This site displays a prototype of a “Web 2.0” version of the daily Federal Register. It is not an official legal edition of the Federal Register, and does not replace the official print version or the official electronic version on GPO’s govinfo.gov.
The documents posted on this site are XML renditions of published Federal Register documents. Each document posted on the site includes a link to the corresponding official PDF file on govinfo.gov. This prototype edition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov will remain an unofficial informational resource until the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register (ACFR) issues a regulation granting it official legal status. For complete information about, and access to, our official publications and services, go to About the Federal Register on NARA's archives.gov.
The OFR/GPO partnership is committed to presenting accurate and reliable regulatory information on FederalRegister.gov with the objective of establishing the XML-based Federal Register as an ACFR-sanctioned publication in the future. While every effort has been made to ensure that the material on FederalRegister.gov is accurately displayed, consistent with the official SGML-based PDF version on govinfo.gov, those relying on it for legal research should verify their results against an official edition of the Federal Register. Until the ACFR grants it official status, the XML rendition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov does not provide legal notice to the public or judicial notice to the courts.
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of study; request for comments.
The Coast Guard is conducting a Port Access Route Study (PARS) to evaluate the continued applicability of and the need for modifications to current vessel routing in the approaches to Los Angeles-Long Beach and in the Santa Barbara Channel. The goal of the study is to help reduce the risk of marine casualties and increase the efficiency of vessel traffic in the study area. The recommendations of the study may lead to future rulemaking action or appropriate international agreements.
Comments and related material must either be submitted to our online docket via http://www.regulations.gov on or before June 7, 2010 or reach the Docket Management Facility by that date.
You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2009-0765 using any one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202-493-2251.
(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-366-9329. To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods. See the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on submitting comments.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
If you have questions on this notice of study, call or e-mail Lieutenant Morgan Barbieri, Project Officer, Eleventh Coast Guard District, telephone 510-437-2978; e-mail Morgan.R.Barbieri@uscg.mil; or George Detweiler, Office of Waterways Management, Coast Guard, telephone 202-372-1566, e-mail George.H.Detweiler@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Ms. Renee K. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
I. Public Participation and Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this study by submitting comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided.
A. Submitting comments: If you submit comments, please include the docket number for this notice (USCG-2009-0765), indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online, or by fax, mail or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an e-mail address, or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov, click on the “submit a comment” box, which will then become highlighted in blue. In the “Document Type” drop down menu select “Notices” and insert “USCG-2009-0576” in the “Keyword” box. Click “Search” then click on the balloon shape in the “Actions” column. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 81/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period.
B. Viewing the comments and documents: To view comments and documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, click on the “read comments” box, which will then become highlighted in blue. In the “Keyword” box insert “USCG-2009-0765” and click “Search.” Click the “Open Docket Folder” in the “Actions” column. If you do not have access to the Internet, you may view the docket online by visiting the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 Start Printed Page 17563on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket Management Facility.
C. Privacy Act: Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act, system of records notice regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
The following definitions (except “Regulated Navigation Area”) are from the International Maritime Organization's (IMO's) publication “Ships' Routeing” and should help you review this notice:
Area to be avoided (ATBA) means a routing measure comprising an area within defined limits in which either navigation is particularly hazardous or it is exceptionally important to avoid casualties and which should be avoided by all vessels, or certain classes of vessels.
Deep-water route means a route within defined limits, which has been accurately surveyed for clearance of sea bottom and submerged obstacles as indicated on nautical charts.
Inshore traffic zone means a routing measure comprising a designated area between the landward boundary of a traffic separation scheme and the adjacent coast, to be used in accordance with the provisions of Rule 10(d), as amended, of the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 (COLREGS).
Precautionary area means a routing measure comprising an area within defined limits where vessels must navigate with particular caution and within which the direction of traffic flow may be recommended.
Recommended route means a route of undefined width, for the convenience of vessels in transit, which is often marked by centerline buoys.
Recommended track is a route which has been specially examined to ensure so far as possible that it is free of dangers and along which vessels are advised to navigate.
Regulated Navigation Area (RNA) means a water area within a defined boundary for which regulations for vessels navigating within the area have been established under 33 CFR part 165.
Roundabout means a routing measure comprising a separation point or circular separation zone and a circular traffic lane within defined limits. Traffic within the roundabout is separated by moving in a counterclockwise direction around the separation point or zone.
Separation Zone or separation line means a zone or line separating the traffic lanes which vessels are proceeding in opposite or nearly opposite directions; or from the adjacent sea area; or separating traffic lanes designated for particular classes of vessels proceeding in the same direction.
Traffic lane means an area within defined limits in which one-way traffic is established. Natural obstacles, including those forming separation zones, may constitute a boundary.
Traffic Separation Scheme (TSS) means a routing measure aimed at the separation of opposing streams of traffic by appropriate means and by the establishment of traffic lanes.
Two-way route means a route within defined limits inside which two-way traffic is established, aimed at providing safe passage of ships through waters where navigation is difficult or dangerous.
Vessel routing system means any system of one or more routes or routing measure aimed at reducing the risk of casualties; it includes traffic separation schemes, two-way routes, recommended tracks, areas to be avoided, no anchoring areas, inshore traffic zones, roundabouts, precautionary areas, and deep-water routes.
