Vessel Traffic Assessment: Near Point Mugu, San Francisco Bay, Humboldt Bay, and Morro Bay, CA, 10757-10760 [2022-03990]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 38 / Friday, February 25, 2022 / Proposed Rules
national Government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify this proposed regulation:
(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Would not affect intrastate
aviation in Alaska, and
(3) Would not have a significant
economic impact, positive or negative,
on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part
39 as follows:
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new airworthiness
directive:
■
The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA–
2022–0093; Project Identifier AD–2021–
00987–T.
(a) Comments Due Date
The FAA must receive comments on this
airworthiness directive (AD) by April 11,
2022.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to The Boeing Company
Model 737–600, –700, –700C, –800, and –900
series airplanes, certificated in any category,
as identified in Boeing Alert Requirements
Bulletin 737–53A1403 RB, dated August 26,
2021.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
(d) Subject
Air Transport Association (ATA) of
America Code 53, Fuselage.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by an evaluation by
the design approval holder (DAH) indicating
that certain web lap splices in the center
dome apex of the aft pressure bulkhead are
subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD).
The FAA is issuing this AD to address fatigue
cracks in the webs of the aft pressure
bulkhead, which could result in reduced
structural integrity of the airplane.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Feb 24, 2022
Jkt 256001
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(g) Required Actions
Except as specified by paragraph (h) of this
AD: At the applicable times specified in the
‘‘Compliance’’ paragraph of Boeing Alert
Requirements Bulletin 737–53A1403 RB,
dated August 26, 2021, do all applicable
actions identified in, and in accordance with,
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Requirements Bulletin 737–53A1403
RB, dated August 26, 2021.
Note 1 to paragraph (g): Guidance for
accomplishing the actions required by this
AD can be found in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737–53A1403, dated August 26,
2021, which is referred to in Boeing Alert
Requirements Bulletin 737–53A1403 RB,
dated August 26, 2021.
(h) Exceptions to Service Information
Specifications
(1) Where the Compliance Time column of
the table in the ‘‘Compliance’’ paragraph of
Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737–
53A1403 RB, dated August 26, 2021, uses the
phrase ‘‘the original issue date of the
Requirements Bulletin 737–53A1403 RB,’’
this AD requires using ‘‘the effective date of
this AD.’’
(2) Where Boeing Alert Requirements
Bulletin 737–53A1403 RB, dated August 26,
2021, specifies contacting Boeing for repair
instructions or for alternative inspections:
This AD requires doing the repair, or doing
the alternative inspections and applicable oncondition actions, using a method approved
in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (i) of this AD.
(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO Branch,
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs
for this AD, if requested using the procedures
found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with
14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your
principal inspector or responsible Flight
Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the
certification office, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (j)(1) of
this AD. Information may be emailed to: 9ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC,
notify your appropriate principal inspector,
or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable
level of safety may be used for any repair,
modification, or alteration required by this
AD if it is approved by The Boeing Company
Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the
Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, FAA, to make
those findings. To be approved, the repair
method, modification deviation, or alteration
deviation must meet the certification basis of
the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.
(j) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Dirk Visser, Aerospace Engineer,
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
10757
Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch,
2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA
98198; phone and fax: 206–231–3994; email:
Dirk.J.Visser@faa.gov.
(2) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd.,
MC 110–SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740–5600;
telephone 562–797–1717; internet https://
www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this
referenced service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational
Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call
206–231–3195.
Issued on February 3, 2022.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022–03968 Filed 2–24–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG–2021–0345]
Vessel Traffic Assessment: Near Point
Mugu, San Francisco Bay, Humboldt
Bay, and Morro Bay, CA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notification of inquiry; request
for comments.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
On July 28, 2021, U.S. Coast
Guard (USCG) Pacific Area Command
issued the Pacific Coast–Port Access
Route Study (PAC–PARS) in the Federal
Register directing USCG District Eleven
and USCG District Thirteen to complete
a PARS on the Pacific coast. In support
of the PAC–PARS, USCG District Eleven
has identified four areas to evaluate
activities within its area of
responsibility. USCG District Eleven
requests public comments regarding
vessel traffic patterns in the areas near
Point Mugu and south of the Channel
Islands in the Pacific Missile Range, San
Francisco Bay, and the Bureau of Ocean
Energy Management (BOEM) Humboldt
Bay and Morro Bay offshore Wind
Energy Areas (WEAs). Information
received will be used to make
recommendations regarding establishing
safety routing measures to improve
waterway operations and vessel
movement along the California coast.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received on or before May 26,
2022.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\25FEP1.SGM
25FEP1
10758
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 38 / Friday, February 25, 2022 / Proposed Rules
2021–0345 using the Federal portal
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
notification of study, call or email Mr.
