Regulated Navigation Area; Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Inner Harbor Navigation Canal, New Orleans, LA, 21129-21137 [2014-08265]
Download as PDF
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
The normal operation schedule for the
bridge is in 33 CFR 117.1041, which
specifies that the draws of each bridge
across the Duwamish Waterway shall
open on signal, except the draw of the
South Park highway bridge, mile 3.8,
which need not be opened for the
passage of vessels from 6:30 a.m. to 8:00
a.m. and 3:30 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding Federal
holidays. The South Park highway
bridge shall open on the specified signal
of one prolonged blast followed quickly
by one short blast and one prolonged
blast. When fog prevails by day or by
night, the drawtender of the South Park
highway bridge, after giving the
acknowledging signal to open, shall toll
a bell continuously during the approach
and passage of vessels.
The deviation period is effective from
12:01 a.m. on March 30, 2014 to 11:59
p.m. on September 1, 2014, and allows
the drawbridge to remain closed to
mariners needing a full channel, double
bascule leaf drawbridge opening unless
12 hours advance notice is provided.
Mariners that only require a single leaf
half channel drawbridge opening will be
given an opening upon signal. A
drawtender will be present 24 hours a
day, 7 days week. To request a single
leaf opening, mariners may utilize any
of the following methods: (1) via VHF
maritime radio channel 13; (2)
telephone, with the numbers posted in
the Notice to Mariners; (3) one
prolonged blast followed quickly by one
short blast and one prolonged blast. All
double leaf openings require 12 hour
notification by VHF maritime radio
channel 13 or telephone; double leaf
openings will not be granted when
requested by signal.
Waterborne traffic on this stretch of
the Duwamish waterway consists of
vessels ranging from small pleasure
craft, sailboats, small tribal fishing
boats, and commercial tug and tow, and
mega yachts. Vessels able to pass
through the bridge in the closed
positions may do so at anytime but are
advised to use caution as the area
surrounding the bridge has numerous
construction craft and equipment in the
water. The bridge will not be able to
open for emergencies and there is no
immediate alternate route for vessels to
pass. The Coast Guard will also inform
the users of the waterways through our
Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners
of the change in operating schedule for
the bridge so that vessels can arrange
their transits to minimize any impact
caused by the temporary deviation.
In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e),
the drawbridge must return to its regular
operating schedule immediately at the
end of the effective period of this
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Apr 14, 2014
Jkt 232001
temporary deviation. This deviation
from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.
Dated: March 30, 2014.
Steven M. Fischer,
Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2014–08550 Filed 4–14–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG–2009–0139]
RIN 1625–A11
Regulated Navigation Area; Gulf
Intracoastal Waterway, Inner Harbor
Navigation Canal, New Orleans, LA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
This final rule revises an
existing interim rule to permanently
establish a Regulated Navigation Area
(RNA) protecting floodwalls and levees
in the New Orleans area from possible
damage caused by vessels that can
breakaway during certain tropical storm
and hurricane conditions. This final
rule also addresses comments from the
public on the previously published
Supplemental Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (SNPRM) and economic
review for this RNA. This action is
necessary for the flood protection of
high-risk areas throughout the Greater
New Orleans Area when a tropical event
threatens to approach and impact the
area.
SUMMARY:
This rule is effective April 15,
2014. This rule has been enforced with
actual notice since April 1, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in
this preamble are part of docket [USCG–
2009–0139]. To view documents
mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://
www.regulations.gov, type the docket
number 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this rule, call or
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
21129
email LCDR Brandon Sullivan, Sector
New Orleans Waterways Division, U.S.
Coast Guard; telephone (504) 365–2281,
email Brandon.J.Sullivan@uscg.mil. If
you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call
Cheryl F. Collins 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
SNPRM Supplemental Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
CPRA Coastal Protection Restoration
Authority
HSDRRS Hurricane Storm Damage Risk
Reduction System
USACE United States Army Corps of
Engineers
COTP Captain of the Port
IHNC Inner Harbor Navigation Canal
GIWW Gulf Intracoastal Waterway
MM Mile Marker
RNA Regulated Navigational Area
A. Regulatory History and Information
The Coast Guard is issuing this final
rule without a full 30-day notice
pursuant to authority under section 4(a)
of the Administrative Procedures Act
(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553). Under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists for making this rule
effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. This
final rule makes permanent the RNA
specific to safety measures during
hurricane season which is June 1
through November 30 each year. The
existing interim rule for this RNA has
been effective for approximately four
years and requires necessary changes,
based on the completed flood protection
system, through this final rule for the
approaching 2014 hurricane season.
This final rule also allows for possible
planned deviation from the RNA
through a Hurricane Operations Plan
submitted at least one month before the
season begins, which is May 1, 2014 for
this year. Throughout the rulemaking
process for this RNA, those regulated by
the rule, specifically industry and
waterway users, have participated in
this rulemaking through public
meetings and the public comment
process and are fully aware that this
RNA will be in place for the 2014
hurricane season. It is unnecessary to
further delay the updated RNA by
waiting for a full 30 days notice to take
place through publication in the Federal
Register.
On June 8, 2010, the Coast Guard
published an interim rule entitled
‘‘Regulated Navigation Area; Gulf
E:\FR\FM\15APR1.SGM
15APR1
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
21130
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Intracoastal Waterway, Inner Harbor
Navigation Canal, New Orleans, LA’’ in
the FR (75 FR 32275) and provided
responses to all comments to the
original Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM), which published May 14, 2009
in the Federal Register (74 FR 22722).
That interim rule is codified and the
RNA is currently enforced under 33 CFR
165.838. The intent behind establishing
the RNA through an interim rulemaking
was to put into place interim
restrictions providing the necessary
protections at the time and until the
final floodwalls and storm protection
system were completed and final
specifications established and received.
The interim rule stated that the Coast
Guard would reevaluate the RNA upon
completion of the United States Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE) Hurricane
and Storm Damage Risk Reduction
System (HSDRRS). With the HSDRRS
being fully operational for the 2013
hurricane season, the Coast Guard, with
input from Federal, State and local
agencies determined that the RNA is
still necessary.
On June 7, 2013, the Coast Guard
published a SNPRM entitled ‘‘Regulated
Navigation Area; Gulf Intracoastal
Waterway, Inner Harbor Navigation
Canal, Harvey Canal, Algiers Canal,
New Orleans, LA’’ in the Federal
Register (78 FR 34293). In the SNPRM,
the Coast Guard proposed changes to
the requirements of the RNA from those
in the interim rule. In developing these
requirements, the Coast Guard
established a work group comprised of
Federal, State and local flood protection
authorities, and port and industry
representatives. Through this work
group, public meetings were held and
input from the meetings helped to
address the protections still necessary
and modify the restrictions in the
interim rule to provide those
protections. The minutes from those
meetings are available for public
viewing on the docket. In addition to
the work-group meetings, the Coast
Guard considered lessons learned from
implementing the RNA provisions of the
interim rule during Hurricane Isaac in
2012. Also, while drafting the SNPRM,
the Coast Guard met formally with the
USACE six times to (1) determine the
risks presented by vessels to the
HSDRRS, (2) understand the conditions
under which such risks occur, and (3)
to ensure that a final RNA aligns with
USACE operations and concerns.
The Coast Guard also held a public
meeting on June 20, 2013 at 5 p.m. local
time, to receive comments on the
SNPRM. Comments received at the
public meeting were supportive of the
overall collaborative planning process,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:01 Apr 14, 2014
Jkt 232001
and did not contain any specific content
requiring a Coast Guard response in this
Final Rule. A transcript of that public
meeting was uploaded to the public
docket. During the SNPRM comment
period, the Coast Guard also received 18
written comments from seven entities
on the proposed changes within the
public docket, which are addressed in
this final rule below. These comments
did not result in any substantial changes
to the requirements of the RNA in this
final rule.
In January 2013, the Coast Guard also
requested information on a voluntary
basis from 10 local industry and
waterway users operating within the
RNA. This information was requested in
the form a questionnaire available in the
public docket accessed as directed
under ADDRESSES. The Coast Guard
worked with an assigned Coast Guard
economist to develop the questionnaire,
which was used to gather information
on the possible economic impacts—both
cost and benefit—that the proposed
changes may impose. These questions
included but were not limited to
assessing the economic impact of
requiring mooring arrangements similar
to those required under 33 CFR 165.803;
developing and submitting mooring
arrangements as an alternate to those
listed under 33 CFR 165.803; evacuating
all vessels out of the RNA during
enforcement periods; requiring weekly
inspections, continuous surveillance,
and certain equipment if a facility
wishes to keep vessels within the RNA
during enforcement; and requiring an
annual Hurricane Operations Plan from
facilities desiring to keep vessels within
certain areas of the RNA as a
preplanned deviation from the RNA
restriction. The existing RNA, the
proposed changes to the RNA in the
SNPRM, and this final rule restrict all
vessels from entering or remaining in
any part of the designated RNA during
enforcement. The existing RNA, the
RNA as proposed in the SNPRM and
this final rule also provide an avenue for
vessels and facilities to pre-plan a
deviation from RNA enforcement.
Comments received at public meetings
and during comment periods
throughout the rulemaking process for
this RNA support the opportunity to
deviate if a facility and/or vessel show
that they can do so safely and securely.
The current RNA affords vessels and
facilities the opportunity to deviate from
the restriction through applying for an
annual waiver and the option to deviate
is provided for in this final rule through
submitting an Annual Hurricane
Operations Plan. This plan replaces the
current waiver requirement.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
B. Basis and Purpose
The legal basis for this rule is the
Coast Guard’s authority to establish
regulated navigation areas and other
limited access areas: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46
U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1,
6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat.
2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
The purpose of this final rule is to
permanently establish the RNA to
protect floodwalls and levees in the
New Orleans area from possible storm
damage caused by moored barges and
vessels, and to prevent flooding in the
New Orleans area that could result from
that storm damage.
This final rule permanently
establishes the RNA now that the flood
protection system is complete. This
final rule responds to the risks at hand
using knowledge and expertise and
addressing the needs uncovered
throughout this rulemaking process
including the NPRM, the interim rule,
the SNPRM, and input and participation
from federal, state, and local agencies as
well as public and industry
stakeholders. Without this RNA, when
navigational structures within the
HSDRRS are to be closed because of an
approaching storm, the Coast Guard
would have to individually order each
vessel within the subject area to depart
or to comply with specific mooring
arrangements. Issuing individual orders
places a significant administrative
burden on the Coast Guard during a
time when important pre-storm
preparations must also be made. By
creating this rule, the Coast Guard is
informing the public in advance of the
restrictions and requirements for vessels
in the area during periods of
enforcement, enabling vessel and
facility operators to make seasonal plans
and arrangements for RNA evacuation
and thus eliminating the need for
individual Captain of the Port (COTP)
Orders.
An additional purpose of this RNA is
to aid the Coast Guard in the early
identification of vessels that may not
depart the RNA when required. Under
PWSA, the Coast Guard has no authority
to take possession of, and move these
vessels during emergency periods such
as the approach of a hurricane. Rather,
Coast Guard enforcement is limited to
imposing civil or criminal penalties on
anyone who fails to comply with the
requirements of an order or regulation
issued under PWSA. Therefore early
identification of vessels that may be
unwilling to depart the area, or are
unable to remain safely moored within
the area during a storm, is extremely
E:\FR\FM\15APR1.SGM
15APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
important and will provide the Coast
Guard time to consider alternatives and
work with interagency authorities and
vessel and facility representatives to
appropriately resolve the problem well
in advance of a storm.
