Anchorage Regulations; Port of New York, 47906-47910 [E9-22457]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
47906
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 180 / Friday, September 18, 2009 / Proposed Rules
Family and Medical Emergencies
Part 382 provides that, when a
passenger does not provide advance
notice for accommodations to which a
carrier may apply an advance notice
requirement, the carrier must provide
the accommodation if it can do so by
making reasonable efforts, without
delaying the flights (see section
382.27(g)). The Department’s rule is
now in effect: Have passengers or
airlines encountered any actual
problems concerning the
implementation of the provisions in
question in this context?
The Department has issued the
following FAQ discussing this principle
in the context of the procedural steps of
section 382.117(e):
Q. When must a carrier accommodate a
passenger accompanied by an emotional
support or psychiatric service animal who
has not provided 48 hours’ advance notice?
A. Carriers must accommodate a passenger
accompanied by an emotional support or
psychiatric service animal who has not
provided 48 hours’ advance notice if the
carrier can do so by making reasonable
efforts, without delaying a flight. The carrier,
at its discretion, may waive its 48 hours’
advance notice requirement in order to
expedite the emergency air travel of a
passenger accompanied by an emotional
support or psychiatric service animal.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Does this guidance adequately handle
the situation of ESA or PSA users with
a family or medical emergency requiring
short-notice travel? Should air carriers
be able to require documentation of the
emergency from someone seeking to
travel with a PSA or ESA who cannot
provide 48 hours’ notice? Are there
additional regulatory or guidance
statements the Department should make
on this matter, such as criteria for when
and on what basis the 48 hours’ advance
notice period should be waived?
Lack of Medical Insurance or a Mental
Health Care Provider
In the absence of recent
documentation from a mental health
professional, how is an air carrier to
determine whether a passenger has a
current need for an ESA or PSA? Would
anyone using a PSA or ESA have had a
medical recommendation for the use of
such an animal at some time in the past
that could be documented? If not, what
information could establish a basis for
the individual’s claim that he or she
needs a service animal? The Department
has issued the following FAQ
discussing this principle in the context
of the procedural steps of section
382.117(e):
Q. May a carrier accept documentation
from a licensed mental health professional
concerning his or her need for a psychiatric
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:09 Sep 17, 2009
Jkt 217001
or emotional support animal if the
documentation is more than one year old?
A. Carriers may, at their discretion, accept
from the passenger documentation from his
or her licensed mental health professional
that is more than one year old. We encourage
carriers to consider accepting ‘‘outdated’’
documentation in situations where a
passenger with a disability provides a letter
or notice of cancellation or other written
communication indicating the cessation of
health insurance coverage, and his/her
inability to afford treatment for his or her
mental or emotional disability.
Does this guidance successfully address
the situation of persons with mental
health-related disabilities who may
currently lack medical insurance? What
is the experience of airlines and
passengers with the existing rule and
guidance, which are now in effect?
Should the guidance or underlying
regulatory provisions be changed (e.g.,
to eliminate the requirement, change the
period of one year to something else,
require airlines to include alternate
documentation in some cases)?
Use of General Practitioners
The Department has clarified in the
regulatory text of section 382.117(e),
quoted above under ‘‘The Current
Regulation,’’ that among the individuals
authorized to provide documentation
concerning the need for ESAs or PSAs
include medical doctors who are
specifically treating a passenger’s
mental or emotional disability. Does this
clarification successfully address the
concern about the types of doctors who
can provide the documentation that the
rule now requires? If not, what
additional provisions would
commenters recommend?
Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)
Analogy
The Department notes that the ACAA
is a separate statute from the ADA. The
ACAA is a specialized statute dealing
only with transportation by air, in an
environment in which a large number of
people are confined within a limited
space for what may be a prolonged
period of time. The Department has long
taken the position that accommodations
for persons with disabilities, and DOT
requirements for them, may justifiably
differ between the air travel context and
other contexts, such as places of public
accommodation regulated by the
Department of Justice under its ADA
regulations. We seek comment on the
application of this principle in the
matter of PSAs and ESAs.
Alternatives for Consideration
After reviewing comments on this
notice, the Department could make a
number of different decisions with
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
respect to the issues involved. The
following are examples of actions the
Department could take:
1. Leave the rule unchanged.
2. Leave the basic provisions of the
rule (i.e., concerning documentation
and advance notice) unchanged, but add
provisions relating to specific concerns
about the implementation of these
provisions (e.g., with respect to medical
privacy or other matters now addressed
by FAQs).
3. Eliminate documentation and
advance notice provisions for all types
of animals assisting passengers with
disabilities.
4. Eliminate the documentation and
advance notice provisions for PSAs, but
leave the provisions in effect for ESAs.
5. Leave the existing documentation
and advance notice provisions for
passengers with disabilities who wish to
bring service animals on board an
aircraft but whose types of disabilities
are not readily apparent.
6. Leave the existing documentation
and advance notice provisions in effect
for ESAs and PSAs, but add parallel
provisions for all passengers with
disabilities who wish to bring service
animals on board an aircraft.
