Anchorage Regulation; Port Everglades, FL, 6607-6610 [E8-1757]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Eileen M. Albanese,
Director for Office of Exporter Services.
[FR Doc. 08–480 Filed 2–4–08; 8:45 am]
PART 520—ORAL DOSAGE FORM
NEW ANIMAL DRUGS
and for 1 day following each
vaccination.
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 520 continues to read as follows:
(2) Limitations. Do not administer to
laying chickens. Do not administer
within 5 days of slaughter.
I 5. Revise § 520.2123c to read as
follows:
I
BILLING CODE 3510–33–P
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
I
Food and Drug Administration
§ 520.2123
forms.
21 CFR Part 520
I
Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs;
Spectinomycin
§ 520.2123a
AGENCY:
2. Revise § 520.2123 to read as
follows:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Final rule.
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with RULES
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is amending the
animal drug regulations to correct an
error in the indications for use for
spectinomycin oral solution in swine.
FDA is also amending the regulations
for other oral dosage forms of
spectinomycin to reflect a current
format. These actions are being taken to
improve the accuracy and readability of
the animal drug regulations.
DATES: This rule is effective February 5,
2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
George K. Haibel, Center for Veterinary
Medicine (HFV–6), Food and Drug
Administration, 7519 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855, 240–276–9019, email: george.haibel@fda.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FDA has
noticed that the animal drug regulations
do not reflect the approved indications
for use for spectinomycin oral solution
in swine. At this time, FDA is amending
the animal drug regulations in
§ 520.2123c (21 CFR 520.2123c) to
correct this error. FDA is also amending
the regulations in § 520.2123a for
spectinomycin tablets and in
§ 520.2123b for spectinomycin powder
to reflect a current format. These actions
are being taken to improve the accuracy
and readability of the animal drug
regulations.
This rule does not meet the definition
of ‘‘rule’’ in 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(A) because
it is a rule of ‘‘particular applicability.’’
Therefore, it is not subject to the
congressional review requirements in 5
U.S.C. 801–808.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 520
Animal drugs.
I Therefore, under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under the
authority delegated to the Commissioner
of Food and Drugs and redelegated to
the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21
CFR part 520 is amended as follows:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Feb 04, 2008
Jkt 214001
6607
Spectinomycin oral dosage
3. Revise § 520.2123a to read as
follows:
Spectinomycin tablets.
(a) Specifications. Each tablet
contains spectinomycin
dihydrochloride pentahydrate
equivalent to 100 milligrams (mg)
spectinomycin.
(b) Sponsor. See No. 061623 in
§ 510.600(c) of this chapter.
(c) Conditions of use in dogs—(1)
Amount. Administer orally to provide
10 mg per pound (lb) of body weight
twice daily. Dosage may be continued
for 4 consecutive days.
(2) Indications for use. For the
treatment of infectious diarrhea and
gastroenteritis caused by organisms
susceptible to spectinomycin.
(3) Limitations. Federal law restricts
this drug to use by or on the order of
a licensed veterinarian.
I 4. Revise § 520.2123b to read as
follows:
§ 520.2123b
Spectinomycin powder.
(a) Specifications. Each gram (g) of
powder contains spectinomycin
dihydrochloride pentahydrate
equivalent to 0.5 g spectinomycin.
(b) Sponsor. See No. 061623 in
§ 510.600(c) of this chapter.
(c) Related tolerances. See § 556.600
of this chapter.
(d) Conditions of use in chickens. It is
administered in the drinking water of
growing chickens as follows:
(1) Indications for use and amounts—
(i) For increased rate of weight gain and
improved feed efficiency in broiler
chickens, administer 0.5 g per gallon of
water as the only source of drinking
water for the first 3 days of life and for
1 day following each vaccination.
(ii) As an aid in controlling infectious
synovitis due to Mycoplasma synoviae
in broiler chickens, administer 1 g per
gallon of water as the only source of
drinking water for the first 3 to 5 days
of life.