C. Discussion of Comments, Changes
and the Final Rule
Seven individuals or companies
submitted a total of 18 comments to the
SNPRM. The Coast Guard’s response to
these comments are discussed in detail
below, however, the Coast Guard has
not made any substantial changes from
the requirements proposed in the
SNPRM as a result of these comments.
One comment expressed concern that
proposed mooring criteria are more
stringent than the criteria in the interim
rule, which would require additional
professional engineering certification
resulting in additional costs for
compliance for this particular entity.
The interim rule published in 2010
stated that the Coast Guard would
reevaluate the need for the Regulated
Navigation Area and make changes and
proposals in a final rule as appropriate.
In developing the mooring criteria
proposed in the SNPRM and
implemented by this final rule, the
Coast Guard worked with the USACE to
determine acceptable standards and
parameters that reduce risk within the
canal basins. In February 2013, the
USACE provided engineering analysis
based on the design and construction of
the newly completed HSDRRS which
determined that mooring criteria needed
to meet more stringent requirements for
potential surge height, wind speeds, etc.
In February 2013, the USACE provided
correspondence to the Coast Guard
recommending that we incorporate
aspects of the standard mooring criteria
found in United Facilities Criteria (UFC)
4–159 and the American Society of the
Civil Engineers (ASCE) 7 that could be
utilized by professional engineers in
designing and approving the mooring
standards. Therefore, the Coast Guard
proposed a standard consistent with the
maximum potential water levels USACE
has determined could occur with
sustained heavy rainfall over a 24 hour
timeframe within the HSDRRS system.
In this correspondence, the USACE
recommended that the Coast Guard
utilize design wind loads based on
ASCE 7. The two design values
mentioned are 88 mph and 140 mph. To
decrease risk of a vessel breaking away
from its mooring, the Coast Guard
incorporated the more stringent 140
mph wind requirement, which
represents a three-second maximum
gust velocity in the New Orleans area as
outlined by the USACE. We understand
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Apr 14, 2014
Jkt 232001
that since 2009 facilities who wished to
keep vessels in the RNA during storms
had to submit multiple engineering
analyses which resulted in financial
expenditures for each entity. Final
determination on criteria required was
simply not available at the time the
interim rule was established. This final
rule and the criteria included were
developed over four years of
partnerships between all entities
involved to lessen the burden of
multiple engineering analyses.
One comment requested that the
Coast Guard differentiate restrictions
and requirements based upon vessel
tonnage, measured or dead weight or
construction. The Coast Guard does not
possess data, and is not aware of a data
source, clearly delineating risk in
relation to size of vessels. The USACE
determined that without an analysis
determining the resiliency of the I-walls,
no vessels, tanks, yachts, boats,
campers, buildings or other structures
should be allowed to impact the
floodwalls. Without this clear
delineation, the Coast Guard will
require all floating vessels intending to
remain in the RNA during a storm event
to submit Annual Hurricane Operation
Plans and meet the requirements
outlined within this final rule to reduce
risk within the canal basins. The Coast
Guard is very aware of the risk in this
area and has closely coordinated with
multiple agencies regarding that risk. In
the absence of further analysis or other
non-Coast Guard actions to mitigate
risks such as reinforcing floodwalls and
levees or installing barriers protecting
them, the Coast Guard is compelled to
take a conservative approach.
Furthermore, as outlined in
correspondence to the Southeast
Louisiana Flood Protection Authority
East dated August 20th, 2012, the
USACE plans to analyze the resiliency
of the I-walls subject to impact loads
from small vessels, small floating
objects, characteristics of boat impacts,
limiting velocities and boat weight to
further classify which vessels actually
constitute a risk. Should this occur, the
Coast Guard may review or update this
regulation to potentially exempt certain
classes of vessels from these regulatory
requirements. In the absence of such
policy, direction or analysis, the Coast
Guard has decided to make this
regulation applicable to all vessels in
the RNA, regardless of size, to provide
the maximum protection possible to the
flood protection structures in the area.
One comment requested the Coast
Guard reevaluate the surge height
requirement for engineering certification
to the lowest height of the levee walls
within the canal basins as well as
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
21131
consider wind directions that could
affect water rise. The Coast Guard has
done this for surge heights; the height in
the SNPRM reflects the lowest height of
a levee or floodwall in each canal basin.
Based on USACE analysis these heights
may be reached by maximum potential
rainfall amounts that could occur within
a 24-hour period. The Coast Guard did
not factor potential wind directions for
surge height requirements because
decisions to enforce and implement the
provisions found in this final rule
would need to occur much sooner than
actual known wind directions which are
subject to changing forecasts, intensities
or error in track models.
One comment described a financial
hardship for small craft moorings to
meet mooring requirements for winds of
140 mph and requests vessels be
allowed to utilize temporary lines in
meeting the 140 mph requirements. This
final rule implements the transition
from a waiver-based system to a
performance-based system proposed in
the SNPRM. It also allows the facility
owners to work with professional
engineers on a plan that meets the
performance requirements, either with
permanent fixed mooring systems,
mooring lines or a combination of both.
One comment requested the Coast
Guard allow the standby tugboat
requirement for individual facilities to
be satisfied by sharing tug(s) across
facilities within established geographic
limits. The ability for facilities to allow
vessels to stay during RNA enforcement
under this final rule is grounded in the
requirement that each facility owner be
responsible for all vessels contained
within their annual hurricane
operations plan. The Coast Guard will
be reviewing these annual hurricane
operations plans and ensuring that each
individual entity meets the
requirements in this final rule to reduce
risk of a breakaway at a facility.
Expanding a tug’s standby area across
multiple businesses and a wider
geographic area increases the risk of a
vessel breakaway. In the event of
multiple breakaways at different
facilities, the likelihood that a
breakaway would not be responded to
given challenges in prioritizing a tug’s
response across businesses is certainly
increased. The Coast Guard intends for
each facility owner to be prepared with
the required on-scene tugs should a
scenario occur where multiple facilities
need their tug assistance and where a
sharing of resources may not be
practicable. Once again the Coast Guard
is only specifying these requirements for
facilities with floating vessels choosing
to deviate from the RNA and intending
to remain within the RNA geographic
E:\FR\FM\15APR1.SGM
15APR1
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
21132
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
area during a tropical event. Should the
facility not want to incur the additional
cost, they may remove the vessel.
One comment requested the Coast
Guard include in the regulation that the
Port Coordination Team would be
consulted prior to mandatory
evacuations in the event a particularly
dangerous storm is predicted. The Coast
Guard agrees and has included this in
the regulation at 33 CFR 165.838 (c) (4).
One comment expressed concerns
that mooring arrangement design
criteria were significantly increased
from the SNPRM, are too stringent, and
may not reflect realistic storm
conditions which may occur within the
canal basins. The commenter requested
further discussion on the reasoning for
these new requirements. In drafting this
Final Rule, the Coast Guard worked
with the USACE and maritime
stakeholders to determine acceptable
standards and parameters that reduced
risk within the canal basins. The criteria
in this rule was provided by the USACE
based on engineering of the completed
HSDRRS and their analysis of
conditions (surge heights and wind
speeds) that could occur within the
canals in the RNA during a storm, even
with navigation structures closed as
outlined in correspondence to the Coast
Guard from the USACE on February 7th,
2013. The USACE proposed that the
standards found in UFC 4–159 and
ASCE 7 were sufficient to meet the
criteria. The Coast Guard relied upon
the engineering expertise of the USACE
to reduce risk during dangerous storms.
Absent new information disputing these
recommendations the Coast Guard feels
it necessary to move forward with these
requirements. However, the Coast Guard
will accept new information that may be
beneficial for future updates for this
RNA.
One comment requested this final rule
expand the RNA to include: (a) the
‘‘Golden Triangle-area’’ on the protected
side (West) of the Lake Borgne Barrier,
bound by the Gulf Intracoastal
Waterway (GIWW), Mississippi River
Gulf Outlet (MRGO) and the IHNC Lake
Borgne Surge Barrier; (b) a half mile
buffer on the East Side of the IHNC Lake
Borgne Surge Barrier parallel to the
entire structure; (c) the area along the
de-authorized MRGO channel adjacent
to the St. Bernard Floodwalls extending
a half mile past the southernmost
portion of the wall; and (d) the Hero
Canal outside of the HSDRRS. The Coast
Guard does not intend to extend the
RNA geographic parameters outside of
what was proposed in the supplemental
rule at this time.
The ‘‘Golden Triangle’’, MRGO, and
half mile area around the IHNC Lake
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Apr 14, 2014
Jkt 232001
Borgne Surge Barrier are not areas
where vessels typically operate or moor
in inclement weather. Should the
USACE identify vessels that pose a
significant risk during a tropical event
in this area, the Coast Guard will issue
individual COTP orders directing them
to relocate outside these areas adjacent
to the RNA. In regards to Hero Canal,
which is outside of the West Closure
Complex and adjacent to an earthen
levee system, the Coast Guard does not
intend to include this in the RNA
without further analysis provided by
levee design and construction entities
demonstrating a potential risk from
vessels in the canal. Hero Canal is not
a waterway with commercial facilities
and moorings in areas subject to storm
surge during hurricanes. Hero Canal has
traditionally been an area where smaller
fishing vessels sought safe refuge during
dangerous storms before the HSDRRS
was completed. During Hurricane Isaac,
fishing vessels sought safe refuge within
the HSDRRS. Lessons learned from
those seeking safe refuge during
Hurricane Isaac resulted in the Coast
Guard, USACE, Southeast Louisiana
Flood Protection Authority West, other
state and local agencies and the fishing
community discussing allowing these
vessels to stage within this canal for
tropical events instead of within the
RNA in the protected side of the West
Closure Complex. Of note, expanding
RNA Geographic areas from what was
proposed within the SNPRM would
require additional public comment. The
Coast Guard feels it necessary to publish
this final rule without further change or
comment, providing those affected
sufficient time to comply with RNA
requirements before the 2014 Hurricane
Season. However, the Coast Guard will
entertain future proposed changes to
this final rule should further analysis be
provided to support a future update
rule.
One comment requested the Coast
Guard clearly define particularly
dangerous storm and consider complete
evacuation of all vessels. This Final
Rule already contains wording that
allows the COTP the flexibility to
require all vessels to vacate the RNA
should a particularly dangerous storm
be predicted to impact the RNA area.
The Coast Guard believes that flexibility
is necessary in determining what storm
forecasts may warrant a complete RNA
evacuation. Storm track and strength
forecasts are uncertain and scenarios
which impact the RNA are wide
ranging, making specific scenario
description impractical in regulation.
However, as previously mentioned, the
Coast Guard accepts that this decision
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
should be made in consultation with the
Port Coordination Team and has
included this in the regulation.
