Seventh Coast Guard District, Captain of the Port Zone Jacksonville, Temporary Restricted Anchorage, 12925-12928 [E8-4757]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 48 / Tuesday, March 11, 2008 / Proposed Rules would cause the payee applicant undue hardship. For example, the payee applicant would have to travel a great distance to the field office. In this situation, we may conduct the investigation to determine the payee applicant’s suitability to serve as a representative payee without a face-toface interview. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 110 [Docket No. USCG–2008–0006] RIN 1625–AA01 Seventh Coast Guard District, Captain of the Port Zone Jacksonville, Temporary Restricted Anchorage PART 416—SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME FOR THE AGED, BLIND, AND DISABLED Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: Subpart F—[Amended] ACTION: SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes establishment of three, multi-purpose, temporary restricted anchorages with Authority: Secs. 702(a)(5), 1631(a)(2) and associated safety/security zones to (d)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. service vessels intending to call on the 902(a)(5) and 1383(a)(2) and (d)(1)). ports of Jacksonville or Fernandina within the Captain of the Port Zone 2. Amend § 416.624 by revising Jacksonville as defined by 33 CFR 3.35– paragraphs (a)(1) and (b) and by adding 20. The temporary restricted anchorages new paragraph (c) as follows: and safety/security zones identify clearly to all mariners the pre§ 416.624 How do we investigate a representative payee applicant? established area of the Captain of the Port Zone for geographic separation * * * * * and/or restriction of certain vessels that (a) * * * may pose a safety, public health, (1) Conduct a face-to-face interview environmental, or security threat to the with the payee applicant unless it is port. The proposed temporary restricted impracticable as explained in paragraph anchorages are necessary to protect the public, port infrastructure, maritime (c) of this section. environment, and viability of the * * * * * Marine Transportation System from (b) Subsequent face-to-face interviews. hazards associated with safety, public After holding a face-to-face interview health, environmental, and security with a payee applicant, subsequent face- threats. to-face interviews are not required if DATES: Comments and related material that applicant continues to be qualified must reach the Coast Guard on or before and currently is acting as a payee, April 10, 2008. unless we determine, within our ADDRESSES: You may submit comments discretion, that a new face-to-face identified by Coast Guard docket interview is necessary. We base this number USCG–2008–0006 to the Docket decision on the payee’s past Management Facility at the U.S. performance and knowledge of and Department of Transportation. To avoid compliance with our reporting duplication, please use only one of the requirements. following methods: (1) Online: https:// (c) Impracticable. We may consider a face-to-face interview impracticable if it www.regulations.gov. (2) Mail: Docket Management Facility would cause the payee applicant undue (M–30), U.S. Department of hardship. For example, the payee Transportation, West Building Ground applicant would have to travel a great Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey distance to the field office. In this Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590– situation, we may conduct the 0001. investigation to determine the payee (3) Hand deliver: Room W12–140 on applicant’s suitability to serve as a the Ground Floor of the West Building, representative payee without a face-to1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., face interview. Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. [FR Doc. E8–4781 Filed 3–10–08; 8:45 am] and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, BILLING CODE 4191–02–P 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 proposed sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS 1. The authority citation for subpart F continues to read as follows: VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:20 Mar 10, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 12925 rule, call Lieutenant Commander Austin Ives at Coast Guard Sector Jacksonville Prevention Department, Florida. Contact telephone is (904) 564–7563. 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: Public Participation and Request for Comments We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related material. 