Anchorage Regulations; Port of New York, 44917-44920 [2013-17921]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 143 / Thursday, July 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
12866, Executive Order 13563, the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
601–612), and the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4).
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct Agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, when regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety,
and other advantages; distributive
impacts; and equity). The Agency
believes that this proposed rule is not a
significant regulatory action as defined
by Executive Order 12866.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
requires Agencies to analyze regulatory
options that would minimize any
significant impact of a rule on small
entities. This proposed rule would not
affect the ban on the sale of viable turtle
eggs and live turtles with a carapace
length of less than 4 inches. Since it
would allow for, but not require, a
change in the disposition of any seized
turtles or eggs, it would not impose any
additional compliance costs. Further, it
could result in a small savings to the
Agency from reduced investigator
training for the care and humane
destruction of these animals. The
Agency proposes to certify that the
proposed rule if finalized would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Section 202(a) of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires
that Agencies prepare a written
statement, which includes an
assessment of anticipated costs and
benefits, before proposing ‘‘any rule that
includes any Federal mandate that may
result in the expenditure by State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $100,000,000
or more (adjusted annually for inflation)
in any one year.’’ The current threshold
after adjustment for inflation is $141
million, using the most current (2012)
Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross
Domestic Product. FDA does not expect
this proposed rule to result in any 1year expenditure that would meet or
exceed this amount.
VI. Federalism
FDA has analyzed this proposed rule
in accordance with the principles set
forth in Executive Order 13132. FDA
has determined that the proposed rule,
if finalized, would not contain policies
that have substantial direct effects on
the States, on the relationship between
the National Government and the States,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Accordingly, the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:49 Jul 24, 2013
Jkt 229001
44917
Agency tentatively concludes that the
proposed rule does not contain policies
that have federalism implications as
defined in the Executive order and,
consequently, a federalism summary
impact statement is not required.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
[Docket No. USCG–2013–0018]
This proposed rule contains no
collection of information. Therefore,
clearance by the Office of Management
and Budget under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 is not required.
RIN 1625–AA01
VIII. Comments
ACTION:
Interested persons may submit either
electronic comments regarding this
document to https://www.regulations.gov
or written comments to the Division of
Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It
is only necessary to send one set of
comments. Identify comments with the
docket number found in brackets in the
heading of this document. Received
comments may be seen in the Division
of Dockets Management between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and
will be posted to the docket at https://
www.regulations.gov.
The Coast Guard proposes to
establish and modify anchorage grounds
within the Port of New York. This
action is necessary to facilitate safe
navigation and provide safe and secure
anchorages for vessels operating in the
area. This proposed rule is intended to
increase the safety of life and property
of both the anchored vessels and those
operating in the area as well as 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 September 23, 2013. Requests
for public meetings must be received by
the Coast Guard on or before August 15,
2013.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number using any
one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202–493–2251.
(3) Mail or Delivery: 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. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. The telephone number is 202–
366–9329. See the ‘‘Public Participation
and Request for Comments’’ portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below for further instructions on
submitting comments. To avoid
duplication, please use only one of
these three methods.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this rule, call or
email Mr. Jeff Yunker, Sector New York,
Waterways Management Division, U.S.
Coast Guard; telephone 718–354–4195,
E-Mail Jeff.M.Yunker@uscg.mil or Chief
Craig Lapiejko, Coast Guard First
District Waterways Management
Branch, telephone 617–223–8385, EMail Craig.D.Lapiejko@uscg.mil. If you
have questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Barbara
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 1240
Communicable diseases, Public
health, Travel restrictions, Water
supply.
Therefore under the Public Health
Service Act and under authority
delegated to the Commissioner of Food
and Drugs, it is proposed that 21 CFR
part 1240 be amended as follows:
PART 1240—CONTROL OF
COMMUNICABLE DISEASES
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 1240 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 216, 243, 264, 271.
§ 1240.62
[Amended]
2. In § 1240.62, remove paragraph (c)
and redesignate paragraphs (d) and (e)
as paragraphs (c) and (d), respectively.