7. Substitute an alternative method of
preventing ‘‘cheating’’ that would allow
airlines to distinguish service animals
from pets but that did not involve the
current documentation and/or advance
notice provisions.
The fact that an idea is on this list
does not mean that the Department
necessarily supports it or believes that
it would be good policy; the list merely
sets out a range of possible approaches
to the issues raised by the PSDS
petition. Nor is the list exhaustive; the
Department solicits other ideas for
addressing these issues as well.
Issued this 27th day of August 2009, at
Washington, DC.
Christa Fornarotto,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Aviation and
International Affairs.
[FR Doc. E9–21351 Filed 9–17–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 110
[Docket No. USCG 2008–1082]
RIN 1625–AA01
Anchorage Regulations; Port of New
York
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\18SEP1.SGM
Coast Guard, DHS.
18SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 180 / Friday, September 18, 2009 / Proposed Rules
ACTION:
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
amend Anchorage Ground No. 19
located east of the WeehawkenEdgewater Federal Channel on the
Hudson River. This action is necessary
to facilitate safe navigation and provide
safe and secure anchorages for vessels
operating in the area. This proposal is
intended to increase the safety of life
and property of both the anchored
vessels and those operating in the area
as well as to provide for the overall safe
and efficient flow of commerce.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before November 17, 2009.
You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2008–1082 using any one of the
following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202–493–2251.
(3) 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.
(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail
address above, between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The telephone number
is 202–366–9329.
To avoid duplication, please use only
one of these four methods. See the
‘‘Public Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below for instructions on submitting
comments.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or e-mail Mr. Jeff Yunker,
Coast Guard Sector New York,
Waterways Management Division;
telephone 718–354–4195, e-mail
Jeff.M.Yunker@uscg.mil. 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:
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
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.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:09 Sep 17, 2009
Jkt 217001
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG–2008–1082),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You
may submit your comments and
material online (via https://
www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or
hand delivery, but please use only one
of these means. If you submit a
comment online via https://
www.regulations.gov, it will be
considered received by the Coast Guard
when you successfully transmit the
comment. If you fax, hand delivery, or
mail your comment, it will be
considered as having been received by
the Coast Guard when it is received at
the Docket Management Facility. We
recommend that you include your name
and a mailing address, an e-mail
address, or a telephone number in the
body of your document so that we can
contact you if we have questions
regarding your submission.
To submit your comment online, go to
https://www.regulations.gov and click on
the ‘‘submit a comment’’ box, which
will then become highlighted in blue. In
the ‘‘Document Type’’ drop-down menu
select ‘‘Proposed Rule’’ and insert
‘‘USCG–2008–1082’’ in the ‘‘Keyword’’
box. Click ‘‘Search’’ and then click on
the balloon shape in the ‘‘Actions’’
column. If you submit your comments
by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than
81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying
and electronic filing. If you submit
comments 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 and may
change the rule based on your
comments.
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 and click on
the ‘‘Read comments’’ box, which will
then become highlighted in blue. In the
‘‘Keyword’’ box insert ‘‘USCG–2008–
1082’’ and click ‘‘Search.’’ Click the
‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ in the ‘‘Actions’’
column. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12–140
on the ground floor of the Department
of Transportation West Building, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
47907
holidays. We have an agreement with
the Department of Transportation to use
the Docket Management Facility.
Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic
form of 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 a Privacy
Act notice regarding our public dockets
in the January 17, 2008 issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for one using one of the four methods
specified under ADDRESSES. Please
explain why you believe a public
meeting 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
The Hudson River Pilots Association,
through the Port of New York/New
Jersey Harbor Safety, Navigation and
Operations Committee, has requested
that the Coast Guard revise the
boundaries of Anchorage Ground No. 19
which is located on the Hudson River,
east of the Weehawken-Edgewater
Federal Channel and south of the
George Washington Bridge.
Due to severe recurring shoaling
within the Weehawken-Edgewater
Federal Channel, the Hudson River
Pilots requested and received
authorization from the Coast Guard and
Army Corps of Engineers to pilot vessels
through the deeper and safer water
located east of the WeehawkenEdgewater Federal Channel which is
within the current boundaries of
Anchorage Ground No. 19.
This proposed revision would divide
Anchorage Ground 19 into two separate
Anchorage Areas; Anchorage Ground
No. 19 West and Anchorage Ground No.
