Anchorage Grounds; Cape Fear River Approach, North Carolina, 17047-17050 [2022-06339]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2022 / Proposed Rules
Matthew Creelman, Waterways
Management Branch, Fifth Coast Guard
District, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone
(757) 398–6225, email
Matthew.K.Creelman2@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
the words ‘‘Commercial Airlift
Division’’ in the following places:
■ a. Section 861.3(e), (f)(1), and (k);
■ b. Section 861.4(c)(2); and (e)
■ c. Section 861.5(e), (g)(2)(i),
(g)(2)(iii)(A), and (g)(4)(i).
■ d. Section 861.6(c)
Adriane S. Paris,
Department of the Air Force Federal Register
Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2022–05715 Filed 3–24–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–10–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 110
[Docket Number USCG–2020–0216]
RIN 1625–AA01
Anchorage Grounds; Cape Fear River
Approach, North Carolina
Coast Guard, Department of
Homeland Security (DHS).
ACTION: Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Coast Guard is proposing
to amend the anchorage regulations for
Lockwoods Folly Inlet, NC, and adjacent
navigable waters, by establishing a new
offshore anchorage, relocating the
existing explosives anchorage and
amending the anchorage regulations.
The purpose of this supplemental
proposed rule is to improve navigation
and public safety by accommodating
recent and anticipated future growth in
cargo vessel traffic and vessel size that
call on Military Ocean Terminal Sunny
Point and the Port of Wilmington, North
Carolina. We invite your comments on
this supplemental proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before April 25, 2022.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2020–0216 using the Federal Decision
Making 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.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
If
you have questions about this proposed
rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant
Gregory Kennerley, Sector North
Carolina, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone
(910) 772–2230, email
Gregory.M.Kennerley@uscg.mil; or Mr.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:08 Mar 24, 2022
Jkt 256001
I. Table of Abbreviations
BOEM Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management
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
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal
Basis
On May 8, 2020, the Coast Guard
published a notification of inquiry in
the Federal Register (85 FR 27343) to
solicit public comments on whether we
should initiate a rulemaking to establish
an anchorage ground offshore in the
approaches to the Cape Fear River,
North Carolina, and to increase the size
and relocate the existing Lockwood’s
Folly Inlet explosives anchorage. After
receiving favorable comments, the Coast
Guard decided to propose the
rulemaking. On August 17, 2021, the
Coast Guard published a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in
Federal Register (86 FR 45936), stating
why we issued the NPRM, and invited
comments on our proposed anchorage.
During the comment period that ended
on October 18, 2021, we received five
comment letters in response. The Coast
Guard is now issuing this supplemental
notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM)
to solicit comments on changes made to
the NPRM.
The purpose of this proposed rule is
to accommodate recent and anticipated
future growth in cargo vessel traffic and
vessel size that call on Military Ocean
Terminal Sunny Point and the Port of
Wilmington, improve navigation and
public safety, and to preserve areas
traditionally used for anchoring.
The legal basis and authorities for this
notice of proposed rulemaking are
found in 46 U.S.C.70006, 33 CFR 1.05–
1, DHS Delegation No. 0170.1, which
collectively authorize the Coast Guard
to propose, establish, and define
regulatory anchorage grounds.
III. Discussion Comments, Changes, and
Proposed Rule
As noted above, we received five
comments on our NPRM published
August 17, 2021. One was in full
support of the proposed rule, one had
concerns over possible area use conflicts
with offshore wind energy development,
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
17047
and three were regarding potential
conflict with the anchorage and an
artificial reef. The following sections
detail the concerns raised by these
comments. As a result, the Coast Guard
has issued this SNPRM with proposed
changes to the regulatory text of the
rule. Specifically, we propose the
western boundary and coordinates of
the proposed Explosives Anchorage B
be moved 1000 yards eastward to avoid
a conflict with a North Carolina
Division of Marine Fisheries Artificial
Reef (AR–455). The remainder of the
proposed rule remains unchanged.
