82 FR 11329 - Port of Miami Anchorage Area; Atlantic Ocean, Miami Beach, FL
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 34 (February 22, 2017)
Coast Guard
Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 34 (February 22, 2017)
| Page Range | 11329-11332 | |
| FR Document | 2017-03405 |
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 34 (Wednesday, February 22, 2017)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 11329-11332] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2017-03405] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 110 [Docket Number USCG-2015-0729] RIN 1625-AA01 Port of Miami Anchorage Area; Atlantic Ocean, Miami Beach, FL AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to amend the Miami Anchorage. The Miami Anchorage would be divided into two separate anchorage areas. This action is necessary to reduce potential damage to threatened coral posed by anchoring vessels. We invite your comments on this supplemental proposed rulemaking. DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before March 24, 2017. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG- 2015-0729 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://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 MST2 Benjamin R. Colbert, Sector Miami Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 305- 535-4317, email [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking SNPRM Supplemental notice of proposed rule making Sec. Section U.S.C. United States Code II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis On December 1, 2015, the Coast Guard published a notice of study (80 FR 75020) that indicated we were evaluating amending the Miami Anchorage to divide the anchorage into two smaller anchorage areas. The proposed amendment was designed in coordination with a variety of local stakeholders, including the South East Florida Coral Reef Initiative (SEFCRI). Comments provided by these stakeholders, academic research, and environmental reports raised concerns with the Coast Guard about the potential for damage to the Florida Reef in the Miami Anchorage. Examples of the body of work that influenced the Coast Guard in proposing the amendment may be found in the docket. In response to the notice of study, the Coast Guard received four comments. These comments were addressed in an NPRM published on May 10, 2016 (81 FR 28788). In response to the NPRM, we received four additional comments. Two of the comments, one by the local non-profit Miami Waterkeeper and the other by a private citizen, supported our planned modification of the Miami Anchorage. The third and fourth comments were submitted by the Biscayne Bay Pilots Association. The Biscayne Bay Pilots Association (pilots) submitted a comment, through the Port of Miami, on May 17, 2016. This comment requested the Coast Guard to evaluate changes in the proposed anchorage, including shifting the outer anchorage west and shifting the southern boundary of the outer anchorage north. In response to these comments, the Coast Guard met with the Pilots to discuss the requests and the basis at which the Coast Guard arrived at the proposed anchorage configuration. During the meeting, the Coast Guard agreed that shifting the western boundary of the outer anchorage approximately 300 feet to the west would provide more room for large anchoring vessels. This change would not have any effect on coral or hardbottom as the sea floor in that area is sand. On June 11, 2016, the Pilots submitted a follow up comment to the public docket expressing concern that the outer anchorage would expose vessels to increased current and waves and, they claim, could increase the chance a vessel would drag anchor. To properly assess environmental conditions and risk of an anchor drag, the Coast Guard consulted with the National Weather Service and Maersk Training Center. The National Weather Service conducted a study, analyzing the previous year's current in the vicinity of the anchorage. The Weather Service found that the average current in the area of the outer anchorage over the previous year was approximately 1.2 knots with current ranging plus or minus half a knot from the mean current 70 percent of the time. This information was provided to the Maersk Training Center in Svendborg, Denmark. Subject matter experts at the Training Center indicated that the conditions posed no significant hazard and that Masters would have the training and experience to set an anchor in the deeper waters of the outer anchorage. In addition to consulting with experts, the Coast Guard has made minor changes to the proposed anchorage regulations that would further ensure the safety of all vessels anchoring in the outer anchorage. Vessels using the Miami Anchorage would be prohibited from anchoring with engines off or in a ``dead ship'' status and would be required to maintain a bridge watch with an English speaking deck officer. Finally, the Coast Guard will submit amendments to the local Coast Pilot to provide improved guidance to vessels planning to anchor in the outer anchorage. In addition to the discussions with the Biscayne Bay Pilots Association and SEFCRI discussed