One comment requested that the
Coast Guard require all vessels with
Hurricane Operation Plans be required
to maintain a constant state of
compliance with this rulemaking
throughout the calendar year. The Coast
Guard will ensure that all facilities
allowing vessels to remain in the RNA
during a tropical event submit an
Annual Hurricane Operations Plan but
will not enforce the implementation of
that plan until necessary for a particular
weather event. The Coast Guard and
USACE will be conducing monthly
patrols during hurricane season to
ensure those with Hurricane Operation
Plans are prepared and able to
implement those plans for pending
tropical events. It is during these
monthly patrols that verification checks
will be made to ensure facilities are
compliant with their certified plan.
Requiring facilities to moor vessels in
accordance with mooring plans for
inclement weather simply isn’t justified
until the COTP announces the
enforcement of the RNA. Other facility
owners who intend to vacate the RNA
upon activation are not required to
comply with the RNA mooring
requirements. If a facility with a valid
Hurricane Operations Plan is not
compliant with their certified plan, the
vessels moored there will be required to
vacate the RNA also.
One comment requested the Coast
Guard consider removing all vessels
from the IHNC corridor and revise the
current language which states the
‘‘Coast Guard is not inclined to allow
any floating vessels to remain within the
IHNC portion of the Canal Basin’’. The
Coast Guard considers that the current
wording is adequate to address the risk
in that area. The Coast Guard has no
intentions to support any additional
annual Hurricane Operation Plan
submissions for floating vessels within
higher risk IHNC areas. Performance
based criteria will not apply to the IHNC
area, and any vessels who expect to
remain will need to apply for a
deviation and demonstrate that mooring
arrangements provide an equivalent
level of safety. As was previously
mentioned, the USACE has stated an
analysis would be produced to
determine the resiliency of the I-walls
subject to impact loads from small
vessels, small floating objects,
characteristics of boat impacts, limiting
velocities and boat weight to further
classify which vessels actually
constitute a risk. Once that analysis is
produced and clearly identified, the
Coast Guard would be willing to review
E:\FR\FM\15APR1.SGM
15APR1
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
or update this Final Rule, which may
allow certain classes of vessels to
remain within the IHNC. In the absence
of such policy, direction or analysis, the
Coast Guard intends to maintain current
posture and wording as outlined within
this Final Rule.
One comment notified the Coast
Guard that revised mooring criteria were
being developed which may slightly
differ from what the Coast Guard was
proposing. The commenter requested
that these newly revised criteria be
included in this final rule. After a two
year process of crafting this rule with
multiple Federal, State and local
entities, the Coast Guard is moving
forward with publishing this final rule
with current information. The Coast
Guard however is open to future
recommendations on mooring guidance
and, if appropriate, would reexamine
these standards in a future rulemaking.
The Coast Guard is publishing this rule
to enable vessels, facility owners and
operators sufficient time to comply with
requirements in time for the 2014
Hurricane Season.
One comment requested that mooring
criteria identified within this final rule
be considered a minimum requirement
and further stated that additional
mooring criteria utilizing UFC 4–159
would be provided to the Coast Guard
for inclusion in this rule. The
commenter suggested apparatus design
plans that accompany a waiver
application should be reviewed by the
USACE and approved or denied by the
USCG. The Coast Guard has stated in
this final rule that the intent of this
rulemaking is transitioning from a
waiver approval process to a
performance based system. The Coast
Guard agrees with the commenter and
will partner with the USACE in the
annual review and submission of all
Hurricane Operational Plans. The Coast
Guard agrees that requirements
described in this rulemaking are
minimum requirements that should be
attained by all vessel and facility
operators, and that mooring designs
need to be certified by a professional
engineer. As previously stated, after a
two year process of crafting this rule
with multiple Federal, State and local
entities, the Coast Guard is moving
forward with publishing this final rule
with current information to ensure
vessels, facility owners, and operators
have sufficient time to comply with
requirements for the 2014 Hurricane
Season.
One comment stated that the actual
size and type of lashing shall be
designed by the owner’s professional
engineer and shall be included in the
required annual hurricane operations
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Apr 14, 2014
Jkt 232001
plan and be consistent with UFC 4–159.
The Coast Guard believes this comment
is already addressed within this
regulation and specifically within the
requirements for a professional engineer
to certify minimum attainment of the
mooring design criteria.
Two related comments requested
clarification on the regulatory text
relating to allowable actions within the
RNA during the enforcement period and
how that relates to the closing of the
navigational structures. For further
clarification, the Coast Guard intends to
begin enforcement of the RNA 24 hours
in advance of the anticipated closure of
either the IHNC Lake Borgne Surge
Barrier or the West Closure Complex.
When the Coast Guard announces that
the RNA will be implemented, all
vessels not having an approved plan to
remain in the RNA need to begin
vacating the RNA, and need to be out of
the RNA area prior to the closure of the
structures or locks. All vessels that are
transiting through the RNA will be
allowed to transit providing there is
sufficient time to either vacate or reach
their intended and approved location.
Progress and status of RNA evacuation
will be monitored by Port Assessment
Teams comprising representatives of the
USCG, USACE and the levee protection
authorities.
Finally, one comment asked whether
the Coast Guard had sufficient resources
to perform compliance inspections
needed to ensure all vessels remaining
in the RNA are properly moored to an
approved mooring facility. Yes, the
Coast Guard has sufficient resources,
utilizing Port Assessment Teams that
patrol the RNA area during hurricane
season to maintain maritime domain
awareness in the canals, counting
vessels, and analyzing how long it
would take for vessels to vacate the
RNA area should a tropical event occur.
Additionally, during a possible tropical
event, the Coast Guard, USACE and
levee protection authorities patrol daily
to ensure facilities that have submitted
annual hurricane operation plans are
complying with those plans and address
any concerns identified during those
patrols. The success of these patrols and
the joint effort between our port
partners to enact the RNA was
demonstrated during Hurricane Isaac
and Tropical Storm Karen where the
RNA was successfully implemented
with current resource levels.
D. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this rule after
considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
21133
based on these statutes and executive
orders.
1. Regulatory Planning and Review
This 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.
In determining if this rule was a
significant regulatory action, the Coast
Guard considered alternatives so as not
to unduly impact the segment of the
economy impacted by the RNA.
Furthermore, the Coast Guard also
incorporated mooring requirements in
regulation that negates the need for
annual waivers greatly reducing
associated costs. The Coast Guard
incorporated into the regulatory
requirements a provision that enables
plans to be submitted with alternative
minimum mooring requirements which
will be reviewed by the COTP on a caseby-case basis. This provision enables the
Coast Guard to review and allow
mooring alternatives such as piling
systems that permanently moor a vessel
not intending to move from its berth
that present an equal or greater level of
safety under the regulation in an effort
to mitigate possible regulatory and
economic impacts. The Coast Guard also
provided a series of questions for
industry comment with the sole purpose
of determining regulatory and economic
impact. The questions were provided to
those entities that had submitted
waivers to remain in the RNA under the
Interim Rule, along with the responses
received, are available for public
viewing in the docket.
Based on responses to the questions,
the Coast Guard modified the proposed
tug boat requirements for on-scene
monitoring of vessels during RNA
enforcement. The Coast Guard originally
contemplated requiring each facility
with three or more vessels to have one
tug on-scene for every 25 vessels. As a
result of the Coast Guard’s outreach to
industry with these questions and
subsequent responses indicating an
unnecessary economic hardship, the
Coast Guard modified this requirement.
The SNPRM proposed every facility
with eight or more vessels to maintain
one tug for every 50 vessels which
significantly reduces the economic
impact on industry but still provides a
substantial measure of safety in the
E:\FR\FM\15APR1.SGM
15APR1
21134
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
event that tugs are required in an
emergency.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
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 rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This rule would affect the following
entities, some of which might be small
entities: The owners or operators of
vessels intending to transit or moor in
the RNA during enforcement, and the
owners or operators or facilities in the
RNA who intend to keep vessels at their
facility during enforcement of the RNA.
On a case by case basis, the Coast Guard
will continue to review alternatives to
the minimum mooring requirements for
those that have an equal or greater
measure of safety. This provision
supports the Coast Guard’s ongoing
effort to keep this rulemaking from
having a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Also, this regulation seeks to reduce
impact on small entities by transitioning
to a performance based system allowing
vessels to remain if they meet the
mooring requirements in the regulation.
In addition, several routes for vessel
traffic exist for departure from the area
before the RNA goes into effect.
3. Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–
121), we want to assist small entities in
understanding this 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.
Small businesses may send comments
on the actions of Federal employees
who enforce, or otherwise determine
compliance with, Federal regulations to
the Small Business and Agriculture
Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman
and the Regional Small Business
Regulatory Fairness Boards. The
Ombudsman evaluates these actions
annually and rates each agency’s
responsiveness to small business. If you
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Apr 14, 2014
Jkt 232001
wish to comment on actions by
employees of the Coast Guard, call 1–
888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The
Coast Guard will not retaliate against
small entities that question or complain
about this rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.
4. Collection of Information
This rule may be found to call for a
new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520.). The Coast Guard
solicited voluntary information
concerning this rulemaking from 10 of
the 10–14 maritime industry entities
that have applied for waivers to deviate
from this RNA during the past four
years. This solicitation did not meet the
guidelines of a new collection of
information. The information solicited
from the maritime industry and
waterway users was specific to the
impacts of the RNA. Questions included
but were not limited to, addressing the
economic costs and benefits of
providing an option for vessels and
facilities to deviate from the RNA
restriction by providing Hurricane
Operations Plans allowing them to
remain in areas of the RNA during
enforcement. Comments received during
public meetings and public comment
periods throughout this rulemaking
project, show that industry wants the
option to safely and securely deviate
from the RNA restriction. Facilities
operating in this area are aware of the
threat of tropical weather conditions
and already have operation plans
specific to Hurricane season in place.
Such a plan is part of their normal
course of business. Therefore, this final
rule does call for a collection of
information in the form of an
operational plan from vessels and
facilities that wish to deviate from the
restrictions under the RNA when
enforced. As understood from industry
and waterway user comments and
responses to the posed questions, no
new information would need to be
collected. Such requirement replaces
the waiver option in the existing RNA.
Still, the Coast Guard has been
advised that this final rule may include
a collection of information as defined
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520. As defined
in 5 CFR 1320.3(c), ‘‘collection of
information’’ comprises reporting,
recordkeeping, monitoring, posting,
labeling, and other similar actions.
Regarding the burden to respond to this
collection of information, under 5 CFR
1320.3(b)(2), the time, effort, and
financial resources necessary to comply
with the information required to deviate
under this rule is excluded, and
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
therefore should not be considered a
burden because it will be incurred in
the normal course of business and
activities.
The Coast Guard will publish a notice
requesting comments on revising
existing OMB Control Number: 1625–
0043 to include any collection of
information resulting from requirements
to voluntarily deviate from this RNA.
OMB Control Number 1625–0043. The
title and description of the information
collection, a description of those who
must collect the information, and an
estimate of the total annual burden are
included in that notice, which may be
found under the same docket number,
USCG–2009–0139, as indicated under
ADDRESSES.
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 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 rule
would not result in such expenditure,
we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
8. Taking of Private Property
This rule will 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.
E:\FR\FM\15APR1.SGM
15APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
9. Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets applicable standards
in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive
Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to
minimize litigation, eliminate
ambiguity, and reduce burden.
10. Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not
an economically significant rule and
does not create an environmental risk to
health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
11. Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.
12. Energy Effects
This rule is not a ‘‘significant energy
action’’ under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use 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.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
13. Technical Standards
This rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
14. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
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 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 Final Rule involves
establishing a regulated navigation area
as defined within this regulation, which
is categorically excluded under figure
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Apr 14, 2014
Jkt 232001
2–1, paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction.
An environmental analysis checklist
supporting this determination and a
Categorical Exclusion Determination are
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 rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR Part 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195;
33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6 and 160.5;
Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department
of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
■
2. Revise § 165.838 to read as follows:
§ 165.838 Regulated Navigation Area; Gulf
Intracoastal Waterway, Inner Harbor
Navigation Canal, New Orleans, LA.
(a) Location. The following is a
regulated navigation area (RNA):
(1) The Gulf Intracoastal Waterway
(GIWW) from Mile Marker (MM) 22 East
of Harvey Locks (EHL), west on the
GIWW, including the Michoud Canal
and the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal
(IHNC), extending North 1⁄2 mile from
the Seabrook Flood Gate Complex out
into Lake Pontchartrain and South to
the IHNC Lock.
(2) The Harvey Canal, between the
Lapalco Boulevard Bridge and the
confluence of the Harvey Canal and the
Algiers Canal;
(3) The Algiers Canal, from the
Algiers Lock to the confluence of the
Algiers Canal and the Harvey Canal;
(4) The GIWW from the confluence of
Harvey Canal and Algiers Canal to MM
7.5 West of Harvey Locks (WHL)
(b) Definitions. As used in this
section:
(1) Breakaway means a floating vessel
that is adrift and that is not under its
own power or the control of a towboat,
or secured to its moorings.
(2) COTP means the Captain of the
Port, New Orleans;
(3) Facility means a fleeting, mooring,
industrial facility or marina along the
shoreline at which vessels are or can be
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
21135
moored and which owns, possesses,
moors, or leases vessels located in the
areas described in paragraph (a) of this
section.
(3) Fleet includes one or more tiers of
barges.
(4) Fleeting or mooring facility means
the area along the shoreline at which
vessels are or can be moored.
(5) Floating vessel means any floating
vessel to which the Ports and
Waterways Safety Act, 33 U.S.C. 1221 et
seq., applies.
(6) Mooring barge or spar barge means
a barge moored to mooring devices or
secured to the ground by spuds, and to
which other barges may be moored.
(7) Mooring device includes a
deadman, anchor, pile or other reliable
holding apparatus.
(8) Navigational structures are the
Seabrook Floodgate Complex, the IHNC
Lake Borgne Surge Barrier, and the West
Closure Complex components of the
Hurricane and Storm Damage Risk
Reduction System (HSDRRS).
(9) Person in charge includes any
owner, agent, pilot, master, officer,
operator, crewmember, supervisor,
dispatcher or other person navigating,
controlling, directing or otherwise
responsible for the movement, action,
securing, or security of any vessel,
barge, tier, fleet or fleeting or mooring
facility subject to the regulations in this
section.
(10) Tier means barges moored
interdependently in rows or groups.
(11) Port Coordination Team is a body
of public and private port stakeholders
led by the COTP whose purpose is to
share information, establish priorities,
recommend and implement actions to
address risks to ports and waterways
during incidents and events.
(12) Tropical Event means the time
period immediately preceding, during,
and immediately following the expected
impact of heavy weather from a tropical
cyclone.
(c) Enforcement. (1) The provisions of
paragraph (d) of this section will be
enforced during a tropical event
beginning 24 hours in advance of the
predicted closure of the IHNC Lake
Borgne Surge Barrier structure within
the HSDRRS (IHNC & GIWW) in the area
defined in paragraph (a)(1) of this
section.
(2) The provisions of paragraph (d) of
this section will be enforced beginning
24 hours in advance of the predicted
closure of the West Closure Complex
within the HSDRRS (Harvey & Algiers
Canals) in the area defined in
paragraphs (a)(2) through (4) of this
section.
(3) If the Coast Guard receives notice
of a closure less than 24 hours before
E:\FR\FM\15APR1.SGM
15APR1
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
21136
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
closure, the provisions of paragraph (d)
of this section will be enforced upon the
COTP receiving the notice of predicted
closing.
(4) In the event that a particularly
dangerous storm is predicted, the COTP,
in consultation with the Port
Coordination Team, may require all
floating vessels to evacuate the RNA
beginning as early as 72 hours before
predicted closure of any navigational
structure or upon notice that
particularly dangerous storm conditions
are approaching, whichever is less.
(5) The COTP will notify the maritime
community of the enforcement periods
for this RNA through Marine Safety
Information Bulletins and Safety
Broadcast Notices to Mariners.
(d) Regulations. During the period
that the RNA is enforced and before
closure of the navigational structures,
all floating vessels must depart the RNA
except as follows:
(1) Floating vessels may remain in the
Harvey and Algiers Canals, provided
they are moored sufficiently to prevent
a breakaway and meet the minimum
mooring requirements and conditions
set forth in paragraphs (f) and (g) of this
section.
(2) Floating vessels may remain in the
Michoud Canal at least 1⁄4 mile north of
the intersection of the Michoud Canal
and the GIWW, the GIWW from MM 15
EHL to MM 10 EHL, provided they are
moored sufficiently to prevent a
breakaway and meet the minimum
mooring requirements and conditions
set forth in paragraphs (f) and (g) of this
section.
(3) During the period that the RNA is
enforced and before closure of the
navigational structures, vessels may
transit through the RNA en route to a
destination outside of the RNA given
there is sufficient time to transit prior to
the closure of a navigational structure,
or they may transit to a facility within
the RNA with which they have a
prearranged agreement. These vessel
movements and time critical decisions
will be made by the COTP in
consultation with the Port Coordination
Team.
(4) The COTP may review, on a caseby-case basis, alternatives to minimum
mooring requirements and conditions
set forth in paragraphs (f) and (g) of this
section and may approve a deviation to
these requirements and conditions
should they provide an equivalent level
of safety.
(e) Special Requirements for
Facilities. In addition to the mooring
and towboat requirements discussed in
paragraph (f) and (g) of this section,
Facilities within the area described in
paragraph (a) of this section that wish to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Apr 14, 2014
Jkt 232001
deviate from these restrictions because
they have vessels intending to remain
within the areas allowed in paragraphs
(d)(1) and (2) of this section shall
comply with the below documentation
and maintenance requirements in order
to obtain the COTP’s approval for their
vessel(s) to remain in the closed RNA.
(1) Annual Hurricane Operations
Plan. All facilities that have vessels
intending to deviate from this RNA and
remain within the areas allowed in
paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of this section
shall develop an operations plan. The
operations plan shall be readily
available by May 1st of each calendar
year for review by the COTP. The
Annual Hurricane Operations Plan shall
include:
(i) A description of the maximum
number of vessels the facility intends to
have remaining at any one time during
hurricane season.
(ii) A detailed plan for any vessel(s)
that are intended to be sunk/grounded
in place when the RNA is enforced if
evacuation is not possible.
(iii) A diagram of the waterfront
facility and fleeting area.
(iv) Name, call sign, official number,
and operational status of machinery on
board (i.e., engines, generators, fire
fighting pumps, bilge pumps, anchors,
mooring machinery, etc.) each standby
towboat.
(v) Characteristics for each vessel
remaining at the fleeting or mooring
facility, as applicable (length, breadth,
draft, air draft, gross tonnage, hull type,
horsepower, single or twin screw);
(vi) Details of mooring arrangements
in accordance with mooring
requirements and conditions set forth in
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this section or
COTP case-by-case approved deviations;
(vii) Certification by a professional
engineer that the mooring arrangements
are able to withstand winds of up to 140
mph, a surge water level of eleven feet,
a current of four mph and a wave height
of three feet within the canal basin in
the area defined in paragraph (a)(1) of
this section and a surge water level of
eight feet, a current of four mph, and a
wave height of two and a half feet
within the canal basin in the area
defined in paragraphs (a)(2) through (4)
of this section;
(viii) Emergency contact information
for the owner/operator, and/or agent of
the facility/property.
(ix) 24-hour emergency contact
information for qualified individuals
empowered in writing by the owners/
operators to make on-site decisions and
authorize expenditures for any required
pollution response or salvage.
(x) Full insurance disclosure to the
COTP. Vessels moored to a facility shall
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
provide insurance information to the
facility.
(2) Storm Specific Verification Report.
72 hrs prior to predicted closure of the
navigational structures, those facilities
which have vessels that intend to
remain within the RNA shall submit a
Storm Specific Verification Report to
the COTP New Orleans. The
requirements for this Storm Specific
Verification Report are located in the
Canal Hurricane Operations Plan, which
is Enclosure Six to the Sector New
Orleans Maritime Hurricane
Contingency Port Plan, https://
homeport.uscg.mil/nola. The report
shall include:
(i) Updated contact information,
including names of manned towboat(s)
and individuals remaining on the
towboat(s).
(ii) Number of vessels currently
moored and mooring configurations if
less than stated in Annual Hurricane
Operations Plan.
(iii) If the number of vessels exceeds
the amount listed in the Annual
Hurricane Operations Plan, describe
process and timeframe for evacuating
vessels to bring total number of vessels
into alignment with the Annual
Hurricane Operations Plan.
(3) The person in charge of a facility
shall inspect each mooring wire, chain,
line and connecting gear between
mooring devices and each wire, line and
connecting equipment used to moor
each vessel, and each mooring device.
Inspections shall be performed
according to the following timelines and
guidance:
(i) Annually between May 1 and June
1 of each calendar year; and
(ii) After vessels are added to,
withdrawn from, or moved at a facility,
each mooring wire, line, and connecting
equipment of each barge within each
tier affected by that operation; and
(iii) At least weekly between June 1
and November 30; and
(iv) 72 hrs prior to predicted closure
of the navigation structures within this
RNA; or within 6 hrs of the predicted
closure, if the notice of predicted
closure is less than 72 hrs.
(4) The person who inspects moorings
shall take immediate action to correct
any deficiency.
(5) Facility Records. The person in
charge of a fleeting or mooring facility
shall maintain, and make available to
the COTP, records containing the
following information:
(i) The time of commencement and
termination of each inspection.
(ii) The name of each person who
makes the inspection.
(iii) The identification of each vessel,
barge entering or departing the fleeting
E:\FR\FM\15APR1.SGM
15APR1
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
or mooring facility, along with the
following information:
(A) Date and time of entry and
departure; and
(B) The names of any hazardous cargo
which the vessel is carrying.
(6) The person in charge of a facility
shall ensure continuous visual
surveillance of all vessels at the facility.
(7) The person who observes the
vessels shall:
(i) Inspect for movements that are
unusual for properly secured vessels;
and
(ii) Take immediate action to correct
each deficiency.
(f) Mooring Requirements. Facility
owners shall consider all requirements
within this section as minimum
standards. Title 33 CFR 165.803, United
Facilities Criteria (UFC) 4–159 and
American Society of the Civil Engineers
(ASCE)7 should be utilized by
Professional Engineers in the
certification of the Annual Hurricane
Operations Plan.
(1) No person may secure a vessel to
trees or to other vegetation.
