Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Coast Guard proposes to change the shape and expand the dimensions of anchorage “D” at Newport, Rhode Island, to better accommodate increasing cruise ship visits to Newport and to improve navigation safety.
Comments and related material, including requests for public meetings, must be received by the Coast Guard on or before October 27, 2011.
You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2011-0443 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 methods. See the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
If you have questions on this proposed rule, call Mr. Edward G. LeBlanc, Chief, Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard Sector Southeastern New England, at 401-435-2351, or Edward.G.LeBlanc@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
Public Participation and Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking 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.
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG-2011-0443), 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 (via http://www.regulations.gov), or by fax, mail or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online via http://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an e-mail address, or a phone 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 “Proposed Rule” and insert “USCG-2011-0443” 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 8½ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments 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 and may change the rule based on your comments.Start Printed Page 59597
Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as 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-2011-0443” and click “Search.” Click the “Open Docket Folder” in the “Actions” column. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on 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.
Anyone can search the electronic form of all 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 notice regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008 issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But, you may submit a request for one to the Docket Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.
Basis and Purpose
The legal basis for the proposed rule is: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236, 2030, 2035, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05-1; and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, which collectively authorize the Coast Guard to define anchorage grounds.
This proposed rule would change the shape and expand the dimensions of anchorage “D” at Newport, Rhode Island, to better accommodate increasing cruise ship visits to Newport, and to improve navigation safety.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
This proposed rule is intended to change the shape and expand the size of anchorage “D” west of Goat Island, Newport, RI, to safely accommodate up to three cruise ships simultaneously. Currently, it is a trapezoid-shaped anchorage of approximately 0.11 square nautical miles that can safely accommodate only two cruise ships simultaneously. Over the past several years cruise ship visits to Newport, RI, have been more frequent. On occasion, there is a need to anchor up to three cruise ships simultaneously in anchorage “D”. For the convenience and safety of passengers, an increase in the size of the anchorage is necessary. The Coast Guard believes the depth of water, water-sheet area, and density of vessel traffic in the vicinity of Newport west of Goat Island are sufficient to accommodate this change.
Consequently, the Coast Guard proposes to change the shape of anchorage “D” from a trapezoid to a square, and expand its size from approximately 0.11 to 0.24 square nautical miles. The proposed rule also includes specific anchorage points when there are one, two, or three vessels anchored in anchorage “D”.
This proposed rule will not change the current provision in 33 CFR 110.145(a)(4)(i) and (ii) that gives preference to the U.S. Navy from May 1 to October 1 each year should it require the anchorage, and allows temporary floats or buoys for marking of anchors or moorings.
We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.
Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563
This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order.
We expect the economic impact of this proposed would not be significant because it only modifies the shape of a currently-existing anchorage at Newport, RI. Although it also would increase the size of the anchorage, the water-sheet area covered by the proposed anchorage is still less than 0.25 square nautical miles.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 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. This proposed rule may affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels that have a need to anchor in anchorage “D” at Newport, RI.
This proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This rule would only modify the shape of a currently-existing anchorage at Newport, RI, and although it also would increase the size of the anchorage, the water-sheet area covered by the proposed anchorage is still less than 0.25 square nautical miles. It would not impose new requirements that would affect vessels' schedules or their ability to transit in the Newport, RI, area or Narragansett Bay, nor would it require the purchase of any new equipment or the hiring of any additional crew.
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 above) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
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 the rule so that they could better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact Mr. Edward G. LeBlanc, Chief, Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard Sector Southeastern New England, at 401-435-2351, or Edward.G.LeBlanc@uscg.mil. 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.
Collection of Information
This rule calls for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Start Printed Page 59598Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism.
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 does not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This proposed rule is not an economically significant rule and does not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does 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.
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under that order because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies.
This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (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. A preliminary environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. This proposed rule involves the modification of a currently-existing anchorage area at Newport, RI. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.Start List of Subjects
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110End List of Subjects
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 110 as follows:Start Part
PART 110—ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows:
2. Revise paragraphs (a)(4) and (d)(2) of § 110.145 to read as follows:
(a) * * *
(4) Anchorage D. West of Goat Island, an area bounded by the following coordinates:
Northeast Corner: 41°29.484′ N, 071°19.975′ W;
Northwest Corner: 41°29.484′ N, 071°20.578′ W;
Southwest Corner: 41°29.005′ N, 071°20.578′ W;
Southeast Corner: 41°29.005′ N, 071°19.975′ W.
(i) * * *
(iii) Should any part of an anchored vessel extend into the recommended vessel route in the East Passage of Narragansett Bay, a securite call notifying mariners of the vessel's exact position and status shall be made at least hourly on VHF channels 13 and 16.
(iv) As much as practicable, vessels anchoring will do so in the following order:
Primary anchoring point: 41°29.25′ N, 071°20.15′ W;
Secondary anchoring point: 41°29.38′ N, 071°20.45′ W;
Tertiary anchoring point: 41°29.15′ N, 071°20.50′ W.
“Anchoring point” is the intended position of the anchor at rest on the bottom of the anchorage. All coordinates referenced use datum: NAD 83.
(d) * * *
(2) Anchors must not be placed outside the anchorage areas, nor shall any vessel be so anchored that any portion of the hull or rigging shall at any time extend outside the boundaries of the anchorage area. However, Anchorage D is exempt from this requirement; see paragraph (a)(4) of this section.
Dated: September 13, 2011.
Daniel A. Neptun,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2011-24729 Filed 9-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P