Anchorage Grounds; Atlantic Ocean, Jacksonville, FL, 40153-40155 [2020-13827]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 129 / Monday, July 6, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Point ID No.
Latitude
3 (yellow can buoy) .........................................................................................................................................................
4 (yellow can buoy) .........................................................................................................................................................
(5) The .13 mi2 area near Pillar Point
from the Pillar Point Harbor entrance
along a 100-yard wide access route
southeast along a bearing of
approximately 174° true (159° magnetic)
to the green bell buoy (identified as
‘‘Buoy 3’’) at 37.48154 N, 122.48156 W
and then along a 100-yard wide access
route northwest along a bearing of
approximately 284° true (269° magnetic)
to the green gong buoy (identified as
‘‘Buoy 1’’) at 37.48625 N, 122.50603 W,
the southwest boundary of Zone Five.
Zone Five exists only when a High Surf
Latitude
(green gong buoy ‘‘1’’ with flashing green 2.5-second light) .......................................................................................
(intersection of sight lines due north of green gong buoy ‘‘1’’ and due west of Sail Rock) ........................................
(Sail Rock) ....................................................................................................................................................................
(intersection of sight lines due east of green gong buoy ‘‘1’’ and due south of Sail Rock) ........................................
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
rulemaking, call or email LT Emily
Sysko, Sector Jacksonville Waterways
Management Division Chief, U.S. Coast
Guard; telephone 904–714–7616, email
Emily.T.Sysko@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Coast Guard
I. Table of Abbreviations
[FR Doc. 2020–14225 Filed 7–2–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–NK–P
33 CFR Part 110
[Docket Number USCG–2016–0897]
RIN 1625–AA01
Anchorage Grounds; Atlantic Ocean,
Jacksonville, FL
Coast Guard, DHS.
Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard is proposing
to establish a dedicated offshore
anchorage approximately seven nautical
miles northeast of the St. Johns River
inlet, Florida. This action is necessary to
ensure the safety and efficiency of
navigation for all vessels transiting in
and out of the Port of Jacksonville. We
invite your comments on this proposed
rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before September 4, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2019–0964 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:
If
you have questions about this proposed
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:03 Jul 02, 2020
Jkt 250001
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
SNPRM Supplemental notice of proposed
rulemaking
§ Section
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal
Basis
The project to establish an offshore
anchorage just outside of the St. Johns
River and offshore of Jacksonville was
initiated in 2013. From 2013 through
2017, certain port stakeholders (St.
Johns Bar Pilots Association (SJBPA),
Jacksonville Marine Transportation
Exchange (JMTX), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
and United States Coast Guard (USCG))
worked to determine a suitable location
for the anchorage, with consideration
given to, among other things,
environmental factors and Seasonal
Management Areas. However, a location
was not determined during this
timeframe. The U.S. Coast Guard
conducted a Waterways Analysis and
Management System (WAMS) survey for
this proposed project and did not
receive any comments of concern from
the entities previously mentioned.
In 2016, the stakeholders re-engaged
the USCG in an attempt to complete the
offshore anchorage project. A Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking was published on
May 4, 2017 (82 FR 20859). Informal
National Environmental Protection Act
(NEPA) consultations were
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Longitude
–121.87416
–121.85500
Advisory has been issued by the
National Weather Service and is in
effect for San Mateo County and only
during December, January, and
February. Zone Five is bounded by:
Point ID No.
1
2
3
4
36.65168
36.63833
40153
37.48625
37.49305
37.49305
37.48625
Longitude
–122.50603
–122.50603
–122.50105
–122.50105
disseminated requesting feedback on the
proposed anchorage location. National
Marine Fisheries (NMFS) and NOAA
responded with significant concerns
regarding the location. The
aforementioned agencies requested an
environmental study be completed to
analyze potential hard bottom locations
within the selected anchorage ground
and the effects of vessels anchoring in
these environmentally sensitive areas.
The stakeholders involved at this time
were unable to financially support the
requested study. Due to these concerns,
no further action was taken after the
NPRM was published in 2017.
In 2018, the USCG met with the
stakeholders again to determine a way
forward with the proposed anchorage.
