Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 21433 

limitations (AWLs) specified in this AD 

because those limitations were applicable as 

part of the airworthiness certification of those 

airplanes. 

(2) This AD requires revisions to certain 

operator maintenance documents to include 

new inspections. Compliance with these 

inspections is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). 

For airplanes that have been previously 

modified, altered, or repaired in the areas 

addressed by these inspections, the operator 

may not be able to accomplish the 

inspections described in the revisions. In this 

situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), 

the operator must request approval for an 

alternative method of compliance according 

to paragraph (j) of this AD. The request 

should include a description of changes to 

the required inspections that will ensure the 

continued damage tolerance of the affected 

structure. 

(d) Subject 

Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/ 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America 

Codes 27, Flight Controls; 28, Fuel; 32, 

Landing Gear; 52, Doors; 53, Fuselage; 54, 

Nacelles/Pylons; 55, Stabilizers; and 57, 

Wings. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by a new revision 

to the airworthiness limitations of the 

maintenance planning document. We are 

issuing this AD to ensure that fatigue 

cracking of various principal structural 

elements (PSEs) is detected and corrected; 

such fatigue cracking could adversely affect 

the structural integrity of these airplanes. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Revision of Maintenance Program 

(1) Within 12 months after the effective 

date of this AD, revise the maintenance 

program by incorporating the information in 

Subsection B, Airworthiness Limitations— 

Structural Inspections, of Section 9, 

‘‘Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and 

Certification Maintenance Requirements 

(CMRs),’’ D622W001–9, Revision July 2011, 

of the Boeing 777 Maintenance Planning Data 

(MPD) Document, except as provided by 

paragraph (h) of this AD. 

(2) The initial compliance time for the 

inspections is within the applicable times 

specified in Subsection B, Airworthiness 

Limitations—Structural Inspections, of 

Section 9, of ‘‘Airworthiness Limitations 

(AWLs) and Certification Maintenance 

Requirements (CMRs),’’ D622W001–9, 

Revision July 2011, of the Boeing 777 

Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) 

Document, or within 18 months after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 

later, or within the applicable time specified 

in Subsection B, Airworthiness Limitations— 

Structural Inspections, of Section 9, 

‘‘Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and 

Certification Maintenance Requirements 

(CMRs),’’ D622W001–9, Revision July 2011, 

of the Boeing 777 Maintenance Planning Data 

(MPD) Document, from the time of 

installation for new parts. 

(3) Reports specified in Section 9, 

‘‘Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and 

Certification Maintenance Requirements 

(CMRs),’’ D622W001–9, Revision July 2011, 

of the Boeing 777 Maintenance Planning Data 

(MPD) Document may be submitted within 

10 days after the airplane is returned to 

service, instead of 10 days after each 

individual finding as specified in this 

document. 

(h) Alternative Inspections and Inspection 

Intervals 

After accomplishing the actions required 

by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative 

inspections or inspection intervals may be 

used unless the alternative inspection or 

interval is approved as an alternative method 

of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with 

the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of 

this AD. 

(i) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden 

Statement 

A federal agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, nor shall a person be subject to 

a penalty for failure to comply with a 

collection of information subject to the 

requirements of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act unless that collection of information 

displays a current valid OMB Control 

Number. The OMB Control Number for this 

information collection is 2120–0056. Public 

reporting for this collection of information is 

estimated to be approximately 5 minutes per 

response, including the time for reviewing 

instructions, completing and reviewing the 

collection of information. All responses to 

this collection of information are mandatory. 

Comments concerning the accuracy of this 

burden and suggestions for reducing the 

burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800 

Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 

20591, Attn: Information Collection 

Clearance Officer, AES–200. 

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested using the procedures found in 

14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 

39.19, send your request to your principal 

inspector or local Flight Standards District 

Office, as appropriate. If sending information 

directly to the manager of the ACO, send it 

to the attention of the person identified in the 

Related Information section of this AD. 

Information may be emailed to: 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov. 

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 

of the local flight standards district office/ 

certificate holding district office. 

(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair in 

the areas affected by this AD if it is approved 

by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes 

Organization Designation Authorization 

(ODA) that has been authorized by the 

Manager, Seattle ACO to make those 

findings. For a repair method to be approved, 

the repair must meet the certification basis of 

the airplane, and the approval must 

specifically refer to this AD. 

(k) Related Information 

For more information about this AD, 

contact James Sutherland, Aerospace 

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, 

FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Renton, Washington 98057–3356; phone: 

(425) 917–6533; fax: (425) 917–6590; email: 

James.Sutherland@faa.gov. 