Tyrone Conner, Eleventh Coast Guard
District (dpw), U.S. Coast Guard;
telephone (510) 437–2968, email
Tyrone.L.Conner@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
U.S.C. United States Code
PAC Pacific Area Command
PARS Port Access Route Study
PAC–PARS Pacific Coast–Port Access Route
Study
EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone
RNA Regulated Navigation Areas
TSS Traffic Separation Scheme
USCG United States Coast Guard
BOEM Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management
WEA Wind Energy Area
NOI Notice of Inquiry
IMO International Maritime Organization
DOD Department of Defense
OCS Outer Continental Shelf
II. Background and Purpose
The Coast Guard is conducting a Port
Access Route Study (PARS) to evaluate
safe access routes for the movement of
vessel traffic proceeding to or from ports
or places along the western seaboard of
the United States and to determine
whether Fairways and Traffic
Separation Schemes for vessels and/or
International Maritime Organization
(IMO) recommended routes should be
established, adjusted and/or modified.
The goal of the Pacific Coast–PARS
(PAC–PARS) is to enhance maritime
safety by examining shipping routes and
waterway uses, and, to the extent
practicable, reconcile the paramount
right of navigation within designated
port access routes with other waterway
uses such as the development of
aquaculture farms, offshore renewable
energy, commercial spaceports/re-entry
sites, marine sanctuaries, ports
supporting Panamax vessels, potential
LNG ports, Pacific Missile Range, and
additional commercial vessel traffic.
During the preliminary informationgathering portion, the areas near Point
Mugu and south of the Channel Islands
in the Pacific Missile Range, San
Francisco Bay, and both BOEM WEAs
were identified as high-interest zones
for traffic congestion and navigation
safety.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Feb 24, 2022
Jkt 256001
A. Requirements for PARS: Chapter
700, Ports and Waterways Safety, of
Title 46 of the United States Code,
specifically 46 U.S.C. 70003 directs the
Secretary of the department in which
the Coast Guard resides, in order to
provide safe access routes for the
movement of vessel traffic proceeding to
or from ports or places subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States, to
designate necessary fairways and traffic
separation schemes for vessels operating
in the territorial sea of the United States
and high seas approaches, outside the
territorial sea, to such ports or places.
Such a designation shall recognize,
within the designated area, the
paramount right of navigation over all
other uses.
46 U.S.C. 70003 requires the Secretary
to: (1) Undertake a study of the potential
traffic density and the need for safe
access routes for vessels in any area for
which fairways or traffic separation
schemes are proposed or that may
otherwise be considered and publish
notice of such undertaking in the
Federal Register; (2) in consultation
with the Secretary of State, the Secretary
of the Interior, the Secretary of
Commerce, the Secretary of the Army,
and the Governors of affected States, as
their responsibilities may require, take
into account all other uses of the area
under consideration, including, as
appropriate, the exploration for, or
exploitation of, oil, gas, or other mineral
resources, the construction or operation
of deep-water ports or other structures
on or above the seabed or subsoil of the
submerged lands or the Outer
Continental Shelf of the United States,
the establishment or operation of marine
or estuarine sanctuaries, and activities
involving recreational or commercial
fishing; and (3) to the extent practicable,
reconcile the need for safe access routes
with the needs of all other reasonable
uses of the area involved.
46 U.S.C. 70003 requires the Secretary
to proceed expeditiously to complete
any study undertaken; and after
completion of such a study, to promptly
issue a notice of proposed rulemaking
for the designation contemplated or
publish in the Federal Register a notice
of rulemaking that no designation is
contemplated as a result of the study
and the reason for such determination.
B. Previous Port Access Route Studies:
The approaches to San Francisco, CA,
were last studied in 2009, and the final
results were published in the Federal
Register on June 20, 2011 (76 FR 35805).