Stakeholders concluded that three
circular anchorages would meet the
needs of an offshore anchorage, while
allowing flexibility to avoid hard bottom
areas. In 2019, USCG Sector Jacksonville
sent out an informal consultation via
email to federal, state, and local
government and private stakeholders to
solicit for feedback on the proposed,
new anchorage construct. NMFS agreed
with the construct, allowing USCG to
move forward with formal NEPA
consultation. Towards the end of 2019,
USCG sent out formal consultation to
approximately 20 different
organizations and agencies regarding the
anchorage. At this time, NMFS
expressed some minor concerns. At the
beginning of 2020, stakeholders and
NMFS came to an agreement that
addressed the minor concerns raised.
The USCG is currently moving forward
with the rulemaking and public
comment period for the proposed
anchorage location.
The purpose of this proposed
rulemaking is to improve the
navigational safety, traffic management
E:\FR\FM\06JYP1.SGM
06JYP1
40154
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 129 / Monday, July 6, 2020 / Proposed Rules
and port security for the Port of
Jacksonville.
Currently, there is no dedicated deep
draft offshore anchorage for commercial
ocean-going vessels arriving at the Port
of Jacksonville. Vessels have routinely
been anchoring 1.5 nautical miles
northeast of the ‘‘STJ’’ entrance buoy.
Without a designated charted anchorage
area, vessels end up drifting or
anchoring in the common approaches to
the St. Johns River, creating a potential
hazardous condition for vessels
transiting in and out of the Port of
Jacksonville. These conditions have
worsened in recent years with the
introduction of Liquefied Natural Gas
(LNG) vessels transiting the Port of
Jacksonville. Additional growth is
forecasted to occur because of
deepening the channel. There will likely
be an increase in the number of large
vessels calling on Jacksonville in the
near future.
The Coast Guard is proposing this
rulemaking under authority in 33 U.S.C.
471.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Captain of the Port is proposing
to establish an offshore anchorage area
approximately seven nautical miles
northeast of the St. Johns River inlet,
Florida. There is not currently a
dedicated deep draft offshore anchorage
for commercial ocean-going vessels
arriving at the Port of Jacksonville. This
action is necessary to ensure the safety
and efficiency of navigation for vessels
transiting in and out of the Port of
Jacksonville. The anchorage areas
consist of three circles each with a
radius of 1,400 feet.The anchorage
boundaries are described, using precise
coordinates, in the proposed regulatory
text at the end of this document.
IV. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after
considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and
Executive orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess the costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits.
Executive Order 13771 directs agencies
to control regulatory costs through a
budgeting process. This SNPRM has not
been designated a ‘‘significant
regulatory action,’’ under Executive
Order 12866. Accordingly, the SNPRM
has not been reviewed by the Office of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:03 Jul 02, 2020
Jkt 250001
Management and Budget (OMB), and
pursuant to OMB guidance, it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive
Order 13771.
This regulatory action determination
is based on the fact that there will be
minimal impact to routine navigation
because the proposed anchorage area
would not restrict traffic. The anchorage
is located well outside of the established
navigation channel. Vessels would still
be able to maneuver in, around, and
through the anchorage.
B. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended,
requires Federal agencies to consider
the potential impact of regulations on
small entities during rulemaking. The
term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small
businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and
operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions
with populations of less than 50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C.
605(b) that this proposed rule would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
While some owners or operators of
vessels intending to transit the
anchorage may be small entities, for the
reasons stated in section IV.A above,
this proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule would have a
significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it
qualifies and how and to what degree
this rule would economically affect it.
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
we want to assist small entities in
understanding this proposed rule. If the
rule would affect your small business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please call or email the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. The Coast
Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about
this proposed rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.
C. Collection of Information
This proposed rule would not call for
a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501–3520).
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
D. Federalism and Indian Tribal
Governments
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism), if it has a substantial
direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. We have analyzed
this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent
with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements
described in Executive Order 13132.
Also, this proposed rule does not have
tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175 (Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments) because it would not
have a substantial direct effect on one or
more Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes.