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference 

(1) You must use the following service 

information to do the actions required by this 

AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The 

Director of the Federal Register approved the 

incorporation by reference (IBR) under 5 

U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 of the 

following service information: 

(i) Section 9, ‘‘Airworthiness Limitations 

(AWLs) and Certification Maintenance 

Requirements (CMRs),’’ D622W001–9, 

Revision July 2011, of the Boeing 777 

Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) 

Document. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 

Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, 

Seattle, Washington 98124–2207; telephone 

206–544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766– 

5680; email me.boecom@boeing.com; Internet 

https://www.myboeingfleet.com. 

(3) You may review copies of the service 

information at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

425–227–1221. 

(4) You may also review copies of the 

service information that is incorporated by 

reference at the National Archives and 

Records Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at an NARA facility, call 202–741– 

6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/ 

federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 

23, 2012. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–8228 Filed 4–9–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2010–1145] 

RIN 1625–AA11 

Regulated Navigation Area; Pacific 

Sound Resources and Lockheed 

Shipyard EPA Superfund Cleanup 

Sites, Elliott Bay, Seattle, WA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
21434 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a permanent regulated 

navigation area (RNA) on a portion of 

Elliott Bay in Seattle, Washington. The 

RNA will protect the seabed in portions 

of the bay that are subject to the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA)’s Pacific Sound Resources (PSR) 

and Lockheed Shipyard superfund 

cleanup remediation efforts. This RNA 

will prohibit activities that would 

disturb the seabed, such as anchoring, 

dragging, trawling, spudding or other 

activities that involve disrupting the 

integrity of the sediment caps that cover 

the superfund sites. It will not affect 

transit or navigation of the area. 

DATES: This rule is effective May 10, 

2012. 

ADDRESSES: Comments and material 

received from the public, as well as 

documents mentioned in this preamble 

as being available in the docket, are part 

of docket USCG–2010–1145 and are 

available online by going to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG– 

2010–1145 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and 

then clicking ‘‘Search.’’ This material is 

also available for inspection or copying 

at the Docket Management Facility (M– 

30), U.S. Department of Transportation, 

West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this proposed 

rule, call or email LT Ian Hanna, 

Waterways Management Division, 

Sector Puget Sound, Coast Guard; 

telephone 206–217–6045, email 

SectorPugetSoundWWM@uscg.mil. If 

you have questions on viewing or 

submitting material to the docket, call 

Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, 

Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– 

9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory Information 

On August 1, 2011, we published a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

entitled Regulated Navigation Area; 

Pacific Sound Resources and Lockheed 

Shipyard EPA Superfund Cleanup Sites, 

Elliott Bay, WA in the Federal Register 

(76 FR 45738). We received 2 comments 

on the proposed rule. No one requested 

a public meeting and a public meeting 

was not held. 

Basis and Purpose 

Under the Ports and Waterways Safety 

Act, the Coast Guard has the authority 

to establish RNAs in defined water areas 

that are determined to have hazardous 

conditions and in which vessel traffic 

can be regulated in the interest of safety. 

See 33 U.S.C. 1231 and Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 

0170.1. 

This rule is necessary to prevent 

disturbance of the PSR and Lockheed 

Shipyard sediment caps. It does so by 

restricting anchoring, dragging, 

trawling, spudding or other activities 

that involve disrupting the integrity of 

the cap in an RNA around the sediment 

caps. This RNA is similar to RNAs 

which protect other caps in the area. 

Enforcement of this RNA will be 

managed by Coast Guard Sector Puget 

Sound assets including Vessel Traffic 

Service Puget Sound through radar and 

closed circuit television sensors. The 

Captain of the Port Puget Sound may 

also be assisted by other government 

agencies in the enforcement of this 

zone. 

Background 

The PSR superfund site, which is 

located on the north shore of West 

Seattle within Elliott Bay, and 

northwest of the mouth of the 

Duwamish river, was created by the 

EPA to cover the remains of the Wyckoff 

West Seattle Wood Treating Facility. 

The wood treating facility, which was in 

operation between 1909 and 1994, was 

mostly located on a pile-supported 

facility extending into Elliott Bay. The 

area was added to the federal Superfund 

National Priorities List in May 1994. 

Later that year the entire wood 

treatment facility was demolished and 

approximately 4000 cubic yards of 

highly contaminated soil and process 

sludge were removed from the site. 

Construction of a subsurface physical 

containment barrier was started in 1996 

and completed in 1999. The final 

sediment cap, completed in 2004, is 

approximately 58-acres which includes 

approximately 1500 linear feet of 

shoreline, and intertidal and subtidal 

areas to depth of about 300 feet. 

