
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 98 (Wednesday, May 21, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29095-29098]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11567]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 147

[Docket No. USCG-2014-0242]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone; Gulfstar 1 SPAR, Mississippi Canyon Block 724, Outer 
Continental Shelf on the Gulf of Mexico

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes a safety zone around the Gulfstar 1 
SPAR, Mississippi Canyon Block 724 on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) 
in the Gulf of Mexico. The purpose of the safety zone is to protect the 
facility from vessels operating outside the normal shipping channels 
and fairways. Placing a safety zone around the facility will 
significantly reduce the threat of allisions, oil spills, and releases 
of natural gas, and thereby protect the safety of life, property, and 
the environment.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast 
Guard on or before June 20, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2014-0242 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax: 202-493-2251.
    (3) Mail or Delivery: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. 
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Deliveries 
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 
federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-366-9329.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion 
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on 
submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of these 
four methods.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed 
rule, call or email Mr. Rusty Wright, U.S. Coast Guard, District Eight 
Waterways Management Branch; telephone 504-671-2138, 
rusty.h.wright@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing or submitting 
material to the docket, call Cheryl F. Collins, Program Manager, Docket 
Operations, telephone (202) 366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
OCS Outer Continental Shelf
USCG United States Coast Guard

A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted 
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided.

1. Submitting Comments

    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. You may submit your comments and

[[Page 29096]]

material online at http://www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or hand 
delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a 
comment online, it will be considered received by the Coast Guard when 
you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or 
mail your comment, it will be considered as having been received by the 
Coast Guard when it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We 
recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email 
address, or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we 
can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov, 
type the docket number [USCG-2014-0242] in the ``SEARCH'' box and click 
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with 
this rulemaking.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them 
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for 
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would 
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, 
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and 
material received during the comment period and may change the rule 
based on your comments.

2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble 
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, 
type the docket number (USCG-2014-0242) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click 
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with 
this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in 
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation 
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, 
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays.

3. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any 
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or 
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, 
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice 
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008 issue of the 
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

4. Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a 
request for one by using one of the methods specified under ADDRESSES. 
Please explain why you believe a public meeting would be beneficial. If 
we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a 
time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

B. Basis and Purpose

    Under the authority provided in 14 U.S.C. 85, 43 U.S.C. 1333, and 
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, Title 33, CFR 
Part 147 permits the establishment of safety zones for facilities 
located on the OCS for the purpose of protecting life, property and the 
marine environment. Williams Midstream requested that the Coast Guard 
establish a safety zone around its facility located in the deepwater 
area of the Gulf of Mexico on the OCS. Placing a safety zone around 
this facility will significantly reduce the threat of allisions, oil 
spills, and releases of natural gas, and thereby protect the safety of 
life, property, and the environment.
    The safety zone proposed by this rulemaking is on the OCS in the 
deepwater area of the Gulf of Mexico in Mississippi Canyon Block 724 
with a center point at 28[deg]14'05.904'' N 88[deg]59'43.306'' W. For 
the purpose of safety zones established under 33 CFR Part 147, the 
deepwater area is considered to be 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 vicinity 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 also includes an extensive system of 
fairways.

C. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    Williams Midstream requested that the Coast Guard establish a 
safety zone extending 500 meters from each point on the Gulfstar 1 SPAR 
facility structure's outermost edge. The request for the safety zone 
was made due to safety concerns for both the personnel aboard the 
facility and the environment. Williams Midstream indicated that it is 
highly likely that any allision with the facility would result in a 
catastrophic event. In evaluating this request, the Coast Guard 
explored relevant safety factors and considered several criteria, 
including but not limited to, (1) the level of shipping activity around 
the facility, (2) safety concerns for personnel aboard the facility, 
(3) concerns for the environment, (4) the likeliness that an allision 
would result in a catastrophic event based on proximity to shipping 
fairways, offloading operations, production levels, and size of the 
crew, (5) the volume of traffic in the vicinity of the proposed area, 
(6) the types of vessels navigating in the vicinity of the proposed 
area, and (7) the structural configuration of the facility.
    Results from a thorough and comprehensive examination of the 
criteria, International Maritime Organization (IMO) guidelines, and 
existing regulations warrant the establishment of a safety zone of 500 
meters around the facility. The proposed safety zone would reduce 
significantly the threat of allisions, oil spills, and releases of 
natural gas and increase the safety of life, property, and the 
environment in the Gulf of Mexico by prohibiting entry into the zone 
unless specifically authorized by the Commander, Eighth Coast Guard 
District or a designated representative.

D. 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 or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under 
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, 
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and 
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential 
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or 
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and 
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
    This rule is not a significant regulatory action due to the 
location of the Gulfstar 1 SPAR--on the Outer Continental Shelf--and 
its distance from both land and safety fairways. Vessels traversing 
waters near the proposed safety zone will be able to safely travel 
around the zone using alternate routes. Exceptions to this proposed 
rule include vessels measuring less than 100 feet in length overall and 
not engaged in towing. Deviation to transit through the

[[Page 29097]]

proposed safety zone may be requested. Such requests will be considered 
on a case-by-case basis and may be authorized by the Commander, Eighth 
Coast Guard District or a designated representative.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 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 will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.
    This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of 
which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels 
intending to transit or anchor in Mississippi Canyon Block 724.
    This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact or a 
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: Vessel 
traffic can pass safely around the safety zone using alternate routes. 
Based on the limited scope of the safety zone, any delay resulting from 
using an alternate route is expected to be minimal depending on vessel 
traffic and speed in the area. Additionally, exceptions to this 
proposed rule include vessels measuring less than 100 feet in length 
overall and not engaged in towing. Deviation to transit through the 
proposed safety zone may be requested. Such requests will be considered 
on a case-by-case basis and may be authorized by the Commander, Eighth 
Coast Guard District or a designated representative.
    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.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    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 submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it 
qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically 
affect it.
    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.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

    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 does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. 
Protesters are asked to contact 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.

7. 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.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would 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.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed 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.

10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks

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

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    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.

12. Energy Effects

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under 
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we 
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed 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 
made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category 
of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant 
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves the 
establishment of a safety zone around an OCS facility to protect life, 
property and the marine environment. This proposed rule is categorical 
excluded from further review, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of 
the Commandant Instruction. A preliminary environmental analysis 
checklist supporting this determination and the Categorical Exclusion 
Determination are available in the

[[Page 29098]]

docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or 
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant 
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 147

    Continental shelf, Marine safety, Navigation (water).

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes 
to amend 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; and Department of 
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.


0
2. Add Sec.  147.859 to read as follows:


Sec.  147.859  Gulfstar 1 SPAR Facility Safety Zone.

    (a) Description. The Gulfstar 1 Spar is in the deepwater area of 
the Gulf of Mexico at Mississippi Canyon Block 724. The facility is 
located at 28[deg]14'05.904'' N, 88[deg]59'43.306'' W, and the area 
within 500 meters (1640.4 feet) from each point on the facility 
structure's outer edge is a safety zone.
    (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 or a designated representative.

    Dated: April 25, 2014.
Kevin S. Cook,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2014-11567 Filed 5-20-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


