Regulated Navigation Area: Narragansett Bay, RI and Mount Hope Bay, MA, Including the Providence River and Taunton River, 30108-30112 [E6-8075]
Download as PDF
30108
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 2006 / Proposed Rules
within this exclusion. A ‘‘Categorical
Exclusion Determination’’ is available in
the docket for inspection or copying
where indicated under ADDRESSES.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
33 CFR Part 165
Coast Guard
Bridges.
[CGD01–06–052]
Regulations
RIN 1625–AA11
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:
Regulated Navigation Area:
Narragansett Bay, RI and Mount Hope
Bay, MA, Including the Providence
River and Taunton River
PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE
OPERATION REGULATIONS
AGENCY:
ACTION:
1. The authority citation for part 117
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1; 33
CFR 1.05–1(g); section 117.255 also issued
under the authority of Pub. L. 102–587, 106
Stat. 5039.
2. Revise § 117.407 to read as follows:
§ 117.407
Missouri River.
See § 117.691, Missouri River listed
under Nebraska.
3. Revise § 117.411 to read as follows:
§ 117.411
Missouri River.
The draws of the bridges across the
Missouri River shall open on signal;
except during the winter season
between the date of closure and the date
of opening of the commercial navigation
season as published by the Army Corps
of Engineers, the draws need not open
unless at least 24 hours advance notice
is given.
4. Revise § 117.687 to read as follows:
§ 117.687
Missouri River.
The draws of the bridges across the
Missouri River shall open on signal;
except during the winter season
between the date of closure and date of
opening of the commercial navigation
season as published by the Army Corps
of Engineers, the draws need not open
unless at least 24 hours advance notice
is given.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Dated: April 25, 2006.
R.F. Duncan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 06–4877 Filed 5–24–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:43 May 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
revise some provisions of the existing
Regulated Navigation Area (RNA) in the
Providence River, Narragansett Bay, RI
and Mount Hope Bay, MA. Specifically,
the purposes of this proposed
rulemaking are to: First, modify
provisions in the current RNA that were
originally implemented to address
severe shoaling in the Providence River;
second, address navigational challenges
associated with the two Brightman
Street bridges; and third, introduce new
measures to improve navigation safety
in all of Narragansett Bay and Mount
Hope Bay, including the Providence and
Taunton Rivers, respectively.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
August 23, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments
and related material to U.S. Coast Guard
Sector Southeastern New England,
Prevention Department, 20 Risho
Avenue, East Providence, RI, 02914–
1208. U.S. Coast Guard Sector
Southeastern New England maintains
the public docket for this rulemaking.
Comments and documents will become
part of this docket and will be available
for inspection and copying at the same
address between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m.
Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Edward G. LeBlanc at U.S. Coast Guard
Sector Southeastern New England, 401–
435–2351.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you
do so, please include your name and
address, identify the docket number for
this rulemaking (CGD01–06–052),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and give the reason for each
comment. Please submit all comments
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and related material in an unbound
format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches,
suitable for copying. If you would like
to know they reached us, please enclose
a stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all
comments and material received during
the comment period. We may change
this proposed rule in view of them.
Public Meeting
We do not plan to hold a public
meeting but you may submit a request
for a meeting by writing to U.S. Coast
Guard Sector Southeastern New
England at the address under ADDRESSES
explaining why one would be
beneficial. If we determine that a public
meeting would aid the Coast Guard in
determining what type of rulemaking (if
any) is appropriate, we will hold one at
a time and place announced by a later
notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
On May 1, 1994, the Coast Guard
established a Regulated Navigation Area
(RNA) in the Providence River,
Providence, Rhode Island, described at
33 CFR 165.122 (59 FR 18487, April 19,
1994). It was designed to protect the
maritime community from hazards to
navigation resulting from the extreme
shoaling that occurred in the northern
section of the Providence River
Channel.
Generally, the current RNA imposes
certain navigation restrictions in various
segments of the Providence River
including, among other requirements, a
maximum draft of 35 feet for most
vessels, one-way vessel traffic, and a
requirement that vessels over 65 feet in
length make periodic SECURITE calls
via VHF radio. In September 2005 the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(‘‘USACE’’) completed a major
maintenance dredging of the Providence
River to remove most shoaling and
restore the channel to a depth of 40 feet
at Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW), and
a minimum channel width of 600 feet.
(The USACE ‘‘Results of Survey’’ dated
September 16, 2005, is available for
review in the docket, CGD01–06–052.)
The restoration of the Providence
River Channel to the above described
dimensions should permit sufficient
depth and width for most commercial
and recreational vessels to navigate
safely within the channel.
Consequently, because the primary
conditions that warranted the RNA no
longer exist, the Coast Guard is
considering making modifications to it.
