Anchorage Regulations; Mississippi River Below Baton Rouge, LA, Including South and Southwest Passes, 63245-63247 [E6-18086]

Agencies

• Coast Guard
• DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 209 (Monday, October 30, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63245-63247]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-18086]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 110

[CGD08-05-016]
RIN 1625-AA01


Anchorage Regulations; Mississippi River Below Baton Rouge, LA, 
Including South and Southwest Passes

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has amended anchorage regulations for the 
Mississippi River below Baton Rouge, LA, including South and Southwest 
Passes, in order to improve safety at the Lower Kenner Bend Anchorage. 
This rule is needed to protect aircraft passengers and crew, mariners 
and the public from the potential safety hazards associated with the 
ascent and descent of aircraft over vessels anchored in the vicinity of 
the Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport, New Orleans, LA.

DATES: This rule is effective November 29, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in 
the docket, are part of docket [CGD08-05-016] and are available for 
inspection or copying at U.S. Coast Guard D8, 500 Poydras Street, New 
Orleans, Louisiana 70130-3396 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Douglas Blakemore, Waterways 
Management Branch, Eighth Coast Guard District, 500 Poydras Street, New 
Orleans, LA 70130-3396. Telephone (504) 671-2109; facsimile (504) 671-
2137. Please cite CGD08-05-016.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    On April 27, 2005, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) entitled ``Anchorage Regulations; Mississippi River Below Baton 
Rouge, LA, Including South and Southwest Passes'' in the Federal 
Register (70 FR 21698). We received 4 letters commenting on this rule. 
A public meeting was held at the Hale Boggs Federal Building, 500 
Poydras Street, New Orleans, LA on January 4, 2006 (70 FR 76320, 
December 23, 2005). The three comments from this public meeting are 
included in this rulemaking.

Background and Purpose

    Runway 1-19 at the Louis Armstrong New Orleans International 
Airport is positioned in a north-south line running parallel to the 
Airport Access Road. Aircraft approaching the runway from the south or 
departing the runway from the north pass over the Lower Kenner Bend 
Anchorage. Officials from Louis Armstrong New Orleans International 
Airport have stated that due to the close proximity of Runway 1-19 to 
Kenner Bend, aircraft occasionally descend and ascend directly over 
vessels anchored in the Lower Kenner Bend Anchorage, creating a 
potentially dangerous situation that is of particular concern during 
periods of reduced visibility. Aircraft approaching the runway from the 
south follow a descending glide slope path with a minimum height of 311 
feet above mean sea level over the Kenner Bend Anchorage. Certain 
vessels with cargo handling equipment such as cranes and booms are 
capable of extending this equipment to a height upwards of 300 feet 
above the waterline. This amendment to the anchorage regulations for 
the Mississippi River below Baton Rouge, LA, including South and 
Southwest Passes prohibits vessels from using ship's hold cargo cranes. 
Vessels in this anchorage must keep their cargo gear in their cradles 
as rigged for sea transits. This restriction does not apply to the use 
of deck-mounted store cranes, deck booms, or stiff legs, nor is it 
intended to restrict ships or ocean-going barges from moving manifold 
hoses.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    Four commenters stated that the Lower Kenner Bend Anchorage was 
important to the maritime industry and were concerned that the Coast 
Guard would completely remove Lower Kenner Bend as an anchorage. We 
agree with this assessment and have no intentions to remove this 
anchorage.
    Three commenters objected that this rule does not address vessel 
size. Small vessels would not be able to use their cargo cranes even 
though the vessels maximum air draft with a completely extended cargo 
crane would be significantly lower than the minimum height of 311 feet 
above mean sea level needed for an aircrafts descending glide slope 
path over Kenner Bend Anchorage. We recognize this possibility; 
however, we feel that to maintain the consistent safety of descending 
airplanes over runway 1-19, we need to restrict the use of cargo cranes 
for all vessels.
    Three commenters objected that this rule does not allow a vessel to 
take on ships stores, spare parts, supplies and fuel. We modified the 
rule to specifically address this issue. Vessels at anchor in the Lower 
Kenner Bend Anchorage are allowed to use deck-mounted cranes, deck 
booms and stiff legs to take on stores, spare parts and to move 
manifold hoses. However, cargo hold booms may not be used. In 
implementing changes from the proposed rule based on comments, we added 
a new paragraph to 33 CFR 110.195 instead of revising paragraph (c)(6).

Regulatory Evaluation

    This 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). We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so 
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies 
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary.

[[Page 63246]]

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this rule has 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 does 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. This rule affects the following entities, some of which may 
be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to 
anchor in the Lower Kenner Bend Anchorage. This rule does not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
for the following reasons: (1) This rule does not prohibit vessels from 
anchoring in the Lower Kenner Bend Anchorage; and (2) Cargo transfer 
operations are not typically conducted at the Lower Kenner Bend 
Anchorage.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule has 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 economically affects 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 rule so that they can better evaluate 
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the rule 
affects your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction 
and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for 
compliance, please contact Doug Blakemore at (504) 671-2109.

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

Taking of Private Property

    This rule does not affect 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 would not create an 
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might 
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 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 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 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, 
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 a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the 
Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under 
figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(f), of the Instruction, from further 
environmental documentation because this rule is not expected to result 
in any significant adverse environmental impact as described in the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). A draft Environmental 
Analysis Check List and a draft Categorical Exclusion Determination are 
available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. Comments on 
this section will be considered before we make the final decision on 
whether the rule should be categorically excluded from further 
environmental review.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110

    Anchorage grounds.

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 
CFR part 110 as follows:

PART 110--ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows:


[[Page 63247]]


    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236, 2030, 2035 and 
2071; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); Department of Homeland Security Delegation 
No. 0170.1.


0
2. In Sec.  110.195, redesignate paragraph (c)(7) as (c)(8) and add a 
new paragraph (c)(7) to read as follows:


Sec.  110.195  Mississippi River below Baton Rouge, LA, including South 
and Southwest Passes.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (7) Vessels anchored in the Lower Kenner Bend Anchorage are 
prohibited from using or exercising the ship's hold cargo cranes. 
Vessels in this anchorage must keep the ship's hold cargo gear in the 
down and hawsed position, as rigged for sea transits. Deck-mounted 
cranes, deck booms and stiff legs may be used to take on ships stores 
and spare parts and may be used to move manifold hoses.
* * * * *

    Dated: October 11, 2006.
J.R. Whitehead,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6-18086 Filed 10-27-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P