(2) No person may allow a vessel to
be moored with unraveled or frayed
lines or other defective or worn
mooring.
(3) No person may moor barges side
to side unless they are secured to each
other from fittings as close to each
corner of abutting sides as practicable.
(4) No person may moor barges end to
end unless they are secured to each
other from fittings as close to each
corner of abutting ends as practicable.
(5) A vessel may be moored to
mooring devices if both ends of that
vessel are secured to mooring devices.
(6) Barges may be moored in tiers if
each shoreward barge is secured to
mooring devices at each end.
(7) A vessel must be secured as near
as practicable to each abutting corner
by:
(i) Three parts of wire rope of at least
11⁄4 inch diameter with an eye at each
end of the rope passed around the
timberhead, caval, or button;
(ii) A mooring of natural or synthetic
fiber rope that has at least the breaking
strength of three parts of 11⁄4 inch
diameter wire rope; or
(iii) Fixed rigging that is at least
equivalent to three parts of 11⁄4 inch
diameter wire rope.
(8) The person in charge shall ensure
that all mooring devices, wires, chains,
lines and connecting gear are of
sufficient strength and in sufficient
number to withstand forces that may be
exerted on them by moored vessels/
barges.
(g) Towboat Requirements. The
person in charge of a fleeting or mooring
facility must ensure:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Apr 14, 2014
Jkt 232001
(1) Each facility consisting of eight or
more vessels that are not under their
own power must be attended by at least
one radar-equipped towboat for every 50
vessels.
(2) Each towboat required must be:
(i) Able to secure any breakaways;
(ii) Capable of safely withdrawing or
moving any vessel at the fleeting or
mooring facility;
(iii) Immediately operational;
(iv) Radio-equipped;
(v) No less than 800 horsepower;
(vi) Within 500 yards of the vessels.
(3) The person in charge of each
towboat required must maintain a
continuous guard on the frequency
specified by current Federal
Communications Commission
regulations found in 47 CFR part 83; a
continuous watch on the vessels moored
at facility; and report any breakaway as
soon as possible to the COTP via
telephone, radio or other means of rapid
communication.
(h) Transient vessels will not be
permitted to seek safe haven in the RNA
except in accordance with a prearranged
agreement between the vessel and a
facility within the RNA.
(i) Penalties. Failure to comply with
this section may result in civil or
criminal penalties pursuant to the Ports
and Waterways Safety Act, 33 U.S.C.
1221 et seq.
Dated: April 1, 2014.
K.S. Cook,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2014–08265 Filed 4–14–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R07–OAR–2013–0672; FRL–9909–43Region 7]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; State of
Missouri
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is taking direct final
action to approve a revision to the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by
the State of Missouri for the purpose of
incorporating administrative changes to
the Missouri rule entitled ‘‘Municipal
Solid Waste Landfills’’. EPA is
approving this SIP revision based on
EPA’s finding that the rule is as
stringent as the rule it replaces and
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
21137
fulfills the requirements of the Clean Air
Act (CAA or Act) for the protection of
the ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) in St. Louis.
DATES: This direct final rule will be
effective June 16, 2014, without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse
comment by May 15, 2014. If EPA
receives adverse comment, we will
publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register
informing the public that the rule will
not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–
OAR–2013–0672, by one of the
following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: Bernstein.craig@epa.gov.
3. Mail or Hand Delivery: Craig
Bernstein, Environmental Protection
Agency, Air Planning and Development
Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard,
Lenexa, Kansas 66219.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2013–
0672. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit through
www.regulations.gov or email
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email comment directly
to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
E:\FR\FM\15APR1.SGM
15APR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 72 (Tuesday, April 15, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21129-21137]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-08265]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG-2009-0139]
RIN 1625-A11
Regulated Navigation Area; Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Inner
Harbor Navigation Canal, New Orleans, LA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule revises an existing interim rule to
permanently establish a Regulated Navigation Area (RNA) protecting
floodwalls and levees in the New Orleans area from possible damage
caused by vessels that can breakaway during certain tropical storm and
hurricane conditions. This final rule also addresses comments from the
public on the previously published Supplemental Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (SNPRM) and economic review for this RNA. This action is
necessary for the flood protection of high-risk areas throughout the
Greater New Orleans Area when a tropical event threatens to approach
and impact the area.
DATES: This rule is effective April 15, 2014. This rule has been
enforced with actual notice since April 1, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
[USCG-2009-0139]. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email LCDR Brandon Sullivan, Sector New Orleans Waterways
Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (504) 365-2281, email
Brandon.J.Sullivan@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call Cheryl F. Collins 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
SNPRM Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
CPRA Coastal Protection Restoration Authority
HSDRRS Hurricane Storm Damage Risk Reduction System
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
COTP Captain of the Port
IHNC Inner Harbor Navigation Canal
GIWW Gulf Intracoastal Waterway
MM Mile Marker
RNA Regulated Navigational Area
A. Regulatory History and Information
The Coast Guard is issuing this final rule without a full 30-day
notice pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative
Procedures Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553). Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the
Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective
less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. This final
rule makes permanent the RNA specific to safety measures during
hurricane season which is June 1 through November 30 each year. The
existing interim rule for this RNA has been effective for approximately
four years and requires necessary changes, based on the completed flood
protection system, through this final rule for the approaching 2014
hurricane season. This final rule also allows for possible planned
deviation from the RNA through a Hurricane Operations Plan submitted at
least one month before the season begins, which is May 1, 2014 for this
year. Throughout the rulemaking process for this RNA, those regulated
by the rule, specifically industry and waterway users, have
participated in this rulemaking through public meetings and the public
comment process and are fully aware that this RNA will be in place for
the 2014 hurricane season. It is unnecessary to further delay the
updated RNA by waiting for a full 30 days notice to take place through
publication in the Federal Register.
On June 8, 2010, the Coast Guard published an interim rule entitled
``Regulated Navigation Area; Gulf
[[Page 21130]]
Intracoastal Waterway, Inner Harbor Navigation Canal, New Orleans, LA''
in the FR (75 FR 32275) and provided responses to all comments to the
original Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), which published May 14,
2009 in the Federal Register (74 FR 22722). That interim rule is
codified and the RNA is currently enforced under 33 CFR 165.838. The
intent behind establishing the RNA through an interim rulemaking was to
put into place interim restrictions providing the necessary protections
at the time and until the final floodwalls and storm protection system
were completed and final specifications established and received. The
interim rule stated that the Coast Guard would reevaluate the RNA upon
completion of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
Hurricane and Storm Damage Risk Reduction System (HSDRRS). With the
HSDRRS being fully operational for the 2013 hurricane season, the Coast
Guard, with input from Federal, State and local agencies determined
that the RNA is still necessary.
On June 7, 2013, the Coast Guard published a SNPRM entitled
``Regulated Navigation Area; Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Inner Harbor
Navigation Canal, Harvey Canal, Algiers Canal, New Orleans, LA'' in the
Federal Register (78 FR 34293). In the SNPRM, the Coast Guard proposed
changes to the requirements of the RNA from those in the interim rule.
In developing these requirements, the Coast Guard established a work
group comprised of Federal, State and local flood protection
authorities, and port and industry representatives. Through this work
group, public meetings were held and input from the meetings helped to
address the protections still necessary and modify the restrictions in
the interim rule to provide those protections. The minutes from those
meetings are available for public viewing on the docket. In addition to
the work-group meetings, the Coast Guard considered lessons learned
from implementing the RNA provisions of the interim rule during
Hurricane Isaac in 2012. Also, while drafting the SNPRM, the Coast
Guard met formally with the USACE six times to (1) determine the risks
presented by vessels to the HSDRRS, (2) understand the conditions under
which such risks occur, and (3) to ensure that a final RNA aligns with
USACE operations and concerns.
The Coast Guard also held a public meeting on June 20, 2013 at 5
p.m. local time, to receive comments on the SNPRM. Comments received at
the public meeting were supportive of the overall collaborative
planning process, and did not contain any specific content requiring a
Coast Guard response in this Final Rule. A transcript of that public
meeting was uploaded to the public docket. During the SNPRM comment
period, the Coast Guard also received 18 written comments from seven
entities on the proposed changes within the public docket, which are
addressed in this final rule below. These comments did not result in
any substantial changes to the requirements of the RNA in this final
rule.
In January 2013, the Coast Guard also requested information on a
voluntary basis from 10 local industry and waterway users operating
within the RNA. This information was requested in the form a
questionnaire available in the public docket accessed as directed under
ADDRESSES. The Coast Guard worked with an assigned Coast Guard
economist to develop the questionnaire, which was used to gather
information on the possible economic impacts--both cost and benefit--
that the proposed changes may impose. These questions included but were
not limited to assessing the economic impact of requiring mooring
arrangements similar to those required under 33 CFR 165.803; developing
and submitting mooring arrangements as an alternate to those listed
under 33 CFR 165.803; evacuating all vessels out of the RNA during
enforcement periods; requiring weekly inspections, continuous
surveillance, and certain equipment if a facility wishes to keep
vessels within the RNA during enforcement; and requiring an annual
Hurricane Operations Plan from facilities desiring to keep vessels
within certain areas of the RNA as a preplanned deviation from the RNA
restriction. The existing RNA, the proposed changes to the RNA in the
SNPRM, and this final rule restrict all vessels from entering or
remaining in any part of the designated RNA during enforcement. The
existing RNA, the RNA as proposed in the SNPRM and this final rule also
provide an avenue for vessels and facilities to pre-plan a deviation
from RNA enforcement. Comments received at public meetings and during
comment periods throughout the rulemaking process for this RNA support
the opportunity to deviate if a facility and/or vessel show that they
can do so safely and securely. The current RNA affords vessels and
facilities the opportunity to deviate from the restriction through
applying for an annual waiver and the option to deviate is provided for
in this final rule through submitting an Annual Hurricane Operations
Plan. This plan replaces the current waiver requirement.
B. Basis and Purpose
The legal basis for this rule is the Coast Guard's authority to
establish regulated navigation areas and other limited access areas: 33
U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33
CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
The purpose of this final rule is to permanently establish the RNA
to protect floodwalls and levees in the New Orleans area from possible
storm damage caused by moored barges and vessels, and to prevent
flooding in the New Orleans area that could result from that storm
damage.
This final rule permanently establishes the RNA now that the flood
protection system is complete. This final rule responds to the risks at
hand using knowledge and expertise and addressing the needs uncovered
throughout this rulemaking process including the NPRM, the interim
rule, the SNPRM, and input and participation from federal, state, and
local agencies as well as public and industry stakeholders. Without
this RNA, when navigational structures within the HSDRRS are to be
closed because of an approaching storm, the Coast Guard would have to
individually order each vessel within the subject area to depart or to
comply with specific mooring arrangements. Issuing individual orders
places a significant administrative burden on the Coast Guard during a
time when important pre-storm preparations must also be made. By
creating this rule, the Coast Guard is informing the public in advance
of the restrictions and requirements for vessels in the area during
periods of enforcement, enabling vessel and facility operators to make
seasonal plans and arrangements for RNA evacuation and thus eliminating
the need for individual Captain of the Port (COTP) Orders.
An additional purpose of this RNA is to aid the Coast Guard in the
early identification of vessels that may not depart the RNA when
required. Under PWSA, the Coast Guard has no authority to take
possession of, and move these vessels during emergency periods such as
the approach of a hurricane. Rather, Coast Guard enforcement is limited
to imposing civil or criminal penalties on anyone who fails to comply
with the requirements of an order or regulation issued under PWSA.
Therefore early identification of vessels that may be unwilling to
depart the area, or are unable to remain safely moored within the area
during a storm, is extremely
[[Page 21131]]
important and will provide the Coast Guard time to consider
alternatives and work with interagency authorities and vessel and
facility representatives to appropriately resolve the problem well in
advance of a storm.
C. Discussion of Comments, Changes and the Final Rule
Seven individuals or companies submitted a total of 18 comments to
the SNPRM. The Coast Guard's response to these comments are discussed
in detail below, however, the Coast Guard has not made any substantial
changes from the requirements proposed in the SNPRM as a result of
these comments.
One comment expressed concern that proposed mooring criteria are
more stringent than the criteria in the interim rule, which would
require additional professional engineering certification resulting in
additional costs for compliance for this particular entity. The interim
rule published in 2010 stated that the Coast Guard would reevaluate the
need for the Regulated Navigation Area and make changes and proposals
in a final rule as appropriate. In developing the mooring criteria
proposed in the SNPRM and implemented by this final rule, the Coast
Guard worked with the USACE to determine acceptable standards and
parameters that reduce risk within the canal basins. In February 2013,
the USACE provided engineering analysis based on the design and
construction of the newly completed HSDRRS which determined that
mooring criteria needed to meet more stringent requirements for
potential surge height, wind speeds, etc. In February 2013, the USACE
provided correspondence to the Coast Guard recommending that we
incorporate aspects of the standard mooring criteria found in United
Facilities Criteria (UFC) 4-159 and the American Society of the Civil
Engineers (ASCE) 7 that could be utilized by professional engineers in
designing and approving the mooring standards. Therefore, the Coast
Guard proposed a standard consistent with the maximum potential water
levels USACE has determined could occur with sustained heavy rainfall
over a 24 hour timeframe within the HSDRRS system. In this
correspondence, the USACE recommended that the Coast Guard utilize
design wind loads based on ASCE 7. The two design values mentioned are
88 mph and 140 mph. To decrease risk of a vessel breaking away from its
mooring, the Coast Guard incorporated the more stringent 140 mph wind
requirement, which represents a three-second maximum gust velocity in
the New Orleans area as outlined by the USACE. We understand that since
2009 facilities who wished to keep vessels in the RNA during storms had
to submit multiple engineering analyses which resulted in financial
expenditures for each entity. Final determination on criteria required
was simply not available at the time the interim rule was established.
This final rule and the criteria included were developed over four
years of partnerships between all entities involved to lessen the
burden of multiple engineering analyses.
One comment requested that the Coast Guard differentiate
restrictions and requirements based upon vessel tonnage, measured or
dead weight or construction. The Coast Guard does not possess data, and
is not aware of a data source, clearly delineating risk in relation to
size of vessels. The USACE determined that without an analysis
determining the resiliency of the I-walls, no vessels, tanks, yachts,
boats, campers, buildings or other structures should be allowed to
impact the floodwalls. Without this clear delineation, the Coast Guard
will require all floating vessels intending to remain in the RNA during
a storm event to submit Annual Hurricane Operation Plans and meet the
requirements outlined within this final rule to reduce risk within the
canal basins. The Coast Guard is very aware of the risk in this area
and has closely coordinated with multiple agencies regarding that risk.
In the absence of further analysis or other non-Coast Guard actions to
mitigate risks such as reinforcing floodwalls and levees or installing
barriers protecting them, the Coast Guard is compelled to take a
conservative approach. Furthermore, as outlined in correspondence to
the Southeast Louisiana Flood Protection Authority East dated August
20th, 2012, the USACE plans to analyze the resiliency of the I-walls
subject to impact loads from small vessels, small floating objects,
characteristics of boat impacts, limiting velocities and boat weight to
further classify which vessels actually constitute a risk. Should this
occur, the Coast Guard may review or update this regulation to
potentially exempt certain classes of vessels from these regulatory
requirements. In the absence of such policy, direction or analysis, the
Coast Guard has decided to make this regulation applicable to all
vessels in the RNA, regardless of size, to provide the maximum
protection possible to the flood protection structures in the area.
One comment requested the Coast Guard reevaluate the surge height
requirement for engineering certification to the lowest height of the
levee walls within the canal basins as well as consider wind directions
that could affect water rise. The Coast Guard has done this for surge
heights; the height in the SNPRM reflects the lowest height of a levee
or floodwall in each canal basin. Based on USACE analysis these heights
may be reached by maximum potential rainfall amounts that could occur
within a 24-hour period. The Coast Guard did not factor potential wind
directions for surge height requirements because decisions to enforce
and implement the provisions found in this final rule would need to
occur much sooner than actual known wind directions which are subject
to changing forecasts, intensities or error in track models.
One comment described a financial hardship for small craft moorings
to meet mooring requirements for winds of 140 mph and requests vessels
be allowed to utilize temporary lines in meeting the 140 mph
requirements. This final rule implements the transition from a waiver-
based system to a performance-based system proposed in the SNPRM. It
also allows the facility owners to work with professional engineers on
a plan that meets the performance requirements, either with permanent
fixed mooring systems, mooring lines or a combination of both.
One comment requested the Coast Guard allow the standby tugboat
requirement for individual facilities to be satisfied by sharing tug(s)
across facilities within established geographic limits. The ability for
facilities to allow vessels to stay during RNA enforcement under this
final rule is grounded in the requirement that each facility owner be
responsible for all vessels contained within their annual hurricane
operations plan. The Coast Guard will be reviewing these annual
hurricane operations plans and ensuring that each individual entity
meets the requirements in this final rule to reduce risk of a breakaway
at a facility. Expanding a tug's standby area across multiple
businesses and a wider geographic area increases the risk of a vessel
breakaway. In the event of multiple breakaways at different facilities,
the likelihood that a breakaway would not be responded to given
challenges in prioritizing a tug's response across businesses is
certainly increased. The Coast Guard intends for each facility owner to
be prepared with the required on-scene tugs should a scenario occur
where multiple facilities need their tug assistance and where a sharing
of resources may not be practicable. Once again the Coast Guard is only
specifying these requirements for facilities with floating vessels
choosing to deviate from the RNA and intending to remain within the RNA
geographic
[[Page 21132]]
area during a tropical event. Should the facility not want to incur the
additional cost, they may remove the vessel.
One comment requested the Coast Guard include in the regulation
that the Port Coordination Team would be consulted prior to mandatory
evacuations in the event a particularly dangerous storm is predicted.
The Coast Guard agrees and has included this in the regulation at 33
CFR 165.838 (c) (4).
One comment expressed concerns that mooring arrangement design
criteria were significantly increased from the SNPRM, are too
stringent, and may not reflect realistic storm conditions which may
occur within the canal basins. The commenter requested further
discussion on the reasoning for these new requirements. In drafting
this Final Rule, the Coast Guard worked with the USACE and maritime
stakeholders to determine acceptable standards and parameters that
reduced risk within the canal basins. The criteria in this rule was
provided by the USACE based on engineering of the completed HSDRRS and
their analysis of conditions (surge heights and wind speeds) that could
occur within the canals in the RNA during a storm, even with navigation
structures closed as outlined in correspondence to the Coast Guard from
the USACE on February 7th, 2013. The USACE proposed that the standards
found in UFC 4-159 and ASCE 7 were sufficient to meet the criteria. The
Coast Guard relied upon the engineering expertise of the USACE to
reduce risk during dangerous storms. Absent new information disputing
these recommendations the Coast Guard feels it necessary to move
forward with these requirements. However, the Coast Guard will accept
new information that may be beneficial for future updates for this RNA.
One comment requested this final rule expand the RNA to include:
(a) the ``Golden Triangle-area'' on the protected side (West) of the
Lake Borgne Barrier, bound by the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW),
Mississippi River Gulf Outlet (MRGO) and the IHNC Lake Borgne Surge
Barrier; (b) a half mile buffer on the East Side of the IHNC Lake
Borgne Surge Barrier parallel to the entire structure; (c) the area
along the de-authorized MRGO channel adjacent to the St. Bernard
Floodwalls extending a half mile past the southernmost portion of the
wall; and (d) the Hero Canal outside of the HSDRRS. The Coast Guard
does not intend to extend the RNA geographic parameters outside of what
was proposed in the supplemental rule at this time.
The ``Golden Triangle'', MRGO, and half mile area around the IHNC
Lake Borgne Surge Barrier are not areas where vessels typically operate
or moor in inclement weather. Should the USACE identify vessels that
pose a significant risk during a tropical event in this area, the Coast
Guard will issue individual COTP orders directing them to relocate
outside these areas adjacent to the RNA. In regards to Hero Canal,
which is outside of the West Closure Complex and adjacent to an earthen
levee system, the Coast Guard does not intend to include this in the
RNA without further analysis provided by levee design and construction
entities demonstrating a potential risk from vessels in the canal. Hero
Canal is not a waterway with commercial facilities and moorings in
areas subject to storm surge during hurricanes. Hero Canal has
traditionally been an area where smaller fishing vessels sought safe
refuge during dangerous storms before the HSDRRS was completed. During
Hurricane Isaac, fishing vessels sought safe refuge within the HSDRRS.
Lessons learned from those seeking safe refuge during Hurricane Isaac
resulted in the Coast Guard, USACE, Southeast Louisiana Flood
Protection Authority West, other state and local agencies and the
fishing community discussing allowing these vessels to stage within
this canal for tropical events instead of within the RNA in the
protected side of the West Closure Complex. Of note, expanding RNA
Geographic areas from what was proposed within the SNPRM would require
additional public comment. The Coast Guard feels it necessary to
publish this final rule without further change or comment, providing
those affected sufficient time to comply with RNA requirements before
the 2014 Hurricane Season. However, the Coast Guard will entertain
future proposed changes to this final rule should further analysis be
provided to support a future update rule.
One comment requested the Coast Guard clearly define particularly
dangerous storm and consider complete evacuation of all vessels. This
Final Rule already contains wording that allows the COTP the
flexibility to require all vessels to vacate the RNA should a
particularly dangerous storm be predicted to impact the RNA area. The
Coast Guard believes that flexibility is necessary in determining what
storm forecasts may warrant a complete RNA evacuation. Storm track and
strength forecasts are uncertain and scenarios which impact the RNA are
wide ranging, making specific scenario description impractical in
regulation. However, as previously mentioned, the Coast Guard accepts
that this decision should be made in consultation with the Port
Coordination Team and has included this in the regulation.
One comment requested that the Coast Guard require all vessels with
Hurricane Operation Plans be required to maintain a constant state of
compliance with this rulemaking throughout the calendar year. The Coast
Guard will ensure that all facilities allowing vessels to remain in the
RNA during a tropical event submit an Annual Hurricane Operations Plan
but will not enforce the implementation of that plan until necessary
for a particular weather event. The Coast Guard and USACE will be
conducing monthly patrols during hurricane season to ensure those with
Hurricane Operation Plans are prepared and able to implement those
plans for pending tropical events. It is during these monthly patrols
that verification checks will be made to ensure facilities are
compliant with their certified plan. Requiring facilities to moor
vessels in accordance with mooring plans for inclement weather simply
isn't justified until the COTP announces the enforcement of the RNA.