■
Dated: July 16, 2013.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013–17752 Filed 7–24–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 110
Anchorage Regulations; Port of New
York
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM
25JYP1
44918
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 143 / Thursday, July 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules
Hairston, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone 202–366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Acronyms
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
WAMS Waterways Analysis and
Management System
A. 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.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
1. Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking, 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 at 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, it will be considered
received by the Coast Guard when you
successfully transmit the comment. If
you fax, hand deliver, 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 email 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, type the
docket number [USCG–2013–0018] in
the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click
‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on ‘‘Submit a
Comment’’ on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
If you submit your comments by mail
or hand delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 8c 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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:49 Jul 24, 2013
Jkt 229001
2. 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, type the
docket number (USCG–2013–0018) in
the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click
‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket
Folder on the line associated with this
rulemaking. 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.
3. Privacy Act
C. Discussion of Proposed Rule
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).
4. Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for one on or before August 15, 2013,
using one of the 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.
B. Basis and Purpose
The legal basis for this rule is: 33
U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236, 2030,
2035, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05–1; and
Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1, which
collectively authorize the Coast Guard
to define anchorage grounds.
This proposal was assessed as part of
a Waterways Analysis and Management
System (WAMS) review of the New
York Vessel Traffic Lanes and
Approaches to New York Harbor with
the intent of optimizing the waterway
and aids to navigation. The Coast Guard
received six responses to the survey
included in the WAMS review. The
survey responses reported that
Anchorage Ground No. 27(ii) Romer
Shoal and Anchorage Ground No. 27(iii)
Flynns Knoll, near Sandy Hook, NJ are
not used because their locations leave
vessels exposed to swells and that there
are safer anchorage grounds available in
Lower New York and Sandy Hook Bays.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
The New York District Army Corps of
Engineers (ACOE) was consulted on this
regulation and had no objections.
In addition, the Hudson River Pilots
Association requested the Coast Guard
establish a federal anchorage ground
near Yonkers, NY on the Hudson River.
The purpose of this rule is to
accommodate ship traffic awaiting
berthing space, favorable weather,
daylight hours, tidal conditions for
transits, and/or other unforeseen
conditions to improve navigation safety;
clarify positions of current areas being
used for vessels anchoring; and reduce
regulatory burden by disestablishing
anchorage grounds that are no longer
used and therefore deemed unnecessary.
Sfmt 4702
We propose to establish a new
Anchorage Ground No. 18 in the
Hudson River west of Yonkers, NY. The
anchorage ground would be
approximately 0.22 square nautical
miles (2,010 yards long by 420 to 470
yards wide). The eastern boundary of
this anchorage ground would be about
470 yards west of the Yonkers
Municipal Pier. The Hudson River
Pilots requested this anchorage ground
be established for the following reasons:
a) for vessels waiting favorable tides
and/or daylight to transit to upstream
ports on the Hudson River, b) for vessels
waiting anchorage space in New York
Harbor to take on bunker fuel and/or
stores, and c) to relieve congestion in
New York Harbor anchorage grounds.
The proposed anchorage ground would
formalize and codify the current
anchoring practices of commercial
vessels in Yonkers, NY. The anchorage
ground would adequately accommodate
two ships at a time and would provide
sufficient maneuvering clearance for
ships entering or departing the
anchorage ground. An area
approximately 1,030 feet east of this
anchorage ground would be in place for
vessels to transit and still not interfere
with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
New York District designated 600 foot
wide federal navigation channel. This
anchorage ground would only be
authorized for usage by ships.
We propose to reduce the size of the
current Anchorage Ground No. 17 by an
area of approximately 0.07 square
nautical miles (910 yards long by 300
yards wide). This proposed reduction at
the northeast corner of the current
Anchorage Ground No. 17 is intended to
limit confusion caused by the
overlapping of the southwest corner of
the proposed new Anchorage Ground
No. 18 with the current northeast corner
of Anchorage Ground No. 17.
E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM
25JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 143 / Thursday, July 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules
We propose to update the description
of the Anchorage Ground No. 27(i)
boundary in the Atlantic Ocean. This is
necessary due to the disestablishment of
Sandy Hook Light 15, which was used
as a reference point. We would update
the other anchorage ground coordinates
to correspond to what is currently
displayed on the navigation charts.
Additionally, we would re-designate the
anchorage ground as Anchorage Ground
No. 27 due to the proposed
disestablishment of Anchorage Ground
No. 27(ii) at 33 CFR 110.155(f)(2)(ii) and
Anchorage Ground No. 27(iii) at 33 CFR
110.155(f)(2)(iii).
