Document ID: USCG-2020-0058-0001
Agency: uscg
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Safety Zone; Monongahela River Mile 23.8 to Mile 26.0, Pittsburgh, PA
Posted Date: 2020-02-03T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 22 (Monday, February 3, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5909-5911]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-01919]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2020-0058]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Monongahela River Mile 23.8 to Mile 26.0, 
Pittsburgh, PA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to establish a temporary safety 
zone from mile 23.8 to mile 26.0 of the Monongahela River. This action 
is necessary to provide for the safety of life on these navigable 
waters near Elrama Power Plant, Pittsburgh, PA, during an electrical 
conducter pull from March 23, 2020 through April 6, 2020. This proposed 
rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels from entering the safety 
zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Marine Safety Unit 
Pittsburgh or a designated representative. We invite your comments on 
this proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast 
Guard on or before March 4, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2020-0058 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for 
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further 
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this 
proposed rulemaking, call or email MST2 Trevor Vannatta, Waterways 
Management U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 412-221-0807, email 
Trevor.J.Vannatta@uscg.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations

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

[[Page 5910]]

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    On November 12, 2019, the Duquesne Light Company notified the Coast 
Guard that it will be conducting an electrical conducter pull on March 
23, 2020, in order to replace existing electrical conductor with new 
higher ampacity electrical conductor. The conducter pull will take 
place between mile 23.8 and mile 26 on the Elrama Power Plant side of 
the Monongahela River. Hazards from the conducter pull include danger 
to the navigability of the waterway due to obstruction by equipment. 
The Captain of the Port (COTP) Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh has 
determined that potential hazards associated with ongoing work would be 
a safety concern for anyone transiting the river during the maintenance 
activity.
    The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels 
and the navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled 
activity. The Coast Guard is proposing this rulemaking under authority 
in 46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231).

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The COTP is proposing to establish a safety zone from March 23, 
2020 through April 6, 2020. The safety zone would cover all navigable 
waters from mile 23.8 to mile 26.0 on the Monongahela River near 
Pittsburgh, PA. The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the 
safety of vessels and these navigable waters before, during, and after 
a scheduled maintenance activity at the Elrama Power Plant. No vessel 
or person would be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining 
permission from the COTP or a designated representative. The regulatory 
text we are proposing appears at the end of this document.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed 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. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control 
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This NPRM has not been 
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 
12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt 
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, 
location, and duration of the safety zone. The zone will impact a 2.2 
mile stretch of the Monongahela River and only be enforced during 
active maintenance periods, and vessel traffic would be able to safely 
transit around the safety zone. Moreover, the Coast Guard would issue a 
Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the 
zone, and the rule would allow vessels to seek permission to enter the 
zone.

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 
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the 
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section 
IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic 
impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    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 how and to what 
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    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 proposed 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. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small 
entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any 
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would 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 proposed 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 proposed rule does not have tribal implications under 
Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments) because it would 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. If 
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or 
Indian tribes, please call or email the person listed in the FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

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 proposed rule would not 
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule 
elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed 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 made 
a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of 
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant 
effect on

[[Page 5911]]

the human environment. This proposed rule involves a safety zone from 
mile 23.8 to mile 26.0 on the Monongahela River near Pittsburgh, PA 
from March 23, 2020 through April 6, 2020. Normally such actions are 
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 
preliminary 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. We seek any 
comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant 
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

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.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, 
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment 
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If 
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which 
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or 
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be 
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person 
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for 
alternate instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted 
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and 
submissions in response to this document, see DHS's Correspondence 
System of Records notice (84 FR 48645, September 26, 2018).
    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, 
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's 
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up 
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a 
final rule is published.

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 is 
proposing to amend 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.T08-0058 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0058   Safety Zone; Monongahela, Mile 23.8 to Mile 26.0, 
Pittsburgh, PA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable 
waters of the Monongahela River from mile 23.8 to mile 26.
    (b) Effective period. This section is effective from March 23, 2020 
through April 6, 2020.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in 
Sec.  165.23, entry of persons and vessels into this zone is prohibited 
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Marine Safety Unit 
Pittsburgh (COTP) or a designated representative.
    (2) Persons or vessels requiring entry into or passage through the 
zone must request permission from the COTP or a designated 
representative. The COTP's representative may be contacted at 412-221-
0807.
    (3) All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of 
the COTP or a designated representative. Designated COTP 
representatives include United States Coast Guard commissioned, 
warrant, and petty officer.
    (d) Information broadcasts. The Captain COTP or a designated 
representative will inform the public through Local Notice to Mariners 
(LNMs), Broadcast Notices to Mariners (BNMs), and/or Marine Safety 
Information Bulletins (MSIBs), as appropriate.

A.W. Demo,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Marine Safety Unit 
Pittsburgh.
[FR Doc. 2020-01919 Filed 1-31-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P