Other facility owners who intend to vacate the RNA upon activation are
not required to comply with the RNA mooring requirements. If a facility
with a valid Hurricane Operations Plan is not compliant with their
certified plan, the vessels moored there will be required to vacate the
RNA also.
One comment requested the Coast Guard consider removing all vessels
from the IHNC corridor and revise the current language which states the
``Coast Guard is not inclined to allow any floating vessels to remain
within the IHNC portion of the Canal Basin''. The Coast Guard considers
that the current wording is adequate to address the risk in that area.
The Coast Guard has no intentions to support any additional annual
Hurricane Operation Plan submissions for floating vessels within higher
risk IHNC areas. Performance based criteria will not apply to the IHNC
area, and any vessels who expect to remain will need to apply for a
deviation and demonstrate that mooring arrangements provide an
equivalent level of safety. As was previously mentioned, the USACE has
stated an analysis would be produced to determine the resiliency of the
I-walls subject to impact loads from small vessels, small floating
objects, characteristics of boat impacts, limiting velocities and boat
weight to further classify which vessels actually constitute a risk.
Once that analysis is produced and clearly identified, the Coast Guard
would be willing to review
[[Page 21133]]
or update this Final Rule, which may allow certain classes of vessels
to remain within the IHNC. In the absence of such policy, direction or
analysis, the Coast Guard intends to maintain current posture and
wording as outlined within this Final Rule.
One comment notified the Coast Guard that revised mooring criteria
were being developed which may slightly differ from what the Coast
Guard was proposing. The commenter requested that these newly revised
criteria be included in this final rule. After a two year process of
crafting this rule with multiple Federal, State and local entities, the
Coast Guard is moving forward with publishing this final rule with
current information. The Coast Guard however is open to future
recommendations on mooring guidance and, if appropriate, would
reexamine these standards in a future rulemaking. The Coast Guard is
publishing this rule to enable vessels, facility owners and operators
sufficient time to comply with requirements in time for the 2014
Hurricane Season.
One comment requested that mooring criteria identified within this
final rule be considered a minimum requirement and further stated that
additional mooring criteria utilizing UFC 4-159 would be provided to
the Coast Guard for inclusion in this rule. The commenter suggested
apparatus design plans that accompany a waiver application should be
reviewed by the USACE and approved or denied by the USCG. The Coast
Guard has stated in this final rule that the intent of this rulemaking
is transitioning from a waiver approval process to a performance based
system. The Coast Guard agrees with the commenter and will partner with
the USACE in the annual review and submission of all Hurricane
Operational Plans. The Coast Guard agrees that requirements described
in this rulemaking are minimum requirements that should be attained by
all vessel and facility operators, and that mooring designs need to be
certified by a professional engineer. As previously stated, after a two
year process of crafting this rule with multiple Federal, State and
local entities, the Coast Guard is moving forward with publishing this
final rule with current information to ensure vessels, facility owners,
and operators have sufficient time to comply with requirements for the
2014 Hurricane Season.
One comment stated that the actual size and type of lashing shall
be designed by the owner's professional engineer and shall be included
in the required annual hurricane operations plan and be consistent with
UFC 4-159. The Coast Guard believes this comment is already addressed
within this regulation and specifically within the requirements for a
professional engineer to certify minimum attainment of the mooring
design criteria.
Two related comments requested clarification on the regulatory text
relating to allowable actions within the RNA during the enforcement
period and how that relates to the closing of the navigational
structures. For further clarification, the Coast Guard intends to begin
enforcement of the RNA 24 hours in advance of the anticipated closure
of either the IHNC Lake Borgne Surge Barrier or the West Closure
Complex. When the Coast Guard announces that the RNA will be
implemented, all vessels not having an approved plan to remain in the
RNA need to begin vacating the RNA, and need to be out of the RNA area
prior to the closure of the structures or locks. All vessels that are
transiting through the RNA will be allowed to transit providing there
is sufficient time to either vacate or reach their intended and
approved location. Progress and status of RNA evacuation will be
monitored by Port Assessment Teams comprising representatives of the
USCG, USACE and the levee protection authorities.
Finally, one comment asked whether the Coast Guard had sufficient
resources to perform compliance inspections needed to ensure all
vessels remaining in the RNA are properly moored to an approved mooring
facility. Yes, the Coast Guard has sufficient resources, utilizing Port
Assessment Teams that patrol the RNA area during hurricane season to
maintain maritime domain awareness in the canals, counting vessels, and
analyzing how long it would take for vessels to vacate the RNA area
should a tropical event occur. Additionally, during a possible tropical
event, the Coast Guard, USACE and levee protection authorities patrol
daily to ensure facilities that have submitted annual hurricane
operation plans are complying with those plans and address any concerns
identified during those patrols. The success of these patrols and the
joint effort between our port partners to enact the RNA was
demonstrated during Hurricane Isaac and Tropical Storm Karen where the
RNA was successfully implemented with current resource levels.
D. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on these statutes and executive orders.
1. Regulatory Planning and Review
This 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.
In determining if this rule was a significant regulatory action,
the Coast Guard considered alternatives so as not to unduly impact the
segment of the economy impacted by the RNA. Furthermore, the Coast
Guard also incorporated mooring requirements in regulation that negates
the need for annual waivers greatly reducing associated costs. The
Coast Guard incorporated into the regulatory requirements a provision
that enables plans to be submitted with alternative minimum mooring
requirements which will be reviewed by the COTP on a case-by-case
basis. This provision enables the Coast Guard to review and allow
mooring alternatives such as piling systems that permanently moor a
vessel not intending to move from its berth that present an equal or
greater level of safety under the regulation in an effort to mitigate
possible regulatory and economic impacts. The Coast Guard also provided
a series of questions for industry comment with the sole purpose of
determining regulatory and economic impact. The questions were provided
to those entities that had submitted waivers to remain in the RNA under
the Interim Rule, along with the responses received, are available for
public viewing in the docket.
Based on responses to the questions, the Coast Guard modified the
proposed tug boat requirements for on-scene monitoring of vessels
during RNA enforcement. The Coast Guard originally contemplated
requiring each facility with three or more vessels to have one tug on-
scene for every 25 vessels. As a result of the Coast Guard's outreach
to industry with these questions and subsequent responses indicating an
unnecessary economic hardship, the Coast Guard modified this
requirement. The SNPRM proposed every facility with eight or more
vessels to maintain one tug for every 50 vessels which significantly
reduces the economic impact on industry but still provides a
substantial measure of safety in the
[[Page 21134]]
event that tugs are required in an emergency.
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 rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. This rule would affect the following entities, some of
which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels
intending to transit or moor in the RNA during enforcement, and the
owners or operators or facilities in the RNA who intend to keep vessels
at their facility during enforcement of the RNA. On a case by case
basis, the Coast Guard will continue to review alternatives to the
minimum mooring requirements for those that have an equal or greater
measure of safety. This provision supports the Coast Guard's ongoing
effort to keep this rulemaking from having a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Also, this regulation
seeks to reduce impact on small entities by transitioning to a
performance based system allowing vessels to remain if they meet the
mooring requirements in the regulation. In addition, several routes for
vessel traffic exist for departure from the area before the RNA goes
into effect.
3. Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this 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.
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.
4. Collection of Information
This rule may be found to call for a new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.). The
Coast Guard solicited voluntary information concerning this rulemaking
from 10 of the 10-14 maritime industry entities that have applied for
waivers to deviate from this RNA during the past four years. This
solicitation did not meet the guidelines of a new collection of
information. The information solicited from the maritime industry and
waterway users was specific to the impacts of the RNA. Questions
included but were not limited to, addressing the economic costs and
benefits of providing an option for vessels and facilities to deviate
from the RNA restriction by providing Hurricane Operations Plans
allowing them to remain in areas of the RNA during enforcement.
Comments received during public meetings and public comment periods
throughout this rulemaking project, show that industry wants the option
to safely and securely deviate from the RNA restriction. Facilities
operating in this area are aware of the threat of tropical weather
conditions and already have operation plans specific to Hurricane
season in place. Such a plan is part of their normal course of
business. Therefore, this final rule does call for a collection of
information in the form of an operational plan from vessels and
facilities that wish to deviate from the restrictions under the RNA
when enforced. As understood from industry and waterway user comments
and responses to the posed questions, no new information would need to
be collected. Such requirement replaces the waiver option in the
existing RNA.
Still, the Coast Guard has been advised that this final rule may
include a collection of information as defined under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520. As defined in 5 CFR
1320.3(c), ``collection of information'' comprises reporting,
recordkeeping, monitoring, posting, labeling, and other similar
actions. Regarding the burden to respond to this collection of
information, under 5 CFR 1320.3(b)(2), the time, effort, and financial
resources necessary to comply with the information required to deviate
under this rule is excluded, and therefore should not be considered a
burden because it will be incurred in the normal course of business and
activities.
The Coast Guard will publish a notice requesting comments on
revising existing OMB Control Number: 1625-0043 to include any
collection of information resulting from requirements to voluntarily
deviate from this RNA. OMB Control Number 1625-0043. The title and
description of the information collection, a description of those who
must collect the information, and an estimate of the total annual
burden are included in that notice, which may be found under the same
docket number, USCG-2009-0139, as indicated under ADDRESSES.
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 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 rule would not result
in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
8. Taking of Private Property
This rule will 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.
[[Page 21135]]
9. Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
10. Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
11. Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
12. Energy Effects
This rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 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.
13. Technical Standards
This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
14. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under 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 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 Final Rule
involves establishing a regulated navigation area as defined within
this regulation, which is categorically excluded under figure 2-1,
paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction. An environmental analysis
checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion
Determination are 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 rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR Part 165 as follows:
PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6 and 160.5; Pub. L.
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
0
2. Revise Sec. 165.838 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.838 Regulated Navigation Area; Gulf Intracoastal Waterway,
Inner Harbor Navigation Canal, New Orleans, LA.
(a) Location. The following is a regulated navigation area (RNA):
(1) The Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW) from Mile Marker (MM) 22
East of Harvey Locks (EHL), west on the GIWW, including the Michoud
Canal and the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal (IHNC), extending North \1/
2\ mile from the Seabrook Flood Gate Complex out into Lake
Pontchartrain and South to the IHNC Lock.
(2) The Harvey Canal, between the Lapalco Boulevard Bridge and the
confluence of the Harvey Canal and the Algiers Canal;
(3) The Algiers Canal, from the Algiers Lock to the confluence of
the Algiers Canal and the Harvey Canal;
(4) The GIWW from the confluence of Harvey Canal and Algiers Canal
to MM 7.5 West of Harvey Locks (WHL)
(b) Definitions. As used in this section:
(1) Breakaway means a floating vessel that is adrift and that is
not under its own power or the control of a towboat, or secured to its
moorings.
(2) COTP means the Captain of the Port, New Orleans;
(3) Facility means a fleeting, mooring, industrial facility or
marina along the shoreline at which vessels are or can be moored and
which owns, possesses, moors, or leases vessels located in the areas
described in paragraph (a) of this section.
