Document ID: USCG-2008-0027-0001
Agency: uscg
Document Type: Rule
Title: Anchorage Regulations; Port of New York
Posted Date: 2008-05-14T04:00Z

[Federal Register: May 14, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 94)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 27775-27778]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr14my08-23]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 110

[Docket No. USCG-2008-0027]
RIN 1625-AA01

 
Anchorage Regulations; Port of New York

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to revise the boundaries of three 
anchorage grounds in Upper New York Bay adjacent to Ellis and Liberty 
Islands. This proposed action is necessary due to the proposed increase 
in size of the Safety and Security Zones surrounding Ellis and Liberty 
Islands.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before July 14, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket 
number USCG-2008-0027 to the Docket Management Facility at the U.S. 
Department of Transportation. To avoid duplication, please use only one 
of the following methods:
    (1) Online: http://www.regulations.gov.

[[Page 27776]]

    (2) 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.
    (3) Hand delivery: Room W12-140 on the Ground Floor of the West 
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The 
telephone number is 202-366-9329.
    (4) Fax: 202-493-2251.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. John J. Mauro, Commander (dpw), 
First Coast Guard District, 408 Atlantic Ave., Boston, MA 02110, 
Telephone (617) 223-8355 or e-mail at John.J.Mauro@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.

SUPPLEMENTARY 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. We have an agreement with the 
Department of Transportation (DOT) to use the Docket Management 
Facility. Please see DOT's ``Privacy Act'' paragraph below.

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 (USCG-2008-
0027), 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 
8\1/2\ 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.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking (USCG-2008-0027), indicate the specific section of this 
document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each 
comment. 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. 
You may submit your comments and material by electronic means, mail, 
fax, or delivery to the Docket Management Facility at the address under 
ADDRESSES; but please submit your comments and material by only one 
means. If you submit them by mail or delivery, submit them in an 
unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ 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. We may change this 
proposed rule in view of them.

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 at 
any time. Enter the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG-2008-0027) 
in the Search box, and click ``Go >>.'' You may also visit either the 
Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the 
DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, 
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays; or, Commander (dpw), First Coast Guard District, 408 Atlantic 
Ave., Boston, MA 02110, between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, except Federal holidays.

Privacy Act

    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 the Department of 
Transportation's Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register 
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit http://
DocketsInfo.dot.gov.

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a 
request for one to the Waterways Management Branch 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

    This proposed rule is intended to reduce confusion that would be 
caused by the proposed expansion of the adjacent safety and security 
zones surrounding Ellis and Liberty Islands (See Docket No. USCG-2007-
0074). This proposed rule would decrease the western boundaries of 
Anchorage Grounds 20-A, 20-B, and 20-C. If these revised western 
anchorage ground boundaries were not proposed then the revised safety 
and security zones would overlap with the current Anchorage Ground 
boundaries. Without these proposed revisions mariners reading the Code 
of Federal Regulations may think that they were authorized to anchor 
within the revised Ellis and Liberty Island safety and security zones. 
The purpose of this proposed rule is to conform the Anchorage Ground 
boundaries to those of the proposed security zone.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The proposed rule would revise the western boundaries of Anchorage 
Grounds 20-A, 20-B, and 20-C located east of Ellis and Liberty Islands 
on Upper New York Bay.
    The revised boundary of Anchorage Grounds 20-A and 20-B would be 
revised to correspond to what is already depicted on the National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's navigation charts.
    The revised western boundary of Anchorage Ground 20-C would be 
moved eastward 375-790 yards.
    We are proposing to revise the western boundaries of these three 
Anchorage Grounds to reduce confusion that would be caused by the 
proposed expansion of the adjacent safety and security zones 
surrounding Ellis and Liberty Islands. Without these proposed revisions 
mariners navigating by the Code of Federal Regulations may think that 
they were authorized to anchor within the revised Ellis and Liberty 
Island safety and security zones.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, 
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 rule to be so 
minimal that