Construction of a new Brightman
Street bridge (‘‘The New Brightman
Street Bridge’’) approximately 1100 feet
north of the existing Brightman Street
E:\FR\FM\25MYP1.SGM
25MYP1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Bridge (‘‘The Old Brightman Street
Bridge’’) presents navigational
challenges, particularly for larger selfpropelled tank vessels. The opening of
the Old Brightman Street Bridge is only
98 feet while the opening of the New
Brightman Street Bridge is 200 feet.
There is an approximate centerline
offset of 100 feet between the two
bridges.
This configuration requires larger
commercial vessels to transit through
one opening, stop, be pushed
transversely (sideways) by tugs for
approximately 100 feet to align with the
next bridge opening, and then proceed
forward. The Coast Guard proposes to
address the challenges in transiting
between the bridges by codifying some
navigational safety measures already
practiced by local marine pilots. The
Coast Guard elaborates on those
navigational challenges in the
Discussion of Proposed Rule section
below.
On August 10, 2005, President Bush
signed the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (SAFETEA–LU) (Pub.
L. 109–59). Section 1948 of that law
prohibits the expenditure of Federal
funds for the demolition of the Old
Brightman Street Bridge. Specifically,
that Section states: ‘‘Notwithstanding
any Federal law, regulation, or policy to
the contrary, no Federal funds shall be
obligated or expended for the
demolition of the existing Brightman
Street Bridge connecting Fall River and
Somerset, Massachusetts, and the
existing Brightman Street Bridge shall
be maintained for pedestrian and
bicycle access, and as an emergency
service route.’’
The unique maneuvers required to
navigate safely between these two
bridges concern the Coast Guard and
consequently, certain measures to
mitigate those navigation challenges are
suggested in this proposed rule. The
safety measures suggested are currently
being practiced voluntarily by the
maritime community. Given that the
configuration of the two bridges now
appears to be the status quo, the Coast
Guard proposes that modifying the
existing RNA in the Providence River,
Narragansett Bay, RI and Mount Hope
Bay, MA, is an appropriate method to
address the respective navigation safety
issues.
Concurrently, the Coast Guard
proposes to implement certain
navigation safety measures applicable to
the waterways that encompass
Narragansett Bay and Mount Hope Bays
(‘‘The Bays’’) in their entirety, including
the Providence River and Taunton
River.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:43 May 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
On September 7, 2004 and September
8, 2004, the Coast Guard sponsored a
Ports and Waterways Safety Assessment
(PAWSA) of Narragansett Bay, which
was conducted by a cross-section of
waterways users and stakeholders. The
report produced by the PAWSA
participants identified several issues
and areas within the Bays where
navigational safety was of particular
concern. (A copy of the PAWSA report
is available in the docket, CGD01–06–
052.) Although the Coast Guard has
taken several non-regulatory actions to
improve navigational safety, such as
public outreach, education and
improved aids to navigation, the Coast
Guard is considering additional
navigational safety regulations within
the Bays.
On November 21, 2005, the Coast
Guard published a notice requesting
public comments on ‘‘Navigation and
Waterways Management Improvements,
Providence River Regulated Navigation
Area; Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island
and Mount Hope Bay, MA’’ (See 70 FR
70052). The Coast Guard invited
comments on several specific questions
regarding navigational safety within the
Bays, and solicited any other comments
regarding navigational safety concerns
and potential impacts of any new
navigational safety measures. Three
comments were submitted.
Two of the three comments addressed
navigational concerns related to the
waterway configuration resulting from
the proximity of the Old Brightman
Street Bridge to the New Brightman
Street Bridge that span the Taunton
River between Somerset and Fall River,
Massachusetts. Specifically, there is
only 1100 feet between the bridges, the
opening of the Old Brightman Street
Bridge is only 98 feet while the opening
of the New Brightman Street Bridge is
200 feet, and the openings of the two
bridges are not aligned with each other.
As noted previously, this configuration
requires a vessel to transit through one
opening, stop, be pushed transversely
(sideways) by tugs for approximately
100 feet to align with the next bridge
opening, and then proceed forward.
Local marine pilots, working with vessel
operators, have devised a method of
transiting the two bridges that involves
the use of a marine pilot, three tugs (in
most cases), and navigating only within
certain weather parameters. The Coast
Guard proposes to codify those
voluntary practices in this NPRM.
The first two comments are more
aptly addressed via the mechanisms
contemplated by 33 CFR part 116,
‘‘Alterations of Unreasonably
Obstructive Bridges.’’ That part
describes the procedures by which the
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30109
Coast Guard determines a bridge to be
an unreasonable obstruction to
navigation. Consequently, the
Commander, First Guard District (dpb)
forwarded a letter on April 3, 2006, to
Commandant (G–PWB), Coast Guard
Headquarters, Washington, DC, to begin
the 33 CFR part 116 process regarding
the Old Brightman Street Bridge.
The third comment pertained
specifically to the current RNA
described at 33 CFR 165.122 and
recommended:
• A reduction in several voice
reporting requirements via VHF radio in
Narragansett Bay and the Providence
River;
• Removal of the one-way traffic
restriction in the Providence River;
• Addition of a voice reporting
requirement via VHF radio in Mount
Hope Bay;
• Addition of an under-keel clearance
requirement for deep draft vessels in
both Narragansett Bay and Mount Hope
Bay.