(3) Fleet includes one or more tiers of barges.
(4) Fleeting or mooring facility means the area along the shoreline
at which vessels are or can be moored.
(5) Floating vessel means any floating vessel to which the Ports
and Waterways Safety Act, 33 U.S.C. 1221 et seq., applies.
(6) Mooring barge or spar barge means a barge moored to mooring
devices or secured to the ground by spuds, and to which other barges
may be moored.
(7) Mooring device includes a deadman, anchor, pile or other
reliable holding apparatus.
(8) Navigational structures are the Seabrook Floodgate Complex, the
IHNC Lake Borgne Surge Barrier, and the West Closure Complex components
of the Hurricane and Storm Damage Risk Reduction System (HSDRRS).
(9) Person in charge includes any owner, agent, pilot, master,
officer, operator, crewmember, supervisor, dispatcher or other person
navigating, controlling, directing or otherwise responsible for the
movement, action, securing, or security of any vessel, barge, tier,
fleet or fleeting or mooring facility subject to the regulations in
this section.
(10) Tier means barges moored interdependently in rows or groups.
(11) Port Coordination Team is a body of public and private port
stakeholders led by the COTP whose purpose is to share information,
establish priorities, recommend and implement actions to address risks
to ports and waterways during incidents and events.
(12) Tropical Event means the time period immediately preceding,
during, and immediately following the expected impact of heavy weather
from a tropical cyclone.
(c) Enforcement. (1) The provisions of paragraph (d) of this
section will be enforced during a tropical event beginning 24 hours in
advance of the predicted closure of the IHNC Lake Borgne Surge Barrier
structure within the HSDRRS (IHNC & GIWW) in the area defined in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
(2) The provisions of paragraph (d) of this section will be
enforced beginning 24 hours in advance of the predicted closure of the
West Closure Complex within the HSDRRS (Harvey & Algiers Canals) in the
area defined in paragraphs (a)(2) through (4) of this section.
(3) If the Coast Guard receives notice of a closure less than 24
hours before
[[Page 21136]]
closure, the provisions of paragraph (d) of this section will be
enforced upon the COTP receiving the notice of predicted closing.
(4) In the event that a particularly dangerous storm is predicted,
the COTP, in consultation with the Port Coordination Team, may require
all floating vessels to evacuate the RNA beginning as early as 72 hours
before predicted closure of any navigational structure or upon notice
that particularly dangerous storm conditions are approaching, whichever
is less.
(5) The COTP will notify the maritime community of the enforcement
periods for this RNA through Marine Safety Information Bulletins and
Safety Broadcast Notices to Mariners.
(d) Regulations. During the period that the RNA is enforced and
before closure of the navigational structures, all floating vessels
must depart the RNA except as follows:
(1) Floating vessels may remain in the Harvey and Algiers Canals,
provided they are moored sufficiently to prevent a breakaway and meet
the minimum mooring requirements and conditions set forth in paragraphs
(f) and (g) of this section.
(2) Floating vessels may remain in the Michoud Canal at least \1/4\
mile north of the intersection of the Michoud Canal and the GIWW, the
GIWW from MM 15 EHL to MM 10 EHL, provided they are moored sufficiently
to prevent a breakaway and meet the minimum mooring requirements and
conditions set forth in paragraphs (f) and (g) of this section.
(3) During the period that the RNA is enforced and before closure
of the navigational structures, vessels may transit through the RNA en
route to a destination outside of the RNA given there is sufficient
time to transit prior to the closure of a navigational structure, or
they may transit to a facility within the RNA with which they have a
prearranged agreement. These vessel movements and time critical
decisions will be made by the COTP in consultation with the Port
Coordination Team.
(4) The COTP may review, on a case-by-case basis, alternatives to
minimum mooring requirements and conditions set forth in paragraphs (f)
and (g) of this section and may approve a deviation to these
requirements and conditions should they provide an equivalent level of
safety.
(e) Special Requirements for Facilities. In addition to the mooring
and towboat requirements discussed in paragraph (f) and (g) of this
section, Facilities within the area described in paragraph (a) of this
section that wish to deviate from these restrictions because they have
vessels intending to remain within the areas allowed in paragraphs
(d)(1) and (2) of this section shall comply with the below
documentation and maintenance requirements in order to obtain the
COTP's approval for their vessel(s) to remain in the closed RNA.
(1) Annual Hurricane Operations Plan. All facilities that have
vessels intending to deviate from this RNA and remain within the areas
allowed in paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of this section shall develop an
operations plan. The operations plan shall be readily available by May
1st of each calendar year for review by the COTP. The Annual Hurricane
Operations Plan shall include:
(i) A description of the maximum number of vessels the facility
intends to have remaining at any one time during hurricane season.
(ii) A detailed plan for any vessel(s) that are intended to be
sunk/grounded in place when the RNA is enforced if evacuation is not
possible.
(iii) A diagram of the waterfront facility and fleeting area.
(iv) Name, call sign, official number, and operational status of
machinery on board (i.e., engines, generators, fire fighting pumps,
bilge pumps, anchors, mooring machinery, etc.) each standby towboat.
(v) Characteristics for each vessel remaining at the fleeting or
mooring facility, as applicable (length, breadth, draft, air draft,
gross tonnage, hull type, horsepower, single or twin screw);
(vi) Details of mooring arrangements in accordance with mooring
requirements and conditions set forth in paragraphs (g) and (h) of this
section or COTP case-by-case approved deviations;
(vii) Certification by a professional engineer that the mooring
arrangements are able to withstand winds of up to 140 mph, a surge
water level of eleven feet, a current of four mph and a wave height of
three feet within the canal basin in the area defined in paragraph
(a)(1) of this section and a surge water level of eight feet, a current
of four mph, and a wave height of two and a half feet within the canal
basin in the area defined in paragraphs (a)(2) through (4) of this
section;
(viii) Emergency contact information for the owner/operator, and/or
agent of the facility/property.
(ix) 24-hour emergency contact information for qualified
individuals empowered in writing by the owners/operators to make on-
site decisions and authorize expenditures for any required pollution
response or salvage.
(x) Full insurance disclosure to the COTP. Vessels moored to a
facility shall provide insurance information to the facility.
(2) Storm Specific Verification Report. 72 hrs prior to predicted
closure of the navigational structures, those facilities which have
vessels that intend to remain within the RNA shall submit a Storm
Specific Verification Report to the COTP New Orleans. The requirements
for this Storm Specific Verification Report are located in the Canal
Hurricane Operations Plan, which is Enclosure Six to the Sector New
Orleans Maritime Hurricane Contingency Port Plan, https://homeport.uscg.mil/nola. The report shall include:
(i) Updated contact information, including names of manned
towboat(s) and individuals remaining on the towboat(s).
(ii) Number of vessels currently moored and mooring configurations
if less than stated in Annual Hurricane Operations Plan.
(iii) If the number of vessels exceeds the amount listed in the
Annual Hurricane Operations Plan, describe process and timeframe for
evacuating vessels to bring total number of vessels into alignment with
the Annual Hurricane Operations Plan.
(3) The person in charge of a facility shall inspect each mooring
wire, chain, line and connecting gear between mooring devices and each
wire, line and connecting equipment used to moor each vessel, and each
mooring device. Inspections shall be performed according to the
following timelines and guidance:
(i) Annually between May 1 and June 1 of each calendar year; and
(ii) After vessels are added to, withdrawn from, or moved at a
facility, each mooring wire, line, and connecting equipment of each
barge within each tier affected by that operation; and
(iii) At least weekly between June 1 and November 30; and
(iv) 72 hrs prior to predicted closure of the navigation structures
within this RNA; or within 6 hrs of the predicted closure, if the
notice of predicted closure is less than 72 hrs.
(4) The person who inspects moorings shall take immediate action to
correct any deficiency.
(5) Facility Records. The person in charge of a fleeting or mooring
facility shall maintain, and make available to the COTP, records
containing the following information:
(i) The time of commencement and termination of each inspection.
(ii) The name of each person who makes the inspection.
(iii) The identification of each vessel, barge entering or
departing the fleeting
[[Page 21137]]
or mooring facility, along with the following information:
(A) Date and time of entry and departure; and
(B) The names of any hazardous cargo which the vessel is carrying.
(6) The person in charge of a facility shall ensure continuous
visual surveillance of all vessels at the facility.
(7) The person who observes the vessels shall:
(i) Inspect for movements that are unusual for properly secured
vessels; and
(ii) Take immediate action to correct each deficiency.
(f) Mooring Requirements. Facility owners shall consider all
requirements within this section as minimum standards. Title 33 CFR
165.803, United Facilities Criteria (UFC) 4-159 and American Society of
the Civil Engineers (ASCE)7 should be utilized by Professional
Engineers in the certification of the Annual Hurricane Operations Plan.
(1) No person may secure a vessel to trees or to other vegetation.
(2) No person may allow a vessel to be moored with unraveled or
frayed lines or other defective or worn mooring.
(3) No person may moor barges side to side unless they are secured
to each other from fittings as close to each corner of abutting sides
as practicable.
(4) No person may moor barges end to end unless they are secured to
each other from fittings as close to each corner of abutting ends as
practicable.
(5) A vessel may be moored to mooring devices if both ends of that
vessel are secured to mooring devices.
(6) Barges may be moored in tiers if each shoreward barge is
secured to mooring devices at each end.
(7) A vessel must be secured as near as practicable to each
abutting corner by:
(i) Three parts of wire rope of at least 1\1/4\ inch diameter with
an eye at each end of the rope passed around the timberhead, caval, or
button;
(ii) A mooring of natural or synthetic fiber rope that has at least
the breaking strength of three parts of 1\1/4\ inch diameter wire rope;
or
(iii) Fixed rigging that is at least equivalent to three parts of
1\1/4\ inch diameter wire rope.
(8) The person in charge shall ensure that all mooring devices,
wires, chains, lines and connecting gear are of sufficient strength and
in sufficient number to withstand forces that may be exerted on them by
moored vessels/barges.
(g) Towboat Requirements. The person in charge of a fleeting or
mooring facility must ensure:
(1) Each facility consisting of eight or more vessels that are not
under their own power must be attended by at least one radar-equipped
towboat for every 50 vessels.
(2) Each towboat required must be:
(i) Able to secure any breakaways;
(ii) Capable of safely withdrawing or moving any vessel at the
fleeting or mooring facility;
(iii) Immediately operational;
(iv) Radio-equipped;
(v) No less than 800 horsepower;
(vi) Within 500 yards of the vessels.
(3) The person in charge of each towboat required must maintain a
continuous guard on the frequency specified by current Federal
Communications Commission regulations found in 47 CFR part 83; a
continuous watch on the vessels moored at facility; and report any
breakaway as soon as possible to the COTP via telephone, radio or other
means of rapid communication.
(h) Transient vessels will not be permitted to seek safe haven in
the RNA except in accordance with a prearranged agreement between the
vessel and a facility within the RNA.
(i) Penalties. Failure to comply with this section may result in
civil or criminal penalties pursuant to the Ports and Waterways Safety
Act, 33 U.S.C. 1221 et seq.
Dated: April 1, 2014.
K.S. Cook,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2014-08265 Filed 4-14-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P