III. Background and Purpose
A. Requirement for port access route studies: Under the Ports and Waterways Safety Act (PWSA) (33 U.S.C. 1223(C)), the Commandant of the Coast Guard may designate necessary fairways and traffic separation schemes (TSSs) to provide safe access routes for vessels proceeding to and from United States ports. The designation of fairways and TSSs recognizes the paramount right of navigation over all other uses in the designated areas.
The PWSA requires the Coast Guard to conduct a study of potential traffic density and the need for safe access routes for vessels before establishing or adjusting fairways or TSSs. Through the study process, we must coordinate with Federal, State, and foreign State agencies (as appropriate) and consider the views of maritime community representatives, environmental groups, and other interested stakeholders. A primary purpose of this coordination is, to the extent practicable, to reconcile the need for safe access routes with other reasonable waterway uses.
B. Previous port access route studies: From 1993 through 1996, the Coast Guard conducted a port access route study to analyze vessel routing measures in the approaches to California ports. We published the study results in the Federal Register on October 25, 1996 (61 FR 55248). The study recommended shifting the southern approach lanes of the existing TSS off San Francisco westward (seaward) and extending the existing TSS in the Santa Barbara Channel from Point Conception to Point Arguello. The study concluded that no changes to the TSS in the approaches to Los Angeles-Long Beach were necessary at that time.
In 1995, the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach initiated major port improvement projects. These projects are completed and included the following:
Lengthening of the Los Angeles Approach Channel to extend approximately 3.5 nautical miles beyond the Los Angeles breakwater.
Deepening of the Los Angeles Approach Channel to a project depth of 81 feet.
A slight shift of the Long Beach Approach to a 355 deg. True inbound course.
Deepening of the Long Beach Approach Channel to a project depth of 69 feet.
The Coast Guard published a notice of study in the Federal Register (64 FR 12139, March 11, 1999) which announced that we would conduct a PARS for the approaches to Los Angeles-Long Beach. The Coast Guard published a notice of study results in the Federal Register on May 19, 2000 (65 FR 31856). The PARS evaluated the potential effects of the port improvement projects on navigational safety and vessel traffic management efficiency. It concluded that modifications to the TSS in the approaches to Los Angeles-Long Beach and the Precautionary Area were necessary for the safety of the maritime community utilizing the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.
C. Necessity for a new port access route study: The Coast Guard is always seeking ways to enhance the safety of life at sea. Increased vessel traffic has been observed bypassing the Santa Barbara Channel TSS and opting for routes south of San Miguel, Santa Rosa and Santa Cruz Islands approaching the San Pedro Channel. Vessels, which have traditionally utilized the established TSS in the Santa Barbara Channel to access ports in Los Angeles-Long Beach, have recently shifted to transit in the Start Printed Page 17564area south of San Miguel, Santa Rosa and Santa Cruz Islands.
The Coast Guard has identified a potential safety enhancement by increasing predictability of vessel traffic patterns in this area with an established vessel routing system. When vessels follow predictable and charted routing measures such as a TSS, congestion may be reduced, and mariners may be better able to predict where vessel interactions may occur and act accordingly.
This study will assess whether the creation of a vessel routing system is necessary to increase the predictability of vessel movements, which may decrease the potential for collisions, oil spills, and other events that could threaten the marine environment.
IV. Timeline, Study Area, and Process of This PARS
The Eleventh Coast Guard District will conduct this PARS. The study will begin upon publication of this notice and should take 6 to 12 months to complete.
The study area will be the area with a northern boundary at 34°30′ N; a western boundary 121°00′ W; a southern boundary at 33°15′ N; and an eastern boundary along the shoreline. This area encompasses the TSSs in the Santa Barbara Channel and in the approaches to Los Angeles-Long Beach and the approach to the San Pedro Channel from the Pacific Ocean, particularly the area south of San Miguel, Santa Rosa and Santa Cruz Islands and north of San Nicholas, Santa Barbara, and Santa Catalina Islands where an increase in vessel traffic has been identified.
As part of this study, we will analyze vessel traffic density, agency and stakeholder experience in vessel traffic management, navigation, ship handling, and effects of weather. We encourage you to participate in the study process by submitting comments in response to this notice.
We will publish the results of the PARS in the Federal Register. It is possible that the study 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 management. The recommendations may lead to future rulemakings or appropriate international agreements.
Possible Scope of the Recommendations
We are attempting to determine the scope of any safety problems associated with vessel transits in the study area. We expect that information gathered during the study will help us identify any problems and appropriate solutions. The study may recommend that we—
- Maintain the current vessel routing measures,
- Modify the existing traffic separations schemes;
- Create one or more precautionary areas;
- Create one or more inshore traffic zones;
- Establish area(s) to be avoided;
- Create deep-draft routes;
- Establish a regulated navigation Area (RNA) with specific vessel operating requirements to ensure safe navigation near shallow water; and
- Identify any other appropriate ships' routing measures.
To help us conduct the port access route 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” above.
1. What navigational hazards do vessels operating in the study area face? Please describe.
2. Are there strains on the current vessel routing system, such as increasing traffic density? Please describe.
3. Are modifications to existing vessel routing measures needed to improve traffic management efficiency in the study area? If so, please describe.
4. What costs and benefits are associated with the potential study recommendations listed above? What measures do you think are most cost-effective?
5. What impacts, both positive and negative, would changes to existing vessel routing measures or establishing new routing measures have on the study area?Start Signature
Dated: March 11, 2010.
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2010-7815 Filed 4-6-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P