The recently-completed major
dredging project by the USACE has
reduced the need for voice reporting
requirements in Narragansett Bay and
the Providence River, and obviated the
need for one-way traffic restrictions in
the river. Consequently, the
recommendations made with respect to
a reduction in several voice reporting
requirements via VHF radio in
Narragansett Bay and the Providence
River and a removal of the one-way
traffic restriction in the Providence
River, as described above, have already
been incorporated and addressed in this
proposed rule. Given the type and
frequency of marine traffic in Mount
Hope Bay and the Taunton River,
combined with the location of three
bridges in close proximity to each other
(the Braga Bridge, the Old Brightman
Street bridge, and the New Brightman
Street Bridge (under construction)), the
Coast Guard believes that voice
reporting requirements are prudent and
should enhance navigation safety, and
those reporting requirements are also
included in this proposed rule.
The recommendation for an underkeel clearance requirement was
considered, but is not included as part
of the proposed rule in this NPRM. The
under-keel clearance is subject to many
variables, such as wave height, squat,
accuracy of tidal predictions, water
density, etc., and is difficult, if not
impossible, to enforce. Rather, we
propose to revise the existing maximum
draft restriction for the Providence River
as described below in our proposed
regulatory text.
E:\FR\FM\25MYP1.SGM
25MYP1
30110
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed modifications to the
current RNA at 33 CFR 165.122 would:
• Remove certain navigation
restrictions and minimum visibility
requirements in the Providence River,
especially for vessels with drafts of 35
feet or greater;
• Remove the one-way-traffic
restriction for vessels over 65 feet in
length that currently exists in certain
areas of the Providence River;
• Reduce the number of required
Safety Signal (SECURITE) calls while
transiting Narragansett Bay and the
Providence River;
• Require a SECURITE call for certain
vessels transiting Mount Hope Bay and
the Taunton River;
• Define maximum draft allowances
for vessels transiting within the RNA;
• Define certain weather parameters,
and require a federally licensed pilot
and assist tugs, for commercial vessels
transiting through the Old and New
Brightman Street bridges.
This proposed rule was prompted by
the completion of a major dredging
project in the Providence River.
Navigation safety measures
implemented to address the shoaling in
that river are no longer required. Based
upon the 2004 PAWSA report, however,
the public response to the Coast Guard
November 21, 2005 notice requesting
comments (See 70 FR 70052), and recent
Federal legislation that will result in
both the Old and New Brightman Street
bridges being retained, (Pub. L. 109–59,
described above) there is a need for
certain navigation safety measures to be
implemented in order to better protect
people, property, waterways users, the
environment, and the economy from the
adverse affects of a marine accident or
incident.
Vessels or persons violating this
section would be subject to the civil or
criminal penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C.
1232.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed 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. It is not
‘‘significant’’ under the regulatory
policies and procedures of the
Department of Homeland Security
(DHS).
The Coast Guard expects the
economic impact of this proposed rule
to be so minimal that a full Regulatory
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:43 May 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
Evaluation under the regulatory policies
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary.
The effect of this proposed rule would
not be significant as it removes some
previously imposed and more restrictive
navigation safety measures, and
modifies already-existing voice
reporting requirements in the affected
waterways. Navigating within certain
weather parameters and requiring
federally licensed pilots and assist tugs
for commercial vessels transiting the
Old and New Brightman Street bridges
are already standard practices and will
not be an additional economic burden.
Should this proposed rule become final,
it would be entered into the local notice
to mariners, and maritime advisories
will be broadcast.
Assistance for Small Entities
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 proposed rule so that
they can better evaluate its effects on
them and participate in the rulemaking.
If the rule would affect your small
business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance; please contact Mr. Edward
G. LeBlanc of U.S. Coast Guard Sector
Southeastern New England at 401–435–
2351. 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.
Small Entities
Collection of Information
This proposed rule would call for no
new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520.).
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this proposed 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 proposed rule
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
This proposed rule would affect the
following entities, some of which might
be small entities: The owners or
operators of vessels 65 feet in length or
greater transiting the waterways of
Narragansett Bay and Mount Hope Bay,
including the Providence and Taunton
rivers, respectively.
This proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for
the following reasons. This proposed
rule only modifies current regulations
and/or codifies current navigation
practices. It does not impose new
requirements which would affect
vessels’ schedules or their ability to
transit the RNA, nor does it require the
purchase of any new equipment or the
hiring of any additional crew.
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 above) explaining why you
think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically
affect it.
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would 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 proposed 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.