(iii) As an aid in the prevention or
control of losses due to CRD associated
with M. gallisepticum (PPLO) in
growing chickens, administer 2 g per
gallon of water as the only source of
drinking water for the first 3 days of life
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
§ 520.2123c
Spectinomycin solution.
(a) Specifications. Each milliliter of
solution contains spectinomycin
dihydrochloride pentahydrate
equivalent to 50 milligrams (mg)
spectinomycin.
(b) Sponsors. See Nos. 000856,
059130, and 061623 in § 510.600(c) of
this chapter.
(c) Related tolerances. See § 556.600
of this chapter.
(d) Conditions of use in swine—(1)
Amount. Administer 5 mg per pound
(lb) of body weight orally twice daily for
3 to 5 days.
(2) Indications for use. For the
treatment and control of porcine enteric
colibacillosis (scours) caused by E. coli
susceptible to spectinomycin in pigs
under 4 weeks of age.
(3) Limitations. Do not administer to
pigs over 15 lb body weight or over 4
weeks of age. Do not administer within
21 days of slaughter.
Dated: January 24, 2008.
Bernadette Dunham,
Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine.
[FR Doc. E8–2065 Filed 2–4–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–S
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 110
[Docket No. USCG–2007–0036, formerly
CGD07–122]
RIN 1625–AA01
Anchorage Regulation; Port
Everglades, FL
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard amends the
anchorage regulations for Port
Everglades, Florida. The amendment
modifies the current anchorage area by
eliminating that portion of the
anchorage closest to sensitive coral reef
areas, expands that portion of the
anchorage area that poses less risk to
these areas, and limits the amount of
time a vessel may remain in the
anchorage area. These changes ensure
E:\FR\FM\05FER1.SGM
05FER1
6608
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
vessels may remain at anchorage. The
Coast Guard has also researched
alternative solutions for restructuring
the anchorage. These alternatives have
included: change nothing and continue
to use the current anchorage; create
anchorage circles to control the location
of vessels in the anchorage; and remove
the anchorage completely. The
groundings and anchor mishaps have
had a negative impact on the sensitive
coral reefs and prompts the Coast Guard
to alter the current anchorage area.
Creating anchorage circles for precision
anchorage does not eliminate the threat
to the local reefs due to changing
weather conditions that may cause
vessels, even if properly anchored, to
drag over the coral reefs to the west.
Lastly, while removing the anchorage
altogether would arguably be best for
the environment, this option is not
economically feasible due to the
legitimate need for commercial vessels
to anchor while awaiting berth in Port
Everglades.
Regulatory Information
On October 22, 2007, we published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
entitled Anchorage Regulation; Port
Everglades, FL in the Federal Register
(72 FR 59491). We received 10 letters
commenting on the proposed rule. No
public meeting was requested, and none
was held.
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with RULES
all vessels have fair access to the
anchorage area, and provide a higher
degree of vessel and environmental
safety by reducing the possibility of
vessels grounding in sensitive coral reef
areas.
DATES: This rule is effective March 6,
2008.
ADDRESSES: Comments and material
received from the public, as well as
documents indicated in this preamble as
being available in the docket, are part of
docket [USCG–2007–0036, formerly
CGD07–122] and are available for
inspection or copying at United States
Coast Guard Sector Miami, 100
MacArthur Causeway, Miami Beach,
Florida between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
LTJG Chris Svencer, United States Coast
Guard Sector Miami Waterways
Management at 305–535–4550.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion of Comments and Changes
On October 22, 2007 the Coast Guard
published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) that proposed
changing the location of the commercial
anchorage located offshore from Port
Everglades in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
Ten letters were received in response to
the NPRM. All ten letters were in favor
of moving the anchorage into deeper
waters to protect the environment.
Within the ten letters there were
numerous different comments
addressing the new location of the
anchorage.
