[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 73 (Tuesday, April 16, 2002)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18523-18527]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-9131]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[COTP San Francisco Bay 02-003]
RIN 2115-AA97


Safety Zone; Carquinez Strait, Vallejo and Crockett, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone 
in the navigable waters of the Carquinez Strait surrounding the 
construction site of the new U.S. Interstate 80 bridge (Alfred Zampa 
Memorial Bridge) over a 30-day period for approximately 6-hours per 
day. The purpose of this safety zone is to protect persons and vessels 
from hazards associated with bridge construction activities; 
specifically, those hazards associated with stringing cables across the 
Strait. The safety zone will temporarily prohibit usage of the 
Carquinez Strait waters surrounding the Alfred Zampa Memorial Bridge; 
specifically, no vessels will be permitted to pass beneath the bridge.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before May 16, 2002.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to the Waterways 
Management Branch at the U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office San 
Francisco Bay, Coast Guard Island, Building 14, Alameda, California 
94501-5100, or deliver them to room 108 at the same address between 9 
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The 
Waterways Management Branch of Marine Safety Office San Francisco Bay 
maintains the public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and material 
received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this 
preamble as being available in the docket, will become part of this 
docket and will be available for inspection or copying at U.S. Coast 
Guard Marine Safety Office San Francisco Bay, Coast Guard Island, 
Building 14, Room 108, Alameda, California 94501-5100 between 9 a.m. 
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Ross Sargent, Chief, 
Waterways Management Branch, U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office San 
Francisco Bay, (510) 437-3073.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 18524]]

Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name 
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (COTP San 
Francisco Bay 02-003), indicate the specific section of this document 
to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. 
Please submit all comments and related material in an unbound format, 
no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would 
like to know they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed 
postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material 
received during the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in 
view of them.
    In our final rule, we will include a concise general statement of 
the comments received and identify any changes from the proposed rule 
based on the comments. If as we expect, we make the final rule 
effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, 
we will explain our good cause for doing so as required by 5 U.S.C. 
553(d)(3).

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a 
request for a meeting by writing to the Waterways Management Branch at 
the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If 
we determine that a public meeting would aid this rulemaking, we will 
hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal 
Register.

