Shipping Safety Fairways Along the Atlantic Coast, 37034-37040 [2020-12910]
Download as PDF
37034
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 119 / Friday, June 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.
Availability of NPRMs
An electronic copy of this document
may be downloaded through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through
the FAA’s web page at https://
www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/
airspace_amendments/.
You may review the public docket
containing the proposal, any comments
received and any final disposition in
person in the Dockets Office (see
ADDRESSES section for address and
phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and
5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except federal holidays. An informal
docket may also be examined during
normal business hours at the office of
the Western Service Center, Operations
Support Group, Federal Aviation
Administration, 2200 South 216th St.,
Des Moines, WA 98198.
Availability and Summary of
Documents for Incorporation by
Reference
This document proposes to amend
FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points,
dated August 8, 2019, and effective
September 15, 2019. FAA Order
7400.11D is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this
document. FAA Order 7400.11D lists
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas,
air traffic service routes, and reporting
points.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Background
The FAA is proposing removal of V–
482 due to tree encroachment on the
Johnstone Point VOR/DME that renders
the airway unusable. The Johnstone
Point VOR/DME is located on
Hinchinbrook Island, with no bridges or
roads to access the island except a small
landing strip. It is cost prohibitive to
mitigate the tree encroachment. There
are 3 other airways (V–481, B–25, and
T–226) with a more direct route to
Gulkana, AK. Additionally, IFR traffic
could receive air traffic control (ATC)
radar vectors through the area. Visual
flight rules pilots who elect to navigate
via the airways through the affected area
could also take advantage of the
adjacent ATS routes or ATC service
listed previously.
The Proposal
16:27 Jun 18, 2020
Regulatory Notices and Analyses
The FAA has determined that this
proposed regulation only involves an
established body of technical
regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to
keep them operationally current. It,
therefore: (1) Is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under Executive
Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant
rule’’ under Department of
Transportation (DOT) Regulatory
Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034;
February 26, 1979); and (3) does not
warrant preparation of a regulatory
evaluation as the anticipated impact is
so minimal. Since this is a routine
matter that will only affect air traffic
procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when
promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Environmental Review
This proposal will be subject to an
environmental analysis in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F,
‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures’’ prior to any FAA final
regulatory action.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).
The Proposed Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as
follows:
PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,
B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND
REPORTING POINTS
1. The authority citation for part 71
continues to read as follows:
■
The FAA is proposing an amendment
to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR) part 71 to remove Alaskan
VOR Federal airway V–482.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
V–482: V–482 currently extends
between Johnstone Point, AK to
Gulkana, AK. This action proposes to
remove the entire route.
Alaskan VOR Federal Airways are
published in paragraph 6010(b) of FAA
Order 7400.11D dated August 8, 2019,
and effective September 15, 2019, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR
71.1. The Alaskan VOR Federal Airway
listed in this document will be
subsequently published in the Order.
FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on
September 15.
Jkt 250001
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103,
40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR,
1959–1963 Comp., p. 389.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
§ 71.1
[Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11D,
Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 8, 2019 and
effective September 15, 2019, is
amended as follows:
■
Paragraph 6010(b)
Airways.
*
*
*
Alaskan VOR Federal
*
*
*
*
V–482 [Remove]
*
*
*
Issued in Washington, DC, on June 12,
2020.
Scott M. Rosenbloom,
Acting Manager, Rules and Regulations
Group.
[FR Doc. 2020–13132 Filed 6–18–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 166
[Docket No. USCG–2019–0279]
RIN 1625–AC57
Shipping Safety Fairways Along the
Atlantic Coast
Coast Guard, DHS.
Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard seeks
comments regarding the possible
establishment of shipping safety
fairways (‘‘fairways’’) along the Atlantic
Coast of the United States identified in
the Atlantic Coast Port Access Route
Study. This potential system of fairways
is intended to ensure that traditional
navigation routes are kept free from
obstructions that could impact
navigation safety.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before August 18, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2019–0279 using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public
Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
further instructions on submitting
comments.
SUMMARY:
For
information about this document call or
email George Detweiler, Coast Guard;
telephone 202–372–1566, email
George.H.Detweiler@uscg.mil.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM
19JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 119 / Friday, June 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents for Preamble
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
I. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
II. Abbreviations
III. Background
A. Shipping Safety Fairway
B. Atlantic Coast Port Access Route Study
C. Port Approaches and International Entry
and Departure Transit Areas PARS
Integral to Efficiency of Possible Atlantic
Coast Fairways
IV. Discussion of Action Under
Consideration
A. Potential Fairways Identified in the
ACPARS
B. Descriptions of Potential Fairways
C. Study of Potential Port Approach
Fairways
D. International Entry/Departure Transit
Areas
V. Information Requested
I. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
The Coast Guard views public
participation as essential to effective
rulemaking, and will consider all
comments and material received during
the comment period. Your comment can
help shape the outcome of this potential
rulemaking. If you submit a comment,
please include the docket number for
this rulemaking, indicate the specific
section of this document to which each
comment applies, and provide a reason
for each suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit your
comments through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. If you cannot
submit your material by using https://
www.regulations.gov, contact the person
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this advance notice
of proposed rulemaking document
(ANPRM) for alternate instructions.
Documents mentioned in this ANPRM
as being available in the docket, and all
public comments, will be available in
our online docket at https://
www.regulations.gov, and can be viewed
by following that website’s instructions.
Additionally, if you visit the online
docket and sign up for email alerts, you
will be notified when comments are
posted or if a notice of proposed
rulemaking is published.
We accept anonymous comments. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and
submissions in response to this
document, see DHS’s eRulemaking
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226,
March 11, 2020).
The Coast Guard does not plan to
hold a public meeting, but we will
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Jun 18, 2020
Jkt 250001
consider doing so if public comments
indicate that a meeting would be
helpful. We would issue a separate
Federal Register notice to announce the
date, time, and location of such a
meeting.
II. Abbreviations
ACPARS Atlantic Coast Port Access Route
Study
AIS Automatic Identification System
BOEM Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management
DHS Department of Homeland Security
EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone
FR Federal Register
PARS Port Access Route Study
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
UNCLOS United Nations Convention of the
Law of the Sea
III. Background
This advanced notice of proposed
rulemaking (ANPRM) seeks comments
regarding the possible establishment of
shipping safety fairways (‘‘fairways’’)
along the Atlantic Coast of the United
States based on navigation safety
corridors identified in the Atlantic Coast
Port Access Route Study (ACPARS). In
this section, we provide background
information on fairways, ACPARS, and
related port access route studies.
A. Shipping Safety Fairways
Section 70003 of Title 46 United
States Code directs the Secretary of the
department in which the Coast Guard
resides to designate necessary fairways
that provide safe access routes for
vessels proceeding to and from U.S.
ports.1 Designation as a fairway keeps
an area free of fixed structures. This
designation recognizes the generally
paramount right of navigation over other
uses in the designated areas.2 The Coast
Guard is coordinating its possible
establishment of fairways 3 along the
Atlantic Coast, as well as
complementary port approaches and
international entry and departure zones,
with the Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management (BOEM) to minimize the
impact on offshore energy leases.
Under 46 U.S.C. 70003, fairways are
designated through federal regulations.
Regulations governing fairways in 33
1 Chapter 700 was added December 4, 2018, by
Sec. 401 of Public Law 115–282, 132 Stat. 4253.
This fairways designation authority was previously
reflected in 33 U.S.C. 1223.
2 See limitations on such designations in 46
U.S.C. 70003(b).
3 A fairway or shipping safety fairway is a lane
or corridor in which no artificial island or fixed
structure, whether temporary or permanent, will be
permitted. Temporary underwater obstacles may be
permitted under certain conditions described for
specific areas. Aids to navigation approved by the
Coast Guard may be established in a fairway. See
33 CFR 166.105(a).
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
37035
CFR part 166 provide that fixed offshore
structures are not permitted within
fairways because these structures would
jeopardize safe navigation. The Coast
Guard may establish, modify, or relocate
existing fairways to improve navigation
safety or accommodate offshore
activities such as mineral exploitation
and exploration. 46 U.S.C. 70003(e)(3);
33 CFR 166.110.
Before establishing or adjusting
fairways, 46 U.S.C. 70003(c)(1) requires
the Coast Guard to study potential
traffic density and assess the need for
safe access routes for vessels. During
this process, the Coast Guard considers
the views of the maritime community,
environmental groups, and other
stakeholders to reconcile the need for
safe access routes with reasonable
waterway uses. See 46 U.S.C.
70003(c)(3). The Coast Guard attempts
to recognize and minimize each
identifiable cost, and balance cost
impacts against the needs of safe
navigation.
B. Atlantic Coast Port Access Route
Study
On May 11, 2011, the Coast Guard
chartered the ACPARS workgroup to
address the potential navigational safety
risks associated with offshore
developments and to support future
marine planning efforts. The workgroup
analyzed the entire Atlantic Coast and
focused on waters located seaward of
existing port approaches within the U.S.
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). The
Coast Guard used Automatic
Identification System (AIS) data and
information from shipping organizations
to identify traditional navigation routes.
The Coast Guard announced the
availability of the final ACPARS report
and requested public comment in the
Federal Register on March 14, 2016 (81
FR 13307). After considering comments
submitted in response to that notice, the
Coast Guard determined that the final
report was complete as published and
announced this finding in the Federal
Register on April 5, 2017 (82 FR 16510).
The final ACPARS report is available in
the docket for this rulemaking, in the
docket for the ACPARS itself (docket
number USCG–2011–0351), and also at
https://www.navcen.uscg.gov/
?pageName=PARSReports.