The study was conducted to evaluate
the continued applicability and the
potential need for modifications to the
vessel routing to help reduce the risk of
marine casualties and increase the
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
efficiency of vessel traffic in the study
area. All USCG publications regarding
this study can be found by searching
docket USCG–2009–0576 on https://
www.regulations.gov. The Port Access
Route Study for the Strait of Juan de
Fuca, Haro Strait, Boundary Pass,
Rosario Strait, the Strait of Georgia, and
adjacent waters was completed in
November 2000, published in the
Federal Register on January 22, 2001
(66 FR 6514). The study was conducted
to evaluate the need for modifications to
current vessel routing and traffic
management measures due to increased
maritime activities. However, there has
never been a PARS conducted for the
entire Pacific Coast of the United States
designed to analyze all vessel traffic
proceeding to and from all the ports and
transiting through the United States
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).
C. Need for a New Port Access Route
Study: Given the current development
of aquaculture farms, offshore
renewable energy, commercial
spaceports/re-entry sites, expansion of
marine sanctuaries, development of
ports supporting Panamax vessels,
potential LNG ports, National Security
Measures, DOD testing and training, and
commercial traffic, the Coast Guard is
conducting the PAC–PARS
(Washington, Oregon, and California).
This PAC–PARS will focus on the
coastwise shipping routes and near
coastal users of the Pacific Ocean
between the coastal ports and the
approaches to coastal ports within the
EEZ. This PAC–PARS will help the
Coast Guard determine what impact, if
any, the siting, construction, and
operation of new developments may
have on existing near coastal users of
the Pacific Ocean. To ensure the safety
of navigation, the Coast Guard will
determine the impacts of rerouting
traffic, funneling traffic, and placement
of structures that may obstruct
navigation. Some of the effects to be
considered are increased vessel traffic
density, offshore vessel routing, fixed
navigation obstructions, underwater
cable hazards, and economic impacts.
Analyzing the various results will
require a thorough understanding of the
interrelationships of shipping, other
commercial and recreational uses, Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS) development,
and port operations.
III. Information Requested
Timelines, Study Area, Focus, and
Process: Coast Guard Eleventh District
will conduct further analysis in the
following areas, which may take
approximately three to six months to
complete. The study will focus on
vessel traffic and navigation mitigation
E:\FR\FM\25FEP1.SGM
25FEP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 38 / Friday, February 25, 2022 / Proposed Rules
techniques to improve and support safe
navigation transits within the area. It
will encompass the areas bound by the
aforementioned coordinates.
This is a Notification of Inquiry (NOI)
to assess the vessel traffic and routing in
the waters indicated by the
supplemental PDF, ‘‘Chart of District
Eleven PAC–PARS Focus Areas’’
(available in the docket), and bound by
the following coordinates:
Area 1: BOEM HUMBOLDT BAY WEA:
40–37.06N 124–35.22W;
40–37.62N 125–15.54W;
41–14.16N 125–15.54W;
41–13.61N 124–15.42W.
Area 2: SAN FRANCISCO BAY:
36–16.27N 121–54.24W;
36–10.36N 123–18.54W;
38–06.78N 124–29.34W;
38–33.93N 123–30.12W.
Area 3: BOEM MORRO BAY WEA:
35–53.90N 122–53.22W;
35–57.09N 121–45.18W;
35–20.35N 121–17.04W;
35–18.54N 122–24.60W.
Area 4: POINT MUGU:
33–46.29N 120–07.80W;
33–53.04N 119–22.80W;
33–28.62N 118–36.48W;
33–2.922N 118–35.10W;
32–50.54N 119–17.58W;
32–13.79N 121–44.22W;
34–19.54N 123–07.02W;
35–14.83N 121–01.86W;
34–59.52N 120–41.52W;
33–58.98N 120–39.48W.
We will analyze current and historical
vessel traffic, fishing vessel information,
agency and stakeholder experience in
vessel traffic management, navigation,
ship handling, and effects of weather.
We encourage you to participate by
submitting comments in response to this
proposed rule.
We will publish the results of the
inquiry in the Federal Register under
the same docket USCG–2021–0345. It is
possible that the results may validate
existing vessel routing measures and
conclude that no changes are necessary.
It is also possible that the study may
recommend one or more changes to
enhance navigational safety and the
efficiency of vessel traffic. The
recommendations may consider the
development of future rulemakings or
appropriate international agreements.
