Anchorage Regulations: Special Anchorage Areas; Marina del Rey Harbor, Marina del Rey, CA, 2893-2896 [2016-31996]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 10, 2017 / Rules and Regulations labeled for sale, distribution, or shipment to members or units of the U.S. Armed Forces, including those located outside the United States. The health warning statement requirement applies to containers of alcoholic beverages manufactured, imported, or bottled for sale or distribution in the United States on or after November 18, 1989. The statement reads as follows: GOVERNMENT WARNING: (1) According to the Surgeon General, women should not drink alcoholic beverages during pregnancy because of the risk of birth defects. (2) Consumption of alcoholic beverages impairs your ability to drive a car or operate machinery, and may cause health problems. Section 204 of the ABLA also specifies that the Secretary of the Treasury shall have the power to ensure the enforcement of the provisions of the ABLA and issue regulations to carry out them out. In addition, section 207 of the ABLA, codified in 27 U.S.C. 218, provides that any person who violates the provisions of the ABLA is subject to a civil penalty of not more than $10,000, with each day constituting a separate offense. Most of the civil monetary penalties administered by TTB are imposed by the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, and thus are not subject to the inflation adjustment mandated by the Inflation Adjustment Act. The only civil monetary penalty enforced by TTB that is subject to the inflation adjustment is the penalty imposed by the ABLA at 27 U.S.C. 218. pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES TTB Regulations The TTB regulations implementing the ABLA are found in 27 CFR part 16, and the regulations implementing the Inflation Adjustment Act with respect to the ABLA penalty are found in 27 CFR 16.33. This section indicates that the ABLA provides that any person who violates the provisions of this part shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than $10,000, but also states that, pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, as amended, this civil penalty is subject to periodic cost-of-living adjustment. Accordingly, any person who violates the provisions of 27 CFR part 16 shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than the amount listed at https://www.ttb.gov/ regulation_guidance/ablapenalty.html. Each day shall constitute a separate offense. To adjust the penalty, § 16.33(b) indicates that TTB will provide notice in the Federal Register and at the Web site mentioned above of cost-of-living VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:51 Jan 09, 2017 Jkt 241001 adjustments to the civil penalty for violations of this part. In this document, TTB is publishing its yearly adjustment to the maximum ABLA penalty, as required by the Inflation Adjustment Act, as amended. TTB made the initial adjustment to the ABLA penalty required by the Inflation Adjustment Act, as amended, in an interim final rule that was published and effective on July 1, 2016 (T.D. TTB–138, 81 FR 43062). Subsequent to the initial adjustment, the Improvements Act of 2015 provides that, not later than January 15 of each year after the initial adjustment, the head of each agency shall adjust each civil monetary penalty subject to the Inflation Adjustment Act, as amended, by the inflation adjustment described in section 5 of the Act. As mentioned earlier, the ABLA contains a maximum civil monetary penalty, rather than a range of minimum and maximum civil monetary penalties. For such penalties, Section 5 indicates that the inflation adjustment shall be determined by increasing the maximum penalty by the cost-of-living adjustment. The cost-of-living adjustment means the percentage (if any) by which the Consumer Price Index for all-urban consumers (CPI–U) for the month of October preceding the date of the adjustment exceeds the CPI–U for the month of October 1 year before the month of October preceding the date of the adjustment. The CPI–U in October 2015 was 237.838, and the CPI–U in October 2016 was 241.729. The rate of inflation between October 2015 and October 2016 is therefore 1.636 percent. When applied to the current ABLA penalty of $19,787, this rate of inflation yields a raw (unrounded) inflation adjustment of $323.72. Rounded to the nearest dollar, the inflation adjustment is $324, meaning that the new maximum civil penalty for violations of the ABLA will be $20,111. The new maximum civil penalty will apply to all penalties that are assessed after January 10, 2017. TTB has also updated its Web page at https:// www.ttb.gov/regulation_guidance/ ablapenalty.html to reflect the adjusted penalty. Signed: January 3, 2017. John J. Manfreda, Administrator. [FR Doc. 2017–00082 Filed 1–9–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810–31–P PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 2893 DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 110 [Docket Number USCG–2014–0142] RIN 1625–AA01 Anchorage Regulations: Special Anchorage Areas; Marina del Rey Harbor, Marina del Rey, CA Coast Guard, DHS. Final rule. AGENCY: ACTION: The Coast Guard is amending the shape and reducing the size of the special anchorage area in Marina del Rey Harbor, Marina del Rey, California. Additionally, the Coast Guard is clarifying the language in the note section of the existing regulation. This action is necessary as it will create sufficient navigable water around the anchorage allowing vessels to traffic the Marina del Rey channel without undue maritime safety concerns. DATES: This rule is effective February 9, 2017. ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket USCG– 2014–0142. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http:// www.regulations.gov, type the docket number in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on the 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, with the exception of federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, call or email Lieutenant Junior Grade Amber Napralla, Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard District 11, telephone (510) 437–2978, email Amber.L.Napralla@uscg.mil. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking SNPRM Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking § Section U.S.C. United States Code E:\FR\FM\10JAR1.SGM 10JAR1 2894 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 10, 2017 / Rules and Regulations pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES II. Background Information and Regulatory History In 1967, the Coast Guard placed the regulation for a special anchorage area in the main channel of Marina del Rey in 33 CFR after anchorage regulations were transferred from the Army Corps of Engineers to the Coast Guard (32 FR 17726, 17737, December 12, 1967.) The specific regulations and boundaries for this special anchorage area are defined by coordinates found in 33 CFR 110.111. On May 28, 2014, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled ‘‘Anchorage Regulations; Special Anchorage Area, Marina del Rey, California’’ in the Federal Register (79 FR 30509, May 28, 2014) to disestablish the anchorage. The stated purpose of the NPRM was to align the regulations with the main channel and docking facilities in Marina del Rey harbor. Existing docks located in the northern section of the harbor were built into the preexisting anchorage area at some point with no record of Coast Guard comment on the construction or its impact on anchorage. On November 4, 2014, the Coast Guard published notice for a public meeting (79 FR 65361, November 4, 2014) to hear concerns regarding the proposed rulemaking. The meeting was held in Marina del Rey, CA on November 20, 2014. The Coast Guard heard from six speakers. To ensure maximum public input was considered, comments to the public docket were kept open and considered through January 5, 2015. In addition to the six speakers at the public meeting, 44 written submissions were made to the docket. The speakers input and written submissions were reviewed and taken into consideration. On February 29, 2016, based on the comments received, the Coast Guard published a Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SNPRM) (81 FR 10156, February 29, 2016) that proposed to maintain the special anchorage area, but amend the boundaries and reduce the size of the anchorage. On April 12, 2016, a public meeting was held in Marina del Rey, CA and comments were open and considered on the docket until April 30, 2016. There was no public representation at the meeting and no comments were submitted to the docket regarding the SNPRM. On July 14, 2016, the docket was reopened for comment (81 FR 45428, July 14, 2016) for 30 days to provide additional opportunity for public feedback on the SNPRM. During this VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:51 Jan 09, 2017 Jkt 241001 period four written comments were submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal and three comments were sent directly to the Coast Guard via email. III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule The legal basis for the final rule is: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236, and 2071; 33 CFR 1.05–1; and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. These authorities collectively authorize the Coast Guard to define anchorage areas. A special anchorage area is a designated water area within which vessels less than 65 feet (20 meters) in length are not required to sound signals required by Rule 35 of the Inland Navigation Rules (33 CFR 83.35) or exhibit the white anchor lights or shapes required by Rule 30 of the Inland Navigation Rules (33 CFR 83.30.) By regulation, special anchorage areas should be well removed from the fairways and be located where general navigation will not endanger or be endangered by unlighted vessels (33 CFR 109.10.) The purpose of this rule is to improve navigation safety by clearly delineating between the designated anchorage and the navigation channel, and by accommodating vessel traffic on all sides of the anchorage. IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule The Coast Guard received a total of 51 written comments and recorded six speakers at a public meeting since the inception of this rulemaking from November, 2014. The public docket for this rulemaking includes all written submissions made through the Federal eRulemaking Portal, the recorded transcripts of the public meetings and all other documents pertaining to this topic. This correspondence can be found where indicated under ADDRESSES. The original NPRM (USCG–2014– 0142) was placed on May 28, 2014 and the Coast Guard received a total of 32 written submissions to the docket following this publication. Of the 32 submissions, 12 comments requested a public hearing and additional time for public comment. As a result, the Coast Guard held a public meeting in Marina del Rey on November 20, 2014 and extended the online comment period to January 5, 2015. The Coast Guard heard from six speakers at the public meeting on November 20, 2014 and received 12 additional written comments to the docket, resulting in 44 total written comments to the docket. Of the 44 submissions, 32 comments requested to keep the anchorage as is or to establish an alternate anchorage at another location in the harbor. The Coast Guard PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 understood the concerns of the comment submitters regarding the need for a safe refuge for recreational vessels during storms or other dangerous conditions and thus proposed a smaller anchorage at the same site as an option for mariners in the SNPRM. The Coast Guard received seven comments in support of removing the anchorage. Some comments indicated that vessels anchoring in the existing anchorage site in the main channel create an unsafe situation. Other comments indicated that mariners rarely use the anchorage and that there is little knowledge of its existence. The special anchorage area in question is clearly marked on the chart with reference to the applicable regulation. A copy of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Office of Coast Survey chart number 18744 has been posted to the docket for reference. In addition, Coast Pilot 7 contains information regarding the special anchorage area in Marina Del Rey. Some comments expressed concern regarding the administration of the special anchorage area by the Marina del Rey Harbormaster, indicating that the