above, the Coast Guard consulted with a number of other stakeholders and subject matter experts in the development of this Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SNPRM). Several biologists from the University of Miami and Nova Southeastern University supported the proposed changes to the Miami Anchorage. The Florida State Historical Preservation Officer determined that there were no known cultural resources [[Page 11330]] that would be impacted by the proposed changes and opined that the proposed changes to the anchorage would have no effect on historic properties listed, or eligible for listing, on the National Register for Historic Places. The Habitat Conservation Division of the National Marine Fisheries Service supports relocating the anchorage as a means to reduce the continued degradation of coral reef and hardbottom in this area from anchoring activities. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection strongly supports this rulemaking and relocating the anchorage as a means to reduce the continued degradation of coral reef and hardbottom in this area from anchoring activities. The Coast Guard is committed to continued outreach, consultation, and communication in order to ensure effective rulemaking and invites your comments to the proposed rule in this SNPRM. All comments referenced above, having been received directly and not submitted to the www.regulations.gov portal, will be added to the docket for public review. III. Discussion of Proposed Rule In this SNPRM, the Coast Guard proposes to amend the Miami Anchorage by dividing the anchorage into two smaller anchorage areas. The amended coordinates would establish two anchorages with a combined area of approximately 1.5 square miles and reduce the total anchorage area by approximately 3 square miles. The amended anchorage areas would be established with the following coordinates: Small Inner Western Anchorage [Approximate water depths: 45 ft] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Latitude Longitude ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NW Corner...................... 25[deg]47'57.687'' 080[deg]05'37.225' N. ' W. NE Corner...................... 25[deg]47'57.341'' 080[deg]05'26.466' N. ' W. SE Corner...................... 25[deg]46'31.443'' 080[deg]05'27.069' N. ' W. SW Corner...................... 25[deg]46'31.557'' 080[deg]05'37.868' N. ' W. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Large Outer Eastern Anchorage [Approximate water depths: 120 ft] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Latitude Longitude ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NW Corner...................... 25[deg]48'13.841'' 080[deg]04'59.155' N. ' W. NE Corner...................... 25[deg]48'04.617'' 080[deg]04'04.582' N. 'W. SE Corner...................... 25[deg]46'32.712'' 080[deg]04'28.387' N. ' W. SW Corner...................... 25[deg]46'43.770'' 080[deg]05'02.360' N. ' W. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Additionally, in response to comments received from the Biscayne Bay Pilots Association and others, the Coast Guard has proposed minor changes to the anchorage regulations. Vessels anchored in the Miami Anchorage will prohibited from anchoring with engines off or in a ``dead ship'' status and vessels will be required to seek permission of the Captain of the Port Miami prior to anchoring for longer than 72 hours. In addition to the above changes, we have reordered and reworded the proposed anchoring regulations. IV. Regulatory Analyses We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders. A. Regulatory Planning and Review Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. 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. This regulatory action determination is based on the relatively minor changes being proposed to the regulation. The regulation would ensure 1.5 square miles of anchorage areas continue to exist, vessels will be prohibited from anchoring with engines off or in a ``dead ship'' status, and vessels will be required to seek permission of the Captain of the Port Miami prior to anchoring for longer than 72 hours. 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 anchorage may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A above this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator. If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it. Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that [[Page 11331]] 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 contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. F. Environment We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 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 reducing an anchorage. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(f) of Figure 2-1 of Commandant Instruction M16475.lD. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule. V. Public Participation and Request for Comments We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions. We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 FR 15086). Documents mentioned in this SNPRM as being available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a final rule is published. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110 Anchorage grounds. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 110 as follows: PART 110--ANCHORAGES 0 1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05- 1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 0 2. Revise Sec. 110.188 to read as follows: Sec. 110.188 Atlantic Ocean off Miami and Miami Beach, Fla. (a) The anchorage grounds. (1) Anchorage A. All area of the Atlantic Ocean, encompassed by a line connecting the points of the following North America Datum 83 coordinates: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Latitude Longitude ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 25[deg]47'57.687'' N. 080[deg]05'37.225'' W. 25[deg]47'57.341'' N. 080[deg]05'26.466'' W. 25[deg]46'31.443'' N. 080[deg]05'27.069'' W. 25[deg]46'31.557'' N. 080[deg]05'37.868'' W. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (2) Anchorage B. All area of the Atlantic Ocean, encompassed by a line connecting the points of the following North America Datum 83 coordinates: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Latitude Longitude ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 25[deg] 48' 13.841'' N. 080[deg] 04' 59.155'' W. 25[deg] 48' 04.617'' N. 080[deg] 04' 04.582'' W. 25[deg] 46' 32.712'' N. 080[deg] 04' 28.387'' W. 25[deg] 46' 43.770'' N. 080[deg] 05' 02.360'' W. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (b) The regulations. (1) Vessels in the Atlantic Ocean in the vicinity of Port of Miami entrance channel must anchor only within the anchorage area hereby defined and established, except in cases of emergency. (2) Prior to entering the anchorage area, all vessels must notify the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, via the Biscayne Bay Pilots, on VHF-FM channel 12 or 16. (3) All vessels within the designated anchorage must maintain a 24- hour bridge watch by a licensed or credentialed deck officer proficient in English, monitoring VHF-FM channel 16. This individual must confirm that the ship's crew performs frequent checks on the vessel's position to ensure the vessel is not dragging anchor. (4) Vessels may anchor anywhere within the designated anchorage area provided that: Such anchoring does not interfere with the operations of any other vessels currently at anchorage; and all anchor and chain or cable is positioned in such a manner to preclude dragging over reefs. (5) No vessel may anchor in a ``dead ship'' status (that is, propulsion or control unavailable for normal operations) without the prior approval of the Captain of the Port. Vessels experiencing casualties such as main propulsion, main steering or anchoring equipment malfunction or which are planning to perform main propulsion engine repairs or maintenance, must, [[Page 11332]] immediately notify the Coast Guard Captain of the Port via Coast Guard Sector Miami on VHF-FM channel 16. (6) No vessel may anchor within the designated anchorage for more than 72 hours without the prior approval of the Captain of the Port. To obtain this approval, contact the Coast Guard Captain of the Port via the Biscayne Bay Pilots, on VHF-FM channel 12 or 16. (7) The Coast Guard Captain of the Port may close the anchorage area and direct vessels to depart the anchorage during periods of adverse weather or at other times as deemed necessary in the interest of port safety or security. (8) Commercial vessels anchoring under emergency circumstances outside the anchorage area must shift to new positions within the anchorage area immediately after the emergency ceases. (9) Whenever the maritime or commercial interests of the United States so require, the Captain of the Port, U.S. Coast Guard, Miami, Florida, may direct relocation of any vessel anchored within the anchorage area. Once directed, such vessel must get underway at once or signal for a tug, and must change position as directed. Dated: February 15, 2017. S.A. Buschman, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. 2017-03405 Filed 2-21-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 34 / Wednesday, February 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules 11329
(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for at the proposed anchorage
(AMOCs) further instructions on submitting configuration. During the meeting, the
The Manager, Chicago Aircraft comments. Coast Guard agreed that shifting the
Certification Office, FAA, may approve
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
western boundary of the outer
AMOCs for this AD. Use the procedures anchorage approximately 300 feet to the
found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your request. you have questions about this proposed
rulemaking, call or email MST2 west would provide more room for large
(h) Related Information Benjamin R. Colbert, Sector Miami anchoring vessels. This change would
(1) For more information about this AD, Waterways Management Division, U.S. not have any effect on coral or
contact Kyri Zaroyiannis, Aerospace Coast Guard; telephone 305–535–4317, hardbottom as the sea floor in that area
Engineer, Chicago Aircraft Certification email Benjamin.R.Colbert@uscg.mil. is sand.
