12742 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 2001 / Proposed Rules

AEA MD, E2 Hagerstown, MD [NEW]

Washington County Regional Airport,

Hagerstown, MD.

(Lat. 39°42′28′′N., long 77 °43′46′′W.)

That airspace extending upward from the

surface to and including 3,200 feet MSL

within a 4.1-mile radius of Washington

County Regional Airport. This Class E2 area

is effective during the specific dates and

times when the Class D airspace is not in

effect.

* * * * *

Issued in Jamaica, New York on February

9, 2001.

F.D. Hatfield,

Manager, Air Traffic Division, Eastern Region.

[FR Doc. 01–4681 Filed 2–27–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 110

[CGD11–01–003]

RIN 2115–AA98

Anchorage Regulation; San Francisco

Bay, California

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to

revise the anchorage boundaries for

Anchorages 8, 9, and 24, and to specify

procedures for vessels intending to be in

a ‘‘dead ship’’ status in the San

Francisco Bay Anchorage Grounds. The

regulations concerning use of the

anchorage by vessels, and the activities

permitted in the anchorage areas are not

affected by the change in shape and size

of these anchorages.

DATES: Comments and related material

must reach the Coast Guard on or before

March 30, 2001.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments

and related material to Commanding

Officer, Coast Guard Marine Safety

Office San Francisco Bay, Bldg. 14,

Coast Guard Island, Alameda, CA

94501, ATTN: LT Andrew Cheney. The

Marine Safety Office maintains the

public docket for this rulemaking.

Comments and material received from

the public, as well as documents

indicated in this preamble as being

available in the docket, will become part

of this docket and will be available for

inspection and copying at the Marine

Safety Office between 7:30 a.m. and 4:00

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lieutenant Patricia Springer, Vessel

Traffic Management Section, Coast

Guard Eleventh District/Pacific Area,

(510) 437–2951, email:

pspringer@d11.uscg.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

We encourage you to participate in

this rulemaking by submitting

comments and related material. If you

do so, please include your name and

address, identify the docket number for

this rulemaking (CGD11–01–003),

indicate the specific section of this

document to which each comment

applies, and give the reason for each

comment. Please submit all comments

and related material in an unbound

format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches,

suitable for copying. If you would like

to know they reached us, please enclose

a stamped, self-addressed postcard or

envelope. We will consider all

comments and material received during

the comment period. We may change

this proposed rule in view of them.

Public Meeting

We do not plan to hold a public

meeting, however you may submit a

request for a meeting by writing the

Marine Safety Office 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.

Background and Purpose

Due to changing uses of the

waterways in the San Francisco Bay

region—including the closure of Naval

Air Station Alameda, the trend of larger

ships arriving in the Bay, and the

anticipated growth of faster Marine

Transportation Systems—mariners have

requested changes to several anchorage

grounds. Recent situations have

demanded increased use and space for

Anchorages 8 and 9. Vessels have had

to take anchor while awaiting the

departure of another at berth. Periodic

labor strikes and disputes have caused

delays in the turnaround time of cargo,

which in turn have filled the anchorages

to capacity. In general, these proposed

changes will allow more room for the

anchorages while enhancing safer and

more efficient use of the waterways

through San Francisco Bay and the

Carquinez Strait.

Currently, safety measures for

anchoring in the San Francisco Bay in

a dead-ship status are addressed by

individual COTP orders. The term

‘‘dead ship’’ refers to when a vessel’s

propulsion or control is unavailable for

normal operations. This rulemaking will

enhance the safety of navigation in the

area by designating a dead-ship

anchorage, away from usual areas of

navigation on the bay, and by uniformly

requiring the assistance of a tug boat

when anchoring in a dead ship status.

Also, with this proposed change to the

rule, the owner/operator will be able to

make its own arrangements for a tug

without having to gain the approval of

the COTP before proceeding to the deadship anchorage.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

Anchorage 8 and Anchorage 9 (South

San Francisco Bay)

In the past, San Francisco Bay had a

strong military presence and much

waterway traffic resulted from the

military facilities homeported in the

area. Both Anchorage 8 and 9 were

designed to accommodate large naval

vessels enroute to Naval Air Station

Alameda. The configuration of these

anchorages is no longer optimal due to

the closure of the Naval Air Station.