A. Offshore Wind Development
One commenter raised concerns that
the proposed anchorage would take up
an area that could be utilized for
offshore wind energy development, and
by doing so, would deprive the local
economy of investment and energy
resulting from the development. The
Coast Guard finds this comment to be
not applicable to this particular
rulemaking as the proposed anchorage
area does not overlap or limit any
known wind energy lease area as
published by the Bureau of Ocean
Energy Management (BOEM), the lead
agency in the U.S. offshore wind
development. The Coast Guard works
closely with BOEM in the planning of
these offshore lease areas and has
confirmed the area proposed for this
rule is not under consideration for wind
development.
B. Artificial Reef
There were three comments received
by the Coast Guard with concerns that
the westernmost boundary of the
proposed Explosives Anchorage B
overlapped the location of an artificial
reef, North Carolina Division of Marine
Fisheries’ Reef (AR–455). This overlap
reveals potential hazards as anchoring
vessels could damage the reef or
possibly foul their anchors on the
underwater structures. The Coast Guard
agreed with these concerns and reached
out to the North Carolina Division of
Marine Fisheries to discuss a new
agreeable boundary for the anchorage
that would not conflict with AR–455.
After reviewing the location of each of
the underwater features within AR–455,
the Coast Guard proposes to move the
western boundary of Anchorage B 1000
yards to the east of AR–455. This
distance would prevent any vessel
anchored within Anchorage B from
damaging the reef or interfering with
other vessels visiting the reef. This
would reduce the overall size of
anchorage area initially proposed, but
the Coast Guard believes there is still
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
17048
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2022 / Proposed Rules
sufficient area within the anchorage to
meet anchorage needs.
C. Proposed Rule
The intent of this proposed rule
remains unchanged. This proposed rule
would formally establish an anchorage
ground, Anchorage A, approximately
eight nautical miles southwest of the
Oak Island Light. This proposed rule
would also increase the size and
relocate Lockwoods Folly Inlet
explosives anchorage to adjacent
Anchorage A on its western boundary;
and rename it Anchorage B. The specific
coordinates for these proposed
anchorage grounds are included in the
proposed regulatory text at the end of
this document.
You may find an illustration of the
anchorages in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES.
Additionally, the anchorage ground is
available for viewing on the MidAtlantic Ocean Data Portal at https://
portal.midatlanticocean.org/visualize/.
See ‘‘USCG Proposed Areas and
Studies’’ under the ‘‘Maritime’’ portion
of the Data Layers section.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
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, and we discuss First
Amendment rights of protestors.
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.
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).
This regulatory action determination
is based on the size, location, and
historical vessel traffic data pertaining
to the anchorage locations. The
regulation would designate and preserve
an approximately 22 square mile deep
water area traditionally used by cargo
ships for anchoring near existing traffic
lanes. It would also relocate the existing
explosives anchorage approximately
five nautical miles further offshore
increasing separation distances between
vessels laden with explosives and the
public, and expand its size from
approximately five to seven square
miles. This regulatory action provides
commercial vessel anchorage needs
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:08 Mar 24, 2022
Jkt 256001
while enhancing the navigation safety,
environmental stewardship, and public
safety.
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 use the anchorages
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. The towns and
communities along the Cape Fear River
approaches have an economy based on
tourism and numerous small entities
and businesses. The establishment of
Anchorage A and Anchorage B will
increase controls over vessels that
currently anchor in the general vicinity
and increase the distance between
anchored vessels and the shore and
beaches, lessening impacts these small
entities may currently experience.
If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this proposed 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
proposed 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 00024
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
potential effects of this proposed 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 an anchorage
ground, Anchorage A, in an area
traditionally used by cargo ships for
anchoring in the approaches to the Cape
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2022 / Proposed Rules
Fear River, NC; and increasing the size
of and relocating the Lockwoods Folly
Inlet explosives anchorage to an area
adjacent to Anchorage A (on its western
boundary), expanding its use, and
renaming it Anchorage B. Normally
such actions are categorically excluded
from further review under paragraph
L[59] 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.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places, or vessels.