19 East. This proposed change will
allow deep draft vessels to transit the
deeper water without having to transit
through the current boundaries of
Anchorage Ground 19. The U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, in conjunction with
this rulemaking, intends to relocate the
Weehawken-Edgewater Federal Channel
to the East of its current location. Under
this proposed rule, The WeehawkenEdgewater Federal Channel would be
located between the proposed
Anchorage Ground No. 19 West and
Anchorage Ground No. 19 East. Due to
shoaling, the March 2007 (ACOE)
E:\FR\FM\18SEP1.SGM
18SEP1
47908
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 180 / Friday, September 18, 2009 / Proposed Rules
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
survey verified a controlling depth of 27
feet in the Right Outside Quarter of the
Weehawken-Edgewater Channel where
vessels bound for ports north of New
York City would have to transit. As
published by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (ACOE) Institute for Water
Resources, vessels with drafts of up to
34 feet transit the Hudson River. In
calendar year 2006, there were 6,562
transits on the Hudson River between
the mouth of the Harlem River and
Waterford, NY by vessels with a draft of
27 feet or greater. Vessels with a draft
of 27 feet or greater would be required
to transit through the new channel
which is within the current boundaries
of Anchorage Ground No. 19.
Tug & Barge traffic within the harbor
has increased 37% since 1991.
Anchorage Ground No. 19 is the closest
Anchorage Ground to use when there is
no space for temporary anchoring
within the Upper New York Bay
Anchorage Grounds. Hence, these
vessels transit to Anchorage Ground No.
19 to await a berth, or orders, to
minimize fuel consumption and provide
an orderly flow of commerce within the
harbor and the New England region.
On October 14, 2008 the Captain of
the Port (COTP) issued an Advisory
Notice to all Tug & Barge operators and
the Hudson River Pilots. The COTP
notified the maritime community that in
accordance with 33 CFR 110.155(c)(5)(i)
he would only grant permission for
vessels to anchor on the western
boundary of the existing Anchorage
Ground No. 19 as an interim measure to
facilitate vessel transits through the area
while alternatives are explored.
This proposed rule would modify
Anchorage Ground No. 19 and remove
the need for vessels to transit through
the anchorage when the Army Corps
relocates Weehawken-Edgewater
Federal Channel to the Eastern portion
of the Hudson River. This proposed rule
will eliminate the unsafe transit
conditions of deep draft vessels
transiting through the current
Anchorage Ground No. 19.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
In this rule we propose to divide the
current Anchorage Ground No. 19 into
two Anchorage Grounds. Anchorage No.
19 East would be bounded by the
following points: 40°49′42.6″ N,
073°57′14.7″ W; thence to 40°49′45.9″ N,
073°57′22.0″ W; thence to 40°49′52.0″ N,
073°57′22.0″ W; thence to 40°50′08.3″ N,
073°57′10.8″ W; thence to 40°50′55.4″ N,
073°56′59.7″ W; thence to 40°51′02.5″ N,
073°56′57.4″ W; thence to 40°51′00.8″ N,
073°56′49.4″W; thence along the
shoreline to the point of origin (NAD
83). Anchorage No. 19 West would be
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:09 Sep 17, 2009
Jkt 217001
bounded by the following points:
40°46′56.3″ N, 073°59′42.2″ W; thence to
40°47′36.9″ N, 073°59′11.7″ W; thence to
40°49′31.3″ N, 073°57′43.8″ W; thence to
40°49′40.2″ N, 073°57′37.6″ W; thence to
40°49′52.4″ N, 073°57′37.6″ W; thence to
40°49′57.7″ N, 073°57′47.3″ W; thence to
40°49′32.2″ N, 073°58′12.9″ W; thence to
40°49′00.7″ N, 073°58′33.1″ W; thence to
40°48′28.7″ N, 073°58′53.8″ W; thence to
40°47′38.2″ N, 073°59′31.2″ W; thence to
40°47′02.7″ N, 073°59′57.4″ W; thence to
the point of origin (NAD 83).
The current Anchorage Ground No. 19
covers 1,352 acres. The proposed
Anchorage Ground No. 19 West would
cover 714.5 acres while the proposed
Anchorage Ground No. 19 East would
cover 185.5 acres. There would be 400
yards separating the two Anchorage
Grounds for vessel transits.
We propose to revise the regulations
specific to these two anchorage grounds
and change the current numbering
within this section. The new regulations
applicable to Anchorage 19 East and
West will appear in 33 CFR
110.155(c)(5)(iii)(A)–(E). The proposed
changes to the anchorage regulations are
detailed below.
We propose to discontinue the
requirement (currently at 33 CFR
110.155(c)(5)(i)) that all vessels obtain
permission from the Captain of the Port
prior to anchoring. The Captain of the
Port is currently not authorizing any
vessels to anchor within the proposed
revised Federal Channel. If the proposed
rule is finalized, then the Coast Guard
would no longer require this regulation
to stop vessels from anchoring within
the deep water being used for vessel
transits. Vessels may still be required to
shift their position into, or within, the
anchorage under the authority of 33 CFR
110.155(l)(12).
We propose to discontinue the
requirement (currently at 33 CFR
110.155(c)(5)(ii)) that each vessel report
its position to the Captain of the Port
immediately after anchoring. This
provision is no longer required due to
vessels already reporting their position
via their Automated Identification
System (AIS) equipment and/or radar
returns from the vessels received by the
Coast Guard and Vessel Traffic Service
(VTS).
We propose to revise the regulation
(currently at 33 CFR 110.155(c)(5)(iii))
that currently provides that no vessel
may conduct lightering operations in
these anchorage grounds without
permission from the Captain of the Port.