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. Submitting Comments If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG–2008–0006), 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 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 questions regarding your submission. You may submit your comments and material by electronic means, mail, fax, or delivery to the Docket Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES; but please submit your comments and material by only one means. If you submit them by mail or delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, 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. Viewing Comments and Documents To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov at any time, click on ‘‘Search for Dockets,’’ and enter the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG–2008–0006) in the Docket ID box, and click enter. You may also visit either the Docket Management Facility in Room W12–140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New E:\FR\FM\11MRP1.SGM 11MRP1 12926 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 48 / Tuesday, March 11, 2008 / Proposed Rules Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays; or the Coast Guard Sector Jacksonville Department, 4200 Ocean St., Atlantic Beach, FL 32233–2416, between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Privacy Act Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the Department of Transportation’s Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit https:// www.DocketsInfo.dot.gov. sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Public Meeting We do not plan to hold a public meeting. You may submit a request for a meeting by writing to Coast Guard Sector Jacksonville at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register. Background and Purpose In 2003–2004, the Northeast and Eastern Central Florida, Area Maritime Security Committee initiated a project to identify potential temporary restricted anchorage areas to which the COTP could direct vessels that presented safety, public health, environmental, or security threats. The project aligned and broadened the on-going efforts of the Consolidated City of Jacksonville/Duval County Security and Emergency Preparedness Planning Council to develop contingency plans for public health threats. The site selection process for designating temporary restricted anchorages was delegated to the Jacksonville Maritime Transportation Exchange, regional Harbor Safety Committee (HSC). In determining the most efficient and effective anchorage area(s), the HSC considered impacts to the public, the environment, and maritime mobility. After detailed evaluation (site selection criteria is explained under the ‘‘Discussion of Proposed Rule’’ section), the committee proposed a set of temporary restricted anchorages to serve the ports of Jacksonville and Fernandina. The concept advocated three such areas (1) very near-shore, approximately four nautical miles, to facilitate quick response by medical personnel where disease and hazardous substance VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:20 Mar 10, 2008 Jkt 214001 exposure is not a threat to the shoreline, (2) a second area further off-shore, approximately seven nautical miles, for disease and/or threats that could pose hazardous to the general population, and (3) a final third anchorage just inside territorial seas, approximately twelve nautical miles, for grave threats that require substantial interagency planning and response. It is anticipated that the need to use these temporary restricted anchorages will be rare. However, with clear predesignation of the anchorages and associated safety/security zones, mariners are both informed of contingency plans and knowledgeable of requirements prior to activation. In addition, Federal, State, and Local plans will be able to clearly reference the establishment process and position of the anchorages for better contingency strategy development. The COTP will determine on a case by case basis, depending on the nature of the threat, whether a safety or security zone is necessary for the activation of a temporary restricted anchorage. These temporary restricted anchorages and associated safety/ security zones are designed for the geographic separation and/or restriction of vessels or persons on such vessels when such vessels or persons pose or are suspected of posing a safety, public health, environmental, or security threat. Threats may include, but are not limited to, the spread of infectious disease or unauthorized transportation of hazardous or illegal substances. The HSC recommended single-ship anchorages with an accompanying limited access area. The target ship type for said anchorages is deep draft oceangoing, ranging from large tug/barge combinations to larger cargo carriers and cruise ships. Discussion of Proposed Rule This proposed rule creates a set of three temporary restricted anchorages off Amelia Island, FL within the COTP Zone Jacksonville, as defined by 33 CFR 3.35–20. The proposed temporary restricted anchorages will be activated on a case by case basis by the Captain of the Port (COTP) and/or Federal Maritime Security Coordinator (FMSC) and will be disestablished when the COTP and/or FMSC releases the vessel or person on such vessel from temporary restriction. (1) Anchorage Locations: General location for the set of three temporary restricted anchorage areas is four, seven, and twelve nautical miles from the shoreline, due east off Amelia Island, Florida. PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 (a) Anchorage A: When activated by the COTP/FMSC, Anchorage A will have a 500 yard safety zone or security zone, as applicable, around the point originating from approximate position 30–36N 81–21.8W. (b) Anchorage B: When activated by the COTP/FMSC, Anchorage B will have a 500 yard safety or security zone, as applicable, around the point originating from approximate position 30–36N 