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.
Submitting comments. We encourage
you to submit comments through the
Federal Decision Making Portal at
https://www.regulations.gov. To do so,
go to https://www.regulations.gov, type
USCG–2020–0216 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. If you cannot submit
your material by using https://
www.regulations.gov, call or email the
person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this proposed rule
for alternate instructions.
Viewing material in docket. To view
documents mentioned in this proposed
rule 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:08 Mar 24, 2022
Jkt 256001
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 will only
post comments that address the topic of
the proposed rule. We may choose not
to post off-topic, inappropriate, or
duplicate comments that we receive.
Personal information. 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 to the docket in
response to this document, see DHS’s
eRulemaking System of Records notice
(85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).
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
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. Revise § 110.170 to read as follows:
§ 110.170
Cape Fear, N.C.
(a) The anchorage grounds. All
coordinates in this section are based on
the World Geodetic System (WGS 84).
(1) Anchorage A. The waters bound
by a line connecting the following
points:
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(1)
Latitude
33°47′59.09″
33°47′59.09″
33°46′01.22″
33°46′01.22″
Longitude
N
N
N
N
78°14′58.67″
78°06′24.74″
78°06′24.74″
78°14′58.67″
W
W
W
W
(2) Anchorage B. Explosives
anchorage. The waters bound by a line
connecting the following points:
TABLE 2 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(2)
Latitude
33°47′59.09″
33°47′59.09″
33°46′01.22″
33°46′01.22″
Longitude
N
N
N
N
78°17′14.00″
78°14′58.67″
78°14′58.67″
78°17′14.00″
W
W
W
W
(b) Definitions. As used in this
section—
Cargoes of particular hazard means
‘‘cargo of particular hazard’’ as defined
in § 126.3 of this title.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
17049
Class 1 (explosive) materials means
Division 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4
explosives, as defined in 49 CFR 173.50.
Dangerous cargo means ‘‘certain
dangerous cargo’’ as defined in
§ 160.204 of this title.
U.S. naval vessel means any vessel
owner, operated, chartered, or leased by
the U.S. Navy; and any vessel under the
operational control of the U.S. Navy or
Combatant Command.
(c) General regulations. (1) Vessels in
the Atlantic Ocean near Cape Fear River
Inlet awaiting berthing space within the
Port of Wilmington shall only anchor
within the anchorage grounds defined
and established in this section, except
in cases of emergency.
(2) Vessels anchoring under
circumstances of emergency outside the
anchorage areas shall be shifted to new
positions within the anchorage grounds
immediately after the emergency ceases.
(3) Vessels may anchor anywhere
within the anchorage grounds provided
such anchoring does not interfere with
the operations of any other vessel at
anchorage; except a vessel may not
anchor within 1,500 yards of a vessel
carrying or handling dangerous cargoes,
cargoes of a particular hazard, or Class
1 (explosive) materials. Vessels shall lie
at anchor with as short of a chain or
cable as conditions permit.
(4) Prior to entering the anchorage
grounds, all vessels must notify the
Coast Guard Captain of the Port Sector
North Carolina (COTP) via VHF–FM
channel 16.
(5) No vessel may anchor within the
anchorage grounds for more than 72
hours without the prior approval of the
COTP. To obtain this approval, contact
the COTP via VHF–FM channel 16.
(6) The COTP may close the
anchorage grounds and direct vessels to
depart the anchorage during periods of
severe weather or at other times as
deemed necessary in the interest of port
safety or security.
(7) The COTP may prescribe specific
conditions for vessels anchoring within
the anchorage grounds, including but
not limited to, the number and location
of anchors, scope of chain, readiness of
engineering plant and equipment, usage
of tugs, and requirements for
maintaining communications guards on
selected radio frequencies.