The revision will clarify that when
lightering is requested, the Captain of
the Port must be notified at least four
hours in advance of a vessel conducting
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
lightering operations as required by
§ 156.118 of this title.
We propose to discontinue the
requirement (currently at 33 CFR
110.155(c)(5)(iv)) that each vessel move
when the Captain of the Port notifies
them the Anchorage is required by naval
vessels. This regulation is no longer
required as the closest naval facility is
now located approximately 22 nautical
miles away at Earle, NJ. A copy of this
notice of proposed rulemaking will be
provided to the Navy seeking comment
regarding the disestablishment of the
Naval Anchorages in this area and
whether they intend to anchor vessels
on this part of the Hudson River at a
future time. Additionally, vessels may
still be required to shift their position
into, or within, the anchorage under
current Captain of the Port authority as
provided for in 33 CFR 110.155(l)(12).
We propose to revise the regulation
(currently at 33 CFR 110.155(c)(5)(v))
requiring 48 hours advance notice to the
Captain of the Port from vessels over
800 feet in length overall, or 40 feet in
draft, requesting to use the anchorage.
As discussed below, we propose to limit
this anchorage ground to tugs and/or
barges. Ships will not be authorized to
anchor in these proposed anchorage
grounds as they are already anchoring
outside of the Federal Channel, off
Yonkers, NY, approximately 5 to 10
nautical miles north of these proposed
revised anchorage grounds.
We propose to add a requirement that
any vessel conducting lightering or
bunkering operations shall display by
day a red flag (Pub 102; International
Code of Signals; signaling instructions)
at its mast head or at least 10 feet above
the upper deck if the vessel has no mast,
and by night the flag must be
illuminated by spotlight. These signals
shall be in addition to day signals, lights
and whistle signals as required by rules
30 (33 U.S.C. 2030) and 35 (33 U.S.C.
2035) of the Inland Navigation Rules
when at anchor in a general anchorage
area.
We propose to add a requirement that
within an anchorage, fishing and
navigation are prohibited within 500
yards of an anchored vessel displaying
a red flag by day or a red light by night.
We propose to add a regulation (the
proposed 33 CFR 110.155(c)(5)(iii)(D))
to specify that these anchorage grounds
are only authorized for use by tugs and/
or barges.
Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after
considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
E:\FR\FM\18SEP1.SGM
18SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 180 / Friday, September 18, 2009 / Proposed Rules
based on 13 of these statutes or
executive orders.
Regulatory Planning and Review
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. This conclusion is based
upon the fact that there are no fees,
permits, or specialized requirements for
the maritime industry to utilize these
anchorage areas. The regulation is solely
for the purpose of advancing safety of
maritime commerce.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this proposed rule would have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises
small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations that are independently
owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and
governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This proposed rule would affect
the following entities, some of which
might be small entities: The owners or
operators of vessels intending to transit
through the proposed Anchorage
Grounds 19 East and 19 West. Vessels
intending to anchor in the current
Anchorage Ground No. 19 would still be
able to anchor in the revised Anchorage
Ground No. 19 East or No. 19 West.
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 want to assist small entities in
understanding this proposed rule so that
they can better evaluate its effects on
them and participate in the rulemaking.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:09 Sep 17, 2009
Jkt 217001
If the rule would affect your small
business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please contact Mr. Jeff
Yunker at 718–354–4195. The Coast
Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about
this proposed rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.
Collection of Information
This proposed rule would call for no
new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520).
Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
effect on State or local governments and
would either preempt State law or
impose a substantial direct cost of
compliance on them. We have analyzed
this 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 would not
result in such an expenditure, we do
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not effect a
taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under
Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with
Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable
standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce
burden.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically
significant rule and would not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
47909
safety that might disproportionately
affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have
tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have
a substantial direct effect on one or
more Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have
determined that it is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under that order because
it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under Executive Order 12866 and is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy. The Administrator of the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs
has not designated it as a significant
energy action. Therefore, it does not
require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use
voluntary consensus standards in their
regulatory activities unless the agency
provides Congress, through the Office of
Management and Budget, with an
explanation of why using these
standards would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are
technical standards (e.g., specifications
of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling
procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies. This proposed rule
does not use technical standards.
Therefore, we did not consider the use
of voluntary consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023–01
and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination
that this action is one of a category of
E:\FR\FM\18SEP1.SGM
18SEP1
47910
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 180 / Friday, September 18, 2009 / Proposed Rules
actions which do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. This rule
involves changing the size of anchorage
grounds resulting in a reduction in the
overall size of the anchorage area. We
seek any comments or information that
may lead to the discovery of a
significant environmental impact from
this proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110
Anchorage grounds.
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. 0170.1.
2. Amend § 110.155, by revising
paragraph (c)(5) to read as follows:
§ 110.155
Port of New York.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(5) Anchorages No. 19 East and 19
West.