Possible Scope of the
Recommendations: We are attempting to
determine the scope of any safety
concerns associated with vessel transits
in the focus areas. The information
gathered during the study should help
us identify concerns and mitigating
solutions. Considerations might include:
(1) Maintain the current vessel routing
measures; (2) modify the existing traffic
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Feb 24, 2022
Jkt 256001
separation schemes; (3) create one or
more precautionary areas; (4) create one
or more inshore traffic zones; (5)
establish area(s) to be avoided; (6) create
deep-draft routes; (7) establish
Regulated Navigation Areas (RNA) with
specific vessel operating requirements
to ensure safe navigation near shallow
water; (8) identify any other appropriate
ships’ routing measures; (9) use this
study for future decisions on routing
measures or other maritime traffic
considerations and; (10) use this study
to inform other agencies concerning the
impacts of their future endeavors.
Questions: To help us conduct the
area study, we request information that
will help answer the following
questions, although comments on other
issues addressed in this notice are also
welcome. In responding to a question,
please explain your reasons for each
answer and follow the instructions
under ‘‘Public Participation and Request
for Comments’’ below.
These questions were generated with
the purpose of eliciting information for
the four focus areas alone. Any
information provided should be directly
related to one or more of the four focus
areas.
General Questions (all four areas):
(1) What are the demographics of the
vessel your organization represents?
(Vessel length, vessel draft, vessel type,
etc.)
(2) Which of the four areas do you
transit through? Where are your transit
routes?
(3) What criteria are used in
determining your transit routes?
(4) How are your vessel routes
affected by seasonal weather patterns,
storms, or other adverse environmental
conditions you have experienced in the
focus areas? Please explain.
(5) What navigational hazards do
vessels operating in the focus areas face?
Please describe.
(6) Are there strains on the current
vessel routing systems?
(7) Do you perceive increasing traffic
density to cause increased navigational
risk?
(8) What is your prediction of future
growth with traffic density? Please
describe.
(9) What is the minimum safe width
of coastwise traffic separation schemes
and lanes considering the traffic density
and other conditions of the focus areas?
(10) Are modifications to existing
vessel routing measures needed to
address hazards and improve traffic
efficiency in the study area? If so, please
describe.
(11) Is your organization open to
traffic management strategies (TSS,
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
10759
Fairways, IMO recommended routes)?
Please elaborate.
(12) What costs and benefits are
associated with traffic management
strategies?
(13) What traffic management
strategies do you think are most costeffective?
(14) What traffic management
strategies do you think are most
detrimental to cost-effectiveness?
(15) What impacts, both positive and
negative, would changes to existing
routing measures or new routing
measures have on the study area?
(16) What improvements to waterway
management would you like to see? If
none, why?
(17) What current waterway
operations affect navigation? How
(details please)?
(18) Do the marine sanctuaries affect
your navigation routing plans?
(19) What is a safe and appropriate
distance between vessel traffic and
major projects such as aquaculture
farms and wind farms?
(20) Are there any results you would
like to see in the completed PAC–PARS
study?
(21) Would you be interested in
attending virtual presentations of
findings?
Pacific Missile Range off Point Mugu
and Vandenberg Space Force Base:
(22) Do you typically transit to the
north or to the south of the Channel
Islands?
(23) Do the operations surrounding
the Pacific Missile Range off
Vandenberg Space Force Base and the
Point Mugu zone affect your routing
plans and vessel movement? How?
(24) How often are you displaced by
hazardous operations, testing, and
military training in the Pacific Missile
Range? Please describe.
BOEM Wind Energy Areas (Humboldt
Bay and Morro Bay)
(25) What navigational challenges do
you foresee with the implementation of
BOEM’s Wind Energy Areas (WEAs)?
(26) Do you currently transit through
the proposed BOEM WEAs? Please
describe.
(27) Do you think the Coast Guard
should create designated fairways,
traffic separation schemes for vessels, or
exclusion/restricted areas around wind
farms?
(28) Would you prefer wind farm
exclusion/restricted areas where you
can navigate anywhere outside of the
wind farm, or would you prefer to
restrict your navigation inside
designated coastwise fairways and
traffic separation schemes through the
wind farms? Please explain.
Is there any additional information,
unrelated to any specific question
E:\FR\FM\25FEP1.SGM
25FEP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
10760
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 38 / Friday, February 25, 2022 / Proposed Rules
above, that you believe the USCG needs
to consider?