Three comments addressed moving
the anchorage either farther to the south
or farther offshore from the Port
Everglades main ship channel. Both of
these options were extensively explored
by the Harbor Safety Committee. Due to
a restricted area designated by 33 CFR
334.580, the area south of Port
Everglades does not permit anchoring of
vessels. This area is immediately south
of the main ship channel entrance and
continues south for approximately 4
nautical miles. Moving the anchorage
further offshore than proposed by this
rule creates a potentially untenable and
even dangerous situation for many
commercial vessels awaiting berths in
Port Everglades. The further the vessels
are offshore the deeper the water they
must anchor in. Beyond the reasonable
depth that the revised anchorage
proposes, many of the commercial
vessels calling on Port Everglades will
have insufficient anchor chain to
properly scope to the standard 5 to 7
times the water depth to provide
sufficient holding, thus presenting a risk
Background and Purpose
During the last ten (10) years, nine (9)
known vessel groundings and six (6)
known vessel anchor mishaps have
occurred during attempted or actual use
of the Port Everglades anchorage areas.
Anchoring mishaps include both
misplacement of the anchor itself and/
or laying of the anchor chain on the
sensitive coral reefs. The east coast of
Florida is susceptible to severe and
erratic weather, and mariners who are
not vigilant can find themselves in
extreme situations. Adverse weather
conditions, proximity to the reef,
congestion in the anchorage, poor
navigation and seamanship were
contributing factors to the groundings
and anchoring mishaps in the Port
Everglades anchorage and surrounding
vicinity. The current anchorage
regulation is published in 33 CFR
110.186. This rule is needed to
strengthen existing anchoring
requirements and guidelines in order to
provide a higher degree of protection to
the coastal area and sensitive benthic
coral reef ecosystems, as well as to
provide a safer anchorage for mariners.
This rule re-designates the anchorage
areas to account for anchor position and
chain lay and limit the amount of time
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Feb 04, 2008
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
to the reefs, other vessels in the
anchorage, and even the vessel
deploying their anchor.
Two comments addressed installing a
mooring buoy system for vessels in the
anchorage. The installation of mooring
buoys is extremely costly and once
installed require continual maintenance
to be effective. One of the comments
also addressed funding the buoys by
taxing each vessel that uses the port.
This option was reviewed and
considered by the Harbor Safety
Committee but was not a viable option.
At this time the committee is unaware
of any federal, state, or local government
agency willing to authorize, fund, and
maintain the mooring buoys. If at a later
time a single or joint entity would fund
this project, the Harbor Safety
Committee would readdress this issue at
that time. The solution to move the
anchorage offshore to its new location is
a step in the right direction to ensure
the safety of our reefs and shores.
Another comment addressed better
educating mariners regarding the
location of the sensitive reefs in the
area. In cooperation with the anchorage
relocation, the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration has added
‘‘Co’’, the charting designation for a
coral bottom, on all charts that depict
the area offshore of Fort Lauderdale.
This in coordination with increased
information in the Coast Pilot will assist
mariners in understanding the location
of reefs in the area.
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.
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.
This rule may affect the following
entities, some of which might be small
entities: The owners or operators of
vessels intending to utilize the
anchorage area outside Port Everglades,
Florida. This rule will not have a
E:\FR\FM\05FER1.SGM
05FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for
the same reasons given above in the
‘‘Regulatory Evaluation’’ section of this
preamble.
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. If
you think that your business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule will have a significant
impact on it, please submit a comment
(see ADDRESSES) explaining why you
think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically
affect it.
effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
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 the rule so that they
could better evaluate its effects on them
and participate in the rulemaking
process. If this rule affects your small
business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning compliance, please contact
Lieutenant Junior Grade Chris Svencer,
Coast Guard Sector Miami, Waterways
Management Division at (305) 535–
4550. 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.
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
does not create an environmental risk to
health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
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).
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with RULES
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 will not result in such
an expenditure, we do discuss the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Feb 04, 2008
Jkt 214001
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
Indian Tribal Governments
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.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
6609
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.