(i) Anchorage No. 19 East. All waters
of the Hudson River bound by the
following points: 40°49′42.6″ N,
073°57′14.7″ W; thence to 40°49′45.9″ N,
073°57′22.0″ W; thence to 40°49′52.0″ N,
073°57′22.0″ W; thence to 40°50′08.3″ N,
073°57′10.8″ W; thence to 40°50′55.4″ N,
073°56′59.7″ W; thence to 40°51′02.5″ N,
073°56′57.4″ W; thence to 40°51′00.8″ N,
073°56′49.4″ W; thence along the
shoreline to the point of origin (NAD
83).
(ii) Anchorage No. 19 West. All waters
of the Hudson River bound by the
following points: 40°46′56.3″ N,
073°59′42.2″ W; thence to 40°47′36.9″ N,
073°59′11.7″ W; thence to 40°49′31.3″ N,
073°57′43.8″ W; thence to 40°49′40.2″ N,
073°57′37.6″ W; thence to 40°49′52.4″ N,
073°57′37.6″ W; thence to 40°49′57.7″ N,
073°57′47.3″ W; thence to 40°49′32.2″ N,
073°58′12.9″ W; thence to 40°49′00.7″ N,
073°58′33.1″ W; thence to 40°48′28.7″ N,
073°58′53.8″ W; thence to 40°47′38.2″ N,
073°59′31.2″ W; thence to 40°47′02.7″ N,
073°59′57.4″ W; thence to the point of
origin.
(iii) The following regulations apply
to 33 CFR 110.155(c)(5)(i) and (ii):
(A) No vessel may conduct lightering
operations in these anchorage grounds
without permission from the Captain of
the Port. When lightering is authorized,
the Captain of the Port New York must
be notified at least four hours in
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:09 Sep 17, 2009
Jkt 217001
advance of a vessel conducting
lightering operations as required by
§ 156.118 of this title.
(B) Any vessel conducting lightering
or bunkering operations shall display by
day a red flag (Pub 102; International
Code of Signals; signaling instructions)
at its mast head or at least 10 feet above
the upper deck if the vessel has no mast,
and by night the flag must be
illuminated by spotlight. These signals
shall be in addition to day signals, lights
and whistle signals as required by rules
30 (33 U.S.C. 2030) and 35 (33 U.S.C.
2035) of the Inland Navigation Rules
when at anchor in a general anchorage
area.
(C) Within an anchorage, fishing and
navigation are prohibited within 500
yards of an anchored vessel displaying
a red flag by day or a red light by night.
(D) These anchorage grounds are only
authorized for use by tugs and/or barges.
(E) No vessel may occupy this
anchorage ground for a period of time in
excess of 96 hours without prior
approval of the Captain of the Port.
(F) All coordinates referenced use
datum: NAD 83.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: July 23, 2009.
Dale G. Gabel,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander,
First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E9–22457 Filed 9–17–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R08–OAR–2005–0463; FRL–8957–2]
Approval and Promulgation of State
Implementation Plans; State of
Colorado; Revisions to the Denver
Emergency Episode Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revisions to the Denver Emergency
Episode Plan submitted by the State of
Colorado on September 16, 1997. EPA
has determined that the Denver
Emergency Episode Plan revisions meet
the requirements for the prevention of
air pollution emergency episodes with
ambient concentrations of air pollutants
that may endanger public health and
welfare. In the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’
section of this Federal Register, EPA is
approving the State’s SIP revision as a
direct final rule without prior proposal
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial SIP revision and
anticipates no adverse comments. A
detailed rationale for the approval is set
forth in the preamble to the direct final
rule. If EPA receives no adverse
comments, EPA will not take further
action on this proposed rule. If EPA
receives adverse comments, EPA will
withdraw the direct final rule and it will
not take effect. EPA will address all
public comments in a subsequent final
rule based on this proposed rule. EPA
will not institute a second comment
period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at
this time. Please note that if EPA
receives adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be
severed from the remainder of the rule,
EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before October 19, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08–
OAR–2005–0463, by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: videtich.callie@epa.gov and
mastrangelo.domenico@epa.gov.
• Fax: (303) 312–6064 (please alert
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing
comments).
• Mail: Callie Videtich, Director, Air
Program, Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P–
AR, 1595 Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado
80202–1129.
• Hand Delivery: Callie Videtich,
Director, Air Program, Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8,
Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop,
Denver, Colorado 80202–1129. Such
deliveries are only accepted Monday
through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding Federal holidays. Special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Please see the direct final rule which is
located in the Rules section of this
Federal Register for detailed instruction
on how to submit comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Domenico Mastrangelo, Air Program,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595
Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202–
1129, (303) 312–6436,
mastrangelo.domenico@epa.gov.
See the
information provided in the Direct Final
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\18SEP1.SGM
18SEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 180 (Friday, September 18, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 47906-47910]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-22457]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 110
[Docket No. USCG 2008-1082]
RIN 1625-AA01
Anchorage Regulations; Port of New York
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
[[Page 47907]]
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to amend Anchorage Ground No. 19
located east of the Weehawken-Edgewater Federal Channel on the Hudson
River. This action is necessary to facilitate safe navigation and
provide safe and secure anchorages for vessels operating in the area.