81– 18.5W. (c) Anchorage C: When activated by the COTP/FMSC, Anchorage C will have a 500 yard safety or security zone, as applicable, around the point originating from approximate position 30–36N 81– 13.5W. (2) Site Selection: Given the close proximity of the ports of Jacksonville and Fernandina, their approach traffic lanes, and response times for collective emergency services, it is recommended that one set of anchorages be established to serve these two ports. Candidate anchorages were chosen for their sufficient water depth, holding ground, and proximity to de-facto approach lanes to the aforementioned ports. (a) Other considerations. (i) Shoreline characteristics: The NE Florida/SE Georgia coastline is primarily barrier island in nature. The proposed positioning for the set of temporary restricted anchorages is off Amelia Island. Both north and south ends of the island are State and County parks. To the north are Cumberland, Jeckyl, and St. Simon’s Island. To the south are Big and Little Talbot Island. Given their size, civilian populations on the islands are very small. Cumberland and Big and Little Talbot Islands are Federal and State Parks with populations less than 50 persons combined. All of the islands are linked to the mainland by one or two bridges, except for Cumberland Island where access is only by water. With this limited access, site control to and within these areas is achievable. (ii) Winds: Winds are primarily from the NE in the winter and fall and from the ESE/SE during the spring and summer months. The proposed anchorage location was selected with these wind patterns in mind because both Cumberland Island to the north and Little Talbot Island to the south are parks with limited populations and limited access. They would make good candidates for emergency response staging and/or monitoring sites. (iii) Right Whales: Choosing one set of anchorage locations to service three ports reduces the potential impact to Northern Right Whale Critical Habitat and further mitigates ship-strike potential. E:\FR\FM\11MRP1.SGM 11MRP1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 48 / Tuesday, March 11, 2008 / Proposed Rules (iv) Artificial Reefs: The off-shore environment of NE Florida and SE Georgia are replete with artificial reefs. The proposed positioning of the anchorages successfully avoids impinging upon artificial reef areas with the closest reef being 2.5 NM north and seaward of the outermost anchorage. 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. We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) because zone activation will be on a case by case basis only, for limited duration, at the discretion of the COTP when such action is required to protect the public, port infrastructure, and the environment. sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we 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 will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit within an activated temporary restricted anchorage. These anchorages will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because zone activation will be on a case by case basis only, for a limited duration, at the discretion of the COTP when such action is required to protect the public, port infrastructure, environment, and viability of the Marine Transportation System. Additionally, vessel traffic could pass safely around the temporary restricted anchorages. VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:20 Mar 10, 2008 Jkt 214001 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) 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 offer to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. 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 the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT for assistance in understanding and participating in this rulemaking. 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 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 proposed 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 will not result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This proposed rule will not affect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 12927 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. 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 does not create an environmental risk to health or safety that may 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 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 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. It has not been designated by the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 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 E:\FR\FM\11MRP1.SGM 11MRP1 12928 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 48 / Tuesday, March 11, 2008 / Proposed Rules 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 proposed rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.1D 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, we believe that this rule should be categorically excluded, under figure 2– 1, paragraph (34)(f), of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. 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 110 Anchorage grounds. Words of Issuance and Proposed Regulatory Text For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR Part 110 as follows: PART 110—ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS 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. 