The ACPARS workgroup identified
navigation safety corridors 4 along the
4 Navigation Safety Corridor is a term used in the
ACPARS final report for areas required by vessels
to safely transit along a customary navigation route
under all situations. A navigation safety corridor is
not a routing measure and should not be confused
with fairways, two-way routes, or traffic separation
schemes. The ACPARS recommended that the
E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM
Continued
19JNP1
37036
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 119 / Friday, June 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Atlantic Coast that have the width
necessary for navigation and sufficient
buffer areas.5 The ACPARS Final Report
identified deep draft routes for
navigation and recommended that they
be given priority consideration over
other uses for consistency with the
United Nations Convention of the Law
of the Sea (UNCLOS).6 Article 78 of
UNCLOS states that, ‘‘[t]he exercise of
the rights of the coastal State over the
continental shelf must not infringe or
result in any unjustifiable interference
with navigation and other rights and
freedoms of other States as provided for
in this Convention.’’ 7 The ACPARS
final report also identified coastal
navigation routes and safety corridors of
an appropriate width for seagoing tows.8
The report recommended that the Coast
Guard consider developing the
navigation safety corridors it identifies
in its Appendix VII—which include
ones for deep draft vessels and ones
closer to shore for towing vessels—into
official shipping safety fairways or other
appropriate vessel routing measures.9
Analysis of the sea space required for
vessels to maneuver led to the
development of marine planning
guidelines that were included in the
ACPARS final report and that the
workgroup considered when identifying
the navigation safety corridors in its
Appendix VII.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
C. Port Approaches and International
Entry and Departure Transit Areas
PARS Integral to Efficiency of Possible
Atlantic Coast Fairways
On March 15, 2019, the Coast Guard
announced a study of port approaches
and international entry and departure
areas in the Federal Register (84 FR
9541).10 This study will consider access
routes from ports along the Atlantic
Coast to the navigation safety corridors
the ACPARS report recommended that
we consider developing as fairways or
identified navigation safety corridors be considered
for designation as fairways or other routing
measures.
5 See pages i, 11, and 12, and Appendix VII of the
ACPARS Final Report which is available in the
docket.
6 See page i of the ACPARS Final Report.
7 Dec. 10, 1982, 1833 U.N.T.S. 397, 430.
8 See pages i and 11, and Appendix VII (p. 7) of
the ACPARS Final Report.
9 See pages 12 and 16 of the ACPARS Final
Report.
10 International Entry and Departure Transit
Areas are navigation routes followed by vessels
entering or departing from the United States
through an international seaport. International entry
and departure transit areas connect navigation
safety corridors identified in the ACPARS to the
outer limit of the U.S. EEZ. Port Approaches are
navigation routes followed by vessels entering or
departing a seaport from or to a primary transit
route. Port approaches link seaports to navigation
safety corridors identified in the ACPARS.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Jun 18, 2020
Jkt 250001
other appropriate vessel routing
measures. The ports to be considered in
this study are economically important,
support military operations, or have
been identified to be strategically
critical to national defense. The study
will also examine areas associated with
customary international trade routes
seaward of the navigation safety
corridors identified in the ACPARS. The
creation of unimpeded transit lanes
from the potential fairways outlined in
the ACPARS final report to ports, and
from those potential fairways to
international transit areas, would help
ensure the safe and efficient flow of
commerce and enhance national
security.
Similar to the ACPARS methodology,
AIS data and information from shipping
organizations will again be used to
identify and verify the customary
navigation routes that are followed by
ships in open-water situations where no
obstructions exist. This will allow the
Coast Guard to identify areas where
structures could jeopardize safe
navigation and impede commerce.
These studies will provide a mechanism
to engage stakeholders with potentially
competing uses of the waters of the U.S.
EEZ in an effort to reduce impacts to
those uses.
IV. Discussion of Action Under
Consideration
The Coast Guard is considering
establishing fairways, as defined in 33
CFR 166.105, to protect maritime
commerce and safe navigation amidst
extensive offshore development on the
Atlantic Coast.
A. Potential Fairways Identified in the
ACPARS
The ACPARS identified nine primary
navigation safety corridors that may be
suitable for designation as fairways.11
Three of these are coastwise primary
navigation safety corridors which would
most likely be used by smaller and
slower moving vessels. Initial
evaluations suggest that the highest
conflict between transiting vessels and
alternative undertakings in offshore
regions—such as resource exploration
and development, production of
renewable energy, environmental
preservation and protection, and
resource conservation and defense—are
likely to occur in these near-coast
regions. Six offshore fairways were also
recommended in the ACPARS final
report. The offshore fairways are most
11 United States Coast Guard, ‘‘Atlantic Coast Port
Access Route Study: Final Report,’’ July 8, 2015, p.
16 and Appendix VII, ‘‘Identification of Alongshore
Towing Vessel and Major Deep Draft Routes.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
likely to be used by larger and fastermoving deep-draft vessels.
B. Descriptions of Potential Fairways
The nine fairways identified by the
ACPARS final report are described as
follows, all geographic points are based
on North American Datum of 1983: 12
1. The potential St. Lucie to New York
Fairway is about 1,350 miles long,
approximately 10 nautical miles wide,
and includes the customary route taken
by vessels transiting between the Port of
Miami, FL; Port Everglades, FL; the Port
of Virginia; the Port of Baltimore, MD;
the Port of Philadelphia, PA; the Port of
Wilmington, DE; and the Port of New
York and New Jersey. This potential
fairway is an area enclosed by rhumb
lines joining points at:
THE ST. LUCIE TO NEW YORK
FAIRWAY
Latitude
38°58′51″
39°17′01″
39°45′42″
39°45′42″
39°11′38″
38°40′33″
36°42′14″
34°33′21″
33°57′08″
32°49′15″
31°37′49″
29°36′06″
27°46′56″
27°13′15″
27°23′50″
27°50′56″
29°40′10″
31°41′47″
32°53′17″
34°01′24″
34°36′25″
36°06′17″
36°43′37″
38°42′09″
38°58′51″
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
Longitude
074°00′42″
073°56′04″
073°54′22″
073°37′40″
073°40′30″
073°54′44″
074°21′12″
074°52′32″
075°20′14″
076°06′42″
076°51′25″
078°06′19″
079°12′18″
079°31′17″
079°36′19″
079°21′12″
078°15′08″
077°00′15″
076°15′27″
075°28′48″
075°02′00″
074°40′11″
074°31′02″
074°04′30″
074°00′42″
W
W*
W*
W*
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
* Crosses the Cape Charles to Montauk
Point Fairway.
2. The potential Delaware Bay
Connector Fairway is about 125 miles
long, approximately 10 nautical miles
wide, and includes the customary route
taken by vessels transiting between the
Port of Miami, FL; Port Everglades, FL;
Port Canaveral, FL; and the Port of
Virginia; the Port of Baltimore, MD; the
Port of Philadelphia, PA; the Port of
Wilmington, DE; and also to the Port of
12 The North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83)
is the horizontal and geometric control datum for
the United States, Canada, Mexico, and Central
America. NAD 83 was released in 1986. A geodetic
datum or reference frame is an abstract coordinate
system with a reference surface (such as sea level)
that serves to provide known locations to begin
surveys and create maps.
E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM
19JNP1
37037
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 119 / Friday, June 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
New York and New Jersey, by linking
with the St. Lucie to New York Fairway
in the vicinity of Cape Henry, VA.13
This potential fairway is an area
enclosed by rhumb lines joining points
at:
THE DELAWARE BAY CONNECTOR
FAIRWAY
Latitude
36°06′17″
37°52′59″
38°05′39″
36°43′37″
36°06′17″
N
N
N
N
N
Longitude
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
074°40′11″
074°42′50″
074°32′53″
074°31′02″
074°40′11″
W
W
W
W
W
3. The potential St. Lucie to
Chesapeake Bay Nearshore Fairway is
about 1,200 miles long, approximately 5
nautical miles wide, and includes the
customary route taken by vessels
transiting between the Port of Miami,
FL; Port Everglades, FL; Port Canaveral,
FL; the Port of Jacksonville, FL; Kings
Bay, GA; the Port of Brunswick, GA; the
Port of Savannah, GA; the Port of
Charleston, SC; the Port of Morehead
City, NC; the Port of Wilmington, NC;
the Port of Virginia,; and the Port of
Baltimore, MD. This potential fairway is
an area enclosed by rhumb lines joining
points at:
THE ST. LUCIE TO CHESAPEAKE BAY
NEARSHORE FAIRWAY
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Latitude
27°10′12″
27°22′58″
27°44′21″
28°38′07″
30°56′24″
31°22′43″
31°31′32″
31°49′26″
31°57′30″
33°20′02″
33°28′47″
34°18′07″
35°09′05″
35°35′43″
36°15′49″
36°35′21″
36°35′09″
36°17′21″
35°36′38″
35°07′04″
34°14′24″
33°24′47″
33°15′52″
31°53′39″
31°46′08″
31°28′58″
31°19′07″
30°55′58″
28°38′50″
27°45′00″
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Longitude
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
080°03′04″
080°07′20″
080°10′14″
080°21′01″
080°45′09″
080°34′10″
080°29′18″
080°17′05″
080°06′05″
077°50′47″
077°35′05″
076°23′59″
075°17′23″
075°19′23″
075°35′37″
075°43′52″
075°38′39″
075°29′56″
075°13′27″
075°11′13″
076°20′01″
077°31′29″
077°47′28″
080°02′10″
080°12′24″
080°24′08″
080°30′22″
080°40′02″
080°16′06″
080°05′18″
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
13 To see an illustration of this linkage, see the
Mid Atlantic Chart in the docket.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Jun 18, 2020
Jkt 250001
THE ST. LUCIE TO CHESAPEAKE BAY
NEARSHORE FAIRWAY—Continued
Latitude
Longitude
27°23′53″ N ...............
27°11′28″ N ...............
27°10′12″ N ...............
080°02′26″ W
079°58′17″ W
080°03′04″ W
4. The potential St. Lucie to
Chesapeake Bay Offshore Fairway is
about 1,200 miles long, approximately
10 nautical miles wide, and includes the
customary route taken by vessels
transiting between the Port of Miami,
FL; Port Everglades, FL; Port Canaveral,
FL; the Port of Jacksonville, FL; Kings
Bay, GA; the Port of Brunswick, GA; the
Port of Savannah, GA; Charleston, SC;
the Port of Morehead City, NC; the Port
of Wilmington, NC; and the Port of
Virginia. It is located seaward of the St.