This proposal is intended to increase the safety of life and property
of both the anchored vessels and those operating in the area as well as
to provide for the overall safe and efficient flow of commerce.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before November 17, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2008-1082 using any one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202-493-2251.
(3) 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.
(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is 202-366-9329.
To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or e-mail Mr. Jeff Yunker, Coast Guard Sector New York,
Waterways Management Division; telephone 718-354-4195, e-mail
Jeff.M.Yunker@uscg.mil. 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 materials. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.
Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2008-1082), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material
online (via https://www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or hand
delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a
comment online via https://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered
received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment.
If you fax, hand delivery, or mail your comment, it will be considered
as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the
Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and
a mailing address, an e-mail address, or a telephone number in the body
of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions
regarding your submission.
To submit your comment online, go to https://www.regulations.gov and
click on the ``submit a comment'' box, which will then become
highlighted in blue. In the ``Document Type'' drop-down menu select
``Proposed Rule'' and insert ``USCG-2008-1082'' in the ``Keyword'' box.
Click ``Search'' and then click on the balloon shape in the ``Actions''
column. If you submit your comments by mail or hand 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 comments 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 and may change
the rule based on your comments.
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 and
click on the ``Read comments'' box, which will then become highlighted
in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2008-1082'' and click
``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column.
You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on
the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an
agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket
Management Facility.
Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic form of 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 a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008 issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one using one of the four methods specified under
ADDRESSES. Please explain why you believe a public meeting 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
The Hudson River Pilots Association, through the Port of New York/
New Jersey Harbor Safety, Navigation and Operations Committee, has
requested that the Coast Guard revise the boundaries of Anchorage
Ground No. 19 which is located on the Hudson River, east of the
Weehawken-Edgewater Federal Channel and south of the George Washington
Bridge.
Due to severe recurring shoaling within the Weehawken-Edgewater
Federal Channel, the Hudson River Pilots requested and received
authorization from the Coast Guard and Army Corps of Engineers to pilot
vessels through the deeper and safer water located east of the
Weehawken-Edgewater Federal Channel which is within the current
boundaries of Anchorage Ground No. 19.
This proposed revision would divide Anchorage Ground 19 into two
separate Anchorage Areas; Anchorage Ground No. 19 West and Anchorage
Ground No. 19 East. This proposed change will allow deep draft vessels
to transit the deeper water without having to transit through the
current boundaries of Anchorage Ground 19. The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, in conjunction with this rulemaking, intends to relocate the
Weehawken-Edgewater Federal Channel to the East of its current
location. Under this proposed rule, The Weehawken-Edgewater Federal
Channel would be located between the proposed Anchorage Ground No. 19
West and Anchorage Ground No. 19 East. Due to shoaling, the March 2007
(ACOE)
[[Page 47908]]
survey verified a controlling depth of 27 feet in the Right Outside
Quarter of the Weehawken-Edgewater Channel where vessels bound for
ports north of New York City would have to transit. As published by the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) Institute for Water Resources,
vessels with drafts of up to 34 feet transit the Hudson River. In
calendar year 2006, there were 6,562 transits on the Hudson River
between the mouth of the Harlem River and Waterford, NY by vessels with
a draft of 27 feet or greater. Vessels with a draft of 27 feet or
greater would be required to transit through the new channel which is
within the current boundaries of Anchorage Ground No. 19.
Tug & Barge traffic within the harbor has increased 37% since 1991.
Anchorage Ground No. 19 is the closest Anchorage Ground to use when
there is no space for temporary anchoring within the Upper New York Bay
Anchorage Grounds. Hence, these vessels transit to Anchorage Ground No.
19 to await a berth, or orders, to minimize fuel consumption and
provide an orderly flow of commerce within the harbor and the New
England region.
On October 14, 2008 the Captain of the Port (COTP) issued an
Advisory Notice to all Tug & Barge operators and the Hudson River
Pilots. The COTP notified the maritime community that in accordance
with 33 CFR 110.155(c)(5)(i) he would only grant permission for vessels
to anchor on the western boundary of the existing Anchorage Ground No.
19 as an interim measure to facilitate vessel transits through the area
while alternatives are explored.
This proposed rule would modify Anchorage Ground No. 19 and remove
the need for vessels to transit through the anchorage when the Army
Corps relocates Weehawken-Edgewater Federal Channel to the Eastern
portion of the Hudson River. This proposed rule will eliminate the
unsafe transit conditions of deep draft vessels transiting through the
current Anchorage Ground No. 19.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
In this rule we propose to divide the current Anchorage Ground No.