2. Add § 110.184 to read as follows: sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS § 110.184 Seventh Coast Guard District, Captain of the Port Zone Jacksonville, Temporary Restricted Anchorage. (a) Applicability. This section applies to all vessels regardless of tonnage or service and all persons on such vessels subject to COTP authority within the COTP Zone Jacksonville as defined by 33 CFR 3.35–20. (b) Temporary Restricted Anchorage Zones: The following three temporary restricted anchorage areas are established off Amelia Island, FL within the COTP Zone Jacksonville, as defined by 33 CFR 3.35–20. Each anchorage area VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:20 Mar 10, 2008 Jkt 214001 has an accompanying 500 yard safety/ security zone, as applicable, emanating from its center point described in the following section: (1) Anchorage A: Originates approximately four nautical miles off Amelia Island, Florida in position 30– 36N 81–21.8W. (2) Anchorage B: Originates approximately seven nautical miles off Amelia Island, Florida in position 30– 36N 81–18.5W. (3) Anchorage C: Originates approximately twelve nautical miles off Amelia Island, Florida in position 30– 36N 81–13.5W. (c) Definitions. The following definition applies to this section: (1) Temporary Restricted Anchorage refers to off-shore areas designated for the geographic separation and/or restriction of vessels or persons on such vessels posing or are suspected of posing a safety, public health, environmental, or security threat. (2) Designated representatives means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers and other officers operating Coast Guard assets, and federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port (COTP), Jacksonville, Florida, in the enforcement of the temporary restricted anchorage area. (d) Anchorage Requirements. Vessels directed to a temporary anchorage shall: (1) If equipped with an Automatic Identification System (AIS), maintain it in the ‘‘on’’ position. (2) Maintain a 24-hour bridge watch by an English-speaking, licensed deck officer monitoring VHF–FM Channel 16. This individual shall perform frequent checks of the vessel’s position to ensure the vessel is not dragging anchor. (e) Safety/Security Zone requirements. (1) Only the specified vessel may occupy the temporary restricted anchorage area. In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.23 and § 165.33 of this part, no person or vessel may anchor, moor, or transit the Regulated Area without permission of the Captain of the Port Jacksonville, Florida, or a designated representative. (2) The Coast Guard will issue a broadcast notice to mariners to advise mariners of the temporary restricted anchorage activation. (f) Captain of the Port Contact Information. If you have questions about the conditions under which the COTP may direct a vessel to temporary restricted anchorage, location of the temporary restricted anchorage areas, the requirements once a vessel is directed to temporary restricted anchorage, or other matters dealing with PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 this regulation, please contact the Sector Jacksonville Command Center at (904) 564–7513. Dated: February 12, 2008. W.D. Lee, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Coast Guard Seventh District (Acting). [FR Doc. E8–4757 Filed 3–10–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–15–P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [DA 08–504; MB Docket No. 08–30; RM– 11419] Television Broadcasting Services; Riverside, California Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: SUMMARY: This document requests comments on a channel substitution proposed by KRCA License, LLC, requesting the post-transition digital television allotment for KRCA-DT, Riverside, California be changed from Channel 45 to Channel 35. DATES: Comments must be filed on or before April 10, 2008, and reply comments on or before April 25, 2008. ADDRESSES: Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. In addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties should serve counsel for the petitioner as follows: Marnie K. Sarver, Esq., Wiley Rein, LLP, 1776 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shaun A. Maher, Media Bureau (202) 418–1600. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MB Docket No. 08–30, adopted March 5, 2008, and released March 5, 2008. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC’s Reference Information Center at Portals II, CY–A257, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., Washington, DC. 20554. This document may also be purchased from the Commission’s duplicating contractors, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone 1– 800–378–3160 or via e-mail https:// www.BCPIWEB.com. This document does not contain proposed information collection requirements subject to the E:\FR\FM\11MRP1.SGM 11MRP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 48 (Tuesday, March 11, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12925-12928]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-4757]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 110