Under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(f), of
the Instruction, an ‘‘Environmental
Analysis Check List’’ and a ‘‘Categorical
Exclusion Determination’’ are not
required for this rule. Even though a
categorical exclusion may be used the
Coast Guard found good reason to
further investigate the effects the
anchorage area modification would have
on the environment. A preliminary
‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’ is
available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES. Furthermore, as part
of section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act (50 CFR part 402, 16 U.S.C. 1536),
the U.S. Coast Guard opened
consultation with a number of
stakeholders. The National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS), and U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS) have reviewed all
restructuring plans and believe the
proposed action would not likely affect
the West Indian Manatee, Johnson’s
Seagrass, Smalltooth Sawfish, and all
local turtle species because the project
does not have any elements with the
potential to affect these listed species.
NOAA also found that the restructuring
into deeper waters, farther away from
the easternmost reef, is likely to have an
indirect beneficial effect on Elkhorn and
Staghorn coral by potentially reducing
vessel groundings and anchor damage
that have adversely affected corals and
other important near shore benthic
resources in the project area.
E:\FR\FM\05FER1.SGM
05FER1
6610
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110
Anchorage grounds.
Words of Issuance and Regulatory Text
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 110 as follows:
I
PART 110—ANCHORAGE
REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 110
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through
1236, 2030, 2035, 2071,; 33 CFR 1.05–1;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
2. Amend § 110.186 by revising
paragraphs (a), (b)(3) through (6), and
adding paragraphs (b)(7) through (9) to
read as follows:
I
§ 110.186
Port Everglades, Florida.
(a) The anchorage grounds. The
anchorage grounds, the center of which
is located approximately two and one
half miles northeast of the entrance to
Port Everglades, is an area bounded by
a line connecting points with the
following North American Datum 83
coordinates:
Latitude
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with RULES
26–08′26.934″
26–08′08.560″
26–07′56.000″
26–07′56.000″
26–07′19.500″
26–07′19.500″
26–06′35.160″
26–06′35.160″
26–08′26.934″
Longitude
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
.......
.......
.......
.......
.......
.......
.......
.......
.......
080–04′28.240″
080–04′16.158″
080–04′17.486″
080–02′42.623″
080–02′53.153″
080–04′28.800″
080–04′28.800″
080–04′38.694″
080–04′28.240″
Dated: January 10, 2008.
D.W. Kunkel,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Seventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E8–1757 Filed 2–4–08; 8:45 am]
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
(b) * * *
(3) All vessels within the designated
anchorage area shall maintain a 24-hour
bridge watch by a licensed deck officer
proficient in English, monitoring VHF–
FM channel 16. This individual shall
confirm that the ship’s crew performs
frequent checks of the vessel’s position
to ensure the vessel is not dragging
anchor.
(4) Vessels may anchor anywhere
within the designated anchorage area
provided that: such anchoring does not
interfere with the operations of any
other vessels currently at anchorage;
and all anchor and chain or cable is
positioned in such a manner to preclude
dragging over reefs.
(5) No vessel may anchor in a ‘‘dead
ship’’ status (i.e. propulsion or control
unavailable for normal operations)
without the prior approval of the
Captain of the Port. Vessels
experiencing casualties such as a main
propulsion, main steering or anchoring
equipment malfunction or which are
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Feb 04, 2008
Jkt 214001
planning to perform main propulsion
engine repairs or maintenance, shall
immediately notify the Coast Guard
Captain of the Port via Coast Guard
Sector Miami on VHF–FM Channel 16.
(6) No vessel may anchor within the
designated anchorage for more than 72
hours without the prior approval of the
Captain of the Port. To obtain this
approval, contact the Coast Guard
Captain of the Port, via the Port
Everglades Harbor Master, on VHF–FM
Channel 14.
(7) The Coast Guard Captain of the
Port may close the anchorage area and
direct vessels to depart the anchorage
during periods of adverse weather or at
other times as deemed necessary in the
interest of port safety or security.
(8) Commercial vessels anchoring
under emergency circumstances outside
the anchorage area shall shift to new
positions within the anchorage area
immediately after the emergency ceases.