Office, Small Airplane Directorate, FAA, On June 11, 2016, the Pilots submitted
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: a follow up comment to the public
2300 E. Devon Ave., Des Plaines, IL 60018;
phone: 847–294–7836; fax: 847–294–7834; I. Table of Abbreviations docket expressing concern that the outer
email: kyri.zaroyiannis@faa.gov. anchorage would expose vessels to
(2) For RRC service information identified CFR Code of Federal Regulations increased current and waves and, they
in this AD, contact Rolls-Royce Corporation, DHS Department of Homeland Security claim, could increase the chance a
450 South Meridian Street, Mail Code NB– FR Federal Register vessel would drag anchor. To properly
01–06, Indianapolis, IN 46225; phone: 317– NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
230–3774; email: indy.pubs.services@rolls-
assess environmental conditions and
SNPRM Supplemental notice of proposed risk of an anchor drag, the Coast Guard
royce.com; Internet: www.rolls-royce.com. rule making
(3) You may view this service information § Section
consulted with the National Weather
at FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 1200 U.S.C. United States Code Service and Maersk Training Center.
District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For The National Weather Service
information on the availability of this II. Background, Purpose, and Legal conducted a study, analyzing the
material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125. Basis previous year’s current in the vicinity of
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on the anchorage. The Weather Service
On December 1, 2015, the Coast found that the average current in the
January 27, 2017.
Guard published a notice of study (80 area of the outer anchorage over the
Colleen M. D’Alessandro,
FR 75020) that indicated we were previous year was approximately 1.2
Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, evaluating amending the Miami
Aircraft Certification Service. knots with current ranging plus or
Anchorage to divide the anchorage into minus half a knot from the mean current
[FR Doc. 2017–03283 Filed 2–21–17; 8:45 am] two smaller anchorage areas. The 70 percent of the time. This information
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P proposed amendment was designed in was provided to the Maersk Training
coordination with a variety of local Center in Svendborg, Denmark. Subject
stakeholders, including the South East matter experts at the Training Center
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Florida Coral Reef Initiative (SEFCRI). indicated that the conditions posed no
SECURITY Comments provided by these significant hazard and that Masters
stakeholders, academic research, and would have the training and experience
Coast Guard environmental reports raised concerns to set an anchor in the deeper waters of
with the Coast Guard about the potential the outer anchorage.
33 CFR Part 110 for damage to the Florida Reef in the In addition to consulting with experts,
[Docket Number USCG–2015–0729] Miami Anchorage. Examples of the body the Coast Guard has made minor
of work that influenced the Coast Guard changes to the proposed anchorage
RIN 1625–AA01
in proposing the amendment may be regulations that would further ensure
Port of Miami Anchorage Area; Atlantic found in the docket. the safety of all vessels anchoring in the
Ocean, Miami Beach, FL In response to the notice of study, the outer anchorage. Vessels using the
Coast Guard received four comments. Miami Anchorage would be prohibited
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. These comments were addressed in an from anchoring with engines off or in a
ACTION:Supplemental notice of NPRM published on May 10, 2016 (81 ‘‘dead ship’’ status and would be
proposed rulemaking. FR 28788). In response to the NPRM, we required to maintain a bridge watch
received four additional comments. Two with an English speaking deck officer.
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to of the comments, one by the local non- Finally, the Coast Guard will submit
amend the Miami Anchorage. The profit Miami Waterkeeper and the other amendments to the local Coast Pilot to
Miami Anchorage would be divided by a private citizen, supported our provide improved guidance to vessels
into two separate anchorage areas. This planned modification of the Miami planning to anchor in the outer
action is necessary to reduce potential Anchorage. The third and fourth anchorage.
