[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 33 (Thursday, February 17, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-3521]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: February 17, 1994]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part V
Department of Transportation
_______________________________________________________________________
Coast Guard
_______________________________________________________________________
33 CFR Part 150
Louisiana Offshore Oil Port: Expansion of Deepwater Port Safety Zone
Boundaries; Proposed Rule
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 150
[CGD 93-080]
RIN 2115-AE69
Louisiana Offshore Oil Port: Expansion of Deepwater Port Safety
Zone Boundaries
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to expand the boundaries of the
safety zone for the Louisiana Offshore Oil Port (LOOP). A deepwater
port safety zone constitutes an area within which the erection of
structures or mobile drilling operations for the exploration for or
extraction of oil or gas is prohibited. An expanded safety zone would
enlarge the approach to the terminal portion of the safety zone and
provide more unobstructed maneuvering room for vessels arriving and
departing from LOOP. This would reduce the risk of a marine casualty
and subsequent pollution.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 21, 1994.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to the Executive Secretary, Marine
Safety Council (G-LRA/3406) (CGD 93-080), U.S. Coast Guard
Headquarters, 2100 Second Street, SW., Washington, DC 20593-0001, or
may be delivered to room 3406, at the same address, between 8 a.m. and
3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is (202) 267-1477.
The Executive Secretary maintains the public docket for this
rulemaking. Comments will become part of this docket and will be
available for inspection or copying at room 3406, U.S. Coast Guard
Headquarters.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Commander Walter (Bud)
Hunt, Project Manager, Oil Pollution Act (OPA 90) Staff, (G-MS-1),
(202) 267-6740. This telephone is equipped to record messages on a 24-
hour basis.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
The Coast Guard encourages interested persons to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting written data, views, or arguments.
Persons submitting comments should include their names and addresses,
identify this rulemaking (CGD 93-080), and give the reason for each
comment. The Coast Guard requests that all comments and attachments be
submitted in an unbound format suitable for copying and electronic
filing. If not practical, a second copy of any bound materials is
requested. Persons wanting acknowledgment of receipt of comments should
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope.
The Coast Guard will consider all comments received during the
comment period. It may change this proposal in view of the comments.
The Coast Guard encourages individuals or organizations that commented
on the notice of petition for rulemaking to submit comments on this
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
The Coast Guard plans no public hearing. Persons may request a
public hearing by writing to the Marine Safety Council at the address
under ADDRESSES. The request should include reasons why a hearing would
be beneficial. If it determines that the opportunity for oral
presentations will aid this rulemaking, the Coast Guard will hold a
public hearing at a time and place to be announced by a later notice in
the Federal Register.
Drafting Information
The principal persons involved in drafting this document are
Lieutenant Commander Walter (Bud) Hunt, Project Manager, and Jacqueline
Sullivan, Project Counsel, Oil Pollution Act (OPA 90) Staff, (G-MS-1).
Background and Purpose
The Deepwater Port Act of 1974 (33 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) requires
the Secretary of Transportation to designate a zone of appropriate size
around and including any deepwater port for the purpose of navigational
safety and to protect the marine environment. This responsibility was
delegated to the Coast Guard in 49 CFR 1.46(s). A deepwater port safety
zone is designed to promote safety of life and property, marine
environmental protection and navigational safety at any deepwater port
and adjacent waters. No installations, structures, or uses that are
incompatible with port operations are permitted in a deepwater safety
zone. 33 CFR part 150 establishes the geographic boundaries of the
safety zone for the Louisiana Offshore Oil Port (LOOP) in Annex A and
provides for the modification of safety zone boundaries as experience
is gained in deepwater port operations. Changes in a safety zone at a
deepwater port are subject to notification and consideration of the
views of interested parties.
On December 29, 1980, the Coast Guard established a safety zone to
protect three single-point moorings at the Louisiana Offshore Oil Port
(LOOP) (45 FR 85644). The rulemaking was considered ``nonsignificant''
under existing Department of Transportation (DOT) and Coast Guard
regulatory guidelines. On May 13, 1982, the Coast Guard established a
safety fairway to provide unobstructed approach for vessels
transmitting to the LOOP safety zone (47 FR 20580).
On January 16, 1984, LOOP submitted to the Coast Guard a request
for a waiver of the requirements of 33 CFR 150.337(a) which prohibits a
tanker from entering or departing a safety zone by other than a
designated safety fairway. LOOP submitted to the Coast Guard chart
11359 and indicated two uncharted areas adjacent to the safety zone
which they referred to as excursion zones. LOOP requested that vessels
calling at the deepwater port be provided with additional maneuvering
room by allowing use of these excursion zones when departing or
entering the LOOP safety zone. Deviations from the safety fairway into
these zones came to be known as ``excursions.'' On February 20, 1987,
the Coast Guard granted for 1 year a waiver of the requirements that
tankers enter and leave the safety zone by the safety fairway. LOOP was
required to document the number of tanker maneuverings requiring
transit outside the existing safety zone, the percentage of excursions
which occurred within the two uncharted areas identified as excursion
zones, and the date, time, and approximate track line used for each
excursion. Since then, the Coast Guard has renewed the waiver on an
annual basis.