Commercial vessels awaiting a berth,

favorable tides, orders, or other

operational uses now use Anchorages 8

and 9. The size and draft of these

commercial vessels has steadily risen in

recent years and this trend is expected

to continue.

This proposed change includes

modifications to Anchorages 8 and 9

which enlarge the anchorage area into

the waters previously used for large

military vessel transit. Enlarging

Anchorage 8 and 9 will allow today’s

larger vessels to have better use of the

available water. Changes to Anchorage 8

would allow one to two more vessels to

anchor, and change to Anchorage 9

would allow more deep draft anchorage

space. Generally, this proposed

regulation is intended to eliminate

congestion in the anchorages and

promote safety for these new vessels.

Anchorage 24 (Carquinez Strait)

The Coast Guard conducted a

Waterways Analysis and Management

study of the San Pablo Bay and

Carquinez Strait in late 1998. One of the

recommendations of the study which

was based primarily on the comments of

mariners using the waterway, was to

make better use of the navigable waters

of the Carquinez Strait just southsoutheast of Southampton Bay. The

Coast Guard decided to establish a buoy

marking the edge of the useable channel

just west-southwest of Commodore

Jones Point, effectively shrinking the

area which is currently Anchorage 24.

Study of records from the Vessel Traffic

Service in San Francisco (which

monitors this waterway) and discussion

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 2001 / Proposed Rules 12743

with waterway users indicated that

Anchorage 24 is rarely used, and almost

never used by vessels that would

require over 10 meters of depth in the

anchorage. Furthermore, there are

adequate anchorages for vessels of this

size in the immediate vicinity. This

proposed rulemaking is intended to

provide more room for large vessels

maneuvering through Carquinez Strait.

Dead-Ship Procedure

The Coast Guard has been issuing

individual Captain of the Port (COTP)

Orders for each vessel entering ‘‘deadship’’ status (propulsion or control

unavailable for normal operations) in

the San Francisco Bay. This rulemaking

proposes to designate Anchorage 9,

which has sufficient room for such

practices, so that within this area,

owner/operators following these new

procedures will not need to obtain the

permission of the COTP before

proceeding to Anchorage 9.

Additionally, instead of issuing

individual COTP orders to require a tug

assist during heavy weather, with this

rulemaking, vessels will be required to

take such safety measures when

disabling their main propulsion at all

times, not just during heavy weather.

Regulatory Evaluation

This proposed regulation is not a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866

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. It is not

significant under the regulatory policies

and procedures of the Department of

Transportation (DOT) (44 FR 11040;

February 26, 1979).

We expect the economic impact of

this proposal to be so minimal that a full

Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph

10(e) of the regulatory policies and

procedures of DOT is unnecessary.

The proposed changes in the size and

shape of anchorage areas are slight and

the purpose is to conform to the

changed use of the harbor and to make

best use of available water. As for

implementing the cold-iron regulation,

this rulemaking simply makes official in

the regulation what has already been in

practice.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

(5 U.S.C. § 601 et seq.), we considered

whether this proposed regulation would

have significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities. The term

‘‘small entities’’ comprises small

businesses, not-for-profit organizations

that are not dominant in their fields,

and governmental jurisdictions with

populations less than 50,000.

The Coast Guard certifies under 5

U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule

will not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small

entities.

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.

Assistance for Small Entities

Under § 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 so that they can

better evaluate its effects on them and

participate in the rulemaking. 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 Lieutenant

Andrew Cheney at the address listed in

ADDRESSES above.

Collection of Information

This proposed rule would call for no

new collection of information

requirements under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501

et seq.).

Federalism

We have analyzed this proposed rule

under E.O. 13132 and have determined

that this rule does not have implications

for federalism under that Order.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) governs

the issuance of Federal regulations that

require unfunded mandates. An

unfunded mandate is a regulation that

requires a State, local, or tribal

government or the private sector to

incur direct costs without the Federal

Government’s having first provided the

funds to pay those costs. This proposed

rule would not impose an unfunded

mandate.

