[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 235 (Wednesday, December 9, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65019-65021]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-29355]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2009-0331]
RIN 1625-AA87 and 1625-AA00


Security and Safety Zone; Cruise Ship Protection, Elliott Bay and 
Pier-91, Seattle, WA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is adopting the subject interim rule published 
in the Federal Register August 20, 2009, as a final rule without 
change. Due to the physical location of Pier 91, Large Passenger Cruise 
Vessels are required to maneuver near a prominent marina frequented by 
a large recreational vessel community and near other numerous large 
commercial fishing vessels located at adjacent piers, posing a high 
safety and security risk when Large Passenger Cruise Vessels are 
entering and departing the cruise terminal. Due to the inherent safety 
and security risks associated with the movement of a cruise ship into 
or out of this especially tight berth at Pier 91, coupled with the 
large recreational boating community and commercial traffic in the 
area, the Coast Guard Captain of the Port Puget Sound finds it 
necessary to enact these safety and security zones.

DATES: This rule is effective January 8, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as 
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, 
are part of docket USCG-2009-0331 and are available online by going to 
http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2009-0331 in the ``Keyword'' 
box, and then clicking ``Search.'' This material is also available for 
inspection or copying at the 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, between 9 a.m. and 5 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this 
temporary rule, call or e-mail LTJG Ian Hanna, Sector Seattle, 
Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard; telephone 206-217-6045, e-
mail [email protected]. If you have questions on viewing the docket, 
call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 
202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    On August 20, 2009, we published an interim rule with request for 
comment entitled Security and Safety Zone; Cruise Ship Protection, 
Elliott Bay and Pier-91, Seattle, Washington in the Federal Register 
(Volume 74, Number 160, Page 42026-42028). We received no comments on 
the interim rule. No parties requested a public meeting, and no meeting 
was held. We are adopting the interim rule as final without change.

Background and Purpose

    The Coast Guard is establishing these safety and security zones to 
ensure adequate measures are in place for the safety and security of 
Large Passenger Cruise Vessels and the boating public. The Coast Guard 
conducted a safety and security risk assessment of the Cruise Terminal 
at Pier 91 (at 47[deg]37.58' N/122[deg]23.0' W), Seattle Washington, 
and the surrounding waterways. As a result of this assessment, the 
Captain of the Port found sufficient cause to require these safety and 
security zones. These zones are necessary to ensure the safety and 
security of not only moored Large Passenger Cruise Vessels, but also 
for Large Passenger Cruise Vessels that are in transit while entering 
or departing the Pier 91 cruise terminal at the Port of Seattle. Due to 
the physical location of Pier 91, Large Passenger Cruise Vessels are 
required to maneuver near a prominent marina and other numerous large 
fishing vessels located at adjacent piers when entering and departing 
the cruise terminal. Therefore, in order to protect these vessels, the 
safety and security zones will be enforced during the arrival and 
departure of Large Passenger Cruise Vessels and during the presence of 
moored Large Passenger Cruise Vessels at Pier 91, Seattle, Washington.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and 
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses 
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This 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. This rule will be enforced to enhance the 
Security and Safety Zone for the protection of large passenger vessels 
under 33 CFR 165.1317. The security and safety zone that is in place 
during the arrival and departure of Large Passenger Cruise Vessels in 
and out of Pier 91 is short in duration, such that, it should not 
adversely affect other vessel traffic in the area, and the Captain of 
the Port Puget Sound may waive any of the requirements of this section 
for any vessel or class of vessels upon finding that a vessel or class 
of vessels, operational conditions or other circumstances are such that 
application of this section is unnecessary or impractical for the 
purpose of port security, safety or environmental safety.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered

[[Page 65020]]

whether this 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 rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. The 100 yard security and safety zone around Pier 91 when 
Large Passenger Cruise Vessels are present, allows a large enough area 
for pleasure craft to transit the area unhindered. Additionally, the 
security and safety zone that is in place during the arrival and 
departure of Large Passenger Cruise Vessels in and out of Pier 91 is 
short in duration, such that, it should not adversely affect other 
vessel traffic in the area.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), in the NPRM we offered to 
assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could 
better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking 
process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal 
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal 
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory 
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory 
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and 
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to 
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR 
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small 
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or 
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls 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 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 rule will not result in such an expenditure, we 
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will 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 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 rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule 
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an 
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may 
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, 
because it does 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.

Energy Effects

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

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards 
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, 
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why 
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or 
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management 
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus 
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not 
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this 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 concluded 
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually 
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. 
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph 
(34)(g), of the Instruction, an environmental analysis checklist and a 
categorical exclusion determination are not required for this rule.

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, under authority of 33 U.S.C. 
1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 
CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 
2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, the Coast 
Guard adopts the interim rule amending 33 CFR part 165 that was 
published at 74 FR 42028 on August 20, 2009, as a final rule without 
change.


[[Page 65021]]


    Dated: November 24, 2009.
S.E. Englebert,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Puget Sound.
[FR Doc. E9-29355 Filed 12-8-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9910-04-P