E:\FR\FM\25MYP1.SGM
25MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically
significant rule and would not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to
safety that might disproportionately
affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
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.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed 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.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
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 proposed rule does not use
technical standards. Therefore, we did
not consider the use of voluntary
consensus standards.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:43 May 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD
and Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 5100.1, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying
with the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–
4370f), and have made a preliminary
determination that there are no factors
in this case that would limit the use of
a categorical exclusion under section
2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, we
believe that this rule should be
categorically excluded, under figure 2–
1, paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction,
from further environmental
documentation. This rule fits the
category selected from paragraph (34)(g),
as it would change a Regulated
Navigation Area. A preliminary
‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’ is
available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES. Comments on this
section will be considered before we
make the final decision on whether this
rule should be categorically excluded
from further environmental review.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine Safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195, 33 CFR
1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Pub. L.
107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Revise § 165.122 to read as follows:
§ 165.122 Regulated Navigation Area:
Narragansett Bay, RI and Mount Hope Bay,
MA, Including the Providence River and
Taunton River.
(a) Description of the regulated
navigation area. The Regulated
Navigation Area (RNA) encompasses all
of the navigable waters of Narragansett
Bay and Mount Hope Bay north of the
COLREGS demarcation line defined in
33 CFR 80.155, and all of the navigable
waters of the Providence River from
Conimicut Point to the Providence
hurricane barrier, and the Taunton River
from Brayton Point northeast to Breeds
Cove north of the New Brightman Street
Bridge.
(b) Regulations. (1) The following
restrictions apply:
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30111
(i) No vessel may transit the
Providence River (the entire channel
from Sandy Point to Fox Point Reach):
(A) With a draft greater than 37 feet,
6 inches (37′6″) when water depth is
below mean low water.
(B) With a draft greater than 41 feet
(41′) when water depth is below mean
high water.
(ii) For the purposes of this section,
water depth for the Providence River is
the water depth at the time a vessel
enters the river as recorded at the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration’s (NOAA’s) Physical
Ocean Real Time System (PORTS) depth
recording device located at Conimicut
Point. If this device is not operating
properly or its information cannot be
obtained, water depth will be
determined using NOAA-published tide
tables.
(iii) No vessel may transit the Mount
Hope Bay/Taunton River channel (the
entire channel from Sandy Point to
Breeds Cove north of the New
Brightman Street Bridge):
(A) With a draft greater than 31 feet,
6 inches (32′6″) when water depth is
below mean low water.
(B) With a draft greater than 34 feet,
6 inches (34′6″) when water depth is
below mean high water.
(iv) For the purposes of this section,
water depth for the Taunton River is the
water depth at the time a vessel enters
the river as recorded at the NOAA’s
Physical Ocean Real Time System
(PORTS) depth recording device located
at Borden Flats, Fall River. If this device
is not operating properly or its
information cannot be obtained, water
depth will be determined using NOAApublished tide tables.
(v) No vessel may transit the Quonset
Point/Davisville Channel (the entire
channel from Sandy Point to Davisville):
(A) With a draft greater than 28 feet,
6 inches (28′6″) when water depth is
below mean low water.
(B) With a draft greater than 30 feet
(30′) when water depth is below mean
high water.
(vi) For the purposes of this section,
water depth for the Quonset Point/
Davisville channel is the water depth at
the time a vessel enters the channel as
recorded at the NOAA’s Physical Ocean
Real Time System (PORTS) depth
recording device located at Quonset
Point. If this device is not operating
properly or its information cannot be
obtained, water depth will be
determined using NOAA-published tide
tables.
(2) All commercial vessels greater
than 200 gross tons must:
(i) Have at least 1 mile of visibility to
transit the Providence River between
E:\FR\FM\25MYP1.SGM
25MYP1
30112
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 2006 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Conimicut Light (LLNR 18305) and
Channel Light 42 (LLNR 18580, Fuller
Rock Light); and
(ii) Transit through the Old and New
Brightman Street bridges only:
(A) During daylight;
(B) On a flood tide when outbound;
(C) When a federally licensed pilot is
aboard;
(D) When winds are no greater than
15 knots; and
(E) Accompanied by at least three
assist tugs, each of sufficient capability
to push, tow, or stop the commercial
vessel to avoid grounding, collision, or
allision, except that:
(i) Only two assist tugs are required
when the commercial vessel is equipped
with a properly operating bow thruster
of at least 1000 horsepower.
(ii) Only one assist tug is required
when a barge is being pushed by a
primary towing vessel. For the purposes
of this regulation, ‘‘primary towing
vessel’’ is as defined in 33 CFR 157.03.
(3) Vessels over 65 feet in length
inbound for berths in the Providence
River, are required to make Safety
Signal (SECURITE) calls on both VHF
channels 13 and 16 at the following
geographic locations: Pilot Boarding
Area, abeam of Castle Hill, abeam of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:43 May 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
Sandy Point, abeam of Conimicut Point
Light (LLNR 18305), abeam of Sabin
Point and upon mooring.