Background and Purpose

    The State of California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS) has 
determined that the original bridge spanning Carquinez Strait must be 
replaced. CALTRANS has begun construction on the new bridge (Alfred 
Zampa Memorial Bridge) and is nearing a phase that will involve 
stringing steel cables across the Strait. More specifically, the cable 
stringing process will involve attaching an approximately 1.5-inch 
diameter steel cable at the bridge's southern terminus and deploying 
the cable from a reel-equipped barge as it is towed northward. The 
cable itself will be partially submerged in the Strait until it is 
connected to the northern terminus, winched upward and secured 
approximately 150 feet above the Strait. The deployment phase will take 
approximately 6 hours for each cable.
    In February 2002, CALTRANS advised the Coast Guard Captain of the 
Port that a series of channel closures would be necessary in order to 
accomplish the cable stringing. The Coast Guard, along with CALTRANS, 
the contractor, a joint venture of FCI Constructors, Inc./Cleveland 
Bridge California, Inc. (FCI/CB), and the San Francisco Bar Pilots, 
have been planning the logistics for the closures in order to ensure 
minimal impacts on involved and potentially involved entities.
    The purpose of this proposed safety zone is to protect persons and 
vessels from hazards, injury and damage associated with the bridge 
construction activities, and cable stringing in particular. One of the 
dangers during the cable deployment phase is the partially submerged 
cable that could inflict serious injury or death to mariners, as well 
as cause major damage to the hull, propeller and rudder of vessels, 
attempting to pass over it. Similarly, the cable deployment barge, its 
towing vessel and towing line all pose significant collision dangers to 
vessels transiting the area. In addition, when the heavy 1.5-inch steel 
cable is being winched to approximately 150 feet above the Strait, it 
may part or break loose and fall upon vessels below.
    This proposed temporary safety zone in the navigable waters of the 
Carquinez Strait surrounding the construction site of the Alfred Zampa 
Memorial Bridge would be in effect during the course of a 30-day 
period, but would only be enforced for approximately six hours in a 
given day. The times would be different for each day based on factors 
that will be explained in detail in the Discussion section. In 
addition, this safety zone would not be enforced everyday during the 
30-day period.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to establish a safety zone that would be 
enforced for approximately 6 hours per day on certain days between June 
17, 2002 and July 16, 2002. The proposed safety zone is necessary to 
protect persons and vessels from hazards, injury and damage associated 
with the bridge construction activities, and cable stringing in 
particular.
    The proposed safety zone would encompass the navigable waters, from 
the surface to the bottom, within two lines; one line drawn from the 
westernmost pier at Crockett Marina [38 deg.03'28" N, 122 deg.13'42" W] 
extending due north to the opposite shore [38 deg.03'56" N, 
122 deg.13'42" W], and the other line drawn from the western end of the 
C & H Sugar facility [38 deg.03'28" N, 122 deg.13'26" W] extending due 
north to the opposite shore [38 deg.03'54" N, 122 deg.13'26" W]. 
[Datum: NAD 83].
    The proposed dates and approximate enforcement times are based on 
certain factors that were considered by the U.S. Coast Guard, San 
Francisco Bar Pilots, and the contractor, FCI/CB. These factors 
included working with favorable tides and currents; and minimizing 
closures during darkness, and the Fourth of July holiday. The proposed 
safety zone would be enforced for approximately 6 hours at a time. On 
some days the proposed safety zone may be enforced for less than 6 
hours. The approximate period of 6 hours is based on the time required 
to string each of the cables from the bridge's southern terminus to its 
northern terminus. Although the approximate times that are being 
proposed here are for a duration of approximately 5.5 hours in length, 
more precise times will be known during the first few days that the 
safety zone will be enforced.
    CALTRANS has proposed times that provide adequate safety to 
construction crews and vessels transiting the area, while minimizing 
the impact on vessels transiting through the Strait. As with other 
construction projects, there are certain unknown factors, such as 
weather conditions and possible unforeseen problems that will only be 
known on a particular day during the cable stringing process. 
Therefore, the proposed safety zone enforcement periods are approximate 
times only. During the days of construction, when further information 
becomes available about the exact times that the proposed safety zone 
would be enforced, the Captain of the Port would advise the public in 
several ways. Mariners that would or could be effected by the channel 
closures, would be advised to monitor for broadcast notice to mariners 
alerts on VHF-FM marine channel 16 or contact the Captain of the Port 
representative on scene via VHF-FM marine channel 22. Vessel Movement 
Reporting System users (VMRS users) would be similarly advised by Coast 
Guard Vessel Traffic Service San Francisco via VHF-FM marine channel 
14. The proposed safety zone dates and approximate enforcement times 
are as follows:

[[Page 18525]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Safety zone in        Safety zone
              Date                      effect              expires
------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 17, 2002...................  7:30 a.m..........  1 p.m.
June 18, 2002...................  9 a.m.............  2:30 p.m.
June 19, 2002...................  10 a.m............  3:30 p.m.
June 20, 2002...................  11:30 a.m.........  5 p.m.
June 21, 2002...................  1 p.m.............  6:30 p.m.
June 22, 2002...................  8 a.m.............  1:30 p.m.
June 23, 2002...................  9 a.m.............  2:30 p.m.
June 24, 2002...................  9:30 a.m..........  3 p.m.
June 25, 2002...................  10 a.m............  3:30 p.m.
June 26, 2002...................  10:30 a.m.........  4 p.m.
June 27, 2002...................  4 a.m.............  9:30 a.m.
June 28, 2002...................  4:30 a.m..........  10 a.m.
June 29, 2002...................  5:30 a.m..........  11 a.m.
June 30, 2002...................  6:30 a.m..........  12 (noon)
July 1, 2002....................  7:30 a.m..........  1 p.m.
July 2, 2002....................  8:30 a.m..........  2 p.m.
July 3, 2002....................  5 a.m.............  10:30 a.m.
July 4, 2002....................          No safety zone enforced
July 5, 2002....................          No safety zone enforced
July 6, 2002....................          No safety zone enforced
July 7, 2002....................          No safety zone enforced
July 8, 2002....................  8:30 a.m..........  2 p.m.
July 9, 2002....................  9:30 a.m..........  3 p.m.
July 10, 2002...................  10 a.m............  3:30 p.m.
July 11, 2002...................  10:30 a.m.........  4 p.m.
July 12, 2002...................  4 a.m.............  9:30 a.m.
July 13, 2002...................  5 a.m.............  10:30 a.m.
July 14, 2002...................  5:30 a.m..........  11 a.m.
July 15, 2002...................  7 a.m.............  12:30 p.m.
July 16, 2002...................  7:30 a.m..........  12:30 p.m.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regulatory Evaluation

    This proposed 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. It is not ``significant'' 
under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of 
Transportation (DOT)(44 FR 11040, February 26, l979).
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so 
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 10e of the 
regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary.
    The effect of this regulation would not be significant for several 
reasons. The San Francisco Bar Pilots, responsible for guiding all deep 
draft commercial vessels in the area of the safety zone, have been 
working closely with CALTRANS, the contractor, and the U.S. Coast Guard 
in order to ensure minimal impact to deep draft commercial vessel 
traffic. The safety zone would be enforced for approximately 6 hours 
per day, taking into account tides, currents, daylight and vessel 
traffic patterns. In addition, we have attempted to minimize impacts on 
the regional commercial and sport fishing industries. Finally, advance 
notifications of the channel closures would be made to the local 
maritime community by broadcast notice to mariner alerts over marine 
band radio, on-scene Captain of the Port representatives and Coast 
Guard Vessel Traffic Service radio communications.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. 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. This proposed rule would affect the following 
entities, some of which might be small entities: the owners or 
operators of commercial shrimp or charter fishing vessels intending to 
transit through the Alfred Zampa Memorial Bridge construction area 
during safety zone enforcement periods (temporary channel closures). 
Additionally, since recreational sport fishing vessels would not be 
able to transit the channel during temporary channel closures, and thus 
possibly divert to fish at other places and times, local bait and 
tackle businesses may be impacted.
    This safety zone would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. 
Although the safety zone would apply to the entire width of the Strait, 
the rule would normally be enforced for six hours usually early in the 
day, during the height of the day's first tidal cycle. Such 
predictability would enable fishing vessels to schedule transits 
through the safety zone area before or after the 6-hour safety zone 
enforcement periods. Before and during the enforcement periods, Captain 
of the Port representatives in patrol vessels would assume their 
stations to the east and west of the safety zone to provide notice and 
enforcement of the zone. The Coast Guard would also issue broadcast 
notice to mariners alerts via VHF-FM marine channel 16 before the 
safety zone is enforced.
    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.

[[Page 18526]]

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small 
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better 
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the 
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or 
options for compliance, please contact Lieutenant Ross Sargent, U.S. 
Coast Guard Marine Safety Office San Francisco Bay at (510) 437-3073.

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.).

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 proposed 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 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.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not effect 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 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.

Protection of Children

    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.

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.
    To help the Coast Guard establish regular and meaningful 
consultation and collaboration with Indian and Alaskan Native tribes, 
we published a notice in the Federal Register (66 FR 36361, July 11, 
2001) requesting comments on how to best carry out the Order. We invite 
your comments on how this proposed rule might impact tribal 
governments, even if that impact may not constitute a ``tribal 
implication'' under the Order.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed 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. It has not been designated by the Administrator of the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy 
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects 
under Executive Order 13211.