Taking of Private Property

This proposed rule would not effect a

taking of private property or otherwise

have taking implications under E.O.

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

E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to

minimize litigation, eliminate

ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

We have analyzed this proposed rule

under E.O. 13045, Protection of

Children from Environmental Health

Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not

an economically significant rule and

does not concern an environmental risk

to health or risk to safety that may

disproportionately affect children.

Environment

We will consider the environmental

impact of this proposed regulation.

However, under figure 2–1, paragraph

34(f) of Commandant Instruction

M16475.1C, this proposed rule is

categorically excluded from conducting

an Environmental Assessment or an

Environmental Impact Statement. In the

above referenced Coast Guard policy

instruction, the Coast Guard has

determined that no further

environmental documentation is

required when changing the size of

Special Anchorage Areas or anchorage

grounds, or when disestablishing or

reducing the size of the Area or grounds,

as proposed to take place in Anchorage

No. 24. Because the Coast Guard is

proposing to increase the size of

Anchorages No. 8 and 9, the Coast

Guard will complete a Categorical

Exclusion Document (CED) and an

Environmental Analysis Checklist.

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—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 110

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through

1236, 2030, 2035, 2071; 49 CFR 1.46; and 33

CFR 1.05–1(g).

2. § 110.224 is amended by:

a. In paragraph (a), add a new

paragraph (a)(18);

b. In paragraph (d), revise Table

110.224(D)(1) and add a new paragraph

m to Notes at the end of the table and;

c. In paragraph (d), revise paragraphs

(e)(5), (e)(6), and (e)(17) to read as

follows:

§ 110.224 San Franciso Bay, San Pablo

Bay, Carquinez Strait, Suisun Bay,

Sacramento River, San Joaquin River, and

connecting waters, CA.

(a) * * *

12744 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 2001 / Proposed Rules

(18) No vessel may anchor in a ‘‘dead

ship’’ status (propulsion or control

unavailable for normal operations) at

any anchorage other than in Anchorage

9 as specified in Table 110.224(D)(1)

without prior approval of the Captain of

the Port.

* * * * *

(d) * * *

TABLE 110.224(D)(1)

Anchorage No. General location Purpose Specific regulations

4 ................................................................. San Francisco Bay .................................... General .... Notes a, b.

5 ................................................................. ......do ........................................................ ......do ...... Do.

6 ................................................................. ......do ........................................................ ......do ...... Note a.

7 ................................................................. ......do ........................................................ ......do ...... Notes a, b, c, d, e.

8 ................................................................. ......do ........................................................ ......do ...... Notes a, b, c.

9 ................................................................. ......do ........................................................ ......do ...... Notes a, b, m.

10 ............................................................... ......do ........................................................ Naval ....... Note a.

12 ............................................................... ......do ........................................................ Explosives Notes a, f.

13 ............................................................... ......do ........................................................ ......do ...... Notes a, e, g.

14 ............................................................... ......do ........................................................ ......do ...... Notes a, f, h.

18 ............................................................... San Pablo Bay .......................................... General ....

19 ............................................................... ......do ........................................................ ......do ...... Note b.

20 ............................................................... ......do ........................................................ ......do ......

21 ............................................................... ......do ........................................................ Naval .......

22 ............................................................... Carquinez Strait ........................................ General ....

23 ............................................................... Benicia ....................................................... General .... Notes c, d, e, l.

24 ............................................................... Carquinez Strait ........................................ General .... Note j.

26 ............................................................... Suisan Bay ................................................ ......do ...... Note k.

27 ............................................................... ......do ........................................................ ......do ......

28 ............................................................... San Joaquin River ..................................... ......do ......