(4) Vessels over 65 feet in length
inbound for berths in Mount Hope Bay
or in the Taunton River, are required to
make Safety Signal (SECURITE) calls on
both VHF channels 13 and 16 at the
Mount Hope Bay Junction Lighted Gong
Buoy ‘‘MH’’ (LLNR 18790).
(5) Vessels over 65 feet in length
outbound for sea down the Providence
River Channel shall make SECURITE
calls on VHF channels 13 and 16 at the
following geographic locations:
(i) One-half hour prior to departure
from the berth;
(ii) At departure from the berth;
(iii) Abeam of Sabin Point;
(iv) Abeam of Gaspee Point; and
(v) Abeam of Conimicut Light (LLNR
18305).
(6) Vessels over 65 feet in length
outbound for sea down the Taunton
River or Mount Hope Bay are required
to make SECURITE calls on VHF
channels 13 and 16 at the following
geographic locations:
(i) One-half hour prior to departure
from the berth;
(ii) At departure from the berth; and
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(iii) At the Mount Hope Bay Junction
Lighted Gong Buoy ‘‘MH’’ (LLNR
18790).
(7) Vessels 65 feet and under in length
and all recreational vessels when
meeting deep draft commercial vessel
traffic in all locations within this RNA
shall keep out of the way of the
oncoming deep draft commercial vessel.
(8) The Captain of the Port,
Southeastern New England, may
authorize a deviation from these
regulations.
(c) Enforcement. As stated in
§ 165.13(b), no person may cause or
authorize the operation of a vessel in an
RNA contrary to the regulations in this
part. Violations of regulations in this
section should be reported to the
Captain of the Port, Southeastern New
England, at 508–457–3211. Persons in
violation of regulations in this section
will be subject to civil or criminal
penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232.
Dated: May 16, 2006.
David P. Pekoske,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6–8075 Filed 5–24–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
E:\FR\FM\25MYP1.SGM
25MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 101 (Thursday, May 25, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30108-30112]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-8075]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD01-06-052]
RIN 1625-AA11
Regulated Navigation Area: Narragansett Bay, RI and Mount Hope
Bay, MA, Including the Providence River and Taunton River
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to revise some provisions of the
existing Regulated Navigation Area (RNA) in the Providence River,
Narragansett Bay, RI and Mount Hope Bay, MA. Specifically, the purposes
of this proposed rulemaking are to: First, modify provisions in the
current RNA that were originally implemented to address severe shoaling
in the Providence River; second, address navigational challenges
associated with the two Brightman Street bridges; and third, introduce
new measures to improve navigation safety in all of Narragansett Bay
and Mount Hope Bay, including the Providence and Taunton Rivers,
respectively.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before August 23, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to U.S. Coast
Guard Sector Southeastern New England, Prevention Department, 20 Risho
Avenue, East Providence, RI, 02914-1208. U.S. Coast Guard Sector
Southeastern New England maintains the public docket for this
rulemaking. Comments and documents will become part of this docket and
will be available for inspection and copying at the same address
between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m. Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Edward G. LeBlanc at U.S. Coast
Guard Sector Southeastern New England, 401-435-2351.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (CGD01-06-
052), indicate the specific section of this document to which each
comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit
all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than
8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know
they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during
the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them.
Public Meeting
We do not plan to hold a public meeting but you may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to U.S. Coast Guard Sector
Southeastern New England at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why
one would be beneficial. If we determine that a public meeting would
aid the Coast Guard in determining what type of rulemaking (if any) is
appropriate, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later
notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
On May 1, 1994, the Coast Guard established a Regulated Navigation
Area (RNA) in the Providence River, Providence, Rhode Island, described
at 33 CFR 165.122 (59 FR 18487, April 19, 1994). It was designed to
protect the maritime community from hazards to navigation resulting
from the extreme shoaling that occurred in the northern section of the
Providence River Channel.
Generally, the current RNA imposes certain navigation restrictions
in various segments of the Providence River including, among other
requirements, a maximum draft of 35 feet for most vessels, one-way
vessel traffic, and a requirement that vessels over 65 feet in length
make periodic SECURITE calls via VHF radio. In September 2005 the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (``USACE'') completed a major maintenance
dredging of the Providence River to remove most shoaling and restore
the channel to a depth of 40 feet at Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW), and a
minimum channel width of 600 feet. (The USACE ``Results of Survey''
dated September 16, 2005, is available for review in the docket, CGD01-
06-052.)
The restoration of the Providence River Channel to the above
described dimensions should permit sufficient depth and width for most
commercial and recreational vessels to navigate safely within the
channel. Consequently, because the primary conditions that warranted
the RNA no longer exist, the Coast Guard is considering making
modifications to it.
Construction of a new Brightman Street bridge (``The New Brightman
Street Bridge'') approximately 1100 feet north of the existing
Brightman Street
[[Page 30109]]
Bridge (``The Old Brightman Street Bridge'') presents navigational
challenges, particularly for larger self-propelled tank vessels. The
opening of the Old Brightman Street Bridge is only 98 feet while the
opening of the New Brightman Street Bridge is 200 feet. There is an
approximate centerline offset of 100 feet between the two bridges.