19 into two Anchorage Grounds. Anchorage No. 19 East would be bounded
by the following points: 40[deg]49'42.6'' N, 073[deg]57'14.7'' W;
thence to 40[deg]49'45.9'' N, 073[deg]57'22.0'' W; thence to
40[deg]49'52.0'' N, 073[deg]57'22.0'' W; thence to 40[deg]50'08.3'' N,
073[deg]57'10.8'' W; thence to 40[deg]50'55.4'' N, 073[deg]56'59.7'' W;
thence to 40[deg]51'02.5'' N, 073[deg]56'57.4'' W; thence to
40[deg]51'00.8'' N, 073[deg]56'49.4''W; thence along the shoreline to
the point of origin (NAD 83). Anchorage No. 19 West would be bounded by
the following points: 40[deg]46'56.3'' N, 073[deg]59'42.2'' W; thence
to 40[deg]47'36.9'' N, 073[deg]59'11.7'' W; thence to 40[deg]49'31.3''
N, 073[deg]57'43.8'' W; thence to 40[deg]49'40.2'' N, 073[deg]57'37.6''
W; thence to 40[deg]49'52.4'' N, 073[deg]57'37.6'' W; thence to
40[deg]49'57.7'' N, 073[deg]57'47.3'' W; thence to 40[deg]49'32.2'' N,
073[deg]58'12.9'' W; thence to 40[deg]49'00.7'' N, 073[deg]58'33.1'' W;
thence to 40[deg]48'28.7'' N, 073[deg]58'53.8'' W; thence to
40[deg]47'38.2'' N, 073[deg]59'31.2'' W; thence to 40[deg]47'02.7'' N,
073[deg]59'57.4'' W; thence to the point of origin (NAD 83).
The current Anchorage Ground No. 19 covers 1,352 acres. The
proposed Anchorage Ground No. 19 West would cover 714.5 acres while the
proposed Anchorage Ground No. 19 East would cover 185.5 acres. There
would be 400 yards separating the two Anchorage Grounds for vessel
transits.
We propose to revise the regulations specific to these two
anchorage grounds and change the current numbering within this section.
The new regulations applicable to Anchorage 19 East and West will
appear in 33 CFR 110.155(c)(5)(iii)(A)-(E). The proposed changes to the
anchorage regulations are detailed below.
We propose to discontinue the requirement (currently at 33 CFR
110.155(c)(5)(i)) that all vessels obtain permission from the Captain
of the Port prior to anchoring. The Captain of the Port is currently
not authorizing any vessels to anchor within the proposed revised
Federal Channel. If the proposed rule is finalized, then the Coast
Guard would no longer require this regulation to stop vessels from
anchoring within the deep water being used for vessel transits. Vessels
may still be required to shift their position into, or within, the
anchorage under the authority of 33 CFR 110.155(l)(12).
We propose to discontinue the requirement (currently at 33 CFR
110.155(c)(5)(ii)) that each vessel report its position to the Captain
of the Port immediately after anchoring. This provision is no longer
required due to vessels already reporting their position via their
Automated Identification System (AIS) equipment and/or radar returns
from the vessels received by the Coast Guard and Vessel Traffic Service
(VTS).
We propose to revise the regulation (currently at 33 CFR
110.155(c)(5)(iii)) that currently provides that no vessel may conduct
lightering operations in these anchorage grounds without permission
from the Captain of the Port. The revision will clarify that when
lightering is requested, the Captain of the Port must be notified at
least four hours in advance of a vessel conducting lightering
operations as required by Sec. 156.118 of this title.
We propose to discontinue the requirement (currently at 33 CFR
110.155(c)(5)(iv)) that each vessel move when the Captain of the Port
notifies them the Anchorage is required by naval vessels. This
regulation is no longer required as the closest naval facility is now
located approximately 22 nautical miles away at Earle, NJ. A copy of
this notice of proposed rulemaking will be provided to the Navy seeking
comment regarding the disestablishment of the Naval Anchorages in this
area and whether they intend to anchor vessels on this part of the
Hudson River at a future time. Additionally, vessels may still be
required to shift their position into, or within, the anchorage under
current Captain of the Port authority as provided for in 33 CFR
110.155(l)(12).
We propose to revise the regulation (currently at 33 CFR
110.155(c)(5)(v)) requiring 48 hours advance notice to the Captain of
the Port from vessels over 800 feet in length overall, or 40 feet in
draft, requesting to use the anchorage. As discussed below, we propose
to limit this anchorage ground to tugs and/or barges. Ships will not be
authorized to anchor in these proposed anchorage grounds as they are
already anchoring outside of the Federal Channel, off Yonkers, NY,
approximately 5 to 10 nautical miles north of these proposed revised
anchorage grounds.
We propose to add a requirement that any vessel conducting
lightering or bunkering operations shall display by day a red flag (Pub
102; International Code of Signals; signaling instructions) at its mast
head or at least 10 feet above the upper deck if the vessel has no
mast, and by night the flag must be illuminated by spotlight. These
signals shall be in addition to day signals, lights and whistle signals
as required by rules 30 (33 U.S.C. 2030) and 35 (33 U.S.C. 2035) of the
Inland Navigation Rules when at anchor in a general anchorage area.