If you believe this proposed rule has
implications for federalism or Indian
tribes, please call or email the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their discretionary regulatory actions. In
particular, the Act addresses actions
that may result in the expenditure by a
State, local, or tribal government, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Though this
proposed rule would not result in such
an expenditure, we do discuss the
effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023–01, Rev. 1,
associated implementing instructions,
and Environmental Planning
COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which
guide the Coast Guard in complying
with the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination
that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. This proposed
rule involves establishing offshore
anchorage grounds, which would be
comprised of three circles, each with a
1,400-foot radius. The anchorage
E:\FR\FM\06JYP1.SGM
06JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 129 / Monday, July 6, 2020 / Proposed Rules
grounds are not designated a critical
habitat or special management area.
Normally such actions are categorically
excluded from further review under
paragraph L59(a) of Appendix A, Table
1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023–01–
001–01, Rev. 1. A preliminary Record of
Environmental Consideration
supporting this determination is
available in the docket. For instructions
on locating the docket, see the
ADDRESSES section of this preamble. We
seek any comments or information that
may lead to the discovery of a
significant environmental impact from
this proposed rule.
V. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We view 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 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
comments through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. If your material
cannot be submitted using https://
www.regulations.gov, call or email the
person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions.
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).
Documents mentioned in this SNPRM
as being available in the docket, and all
public comments, will be in our online
docket at https://www.regulations.gov
and can be viewed by following that
website’s instructions. Additionally, if
you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified
when comments are posted or a final
rule is published.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110
Anchorage grounds.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing
to amend 33 CFR part 110 as follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:03 Jul 02, 2020
Jkt 250001
PART 110—ANCHORAGE
REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 110
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 2071; 46 U.S.C.
70034; 33 CFR 1.05–1; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Add § 110.184 to subpart B to read
as follows:
■
§ 110.184 Atlantic Ocean, Offshore
Jacksonville, FL.
(a) Location. All waters of the Atlantic
Ocean encompassed within a radius of
1,400 feet of the following coordinates
based on North American Datum 1983:
(1) Anchorage Ground 1 with a center
point in position 30°26″48.6′ N,
81°17″14.9′ W.
(2) Anchorage Ground 2 with a center
point in position 30°26″20.5′ N,
81°17″30.8′ W; and
(3) Anchorage Ground 3 with a center
point in position 30°26″20.2′ N,
81°16″57.8′ W.
(b) The regulations. (1) Commercial
vessels in the Atlantic Ocean near the
Port of Jacksonville desiring to anchor
must anchor only within the anchorage
area hereby defined and established,
except in cases of emergency.
(2) All vessels within the designated
anchorage area must maintain a 24-hour
bridge watch by a licensed or
credentialed deck officer proficient in
English, monitoring VHF–FM channel
16. This individual must confirm that
the ship’s crew performs frequent
checks of the vessel’s position to ensure
the vessel is not dragging anchor.
(3) Vessels may anchor anywhere
within the designated anchorage area,
provided that: Such anchoring does not
interfere with the operations of any
other vessels currently at anchorage;
and all anchor and chain or cable is
positioned in such a manner to preclude
dragging.
(4) No vessel may anchor in a ‘‘dead
ship’’ status (that is, propulsion or
control unavailable for normal
operations) without the prior approval
of the COTP. Vessels which are
planning to perform main propulsion
engine repairs or maintenance, must
immediately notify the COTP on VHF–
FM Channel 22A. Vessels must also
report marine casualties in accordance
with 46 CFR 4.05–1.
(5) No vessel may anchor within the
designated anchorage for more than 72
hours without the prior approval of the
COTP. To obtain this approval, contact
the COTP on VHF–FM Channel 22A.
(6) The COTP may close the
anchorage area and direct vessels to
depart the anchorage during periods of
adverse weather or at other times as
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
40155
deemed necessary in the interest of port
safety or security.
(7) Commercial vessels anchoring
under emergency circumstances outside
the anchorage area must shift to new
positions within the anchorage area
immediately after the emergency ceases.
Dated: June 22, 2020.
Eric C. Jones,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Seventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2020–13827 Filed 7–2–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 167
[USCG–2018–1058]
Port Access Route Study: Alaskan
Arctic Coast; Reopening of Comment
Period
Coast Guard, Homeland
Security (DHS).
ACTION: Notification of reopening of
commend period.