(9) Whenever the maritime or
commercial interests of the United
States so require, the Captain of the
Port, U.S. Coast Guard, Miami, Florida,
may direct relocation of any vessel
anchored within the anchorage area.
Once directed, such vessel must get
underway at once or signal for a tug,
and must change position as directed.
Port St. Petersburg or a designated
representative.
DATES: This interim rule is effective
February 5, 2008. Comments and related
material must reach the Docket
Management Facility on or before April
7, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by Coast Guard docket
number USCG–2008–0013 to the Docket
Management Facility at the U.S.
Department of Transportation. To avoid
duplication, please use only one of the
following methods:
(1) Online: https://
www.regulations.gov.
(2) Mail: Docket Management Facility
(M–30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590–
0001.
(3) Hand delivery: Room W12–140 on
the Ground Floor of the West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is 202–366–9329.
(4) Fax: 202–493–2251.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this rule, call
Waterways Management Division,
Sector St. Petersburg, FL (813) 228–
2191, Ext 8307. If you have questions on
viewing or submitting material to the
docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202–366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ACTION:
Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All
comments received will be posted,
without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided. We have an agreement with
the Department of Transportation (DOT)
to use the Docket Management Facility.
Please see DOT’s ‘‘Privacy Act’’
paragraph below.
The Coast Guard is
establishing a security zone that is
concurrent with the Army Corps of
Engineers restricted area adjacent to
MacDill Air Force Base. The security
zone is necessary to facilitate security
operations conducted at the Air Force
Base. All persons, vessels, or other craft
are prohibited from anchoring, mooring,
drifting, or transiting within this zone,
unless authorized by the Captain of the
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG–2008–0013),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and give the reason for each
comment. We recommend that you
include your name and a mailing
address, an e-mail address, or a phone
number in the body of your document
so that we can contact you if we have
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG–2008–0013]
RIN 1625–AA87
Security Zone; MacDill Air Force Base,
Tampa Bay, FL
Coast Guard, DHS.
Interim rule with request for
comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\05FER1.SGM
05FER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 24 (Tuesday, February 5, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 6607-6610]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-1757]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 110
[Docket No. USCG-2007-0036, formerly CGD07-122]
RIN 1625-AA01
Anchorage Regulation; Port Everglades, FL
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard amends the anchorage regulations for Port
Everglades, Florida. The amendment modifies the current anchorage area
by eliminating that portion of the anchorage closest to sensitive coral
reef areas, expands that portion of the anchorage area that poses less
risk to these areas, and limits the amount of time a vessel may remain
in the anchorage area. These changes ensure
[[Page 6608]]
all vessels have fair access to the anchorage area, and provide a
higher degree of vessel and environmental safety by reducing the
possibility of vessels grounding in sensitive coral reef areas.
DATES: This rule is effective March 6, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as
documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket,
are part of docket [USCG-2007-0036, formerly CGD07-122] and are
available for inspection or copying at United States Coast Guard Sector
Miami, 100 MacArthur Causeway, Miami Beach, Florida between 8 a.m. and
3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LTJG Chris Svencer, United States
Coast Guard Sector Miami Waterways Management at 305-535-4550.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
On October 22, 2007, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled Anchorage Regulation; Port Everglades, FL in the
Federal Register (72 FR 59491). We received 10 letters commenting on
the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was held.