damage to threatened coral posed by comments were submitted by the In addition to the discussions with
anchoring vessels. We invite your Biscayne Bay Pilots Association. the Biscayne Bay Pilots Association and
comments on this supplemental The Biscayne Bay Pilots Association SEFCRI discussed above, the Coast
proposed rulemaking. (pilots) submitted a comment, through Guard consulted with a number of other
DATES: Comments and related material the Port of Miami, on May 17, 2016. stakeholders and subject matter experts
must be received by the Coast Guard on This comment requested the Coast in the development of this
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
or before March 24, 2017. Guard to evaluate changes in the Supplemental Notice of Proposed
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments proposed anchorage, including shifting Rulemaking (SNPRM). Several biologists
identified by docket number USCG– the outer anchorage west and shifting from the University of Miami and Nova
2015–0729 using the Federal the southern boundary of the outer Southeastern University supported the
eRulemaking Portal at http:// anchorage north. In response to these proposed changes to the Miami
www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public comments, the Coast Guard met with Anchorage. The Florida State Historical
Participation and Request for the Pilots to discuss the requests and the Preservation Officer determined that
Comments’’ portion of the basis at which the Coast Guard arrived there were no known cultural resources
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:01 Feb 21, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\22FEP1.SGM 22FEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_11363/page/1.svg)
![11330 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 34 / Wednesday, February 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules
that would be impacted by the proposed relocating the anchorage as a means to III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
changes and opined that the proposed reduce the continued degradation of
changes to the anchorage would have no coral reef and hardbottom in this area In this SNPRM, the Coast Guard
effect on historic properties listed, or from anchoring activities. proposes to amend the Miami
eligible for listing, on the National The Coast Guard is committed to Anchorage by dividing the anchorage
Register for Historic Places. The Habitat continued outreach, consultation, and into two smaller anchorage areas. The
Conservation Division of the National communication in order to ensure amended coordinates would establish
Marine Fisheries Service supports effective rulemaking and invites your two anchorages with a combined area of
relocating the anchorage as a means to comments to the proposed rule in this approximately 1.5 square miles and
reduce the continued degradation of SNPRM. All comments referenced reduce the total anchorage area by
coral reef and hardbottom in this area above, having been received directly approximately 3 square miles. The
from anchoring activities. The Florida and not submitted to the amended anchorage areas would be
Department of Environmental Protection www.regulations.gov portal, will be established with the following
strongly supports this rulemaking and added to the docket for public review. coordinates:
SMALL INNER WESTERN ANCHORAGE
[Approximate water depths: 45 ft]
Latitude Longitude
NW Corner ......................................................... 25°47′57.687″ N ............................................... 080°05′37.225″ W.
NE Corner .......................................................... 25°47′57.341″ N ............................................... 080°05′26.466″ W.
SE Corner .......................................................... 25°46′31.443″ N ............................................... 080°05′27.069″ W.
SW Corner ......................................................... 25°46′31.557″ N ............................................... 080°05′37.868″ W.
LARGE OUTER EASTERN ANCHORAGE
[Approximate water depths: 120 ft]
Latitude Longitude
NW Corner ......................................................... 25°48′13.841″ N ............................................... 080°04′59.155″ W.
NE Corner .......................................................... 25°48′04.617″ N ............................................... 080°04′04.582″W.
SE Corner .......................................................... 25°46′32.712″ N ............................................... 080°04′28.387″ W.
SW Corner ......................................................... 25°46′43.770″ N ............................................... 080°05′02.360″ W.
Additionally, in response to and benefits, of reducing costs, of 605(b) that this proposed rule would not
comments received from the Biscayne harmonizing rules, and of promoting have a significant economic impact on
Bay Pilots Association and others, the flexibility. This SNPRM has not been a substantial number of small entities.
Coast Guard has proposed minor designated a ‘‘significant regulatory While some owners or operators of
changes to the anchorage regulations. action,’’ under Executive Order 12866. vessels intending to use the anchorage
Vessels anchored in the Miami Accordingly, the SNPRM has not been may be small entities, for the reasons
Anchorage will prohibited from reviewed by the Office of Management stated in section IV.A above this
anchoring with engines off or in a ‘‘dead and Budget. proposed rule would not have a
ship’’ status and vessels will be required This regulatory action determination significant economic impact on any
to seek permission of the Captain of the is based on the relatively minor changes vessel owner or operator.