On December 30, 1987, LOOP asked the Coast Guard to make the waiver
permanent. On February 8, 1988, the request was denied on the grounds
that future exploration for or extraction of oil or gas might occur
within one or both excursion zones. If such activity took place, the
Coast Guard might have to revoke the waiver for the sake of safety.
In May 1988, CONOCO, Inc. (CONOCO) was issued an oil and gas lease
by the Department of the Interior's Minerals Management Service (MMS)
under the Outer Continental Shelf and Lands Act (OCSLA) (43 U.S.C. 1331
et seq.) in the area that was in the uncharted existing excursion zone.
The lease included a provision for the government to suspend or cancel
the lease with compensation when provided by the OCSLA. In August 1990,
LOOP notified the Coast Guard that CONOCO intended to drill under
authority of Lease OCS-G 9678 within Grand Isle Block 59, approximately
500 yards outside of the existing safety zone and safety fairway and
inside the uncharted southerly excursion zone. The Coast Guard is
concerned that a vessel casualty could result in a catastrophic
pollution incident if a vessel collided with a drilling platform
located in the existing excursion area. However, neither MMS policy nor
budget provided for repurchasing a lease. While MMS supports the Coast
Guard's interest in minimizing the risk of a catastrophic pollution
incident at LOOP, it contends that CONOCO has a legal right of access
to explore for and produce oil or gas from the lease.
On January 21, 1992, the Coast Guard published a notice of petition
for rulemaking and request for comments in the Federal Register
announcing a request by LOOP that the Coast Guard expand the safety
zone that surrounds the deepwater port (57 FR 2236). LOOP requested the
Coast Guard to make the waiver permanent thereby enlarging the safety
zone by adding the two excursion zones, and prohibiting structures. The
proposed safety zone would broaden the entrance to LOOP and prohibit
the erection of structures or mobile drilling operations. As a result,
the enlarged safety zone would reduce the number of required vessel
maneuverings, eliminate structures from the zone, possibly reducing the
risk of accidents and subsequent pollution. The proposed safety zone
reflects actual tanker activity at LOOP based on detailed records the
Coast Guard has required LOOP to maintain.
The Coast Guard received 48 comments in response to the notice of
petition for rulemaking. Forty-three responses, mostly from mooring
masters and shipping companies, offered strong support for the safety
zone expansion. Opposition to the proposal came from CONOCO, MMS, and
three oil exploration companies. MMS suggested that if CONOCO or other
lessees are denied access to potential oil and gas resources,
restitution should be provided by either LOOP or the Coast Guard.
Neither the Coast Guard nor the DOT is prepared to provide restitution
to CONOCO for loss of potential revenues or costs already incurred in
conjunction with oil or gas exploration.
To resolve the conflicting use problems in the excursion zones,
LOOP has agreed to purchase from CONOCO the oil and gas leases for
Grand Isle Blocks 53, 58, 59, and 65. LOOP would then relinquish these
blocks to MMS. LOOP would not seek further expansion of the safety zone
or oppose any exploration and production activity outside or adjacent
to the expanded safety zone.
On November 2, 1993, in a letter to the Department of
Transportation, the MMS stated that it supports the agreement between
CONOCO and LOOP. MMS stated that it is prepared to prohibit surface
occupancy of offshore oil and gas facilities in the proposed safety
zone. However, MMS stated that it may be economically and technically
feasible to develop the resources lying beneath the safety zone by
directional drilling. MMS would not preclude subseabed access provided
that any surface facilities are located outside the safety zone. Such
subseabed activity within the safety zone would not interfere with
vessel activity in the safety zone.
Under the Deepwater Port Act of 1974, as amended (33 U.S.C.
1509(d)(1)), the Secretary of Transportation is required to consult
with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of
the Interior, and the Secretary of Commerce prior to issuing the safety
zone around any deepwater port for the purposes of navigational safety.
The Coast Guard has informed the noted Departments of the proposed
safety zone.
Discussion of Proposed Amendment
Appendix A, Annex A, section (a) of 33 CFR part 150 is amended to
expand the boundaries of the deepwater port safety zone at LOOP. This
is being done at the request of LOOP, Inc. to enlarge the approach to
the terminal portion and provide more maneuvering area for tank vessels
arriving or departing from the deepwater port. It does not amend the
Areas to be Avoided or the Anchorage Area listed in sections (b) and
(c), respectively, in Annex A to Appendix A of 33 CFR part 150.