The Lockheed Shipyard Sediment 

Operable Unit consists of contaminated 

near shore sediments within and 

adjacent to the Lockheed Shipyard on 

Harbor Island. Harbor Island is located 

approximately one mile southwest of 

the Central Business District of Seattle, 

in King County, Washington, and lies at 

the mouth of the Duwamish Waterway 

on the southern edge of Elliott Bay. The 

Lockheed Shipyard sediments are 

located on the west side of Harbor 

Island and face the West Waterway of 

the Duwamish Waterway. The final site 

does not protrude a significant distance 

into the West Duwamish waterway. 

Lockheed Shipyards acquired the 

facility in 1959 and conducted 

shipbuilding operations there until 

1986. In April 1997, Lockheed sold the 

upland property and its legal rights to 

the submerged portions of the site to the 

Port of Seattle. The remedy for the 

contaminated sediments included 

demolition of 3 piers, three shipways 

and one finger pier. The piers and 

shipways primarily consist of timber 

superstructures supported by 

approximately 6000 piles. Contaminants 

found in sediments which were either 

dredged or capped are arsenic, copper, 

lead, mercury, zinc, PAHs and PCBs. 

The metal contaminants were associated 

with sand blast grit and paint clips. 

Remedial actions for both of these 

sites as established by the EPA include 

preventing use of large anchors on the 

cap. This rulemaking is necessary to 

assist the EPA in that remedial action. 

Discussion of Comments and Changes 

We received two positive comments 

in favor of the proposed rule. One 

commenter simply expressed support 

for the proposed rule. The second 

discussed the environmental benefits of 

creating an RNA that protects the 

sediment cap as well as supported the 

points made in our regulatory analysis. 

There were no changes made to the rule 

based on these comments. 

Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on 13 of these statutes or 

executive orders. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

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. This expectation is based on the 

fact that the RNA established by the rule 

would encompass a small area that 

should not impact commercial or 

recreational traffic, and prohibited 

activities are not routine for the 

designated areas. There have been no 

changes to the proposed rule published 

in Federal Register August 1, 2011 (76 

FR 45738). 

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. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 21435 

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 would affect the following 

entities, some of which may be small 

entities: the owners or operators of 

vessels intending to anchor, dredge, 

spud, lay cable or disturb the seabed in 

any fashion when this rule is in effect. 

The RNA would not have a significant 

economic impact on small entities due 

to its minimal restrictive area and the 

opportunity for a waiver to be granted 

for any legitimate use of the seabed. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), 

in the NPRM 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. 

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 (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. 

Taking of Private Property 

This rule will not cause 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 

In preparation for this rulemaking, on 

October 8, 2010, Sector Puget Sound 

conducted a tribal consultation with 

representatives from the Suquamish and 

Muckleshoot tribes in accordance with 

Executive Order 13175, Consultation 

and Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments. The group noted that the 

sediment caps were in the usual and 

accustomed (U&A) fishing grounds of 

both tribes. Their main concern was that 

this RNA would prohibit them from 

exercising their U&A fishing. The Coast 

Guard and EPA clarified that nothing in 

this rulemaking is intended to conflict 

with these tribes’ treaty fishing rights 

and they are not restricted from any 

type of fishing in the described areas. As 

a result of the consultation the Coast 

Guard added paragraph b.(3) to the 

regulation. There were no comments to 

the NPRM concerning tribal 

implications. 

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 

Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 023–01 and 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

which guide the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have concluded 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 is categorically 

excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph 

(34)(g) of the Instruction. This rule 

involves a regulated navigation area 

which prevents activities which would 

disturb the seabed within the areas 

outlined in this regulation. An 

environmental analysis checklist and a 

categorical exclusion determination are 

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. 

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: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L. 

107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add § 165.1336 to read as follows: 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
21436 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

§ 165.1336 Regulated Navigation Area; 

Pacific Sound Resources and Lockheed 

Shipyard Superfund Sites, Elliott Bay, 

Seattle, WA. 

(a) Regulated Areas. The following 

areas are regulated navigation areas: 

(1) All waters inside an area 

beginning at a point on the shore at 

47°35′ 02.7′′ N 122°22′23.00′′ W; thence 

north to 47°35′26.00′′ N 122°22′23.00′′ 

W; thence east to 47°35′26.00′′ N 

122°21′52.50′′ W; thence south to 

47°35′10.80′′ N 122°21′52.50′′ W; thence 

southwest to a point on the shoreline at 

47°35′05.9′′ N 122°21′58.00′′ W. [Datum: 

NAD 1983]. 