30 ............................................................... ......do ........................................................ Explosives

Notes: a. When sustained winds are in

excess of 25 knots each vessel greater than

300 gross tons using this anchorage shall

maintain a continuous radio watch on VHF

channel 13 (156.65 MHz) and VHF channel

14 (156.70 MHz). This radio watch must be

maintained by a person who fluently speaks

the English language.

b. Each vessel using this anchorage may

not project into adjacent channels or

fairways.

c. This anchorage is primarily for use by

vessels requiring a temporary anchorage

waiting to proceed to pier facilities or other

anchorage grounds. This anchorage may not

be used by vessels for the purpose of loading

any dangerous cargoes or combustible liquids

unless authorized by the Captain of the Port.

d. Each vessel using this anchorage may

not remain for more than 12 hours unless

authorized by the Captain of the Port.

e. Each vessel using this anchorage shall be

prepared to move within 1 hour upon

notification by the Captain of the Port.

f. The maximum total quantity of

explosives that may be on board a vessel

using this anchorage shall be limited to 3,000

tons unless otherwise authorized with the

written permission of the Captain of the Port.

g. The maximum total quantity of

explosives that may be on board a vessel

using this anchorage shall be limited to 50

tons except that, with the written permission

of the Captain of the Port, each vessel in

transit, loaded with explosives in excess of

50 tons, may anchor temporarily in this

anchorage provided that the hatches to the

holds containing explosives are not opened.

h. Each vessel using this anchorage will be

assigned a berth by the Captain of the Port

on the basis of the maximum quantity of

explosives that will be on board the vessel.

i. [Reserved]

j. Each vessel using this anchorage shall

promptly notify the Captain of the Port, upon

anchoring and upon departure.

k. See § 162.270 of this title establishing

restricted areas in the vicinity of the

Maritime Administration Reserve Fleet.

l. Vessels using this anchorage must exceed

15 feet draft, have engines on standby, and

have a pilot on board.

m. Any vessel anchoring in a ‘‘dead-ship’’

status shall have one assist tug of adequate

bollard pull on standby and immediately

available (maximum of 15 minute response

time) to provide emergency maneuvering.

When the sustained winds are 20 knots or

greater, or when the wind gusts are 25 knots

or greater, the tug must be alongside.

(e) * * *

(5) Anchorage No. 8. In San Francisco

Bay bounded by the west shore of

Alameda Island and the following lines:

Beginning at 37°47′52′′ N, 122°19′58′′ W;

thence west-northwesterly to

37°48′02.5′′ N 122°21′01.5′′ W; thence

west-southwesterly to 37°47′51.5′′ N,

122°21′40′′ W; thence southsouthwesterly to 37°47′35.5′′ N,

122°21′50′′ W; thence southsoutheasterly to 37°46′40′′ N, 122°21′23′′

W; thence easterly to 37°46′36.5′′ N,

122°19′52′′ W; thence northerly to shore

at 37°46′53′′ N, 122°19′53.5′′ W (NAD

83).

(6) Anchorage No. 9. In San Francisco

Bay bounded on the east by the eastern

shore of San Francisco Bay and on the

north by the southern shore of Alameda

Island and a line beginning at

37°46′21.5′′ N, 122°19′07′′ W; thence

westerly to 37°46′30′′ N, 122°21′56′′ W;

thence south-southeasterly to 37°41′45′′

N, 122°20′22′′ W (San Bruno Channel

Light 1); thence south-southeasterly to

37°38′38.5′′ N, 122°18′48.5′′ W (San

Bruno Channel Light 5); thence

southeasterly to 37°36′05′′ N, 122°14′18′′

W; thence northeasterly to shore at

37°37′38.5′′ N, 122°09′06.5′′ W (NAD

83).

* * * * *

(17) Anchorage No. 24. Bounded by

the north shore of Carquinez Strait and

the following points: Beginning on the

shore at Dillon Point at 38°03′44′′ N,

122°11′34′′ W; thence southeasterly to

38°03′21′′ N, 122°10′43′′ W; thence

southeasterly to 38°02′36′′ N, 122°10′03′′

W (Carquinez Strait Light 23); thence to

the shore at the Benicia City Wharf at

38°02′40′′ N, 122°09′55′′ W (NAD 83).

* * * * *

Dated: February 1, 2001.

L.G. Brudnicki,

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,

Eleventh Coast Guard District, Acting.

[FR Doc. 01–4885 Filed 2–27–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–U