Port Miami prior to anchoring for longer being proposed to the regulation. The
If you think that your business,
than 72 hours. In addition to the above regulation would ensure 1.5 square
organization, or governmental
changes, we have reordered and miles of anchorage areas continue to
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
reworded the proposed anchoring exist, vessels will be prohibited from
and that this rule would have a
regulations. anchoring with engines off or in a ‘‘dead
significant economic impact on it,
ship’’ status, and vessels will be
IV. Regulatory Analyses please submit a comment (see
required to seek permission of the
We developed this proposed rule after ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it
Captain of the Port Miami prior to
considering numerous statutes and anchoring for longer than 72 hours. qualifies and how and to what degree
Executive orders related to rulemaking. this rule would economically affect it.
Below we summarize our analyses B. Impact on Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small
based on a number of these statutes and The Regulatory Flexibility Act of Business Regulatory Enforcement
Executive orders. 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
requires Federal agencies to consider we want to assist small entities in
A. Regulatory Planning and Review the potential impact of regulations on understanding this proposed rule. If the
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 small entities during rulemaking. The rule would affect your small business,
direct agencies to assess the costs and term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small organization, or governmental
benefits of available regulatory businesses, not-for-profit organizations jurisdiction and you have questions
alternatives and, if regulation is that are independently owned and concerning its provisions or options for
necessary, to select regulatory operated and are not dominant in their compliance, please contact the person
approaches that maximize net benefits. fields, and governmental jurisdictions listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the with populations of less than 50,000. CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will
importance of quantifying both costs The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. not retaliate against small entities that
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:01 Feb 21, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\22FEP1.SGM 22FEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_11363/page/2.svg)
![11332 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 34 / Wednesday, February 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules
immediately notify the Coast Guard action is necessary to provide for the 2017. Once traffic has been shifted to
Captain of the Port via Coast Guard safety of life on these navigable waters the new bridge the existing bridge will
Sector Miami on VHF–FM channel 16. during the lowering and securing of the be demolished and replaced with a new
(6) No vessel may anchor within the existing bridge’s center span onto two bridge carrying Interstate 278
designated anchorage for more than 72 barges within the Federal navigation westbound traffic over Newtown Creek.
hours without the prior approval of the channel and during the barge’s On November 29, 2016, NYSDOT
Captain of the Port. To obtain this outbound transit through Newtown notified the Coast Guard that it will be
approval, contact the Coast Guard Creek to the East River tentatively lowering the existing center span from
Captain of the Port via the Biscayne Bay scheduled during April–May, 2017. the Kosciuszko Bridge over Newtown
Pilots, on VHF–FM channel 12 or 16. This proposed rulemaking would Creek at mile 2.1 onto two barges within
(7) The Coast Guard Captain of the prohibit persons and vessels from being the Newtown Creek Federal navigation
Port may close the anchorage area and in the safety zones unless authorized by channel, securing the center span to the
direct vessels to depart the anchorage the Captain of the Port New York or a barges for transit, rotating the barges,
during periods of adverse weather or at designated representative. We invite and towing the barges through Newtown
other times as deemed necessary in the your comments on this proposed Creek to the East River for final upland
interest of port safety or security. rulemaking. disposal. The center span is 259 feet
(8) Commercial vessels anchoring long, 88 feet 8 inches wide, 46 feet high,
DATES: Comments and related material and weighs 2,400 tons. This operation is
under emergency circumstances outside
must be received by the Coast Guard on dependent on the ongoing construction
the anchorage area must shift to new
or before March 24, 2017. of the new eastbound span of the new
positions within the anchorage area
immediately after the emergency ceases. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Kosciuszko Bridge being built adjacent
(9) Whenever the maritime or identified by docket number USCG– to, and south (upstream) of, the existing
commercial interests of the United 2016–1048 using the Federal bridge and tides during daylight hours.