Lucie to Chesapeake Bay Nearshore
Fairway. This potential fairway is an
area enclosed by rhumb lines joining
points at:
THE ST. LUCIE TO CHESAPEAKE BAY
OFFSHORE FAIRWAY 14
Latitude
27°11′28″
27°45′00″
28°38′50″
30°55′58″
31°19′07″
31°28′58″
31°46′08″
31°53′39″
33°15′52″
33°24′47″
34°14′24″
35°10′58″
35°59′41″
36°35′09″
36°38′54″
36°01′48″
35°06′32″
34°08′12″
33°18′05″
33°09′00″
31°47′03″
31°40′38″
31°24′48″
31°15′38″
30°55′07″
28°40′16″
27°13′02″
27°11′28″
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Longitude
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
079°58′17″
080°05′18″
080°16′06″
080°40′02″
080°30′22″
080°24′08″
080°12′24″
080°02′10″
077°47′28″
077°31′29″
076°20′01″
075°06′08″
075°06′58″
075°38′39″
075°32′10″
074°59′01″
074°58′03″
076°13′25″
077°25′30″
077°41′48″
079°55′54″
080°04′37″
080°15′25″
080°21′14″
080°29′47″
080°06′15″
079°48′27″
079°58′17″
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
14 Portions of BOEM North Carolina Lease OCS–
A 0508, in OCS sub-block 6664D are located within
protraction NJ18–11. This potential fairway
overlaps a portion of this sub-block by 120 meters
at its widest point. This is a renewable energy lease
for wind-generated energy. We have placed a chart
in the docket that displays specific areas where the
potential St. Lucie to Chesapeake Bay Offshore
Fairway overlap areas of this lease. The chart is
entitled ‘‘Chart Showing Overlap of BOEM North
Carolina Lease OCS–A 0508.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
5. The potential Cape Charles to
Montauk Point Fairway is about 400
miles long, varies from approximately 5
to 10 nautical miles wide, and includes
the customary route taken by vessels
transiting between the Port of New York
and New Jersey; the Port of
Philadelphia, PA; the Port of
Wilmington, DE; and the Port of
Baltimore, MD. This potential fairway is
an area enclosed by rhumb lines joining
points at:
THE CAPE CHARLES TO MONTAUK
POINT FAIRWAY 15 16
Latitude
37°07′24″
37°32′04″
37°50′37″
37°59′42″
38°04′21″
38°21′43″
38°26′49″
38°30′53″
38°44′16″
38°50′05″
38°58′12″
39°07′51″
39°24′49″
39°40′32″
39°45′42″
39°54′39″
40°02′33″
40°10′45″
40°21′01″
40°23′05″
40°29′17″
40°31′21″
40°51′49″
41°01′54″
40°31′42″
40°29′38″
40°23′25″
40°21′21″
40°05′14″
39°57′08″
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
Longitude
075°40′59″
075°25′53″
075°12′06″
075°01′23″
074°54′04″
074°41′01″
074°37′11″
074°34′07″
074°32′52″
074°32′20″
074°31′35″
074°31′24″
074°13′47″
074°02′55″
073°54′22″
073°39′43″
073°26′46″
073°13′18″
072°56′29″
072°53′05″
072°42′55″
072°39′31″
072°05′57″
071°32′17″
072°21′59″
072°25′24″
072°35′36″
072°39′00″
073°05′37″
073°19′03″
W
W
W
W
W
W†
W†
W
W ††
W ††
W
W
W
W
W
W
W‡
W‡
W‡
W‡
W
W
W
W
W‡
W‡
W
W‡
W‡
W
15 Portions of BOEM Maryland Lease OCS–A
0490, in the following OCS blocks and sub-blocks
are located within protraction NI18–05: 6726K,
6726N, 6726O, 6726P, 6775, 6776, 6777E, 6777I,
6777J, 6777M, 6777N, 6825, 6826, 6827A, 6827B,
6827C, 6827E, 6827F, 6827H, 6827I, and 6827M.
This is a renewable energy lease for wind-generated
energy. We have placed a chart in the docket that
displays specific areas where the potential Cape
Charles to Montauk Point Fairway overlap areas of
this lease. The chart is entitled ‘‘Chart Showing
Overlap of BOEM Maryland Lease OCS–A–0490,
and New Jersey Leases OCS–A–0498 and OCS–A–
0499.’’
16 Portions of BOEM New Jersey Leases OCS–A
0498 and OCS–A 0499 (123 sub-blocks) were found
to overlap with this potential fairway. One hundred
of these 123 sub-blocks were identified in BOEM’s
ATLW–5 Final Sale Notice (FSN) as potentially
being not available for development. These are
renewable energy leases for wind-generated energy.
We have placed a chart in the docket that displays
specific areas where the potential Cape Charles to
Montauk Point Fairway overlap areas of these
leases. The chart is entitled ‘‘Chart Showing
Overlap of BOEM Maryland Lease OCS–A–0490,
and New Jersey Leases OCS–A–0498 and OCS–A–
0499.’’
E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM
19JNP1
37038
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 119 / Friday, June 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
THE CAPE CHARLES TO MONTAUK
POINT FAIRWAY 15 16—Continued
Latitude
39°45′42″
39°38′23″
39°36′12″
39°22′41″
39°06′27″
38°58′02″
38°50′42″
38°43′39″
38°29′41″
38°23′38″
38°18′03″
38°01′44″
37°56′49″
37°48′15″
37°30′12″
37°05′38″
37°07′24″
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Longitude
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
073°37′40″
073°54′48″
073°59′57″
074°09′36″
074°26′26″
074°26′35″
074°27′16″
074°27′56″
074°29′14″
074°33′47″
074°37′58″
074°50′13″
074°57′58″
075°08′04″
075°21′28″
075°36′30″
075°40′59″
W ‡‡
W ‡‡
W
W
W
W
W ††
W ††
W
W†
W†
W
W
W
W
W
W
Latitude
38°14′35″
38°18′03″
38°21′43″
38°27′00″
38°28′48″
38°23′38″
38°20′25″
38°14′35″
6. The potential Chesapeake Bay to
Delaware Bay: Eastern Approach Cutoff
Fairway is about 200 miles long,
approximately 10 nautical miles wide,
and includes the customary route taken
by vessels transiting between the Port of
Virginia; the Port of Baltimore, MD; the
Port of Philadelphia, PA; and the Port of
Wilmington, DE. This potential fairway
is an area enclosed by rhumb lines
joining points at:
THE CHESAPEAKE BAY TO DELAWARE
BAY: EASTERN APPROACH CUTOFF
FAIRWAY
36°57′07″
37°04′32″
38°04′39″
38°14′35″
38°20′25″
38°41′54″
38°42′09″
38°05′39″
37°52′59″
37°19′37″
36°52′24″
36°57′07″
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
075°35′54″
075°29′41″
074°43′07″
074°35′05″
074°30′22″
074°13′57″
074°04′30″
074°32′53″
074°42′50″
075°08′42″
075°34′11″
075°35′54″
W
W
W
W*
W*
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
7. The potential Off Delaware Bay:
Southern Approach Cutoff Fairway is
about 20 miles long, approximately 10
nautical miles wide, and includes the
customary route taken by vessels
transiting between the Port of Miami,
FL; Port Everglades, FL; Port Canaveral,
FL; and the Port of Virginia; the Port of
Baltimore, MD; the Port of Philadelphia,
PA; and the Port of Wilmington, DE, by
16:27 Jun 18, 2020
Jkt 250001
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
074°35′05″
074°37′58″
074°41′01″
074°45′24″
074°39′18″
074°33′47″
074°30′22″
074°35′05″
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
THE OFF DELAWARE BAY: EASTERN
APPROACH CUTOFF FAIRWAY
Latitude
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Longitude
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
074°13′57″
074°27′56″
074°32′52″
074°34′21″
074°32′20″
074°27′16″
074°04′39″
074°00′42″
074°04′30″
074°13′57″
W
W*
W*
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
* Crosses the Cape Charles to Montauk
Point Fairway.
* Crosses the Off Delaware Bay Southern
Approach Cutoff Fairway.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Longitude
8. The potential Off Delaware Bay:
Eastern Approach Cutoff Fairway is
about 50 miles long, approximately 10
nautical miles wide, and includes the
customary route taken by vessels
transiting between the Port of Miami,
FL; Port Everglades, FL; Port Canaveral,
FL; by linking the St. Lucie to New York
Fairway in the vicinity of Cape May, NJ;
or the Port of Virginia and the Port of
Baltimore, MD; and the Port of
Philadelphia, PA; and the Port of
Wilmington, DE, by linking with the
Chesapeak Bay to Delaware Bay Eastern
Approach Cutoff in the vicinity of Cape
May.18 This potential fairway is an area
enclosed by rhumb lines joining points
at:
38°41′54″
38°43′39″
38°44′16″
38°44′27″
38°50′05″
38°50′42″
38°53′30″
38°58′51″
38°42′09″
38°41′54″
Longitude
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
is an area enclosed by rhumb lines
joining points at:
THE LONG ISLAND FAIRWAY
Latitude
THE OFF DELAWARE BAY: SOUTHERN
APPROACH CUTOFF FAIRWAY
† Crosses the Off Delaware Bay Southern
Approach Cutoff Fairway.
†† Crosses the Off Delaware Eastern Approach Cutoff Fairway.
‡ Crosses Traffic Separation Scheme.
‡‡ Crosses the St. Lucie to New York
Fairway.
Latitude
linking with the St. Lucie to New York
Fairway in the vicinity of Cape
Henlopen, DE.17 This potential fairway
is an area enclosed by rhumb lines
joining points at:
9. The potential Long Island Fairway
is about 150 miles long, approximately
5 nautical miles wide, and includes the
customary route taken by vessels
transiting between the Long Island
Sound Eastern Entrances; the Port of
Groton, CT; the Port of New Haven
Harbor, CT; and the Port of New York
and New Jersey. This potential fairway
17 To see an illustration of this linkage, see the
Northern Area Chart in the docket.
18 To see an illustration of this linkage, see the
Northern Area Chart in the docket.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
40°28′15″
40°31′52″
40°35′59″
41°06′36″
41°03′06″
40°32′12″
40°28′15″
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
Longitude
073°38′59″
073°39′54″
073°11′39″
071°30′06″
071°28′15″
073°11′28″
073°38′59″
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
You can find three charts depicting
and labelling the locations of these
potential fairways in the docket. The
Northern Area chart illustrates all nine.