We propose to disestablish Anchorage
Ground No. 27(ii) Romer Shoal and
Anchorage Ground No. 27(iii) Flynns
Knoll, near Sandy Hook, NJ. The
irregular shaped area of Anchorage
Ground No. 27(ii) Romer Shoal is about
4.08 square nautical miles (5.5 nautical
miles long by 0.3 to 1.3 nautical miles
wide). The irregular bowl-shaped area of
Anchorage Ground No. 27(iii) Flynns
Knoll is about 3.35 square nautical
miles. These proposals were reviewed
as part of a Waterways Analysis and
Management System (WAMS) review of
the New York Vessel Traffic Lanes and
Approaches to New York Harbor with
the intent of optimizing the waterway
and the aids to navigation therein. The
Coast Guard received six responses to
the survey included in the WAMS
review. The survey responses reported
that these two anchorage grounds are
not used because their locations leave
vessels exposed to swells and there are
safer anchorage grounds available in the
Lower New York and Sandy Hook Bays.
These anchorage grounds provide better
protection from impacts of winds and
seas on anchored vessels than the
offshore Anchorage Grounds No. 27(ii)
and No. 27(iii).
D. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after
considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes or
executive orders.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
1. 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, as supplemented
by Executive Order 13563, Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review, and
does not require an assessment of
potential costs and benefits under
section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866
or under section 1 of Executive Order
13563. The Office of Management and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:49 Jul 24, 2013
Jkt 229001
44919
Budget has not reviewed it under those
Orders.
We expect minimal additional cost
impacts to the industry because this rule
is not imposing fees, permits, or
specialized requirements for the
maritime industry to utilize these
anchorage grounds. The effect of this
rule would not be significant as it
removes two obsolete anchorage
grounds that are no longer used and
codifies one anchorage ground that is
currently used by commercial vessels as
a general anchorage area. This would
represent an improvement to the safety
of vessels using the anchorage grounds,
facilitate the transit of deep draft vessels
through the adjoining waterways, and
increase mariner awareness that they
can expect to find anchored vessels in
the vicinity.
qualifies and how and to what degree
this rule would economically affect it.
2. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended,
requires federal agencies to consider the
potential impact of regulations on small
entities during rulemaking. 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 would affect the
following entities, some of which might
be small entities: The owners or
operators of vessels that have a need to
anchor or transit through the lower
Hudson River near Yonkers, NY; and
Lower New York Bay near Romer Shoal
and Flynns Knoll near Sandy Hook, NJ.
This proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for
the following reasons: This rule would
only codify current navigation practices
already in use by commercial vessels in
these areas. The anchorage grounds
would not affect vessels’ schedules or
their abilities to freely transit near these
areas within the Captain of the Port New
York zone. The anchorage grounds
would not impose any monetary
expenses on small entities because it
does not require them to purchase any
new equipment, hire additional crew, or
make any other expenditures.
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
4. Collection of Information
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
3. 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. 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 in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT, above. 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.
This proposed rule will not call for a
new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520).
5. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. We have
analyzed this proposed rule under that
Order and determined that this rule
does not have implications for
federalism.
6. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places or vessels.
7. 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 (adjusted for inflation) 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.
E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM
25JYP1
44920
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 143 / Thursday, July 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules
8. Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not cause a
taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under
Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with
Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
9. 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.
10. Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks
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.
11. 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.
12. Energy Effects
This proposed rule is not a
‘‘significant energy action’’ under
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
13. Technical Standards
This proposed rule does not use
technical standards. Therefore, we did
not consider the use of voluntary
consensus standards.
14. 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
actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:49 Jul 24, 2013
Jkt 229001
the human environment. This proposed
rule involves disestablishing two
unused anchorage grounds, establishing
one anchorage ground, updates the
coordinates of one anchorage ground,
and reduces the size of one anchorage
ground resulting in a reduction in the
overall size of the anchorage grounds by
7.28 square nautical miles in the
Captain of the Port New York zone. This
rule may be categorically excluded from
further review under paragraph 34(f) of
Figure 2–1 of the Commandant
Instruction. A preliminary
environmental analysis checklist is
available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES. 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:
073°54′58.0″ W; thence to the point of
origin (NAD 83).
(i) This anchorage ground is reserved
for use by ships only.