Harbor Master does not allow vessels to anchor in the area for other than emergency reasons. Local regulations administered by the Harbor Master are outside the scope of Coast Guard authority, and are not addressed in this rulemaking. At the public meeting, the Coast Guard received two comments and questions concerning proposed projects located in other areas within the harbor. The Coast Guard responded to these comments and questions by indicating that these comments addressed areas outside the anchorage area being discussed. The Coast Guard indicated to the attendees that projects in other areas within the harbor would not impact the existing anchorage and were beyond the scope of the proposed rulemaking. The Coast Guard determined that the existing configuration of the special anchorage area in Marina del Rey poses a safety concern because it occupies the entire channel width at the north end of the harbor. The SNPRM published on February 29, 2016 proposed a smaller special anchorage area that allows vessel traffic to pass safely on all sides of the designated anchorage and also amends the note to update authority to the Marina del Rey Harbor Master for prescribing local regulation for mooring and boating activities in the area. A public meeting regarding the revised proposal in the SNPRM was held on April 12, 2016. No members of the public attended this meeting. The Federal Register announcement for the E:\FR\FM\10JAR1.SGM 10JAR1 pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 10, 2017 / Rules and Regulations meeting was delayed due to administrative errors and was not available for review until after the meeting. However, the meeting was advertised locally and through direct outreach. The online comments for the docket were open until April 30, 2016; no comments were made to the docket during this time period. In light of the delayed announcement by the Federal Register, the Coast Guard reopened the docket for comments on July 15, 2016 to allow for an extended period of public comment. Seven comments were received during this time; four via the online docket and three via email bringing the total number to 51 written submissions to the docket. Two comments were identical and appear to have been incorrectly filed in the docket, as they addressed concerns with a proposed anchorage on the east coast and were unrelated to the anchorage in Marina del Rey. One comment supported the proposal, citing safety concerns due to the increasing number of waterway users. One comment to the docket and three email comments opposed disestablishment of the Marina del Rey anchorage due to there not being an alternate anchorage site for safe harbor in the area and the comments also expressed concern regarding future development. These comments appear to reference the original NPRM, proposing removal of the anchorage, not the most recent SNPRM, proposing retention of the anchorage area with an amended size and shape of the anchorage. The Coast Guard is retaining the anchorage but is changing the shape and size of the anchorage area to allow for safer transit around the anchorage for recreational traffic. The reconfiguration of the anchorage area does not accommodate further development as it more clearly delineates the navigation channel on either side of the anchorage. Nothing in this regulation prevents vessels from anchoring due to emergency situations. This final rule will decrease the size of the current anchorage in Marina del Rey Harbor. The anchorage is currently a trapezoid-shaped anchorage of approximately 0.48 square nautical miles. The Coast Guard is changing the shape of the anchorage from a trapezoid to a rectangular shape and reducing the size from 0.48 to 0.11 square nautical miles. The revised anchorage will be moved to the middle of the channel across from Burton Chace Park with its northern boundary line extending from approximately the midpoint of Basin G south to the midpoint of Basin H. The anchorage dimensions will be 1,154 feet in length by 365 feet in width. The VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:51 Jan 09, 2017 Jkt 241001 distance from the closest shore-side dock to the anchorage boundary will be approximately 243 feet. The anchorage boundaries are described, using precise coordinates, in the final regulatory text at the end of this document. V. Regulatory Analyses We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive Orders (E.O.s) related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on these statutes and Executive Orders. A. 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. The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this proposed rule will not be significant to the maritime and local community. The existing anchorage is currently used only in emergency circumstances and this final rule will not significantly reduce the number of vessels using the anchorage. B. 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 final rule may affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: Owners or operators of recreational vessels that have a need to anchor in Marina del Rey special anchorage area. This final rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Although this rule will decrease the size of the special anchorage area, the dimensions provide sufficient room for vessels to anchor without presenting a hazard to vessels transiting in the channel. PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 2895 C. Collection of Information This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520.) D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments 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 have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132. This rule has no 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. If you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. E. 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 will not result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. F. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023–01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969.42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f, and have concluded that this action is one of the category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves the amendment of a currently-existing anchorage area. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further E:\FR\FM\10JAR1.SGM 10JAR1 2896 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 10, 2017 / Rules and Regulations review under paragraph 34(f) of Figure 2–1 of the Commandant Instruction M16475.1D. A final environmental analysis checklist 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. G. 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. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110 Anchorage grounds. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 110 as follows: PART 110—ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05–1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.01. ■ 2. Revise § 110.111 to read as follows: § 110.111 Marina del Rey Harbor, Calif. pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES An area in the main channel encompassed within the following described boundaries: Beginning at the northeasterly corner in position latitude 33°58′41.6″ N., longitude 118°26′50.8″ W.; thence southerly to latitude 33°58′30.2″ N., longitude 118°26′50.8″ W.; thence westerly to latitude 33°58′30.2″ N., longitude 118°26′55.1″ W.; thence northerly to latitude 33°58′41.6″ N., longitude 118°26′55.1″ W.; thence easterly to the point of origin. All coordinates referenced North American Datum 1983. Note to 110.111: The Marina del Rey Harbor Master, Los Angeles County, prescribes local regulations for mooring and boating activities in this area. Dated: December 2, 2016 T.A. Sokalzuk Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. 2016–31996 Filed 1–9–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:51 Jan 09, 2017 Jkt 241001 POSTAL SERVICE 39 CFR Part 265 Production or Disclosure of Material or Information Postal Service. Final rule. AGENCY: ACTION: The United States Postal Service® (Postal Service) is responding to public comments regarding the amendment of its regulations concerning compliance with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to implement the changes to the procedures for the disclosure of records and for engaging in dispute resolution required by the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016. Upon review and evaluation of such comments, the Postal Service has found that one change to the regulations is necessary. DATES: Effective date: January 10, 2017. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Natalie A. Bonanno, Chief Counsel, Federal Compliance, natalie.a.bonanno@usps.gov, (202) 268– 2944. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 30, 2016 (81 FR 86270), the Postal Service published notice of amendments to 39 CFR part 265 to implement changes required by the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016 (FOIAIA), Public Law 114–185 (June 30, 2016). These changes were effective on December 27, 2016. In response to this notice, we received comments that generally supported the amendments to the regulations, but questioned the definition of a ‘‘representative of the news media’’ in the regulations. The Postal Service has reviewed these comments, and has concluded that one change should be made to the definition in question. Our responses to the comments received, as grouped and categorized for convenience, are as follows. Question 1: Why did the Postal Service fail to eliminate the ‘‘organized and operated’’ standard from the definition of a representative of the news media in 39 CFR part 265.9(b)(8) in accordance with 5 U.S.C. part 552(a)(4)(a), recent case law, and the Open Government Act of 2007? Answer: Thank you for bringing this our attention. We will eliminate the ‘‘organized and operated’’ standard from the definition of a representative of the news media in 39 CFR 265.9(b)(8). Question 2: Why did the Postal Service fail to eliminate the requirement that a news media requester use ‘‘editorial skills’’ to turn ‘‘raw materials’’ into a ‘‘distinct work’’ as a SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 ‘‘simple press release commenting on records’’ would satisfy this criterion? Answer: Such a change would be inconsistent with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(a), and the Department of Justice, Office of Information Policy’s template regulations for agencies. In addition, eliminating the ‘‘editorial skills’’ requirement would extend the definition from representatives of the news media with a minimal degree of professionalism to almost anyone. Question 3: Why did the Postal Service fail to indicate that its list of examples of news media entities is nonexhaustive in contemplation of alternative media and evolving news media formats that may include posting content to a Web site? Answer: Such a change would be inconsistent with the Department of Justice, Office of Information Policy’s template regulations for agencies. Please note that the Postal Service accounted for ‘‘news organizations that disseminate solely on the Internet’’ in contemplation of evolving news media formats in 39 CFR 265.9(b)(8). List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 265 Administrative practice and procedure, Courts, Freedom of information, Government employees. For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Postal Service amends 39 CFR part 265 as follows: PART 265—PRODUCTION OR DISCLOSURE OF MATERIAL OR INFORMATION 1. The authority citation for 39 CFR part 265 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552; 5 U.S.C. App. 3; 39 U.S.C. 401, 403, 410, 1001, 2601; Pub. L. 114–185. 2. Revise the first sentence of § 265.9(b)(8) to read as follows: ■ § 265.9 Fees. * * * * * (b) * * * (8) Representative of the news media is any person or entity that gathers information of potential interest to a segment of the public, uses its editorial skills to turn the raw materials into a distinct work, and distributes that work to an audience. * * * * * * * * Stanley F. Mires, Attorney, Federal Compliance. [FR Doc. 2017–00106 Filed 1–9–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710–12–P E:\FR\FM\10JAR1.SGM 10JAR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 10, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2893-2896]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-31996]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 110