As numbered in the tables above, the
Mid-Atlantic Area chart illustrates
potential fairways 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 8,
and the Southern Area chart illustrates
potential fairways 1, 3, and 4. These
charts only show the portion of the
potential fairway in the area covered by
the chart. Additionally, two charts
depicting and labelling the locations of
overlaps between the proposed fairways
and existing BOEM leases are contained
in the docket: Chart Showing Overlap of
BOEM Maryland Lease OCS–A–0490,
and New Jersey Leases OCS–A–0498
and OCS–A–0499; and Chart Showing
Overlap of BOEM North Carolina Lease
OCS–A 0508.
C. Study of Potential Port Approach
Fairways
As announced in the Federal Register
on March 15, 2019, the Coast Guard is
also conducting Port Access Route
Studies in accordance with 46 U.S.C.
70003(c) to determine whether or not
fairways should be established or
whether other routing measures for
existing port approaches would be more
appropriate. 84 FR 9541. These port
approach fairways would provide access
to the potential fairways identified in
the ACPARS final report and in this
ANPRM, would be important to the safe
and efficient movement of ships and
cargo, and would be critical to
sustaining interstate and international
commerce.
Each Coast Guard district commander
will study the ports in their district that
are economically significant, support
military operations, or are critical to
national defense. For an example of this
multi-Coast Guard District effort, see a
recent notice announcing PARS for
approaches to the Chesapeake Bay,
Virginia (84 FR 65398, November 27,
2019). Results of each PARS will be
published separately in the Federal
Register by the district commander.
Like the ACPARS, these PARS will
use AIS data and information from
E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM
19JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 119 / Friday, June 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
V. Information Requested
stakeholders to identify and verify
customary navigation routes. Each
PARS will identify potential conflicts
involving alternative activities in the
studied area, such as wind energy
generation and offshore mineral
exploration and exploitation.
The following 23 U.S. ports are
initially under consideration for PARS:
PORTS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR
PARS
Kennebec River/Bath, ME.
Port of Portland, ME.
Port of Portsmouth, NH.
Port of New Bedford, MA.
Port of Boston, MA.
Narragansett Bay, RI.
Long Island Sound Eastern Entrances.
Port of Groton, CT.
Port of New Haven, CT.
Port of New York and New Jersey, including
Port Elizabeth and Newark.
Port of Philadelphia, PA, including CamdenGloucester City, NJ, Port of Wilmington,
DE.
Port of Baltimore, MD.
Port of Virginia, including Norfolk, Newport
News and Hampton Roads, VA.
Port of Morehead City, NC.
Port of Wilmington, NC.
Port of Charleston, SC.
Port of Savannah, GA.
Port of Brunswick, GA.
Kings Bay, GA.
Port of Jacksonville, FL.
Port Canaveral, FL.
Port Everglades, FL.
Port of Miami, FL.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
D. International Entry and Departure
Transit Areas
We also announced studies related to
international entry and departure transit
areas seaward of the potential fairways
in the U.S. EEZ. 84 FR 9541.
International entry and departure transit
areas are integral to the safe, efficient,
and unimpeded flow of ships. Fairways
established based on the studies of
international entry and departure transit
areas would be used by vessels coming
from a foreign port and transiting to a
coastwise or offshore fairway or directly
to a port approach leading to a U.S. port.
It is important that fairways for regions
of the U.S. EEZ between principal
international ports and the United
States are considered to ensure the safe
and direct movement of ships and cargo
between international origins and
destinations. Each route or fairway
would be a link in a chain connecting
ports in the United States and abroad,
and each link should be as robust and
effective as the routes identified in the
ACPARS.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Jun 18, 2020
Jkt 250001
Public participation will help the
Coast Guard decide whether to establish
coastwise and offshore fairways and, if
so, how to balance ship routing with
offshore development activities and
other uses. The Coast Guard seeks
public comments, positive or negative,
on the impacts that the nine potential
fairways under consideration may have
on navigational safety and on other
activities in these offshore areas to aid
us in developing a proposed rule and
the supporting analyses. Where possible
and pertinent, please provide sources,
citations and references to back up or
justify your responses. Also, for all
pertinent responses, please provide a
detailed explanation of how you arrived
at this conclusion and the underlying
assessment that supports your
conclusion. Finally, for all numerical
responses please provide us with
sufficient information to recreate your
calculations.
We seek public feedback on the
following questions:
1. Do the nine potential fairways
provide safe and efficient routes for
vessels transiting to and from
international ports to the United States?
Why or why not? If not, what would you
recommend instead?
2. Are the ACPARS-potential fairways
described in this ANPRM, or similar
ones, necessary for ensuring a safe and
orderly passage for vessels transiting
among U.S. domestic ports of call? Why
or why not? Please explain your answer,
including your specific comments on
how the fairways described in this
ANPRM would affect maritime traffic
patterns, navigational safety and access
to ports.
3. Are there any positive or negative
impacts of not establishing the nine
fairways noted in this ANPRM? If so,
please describe them.
4. If these potential fairways are
established, what persons, entities, or
organizations would be positively or
negatively impacted? In other words,
which groups of people, businesses, or
industries (maritime and non-maritime)
would be positively or negatively
impacted by these potential fairways?
5. What other offshore uses may be
positively or negatively affected by the
potential fairways? Please include
specific locations, potential impact, and
associated costs or benefits. Please also
describe the safety significance of the
potential fairways on the activity.
6. Do the nine potential fairways
unduly limit offshore development? If
so, is there a cost model or structure that
should be considered for analysis? What
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
37039
are the limitations of the cost model? If
so, why do you believe the proposal
would limit offshore development and
what specific development would it
limit?
7. From an environmental
perspective, would the potential
fairways described in this ANPRM
negatively impact living marine
resources? If so, which marine resources
would be impacted and how? What
measures within the Coast Guard’s
jurisdiction should be considered to
avoid, minimize, or mitigate any such
impacts?
8. Beyond the environmental impacts
mentioned in question 7, are there any
other positive or negative environmental
impacts from these potential fairways? If
so, please provide detail as to how and
what would be impacted. To the degree
possible, please provide the data,
impact assessments, and other pertinent
background information necessary to
understand and reproduce your results.
9. What mitigation measures within
the Coast Guard’s jurisdiction could be
used to relieve the economic and safety
impacts of the potential fairways on
other offshore uses? What are the
expected costs and associated benefits
of the suggested mitigation measures?
10. Are there additional measures that
should be considered to improve safety
or relieve an economic burden imposed
by these potential fairways? What are
the expected costs and associated
benefits of the suggested additional
measures?
11. Are there other variables that
should be considered in developing this
system of potential fairways? If so,
please indicate particular issues and the
specific areas to which they pertain.
13. Besides the Coast Guard’s noted
intention and purpose of this
rulemaking, what positive aspects
would this proposal produce for the
safety of maritime transportation?
14. Have there been any offshore
developments built or installed in the
past 10 years that have impacted traffic
patterns, navigational safety, or
maritime commerce? If so, were the net
impacts positive or negative? Please
provide a detailed explanation of how
you arrived at this conclusion.
15. Please offer any other comments
or suggestions that may improve this
initiative.
Please submit comments or concerns
you may have in accordance with the
‘‘Public Participation and Request for
Comments’’ section above.
E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM
19JNP1
37040
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 119 / Friday, June 19, 2020 / Proposed Rules
This notice is issued under the
authority of 46 U.S.C. 70003 and 5
U.S.C. 552.
Dated: June 10, 2020.
R.V. Timme,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant
Commandant for Prevention Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020–12910 Filed 6–18–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
37 CFR Parts 2 and 7
[Docket No. PTO–T–2019–0027]
RIN 0651–AD42
Trademark Fee Adjustment
United States Patent and
Trademark Office, Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The United States Patent and
Trademark Office (Office or USPTO)
proposes to set or adjust certain
trademark fees, as authorized by the
Leahy-Smith America Invents Act
(AIA), as amended by the Study of
Underrepresented Classes Chasing
Engineering and Science Success Act of
2018 (SUCCESS Act). The proposed fees
are intended to recover the prospective
aggregate costs of future strategic and
operational trademark and Trademark
Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB or
Board) goals (based on workload
projections included in the USPTO
fiscal year (FY) 2021 Congressional
Justification), including associated
administrative costs. The proposed fees
will further USPTO strategic objectives
by: Better aligning fees with costs,
protecting the integrity of the trademark
register, improving the efficiency of
agency processes, and ensuring
financial sustainability to facilitate
effective trademark operations. Before a
final rule is issued, the USPTO will
consider the state of the U.S. economy,
the operational needs of the agency, and
public comments submitted pursuant to
this rulemaking. The USPTO will make
adjustments as necessary to the
substance and timing of any final rule
based on all of these considerations.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before August 3, 2020.
ADDRESSES: The USPTO prefers that
comments be submitted electronically
via email to TMFRNotices@uspto.gov.
Written comments may also be
submitted by mail to Commissioner for
Trademarks, P.O. Box 1451, Alexandria,
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Jun 18, 2020
Jkt 250001
VA 22313–1451, attention Catherine
Cain; by hand delivery to the Trademark
Assistance Center, Concourse Level,
James Madison Building-East Wing, 600
Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia
22314, attention Catherine Cain; or via
the Federal eRulemaking Portal. See the
Federal eRulemaking Portal website
(https://www.regulations.gov) for
additional instructions on providing
comments via the portal. All comments
submitted directly to the USPTO or
provided on the Federal eRulemaking
Portal should include the docket
number (PTO–T–2019–0027).
Although comments may be
submitted by postal mail, the USPTO
prefers to receive comments
electronically because the Office may
more easily share such comments with
the public. The USPTO prefers that
comments submitted electronically be
in plain text, but they also may be
submitted in portable document format
(PDF) or a word processing file format
(DOC or DOCX). Comments not
submitted electronically should be
submitted on paper in a format that
facilitates convenient digital scanning
into PDF.
The comments will be available for
public inspection on the USPTO’s
website at https://www.uspto.gov, on the
Federal eRulemaking Portal, and at the
Office of the Commissioner for
Trademarks, Madison East, Tenth Floor,
600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia
22314. Because comments will be made
available for public inspection,
information that is not desired to be
made public, such as an address or
phone number, should not be included.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Catherine Cain, Office of the Deputy
Commissioner for Trademark
Examination Policy, at 571–272–8946,
or by email at TMPolicy@uspto.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
USPTO conducted a fee assessment in
January 2019 that formed the basis for
this regulatory process to propose
adjusting and setting new trademark
user fees. While trademark-related costs
of operations have risen, trademark fees
have not changed since January 2017.