This configuration requires larger commercial vessels to transit
through one opening, stop, be pushed transversely (sideways) by tugs
for approximately 100 feet to align with the next bridge opening, and
then proceed forward. The Coast Guard proposes to address the
challenges in transiting between the bridges by codifying some
navigational safety measures already practiced by local marine pilots.
The Coast Guard elaborates on those navigational challenges in the
Discussion of Proposed Rule section below.
On August 10, 2005, President Bush signed the Safe, Accountable,
Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users
(SAFETEA-LU) (Pub. L. 109-59). Section 1948 of that law prohibits the
expenditure of Federal funds for the demolition of the Old Brightman
Street Bridge. Specifically, that Section states: ``Notwithstanding any
Federal law, regulation, or policy to the contrary, no Federal funds
shall be obligated or expended for the demolition of the existing
Brightman Street Bridge connecting Fall River and Somerset,
Massachusetts, and the existing Brightman Street Bridge shall be
maintained for pedestrian and bicycle access, and as an emergency
service route.''
The unique maneuvers required to navigate safely between these two
bridges concern the Coast Guard and consequently, certain measures to
mitigate those navigation challenges are suggested in this proposed
rule. The safety measures suggested are currently being practiced
voluntarily by the maritime community. Given that the configuration of
the two bridges now appears to be the status quo, the Coast Guard
proposes that modifying the existing RNA in the Providence River,
Narragansett Bay, RI and Mount Hope Bay, MA, is an appropriate method
to address the respective navigation safety issues.
Concurrently, the Coast Guard proposes to implement certain
navigation safety measures applicable to the waterways that encompass
Narragansett Bay and Mount Hope Bays (``The Bays'') in their entirety,
including the Providence River and Taunton River.
On September 7, 2004 and September 8, 2004, the Coast Guard
sponsored a Ports and Waterways Safety Assessment (PAWSA) of
Narragansett Bay, which was conducted by a cross-section of waterways
users and stakeholders. The report produced by the PAWSA participants
identified several issues and areas within the Bays where navigational
safety was of particular concern. (A copy of the PAWSA report is
available in the docket, CGD01-06-052.) Although the Coast Guard has
taken several non-regulatory actions to improve navigational safety,
such as public outreach, education and improved aids to navigation, the
Coast Guard is considering additional navigational safety regulations
within the Bays.
On November 21, 2005, the Coast Guard published a notice requesting
public comments on ``Navigation and Waterways Management Improvements,
Providence River Regulated Navigation Area; Narragansett Bay, Rhode
Island and Mount Hope Bay, MA'' (See 70 FR 70052). The Coast Guard
invited comments on several specific questions regarding navigational
safety within the Bays, and solicited any other comments regarding
navigational safety concerns and potential impacts of any new
navigational safety measures. Three comments were submitted.
Two of the three comments addressed navigational concerns related
to the waterway configuration resulting from the proximity of the Old
Brightman Street Bridge to the New Brightman Street Bridge that span
the Taunton River between Somerset and Fall River, Massachusetts.
Specifically, there is only 1100 feet between the bridges, the opening
of the Old Brightman Street Bridge is only 98 feet while the opening of
the New Brightman Street Bridge is 200 feet, and the openings of the
two bridges are not aligned with each other. As noted previously, this
configuration requires a vessel to transit through one opening, stop,
be pushed transversely (sideways) by tugs for approximately 100 feet to
align with the next bridge opening, and then proceed forward. Local
marine pilots, working with vessel operators, have devised a method of
transiting the two bridges that involves the use of a marine pilot,
three tugs (in most cases), and navigating only within certain weather
parameters. The Coast Guard proposes to codify those voluntary
practices in this NPRM.
The first two comments are more aptly addressed via the mechanisms
contemplated by 33 CFR part 116, ``Alterations of Unreasonably
Obstructive Bridges.'' That part describes the procedures by which the
Coast Guard determines a bridge to be an unreasonable obstruction to
navigation. Consequently, the Commander, First Guard District (dpb)
forwarded a letter on April 3, 2006, to Commandant (G-PWB), Coast Guard
Headquarters, Washington, DC, to begin the 33 CFR part 116 process
regarding the Old Brightman Street Bridge.
The third comment pertained specifically to the current RNA
described at 33 CFR 165.122 and recommended:
A reduction in several voice reporting requirements via
VHF radio in Narragansett Bay and the Providence River;
Removal of the one-way traffic restriction in the
Providence River;
Addition of a voice reporting requirement via VHF radio in
Mount Hope Bay;
Addition of an under-keel clearance requirement for deep
draft vessels in both Narragansett Bay and Mount Hope Bay.