[Docket Number USCG-2014-0142]
RIN 1625-AA01


Anchorage Regulations: Special Anchorage Areas; Marina del Rey 
Harbor, Marina del Rey, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is amending the shape and reducing the size of 
the special anchorage area in Marina del Rey Harbor, Marina del Rey, 
California. Additionally, the Coast Guard is clarifying the language in 
the note section of the existing regulation. This action is necessary 
as it will create sufficient navigable water around the anchorage 
allowing vessels to traffic the Marina del Rey channel without undue 
maritime safety concerns.

DATES: This rule is effective February 9, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket 
USCG-2014-0142. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being 
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the 
docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on the 
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, with the exception of federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, 
call or email Lieutenant Junior Grade Amber Napralla, Waterways 
Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard District 11, telephone (510) 437-
2978, email Amber.L.Napralla@uscg.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
SNPRM Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

[[Page 2894]]

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    In 1967, the Coast Guard placed the regulation for a special 
anchorage area in the main channel of Marina del Rey in 33 CFR after 
anchorage regulations were transferred from the Army Corps of Engineers 
to the Coast Guard (32 FR 17726, 17737, December 12, 1967.) The 
specific regulations and boundaries for this special anchorage area are 
defined by coordinates found in 33 CFR 110.111.
    On May 28, 2014, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPRM) entitled ``Anchorage Regulations; Special Anchorage 
Area, Marina del Rey, California'' in the Federal Register (79 FR 
30509, May 28, 2014) to disestablish the anchorage. The stated purpose 
of the NPRM was to align the regulations with the main channel and 
docking facilities in Marina del Rey harbor. Existing docks located in 
the northern section of the harbor were built into the pre-existing 
anchorage area at some point with no record of Coast Guard comment on 
the construction or its impact on anchorage.
    On November 4, 2014, the Coast Guard published notice for a public 
meeting (79 FR 65361, November 4, 2014) to hear concerns regarding the 
proposed rulemaking. The meeting was held in Marina del Rey, CA on 
November 20, 2014. The Coast Guard heard from six speakers. To ensure 
maximum public input was considered, comments to the public docket were 
kept open and considered through January 5, 2015. In addition to the 
six speakers at the public meeting, 44 written submissions were made to 
the docket. The speakers input and written submissions were reviewed 
and taken into consideration.
    On February 29, 2016, based on the comments received, the Coast 
Guard published a Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SNPRM) 
(81 FR 10156, February 29, 2016) that proposed to maintain the special 
anchorage area, but amend the boundaries and reduce the size of the 
anchorage.
    On April 12, 2016, a public meeting was held in Marina del Rey, CA 
and comments were open and considered on the docket until April 30, 
2016. There was no public representation at the meeting and no comments 
were submitted to the docket regarding the SNPRM.
    On July 14, 2016, the docket was reopened for comment (81 FR 45428, 
July 14, 2016) for 30 days to provide additional opportunity for public 
feedback on the SNPRM. During this period four written comments were 
submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal and three comments were 
sent directly to the Coast Guard via email.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The legal basis for the final rule is: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 
1236, and 2071; 33 CFR 1.05-1; and Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.1. These authorities collectively authorize the 
Coast Guard to define anchorage areas. A special anchorage area is a 
designated water area within which vessels less than 65 feet (20 
meters) in length are not required to sound signals required by Rule 35 
