]38[min]22[sec] N 
122[deg]44[min]37[sec] W then northeast to 45[deg]37[min]53[sec] N 
122[deg]43[min]58[sec] W south back to the point of origin.
    (2) Effective time and date. 7 a.m. on January 17, 2006 to 7 p.m. 
on March 15, 2006.
    (b) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations in 
section 165.23

[[Page 4045]]

of this part, no person or vessel may enter or remain in this zone 
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or his designated 
representative.

    Dated: January 17, 2006.
Patrick G. Gerrity,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Portland, OR.
[FR Doc. 06-677 Filed 1-24-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P