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
I. General Information
IV. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
40 CFR Parts 174 and 180
We encourage you to submit
comments in response to this
notification of inquiry through the
Federal Decision Making portal at
https://www.regulations.gov. To do so,
go to https://www.regulations.gov, type
USCG–2021–0345 in the search box,
and click ‘‘Search.’’ Next, look for this
document in the Search Results column,
and click on it. Then click on the
Comment option. In your submission,
please include the docket number for
this notice of inquiry and provide a
reason for each suggestion or
recommendation. 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.
To view documents mentioned in this
notice of inquiry as being available in
the docket, find the docket as described
in the previous paragraph, and then
select ‘‘Supporting & Related Material’’
in the Document Type column. Public
comments will also be placed in our
online docket and can be viewed by
following instructions on the https://
www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked
Questions web page. We review all
comments received, but we may choose
not to post off-topic, inappropriate, or
duplicate comments that we receive.
We accept anonymous comments.
Comments we post to https://
www.regulations.gov 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).
Additionally, if you go to the online
docket and sign up for email alerts, you
will be notified when comments are
posted.
This notice is published under the
authority of 5 U.S.C. 552(a).
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2022–0161; FRL–9410–01–
OCSPP]
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
Dated: February 17, 2022.
B.K. Penoyer,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Eleventh District.
[FR Doc. 2022–03990 Filed 2–24–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
Receipt of Pesticide Petitions Filed for
Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or
on Various Commodities—January
2022
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
Notices of filing of petitions and
request for comment.
ACTION:
This document announces the
Agency’s receipt of initial filings of
pesticide petitions requesting the
establishment or modification of
regulations for residues of pesticide
chemicals in or on various commodities.
SUMMARY:
Comments must be received on
or before March 28, 2022.
DATES:
Submit your comments,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number and the pesticide petition (PP)
of interest as shown in the body of this
document, through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Additional
instructions on commenting or visiting
the docket, along with more information
about dockets generally, is available at
https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
Due to the public health concerns
related to COVID–19, the EPA Docket
Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room is
open to visitors by appointment only.
For the latest status information on
EPA/DC services and access, visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Marietta Echeverria, Registration
Division (7505P), main telephone
number: (703) 305–7090, email address:
RDFRNotices@epa.gov. The mailing
address for each contact person is:
Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460–0001. As part of the mailing
address, include the contact person’s
name, division, and mail code. The
division to contact is listed at the end
of each pesticide petition summary.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Feb 24, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
A. Does this action apply to me?
B. What should I consider as I prepare
my comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this
information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark
the part or all of the information that
you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk or CD–ROM that
you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then
identify electronically within the disk or
CD–ROM the specific information that
is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that
includes information claimed as CBI, a
copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked
will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for preparing your comments.
When preparing and submitting your
comments, see the commenting tips at
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
comments.html.
3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to
achieve environmental justice, the fair
treatment and meaningful involvement
of any group, including minority and/or
low-income populations, in the
development, implementation, and
enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies. To help
address potential environmental justice
issues, the Agency seeks information on
any groups or segments of the
population who, as a result of their
location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical or
disproportionately high and adverse
human health impacts or environmental
effects from exposure to the pesticides
discussed in this document, compared
to the general population.
E:\FR\FM\25FEP1.SGM
25FEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 38 (Friday, February 25, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10757-10760]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03990]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG-2021-0345]
Vessel Traffic Assessment: Near Point Mugu, San Francisco Bay,
Humboldt Bay, and Morro Bay, CA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notification of inquiry; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On July 28, 2021, U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) Pacific Area Command
issued the Pacific Coast-Port Access Route Study (PAC-PARS) in the
Federal Register directing USCG District Eleven and USCG District
Thirteen to complete a PARS on the Pacific coast. In support of the
PAC-PARS, USCG District Eleven has identified four areas to evaluate
activities within its area of responsibility. USCG District Eleven
requests public comments regarding vessel traffic patterns in the areas
near Point Mugu and south of the Channel Islands in the Pacific Missile
Range, San Francisco Bay, and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
(BOEM) Humboldt Bay and Morro Bay offshore Wind Energy Areas (WEAs).
