[Federal Register: October 14, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 198)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 59116-59118]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr14oc03-20]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 147
[CGD08-03-017]
RIN 1625-AA72
Safety Zone; Outer Continental Shelf Facility in the Gulf of
Mexico in Mississippi Canyon 243
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone around a
petroleum and gas production facility in Mississippi Canyon 243 of the
Outer Continental Shelf in the Gulf of Mexico while the facility is
being constructed and after the construction is completed. The
construction site and facility need to be protected from vessels
operating outside the normal shipping channels and fairways, and
placing a safety zone around the construction site and facility will
significantly reduce the threat of allisions, oil spills and releases
of natural gas. The regulation prohibits all vessels from entering or
remaining in the specified area around the construction site and
facility except for the following: an attending vessel; a vessel under
100 feet in length overall not engaged in towing; or a vessel
authorized by the Eighth Coast Guard District Commander.
DATES: This final rule is effective on November 13, 2003.
ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as
documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket,
are part of docket [CGD08-03-017] and are available for inspection or
copying at Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District (m), Hale Boggs
Federal Bldg., 501 Magazine Street, New Orleans, LA, 70130, between 8
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant (LT) Kevin Lynn, Project
Manager for Eighth Coast Guard District Commander, Hale Boggs Federal
Bldg., 501 Magazine Street, New Orleans, LA 70130, telephone (504) 589-
6271.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory History
On July 7, 2003, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled ``Safety Zone; Outer Continental Shelf Facility in the
Gulf of Mexico in Mississippi Canyon 243'' in the Federal Register (68
FR 40229). We received one comment on the proposed rule. No public
hearing was requested and none was held.
Background and Purpose
The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone around a petroleum
and gas production facility in the Gulf of Mexico: Matterhorn Tension
Leg Platform A (Matterhorn TLP), Mississippi Canyon 243 (MC 243),
located at position 28[deg]44'32'' N, 88[deg]39'32'' W. The safety zone
is in effect while the facility is being constructed and after the
construction is completed.
This safety zone is in the deepwater area of the Gulf of Mexico.
For the purposes of this regulation it is considered to be in waters of
304.8 meters (1,000 feet) or greater depth extending to the limits of
the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) contiguous to the territorial sea of
the United States and extending to a distance up to 200 nautical miles
from the baseline from
[[Page 59117]]
which the breadth of the sea is measured. Navigation in the area of the
safety zone consists of large commercial shipping vessels, fishing
vessels, cruise ships, tugs with tows and the occasional recreational
vessel. The deepwater area also includes an extensive system of
fairways. The fairways include the Gulf of Mexico South Pass Fairway,
and the South Pass to Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet Channel Safety
Fairway. Significant amounts of vessel traffic occur in or near the
various fairways in the deepwater area.
TotalFinaElf E&P USA, Inc., hereafter referred to as TotalFinaElf
requested that the Coast Guard establish a safety zone in the Gulf of
Mexico around the Matterhorn TLP construction site and for the zone to
remain in effect after construction is completed.
The request for the safety zone was made due to the high level of
shipping activity around the site of the facility and the safety
concerns for construction personnel, the personnel on board the
facility after it is completed and the environment. TotalFinaElf
indicated that the location, production level, and personnel levels on
board the facility make it highly likely that any allision with the
facility during and after construction would result in a catastrophic
event. The Matterhorn TLP will be a high production petroleum and gas
drilling facility, capable of producing approximately 30,000 barrels of
oil per day and 50 million cubic feet of gas per day, and manned with a
crew of approximately 60 people.
The Coast Guard reviewed TotalFinaElf's concerns and agreed that
the risk of allision to the facility and the potential for loss of life
and damage to the environment resulting from such an accident during
and following the construction of Matterhorn TLP warrants the
establishment of this safety zone. This regulation significantly
reduces the threat of allisions, oil spills and natural gas releases,
and increases the safety of life, property, and the environment in the
Gulf of Mexico. This regulation is issued pursuant to 14 U.S.C. 85 and
43 U.S.C. 1333 as set out in the authority citation for 33 CFR part
147.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
We received one comment on the proposed rule. The comment addressed
several issues, the first being that oil facilities should be built
with safeguards to prevent oil pollution and the Coast Guard should
insist on total safety for oil drilling at this location. This
regulation significantly reduces the threat of allisions, oil spills
and natural gas releases, and increases the safety of life, property,
and the environment in the Gulf of Mexico by creating a no entry zone
around the facility applicable to certain vessels (see SUMMARY). The
second issue posed by the comment recommends the Coast Guard deem
certain poor weather days as being unsuitable for vessel transits. This
issue is not relevant to the rule and will not be discussed. The final
issue raised in the comment recommends that the Coast Guard designate
``off limit'' areas to include the location at which the Matterhorn TLP
is to be constructed and all other places where vessels can experience
trouble due to rough weather. This issue is not relevant to the rule
and will not be discussed. In consideration of this comment, the Coast
Guard has made no substantial changes to the provisions of this rule.
Regulatory Evaluation
This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866 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 Homeland Security (DHS).
The impacts on routine navigation are expected to be minimal
because the safety zone will not overlap any of the safety fairways
within the Gulf of Mexico.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered 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. Since the construction site for the Matterhorn TLP is located
far offshore, few privately owned fishing vessels and recreational
boats/yachts operate in the area and alternate routes are available for
those vessels. Use of an alternate route may cause a vessel to incur a
delay of 4 to 10 minutes in arriving at their destinations depending on
how fast the vessel is traveling. Therefore, the Coast Guard expects
the impact of this regulation on small entities to be minimal.
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 to what degree
this rule would economically affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small
entities in understanding this rule so they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking.
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).
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
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
[[Page 59118]]
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.
Environment
We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.1D,
which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit
the use of categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the
Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under
figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation because this rule is not expected to result
in any significant environmental impact as described in NEPA. Paragraph
(34)(g) is applicable because this rule is establishing a safety zone
that will be effective for a period greater than one week. A final
``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a final ``Categorical
Exclusion Determination'' (CED) are available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 147
Continental shelf, Marine safety, Navigation (water).
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 147 as follows:
PART 147--SAFETY ZONES
0
1. The authority citation for part 147 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 14 U.S.C. 85; 43 U.S.C. 1333; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
0
2. Add Sec. 147.829 to read as follows:
Sec. 147.829 Matterhorn Tension Leg Platform safety zone.
(a) Description. The Matterhorn Tension Leg Platform A (Matterhorn
TLP), Mississippi Canyon 243 (MC 243), located at position
28[deg]44'32'' N, 88[deg]39'32'' W. The area within 500 meters (1640.4
feet) from each point on the structure's outer edge is a safety zone.
These coordinates are based upon [NAD 83].
(b) Regulation. No vessel may enter or remain in this safety zone
except the following:
(1) An attending vessel;
(2) A vessel under 100 feet in length overall not engaged in
towing; or
(3) A vessel authorized by the Commander, Eighth Coast Guard
District.
Dated: September 22, 2003.
R.F. Duncan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 03-25890 Filed 10-10-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P