The revenue and workload assumptions
in this notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) are based on the assumptions
found in the FY 2021 Congressional
Justification. However, projections of
aggregate revenues and costs are based
on point-in-time estimates, and the
circumstances surrounding these
assumptions can change quickly.
Notably, since the FY 2021
Congressional Justification was
published, fee collections have been
lower than anticipated, in part due to
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
lower than expected application filings
as a result of the COVID–19 outbreak.
The USPTO is also mindful of the
current difficulties many USPTO users
are experiencing as a result of the
pandemic. The USPTO has undertaken
many efforts to provide various types of
relief, including deadline extensions
and fee postponements. Ultimately, the
goal of the USPTO is to ensure not only
that businesses and entrepreneurs can
weather this storm, but that they can hit
the ground running once it passes.
The USPTO anticipates that the
earliest any proposed trademark fee
changes could take effect is October
2020. Before a final rule is issued, the
USPTO will consider the state of the
U.S. economy, the operational needs of
the agency, and public comments
submitted pursuant to this NPRM. The
USPTO will make adjustments as
necessary to the substance and timing of
any final rule based on all of these
considerations.
As part of the multi-year fee-setting
process, the Trademark Public Advisory
Committee (TPAC) held a public
hearing at the USPTO on September 23,
2019. The Office considered and
analyzed all comments, advice, and
recommendations received from the
TPAC before publishing this NPRM. The
USPTO is now moving to the next step
in the process. This NPRM proposes
changes to fees and also proposes new
fees in order to solicit public comment.
Purpose: The USPTO protects
consumers and provides benefits to
businesses by effectively and efficiently
carrying out the trademark laws of the
United States. As a fee funded agency,
appropriate fees are critically important
for the USPTO to maintain the quality
and timeliness of examination and other
services, and to stabilize and modernize
aging information technology (IT)
infrastructure. The fee schedule
proposed in this rulemaking will
recover the USPTO’s aggregate
estimated future costs and ensure the
USPTO can achieve strategic and
operational goals, such as effectively
using resources to maintain low
trademark pendency and high quality,
fostering business effectiveness
(ensuring quality results for employees
and managers), stabilizing and
modernizing trademark IT systems,
continuing programs for stakeholder
and public outreach, enhancing
operations of the TTAB, and ensuring
financial sustainability to facilitate
effective trademark operations.
Section 10 of the AIA authorizes the
Director of the USPTO (Director) to set
or adjust by rule any fee established,
authorized, or charged under the
Trademark Act of 1946, 15 U.S.C. 1051
E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM
19JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 119 (Friday, June 19, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37034-37040]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-12910]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 166
[Docket No. USCG-2019-0279]
RIN 1625-AC57
Shipping Safety Fairways Along the Atlantic Coast
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard seeks comments regarding the possible
establishment of shipping safety fairways (``fairways'') along the
Atlantic Coast of the United States identified in the Atlantic Coast
Port Access Route Study. This potential system of fairways is intended
to ensure that traditional navigation routes are kept free from
obstructions that could impact navigation safety.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before August 18, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2019-0279 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about this document
call or email George Detweiler, Coast Guard; telephone 202-372-1566,
email [email protected].
[[Page 37035]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents for Preamble
I. Public Participation and Request for Comments
II. Abbreviations
III. Background
A. Shipping Safety Fairway
B. Atlantic Coast Port Access Route Study
C. Port Approaches and International Entry and Departure Transit
Areas PARS Integral to Efficiency of Possible Atlantic Coast
Fairways
IV. Discussion of Action Under Consideration
A. Potential Fairways Identified in the ACPARS
B. Descriptions of Potential Fairways
C. Study of Potential Port Approach Fairways
D. International Entry/Departure Transit Areas
V. Information Requested
I. Public Participation and Request for Comments
The Coast Guard views public participation as essential to
effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material
received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the
outcome of this potential rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific
section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a
reason for each suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit your comments through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If you cannot submit
your material by using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this advance notice
of proposed rulemaking document (ANPRM) for alternate instructions.
Documents mentioned in this ANPRM as being available in the docket, and
all public comments, will be available in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov, and can be viewed by following that website's
instructions. Additionally, if you visit the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or if a
notice of proposed rulemaking is published.
We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and
submissions in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking System
of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).
The Coast Guard does not plan to hold a public meeting, but we will
consider doing so if public comments indicate that a meeting would be
helpful. We would issue a separate Federal Register notice to announce
the date, time, and location of such a meeting.
II. Abbreviations
ACPARS Atlantic Coast Port Access Route Study
AIS Automatic Identification System
BOEM Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
DHS Department of Homeland Security
EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone
FR Federal Register
PARS Port Access Route Study
Sec. Section
U.S.C. United States Code
UNCLOS United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea
III. Background
This advanced notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) seeks comments
regarding the possible establishment of shipping safety fairways
(``fairways'') along the Atlantic Coast of the United States based on
navigation safety corridors identified in the Atlantic Coast Port
Access Route Study (ACPARS). In this section, we provide background
information on fairways, ACPARS, and related port access route studies.
A. Shipping Safety Fairways
Section 70003 of Title 46 United States Code directs the Secretary
of the department in which the Coast Guard resides to designate
necessary fairways that provide safe access routes for vessels
proceeding to and from U.S. ports.\1\ Designation as a fairway keeps an
area free of fixed structures. This designation recognizes the
generally paramount right of navigation over other uses in the
designated areas.\2\ The Coast Guard is coordinating its possible
establishment of fairways \3\ along the Atlantic Coast, as well as
complementary port approaches and international entry and departure
zones, with the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) to minimize
the impact on offshore energy leases.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Chapter 700 was added December 4, 2018, by Sec. 401 of
Public Law 115-282, 132 Stat. 4253. This fairways designation
authority was previously reflected in 33 U.S.C. 1223.
\2\ See limitations on such designations in 46 U.S.C. 70003(b).
\3\ A fairway or shipping safety fairway is a lane or corridor
in which no artificial island or fixed structure, whether temporary
or permanent, will be permitted. Temporary underwater obstacles may
be permitted under certain conditions described for specific areas.
Aids to navigation approved by the Coast Guard may be established in
a fairway. See 33 CFR 166.105(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under 46 U.S.C. 70003, fairways are designated through federal
regulations. Regulations governing fairways in 33 CFR part 166 provide
that fixed offshore structures are not permitted within fairways
because these structures would jeopardize safe navigation. The Coast
Guard may establish, modify, or relocate existing fairways to improve
navigation safety or accommodate offshore activities such as mineral
exploitation and exploration. 46 U.S.C. 70003(e)(3); 33 CFR 166.110.
Before establishing or adjusting fairways, 46 U.S.C. 70003(c)(1)
requires the Coast Guard to study potential traffic density and assess
the need for safe access routes for vessels. During this process, the
Coast Guard considers the views of the maritime community,
environmental groups, and other stakeholders to reconcile the need for
safe access routes with reasonable waterway uses. See 46 U.S.C.
70003(c)(3). The Coast Guard attempts to recognize and minimize each
identifiable cost, and balance cost impacts against the needs of safe
navigation.
B. Atlantic Coast Port Access Route Study
On May 11, 2011, the Coast Guard chartered the ACPARS workgroup to
address the potential navigational safety risks associated with
offshore developments and to support future marine planning efforts.
The workgroup analyzed the entire Atlantic Coast and focused on waters
located seaward of existing port approaches within the U.S. Exclusive
Economic Zone (EEZ). The Coast Guard used Automatic Identification
System (AIS) data and information from shipping organizations to
identify traditional navigation routes.
The Coast Guard announced the availability of the final ACPARS
report and requested public comment in the Federal Register on March
14, 2016 (81 FR 13307). After considering comments submitted in
response to that notice, the Coast Guard determined that the final
report was complete as published and announced this finding in the
Federal Register on April 5, 2017 (82 FR 16510). The final ACPARS
report is available in the docket for this rulemaking, in the docket
for the ACPARS itself (docket number USCG-2011-0351), and also at
https://www.navcen.uscg.gov/?pageName=PARSReports.
The ACPARS workgroup identified navigation safety corridors \4\
along the
[[Page 37036]]
Atlantic Coast that have the width necessary for navigation and
sufficient buffer areas.\5\ The ACPARS Final Report identified deep
draft routes for navigation and recommended that they be given priority
consideration over other uses for consistency with the United Nations
Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).\6\ Article 78 of UNCLOS
states that, ``[t]he exercise of the rights of the coastal State over
the continental shelf must not infringe or result in any unjustifiable
interference with navigation and other rights and freedoms of other
States as provided for in this Convention.'' \7\ The ACPARS final
report also identified coastal navigation routes and safety corridors
of an appropriate width for seagoing tows.\8\ The report recommended
that the Coast Guard consider developing the navigation safety
corridors it identifies in its Appendix VII--which include ones for
deep draft vessels and ones closer to shore for towing vessels--into
official shipping safety fairways or other appropriate vessel routing
measures.\9\ Analysis of the sea space required for vessels to maneuver
led to the development of marine planning guidelines that were included
in the ACPARS final report and that the workgroup considered when
identifying the navigation safety corridors in its Appendix VII.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Navigation Safety Corridor is a term used in the ACPARS
final report for areas required by vessels to safely transit along a
customary navigation route under all situations. A navigation safety
corridor is not a routing measure and should not be confused with
fairways, two-way routes, or traffic separation schemes. The ACPARS
recommended that the identified navigation safety corridors be
considered for designation as fairways or other routing measures.
\5\ See pages i, 11, and 12, and Appendix VII of the ACPARS
Final Report which is available in the docket.
\6\ See page i of the ACPARS Final Report.
\7\ Dec. 10, 1982, 1833 U.N.T.S. 397, 430.
\8\ See pages i and 11, and Appendix VII (p. 7) of the ACPARS
Final Report.