Regulatory Assessment
This proposal is not a significant regulatory action under Section
3(F)(1) of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735; October 4, 1993) and it
does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under
section 6(a)(3) of that Order. It is not a significant regulation under
the ``Department of Transportation Regulatory Policies and Procedures''
(44 FR 11040; February 26, 1979).
The Coast Guard expects the economic consequences of this
rulemaking to be minimal. Potential economic effects include impacts on
mineral extraction and the commercial fishing industry. The proposed
expansion is relatively insignificant, comprising an approximate 15
percent increase in the size of the safety zone.
When the original safety zone was established, it was not expected
that there would be significant interference with mineral extraction or
navigation. Due to the relative size of the expansion, no impacts on
mineral extraction or navigation are expected in this case either.
Access is available via alternative methods such as directional
drilling.
The economic consequences of the proposed rulemaking are expected
to primarily impact commercial vessels, including commercial fishing
vessels. Commercial fishing vessels are permitted restricted use of
portions of the safety zone as provided in 33 CFR Table 150.345(a).
Therefore, the impact on fishing activities would be negligible due to
the small additional area involved. No opposition to the notice of
petition for rulemaking was received from the commercial fishing
industry.
In addition, this proposed rulemaking will result in permanent
safety benefits. Providing additional maneuvering area minimizes the
likelihood of a catastrophic pollution incident resulting from a vessel
colliding with any portion of the LOOP facility. Therefore, it is
expected that expansion of the safety zone will reduce the
environmental hazard.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.), the
Coast Guard must consider whether this proposed safety zone will have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
``Small entities'' include independently owned and operated small
business concerns under section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.
632). The small entities affected by this proposed rule are commercial
fishing activities at the deepwater port. Because it expects the impact
of this proposal to be minimal, the Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed safety zone will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Collection of Information
This proposed rule does not require the collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.).
Federalism
The Coast Guard has analyzed this proposal in accordance with the
principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 12612 and has
determined that this proposal does not have federalism implications and
does not warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. LOOP is
located beyond State waters where only Federal jurisdiction applies.
Environment
The Coast Guard considered the environmental impact of this
proposal and concluded that, under section 2.B.2(c) of Commandant
Instruction M16475.1B, this proposed rule is categorically excluded
from further environmental documentation. This rule will not result in
significant impact on the quality of the human environment, as defined
by the National Environmental Policy Act. A Categorical Exclusion
Determination is available in the docket for inspection or copying
where indicated under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 150
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Occupational safety and
health, Oil pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 150 as follows:
PART 150--OPERATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 150 continues to read as
follows: 33 U.S.C. 1231, 1321(j)(1)(C), (j)(5), (j)(6) and (m)(2),
1509; sec. 2, E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757; 49 CFR 1.46.
2. Appendix A to part 150, Annex A, is amended by revising
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Appendix A to Part 150--Deepwater Port Safety Zone Boundaries
* * * * *
Annex A--Loop, Inc. Deepwater Port, Gulf of Mexico
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude N. Longitude W.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Deepwater Port Safety Zone:
(1) Starting at:
28 deg.55'23'' 90 deg.00'37
''
(2) A rhumb line to:
28 deg.53'50'' 90 deg.04'07
''
(3) Then an arc with a 4,465 meter (4,883 yard) radius centered at the
port pumping platform complex (PPC),
28 deg.53'06'' 90 deg.01'30
''
(4) To a point:
28 deg.51'07'' 90 deg.03'06
''
(5) Then a rhumb line to:
28 deg.50'09'' 90 deg.02'24
''
(6) Then a rhumb line to:
28 deg.49'05'' 89 deg.55'54
''
(6) Then a rhumb line to:
28 deg.48'36'' 89 deg.55'00
''
(8) Then a rhumb line to:
28 deg.52'04'' 89 deg.52'42
''
(9) Then a rhumb line to:
28 deg.53'10'' 89 deg.53'42
''
(10) Then a rhumb line to:
28 deg.54'52'' 89 deg.57'00
''
(11) Then a rhumb line to:
28 deg.54'52'' 89 deg.59'36
''
(12) Then an arc with a 4,465 meter (4,883 yard) radius centered again
at the port PPC,
28 deg.53'06'' 90 deg.01'30
''
(13) To the point of starting:
28 deg.55'23'' 90 deg.00'37
''
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Dated: January 31, 1994.
A.E. Henn,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Office of Marine Safety,
Security and Environmental Protection.
[FR Doc. 94-3521 Filed 2-16-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-14-M