(ii) [Reserved]
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
(2) Anchorage No. 27. Atlantic
Ocean—
(i) All waters bound by the following
points: 40°28′49.27″ N, 074°00′12.13″
W; thence to 40°28′52.12″ N,
074°00′00.56″ W; thence to 40°28′40.88″
N, 073°58′51.95″ W; thence to
40°25′57.91″ N, 073°54′55.56″ W; thence
to 40°23′45.55″ N, 073°54′54.89″ W;
thence to 40°23′45.38″ N, 073°58′32.10″
W; thence along the shoreline to the
point of origin (NAD 83).
(ii) [Reserved]
(iii) [Reserved]
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: July 2, 2013.
V.B. Gifford,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting
Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2013–17921 Filed 7–24–13; 8:45 am]
PART 110—ANCHORAGE
REGULATIONS
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
1. The authority citation for part 110
continues to read as follows:
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
■
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. In § 110.155 revise paragraphs (c)
and (f) to read as follows:
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Parts 300 and 679
■
§ 110.155
RIN 0648–BA37
Port of New York.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(2) Anchorage No. 17. All waters of
the Hudson River bound by the
following points: 40°56′26.66″ N,
073°55′12.06″ W; thence to 40°56′22.54″
N, 073°54′49.77″ W; thence to
40°55′56.00″ N, 073°54′58.00″ W; thence
to 40°55′54.15″ N, 073°54′46.96″ W;
thence to 40°54′18.43″ N, 073°55′21.12″
W; thence to 40°52′27.59″ N,
073°56′14.32″ W; thence to 40°51′34.20″
N, 073°56′52.64″ W; thence to
40°51′20.76″ N, 073°57′31.75″ W; thence
along the shoreline to the point of origin
(NAD 83).
(i) When the use of Anchorage No. 17
is required by naval vessels, the vessels
anchored therein shall move when the
Captain of the Port directs them.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) * * *
(4) Anchorage No. 18. All waters of
the Hudson River bound by the
following points: 40°56′54.0″ N,
073°54′40.0″ W; thence to 40°56′51.0″ N,
073°54′24.0″ W; thence to 40°55′53.0″ N,
073°54′40.0″ W; thence to 40°55′56.0″ N,
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
[Docket No. 101027534–3546–01]
Pacific Halibut Fisheries; Catch
Sharing Plan for Guided Sport and
Commercial Fisheries in Alaska;
Extension of Comment Period
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule, extension of
comment period.
AGENCY:
NMFS is extending the date
by which public comments are due
concerning proposed regulations to
implement a catch sharing plan for the
guided sport and commercial fisheries
for Pacific halibut in waters of
International Pacific Halibut
Commission (IPHC) Regulatory Areas 2C
(Southeast Alaska) and 3A (Central Gulf
of Alaska). NMFS published the
proposed rule on June 28, 2013, and
announced that the public comment
period would end on August 12, 2013.
With this notice, NMFS is extending the
comment period to August 26, 2013, to
provide additional time for stakeholders
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM
25JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 143 (Thursday, July 25, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44917-44920]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17921]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 110
[Docket No. USCG-2013-0018]
RIN 1625-AA01
Anchorage Regulations; Port of New York
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish and modify anchorage
grounds within the Port of New York. This action is necessary to
facilitate safe navigation and provide safe and secure anchorages for
vessels operating in the area. This proposed rule is intended to
increase the safety of life and property of both the anchored vessels
and those operating in the area as well as 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 September 23, 2013. Requests for public meetings
must be received by the Coast Guard on or before August 15, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number using
any one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202-493-2251.
(3) Mail or Delivery: 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. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-366-9329. See the
``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for further instructions on
submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of these
three methods.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Mr. Jeff Yunker, Sector New York, Waterways Management
Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 718-354-4195, E-Mail
Jeff.M.Yunker@uscg.mil or Chief Craig Lapiejko, Coast Guard First
District Waterways Management Branch, telephone 617-223-8385, E-Mail
Craig.D.Lapiejko@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call Barbara
[[Page 44918]]
Hairston, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Acronyms
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
WAMS Waterways Analysis and Management System
A. 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.
1. Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, 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 at
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, it
will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully
transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, 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 email 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,
type the docket number [USCG-2013-0018] in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8[frac12] 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.
2. 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,
type the docket number (USCG-2013-0018) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. 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.
3. 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).
4. Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one on or before August 15, 2013, using one of the 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.
B. Basis and Purpose
The legal basis for this rule is: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236,
2030, 2035, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05-1; and Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1, which collectively authorize the Coast Guard to
define anchorage grounds.