The recently-completed major dredging project by the USACE has
reduced the need for voice reporting requirements in Narragansett Bay
and the Providence River, and obviated the need for one-way traffic
restrictions in the river. Consequently, the recommendations made with
respect to a reduction in several voice reporting requirements via VHF
radio in Narragansett Bay and the Providence River and a removal of the
one-way traffic restriction in the Providence River, as described
above, have already been incorporated and addressed in this proposed
rule. Given the type and frequency of marine traffic in Mount Hope Bay
and the Taunton River, combined with the location of three bridges in
close proximity to each other (the Braga Bridge, the Old Brightman
Street bridge, and the New Brightman Street Bridge (under
construction)), the Coast Guard believes that voice reporting
requirements are prudent and should enhance navigation safety, and
those reporting requirements are also included in this proposed rule.
The recommendation for an under-keel clearance requirement was
considered, but is not included as part of the proposed rule in this
NPRM. The under-keel clearance is subject to many variables, such as
wave height, squat, accuracy of tidal predictions, water density, etc.,
and is difficult, if not impossible, to enforce. Rather, we propose to
revise the existing maximum draft restriction for the Providence River
as described below in our proposed regulatory text.
[[Page 30110]]
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed modifications to the current RNA at 33 CFR 165.122
would:
Remove certain navigation restrictions and minimum
visibility requirements in the Providence River, especially for vessels
with drafts of 35 feet or greater;
Remove the one-way-traffic restriction for vessels over 65
feet in length that currently exists in certain areas of the Providence
River;
Reduce the number of required Safety Signal (SECURITE)
calls while transiting Narragansett Bay and the Providence River;
Require a SECURITE call for certain vessels transiting
Mount Hope Bay and the Taunton River;
Define maximum draft allowances for vessels transiting
within the RNA;
Define certain weather parameters, and require a federally
licensed pilot and assist tugs, for commercial vessels transiting
through the Old and New Brightman Street bridges.
This proposed rule was prompted by the completion of a major
dredging project in the Providence River. Navigation safety measures
implemented to address the shoaling in that river are no longer
required. Based upon the 2004 PAWSA report, however, the public
response to the Coast Guard November 21, 2005 notice requesting
comments (See 70 FR 70052), and recent Federal legislation that will
result in both the Old and New Brightman Street bridges being retained,
(Pub. L. 109-59, described above) there is a need for certain
navigation safety measures to be implemented in order to better protect
people, property, waterways users, the environment, and the economy
from the adverse affects of a marine accident or incident.
Vessels or persons violating this section would be subject to the
civil or criminal penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed 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. It is not ``significant''
under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS).
The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this proposed rule
to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory
policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. The effect of this
proposed rule would not be significant as it removes some previously
imposed and more restrictive navigation safety measures, and modifies
already-existing voice reporting requirements in the affected
waterways. Navigating within certain weather parameters and requiring
federally licensed pilots and assist tugs for commercial vessels
transiting the Old and New Brightman Street bridges are already
standard practices and will not be an additional economic burden.
Should this proposed rule become final, it would be entered into the
local notice to mariners, and maritime advisories will be broadcast.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed 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 proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of
which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels 65
feet in length or greater transiting the waterways of Narragansett Bay
and Mount Hope Bay, including the Providence and Taunton rivers,
respectively.
This proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This
proposed rule only modifies current regulations and/or codifies current
navigation practices. It does not impose new requirements which would
affect vessels' schedules or their ability to transit the RNA, nor does
it require the purchase of any new equipment or the hiring of any
additional crew.
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 above) explaining why you think it qualifies and how 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 want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance; please contact Mr. Edward G. LeBlanc of U.S.
Coast Guard Sector Southeastern New England at 401-435-2351. 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 proposed rule would call 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 proposed rule would not result in such an
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would 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 proposed 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.
[[Page 30111]]
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
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.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed 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 proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD
and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a
preliminary determination that there are no factors in this case that
would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of
the Instruction. Therefore, we believe that this rule should be
categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g) of the
Instruction, from further environmental documentation. This rule fits
the category selected from paragraph (34)(g), as it would change a
Regulated Navigation Area. A preliminary ``Environmental Analysis Check
List'' is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.
Comments on this section will be considered before we make the final
decision on whether this rule should be categorically excluded from
further environmental review.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine Safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195, 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Revise Sec. 165.122 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.122 Regulated Navigation Area: Narragansett Bay, RI and
Mount Hope Bay, MA, Including the Providence River and Taunton River.
(a) Description of the regulated navigation area. The Regulated
Navigation Area (RNA) encompasses all of the navigable waters of
Narragansett Bay and Mount Hope Bay north of the COLREGS demarcation
line defined in 33 CFR 80.155, and all of the navigable waters of the
Providence River from Conimicut Point to the Providence hurricane
barrier, and the Taunton River from Brayton Point northeast to Breeds
Cove north of the New Brightman Street Bridge.
(b) Regulations. (1) The following restrictions apply:
(i) No vessel may transit the Providence River (the entire channel
from Sandy Point to Fox Point Reach):
(A) With a draft greater than 37 feet, 6 inches (37'6'') when water
depth is below mean low water.
