Security Zones; Tampa Bay: Big Bend, Boca Grande, Crystal River, East Bay, Hillsborough Bay, MacDill Air Force Base, Manbirtee Key, Old Port Tampa, Port Manatee, Port Tampa, Port St. Petersburg, Port Sutton, Rattlesnake, and Weedon Island, FL

<RULE> DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY <SUBAGY>Coast Guard</SUBAGY> <CFR>33 CFR Part 165</CFR> <DEPDOC>[Docket Number USCG-2024-1098]</DEPDOC> <RIN>RIN 1625-AA87</RIN> <SUBJECT>Security Zones; Tampa Bay: Big Bend, Boca Grande, Crystal River, East Bay, Hillsborough Bay, MacDill Air Force Base, Manbirtee Key, Old Port Tampa, Port Manatee, Port Tampa, Port St. Petersburg, Port Sutton, Rattlesnake, and Weedon Island, FL</SUBJECT> <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD> Coast Guard, DHS. <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD> Final rule. <SUM> <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD> The Coast Guard is disestablishing a security zone in old Tampa Bay, including on land portions of Chemical Formulators Chlorine Facility. The security zone is no longer needed since Chemical Formulators facility is no longer operating. This action will remove existing regulations that restrict vessel movement through the area. </SUM> <EFFDATE> <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD> This rule is effective July 7, 2025. </EFFDATE> <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD> To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to <E T="03">https://www.regulations.gov,</E> type USCG-2024-1098 in the search box and click “Search.” Next, in the Document Type column, select “Supporting & Related Material.” <FURINF> <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD> If you have questions about this rule, call or email Lieutenant Ryan McNaughton. Sector St. Petersburg, Ports & Waterways Branch Chief, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (813) 228-2191 ext. 8142, email <E T="03">Ryan.A.McNaughton@uscg.mil</E> . </FURINF> <SUPLINF> <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD> <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. Table of Abbreviations</HD> <EXTRACT> <FP SOURCE="FP-1">CFR Code of Federal Regulations</FP> <FP SOURCE="FP-1">DHS Department of Homeland Security</FP> <FP SOURCE="FP-1">FR Federal Register</FP> <FP SOURCE="FP-1">NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking</FP> <FP SOURCE="FP-1">§ Section </FP> <FP SOURCE="FP-1">U.S.C. United States Code</FP> </EXTRACT> <HD SOURCE="HD1">II. Background Information and Regulatory History</HD> On February 3, 2024, the Coast Guard was notified that a security zone was no longer necessary due to the closure of the facility needing the security zone. The security zone is described in 33 CFR 165.703(a)(1)(i). In response, on March 24, 2025, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled Security Zones; Tampa Bay: Big Bend, Boca Grande, Crystal River, East Bay, Hillsborough Bay, MacDill Air Force Base, Manbirtee Key, Old Port Tampa, Port Manatee, Port Tampa, Port St. Petersburg, Port Sutton, Rattlesnake, and Weedon Island, FL. <SU>1</SU> <FTREF/> There we stated why we issued the NPRM and invited comments on our proposed regulatory action related to the removal of the security zone. During the comment period that ended March 24, 2025, we received 2 comments. <FTNT> <SU>1</SU>  90 FR 12118. </FTNT> <HD SOURCE="HD1">III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule</HD> With the closure of Chemical Formulators Chlorine facility, the security zone is no longer necessary. The Coast Guard is proposing this rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70051 and 70124. The purpose of this rule is to remove the security zone that is no longer necessary due to the closure of Chemical Formulators Chlorine facility. <HD SOURCE="HD1">IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule</HD> As noted above, we received 2 comments on our NPRM published March 24, 2025. Below is our discussion of these comments. One commenter requested clarification on the summary of our rule. We are removing the Rattlesnake, Tampa, FL security zone currently in § 165.703, paragraph(a)(1)(i). The remaining paragraphs will be shifted up to maintain the current numbering system. With the removal of the regulation for Rattlesnake, Tampa, FL security zone in paragraph (a)(1)(i), current Old Port Tampa, Tampa, FL security zone in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) will be moved up to paragraph (a)(1)(i) without change. The remaining security zones in § 165.703 will be redesignated from paragraphs (a)(1)(iii) through (a)(1)(xii) to paragraphs (a)(1)(ii) through (a)(1)(xi) without changes. The commenter also stated the name “Rattlesnake” should be removed from the title of § 165.703, since it is no longer a security zone. The Coast Guard will remove the word “Rattlesnake” from the title of the regulation. Lastly, the commenter suggested revisions to existing § 165.703 paragraph (c)(2) and (3). The Coast Guard is not revising these paragraphs as part of this rule change. Another commenter requested information about vessel traffic with concerns about environmental impacts and marine species. The location of the existing security zone is on a dead-end canal, adjacent to two large marinas as well as a demanding public boat ramp. The removal of the security zone does not promote or hinder vessel access to an area that is already surrounded by industrial seawalls and multi-unit condominiums. This is an area already dense with recreational vessel traffic due to boat clubs, boat launches, marinas and public parks. The original establishment of this zone was not to protect environmental resources, but to protect a critical infrastructure. The removal of the security zone is necessary as the infrastructure being protected is no longer present. The Coast Guard is revising the title of the regulation to remove the name “Rattlesnake” for clarity. There are no other changes in the regulatory text of this rule from the proposed rule in the NPRM, which disestablishes the security zone for facilities and structures; Rattlesnake, Tampa, FL. in § 165.703(a)(1)(i). The regulation places unnecessary restrictions on vessel movement in Old Tampa Bay. <HD SOURCE="HD1">V. Regulatory Analyses</HD> 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. <HD SOURCE="HD2">A. Regulatory Planning and Review</HD> 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 section 3(f) of 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 need to align the regulations with the current arrangements of the port as the waterfront facility safety zone is no longer required. <HD SOURCE="HD2">B. Impact on Small Entities</HD> 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 00 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. No restrictions will be placed on owners or operators of vessels of 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 will 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 <E T="02">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT</E> 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. <HD SOURCE="HD2">C. Collection of Information</HD> This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). <HD SOURCE="HD2">D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments</HD> 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. <HD SOURCE="HD2">E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act</HD> The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ Preview showing 10k of 25k characters. Full document text is stored and available for version comparison. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━