[[Page 27777]]

a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
    This finding is based on the fact that this proposal conforms to 
the changing security needs of the Port of NY/NJ, the three anchorage 
grounds are rarely used by commercial vessels due to the already 
limited available area in the anchorage grounds, and the availability 
of additional anchorage grounds in Upper New York Bay and the Hudson 
River.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this proposed 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 would affect the following entities, some of 
which might be small entities: The owners or operators of recreational 
or commercial vessels intending to anchor, in a portion of Upper New 
York Bay in and around the anchorage grounds. However, decreasing the 
size of the three anchorage grounds would not have a significant 
economic impact on these entities for the following reasons: Commercial 
vessels rarely use the three anchorage grounds due to the already 
limited size and the availability of other anchorage grounds in Upper 
New York Bay and the Hudson River. Recreational vessels may still 
anchor northwest of Ellis Island and southwest of Liberty Island.
    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 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 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 John J. Mauro, Waterways 
Management Branch, First Coast Guard District Boston at (617) 223-8355 
or e-mail at John.J.Mauro@uscg.mil. The Coast Guard will not retaliate 
against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any 
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.).

Federalism

    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 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.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not effect 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 rule is not an economically significant rule and would not 
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might 
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 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.

Energy Effects

    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.

Technical Standards

    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.

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction 
M16475.lD which guides 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

[[Page 27778]]

that this action is not likely to have a significant effect on the 
human environment. We seek any comments or information that may lead to 
the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed 
rule.

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--ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS

    1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471; 1221 through 1236, 2030, 2035 and 
2071; 33 CFR 1.05-1; and Department of Homeland Security Delegation 
No. 0170.1.

    2. Amend Sec.  110.155, by revising paragraphs (d)(1), (d)(2), and 
(d)(3) to read as follows:

Sec.  110.155  Port of New York.

* * * * *
    (d) Upper Bay--(1) Anchorage No. 20-A. That area bound by the 
following coordinates: 40[deg]41'53.8'' N, 074[deg]02'11.6'' W; thence 
to 40[deg]41'54.8'' N, 074[deg]01'58.0'' W; thence to 40[deg]42'05.0'' 
N, 074[deg]01'57.0'' W; thence to 40[deg]42'06.8'' N, 074[deg]02'17.9'' 
W; thence to 40[deg]42'06.2'' N, 074[deg]02'18.8'' W; thence to 
40[deg]41'57.4'' N, 074[deg]02'07.0'' W; thence to 40[deg]41'54.4'' N, 
074[deg]02'11.2'' W.
    (i) See 33 CFR 110.155(d)(6), (d)(16), and (l).
    (2) Anchorage No. 20-B. That area bound by the following 
coordinates: 40[deg]41'45.8'' N, 074[deg]02'22.7'' W; thence to 
40[deg]41'42.3'' N, 074[deg]02'00.5'' W; thence to 40[deg]41'35.9'' N, 
074[deg]02'02.5'' W; thence to 40[deg]41'30.2'' N, 074[deg]02'06.5'' W; 
thence to 40[deg]41'41.4'' N, 074[deg]02'29.0'' W.
    (i) See 33 CFR 110.155(d)(6), (d)(16), and (l).
    (3) Anchorage No. 20-C. That area bound by the following 
coordinates: 40[deg]41'25.6'' N, 074[deg]02'09.4'' W; thence to 
40[deg]41'02.0'' N, 074[deg]02'24.6'' W; thence to 40[deg]41'09.2'' N, 
074[deg]02'39.7'' W; thence to 40[deg]41'11.0'' N, 074[deg]02'25.0'' W; 
thence to 40[deg]41'27.0'' N, 074[deg]02'20.8'' W; thence to 
40[deg]41'35.9'' N, 074[deg]02'29.6'' W.
    (i) See 33 CFR 110.155(d)(6), (d)(16), and (l).
* * * * *

    Dated: January 18, 2008.
Timothy V. Skuby,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, First Coast Guard 
District.
[FR Doc. E8-10706 Filed 5-13-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P