[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 132 (Wednesday, July 14, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37049-37051]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-14971]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2021-0062]
RIN 1625-AA87


Security Zone: Electric Boat Shipyard, Groton, CT

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will modify the security zone boundaries 
surrounding the Electric Boat Shipyard in Groton, Connecticut. The 
amendment to the Security Zone is due to the expanding operations at 
Electric Boat Shipyard.

DATES: This rule is effective August 13, 2021.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being 
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2021-0062 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open 
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, 
call or email Marine Science Technician 3rd Class Ashley Dodd, 
Waterways Management Division, Sector Long Island Sound; Tel: (203) 
468-4469; 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

[[Page 37050]]

U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    Electric Boat Shipyard requested a modification to expand the 
currently existing security zone. In response, on April 13, 2021, the 
Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled 
Security Zone: Electric Boat Shipyard, Groton, CT (86 FR 19171). There 
we stated why we issued the NPRM, and invited comments on our proposed 
regulatory action related to this fireworks display. During the comment 
period that ended May 13, 2021, we received 1 comment.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C. 
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The purpose of this rule is to 
modify the location of the existing security zone listed in 33 CFR 
165.154(a)(2). Captain of the Port Long Island Sound will add a new 
point in the definition of the security zone and replace two turning 
points. This allows the zone to encompass the new building for 
construction of submarines and floating dry dock.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    As noted above, we received 1 comment on our NPRM published April 
13, 2021. The comment submitted by an anonymous individual addressed a 
clerical error to the NPRM. The word ``subversive'' should have been 
used instead of ``submersive'' in the sentence ``for this reason a 
security zone is established to safeguard from destruction, loss, or 
injury from sabotage or other submersive acts, or other causes of a 
similar nature to its waterfront facility and its vessels that they 
construct.'' There are no changes in the regulatory text of this rule 
from the proposed rule in the NPRM.
    Part 165 of 33 CFR contains specific regulated navigation areas and 
limited access areas to prescribe general regulations for different 
types of limited or controlled access areas and regulated navigation 
areas and list specific areas and their boundaries. Section 165.154 
establishes Safety and Security Zones: Captain of the Port Long Island 
Sound Zone Safety and Security Zones.
    The Coast Guard will modify the location of the existing security 
zone listed in 33 CFR 165.154(a)(2)(i) Safety and Security Zones: 
Captain of the Port Zone Safety and Security Zones, to expand the zone 
and to protect a new submarine construction facility and floating dry 
dock being built adjacent to the current facility.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this 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 rule has not been designated a ``significant 
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this 
rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, 
location, and duration of the security zone. Vessel traffic would be 
able to safely transit around the security zone which would impact a 
small designated area of the Thames River.

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 received 0 comments from the Small Business 
Administration on this rulemaking. 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.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the 
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section 
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any 
vessel owner or operator.
    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 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 
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section.
    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.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will 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 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 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.

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

[[Page 37051]]

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this 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 determined 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 rule involves 
expanding an already existing security zone to limit access near 
Electric Boat Shipyard. It is categorically excluded from further 
review under paragraph L60a of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction 
Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental Consideration 
supporting this determination is available in the docket. For 
instructions on locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this 
preamble.

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.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Marine Safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 
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; Departmemt of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1

0
2. Revise Sec.  165.154 (a)(2) to read as follows:


Sec.  165.154   Safety and Security Zones; Captain of the Port Long 
Island Sound Zone Safety and Security Zones.

    (a)* * *
    (2) Electric Boat Shipyard, Groton, CT.
    (i) Location. All navigable waters of the Thames River, from 
surface to bottom, West of the Electric Boat Corportation Shipyard 
enclosed by a line beginning at a point on the shoreline 41[deg]20' 
16'' N, 72[deg]04 ' 47'' W; then running West to 41[deg]20' 16.2'' N, 
72[deg]04 '58.0'' W; then running North to 41[deg]20'28.7'' N, 
72[deg]05'01.7'' W; then North-Northwest to 41[deg]20'53.3'' N, 
72[deg]05'04.8'' W; then North-Northeast to 41[deg]21'02.9'' N, 
72[deg]05'04.9'' W; then running to shoreline at 41[deg]21'02.9'' N, 
72[deg]04'58.2'' W (NAD 83).
    (ii) Application. Paragraphs (a),(e), (f) of Sec.  165.33 do not 
apply to public vessels or to vessels owned by, under hire to, or 
performing work for the Electric Boat Division when operating in the 
security zone.

    Dated: July 8, 2021.
E.J. Van Camp,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Long Island Sound.
[FR Doc. 2021-14971 Filed 7-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P