\9\ See pages 12 and 16 of the ACPARS Final Report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Port Approaches and International Entry and Departure Transit Areas
PARS Integral to Efficiency of Possible Atlantic Coast Fairways
On March 15, 2019, the Coast Guard announced a study of port
approaches and international entry and departure areas in the Federal
Register (84 FR 9541).\10\ This study will consider access routes from
ports along the Atlantic Coast to the navigation safety corridors the
ACPARS report recommended that we consider developing as fairways or
other appropriate vessel routing measures. The ports to be considered
in this study are economically important, support military operations,
or have been identified to be strategically critical to national
defense. The study will also examine areas associated with customary
international trade routes seaward of the navigation safety corridors
identified in the ACPARS. The creation of unimpeded transit lanes from
the potential fairways outlined in the ACPARS final report to ports,
and from those potential fairways to international transit areas, would
help ensure the safe and efficient flow of commerce and enhance
national security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ International Entry and Departure Transit Areas are
navigation routes followed by vessels entering or departing from the
United States through an international seaport. International entry
and departure transit areas connect navigation safety corridors
identified in the ACPARS to the outer limit of the U.S. EEZ. Port
Approaches are navigation routes followed by vessels entering or
departing a seaport from or to a primary transit route. Port
approaches link seaports to navigation safety corridors identified
in the ACPARS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Similar to the ACPARS methodology, AIS data and information from
shipping organizations will again be used to identify and verify the
customary navigation routes that are followed by ships in open-water
situations where no obstructions exist. This will allow the Coast Guard
to identify areas where structures could jeopardize safe navigation and
impede commerce. These studies will provide a mechanism to engage
stakeholders with potentially competing uses of the waters of the U.S.
EEZ in an effort to reduce impacts to those uses.
IV. Discussion of Action Under Consideration
The Coast Guard is considering establishing fairways, as defined in
33 CFR 166.105, to protect maritime commerce and safe navigation amidst
extensive offshore development on the Atlantic Coast.
A. Potential Fairways Identified in the ACPARS
The ACPARS identified nine primary navigation safety corridors that
may be suitable for designation as fairways.\11\ Three of these are
coastwise primary navigation safety corridors which would most likely
be used by smaller and slower moving vessels. Initial evaluations
suggest that the highest conflict between transiting vessels and
alternative undertakings in offshore regions--such as resource
exploration and development, production of renewable energy,
environmental preservation and protection, and resource conservation
and defense--are likely to occur in these near-coast regions. Six
offshore fairways were also recommended in the ACPARS final report. The
offshore fairways are most likely to be used by larger and faster-
moving deep-draft vessels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ United States Coast Guard, ``Atlantic Coast Port Access
Route Study: Final Report,'' July 8, 2015, p. 16 and Appendix VII,
``Identification of Alongshore Towing Vessel and Major Deep Draft
Routes.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Descriptions of Potential Fairways
The nine fairways identified by the ACPARS final report are
described as follows, all geographic points are based on North American
Datum of 1983: \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ The North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83) is the horizontal
and geometric control datum for the United States, Canada, Mexico,
and Central America. NAD 83 was released in 1986. A geodetic datum
or reference frame is an abstract coordinate system with a reference
surface (such as sea level) that serves to provide known locations
to begin surveys and create maps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. The potential St. Lucie to New York Fairway is about 1,350 miles
long, approximately 10 nautical miles wide, and includes the customary
route taken by vessels transiting between the Port of Miami, FL; Port
Everglades, FL; the Port of Virginia; the Port of Baltimore, MD; the
Port of Philadelphia, PA; the Port of Wilmington, DE; and the Port of
New York and New Jersey. This potential fairway is an area enclosed by
rhumb lines joining points at:
The St. Lucie to New York Fairway
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
38[deg]58'51'' N.......................... 074[deg]00'42'' W
39[deg]17'01'' N.......................... 073[deg]56'04'' W \*\
39[deg]45'42'' N.......................... 073[deg]54'22'' W \*\
39[deg]45'42'' N.......................... 073[deg]37'40'' W \*\
39[deg]11'38'' N.......................... 073[deg]40'30'' W
38[deg]40'33'' N.......................... 073[deg]54'44'' W
36[deg]42'14'' N.......................... 074[deg]21'12'' W
34[deg]33'21'' N.......................... 074[deg]52'32'' W
33[deg]57'08'' N.......................... 075[deg]20'14'' W
32[deg]49'15'' N.......................... 076[deg]06'42'' W
31[deg]37'49'' N.......................... 076[deg]51'25'' W
29[deg]36'06'' N.......................... 078[deg]06'19'' W
27[deg]46'56'' N.......................... 079[deg]12'18'' W
27[deg]13'15'' N.......................... 079[deg]31'17'' W
27[deg]23'50'' N.......................... 079[deg]36'19'' W
27[deg]50'56'' N.......................... 079[deg]21'12'' W
29[deg]40'10'' N.......................... 078[deg]15'08'' W
31[deg]41'47'' N.......................... 077[deg]00'15'' W
32[deg]53'17'' N.......................... 076[deg]15'27'' W
34[deg]01'24'' N.......................... 075[deg]28'48'' W
34[deg]36'25'' N.......................... 075[deg]02'00'' W
36[deg]06'17'' N.......................... 074[deg]40'11'' W
36[deg]43'37'' N.......................... 074[deg]31'02'' W
38[deg]42'09'' N.......................... 074[deg]04'30'' W
38[deg]58'51'' N.......................... 074[deg]00'42'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\*\ Crosses the Cape Charles to Montauk Point Fairway.
2. The potential Delaware Bay Connector Fairway is about 125 miles
long, approximately 10 nautical miles wide, and includes the customary
route taken by vessels transiting between the Port of Miami, FL; Port
Everglades, FL; Port Canaveral, FL; and the Port of Virginia; the Port
of Baltimore, MD; the Port of Philadelphia, PA; the Port of Wilmington,
DE; and also to the Port of
[[Page 37037]]
New York and New Jersey, by linking with the St. Lucie to New York
Fairway in the vicinity of Cape Henry, VA.\13\ This potential fairway
is an area enclosed by rhumb lines joining points at:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ To see an illustration of this linkage, see the Mid
Atlantic Chart in the docket.
The Delaware Bay Connector Fairway
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
36[deg]06'17'' N.......................... 074[deg]40'11'' W
37[deg]52'59'' N.......................... 074[deg]42'50'' W
38[deg]05'39'' N.......................... 074[deg]32'53'' W
36[deg]43'37'' N.......................... 074[deg]31'02'' W
36[deg]06'17'' N.......................... 074[deg]40'11'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The potential St. Lucie to Chesapeake Bay Nearshore Fairway is
about 1,200 miles long, approximately 5 nautical miles wide, and
includes the customary route taken by vessels transiting between the
Port of Miami, FL; Port Everglades, FL; Port Canaveral, FL; the Port of
Jacksonville, FL; Kings Bay, GA; the Port of Brunswick, GA; the Port of
Savannah, GA; the Port of Charleston, SC; the Port of Morehead City,
NC; the Port of Wilmington, NC; the Port of Virginia,; and the Port of
Baltimore, MD. This potential fairway is an area enclosed by rhumb
lines joining points at:
The St. Lucie to Chesapeake Bay Nearshore Fairway
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
27[deg]10'12'' N.......................... 080[deg]03'04'' W
27[deg]22'58'' N.......................... 080[deg]07'20'' W
27[deg]44'21'' N.......................... 080[deg]10'14'' W
28[deg]38'07'' N.......................... 080[deg]21'01'' W
30[deg]56'24'' N.......................... 080[deg]45'09'' W
31[deg]22'43'' N.......................... 080[deg]34'10'' W
31[deg]31'32'' N.......................... 080[deg]29'18'' W
31[deg]49'26'' N.......................... 080[deg]17'05'' W
31[deg]57'30'' N.......................... 080[deg]06'05'' W
33[deg]20'02'' N.......................... 077[deg]50'47'' W
33[deg]28'47'' N.......................... 077[deg]35'05'' W
34[deg]18'07'' N.......................... 076[deg]23'59'' W
35[deg]09'05'' N.......................... 075[deg]17'23'' W
35[deg]35'43'' N.......................... 075[deg]19'23'' W
36[deg]15'49'' N.......................... 075[deg]35'37'' W
36[deg]35'21'' N.......................... 075[deg]43'52'' W
36[deg]35'09'' N.......................... 075[deg]38'39'' W
36[deg]17'21'' N.......................... 075[deg]29'56'' W
35[deg]36'38'' N.......................... 075[deg]13'27'' W
35[deg]07'04'' N.......................... 075[deg]11'13'' W
34[deg]14'24'' N.......................... 076[deg]20'01'' W
33[deg]24'47'' N.......................... 077[deg]31'29'' W
33[deg]15'52'' N.......................... 077[deg]47'28'' W
31[deg]53'39'' N.......................... 080[deg]02'10'' W
31[deg]46'08'' N.......................... 080[deg]12'24'' W
31[deg]28'58'' N.......................... 080[deg]24'08'' W
31[deg]19'07'' N.......................... 080[deg]30'22'' W
30[deg]55'58'' N.......................... 080[deg]40'02'' W
28[deg]38'50'' N.......................... 080[deg]16'06'' W
27[deg]45'00'' N.......................... 080[deg]05'18'' W
27[deg]23'53'' N.......................... 080[deg]02'26'' W
27[deg]11'28'' N.......................... 079[deg]58'17'' W
27[deg]10'12'' N.......................... 080[deg]03'04'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. The potential St. Lucie to Chesapeake Bay Offshore Fairway is
about 1,200 miles long, approximately 10 nautical miles wide, and
includes the customary route taken by vessels transiting between the
Port of Miami, FL; Port Everglades, FL; Port Canaveral, FL; the Port of
Jacksonville, FL; Kings Bay, GA; the Port of Brunswick, GA; the Port of
Savannah, GA; Charleston, SC; the Port of Morehead City, NC; the Port
of Wilmington, NC; and the Port of Virginia. It is located seaward of
the St. Lucie to Chesapeake Bay Nearshore Fairway. This potential
fairway is an area enclosed by rhumb lines joining points at:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Portions of BOEM North Carolina Lease OCS-A 0508, in OCS
sub-block 6664D are located within protraction NJ18-11. This
potential fairway overlaps a portion of this sub-block by 120 meters
at its widest point. This is a renewable energy lease for wind-
generated energy. We have placed a chart in the docket that displays
specific areas where the potential St. Lucie to Chesapeake Bay
Offshore Fairway overlap areas of this lease. The chart is entitled
``Chart Showing Overlap of BOEM North Carolina Lease OCS-A 0508.''
The St. Lucie to Chesapeake Bay Offshore Fairway \14\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
27[deg]11'28'' N.......................... 079[deg]58'17'' W
27[deg]45'00'' N.......................... 080[deg]05'18'' W
28[deg]38'50'' N.......................... 080[deg]16'06'' W
30[deg]55'58'' N.......................... 080[deg]40'02'' W
31[deg]19'07'' N.......................... 080[deg]30'22'' W
31[deg]28'58'' N.......................... 080[deg]24'08'' W
31[deg]46'08'' N.......................... 080[deg]12'24'' W
31[deg]53'39'' N.......................... 080[deg]02'10'' W
33[deg]15'52'' N.......................... 077[deg]47'28'' W
33[deg]24'47'' N.......................... 077[deg]31'29'' W
34[deg]14'24'' N.......................... 076[deg]20'01'' W
35[deg]10'58'' N.......................... 075[deg]06'08'' W
35[deg]59'41'' N.......................... 075[deg]06'58'' W
36[deg]35'09'' N.......................... 075[deg]38'39'' W
36[deg]38'54'' N.......................... 075[deg]32'10'' W
36[deg]01'48'' N.......................... 074[deg]59'01'' W
35[deg]06'32'' N.......................... 074[deg]58'03'' W
34[deg]08'12'' N.......................... 076[deg]13'25'' W
33[deg]18'05'' N.......................... 077[deg]25'30'' W
33[deg]09'00'' N.......................... 077[deg]41'48'' W
31[deg]47'03'' N.......................... 079[deg]55'54'' W
31[deg]40'38'' N.......................... 080[deg]04'37'' W
31[deg]24'48'' N.......................... 080[deg]15'25'' W
31[deg]15'38'' N.......................... 080[deg]21'14'' W
30[deg]55'07'' N.......................... 080[deg]29'47'' W
28[deg]40'16'' N.......................... 080[deg]06'15'' W
27[deg]13'02'' N.......................... 079[deg]48'27'' W
27[deg]11'28'' N.......................... 079[deg]58'17'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. The potential Cape Charles to Montauk Point Fairway is about 400
miles long, varies from approximately 5 to 10 nautical miles wide, and
includes the customary route taken by vessels transiting between the
Port of New York and New Jersey; the Port of Philadelphia, PA; the Port
of Wilmington, DE; and the Port of Baltimore, MD. This potential
fairway is an area enclosed by rhumb lines joining points at:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Portions of BOEM Maryland Lease OCS-A 0490, in the
following OCS blocks and sub-blocks are located within protraction
NI18-05: 6726K, 6726N, 6726O, 6726P, 6775, 6776, 6777E, 6777I,
6777J, 6777M, 6777N, 6825, 6826, 6827A, 6827B, 6827C, 6827E, 6827F,
6827H, 6827I, and 6827M. This is a renewable energy lease for wind-
generated energy. We have placed a chart in the docket that displays
specific areas where the potential Cape Charles to Montauk Point
Fairway overlap areas of this lease. The chart is entitled ``Chart
Showing Overlap of BOEM Maryland Lease OCS-A-0490, and New Jersey
Leases OCS-A-0498 and OCS-A-0499.''
\16\ Portions of BOEM New Jersey Leases OCS-A 0498 and OCS-A
0499 (123 sub-blocks) were found to overlap with this potential
fairway. One hundred of these 123 sub-blocks were identified in
BOEM's ATLW-5 Final Sale Notice (FSN) as potentially being not
available for development. These are renewable energy leases for
wind-generated energy. We have placed a chart in the docket that
displays specific areas where the potential Cape Charles to Montauk
Point Fairway overlap areas of these leases. The chart is entitled
``Chart Showing Overlap of BOEM Maryland Lease OCS-A-0490, and New
Jersey Leases OCS-A-0498 and OCS-A-0499.''
The Cape Charles to Montauk Point Fairway 15 16
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
37[deg]07'24'' N.......................... 075[deg]40'59'' W
37[deg]32'04'' N.......................... 075[deg]25'53'' W
37[deg]50'37'' N.......................... 075[deg]12'06'' W
37[deg]59'42'' N.......................... 075[deg]01'23'' W
38[deg]04'21'' N.......................... 074[deg]54'04'' W
38[deg]21'43'' N.......................... 074[deg]41'01'' W [dagger]
38[deg]26'49'' N.......................... 074[deg]37'11'' W [dagger]
38[deg]30'53'' N.......................... 074[deg]34'07'' W
38[deg]44'16'' N.......................... 074[deg]32'52'' W
[dagger][dagger]
38[deg]50'05'' N.......................... 074[deg]32'20'' W
[dagger][dagger]
38[deg]58'12'' N.......................... 074[deg]31'35'' W
39[deg]07'51'' N.......................... 074[deg]31'24'' W
39[deg]24'49'' N.......................... 074[deg]13'47'' W
39[deg]40'32'' N.......................... 074[deg]02'55'' W
39[deg]45'42'' N.......................... 073[deg]54'22'' W
39[deg]54'39'' N.......................... 073[deg]39'43'' W
40[deg]02'33'' N.......................... 073[deg]26'46'' W [Dagger]
40[deg]10'45'' N.......................... 073[deg]13'18'' W [Dagger]
40[deg]21'01'' N.......................... 072[deg]56'29'' W [Dagger]
40[deg]23'05'' N.......................... 072[deg]53'05'' W [Dagger]
40[deg]29'17'' N.......................... 072[deg]42'55'' W
40[deg]31'21'' N.......................... 072[deg]39'31'' W
40[deg]51'49'' N.......................... 072[deg]05'57'' W
41[deg]01'54'' N.......................... 071[deg]32'17'' W
40[deg]31'42'' N.......................... 072[deg]21'59'' W [Dagger]
40[deg]29'38'' N.......................... 072[deg]25'24'' W [Dagger]
40[deg]23'25'' N.......................... 072[deg]35'36'' W
40[deg]21'21'' N.......................... 072[deg]39'00'' W [Dagger]
40[deg]05'14'' N.......................... 073[deg]05'37'' W [Dagger]
39[deg]57'08'' N.......................... 073[deg]19'03'' W
[[Page 37038]]
39[deg]45'42'' N.......................... 073[deg]37'40'' W
[Dagger][Dagger]
39[deg]38'23'' N.......................... 073[deg]54'48'' W
[Dagger][Dagger]
39[deg]36'12'' N.......................... 073[deg]59'57'' W
39[deg]22'41'' N.......................... 074[deg]09'36'' W
39[deg]06'27'' N.......................... 074[deg]26'26'' W
38[deg]58'02'' N.......................... 074[deg]26'35'' W
38[deg]50'42'' N.......................... 074[deg]27'16'' W
[dagger][dagger]
38[deg]43'39'' N.......................... 074[deg]27'56'' W
[dagger][dagger]
38[deg]29'41'' N.......................... 074[deg]29'14'' W
38[deg]23'38'' N.......................... 074[deg]33'47'' W [dagger]
38[deg]18'03'' N.......................... 074[deg]37'58'' W [dagger]
38[deg]01'44'' N.......................... 074[deg]50'13'' W
37[deg]56'49'' N.......................... 074[deg]57'58'' W
37[deg]48'15'' N.......................... 075[deg]08'04'' W
37[deg]30'12'' N.......................... 075[deg]21'28'' W
37[deg]05'38'' N.......................... 075[deg]36'30'' W
37[deg]07'24'' N.......................... 075[deg]40'59'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[dagger] Crosses the Off Delaware Bay Southern Approach Cutoff Fairway.
[dagger][dagger] Crosses the Off Delaware Eastern Approach Cutoff
Fairway.
[Dagger] Crosses Traffic Separation Scheme.
[Dagger][Dagger] Crosses the St. Lucie to New York Fairway.
6. The potential Chesapeake Bay to Delaware Bay: Eastern Approach
Cutoff Fairway is about 200 miles long, approximately 10 nautical miles
wide, and includes the customary route taken by vessels transiting
between the Port of Virginia; the Port of Baltimore, MD; the Port of
Philadelphia, PA; and the Port of Wilmington, DE. This potential
fairway is an area enclosed by rhumb lines joining points at:
The Chesapeake Bay to Delaware Bay: Eastern Approach Cutoff Fairway
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
36[deg]57'07'' N.......................... 075[deg]35'54'' W
37[deg]04'32'' N.......................... 075[deg]29'41'' W
38[deg]04'39'' N.......................... 074[deg]43'07'' W
38[deg]14'35'' N.......................... 074[deg]35'05'' W *
38[deg]20'25'' N.......................... 074[deg]30'22'' W *
38[deg]41'54'' N.......................... 074[deg]13'57'' W
38[deg]42'09'' N.......................... 074[deg]04'30'' W
38[deg]05'39'' N.......................... 074[deg]32'53'' W
37[deg]52'59'' N.......................... 074[deg]42'50'' W
37[deg]19'37'' N.......................... 075[deg]08'42'' W
36[deg]52'24'' N.......................... 075[deg]34'11'' W
36[deg]57'07'' N.......................... 075[deg]35'54'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Crosses the Off Delaware Bay Southern Approach Cutoff Fairway.
7. The potential Off Delaware Bay: Southern Approach Cutoff Fairway
is about 20 miles long, approximately 10 nautical miles wide, and
includes the customary route taken by vessels transiting between the
Port of Miami, FL; Port Everglades, FL; Port Canaveral, FL; and the
Port of Virginia; the Port of Baltimore, MD; the Port of Philadelphia,
PA; and the Port of Wilmington, DE, by linking with the St. Lucie to
New York Fairway in the vicinity of Cape Henlopen, DE.\17\ This
potential fairway is an area enclosed by rhumb lines joining points at:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ To see an illustration of this linkage, see the Northern
Area Chart in the docket.