Information received will be used to make recommendations regarding
establishing safety routing measures to improve waterway operations and
vessel movement along the California coast.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received on or before May
26, 2022.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
[[Page 10758]]
2021-0345 using the Federal portal 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
notification of study, call or email Mr. Tyrone Conner, Eleventh Coast
Guard District (dpw), U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (510) 437-2968, email
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
U.S.C. United States Code
PAC Pacific Area Command
PARS Port Access Route Study
PAC-PARS Pacific Coast-Port Access Route Study
EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone
RNA Regulated Navigation Areas
TSS Traffic Separation Scheme
USCG United States Coast Guard
BOEM Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
WEA Wind Energy Area
NOI Notice of Inquiry
IMO International Maritime Organization
DOD Department of Defense
OCS Outer Continental Shelf
II. Background and Purpose
The Coast Guard is conducting a Port Access Route Study (PARS) to
evaluate safe access routes for the movement of vessel traffic
proceeding to or from ports or places along the western seaboard of the
United States and to determine whether Fairways and Traffic Separation
Schemes for vessels and/or International Maritime Organization (IMO)
recommended routes should be established, adjusted and/or modified. The
goal of the Pacific Coast-PARS (PAC-PARS) is to enhance maritime safety
by examining shipping routes and waterway uses, and, to the extent
practicable, reconcile the paramount right of navigation within
designated port access routes with other waterway uses such as the
development of aquaculture farms, offshore renewable energy, commercial
spaceports/re-entry sites, marine sanctuaries, ports supporting Panamax
vessels, potential LNG ports, Pacific Missile Range, and additional
commercial vessel traffic. During the preliminary information-gathering
portion, the areas near Point Mugu and south of the Channel Islands in
the Pacific Missile Range, San Francisco Bay, and both BOEM WEAs were
identified as high-interest zones for traffic congestion and navigation
safety.
A. Requirements for PARS: Chapter 700, Ports and Waterways Safety,
of Title 46 of the United States Code, specifically 46 U.S.C. 70003
directs the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard
resides, in order to provide safe access routes for the movement of
vessel traffic proceeding to or from ports or places subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States, to designate necessary fairways and
traffic separation schemes for vessels operating in the territorial sea
of the United States and high seas approaches, outside the territorial
sea, to such ports or places. Such a designation shall recognize,
within the designated area, the paramount right of navigation over all
other uses.
46 U.S.C. 70003 requires the Secretary to: (1) Undertake a study of
the potential traffic density and the need for safe access routes for
vessels in any area for which fairways or traffic separation schemes
are proposed or that may otherwise be considered and publish notice of
such undertaking in the Federal Register; (2) in consultation with the
Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of
Commerce, the Secretary of the Army, and the Governors of affected
States, as their responsibilities may require, take into account all
other uses of the area under consideration, including, as appropriate,
the exploration for, or exploitation of, oil, gas, or other mineral
resources, the construction or operation of deep-water ports or other
structures on or above the seabed or subsoil of the submerged lands or
the Outer Continental Shelf of the United States, the establishment or
operation of marine or estuarine sanctuaries, and activities involving
recreational or commercial fishing; and (3) to the extent practicable,
reconcile the need for safe access routes with the needs of all other
reasonable uses of the area involved.
46 U.S.C. 70003 requires the Secretary to proceed expeditiously to
complete any study undertaken; and after completion of such a study, to
promptly issue a notice of proposed rulemaking for the designation
contemplated or publish in the Federal Register a notice of rulemaking
that no designation is contemplated as a result of the study and the
reason for such determination.
B. Previous Port Access Route Studies: The approaches to San
Francisco, CA, were last studied in 2009, and the final results were
published in the Federal Register on June 20, 2011 (76 FR 35805). The
study was conducted to evaluate the continued applicability and the
potential need for modifications to the vessel routing to help reduce
the risk of marine casualties and increase the efficiency of vessel
traffic in the study area. All USCG publications regarding this study
can be found by searching docket USCG-2009-0576 on https://www.regulations.gov. The Port Access Route Study for the Strait of Juan
de Fuca, Haro Strait, Boundary Pass, Rosario Strait, the Strait of
Georgia, and adjacent waters was completed in November 2000, published
in the Federal Register on January 22, 2001 (66 FR 6514). The study was
conducted to evaluate the need for modifications to current vessel
routing and traffic management measures due to increased maritime
activities. However, there has never been a PARS conducted for the
entire Pacific Coast of the United States designed to analyze all
vessel traffic proceeding to and from all the ports and transiting
through the United States Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).