[Docket No. USCG-2008-0006]
RIN 1625-AA01


Seventh Coast Guard District, Captain of the Port Zone 
Jacksonville, Temporary Restricted Anchorage

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes establishment of three, multi-
purpose, temporary restricted anchorages with associated safety/
security zones to service vessels intending to call on the ports of 
Jacksonville or Fernandina within the Captain of the Port Zone 
Jacksonville as defined by 33 CFR 3.35-20. The temporary restricted 
anchorages and safety/security zones identify clearly to all mariners 
the pre-established area of the Captain of the Port Zone for geographic 
separation and/or restriction of certain vessels that may pose a 
safety, public health, environmental, or security threat to the port. 
The proposed temporary restricted anchorages are necessary to protect 
the public, port infrastructure, maritime environment, and viability of 
the Marine Transportation System from hazards associated with safety, 
public health, environmental, and security threats.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before April 10, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket 
number USCG-2008-0006 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 deliver: 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 proposed 
rule, call Lieutenant Commander Austin Ives at Coast Guard Sector 
Jacksonville Prevention Department, Florida. Contact telephone is (904) 
564-7563. 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:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments and related material. 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.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking (USCG-2008-0006), 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 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 questions regarding your submission. 
You may submit your comments and material by electronic means, mail, 
fax, or delivery to the Docket Management Facility at the address under 
ADDRESSES; but please submit your comments and material by only one 
means. If you submit them by mail or delivery, submit them in an 
unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for 
copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would 
like to know that they reached the Facility, 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.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble 
as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov at 
any time, click on ``Search for Dockets,'' and enter the docket number 
for this rulemaking (USCG-2008-0006) in the Docket ID box, and click 
enter. You may also visit either the Docket Management Facility in Room 
W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New

[[Page 12926]]

Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays; or the Coast Guard 
Sector Jacksonville Department, 4200 Ocean St., Atlantic Beach, FL 
32233-2416, between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 
Federal holidays.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into 
any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment 
(or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, 
business, labor union, etc.). You may review the Department of 
Transportation's Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register 
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit https://
www.DocketsInfo.dot.gov.

Public Meeting

    We do not plan to hold a public meeting. You may submit a request 
for a meeting by writing to Coast Guard Sector Jacksonville at the 
address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we 
determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a 
time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