AGENCY:
The United States Coast
Guard is reopening the comment period
for the notice of study and request for
comments for the Port Access Route
Study: Alaskan Arctic Coast that we
published on December 21, 2018. This
action will provide the public with
additional time and opportunity to
provide the Coast Guard with
information regarding the Port Access
Route Study: Alaskan Arctic Coast. The
comment period is extended until
September 30, 2021.
DATES: The comment period for the
document that published on December
21, 2018 (83 FR 65701), which was
extended on September 4, 2019 (84 FR
46501), and January 13, 2020 (85 FR
1793), is reopened. Comments and
related material must be received by the
Coast Guard on or before September 30,
2021.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2018–1058 using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. If your material
cannot be submitted using https://
www.regulations.gov, contact the person
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions about this
document, please contact LCDR Michael
Newell, Seventeenth Coast Guard
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\06JYP1.SGM
06JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 129 (Monday, July 6, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40153-40155]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-13827]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 110
[Docket Number USCG-2016-0897]
RIN 1625-AA01
Anchorage Grounds; Atlantic Ocean, Jacksonville, FL
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to establish a dedicated offshore
anchorage approximately seven nautical miles northeast of the St. Johns
River inlet, Florida. This action is necessary to ensure the safety and
efficiency of navigation for all vessels transiting in and out of the
Port of Jacksonville. We invite your comments on this proposed
rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before September 4, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2019-0964 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: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email LT Emily Sysko, Sector Jacksonville
Waterways Management Division Chief, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 904-
714-7616, email [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
SNPRM Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec. Section
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis
The project to establish an offshore anchorage just outside of the
St. Johns River and offshore of Jacksonville was initiated in 2013.
From 2013 through 2017, certain port stakeholders (St. Johns Bar Pilots
Association (SJBPA), Jacksonville Marine Transportation Exchange
(JMTX), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and
United States Coast Guard (USCG)) worked to determine a suitable
location for the anchorage, with consideration given to, among other
things, environmental factors and Seasonal Management Areas. However, a
location was not determined during this timeframe. The U.S. Coast Guard
conducted a Waterways Analysis and Management System (WAMS) survey for
this proposed project and did not receive any comments of concern from
the entities previously mentioned.
In 2016, the stakeholders re-engaged the USCG in an attempt to
complete the offshore anchorage project. A Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking was published on May 4, 2017 (82 FR 20859). Informal
National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) consultations were
disseminated requesting feedback on the proposed anchorage location.
National Marine Fisheries (NMFS) and NOAA responded with significant
concerns regarding the location. The aforementioned agencies requested
an environmental study be completed to analyze potential hard bottom
locations within the selected anchorage ground and the effects of
vessels anchoring in these environmentally sensitive areas. The
stakeholders involved at this time were unable to financially support
the requested study. Due to these concerns, no further action was taken
after the NPRM was published in 2017.
In 2018, the USCG met with the stakeholders again to determine a
way forward with the proposed anchorage. Stakeholders concluded that
three circular anchorages would meet the needs of an offshore
anchorage, while allowing flexibility to avoid hard bottom areas. In
2019, USCG Sector Jacksonville sent out an informal consultation via
email to federal, state, and local government and private stakeholders
to solicit for feedback on the proposed, new anchorage construct. NMFS
agreed with the construct, allowing USCG to move forward with formal
NEPA consultation. Towards the end of 2019, USCG sent out formal
consultation to approximately 20 different organizations and agencies
regarding the anchorage. At this time, NMFS expressed some minor
concerns. At the beginning of 2020, stakeholders and NMFS came to an
agreement that addressed the minor concerns raised. The USCG is
currently moving forward with the rulemaking and public comment period
for the proposed anchorage location.
The purpose of this proposed rulemaking is to improve the
navigational safety, traffic management
[[Page 40154]]
and port security for the Port of Jacksonville.
Currently, there is no dedicated deep draft offshore anchorage for
commercial ocean-going vessels arriving at the Port of Jacksonville.
Vessels have routinely been anchoring 1.5 nautical miles northeast of
the ``STJ'' entrance buoy. Without a designated charted anchorage area,
vessels end up drifting or anchoring in the common approaches to the
St. Johns River, creating a potential hazardous condition for vessels
transiting in and out of the Port of Jacksonville. These conditions
have worsened in recent years with the introduction of Liquefied
Natural Gas (LNG) vessels transiting the Port of Jacksonville.