C. Need for a New Port Access Route Study: Given the current
development of aquaculture farms, offshore renewable energy, commercial
spaceports/re-entry sites, expansion of marine sanctuaries, development
of ports supporting Panamax vessels, potential LNG ports, National
Security Measures, DOD testing and training, and commercial traffic,
the Coast Guard is conducting the PAC-PARS (Washington, Oregon, and
California). This PAC-PARS will focus on the coastwise shipping routes
and near coastal users of the Pacific Ocean between the coastal ports
and the approaches to coastal ports within the EEZ. This PAC-PARS will
help the Coast Guard determine what impact, if any, the siting,
construction, and operation of new developments may have on existing
near coastal users of the Pacific Ocean. To ensure the safety of
navigation, the Coast Guard will determine the impacts of rerouting
traffic, funneling traffic, and placement of structures that may
obstruct navigation. Some of the effects to be considered are increased
vessel traffic density, offshore vessel routing, fixed navigation
obstructions, underwater cable hazards, and economic impacts. Analyzing
the various results will require a thorough understanding of the
interrelationships of shipping, other commercial and recreational uses,
Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) development, and port operations.
III. Information Requested
Timelines, Study Area, Focus, and Process: Coast Guard Eleventh
District will conduct further analysis in the following areas, which
may take approximately three to six months to complete. The study will
focus on vessel traffic and navigation mitigation
[[Page 10759]]
techniques to improve and support safe navigation transits within the
area. It will encompass the areas bound by the aforementioned
coordinates.
This is a Notification of Inquiry (NOI) to assess the vessel
traffic and routing in the waters indicated by the supplemental PDF,
``Chart of District Eleven PAC-PARS Focus Areas'' (available in the
docket), and bound by the following coordinates:
Area 1: BOEM HUMBOLDT BAY WEA:
40-37.06N 124-35.22W;
40-37.62N 125-15.54W;
41-14.16N 125-15.54W;
41-13.61N 124-15.42W.
Area 2: SAN FRANCISCO BAY:
36-16.27N 121-54.24W;
36-10.36N 123-18.54W;
38-06.78N 124-29.34W;
38-33.93N 123-30.12W.
Area 3: BOEM MORRO BAY WEA:
35-53.90N 122-53.22W;
35-57.09N 121-45.18W;
35-20.35N 121-17.04W;
35-18.54N 122-24.60W.
Area 4: POINT MUGU:
33-46.29N 120-07.80W;
33-53.04N 119-22.80W;
33-28.62N 118-36.48W;
33-2.922N 118-35.10W;
32-50.54N 119-17.58W;
32-13.79N 121-44.22W;
34-19.54N 123-07.02W;
35-14.83N 121-01.86W;
34-59.52N 120-41.52W;
33-58.98N 120-39.48W.
We will analyze current and historical vessel traffic, fishing
vessel information, agency and stakeholder experience in vessel traffic
management, navigation, ship handling, and effects of weather. We
encourage you to participate by submitting comments in response to this
proposed rule.
We will publish the results of the inquiry in the Federal Register
under the same docket USCG-2021-0345. It is possible that the results
may validate existing vessel routing measures and conclude that no
changes are necessary. It is also possible that the study may recommend
one or more changes to enhance navigational safety and the efficiency
of vessel traffic. The recommendations may consider the development of
future rulemakings or appropriate international agreements.
Possible Scope of the Recommendations: We are attempting to
determine the scope of any safety concerns associated with vessel
transits in the focus areas. The information gathered during the study
should help us identify concerns and mitigating solutions.
Considerations might include: (1) Maintain the current vessel routing
measures; (2) modify the existing traffic separation schemes; (3)
create one or more precautionary areas; (4) create one or more inshore
traffic zones; (5) establish area(s) to be avoided; (6) create deep-
draft routes; (7) establish Regulated Navigation Areas (RNA) with
specific vessel operating requirements to ensure safe navigation near
shallow water; (8) identify any other appropriate ships' routing
measures; (9) use this study for future decisions on routing measures
or other maritime traffic considerations and; (10) use this study to
inform other agencies concerning the impacts of their future endeavors.