(d) Regulations for vessels handling or
carrying dangerous cargoes, cargoes of a
particular hazard, or Class 1 (explosive)
materials. This paragraph (d) applies to
every vessel, except U.S. naval vessels,
handling or carrying dangerous cargoes,
cargoes of a particular hazard, or Class
1 (explosive) materials.
(1) Unless otherwise directed by the
Captain of the Port, each commercial
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
17050
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2022 / Proposed Rules
vessel handling or carrying dangerous
cargoes, cargoes of a particular hazard,
or Class 1 (explosive) materials must be
anchored within Anchorage B.
(2) Vessels requiring the use of
Anchorage B must display by day a red
flag (Bravo flag) in a prominent location
and by night a fixed red light. In lieu of
a fixed red light, by night a red flag may
be illuminated by spotlight.
Dated: March 10, 2022.
Laura M. Dickey,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2022–06339 Filed 3–24–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 17
RIN 2900–AR01
VA Pilot Program on Graduate Medical
Education and Residency; Extension
of Comment Period
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Proposed rule; extension of
comment period.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) is extending the comment
period of the proposed rule ‘‘Pilot
Program on Graduate Medical Education
and Residency.’’ This action is being
taken in response to requests from
stakeholders to allow additional time for
interested persons to submit comments
on the proposed rule.
DATES: VA is extending the comment
period on the proposed rule published
on February 4, 2022 by 90 days. 87 FR
6456. Ninety days from April 5, 2022 is
July 4, 2022, which is a federal holiday;
therefore, the VA is extending the
comment period to the following day,
July 5, 2022. Comments must now be
received on or before July 5, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Comments must be
submitted through
www.Regulations.gov. Comments
received will be available at
regulations.gov for public viewing,
inspection or copies.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Andrea Bennett, Office of Academic
Affiliations, Department of Veterans
Affairs, at (202) 368–0324 or
VAMission403Help@va.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
February 4, 2022, VA issued a proposed
rule to revise its medical regulations to
establish a new pilot program related to
graduate medical education and
residency, as required by section 403 of
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:08 Mar 24, 2022
Jkt 256001
the John S. McCain III, Daniel K. Akaka,
and Samuel R. Johnson VA Maintaining
Internal Systems and Strengthening
Integrated Outside Network Act of 2018
(Pub. L. 115–182, hereinafter referred to
as the MISSION Act). See 87 FR 6456.
Consistent with section 403 of the
MISSION Act, the proposed rule
established parameters by which VA
would determine those covered
facilities in which residents would be
placed under the pilot program, such as
certain consideration factors to
determine whether there is a clinical
need for providers in areas where
residents would be placed. VA further
proposed to prioritize placement of
residents under the pilot program in
Indian Health Service facilities, Indian
tribal or tribal organization facilities,
certain underserved VA facilities, or
other covered facilities, as required by
section 403 of the MISSION Act. In
addition, VA proposed parameters to
pay resident stipends and benefits and
certain startup costs of new residency
programs if residents are placed in such
programs under the pilot program.
The proposed rule provided an
opportunity to submit comments by
April 5, 2022. In response to requests
from stakeholders to extend the
comment period, VA extends the
comment period by 90 days to allow
additional time for interested persons to
submit comments on the proposed rule.
Comments must now be received on or
before July 5, 2022.
Signing Authority
Denis McDonough, Secretary of
Veterans Affairs, approved this
document on March 21, 2022, and
authorized the undersigned to sign and
submit the document to the Office of the
Federal Register for publication
electronically as an official document of
the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Consuela Benjamin,
Regulation Development Coordinator, Office
of Regulation Policy & Management, Office
of General Counsel, Department of Veterans
Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2022–06293 Filed 3–24–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R07–OAR–2022–0285; FRL–9645–01–
R7]
Air Plan Approval; Missouri;
Restriction of Emissions Credit for
Reduced Pollutant Concentrations
From the Use of Dispersion
Techniques
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing approval of
a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of
Missouri on January 30, 2020. Missouri
requests that the EPA approve revisions
to a State regulation that limits the use
of dispersion techniques to meet
ambient air quality standards in the
vicinity of major sources of air
pollution. The use of certain dispersion
techniques is prohibited by section 123
of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The
revisions to the rule are a revised
restructured version of the same rule.