Additional growth is forecasted to occur because of deepening the
channel. There will likely be an increase in the number of large
vessels calling on Jacksonville in the near future.
The Coast Guard is proposing this rulemaking under authority in 33
U.S.C. 471.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Captain of the Port is proposing to establish an offshore
anchorage area approximately seven nautical miles northeast of the St.
Johns River inlet, Florida. There is not currently a dedicated deep
draft offshore anchorage for commercial ocean-going vessels arriving at
the Port of Jacksonville. This action is necessary to ensure the safety
and efficiency of navigation for vessels transiting in and out of the
Port of Jacksonville. The anchorage areas consist of three circles each
with a radius of 1,400 feet.The anchorage boundaries are described,
using precise coordinates, in the proposed regulatory text at the end
of this document.
IV. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This SNPRM has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, the SNPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance, it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
This regulatory action determination is based on the fact that
there will be minimal impact to routine navigation because the proposed
anchorage area would not restrict traffic. The anchorage is located
well outside of the established navigation channel. Vessels would still
be able to maneuver in, around, and through the anchorage.
B. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
anchorage may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A
above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact
on any vessel owner or operator.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any
policy or action of the Coast Guard.
C. Collection of Information
This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520).
D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism), if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on
the relationship between the national government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments) because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves
establishing offshore anchorage grounds, which would be comprised of
three circles, each with a 1,400-foot radius. The anchorage
[[Page 40155]]
grounds are not designated a critical habitat or special management
area. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further
review under paragraph L59(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction
Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A preliminary Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket.
For instructions on locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of
this preamble. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed
rule.
V. Public Participation and Request for Comments
We view 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 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 comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions.
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).
Documents mentioned in this SNPRM as being available in the docket,
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110
Anchorage grounds.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard is
proposing to amend 33 CFR part 110 as follows:
PART 110--ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 2071; 46 U.S.C. 70034; 33 CFR 1.05-1;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
0
2. Add Sec. 110.184 to subpart B to read as follows:
Sec. 110.184 Atlantic Ocean, Offshore Jacksonville, FL.
(a) Location. All waters of the Atlantic Ocean encompassed within a
radius of 1,400 feet of the following coordinates based on North
American Datum 1983:
(1) Anchorage Ground 1 with a center point in position
30[deg]26''48.6' N, 81[deg]17''14.9' W.
(2) Anchorage Ground 2 with a center point in position
30[deg]26''20.5' N, 81[deg]17''30.8' W; and
(3) Anchorage Ground 3 with a center point in position
30[deg]26''20.2' N, 81[deg]16''57.8' W.
(b) The regulations. (1) Commercial vessels in the Atlantic Ocean
near the Port of Jacksonville desiring to anchor must anchor only
within the anchorage area hereby defined and established, except in
cases of emergency.
(2) All vessels within the designated anchorage area must maintain
a 24-hour bridge watch by a licensed or credentialed deck officer
proficient in English, monitoring VHF-FM channel 16. This individual
must confirm that the ship's crew performs frequent checks of the
vessel's position to ensure the vessel is not dragging anchor.
(3) Vessels may anchor anywhere within the designated anchorage
area, provided that: Such anchoring does not interfere with the
operations of any other vessels currently at anchorage; and all anchor
and chain or cable is positioned in such a manner to preclude dragging.
(4) No vessel may anchor in a ``dead ship'' status (that is,
propulsion or control unavailable for normal operations) without the
prior approval of the COTP. Vessels which are planning to perform main
propulsion engine repairs or maintenance, must immediately notify the
COTP on VHF-FM Channel 22A. Vessels must also report marine casualties
in accordance with 46 CFR 4.05-1.
(5) No vessel may anchor within the designated anchorage for more
than 72 hours without the prior approval of the COTP. To obtain this
approval, contact the COTP on VHF-FM Channel 22A.
(6) The COTP may close the anchorage area and direct vessels to
depart the anchorage during periods of adverse weather or at other
times as deemed necessary in the interest of port safety or security.
(7) Commercial vessels anchoring under emergency circumstances
outside the anchorage area must shift to new positions within the
anchorage area immediately after the emergency ceases.
Dated: June 22, 2020.
Eric C. Jones,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2020-13827 Filed 7-2-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P