    In 2003-2004, the Northeast and Eastern Central Florida, Area 
Maritime Security Committee initiated a project to identify potential 
temporary restricted anchorage areas to which the COTP could direct 
vessels that presented safety, public health, environmental, or 
security threats. The project aligned and broadened the on-going 
efforts of the Consolidated City of Jacksonville/Duval County Security 
and Emergency Preparedness Planning Council to develop contingency 
plans for public health threats. The site selection process for 
designating temporary restricted anchorages was delegated to the 
Jacksonville Maritime Transportation Exchange, regional Harbor Safety 
Committee (HSC). In determining the most efficient and effective 
anchorage area(s), the HSC considered impacts to the public, the 
environment, and maritime mobility. After detailed evaluation (site 
selection criteria is explained under the ``Discussion of Proposed 
Rule'' section), the committee proposed a set of temporary restricted 
anchorages to serve the ports of Jacksonville and Fernandina. The 
concept advocated three such areas (1) very near-shore, approximately 
four nautical miles, to facilitate quick response by medical personnel 
where disease and hazardous substance exposure is not a threat to the 
shoreline, (2) a second area further off-shore, approximately seven 
nautical miles, for disease and/or threats that could pose hazardous to 
the general population, and (3) a final third anchorage just inside 
territorial seas, approximately twelve nautical miles, for grave 
threats that require substantial interagency planning and response.
    It is anticipated that the need to use these temporary restricted 
anchorages will be rare. However, with clear pre-designation of the 
anchorages and associated safety/security zones, mariners are both 
informed of contingency plans and knowledgeable of requirements prior 
to activation. In addition, Federal, State, and Local plans will be 
able to clearly reference the establishment process and position of the 
anchorages for better contingency strategy development.
    The COTP will determine on a case by case basis, depending on the 
nature of the threat, whether a safety or security zone is necessary 
for the activation of a temporary restricted anchorage.
    These temporary restricted anchorages and associated safety/
security zones are designed for the geographic separation and/or 
restriction of vessels or persons on such vessels when such vessels or 
persons pose or are suspected of posing a safety, public health, 
environmental, or security threat. Threats may include, but are not 
limited to, the spread of infectious disease or unauthorized 
transportation of hazardous or illegal substances.
    The HSC recommended single-ship anchorages with an accompanying 
limited access area. The target ship type for said anchorages is deep 
draft ocean-going, ranging from large tug/barge combinations to larger 
cargo carriers and cruise ships.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    This proposed rule creates a set of three temporary restricted 
anchorages off Amelia Island, FL within the COTP Zone Jacksonville, as 
defined by 33 CFR 3.35-20. The proposed temporary restricted anchorages 
will be activated on a case by case basis by the Captain of the Port 
(COTP) and/or Federal Maritime Security Coordinator (FMSC) and will be 
disestablished when the COTP and/or FMSC releases the vessel or person 
on such vessel from temporary restriction.
    (1) Anchorage Locations: General location for the set of three 
temporary restricted anchorage areas is four, seven, and twelve 
nautical miles from the shoreline, due east off Amelia Island, Florida.
    (a) Anchorage A: When activated by the COTP/FMSC, Anchorage A will 
have a 500 yard safety zone or security zone, as applicable, around the 
point originating from approximate position 30-36N 81-21.8W.
    (b) Anchorage B: When activated by the COTP/FMSC, Anchorage B will 
have a 500 yard safety or security zone, as applicable, around the 
point originating from approximate position 30-36N 81-18.5W.
    (c) Anchorage C: When activated by the COTP/FMSC, Anchorage C will 
have a 500 yard safety or security zone, as applicable, around the 
point originating from approximate position 30-36N 81-13.5W.
    (2) Site Selection: Given the close proximity of the ports of 
Jacksonville and Fernandina, their approach traffic lanes, and response 
times for collective emergency services, it is recommended that one set 
of anchorages be established to serve these two ports. Candidate 
anchorages were chosen for their sufficient water depth, holding 
ground, and proximity to de-facto approach lanes to the aforementioned 
ports.
    (a) Other considerations.
    (i) Shoreline characteristics: The NE Florida/SE Georgia coastline 
is primarily barrier island in nature. The proposed positioning for the 
set of temporary restricted anchorages is off Amelia Island. Both north 
and south ends of the island are State and County parks. To the north 
are Cumberland, Jeckyl, and St. Simon's Island. To the south are Big 
and Little Talbot Island. Given their size, civilian populations on the 
islands are very small. Cumberland and Big and Little Talbot Islands 
are Federal and State Parks with populations less than 50 persons 
combined. All of the islands are linked to the mainland by one or two 
bridges, except for Cumberland Island where access is only by water. 
With this limited access, site control to and within these areas is 
achievable.
    (ii) Winds: Winds are primarily from the NE in the winter and fall 
and from the ESE/SE during the spring and summer months. The proposed 
anchorage location was selected with these wind patterns in mind 
because both Cumberland Island to the north and Little Talbot Island to 
the south are parks with limited populations and limited access. They 
would make good candidates for emergency response staging and/or 
monitoring sites.
    (iii) Right Whales: Choosing one set of anchorage locations to 
service three ports reduces the potential impact to Northern Right 
Whale Critical Habitat and further mitigates ship-strike potential.

[[Page 12927]]

    (iv) Artificial Reefs: The off-shore environment of NE Florida and 
SE Georgia are replete with artificial reefs. The proposed positioning 
of the anchorages successfully avoids impinging upon artificial reef 
areas with the closest reef being 2.5 NM north and seaward of the 
outermost anchorage.

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.
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so 
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. It is not 
``significant'' under the regulatory policies and procedures of the 
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) because zone activation will be 
on a case by case basis only, for limited duration, at the discretion 
of the COTP when such action is required to protect the public, port 
infrastructure, and the environment.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we 
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 will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. This proposed rule may affect the following 
entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners or operators 
of vessels intending to transit within an activated temporary 
restricted anchorage. These anchorages will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because zone 
activation will be on a case by case basis only, for a limited 
duration, at the discretion of the COTP when such action is required to 
protect the public, port infrastructure, environment, and viability of 
the Marine Transportation System. Additionally, vessel traffic could 
pass safely around the temporary restricted anchorages.
    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) 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 offer to assist small 
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better 
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. 
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 the person listed 
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT for assistance in understanding 
and participating in this rulemaking. 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 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 proposed 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 will not result in such 
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this 
preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule will 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 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.

