[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 176 (Tuesday, September 13, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55974-55976]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-19777]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2022-0731]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone; Mission Bay Closure, San Diego, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to establish a temporary safety 
zone for certain waters of Mission Bay. The safety zone is needed to 
protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential 
hazards created by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife 
(CDFW) Oil Spill Prevention and Response (OSPR) Sensitive Site Strategy 
Evaluation Program (SSSEP) boom deployment exercise. Entry of vessels 
or persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized 
by the Captain of the Port Sector San Diego. We invite your comments on 
this proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast 
Guard on or before October 13, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2022-0731 using the Federal Decision Making 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 LTJG Shera Kim, Waterways 
Management, U.S. Coast guard Sector San Diego, Coast Guard; telephone 
619-278-7656, email [email protected].

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

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    On November 15, 2022, the Coast Guard will be working in 
conjunction with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and 
local Oil Spill Response Organization to conduct boom deployment 
exercises from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. Contractors will bring up to 12000-
feet of floating oil boom aboard a workboat and deploy Area Contingency 
Plan (ACP)-6 Geographic Response Strategies (GRS). The Captain of the 
Port San Diego (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated 
with the boom deployment exercise would be a safety concern for anyone 
within a 100-yard radius of the boom. The COTP is proposing to 
establish a safety zone from 9 a.m. to noon on November 15, 2022.
    The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels 
and the navigable waters within a 100-yard radius of the boom before, 
during, and after the scheduled event. 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 9 a.m. until 
noon on November 15, 2022. The safety zone would cover all navigable 
waters within 100 yards of a boom in Mission Bay located across the 
entrance channel from the shoreline north of Mariners Cove inlet to a 
point south of Mission Bay Drive bridge on the Quivira Basin shoreline. 
The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the safety of vessels 
and these navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled 9 
a.m. until noon boom deployment exercise. 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. This NPRM has not been designated a ``significant 
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM 
has not been reviewed by the

[[Page 55975]]

Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on safety zone being 
of a limited three hour duration, limited to a relatively small 
geographic area, and the presence of safety hazards in the area 
encompassing the Mission Bay Entrance.

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 proposed 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 proposed 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 potential effects of 
this proposed 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 the human environment. This proposed rule involves a safety 
zone lasting 3 hours that would prohibit entry within 100 yards of the 
boom. 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. 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.
    Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through 
the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To 
do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2022-0731 in the 
search box and click ``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the 
Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment 
option. If you cannot submit your material by using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule for alternate 
instructions.
    Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this 
proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as 
described in the previous paragraph, and then select ``Supporting & 
Related Material'' in the Document Type column. Public comments will 
also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following 
instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked 
Questions web page. We review all comments received, but we will only 
post comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may 
choose not to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that 
we receive.
    Personal information. We accept anonymous comments. Comments we 
post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal 
information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions 
to the docket in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking 
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).

[[Page 55976]]

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. 
00170.1, Revision No. 01.2.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T11-0731 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.T11-0731   Safety Zone; Mission Bay, San Diego, CA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: Mission Bay 
located across the entrance channel from the shoreline north of 
Mariners Cove inlet to a point south of Mission Bay Drive bridge on the 
Quivira Basin shoreline.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, designated representative 
means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain, 
petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a 
Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the 
Captain of the Port Sector San Diego (COTP) in the enforcement of the 
safety zone.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in 
subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in 
paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the 
COTP's designated representative.
    (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's 
representative by VHF Channel 16. Those in the safety zone must comply 
with all lawful orders or directions given to them by the COTP or the 
COTP's designated representative.
    (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 9 a.m. 
until noon on November 15, 2022.

    Dated: September 7, 2022.
J.W. Spitler,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector San Diego.
[FR Doc. 2022-19777 Filed 9-12-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