The Off Delaware Bay: Southern Approach Cutoff Fairway
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
38[deg]14'35'' N.......................... 074[deg]35'05'' W
38[deg]18'03'' N.......................... 074[deg]37'58'' W
38[deg]21'43'' N.......................... 074[deg]41'01'' W
38[deg]27'00'' N.......................... 074[deg]45'24'' W
38[deg]28'48'' N.......................... 074[deg]39'18'' W
38[deg]23'38'' N.......................... 074[deg]33'47'' W
38[deg]20'25'' N.......................... 074[deg]30'22'' W
38[deg]14'35'' N.......................... 074[deg]35'05'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. The potential Off Delaware Bay: Eastern Approach Cutoff Fairway
is about 50 miles long, approximately 10 nautical miles wide, and
includes the customary route taken by vessels transiting between the
Port of Miami, FL; Port Everglades, FL; Port Canaveral, FL; by linking
the St. Lucie to New York Fairway in the vicinity of Cape May, NJ; or
the Port of Virginia and the Port of Baltimore, MD; and the Port of
Philadelphia, PA; and the Port of Wilmington, DE, by linking with the
Chesapeak Bay to Delaware Bay Eastern Approach Cutoff in the vicinity
of Cape May.\18\ This potential fairway is an area enclosed by rhumb
lines joining points at:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ To see an illustration of this linkage, see the Northern
Area Chart in the docket.
The Off Delaware Bay: Eastern Approach Cutoff Fairway
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
38[deg]41'54'' N.......................... 074[deg]13'57'' W
38[deg]43'39'' N.......................... 074[deg]27'56'' W *
38[deg]44'16'' N.......................... 074[deg]32'52'' W *
38[deg]44'27'' N.......................... 074[deg]34'21'' W
38[deg]50'05'' N.......................... 074[deg]32'20'' W
38[deg]50'42'' N.......................... 074[deg]27'16'' W
38[deg]53'30'' N.......................... 074[deg]04'39'' W
38[deg]58'51'' N.......................... 074[deg]00'42'' W
38[deg]42'09'' N.......................... 074[deg]04'30'' W
38[deg]41'54'' N.......................... 074[deg]13'57'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Crosses the Cape Charles to Montauk Point Fairway.
9. The potential Long Island Fairway is about 150 miles long,
approximately 5 nautical miles wide, and includes the customary route
taken by vessels transiting between the Long Island Sound Eastern
Entrances; the Port of Groton, CT; the Port of New Haven Harbor, CT;
and the Port of New York and New Jersey. This potential fairway is an
area enclosed by rhumb lines joining points at:
The Long Island Fairway
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40[deg]28'15'' N.......................... 073[deg]38'59'' W
40[deg]31'52'' N.......................... 073[deg]39'54'' W
40[deg]35'59'' N.......................... 073[deg]11'39'' W
41[deg]06'36'' N.......................... 071[deg]30'06'' W
41[deg]03'06'' N.......................... 071[deg]28'15'' W
40[deg]32'12'' N.......................... 073[deg]11'28'' W
40[deg]28'15'' N.......................... 073[deg]38'59'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can find three charts depicting and labelling the locations of
these potential fairways in the docket. The Northern Area chart
illustrates all nine. As numbered in the tables above, the Mid-Atlantic
Area chart illustrates potential fairways 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 8, and the
Southern Area chart illustrates potential fairways 1, 3, and 4. These
charts only show the portion of the potential fairway in the area
covered by the chart. Additionally, two charts depicting and labelling
the locations of overlaps between the proposed fairways and existing
BOEM leases are contained in the docket: Chart Showing Overlap of BOEM
Maryland Lease OCS-A-0490, and New Jersey Leases OCS-A-0498 and OCS-A-
0499; and Chart Showing Overlap of BOEM North Carolina Lease OCS-A
0508.
C. Study of Potential Port Approach Fairways
As announced in the Federal Register on March 15, 2019, the Coast
Guard is also conducting Port Access Route Studies in accordance with
46 U.S.C. 70003(c) to determine whether or not fairways should be
established or whether other routing measures for existing port
approaches would be more appropriate. 84 FR 9541. These port approach
fairways would provide access to the potential fairways identified in
the ACPARS final report and in this ANPRM, would be important to the
safe and efficient movement of ships and cargo, and would be critical
to sustaining interstate and international commerce.
Each Coast Guard district commander will study the ports in their
district that are economically significant, support military
operations, or are critical to national defense. For an example of this
multi-Coast Guard District effort, see a recent notice announcing PARS
for approaches to the Chesapeake Bay, Virginia (84 FR 65398, November
27, 2019). Results of each PARS will be published separately in the
Federal Register by the district commander.
Like the ACPARS, these PARS will use AIS data and information from
[[Page 37039]]
stakeholders to identify and verify customary navigation routes. Each
PARS will identify potential conflicts involving alternative activities
in the studied area, such as wind energy generation and offshore
mineral exploration and exploitation.
The following 23 U.S. ports are initially under consideration for
PARS:
Ports Under Consideration for PARS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kennebec River/Bath, ME.
Port of Portland, ME.
Port of Portsmouth, NH.
Port of New Bedford, MA.
Port of Boston, MA.
Narragansett Bay, RI.
Long Island Sound Eastern Entrances.
Port of Groton, CT.
Port of New Haven, CT.
Port of New York and New Jersey, including Port Elizabeth and Newark.
Port of Philadelphia, PA, including Camden-Gloucester City, NJ, Port of
Wilmington, DE.
Port of Baltimore, MD.
Port of Virginia, including Norfolk, Newport News and Hampton Roads, VA.
Port of Morehead City, NC.
Port of Wilmington, NC.
Port of Charleston, SC.
Port of Savannah, GA.
Port of Brunswick, GA.
Kings Bay, GA.
Port of Jacksonville, FL.
Port Canaveral, FL.
Port Everglades, FL.
Port of Miami, FL.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. International Entry and Departure Transit Areas
We also announced studies related to international entry and
departure transit areas seaward of the potential fairways in the U.S.
EEZ. 84 FR 9541. International entry and departure transit areas are
integral to the safe, efficient, and unimpeded flow of ships. Fairways
established based on the studies of international entry and departure
transit areas would be used by vessels coming from a foreign port and
transiting to a coastwise or offshore fairway or directly to a port
approach leading to a U.S. port. It is important that fairways for
regions of the U.S. EEZ between principal international ports and the
United States are considered to ensure the safe and direct movement of
ships and cargo between international origins and destinations. Each
route or fairway would be a link in a chain connecting ports in the
United States and abroad, and each link should be as robust and
effective as the routes identified in the ACPARS.
V. Information Requested
Public participation will help the Coast Guard decide whether to
establish coastwise and offshore fairways and, if so, how to balance
ship routing with offshore development activities and other uses. The
Coast Guard seeks public comments, positive or negative, on the impacts
that the nine potential fairways under consideration may have on
navigational safety and on other activities in these offshore areas to
aid us in developing a proposed rule and the supporting analyses. Where
possible and pertinent, please provide sources, citations and
references to back up or justify your responses. Also, for all
pertinent responses, please provide a detailed explanation of how you
arrived at this conclusion and the underlying assessment that supports
your conclusion. Finally, for all numerical responses please provide us
with sufficient information to recreate your calculations.
We seek public feedback on the following questions:
1. Do the nine potential fairways provide safe and efficient routes
for vessels transiting to and from international ports to the United
States? Why or why not? If not, what would you recommend instead?
2. Are the ACPARS-potential fairways described in this ANPRM, or
similar ones, necessary for ensuring a safe and orderly passage for
vessels transiting among U.S. domestic ports of call? Why or why not?
Please explain your answer, including your specific comments on how the
fairways described in this ANPRM would affect maritime traffic
patterns, navigational safety and access to ports.
3. Are there any positive or negative impacts of not establishing
the nine fairways noted in this ANPRM? If so, please describe them.
4. If these potential fairways are established, what persons,
entities, or organizations would be positively or negatively impacted?
In other words, which groups of people, businesses, or industries
(maritime and non-maritime) would be positively or negatively impacted
by these potential fairways?
5. What other offshore uses may be positively or negatively
affected by the potential fairways? Please include specific locations,
potential impact, and associated costs or benefits. Please also
describe the safety significance of the potential fairways on the
activity.
6. Do the nine potential fairways unduly limit offshore
development? If so, is there a cost model or structure that should be
considered for analysis? What are the limitations of the cost model? If
so, why do you believe the proposal would limit offshore development
and what specific development would it limit?
7. From an environmental perspective, would the potential fairways
described in this ANPRM negatively impact living marine resources? If
so, which marine resources would be impacted and how? What measures
within the Coast Guard's jurisdiction should be considered to avoid,
minimize, or mitigate any such impacts?
8. Beyond the environmental impacts mentioned in question 7, are
there any other positive or negative environmental impacts from these
potential fairways? If so, please provide detail as to how and what
would be impacted. To the degree possible, please provide the data,
impact assessments, and other pertinent background information
necessary to understand and reproduce your results.
9. What mitigation measures within the Coast Guard's jurisdiction
could be used to relieve the economic and safety impacts of the
potential fairways on other offshore uses? What are the expected costs
and associated benefits of the suggested mitigation measures?
10. Are there additional measures that should be considered to
improve safety or relieve an economic burden imposed by these potential
fairways? What are the expected costs and associated benefits of the
suggested additional measures?
11. Are there other variables that should be considered in
developing this system of potential fairways? If so, please indicate
particular issues and the specific areas to which they pertain.
13. Besides the Coast Guard's noted intention and purpose of this
rulemaking, what positive aspects would this proposal produce for the
safety of maritime transportation?
14. Have there been any offshore developments built or installed in
the past 10 years that have impacted traffic patterns, navigational
safety, or maritime commerce? If so, were the net impacts positive or
negative? Please provide a detailed explanation of how you arrived at
this conclusion.
15. Please offer any other comments or suggestions that may improve
this initiative.
Please submit comments or concerns you may have in accordance with
the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' section above.
[[Page 37040]]
This notice is issued under the authority of 46 U.S.C. 70003 and 5
U.S.C. 552.
Dated: June 10, 2020.
R.V. Timme,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Prevention
Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-12910 Filed 6-18-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P