This proposal was assessed as part of a Waterways Analysis and
Management System (WAMS) review of the New York Vessel Traffic Lanes
and Approaches to New York Harbor with the intent of optimizing the
waterway and aids to navigation. The Coast Guard received six responses
to the survey included in the WAMS review. The survey responses
reported that Anchorage Ground No. 27(ii) Romer Shoal and Anchorage
Ground No. 27(iii) Flynns Knoll, near Sandy Hook, NJ are not used
because their locations leave vessels exposed to swells and that there
are safer anchorage grounds available in Lower New York and Sandy Hook
Bays.
The New York District Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) was consulted
on this regulation and had no objections.
In addition, the Hudson River Pilots Association requested the
Coast Guard establish a federal anchorage ground near Yonkers, NY on
the Hudson River.
The purpose of this rule is to accommodate ship traffic awaiting
berthing space, favorable weather, daylight hours, tidal conditions for
transits, and/or other unforeseen conditions to improve navigation
safety; clarify positions of current areas being used for vessels
anchoring; and reduce regulatory burden by disestablishing anchorage
grounds that are no longer used and therefore deemed unnecessary.
C. Discussion of Proposed Rule
We propose to establish a new Anchorage Ground No. 18 in the Hudson
River west of Yonkers, NY. The anchorage ground would be approximately
0.22 square nautical miles (2,010 yards long by 420 to 470 yards wide).
The eastern boundary of this anchorage ground would be about 470 yards
west of the Yonkers Municipal Pier. The Hudson River Pilots requested
this anchorage ground be established for the following reasons: a) for
vessels waiting favorable tides and/or daylight to transit to upstream
ports on the Hudson River, b) for vessels waiting anchorage space in
New York Harbor to take on bunker fuel and/or stores, and c) to relieve
congestion in New York Harbor anchorage grounds. The proposed anchorage
ground would formalize and codify the current anchoring practices of
commercial vessels in Yonkers, NY. The anchorage ground would
adequately accommodate two ships at a time and would provide sufficient
maneuvering clearance for ships entering or departing the anchorage
ground. An area approximately 1,030 feet east of this anchorage ground
would be in place for vessels to transit and still not interfere with
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers New York District designated 600 foot
wide federal navigation channel. This anchorage ground would only be
authorized for usage by ships.
We propose to reduce the size of the current Anchorage Ground No.
17 by an area of approximately 0.07 square nautical miles (910 yards
long by 300 yards wide). This proposed reduction at the northeast
corner of the current Anchorage Ground No. 17 is intended to limit
confusion caused by the overlapping of the southwest corner of the
proposed new Anchorage Ground No. 18 with the current northeast corner
of Anchorage Ground No. 17.
[[Page 44919]]
We propose to update the description of the Anchorage Ground No.
27(i) boundary in the Atlantic Ocean. This is necessary due to the
disestablishment of Sandy Hook Light 15, which was used as a reference
point. We would update the other anchorage ground coordinates to
correspond to what is currently displayed on the navigation charts.
Additionally, we would re-designate the anchorage ground as Anchorage
Ground No. 27 due to the proposed disestablishment of Anchorage Ground
No. 27(ii) at 33 CFR 110.155(f)(2)(ii) and Anchorage Ground No. 27(iii)
at 33 CFR 110.155(f)(2)(iii).
We propose to disestablish Anchorage Ground No. 27(ii) Romer Shoal
and Anchorage Ground No. 27(iii) Flynns Knoll, near Sandy Hook, NJ. The
irregular shaped area of Anchorage Ground No. 27(ii) Romer Shoal is
about 4.08 square nautical miles (5.5 nautical miles long by 0.3 to 1.3
nautical miles wide). The irregular bowl-shaped area of Anchorage
Ground No. 27(iii) Flynns Knoll is about 3.35 square nautical miles.
These proposals were reviewed as part of a Waterways Analysis and
Management System (WAMS) review of the New York Vessel Traffic Lanes
and Approaches to New York Harbor with the intent of optimizing the
waterway and the aids to navigation therein. The Coast Guard received
six responses to the survey included in the WAMS review. The survey
responses reported that these two anchorage grounds are not used
because their locations leave vessels exposed to swells and there are
safer anchorage grounds available in the Lower New York and Sandy Hook
Bays. These anchorage grounds provide better protection from impacts of
winds and seas on anchored vessels than the offshore Anchorage Grounds
No. 27(ii) and No. 27(iii).
D. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes or executive orders.