(2) All waters inside an area 

beginning at 47°34′ 52.16′′ N 

122°21′27.11′′ W; thence to 47°34′ 

53.46′′ N 122°21′30.42′′ W; thence to 

47°34′ 37.92′′ N 122°21′30.51′′ W; thence 

to 47°34′ 37.92′′ N 122°21′27.65′′ W. 

[Datum: NAD 1983]. 

(b) Regulations. (1) All vessels and 

persons are prohibited from activities 

that would disturb the seabed, such as 

anchoring, dragging, trawling, spudding, 

or other activities that involve 

disrupting the integrity of the sediment 

caps installed in the designated 

regulated navigation area, pursuant to 

the remediation efforts of the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

and others in the Pacific Sound 

Resources and Lockheed Shipyard EPA 

superfund sites. Vessels may otherwise 

transit or navigate within this area 

without reservation. 

(2) The prohibition described in 

paragraph (b)(1) of this section does not 

apply to vessels or persons engaged in 

activities associated with remediation 

efforts in the superfund sites, provided 

that the Captain of the Port, Puget 

Sound (COTP), is given advance notice 

of those activities by the EPA. 

(3) Nothing in this section is intended 

to conflict with treaty fishing rights of 

the Muckleshoot and Suquamish tribes, 

and they are not restricted from any 

type of fishing in the described area. 

(c) Waivers. Upon written request 

stating the need and proposed 

conditions of the waiver, and any 

proposed precautionary measures, the 

COTP may authorize a waiver from this 

section if the COTP determines that the 

activity for which the waiver is sought 

can take place without undue risk to the 

remediation efforts described in 

paragraph (b)(1) of this section. The 

COTP will consult with EPA in making 

this determination when necessary and 

practicable. 

Dated: March 25, 2012. 

K.A. Taylor, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

Thirteenth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 2012–8545 Filed 4–9–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2012–0263] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone, East River, Brooklyn 

Bridge Scaffolding Repair, Brooklyn, 

NY 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a temporary safety zone on 

the navigable waters of the East River, 

in the vicinity of the Brooklyn Bridge. 

This action is necessary to provide for 

the safety of life and property on the 

navigable waters during emergency 

repairs to stabilize and remove the 

damaged scaffolding under the eastern 

span of the bridge. This rule is intended 

to restrict all vessels from a portion of 

the East River during the repair and 

removal of the damaged scaffolding. 

DATES: This rule is effective from March 

27, 2012 until April 30, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this 

preamble as being available in the 

docket are part of docket USCG–2012– 

0263 and are available online by going 

to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting 

USCG–2012–0263 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ 

box, and then clicking ‘‘Search.’’ They 

are also available for inspection or 

copying at the Docket Management 

Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of 

Transportation, West Building Ground 

Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this temporary 

rule, call or email Lieutenant William 

George, Coast Guard; telephone (718) 

354–4114, email 

William.J.George@uscg.mil. If you have 

questions on viewing the docket, call 

Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, 

Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– 

9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory Information 

The Coast Guard is issuing this 

temporary 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)(B), the Coast Guard finds that 

good cause exists for not publishing a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

with respect to this rule because 

immediate action is necessary to ensure 

the safety of mariners and vessels 

intending to transit on the East River in 

the vicinity of the Brooklyn Bridge 

where damaged corrugated metal 

scaffoldings and loosely hanging cables 

pose a potential hazard to navigation. 

Temporary repairs of the damaged 

section of the scaffolding are currently 

ongoing. The removal of the scaffolding 

is expected to take approximately three 

to four weeks. During this period falling 

debris may pose an imminent danger to 

the safety of the vessels and their 

occupants transiting the East River in 

the vicinity of the Brooklyn Bridge. 

Therefore, a temporary safety zone to 

protect transiting mariners and vessels 

from this hazard is needed immediately. 

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 Coast Guard finds that 

good cause exists for making this rule 

effective less than 30 days after 

publication because to do otherwise 

would be contrary to the public interest 

since immediate action is required to 

protect mariners and vessels transiting 

under the bridge while workers conduct 

emergency repairs and removal of the 

damaged scaffolding. 

Basis and Purpose 

The legal basis for this rule is 

33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 

3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 

1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Public 

Law 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; 

Department of Homeland Security 

Delegation No. 0170.1. 

On March 14, 2012 the Coast Guard 

received a report that a crane barge 

struck the scaffolding under the eastern 

span of the Brooklyn Bridge. As a result 

of the allision the corrugated metal 

panels that make up the scaffolding 

structure were damaged and some of the 

cables that supported the scaffolding 

were broken and are loosely hanging 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES