Anchorage Regulations; Falmouth Maine, Casco Bay, 66668-66669 [E6-19315]

Agencies

• Coast Guard
• DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 221 (Thursday, November 16, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 66668-66669]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-19315]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 110

[CGD01-06-026]
RIN 1625-AA01


Anchorage Regulations; Falmouth Maine, Casco Bay

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard hereby amends the special anchorage area in 
Falmouth, Maine, Casco Bay. This action is necessary to facilitate safe 
navigation and provide mariners a safe and secure anchorage for vessels 
of not more than 65 feet in length. This action is intended to increase 
the safety of life and property on Casco Bay, improve the safety of 
anchored vessels, and provide for the overall safe and efficient flow 
of vessel traffic and commerce.

DATES: This rule is effective December 18, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Comments and materials received from the public, as well as 
documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, 
are part of docket (CGD01-06-026), and are available for inspection or 
copying at room 628, First Coast Guard District Boston, between 8 a.m. 
and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. John J. Mauro, Commander (dpw), 
First Coast Guard District, 408 Atlantic Ave., Boston, MA 02110, 
Telephone (617) 223-8355, e-mail: John.J.Mauro@uscg.mil.

Regulatory Information

    On August 11, 2006, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) entitled ``Anchorage Regulations; Falmouth, ME, Casco Bay'' in 
the Federal Register (71 FR 46181). We received no letters commenting 
on the proposed rule. No public hearing was requested, and none was 
held.
    Because we did not receive any comments on the proposed rule, we 
have not made any changes from the proposed rule with the exception of 
correcting a paragraph reference in the note to paragraph (d) of 33 CFR 
110.5 from ``(g)'' to ``(d)''.

Background and Purpose

    This rule is intended to reduce the risk of vessel collisions by 
enlarging the current special anchorage area in Falmouth, Maine, by an 
additional 206 acres. This rule will expand the existing special 
anchorage, described in 33 CFR 110.5(d), to allow anchorage for 
approximately 150 additional vessels. When at anchor in any special 
anchorage, vessels not more than 65 feet in length need not carry or 
exhibit the white anchor lights required by the Navigation Rules.
    The Coast Guard has defined the anchorage area contained herein 
with the advice and consent of the Army Corps of Engineers, Northeast, 
located at 696 Virginia Rd., Concord, MA 01742.

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.
    We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a 
full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
    This finding is based on the fact that this rule conforms to the 
changing needs of the Town of Falmouth, the changing needs of 
recreational, fishing and commercial vessels, and makes the best use of 
the available navigable water. This rule is in the interest of safe 
navigation and protection of Falmouth and the marine environment. This 
special area, while in the interest of safe navigation and protection 
of the vessels moored at the Town of Falmouth, does not impede the 
passage of vessels intending to transit within Casco Bay.

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. This rule will affect the following entities, some of which 
might be small entities: The owners or operators of recreational or 
commercial vessels intending to transit in a portion of the Casco Bay 
in and around the anchorage area. However, this anchorage area would 
not have a significant economic impact on these entities for the 
following reasons: The special area does not impede the passage of 
vessels intending to transit in and around Falmouth, which include both 
small recreational and large commercial vessels. Thus, the special 
anchorage area will not impede safe and efficient vessel transits on 
Casco Bay.

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 that they can better evaluate 
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    If this rule would affect your small business, organization, or 
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its 
provisions or options for compliance, please contact John J. Mauro, at 
the address listed in ADDRESSES above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal 
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal 
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 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

[[Page 66669]]

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

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 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 considered the environmental impact of this rule and 
concluded that, under figure 2-1, paragraph 34(f), of Commandant 
Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is categorically excluded from further 
environmental documentation. A final ``Categorical Exclusion 
Determination'' and a final ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' are 
available in the docket for inspection or copying where indicated under 
ADDRESSES. This rule fits the category selected from paragraph (34)(f) 
as it would expand a special anchorage area.

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:

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


0
2. Amend Sec.  110.5, by revising paragraph (d) to read as follows:


Sec.  110.5  Casco Bay, Maine.

* * * * *
    (d) Mussel Cove and adjacent waters at Falmouth Foreside, Falmouth. 
All of the waters enclosed by a line beginning at the Dock House (F.S.) 
located at latitude 43[deg]44'22'' N, longitude 70[deg]11'41'' W; 
thence to latitude 43[deg]44'19'' N, longitude 70[deg]11'33'' W; thence 
to latitude 43[deg]44'00'' N, longitude 70[deg]11'44'' W; thence to 
latitude 43[deg]43'37'' N, longitude 70[deg]11'37'' W; thence to 
latitude 43[deg]43'04'' N, longitude 70[deg]12'13'' W; thence to 
latitude 43[deg]41'56'' N, longitude 70[deg]12'53'' W; thence to 
latitude 43[deg]41'49'' N, longitude 70[deg]13'05'' W; thence to 
latitude 43[deg]42'11'' N, longitude 70[deg]13'30'' W; thence along the 
shoreline to the point of beginning. DATUM: NAD 83.


    Note to paragraph (d). The area designed by paragraph (g) of 
this section is reserved for yachts and other small recreational 
craft. Fore and aft moorings will be allowed in this area. Temporary 
floats or buoys for marking anchors or moorings in place will be 
allowed. Fixed mooring piles or stakes are prohibited. All moorings 
must be so placed so that no vessel when anchored is at any time 
extended into the thoroughfare. All anchoring in the area is under 
the supervision of the local harbor master or such other authority 
as may be designated by the authorities of the Town of Falmouth, 
Maine.

* * * * *

    Dated: October 30, 2006.
Timothy S. Sullivan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
 [FR Doc. E6-19315 Filed 11-15-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P