Questions: To help us conduct the area study, we request
information that will help answer the following questions, although
comments on other issues addressed in this notice are also welcome. In
responding to a question, please explain your reasons for each answer
and follow the instructions under ``Public Participation and Request
for Comments'' below.
These questions were generated with the purpose of eliciting
information for the four focus areas alone. Any information provided
should be directly related to one or more of the four focus areas.
General Questions (all four areas):
(1) What are the demographics of the vessel your organization
represents? (Vessel length, vessel draft, vessel type, etc.)
(2) Which of the four areas do you transit through? Where are your
transit routes?
(3) What criteria are used in determining your transit routes?
(4) How are your vessel routes affected by seasonal weather
patterns, storms, or other adverse environmental conditions you have
experienced in the focus areas? Please explain.
(5) What navigational hazards do vessels operating in the focus
areas face? Please describe.
(6) Are there strains on the current vessel routing systems?
(7) Do you perceive increasing traffic density to cause increased
navigational risk?
(8) What is your prediction of future growth with traffic density?
Please describe.
(9) What is the minimum safe width of coastwise traffic separation
schemes and lanes considering the traffic density and other conditions
of the focus areas?
(10) Are modifications to existing vessel routing measures needed
to address hazards and improve traffic efficiency in the study area? If
so, please describe.
(11) Is your organization open to traffic management strategies
(TSS, Fairways, IMO recommended routes)? Please elaborate.
(12) What costs and benefits are associated with traffic management
strategies?
(13) What traffic management strategies do you think are most cost-
effective?
(14) What traffic management strategies do you think are most
detrimental to cost-effectiveness?
(15) What impacts, both positive and negative, would changes to
existing routing measures or new routing measures have on the study
area?
(16) What improvements to waterway management would you like to
see? If none, why?
(17) What current waterway operations affect navigation? How
(details please)?
(18) Do the marine sanctuaries affect your navigation routing
plans?
(19) What is a safe and appropriate distance between vessel traffic
and major projects such as aquaculture farms and wind farms?
(20) Are there any results you would like to see in the completed
PAC-PARS study?
(21) Would you be interested in attending virtual presentations of
findings?
Pacific Missile Range off Point Mugu and Vandenberg Space Force
Base:
(22) Do you typically transit to the north or to the south of the
Channel Islands?
(23) Do the operations surrounding the Pacific Missile Range off
Vandenberg Space Force Base and the Point Mugu zone affect your routing
plans and vessel movement? How?
(24) How often are you displaced by hazardous operations, testing,
and military training in the Pacific Missile Range? Please describe.
BOEM Wind Energy Areas (Humboldt Bay and Morro Bay)
(25) What navigational challenges do you foresee with the
implementation of BOEM's Wind Energy Areas (WEAs)?
(26) Do you currently transit through the proposed BOEM WEAs?
Please describe.
(27) Do you think the Coast Guard should create designated
fairways, traffic separation schemes for vessels, or exclusion/
restricted areas around wind farms?
(28) Would you prefer wind farm exclusion/restricted areas where
you can navigate anywhere outside of the wind farm, or would you prefer
to restrict your navigation inside designated coastwise fairways and
traffic separation schemes through the wind farms? Please explain.
Is there any additional information, unrelated to any specific
question
[[Page 10760]]
above, that you believe the USCG needs to consider?
IV. Public Participation and Request for Comments
We encourage you to submit comments in response to this
notification of inquiry through the Federal Decision Making portal at
https://www.regulations.gov. To do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2021-0345 in the search box, and click
``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the Search Results column,
and click on it. Then click on the Comment option. In your submission,
please include the docket number for this notice of inquiry and provide
a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. 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.
To view documents mentioned in this notice of inquiry as being
available in the docket, find the docket as described in the previous
paragraph, and then select ``Supporting & Related Material'' in the
Document Type column. Public comments will also be placed in our online
docket and can be viewed by following instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked Questions web page. We review all
comments received, but we may choose not to post off-topic,
inappropriate, or duplicate comments that we receive.
We accept anonymous comments. Comments we post to https://www.regulations.gov 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).
Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up for email
alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted.
This notice is published under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 552(a).
Dated: February 17, 2022.
B.K. Penoyer,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eleventh District.
[FR Doc. 2022-03990 Filed 2-24-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