These revisions are administrative in
nature and do not impact the stringency
of the SIP or air quality. The EPA’s
proposed approval of this rule revision
is in accordance with the requirements
of the CAA.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before April 25, 2022.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–
OAR–2022–0285 to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the Docket ID No. for this
rulemaking. Comments received will be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov/, including any
personal information provided. For
detailed instructions on sending
comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the
‘‘Written Comments’’ heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steven Brown, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air
Quality Planning Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219;
telephone number: (913) 551–7718;
email address: brown.steven@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 58 (Friday, March 25, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17047-17050]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-06339]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 110
[Docket Number USCG-2020-0216]
RIN 1625-AA01
Anchorage Grounds; Cape Fear River Approach, North Carolina
AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to amend the anchorage
regulations for Lockwoods Folly Inlet, NC, and adjacent navigable
waters, by establishing a new offshore anchorage, relocating the
existing explosives anchorage and amending the anchorage regulations.
The purpose of this supplemental proposed rule is to improve navigation
and public safety by accommodating recent and anticipated future growth
in cargo vessel traffic and vessel size that call on Military Ocean
Terminal Sunny Point and the Port of Wilmington, North Carolina. We
invite your comments on this supplemental proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before April 25, 2022.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2020-0216 using the Federal Decision Making 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 Lieutenant Gregory Kennerley, Sector
North Carolina, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (910) 772-2230, email
[email protected]; or Mr. Matthew Creelman, Waterways
Management Branch, Fifth Coast Guard District, U.S. Coast Guard;
telephone (757) 398-6225, email [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
BOEM Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
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
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis
On May 8, 2020, the Coast Guard published a notification of inquiry
in the Federal Register (85 FR 27343) to solicit public comments on
whether we should initiate a rulemaking to establish an anchorage
ground offshore in the approaches to the Cape Fear River, North
Carolina, and to increase the size and relocate the existing Lockwood's
Folly Inlet explosives anchorage. After receiving favorable comments,
the Coast Guard decided to propose the rulemaking. On August 17, 2021,
the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in
Federal Register (86 FR 45936), stating why we issued the NPRM, and
invited comments on our proposed anchorage. During the comment period
that ended on October 18, 2021, we received five comment letters in
response. The Coast Guard is now issuing this supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to solicit comments on changes made to the
NPRM.
The purpose of this proposed rule is to accommodate recent and
anticipated future growth in cargo vessel traffic and vessel size that
call on Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point and the Port of Wilmington,
improve navigation and public safety, and to preserve areas
traditionally used for anchoring.
The legal basis and authorities for this notice of proposed
rulemaking are found in 46 U.S.C.70006, 33 CFR 1.05-1, DHS Delegation
No. 0170.1, which collectively authorize the Coast Guard to propose,
establish, and define regulatory anchorage grounds.
III. Discussion Comments, Changes, and Proposed Rule
As noted above, we received five comments on our NPRM published
August 17, 2021. One was in full support of the proposed rule, one had
concerns over possible area use conflicts with offshore wind energy
development, and three were regarding potential conflict with the
anchorage and an artificial reef. The following sections detail the
concerns raised by these comments. As a result, the Coast Guard has
issued this SNPRM with proposed changes to the regulatory text of the
rule. Specifically, we propose the western boundary and coordinates of
the proposed Explosives Anchorage B be moved 1000 yards eastward to
avoid a conflict with a North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries
Artificial Reef (AR-455). The remainder of the proposed rule remains
unchanged.