States so require, the Captain of the eRulemaking Portal at http:// NYSDOT has identified April 1–24, May
Port, U.S. Coast Guard, Miami, Florida, www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public 1–23, and May 30–31, 2017 as being
may direct relocation of any vessel Participation and Request for conducive to this operation. The Coast
anchored within the anchorage area. Comments’’ portion of the Guard proposes to make this rule
Once directed, such vessel must get SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for enforceable through December 31, 2017
underway at once or signal for a tug, further instructions on submitting as a contingency for any unforeseen
and must change position as directed. comments. delays to the bridge construction
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If schedule. The loading and securing of
Dated: February 15, 2017.
you have questions about this proposed the bridge span to the two barges is
S.A. Buschman, expected to take a minimum of 24-hours
rulemaking, call or email Mr. Jeff
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, and the towing time to the East River is
Seventh Coast Guard District. Yunker, Sector New York Waterways
Management Division; telephone 718– expected to be one hour. The entire
[FR Doc. 2017–03405 Filed 2–21–17; 8:45 am] process is expected to last at least 48
354–4195, email jeff.m.yunker@
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
uscg.mil. hours. Hazards from this operation
include accidental falling debris. The
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: two barges will block at least 109 feet of
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND the 130 foot wide Newtown Creek
I. Table of Abbreviations
SECURITY Federal navigation channel during
COTP Captain of the Port New York loading, securing, and towing
Coast Guard CFR Code of Federal Regulations
operations. The COTP has determined
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register that potential hazards associated with
33 CFR Part 165 these operations would be a safety
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
[Docket Number USCG–2016–1048] NYSDOT New York State Department of concern for anyone within a 500-foot
Transportation radius of the tugs and barges.
RIN 1625–AA00
§ Section The purpose of this rulemaking is to
Safety Zone; Kosciuszko Bridge U.S.C. United States Code ensure the safety of vessels and the
Construction, Newtown Creek, II. Background, Purpose, and Legal navigable waters within a 500-foot
Brooklyn and Queens, NY Basis radius of the two barges and assist
vessels when loading, securing, and
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. The Coast Guard issued a Bridge transporting the center span of the
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. Permit dated August 21, 2013 approving Kosciuszko Bridge through Newtown
the location and construction of the Creek before, during, and after the
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to Kosciuszko Bridge across Newtown operations. The Coast Guard proposes
establish two safety zones on the Creek, mile 2.1, between the Boroughs this rulemaking under authority in 33
navigable waters of Newtown Creek, of Queens and Brooklyn, NY. The bridge U.S.C. 1231.
NY. The first safety zone is within 500 carries Interstate 278, also known as the
feet of the two barges and assist vessels Brooklyn-Queens Expressway over III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
to be used for the removal and loading Newtown Creek. On May 23, 2014 the The COTP proposes to establish two
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
of the existing center span from the New York State Department of safety zones for approximately 48 hours
Kosciuszko Bridge at mile 2.1. The Transportation awarded a $554 million between April 1 and May 31, 2017. The
second is from approximately 370 yards dollar contract to design and build the safety zone would cover all navigable
south (upstream) of the Kosciuszko replacement bridge. On December 4, waters of Newtown Creek within 500
Bridge at mile 2.1 and Newtown Creek’s 2014 construction began on the feet of the two barges and assist vessels
confluence with the East River at mile eastbound replacement bridge. All to be used for the removal and loading
0.0 during transport of the existing vehicle traffic is expected to be shifted of the existing center span from the
center span to an offsite location. This onto this new bridge in the spring of Kosciuszko Bridge at mile 2.1 and
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:01 Feb 21, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\22FEP1.SGM 22FEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_11363/page/4.svg)
Document Created: 2017-02-22 00:08:40
Document Modified: 2017-02-22 00:08:40
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking. | |
| Dates | Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before March 24, 2017. | |
| Contact | If you have questions about this proposed rulemaking, call or email MST2 Benjamin R. Colbert, Sector Miami Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 305- 535-4317, email [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 82 FR 11329 | |
| RIN Number | 1625-AA01 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR