Je veux savoir à propos de…

51846

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 178 / Friday, September 17, 2021 / Proposed Rules
established in the Offshore Cape Canaveral Safety Zone of 2009. For most launches originating from Cape Canaveral, the existing safety zones are far too large and enforcement of them may unnecessarily restrict vessel traffic.
Rocket launch activity has doubled since 2009. In 2020 the 45th Space Wing now designated as Space Launch Delta 45 under the U.S. Space Force launched 39 missions which required 20 activations of the 2009 safety zone.
The type, configuration, and mission profile of contemporary governmental and commercial rockets adds additional variability to risk assessments and requires a more adaptable regulatory tool.
A Safety Zone, as defined in 33 CFR
165.20, is intended to limit access to a hazardous area to authorized persons, vehicles, or vessels. Given the rapidly changing nature of space launch operations in the area, an RNA, as defined in 33 CFR 165.11, which allows the control of vessel traffic with more flexibility and expediency, is the more appropriate regulatory tool.
This RNA is not meant to replace, alter, or conflict with Coast Guard security zones as described in 33 CFR
165.701, Vicinity, Kennedy Space Center, Merritt Island, FL; or 33 CFR
165.705, Port Canaveral Harbor, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL. The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this document.
We propose the following area to be a RNA: All waters offshore Cape Canaveral from surface to bottom, encompassed by a line connecting the following points beginning with Point 1
at 284854 N, 802840 W; thence southwest to Point 2 at 284320 N, 8041 W; thence south along the shoreline to Point 3 at 282640 N, 803249 W; thence continuing south offshore to Point 4 at 2810 N, 802320 W; thence east Point 5 at 2810 N, 802113 W; thence north along the 12 nautical mile line back to Point 1. Coordinates are in WGS 1984.
These coordinates are based on the furthest north and south trajectories of typical rocket launch vehicles originating from Cape Canaveral. In addition, there are five typical launch exclusion areas that cover the majority of rocket launches. We list the coordinates and locations of the five typical launch exclusion areas in the regulatory text.
When the RNA is deemed activated, the COTP or a designated representive would be able to restrict vessel movement including but not limited to transiting, anchoring, or mooring within this RNA to protect vessels from hazards associated with rocket launches. These
VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:47 Sep 16, 2021

Jkt 253001

restrictions are temporary in nature and would only be enacted and enforced prior to and just after a successful launch. The COTP would be able to activate any single area, a combination of areas, or establish ad hoc areas within the RNA boundary area as warranted by the specific risks posed by individual launches.
The COTP would inform the public of the activation or status of the RNA by Broadcast Notice to Mariners on VHF
FM channel 16, Public Notice of Enforcement, on-scene presence, and by the display of a yellow ball from a 90foot pole near the shoreline.
IV. Regulatory Analyses We developed this proposed 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 NPRM has not been designated a significant regulatory action, under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget OMB.
The RNA will operate in a similar way to the existing safety zone, but will reduce the size of exclusionary areas for each typical rocket launch. We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a full regulatory evaluation is unnecessary. The RNA
will only be activated a reasonable time before a launch and deactivated once the area is no longer hazardous.
B. Impact on Small Entities The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601612, 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 certifies under 5 U.S.C.
605b that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The total time of the RNA activation and thus restriction to the public is expected to be approximately one hour
PO 00000

Frm 00012

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

per launch. Vessels would be able to transit around the activated RNA
locations during these launches. We do not anticipate any significant economic impact resulting from activation of the RNA.
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.
Under section 213a of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 Pub. L. 104121, we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed 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. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
C. Collection of Information This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
44 U.S.C. 35013520.
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 proposed 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 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.
If you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please call or email the person
E:FRFM17SEP1.SGM

17SEP1