A. Offshore Wind Development
One commenter raised concerns that the proposed anchorage would
take up an area that could be utilized for offshore wind energy
development, and by doing so, would deprive the local economy of
investment and energy resulting from the development. The Coast Guard
finds this comment to be not applicable to this particular rulemaking
as the proposed anchorage area does not overlap or limit any known wind
energy lease area as published by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
(BOEM), the lead agency in the U.S. offshore wind development. The
Coast Guard works closely with BOEM in the planning of these offshore
lease areas and has confirmed the area proposed for this rule is not
under consideration for wind development.
B. Artificial Reef
There were three comments received by the Coast Guard with concerns
that the westernmost boundary of the proposed Explosives Anchorage B
overlapped the location of an artificial reef, North Carolina Division
of Marine Fisheries' Reef (AR-455). This overlap reveals potential
hazards as anchoring vessels could damage the reef or possibly foul
their anchors on the underwater structures. The Coast Guard agreed with
these concerns and reached out to the North Carolina Division of Marine
Fisheries to discuss a new agreeable boundary for the anchorage that
would not conflict with AR-455. After reviewing the location of each of
the underwater features within AR-455, the Coast Guard proposes to move
the western boundary of Anchorage B 1000 yards to the east of AR-455.
This distance would prevent any vessel anchored within Anchorage B from
damaging the reef or interfering with other vessels visiting the reef.
This would reduce the overall size of anchorage area initially
proposed, but the Coast Guard believes there is still
[[Page 17048]]
sufficient area within the anchorage to meet anchorage needs.
C. Proposed Rule
The intent of this proposed rule remains unchanged. This proposed
rule would formally establish an anchorage ground, Anchorage A,
approximately eight nautical miles southwest of the Oak Island Light.
This proposed rule would also increase the size and relocate Lockwoods
Folly Inlet explosives anchorage to adjacent Anchorage A on its western
boundary; and rename it Anchorage B. The specific coordinates for these
proposed anchorage grounds are included in the proposed regulatory text
at the end of this document.
You may find an illustration of the anchorages in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES. Additionally, the anchorage ground is
available for viewing on the Mid-Atlantic Ocean Data Portal at https://portal.midatlanticocean.org/visualize/. See ``USCG Proposed Areas and
Studies'' under the ``Maritime'' portion of the Data Layers section.
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, and
we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
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. 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).
This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, and historical vessel traffic data pertaining to the
anchorage locations. The regulation would designate and preserve an
approximately 22 square mile deep water area traditionally used by
cargo ships for anchoring near existing traffic lanes. It would also
relocate the existing explosives anchorage approximately five nautical
miles further offshore increasing separation distances between vessels
laden with explosives and the public, and expand its size from
approximately five to seven square miles. This regulatory action
provides commercial vessel anchorage needs while enhancing the
navigation safety, environmental stewardship, and public safety.
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 use the
anchorages 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. The towns and communities along
the Cape Fear River approaches have an economy based on tourism and
numerous small entities and businesses. The establishment of Anchorage
A and Anchorage B will increase controls over vessels that currently
anchor in the general vicinity and increase the distance between
anchored vessels and the shore and beaches, lessening impacts these
small entities may currently experience.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed 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 proposed 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 potential effects of
this proposed 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 an anchorage ground, Anchorage A, in an area traditionally
used by cargo ships for anchoring in the approaches to the Cape
[[Page 17049]]
Fear River, NC; and increasing the size of and relocating the Lockwoods
Folly Inlet explosives anchorage to an area adjacent to Anchorage A (on
its western boundary), expanding its use, and renaming it Anchorage B.
Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review
under paragraph L[59] 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.
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so
that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places, or vessels.
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.
Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through
the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To
do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2020-0216 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. If you cannot submit your material by using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule for alternate
instructions.
Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this
proposed rule 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 will only
post comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may
choose not to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that
we receive.
Personal information. 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
to the docket in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).