of the Inland Navigation Rules (33 CFR 83.35) or exhibit the white 
anchor lights or shapes required by Rule 30 of the Inland Navigation 
Rules (33 CFR 83.30.) By regulation, special anchorage areas should be 
well removed from the fairways and be located where general navigation 
will not endanger or be endangered by unlighted vessels (33 CFR 
109.10.) The purpose of this rule is to improve navigation safety by 
clearly delineating between the designated anchorage and the navigation 
channel, and by accommodating vessel traffic on all sides of the 
anchorage.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    The Coast Guard received a total of 51 written comments and 
recorded six speakers at a public meeting since the inception of this 
rulemaking from November, 2014. The public docket for this rulemaking 
includes all written submissions made through the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal, the recorded transcripts of the public meetings and all other 
documents pertaining to this topic. This correspondence can be found 
where indicated under ADDRESSES.
    The original NPRM (USCG-2014-0142) was placed on May 28, 2014 and 
the Coast Guard received a total of 32 written submissions to the 
docket following this publication. Of the 32 submissions, 12 comments 
requested a public hearing and additional time for public comment. As a 
result, the Coast Guard held a public meeting in Marina del Rey on 
November 20, 2014 and extended the online comment period to January 5, 
2015. The Coast Guard heard from six speakers at the public meeting on 
November 20, 2014 and received 12 additional written comments to the 
docket, resulting in 44 total written comments to the docket. Of the 44 
submissions, 32 comments requested to keep the anchorage as is or to 
establish an alternate anchorage at another location in the harbor. The 
Coast Guard understood the concerns of the comment submitters regarding 
the need for a safe refuge for recreational vessels during storms or 
other dangerous conditions and thus proposed a smaller anchorage at the 
same site as an option for mariners in the SNPRM. The Coast Guard 
received seven comments in support of removing the anchorage. Some 
comments indicated that vessels anchoring in the existing anchorage 
site in the main channel create an unsafe situation. Other comments 
indicated that mariners rarely use the anchorage and that there is 
little knowledge of its existence. The special anchorage area in 
question is clearly marked on the chart with reference to the 
applicable regulation. A copy of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration (NOAA) Office of Coast Survey chart number 18744 has 
been posted to the docket for reference. In addition, Coast Pilot 7 
contains information regarding the special anchorage area in Marina Del 
Rey. Some comments expressed concern regarding the administration of 
the special anchorage area by the Marina del Rey Harbormaster, 
indicating that the Harbor Master does not allow vessels to anchor in 
the area for other than emergency reasons. Local regulations 
administered by the Harbor Master are outside the scope of Coast Guard 
authority, and are not addressed in this rulemaking. At the public 
meeting, the Coast Guard received two comments and questions concerning 
proposed projects located in other areas within the harbor. The Coast 
Guard responded to these comments and questions by indicating that 
these comments addressed areas outside the anchorage area being 
discussed. The Coast Guard indicated to the attendees that projects in 
other areas within the harbor would not impact the existing anchorage 
and were beyond the scope of the proposed rulemaking.
    The Coast Guard determined that the existing configuration of the 
special anchorage area in Marina del Rey poses a safety concern because 
it occupies the entire channel width at the north end of the harbor. 
The SNPRM published on February 29, 2016 proposed a smaller special 
anchorage area that allows vessel traffic to pass safely on all sides 
of the designated anchorage and also amends the note to update 
authority to the Marina del Rey Harbor Master for prescribing local 
regulation for mooring and boating activities in the area. A public 
meeting regarding the revised proposal in the SNPRM was held on April 
12, 2016. No members of the public attended this meeting. The Federal 
Register announcement for the