We propose to add a requirement that within an anchorage, fishing
and navigation are prohibited within 500 yards of an anchored vessel
displaying a red flag by day or a red light by night.
We propose to add a regulation (the proposed 33 CFR
110.155(c)(5)(iii)(D)) to specify that these anchorage grounds are only
authorized for use by tugs and/or barges.
Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses
[[Page 47909]]
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.
Regulatory Planning and Review
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. This
conclusion is based upon the fact that there are no fees, permits, or
specialized requirements for the maritime industry to utilize these
anchorage areas. The regulation is solely for the purpose of advancing
safety of maritime commerce.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. This proposed rule would affect the following
entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or
operators of vessels intending to transit through the proposed
Anchorage Grounds 19 East and 19 West. Vessels intending to anchor in
the current Anchorage Ground No. 19 would still be able to anchor in
the revised Anchorage Ground No. 19 East or No. 19 West.
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 want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact Mr. Jeff Yunker at 718-354-4195.
The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question
or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the
Coast Guard.
Collection of Information
This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this 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 would not result in such an
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not effect a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies. This proposed rule does not use technical standards.
Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of
[[Page 47910]]
actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This rule involves changing the size
of anchorage grounds resulting in a reduction in the overall size of
the anchorage area. We seek any comments or information that may lead
to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this
proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110
Anchorage grounds.
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.
0170.1.
2. Amend Sec. 110.155, by revising paragraph (c)(5) to read as
follows:
Sec. 110.155 Port of New York.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(5) Anchorages No. 19 East and 19 West.
(i) Anchorage No. 19 East. All waters of the Hudson River bound by
the following points: 40[deg]49[min]42.6[sec] N,
073[deg]57[min]14.7[sec] W; thence to 40[deg]49[min]45.9[sec] N,
073[deg]57[min]22.0[sec] W; thence to 40[deg]49[min]52.0[sec] N,
073[deg]57[min]22.0[sec] W; thence to 40[deg]50[min]08.3[sec] N,
073[deg]57[min]10.8[sec] W; thence to 40[deg]50[min]55.4[sec] N,
073[deg]56[min]59.7[sec] W; thence to 40[deg]51[min]02.5[sec] N,
073[deg]56[min]57.4[sec] W; thence to 40[deg]51[min]00.8[sec] N,
073[deg]56[min]49.4[sec] W; thence along the shoreline to the point of
origin (NAD 83).
(ii) Anchorage No. 19 West. All waters of the Hudson River bound by
the following points: 40[deg]46[min]56.3[sec] N,
073[deg]59[min]42.2[sec] W; thence to 40[deg]47[min]36.9[sec] N,
073[deg]59[min]11.7[sec] W; thence to 40[deg]49[min]31.3[sec] N,
073[deg]57[min]43.8[sec] W; thence to 40[deg]49[min]40.2[sec] N,
073[deg]57[min]37.6[sec] W; thence to 40[deg]49[min]52.4[sec] N,
073[deg]57[min]37.6[sec] W; thence to 40[deg]49[min]57.7[sec] N,
073[deg]57[min]47.3[sec] W; thence to 40[deg]49[min]32.2[sec] N,
073[deg]58[min]12.9[sec] W; thence to 40[deg]49[min]00.7[sec] N,
073[deg]58[min]33.1[sec] W; thence to 40[deg]48[min]28.7[sec] N,
073[deg]58[min]53.8[sec] W; thence to 40[deg]47[min]38.2[sec] N,
073[deg]59[min]31.2[sec] W; thence to 40[deg]47[min]02.7[sec] N,
073[deg]59[min]57.4[sec] W; thence to the point of origin.
(iii) The following regulations apply to 33 CFR 110.155(c)(5)(i)
and (ii):
(A) No vessel may conduct lightering operations in these anchorage
grounds without permission from the Captain of the Port. When
lightering is authorized, the Captain of the Port New York must be
notified at least four hours in advance of a vessel conducting
lightering operations as required by Sec. 156.118 of this title.
(B) Any vessel conducting lightering or bunkering operations shall
display by day a red flag (Pub 102; International Code of Signals;
signaling instructions) at its mast head or at least 10 feet above the
upper deck if the vessel has no mast, and by night the flag must be
illuminated by spotlight. These signals shall be in addition to day
signals, lights and whistle signals as required by rules 30 (33 U.S.C.
2030) and 35 (33 U.S.C. 2035) of the Inland Navigation Rules when at
anchor in a general anchorage area.
(C) Within an anchorage, fishing and navigation are prohibited
within 500 yards of an anchored vessel displaying a red flag by day or
a red light by night.
(D) These anchorage grounds are only authorized for use by tugs
and/or barges.
(E) No vessel may occupy this anchorage ground for a period of time
in excess of 96 hours without prior approval of the Captain of the
Port.
(F) All coordinates referenced use datum: NAD 83.
* * * * *
Dated: July 23, 2009.
Dale G. Gabel,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E9-22457 Filed 9-17-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