Background and Purpose
During the last ten (10) years, nine (9) known vessel groundings
and six (6) known vessel anchor mishaps have occurred during attempted
or actual use of the Port Everglades anchorage areas. Anchoring mishaps
include both misplacement of the anchor itself and/or laying of the
anchor chain on the sensitive coral reefs. The east coast of Florida is
susceptible to severe and erratic weather, and mariners who are not
vigilant can find themselves in extreme situations. Adverse weather
conditions, proximity to the reef, congestion in the anchorage, poor
navigation and seamanship were contributing factors to the groundings
and anchoring mishaps in the Port Everglades anchorage and surrounding
vicinity. The current anchorage regulation is published in 33 CFR
110.186. This rule is needed to strengthen existing anchoring
requirements and guidelines in order to provide a higher degree of
protection to the coastal area and sensitive benthic coral reef
ecosystems, as well as to provide a safer anchorage for mariners. This
rule re-designates the anchorage areas to account for anchor position
and chain lay and limit the amount of time vessels may remain at
anchorage. The Coast Guard has also researched alternative solutions
for restructuring the anchorage. These alternatives have included:
change nothing and continue to use the current anchorage; create
anchorage circles to control the location of vessels in the anchorage;
and remove the anchorage completely. The groundings and anchor mishaps
have had a negative impact on the sensitive coral reefs and prompts the
Coast Guard to alter the current anchorage area. Creating anchorage
circles for precision anchorage does not eliminate the threat to the
local reefs due to changing weather conditions that may cause vessels,
even if properly anchored, to drag over the coral reefs to the west.
Lastly, while removing the anchorage altogether would arguably be best
for the environment, this option is not economically feasible due to
the legitimate need for commercial vessels to anchor while awaiting
berth in Port Everglades.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
On October 22, 2007 the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) that proposed changing the location of the commercial
anchorage located offshore from Port Everglades in Fort Lauderdale,
Florida. Ten letters were received in response to the NPRM. All ten
letters were in favor of moving the anchorage into deeper waters to
protect the environment. Within the ten letters there were numerous
different comments addressing the new location of the anchorage.
Three comments addressed moving the anchorage either farther to the
south or farther offshore from the Port Everglades main ship channel.
Both of these options were extensively explored by the Harbor Safety
Committee. Due to a restricted area designated by 33 CFR 334.580, the
area south of Port Everglades does not permit anchoring of vessels.
This area is immediately south of the main ship channel entrance and
continues south for approximately 4 nautical miles. Moving the
anchorage further offshore than proposed by this rule creates a
potentially untenable and even dangerous situation for many commercial
vessels awaiting berths in Port Everglades. The further the vessels are
offshore the deeper the water they must anchor in. Beyond the
reasonable depth that the revised anchorage proposes, many of the
commercial vessels calling on Port Everglades will have insufficient
anchor chain to properly scope to the standard 5 to 7 times the water
depth to provide sufficient holding, thus presenting a risk to the
reefs, other vessels in the anchorage, and even the vessel deploying
their anchor.
Two comments addressed installing a mooring buoy system for vessels
in the anchorage. The installation of mooring buoys is extremely costly
and once installed require continual maintenance to be effective. One
of the comments also addressed funding the buoys by taxing each vessel
that uses the port. This option was reviewed and considered by the
Harbor Safety Committee but was not a viable option. At this time the
committee is unaware of any federal, state, or local government agency
willing to authorize, fund, and maintain the mooring buoys. If at a
later time a single or joint entity would fund this project, the Harbor
Safety Committee would readdress this issue at that time. The solution
to move the anchorage offshore to its new location is a step in the
right direction to ensure the safety of our reefs and shores.
Another comment addressed better educating mariners regarding the
location of the sensitive reefs in the area. In cooperation with the
anchorage relocation, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration has added ``Co'', the charting designation for a coral
bottom, on all charts that depict the area offshore of Fort Lauderdale.
This in coordination with increased information in the Coast Pilot will
assist mariners in understanding the location of reefs in the area.
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.
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.
This rule may affect the following entities, some of which might be
small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to utilize
the anchorage area outside Port Everglades, Florida. This rule will not
have a
[[Page 6609]]
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
for the same reasons given above in the ``Regulatory Evaluation''
section of this preamble.
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. If you think that your business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this
rule will have a significant impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
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 the rule so that they could better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. If this
rule affects your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning compliance, please
contact Lieutenant Junior Grade Chris Svencer, Coast Guard Sector
Miami, Waterways Management Division at (305) 535-4550. 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 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 will 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 does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
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 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.
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.