[[Page 2895]]

meeting was delayed due to administrative errors and was not available 
for review until after the meeting. However, the meeting was advertised 
locally and through direct outreach. The online comments for the docket 
were open until April 30, 2016; no comments were made to the docket 
during this time period. In light of the delayed announcement by the 
Federal Register, the Coast Guard reopened the docket for comments on 
July 15, 2016 to allow for an extended period of public comment. Seven 
comments were received during this time; four via the online docket and 
three via email bringing the total number to 51 written submissions to 
the docket. Two comments were identical and appear to have been 
incorrectly filed in the docket, as they addressed concerns with a 
proposed anchorage on the east coast and were unrelated to the 
anchorage in Marina del Rey. One comment supported the proposal, citing 
safety concerns due to the increasing number of waterway users. One 
comment to the docket and three email comments opposed disestablishment 
of the Marina del Rey anchorage due to there not being an alternate 
anchorage site for safe harbor in the area and the comments also 
expressed concern regarding future development. These comments appear 
to reference the original NPRM, proposing removal of the anchorage, not 
the most recent SNPRM, proposing retention of the anchorage area with 
an amended size and shape of the anchorage. The Coast Guard is 
retaining the anchorage but is changing the shape and size of the 
anchorage area to allow for safer transit around the anchorage for 
recreational traffic. The reconfiguration of the anchorage area does 
not accommodate further development as it more clearly delineates the 
navigation channel on either side of the anchorage. Nothing in this 
regulation prevents vessels from anchoring due to emergency situations.
    This final rule will decrease the size of the current anchorage in 
Marina del Rey Harbor. The anchorage is currently a trapezoid-shaped 
anchorage of approximately 0.48 square nautical miles. The Coast Guard 
is changing the shape of the anchorage from a trapezoid to a 
rectangular shape and reducing the size from 0.48 to 0.11 square 
nautical miles. The revised anchorage will be moved to the middle of 
the channel across from Burton Chace Park with its northern boundary 
line extending from approximately the midpoint of Basin G south to the 
midpoint of Basin H. The anchorage dimensions will be 1,154 feet in 
length by 365 feet in width. The distance from the closest shore-side 
dock to the anchorage boundary will be approximately 243 feet. The 
anchorage boundaries are described, using precise coordinates, in the 
final regulatory text at the end of this document.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and 
Executive Orders (E.O.s) related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our 
analyses based on these statutes and Executive Orders.

A. 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.
    The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this proposed rule 
will not be significant to the maritime and local community. The 
existing anchorage is currently used only in emergency circumstances 
and this final rule will not significantly reduce the number of vessels 
using the anchorage.

B. 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 final rule may affect the following entities, some of 
which might be small entities: Owners or operators of recreational 
vessels that have a need to anchor in Marina del Rey special anchorage 
area.
    This final rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Although this rule will decrease the size of 
the special anchorage area, the dimensions provide sufficient room for 
vessels to anchor without presenting a hazard to vessels transiting in 
the channel.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under 
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.)

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    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 have 
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism 
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 
13132.
    This rule has no 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. If you believe this rule has 
implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person 
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. 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 will not result in 
such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in 
this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security 
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which 
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental 
Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969.42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f, and have concluded that 
this action is one of the category of actions that do not individually 
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. 
This rule involves the amendment of a currently-existing anchorage 
area. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further

[[Page 2896]]

review under paragraph 34(f) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant 
Instruction M16475.1D. A final environmental analysis checklist 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.

G. 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.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110

    Anchorage grounds.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 
33 CFR part 110 as follows:

PART 110--ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05-
1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.01.


0
2. Revise Sec.  [thinsp]110.111 to read as follows:


Sec.  [thinsp]110.111  Marina del Rey Harbor, Calif.

    An area in the main channel encompassed within the following 
described boundaries: Beginning at the northeasterly corner in position 
latitude 33[deg]58'41.6'' N., longitude 118[deg]26'50.8'' W.; thence 
southerly to latitude 33[deg]58'30.2'' N., longitude 118[deg]26'50.8'' 
W.; thence westerly to latitude 33[deg]58'30.2'' N., longitude 
118[deg]26'55.1'' W.; thence northerly to latitude 33[deg]58'41.6'' N., 
longitude 118[deg]26'55.1'' W.; thence easterly to the point of origin. 
All coordinates referenced North American Datum 1983.

    Note to 110.111:  The Marina del Rey Harbor Master, Los Angeles 
County, prescribes local regulations for mooring and boating 
activities in this area.


    Dated: December 2, 2016
T.A. Sokalzuk
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard 
District.
[FR Doc. 2016-31996 Filed 1-9-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P