Environment

    We have considered the environmental impact of this proposed rule 
and concluded that, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of Commandant 
Instruction M16475.lD, this rule is categorically excluded from further 
environmental documentation. A ``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' 
is 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 proposes 
to amend 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; 50 U.S.C. 191, 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 
6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; 49 CFR 1.46.

    2. Add new Sec. 165.T11-078 to read as follows:


Sec. 165.T11-078  Safety Zone: Carquinez Strait, Vallejo and Crockett, 
CA.

    (a) Location. The safety zone encompasses the navigable waters, 
from the surface to the bottom, within two lines; one line drawn from 
the westernmost pier at Crockett Marina [38 deg.03'28" N, 
122 deg.13'42" W] extending due north to the opposite shore 
[38 deg.03'56" N, 122 deg.13'42" W], and the other line drawn from the 
western end of the C & H Sugar facility [38 deg.03'28" N, 
122 deg.13'26" W] extending due north to the opposite shore 
[38 deg.03'54" N, 122 deg.13'26" W]. [Datum: NAD 83].
    (b) Effective period. This safety zone is effective from 7:30 a.m., 
June 17, 2002 to 12:30 p.m., July 16, 2002.
    (c) Enforcement periods. The Coast Guard will notify the maritime 
public of the precise times for enforcement of the safety zone via 
broadcast notice to mariners, Vessel Traffic Service radio 
communications, and Captain of the Port representatives on scene. If 
the safety zone is no longer needed prior to the scheduled termination 
times, the Captain of the Port will cease enforcement of this safety 
zone and will announce that fact via broadcast notice to mariners. The 
safety zone dates and times are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Safety zone in        Safety zone
              Date                      effect              expires
------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 17, 2002...................  7:30 a.m..........  1 p.m.
June 18, 2002...................  9 a.m.............  2:30 p.m.
June 19, 2002...................  10 a.m............  3:30 p.m.
June 20, 2002...................  11:30 a.m.........  5 p.m.

[[Page 18527]]

 
June 21, 2002...................  1 p.m.............  6:30 p.m.
June 22, 2002...................  8 a.m.............  1:30 p.m.
June 23, 2002...................  9 a.m.............  2:30 p.m.
June 24, 2002...................  9:30 a.m..........  3 p.m.
June 25, 2002...................  10 a.m............  3:30 p.m.
June 26, 2002...................  10:30 a.m.........  4 p.m.
June 27, 2002...................  4 a.m.............  9:30 a.m.
June 28, 2002...................  4:30 a.m..........  10 a.m.
June 29, 2002...................  5:30 a.m..........  11 a.m.
June 30, 2002...................  6:30 a.m..........  12 (noon)
July 1, 2002....................  7:30 a.m..........  1 p.m.
July 2, 2002....................  8:30 a.m..........  2 p.m.
July 3, 2002....................  5 a.m.............  10:30 a.m.
July 4, 2002....................         No safety zone enforced.
July 5, 2002....................         No safety zone enforced.
July 6, 2002....................         No safety zone enforced.
July 7, 2002....................         No safety zone enforced.
July 8, 2002....................  8:30 a.m..........  2 p.m.
July 9, 2002....................  9:30 a.m..........  3 p.m.
July 10, 2002...................  10 a.m............  3:30 p.m.
July 11, 2002...................  10:30 a.m.........  4 p.m.
July 12, 2002...................  4 a.m.............  9:30 a.m.
July 13, 2002...................  5 a.m.............  10:30 a.m.
July 14, 2002...................  5:30 a.m..........  11 a.m.
July 15, 2002...................  7 a.m.............  12:30 p.m.
July 16, 2002...................  7:30 a.m..........  12:30 p.m.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (d) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations in 
Sec. 165.23 of this part, no person or vessel may enter, transit 
through, or anchor within this safety zone unless authorized by the 
Captain of the Port, or his designated representative.

    Dated: April 5, 2002.
L.L. Hereth,
Captain, Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, San Francisco Bay.
[FR Doc. 02-9131 Filed 4-15-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P