Under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(f), of the Instruction, an
``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a ``Categorical Exclusion
Determination'' are not required for this rule. Even though a
categorical exclusion may be used the Coast Guard found good reason to
further investigate the effects the anchorage area modification would
have on the environment. A preliminary ``Environmental Analysis Check
List'' is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.
Furthermore, as part of section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (50 CFR
part 402, 16 U.S.C. 1536), the U.S. Coast Guard opened consultation
with a number of stakeholders. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS),
and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) have reviewed all
restructuring plans and believe the proposed action would not likely
affect the West Indian Manatee, Johnson's Seagrass, Smalltooth Sawfish,
and all local turtle species because the project does not have any
elements with the potential to affect these listed species. NOAA also
found that the restructuring into deeper waters, farther away from the
easternmost reef, is likely to have an indirect beneficial effect on
Elkhorn and Staghorn coral by potentially reducing vessel groundings
and anchor damage that have adversely affected corals and other
important near shore benthic resources in the project area.
[[Page 6610]]
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110
Anchorage grounds.
Words of Issuance and Regulatory Text
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, 2071,;
33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.
0
2. Amend Sec. 110.186 by revising paragraphs (a), (b)(3) through (6),
and adding paragraphs (b)(7) through (9) to read as follows:
Sec. 110.186 Port Everglades, Florida.
(a) The anchorage grounds. The anchorage grounds, the center of
which is located approximately two and one half miles northeast of the
entrance to Port Everglades, is an area bounded by a line connecting
points with the following North American Datum 83 coordinates:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
26-08'26.934'' N.......................... 080-04'28.240'' W
26-08'08.560'' N.......................... 080-04'16.158'' W
26-07'56.000'' N.......................... 080-04'17.486'' W
26-07'56.000'' N.......................... 080-02'42.623'' W
26-07'19.500'' N.......................... 080-02'53.153'' W
26-07'19.500'' N.......................... 080-04'28.800'' W
26-06'35.160'' N.......................... 080-04'28.800'' W
26-06'35.160'' N.......................... 080-04'38.694'' W
26-08'26.934'' N.......................... 080-04'28.240'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) * * *
(3) All vessels within the designated anchorage area shall maintain
a 24-hour bridge watch by a licensed deck officer proficient in
English, monitoring VHF-FM channel 16. This individual shall confirm
that the ship's crew performs frequent checks of the vessel's position
to ensure the vessel is not dragging anchor.
(4) Vessels may anchor anywhere within the designated anchorage
area provided that: such anchoring does not interfere with the
operations of any other vessels currently at anchorage; and all anchor
and chain or cable is positioned in such a manner to preclude dragging
over reefs.
(5) No vessel may anchor in a ``dead ship'' status (i.e. propulsion
or control unavailable for normal operations) without the prior
approval of the Captain of the Port. Vessels experiencing casualties
such as a main propulsion, main steering or anchoring equipment
malfunction or which are planning to perform main propulsion engine
repairs or maintenance, shall immediately notify the Coast Guard
Captain of the Port via Coast Guard Sector Miami on VHF-FM Channel 16.
(6) No vessel may anchor within the designated anchorage for more
than 72 hours without the prior approval of the Captain of the Port. To
obtain this approval, contact the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, via
the Port Everglades Harbor Master, on VHF-FM Channel 14.
(7) The Coast Guard Captain of the Port may close the anchorage
area and direct vessels to depart the anchorage during periods of
adverse weather or at other times as deemed necessary in the interest
of port safety or security.
(8) Commercial vessels anchoring under emergency circumstances
outside the anchorage area shall shift to new positions within the
anchorage area immediately after the emergency ceases.
(9) Whenever the maritime or commercial interests of the United
States so require, the Captain of the Port, U.S. Coast Guard, Miami,
Florida, may direct relocation of any vessel anchored within the
anchorage area. Once directed, such vessel must get underway at once or
signal for a tug, and must change position as directed.
Dated: January 10, 2008.
D.W. Kunkel,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. E8-1757 Filed 2-4-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