(B) With a draft greater than 41 feet (41') when water depth is
below mean high water.
(ii) For the purposes of this section, water depth for the
Providence River is the water depth at the time a vessel enters the
river as recorded at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's (NOAA's) Physical Ocean Real Time System (PORTS) depth
recording device located at Conimicut Point. If this device is not
operating properly or its information cannot be obtained, water depth
will be determined using NOAA-published tide tables.
(iii) No vessel may transit the Mount Hope Bay/Taunton River
channel (the entire channel from Sandy Point to Breeds Cove north of
the New Brightman Street Bridge):
(A) With a draft greater than 31 feet, 6 inches (32'6'') when water
depth is below mean low water.
(B) With a draft greater than 34 feet, 6 inches (34'6'') when water
depth is below mean high water.
(iv) For the purposes of this section, water depth for the Taunton
River is the water depth at the time a vessel enters the river as
recorded at the NOAA's Physical Ocean Real Time System (PORTS) depth
recording device located at Borden Flats, Fall River. If this device is
not operating properly or its information cannot be obtained, water
depth will be determined using NOAA-published tide tables.
(v) No vessel may transit the Quonset Point/Davisville Channel (the
entire channel from Sandy Point to Davisville):
(A) With a draft greater than 28 feet, 6 inches (28'6'') when water
depth is below mean low water.
(B) With a draft greater than 30 feet (30') when water depth is
below mean high water.
(vi) For the purposes of this section, water depth for the Quonset
Point/Davisville channel is the water depth at the time a vessel enters
the channel as recorded at the NOAA's Physical Ocean Real Time System
(PORTS) depth recording device located at Quonset Point. If this device
is not operating properly or its information cannot be obtained, water
depth will be determined using NOAA-published tide tables.
(2) All commercial vessels greater than 200 gross tons must:
(i) Have at least 1 mile of visibility to transit the Providence
River between
[[Page 30112]]
Conimicut Light (LLNR 18305) and Channel Light 42 (LLNR 18580, Fuller
Rock Light); and
(ii) Transit through the Old and New Brightman Street bridges only:
(A) During daylight;
(B) On a flood tide when outbound;
(C) When a federally licensed pilot is aboard;
(D) When winds are no greater than 15 knots; and
(E) Accompanied by at least three assist tugs, each of sufficient
capability to push, tow, or stop the commercial vessel to avoid
grounding, collision, or allision, except that:
(i) Only two assist tugs are required when the commercial vessel is
equipped with a properly operating bow thruster of at least 1000
horsepower.
(ii) Only one assist tug is required when a barge is being pushed
by a primary towing vessel. For the purposes of this regulation,
``primary towing vessel'' is as defined in 33 CFR 157.03.
(3) Vessels over 65 feet in length inbound for berths in the
Providence River, are required to make Safety Signal (SECURITE) calls
on both VHF channels 13 and 16 at the following geographic locations:
Pilot Boarding Area, abeam of Castle Hill, abeam of Sandy Point, abeam
of Conimicut Point Light (LLNR 18305), abeam of Sabin Point and upon
mooring.
(4) Vessels over 65 feet in length inbound for berths in Mount Hope
Bay or in the Taunton River, are required to make Safety Signal
(SECURITE) calls on both VHF channels 13 and 16 at the Mount Hope Bay
Junction Lighted Gong Buoy ``MH'' (LLNR 18790).
(5) Vessels over 65 feet in length outbound for sea down the
Providence River Channel shall make SECURITE calls on VHF channels 13
and 16 at the following geographic locations:
(i) One-half hour prior to departure from the berth;
(ii) At departure from the berth;
(iii) Abeam of Sabin Point;
(iv) Abeam of Gaspee Point; and
(v) Abeam of Conimicut Light (LLNR 18305).
(6) Vessels over 65 feet in length outbound for sea down the
Taunton River or Mount Hope Bay are required to make SECURITE calls on
VHF channels 13 and 16 at the following geographic locations:
(i) One-half hour prior to departure from the berth;
(ii) At departure from the berth; and
(iii) At the Mount Hope Bay Junction Lighted Gong Buoy ``MH'' (LLNR
18790).
(7) Vessels 65 feet and under in length and all recreational
vessels when meeting deep draft commercial vessel traffic in all
locations within this RNA shall keep out of the way of the oncoming
deep draft commercial vessel.
(8) The Captain of the Port, Southeastern New England, may
authorize a deviation from these regulations.
(c) Enforcement. As stated in Sec. 165.13(b), no person may cause
or authorize the operation of a vessel in an RNA contrary to the
regulations in this part. Violations of regulations in this section
should be reported to the Captain of the Port, Southeastern New
England, at 508-457-3211. Persons in violation of regulations in this
section will be subject to civil or criminal penalties set forth in 33
U.S.C. 1232.
Dated: May 16, 2006.
David P. Pekoske,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6-8075 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P