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. Revise Sec. 110.170 to read as follows:
Sec. 110.170 Cape Fear, N.C.
(a) The anchorage grounds. All coordinates in this section are
based on the World Geodetic System (WGS 84).
(1) Anchorage A. The waters bound by a line connecting the
following points:
Table 1 to Paragraph (a)(1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
33[deg]47'59.09'' N 78[deg]14'58.67'' W
33[deg]47'59.09'' N 78[deg]06'24.74'' W
33[deg]46'01.22'' N 78[deg]06'24.74'' W
33[deg]46'01.22'' N 78[deg]14'58.67'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Anchorage B. Explosives anchorage. The waters bound by a line
connecting the following points:
Table 2 to Paragraph (a)(2)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
33[deg]47'59.09'' N 78[deg]17'14.00'' W
33[deg]47'59.09'' N 78[deg]14'58.67'' W
33[deg]46'01.22'' N 78[deg]14'58.67'' W
33[deg]46'01.22'' N 78[deg]17'14.00'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Definitions. As used in this section--
Cargoes of particular hazard means ``cargo of particular hazard''
as defined in Sec. 126.3 of this title.
Class 1 (explosive) materials means Division 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4
explosives, as defined in 49 CFR 173.50.
Dangerous cargo means ``certain dangerous cargo'' as defined in
Sec. 160.204 of this title.
U.S. naval vessel means any vessel owner, operated, chartered, or
leased by the U.S. Navy; and any vessel under the operational control
of the U.S. Navy or Combatant Command.
(c) General regulations. (1) Vessels in the Atlantic Ocean near
Cape Fear River Inlet awaiting berthing space within the Port of
Wilmington shall only anchor within the anchorage grounds defined and
established in this section, except in cases of emergency.
(2) Vessels anchoring under circumstances of emergency outside the
anchorage areas shall be shifted to new positions within the anchorage
grounds immediately after the emergency ceases.
(3) Vessels may anchor anywhere within the anchorage grounds
provided such anchoring does not interfere with the operations of any
other vessel at anchorage; except a vessel may not anchor within 1,500
yards of a vessel carrying or handling dangerous cargoes, cargoes of a
particular hazard, or Class 1 (explosive) materials. Vessels shall lie
at anchor with as short of a chain or cable as conditions permit.
(4) Prior to entering the anchorage grounds, all vessels must
notify the Coast Guard Captain of the Port Sector North Carolina (COTP)
via VHF-FM channel 16.
(5) No vessel may anchor within the anchorage grounds for more than
72 hours without the prior approval of the COTP. To obtain this
approval, contact the COTP via VHF-FM channel 16.
(6) The COTP may close the anchorage grounds and direct vessels to
depart the anchorage during periods of severe weather or at other times
as deemed necessary in the interest of port safety or security.
(7) The COTP may prescribe specific conditions for vessels
anchoring within the anchorage grounds, including but not limited to,
the number and location of anchors, scope of chain, readiness of
engineering plant and equipment, usage of tugs, and requirements for
maintaining communications guards on selected radio frequencies.
(d) Regulations for vessels handling or carrying dangerous cargoes,
cargoes of a particular hazard, or Class 1 (explosive) materials. This
paragraph (d) applies to every vessel, except U.S. naval vessels,
handling or carrying dangerous cargoes, cargoes of a particular hazard,
or Class 1 (explosive) materials.
(1) Unless otherwise directed by the Captain of the Port, each
commercial
[[Page 17050]]
vessel handling or carrying dangerous cargoes, cargoes of a particular
hazard, or Class 1 (explosive) materials must be anchored within
Anchorage B.
(2) Vessels requiring the use of Anchorage B must display by day a
red flag (Bravo flag) in a prominent location and by night a fixed red
light. In lieu of a fixed red light, by night a red flag may be
illuminated by spotlight.
Dated: March 10, 2022.
Laura M. Dickey,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2022-06339 Filed 3-24-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