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 does not 
create an environmental risk to health or safety that may 
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 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 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. It has not been designated by the Administrator of the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 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

[[Page 12928]]

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 proposed rule under Commandant Instruction 
M16475.1D 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, we believe that this rule should be 
categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(f), of the 
Instruction, from further environmental documentation.
    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 110

    Anchorage grounds.

Words of Issuance and Proposed Regulatory Text

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes 
to amend 33 CFR Part 110 as follows:

PART 110--ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS

    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.

    2. Add Sec.  110.184 to read as follows:


Sec.  110.184  Seventh Coast Guard District, Captain of the Port Zone 
Jacksonville, Temporary Restricted Anchorage.

    (a) Applicability. This section applies to all vessels regardless 
of tonnage or service and all persons on such vessels subject to COTP 
authority within the COTP Zone Jacksonville as defined by 33 CFR 3.35-
20.
    (b) Temporary Restricted Anchorage Zones: The following three 
temporary restricted anchorage areas are established off Amelia Island, 
FL within the COTP Zone Jacksonville, as defined by 33 CFR 3.35-20. 
Each anchorage area has an accompanying 500 yard safety/security zone, 
as applicable, emanating from its center point described in the 
following section:
    (1) Anchorage A: Originates approximately four nautical miles off 
Amelia Island, Florida in position 30-36N 81-21.8W.
    (2) Anchorage B: Originates approximately seven nautical miles off 
Amelia Island, Florida in position 30-36N 81-18.5W.
    (3) Anchorage C: Originates approximately twelve nautical miles off 
Amelia Island, Florida in position 30-36N 81-13.5W.
    (c) Definitions. The following definition applies to this section:
    (1) Temporary Restricted Anchorage refers to off-shore areas 
designated for the geographic separation and/or restriction of vessels 
or persons on such vessels posing or are suspected of posing a safety, 
public health, environmental, or security threat.
    (2) Designated representatives means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders 
including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers and other officers 
operating Coast Guard assets, and federal, state, and local officers 
designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port (COTP), 
Jacksonville, Florida, in the enforcement of the temporary restricted 
anchorage area.
    (d) Anchorage Requirements. Vessels directed to a temporary 
anchorage shall:
    (1) If equipped with an Automatic Identification System (AIS), 
maintain it in the ``on'' position.
    (2) Maintain a 24-hour bridge watch by an English-speaking, 
licensed deck officer monitoring VHF-FM Channel 16. This individual 
shall perform frequent checks of the vessel's position to ensure the 
vessel is not dragging anchor.
    (e) Safety/Security Zone requirements.
    (1) Only the specified vessel may occupy the temporary restricted 
anchorage area. In accordance with the general regulations in Sec.  
165.23 and Sec.  165.33 of this part, no person or vessel may anchor, 
moor, or transit the Regulated Area without permission of the Captain 
of the Port Jacksonville, Florida, or a designated representative.
    (2) The Coast Guard will issue a broadcast notice to mariners to 
advise mariners of the temporary restricted anchorage activation.
    (f) Captain of the Port Contact Information. If you have questions 
about the conditions under which the COTP may direct a vessel to 
temporary restricted anchorage, location of the temporary restricted 
anchorage areas, the requirements once a vessel is directed to 
temporary restricted anchorage, or other matters dealing with this 
regulation, please contact the Sector Jacksonville Command Center at 
(904) 564-7513.

    Dated: February 12, 2008.
W.D. Lee,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Coast Guard Seventh District 
(Acting).
[FR Doc. E8-4757 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.