1. 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,
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
We expect minimal additional cost impacts to the industry because
this rule is not imposing fees, permits, or specialized requirements
for the maritime industry to utilize these anchorage grounds. The
effect of this rule would not be significant as it removes two obsolete
anchorage grounds that are no longer used and codifies one anchorage
ground that is currently used by commercial vessels as a general
anchorage area. This would represent an improvement to the safety of
vessels using the anchorage grounds, facilitate the transit of deep
draft vessels through the adjoining waterways, and increase mariner
awareness that they can expect to find anchored vessels in the
vicinity.
2. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. 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 would affect the following entities, some of
which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels that
have a need to anchor or transit through the lower Hudson River near
Yonkers, NY; and Lower New York Bay near Romer Shoal and Flynns Knoll
near Sandy Hook, NJ.
This proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: This
rule would only codify current navigation practices already in use by
commercial vessels in these areas. The anchorage grounds would not
affect vessels' schedules or their abilities to freely transit near
these areas within the Captain of the Port New York zone. The anchorage
grounds would not impose any monetary expenses on small entities
because it does not require them to purchase any new equipment, hire
additional crew, or make any other expenditures.
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.
3. 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. 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 in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT, above. 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.
4. Collection of Information
This proposed rule will not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520).
5. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
determined that this rule does not have implications for federalism.
6. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.
7. 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 (adjusted for
inflation) 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.
[[Page 44920]]
8. Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not cause a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.
9. 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.
10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks
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.
11. 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.
12. Energy Effects
This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.
13. Technical Standards
This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
14. 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 actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule
involves disestablishing two unused anchorage grounds, establishing one
anchorage ground, updates the coordinates of one anchorage ground, and
reduces the size of one anchorage ground resulting in a reduction in
the overall size of the anchorage grounds by 7.28 square nautical miles
in the Captain of the Port New York zone. This rule may be
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(f) of
Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. A preliminary environmental
analysis checklist is available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. 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
0
1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471; 1221 through 1236, 2030, 2035, 2071;
33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.
0
2. In Sec. 110.155 revise paragraphs (c) and (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 110.155 Port of New York.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) Anchorage No. 17. All waters of the Hudson River bound by the
following points: 40[deg]56'26.66'' N, 073[deg]55'12.06'' W; thence to
40[deg]56'22.54'' N, 073[deg]54'49.77'' W; thence to 40[deg]55'56.00''
N, 073[deg]54'58.00'' W; thence to 40[deg]55'54.15'' N,
073[deg]54'46.96'' W; thence to 40[deg]54'18.43'' N, 073[deg]55'21.12''
W; thence to 40[deg]52'27.59'' N, 073[deg]56'14.32'' W; thence to
40[deg]51'34.20'' N, 073[deg]56'52.64'' W; thence to 40[deg]51'20.76''
N, 073[deg]57'31.75'' W; thence along the shoreline to the point of
origin (NAD 83).
(i) When the use of Anchorage No. 17 is required by naval vessels,
the vessels anchored therein shall move when the Captain of the Port
directs them.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) * * *
(4) Anchorage No. 18. All waters of the Hudson River bound by the
following points: 40[deg]56'54.0'' N, 073[deg]54'40.0'' W; thence to
40[deg]56'51.0'' N, 073[deg]54'24.0'' W; thence to 40[deg]55'53.0'' N,
073[deg]54'40.0'' W; thence to 40[deg]55'56.0'' N, 073[deg]54'58.0'' W;
thence to the point of origin (NAD 83).
(i) This anchorage ground is reserved for use by ships only.
(ii) [Reserved]
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(2) Anchorage No. 27. Atlantic Ocean--
(i) All waters bound by the following points: 40[deg]28'49.27'' N,
074[deg]00'12.13'' W; thence to 40[deg]28'52.12'' N, 074[deg]00'00.56''
W; thence to 40[deg]28'40.88'' N, 073[deg]58'51.95'' W; thence to
40[deg]25'57.91'' N, 073[deg]54'55.56'' W; thence to 40[deg]23'45.55''
N, 073[deg]54'54.89'' W; thence to 40[deg]23'45.38'' N,
073[deg]58'32.10'' W; thence along the shoreline to the point of origin
(NAD 83).
(ii) [Reserved]
(iii) [Reserved]
* * * * *
Dated: July 2, 2013.
V.B. Gifford,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, First Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2013-17921 Filed 7-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
