Document ID: USCG-2021-0345-0054
Agency: uscg
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Vessel Traffic Assessment: Near Point Mugu, San Francisco Bay, Humboldt Bay, and Morro Bay, CA
Posted Date: 2022-02-25T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 38 (Friday, February 25, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10757-10760]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03990]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2021-0345]

Vessel Traffic Assessment: Near Point Mugu, San Francisco Bay, 
Humboldt Bay, and Morro Bay, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notification of inquiry; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: On July 28, 2021, U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) Pacific Area Command 
issued the Pacific Coast-Port Access Route Study (PAC-PARS) in the 
Federal Register directing USCG District Eleven and USCG District 
Thirteen to complete a PARS on the Pacific coast. In support of the 
PAC-PARS, USCG District Eleven has identified four areas to evaluate 
activities within its area of responsibility. USCG District Eleven 
requests public comments regarding vessel traffic patterns in the areas 
near Point Mugu and south of the Channel Islands in the Pacific Missile 
Range, San Francisco Bay, and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management 
(BOEM) Humboldt Bay and Morro Bay offshore Wind Energy Areas (WEAs). 
Information received will be used to make recommendations regarding 
establishing safety routing measures to improve waterway operations and 
vessel movement along the California coast.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received on or before May 
26, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-

[[Page 10758]]

2021-0345 using the Federal portal 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 
notification of study, call or email Mr. Tyrone Conner, Eleventh Coast 
Guard District (dpw), U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (510) 437-2968, email 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
U.S.C. United States Code
PAC Pacific Area Command
PARS Port Access Route Study
PAC-PARS Pacific Coast-Port Access Route Study
EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone
RNA Regulated Navigation Areas
TSS Traffic Separation Scheme
USCG United States Coast Guard
BOEM Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
WEA Wind Energy Area
NOI Notice of Inquiry
IMO International Maritime Organization
DOD Department of Defense
OCS Outer Continental Shelf

II. Background and Purpose

    The Coast Guard is conducting a Port Access Route Study (PARS) to 
evaluate safe access routes for the movement of vessel traffic 
proceeding to or from ports or places along the western seaboard of the 
United States and to determine whether Fairways and Traffic Separation 
Schemes for vessels and/or International Maritime Organization (IMO) 
recommended routes should be established, adjusted and/or modified. The 
goal of the Pacific Coast-PARS (PAC-PARS) is to enhance maritime safety 
by examining shipping routes and waterway uses, and, to the extent 
practicable, reconcile the paramount right of navigation within 
designated port access routes with other waterway uses such as the 
development of aquaculture farms, offshore renewable energy, commercial 
spaceports/re-entry sites, marine sanctuaries, ports supporting Panamax 
vessels, potential LNG ports, Pacific Missile Range, and additional 
commercial vessel traffic. During the preliminary information-gathering 
portion, the areas near Point Mugu and south of the Channel Islands in 
the Pacific Missile Range, San Francisco Bay, and both BOEM WEAs were 
identified as high-interest zones for traffic congestion and navigation 
safety.
    A. Requirements for PARS: Chapter 700, Ports and Waterways Safety, 
of Title 46 of the United States Code, specifically 46 U.S.C. 70003 
directs the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard 
resides, in order to provide safe access routes for the movement of 
vessel traffic proceeding to or from ports or places subject to the 
jurisdiction of the United States, to designate necessary fairways and 
traffic separation schemes for vessels operating in the territorial sea 
of the United States and high seas approaches, outside the territorial 
sea, to such ports or places. Such a designation shall recognize, 
within the designated area, the paramount right of navigation over all 
other uses.
    46 U.S.C. 70003 requires the Secretary to: (1) Undertake a study of 
the potential traffic density and the need for safe access routes for 
vessels in any area for which fairways or traffic separation schemes 
are proposed or that may otherwise be considered and publish notice of 
such undertaking in the Federal Register; (2) in consultation with the 
Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of 
Commerce, the Secretary of the Army, and the Governors of affected 
States, as their responsibilities may require, take into account all 
other uses of the area under consideration, including, as appropriate, 
the exploration for, or exploitation of, oil, gas, or other mineral 
resources, the construction or operation of deep-water ports or other 
structures on or above the seabed or subsoil of the submerged lands or 
the Outer Continental Shelf of the United States, the establishment or 
operation of marine or estuarine sanctuaries, and activities involving 
recreational or commercial fishing; and (3) to the extent practicable, 
reconcile the need for safe access routes with the needs of all other 
reasonable uses of the area involved.
    46 U.S.C. 70003 requires the Secretary to proceed expeditiously to 
complete any study undertaken; and after completion of such a study, to 
promptly issue a notice of proposed rulemaking for the designation 
contemplated or publish in the Federal Register a notice of rulemaking 
that no designation is contemplated as a result of the study and the 
reason for such determination.
    B. Previous Port Access Route Studies: The approaches to San 
Francisco, CA, were last studied in 2009, and the final results were 
published in the Federal Register on June 20, 2011 (76 FR 35805). The 
study was conducted to evaluate the continued applicability and the 
potential need for modifications to the vessel routing to help reduce 
the risk of marine casualties and increase the efficiency of vessel 
traffic in the study area. All USCG publications regarding this study 
can be found by searching docket USCG-2009-0576 on https://www.regulations.gov. The Port Access Route Study for the Strait of Juan 
de Fuca, Haro Strait, Boundary Pass, Rosario Strait, the Strait of 
Georgia, and adjacent waters was completed in November 2000, published 
in the Federal Register on January 22, 2001 (66 FR 6514). The study was 
conducted to evaluate the need for modifications to current vessel 
routing and traffic management measures due to increased maritime 
activities. However, there has never been a PARS conducted for the 
entire Pacific Coast of the United States designed to analyze all 
vessel traffic proceeding to and from all the ports and transiting 
through the United States Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).
    C. Need for a New Port Access Route Study: Given the current 
development of aquaculture farms, offshore renewable energy, commercial 
spaceports/re-entry sites, expansion of marine sanctuaries, development 
of ports supporting Panamax vessels, potential LNG ports, National 
Security Measures, DOD testing and training, and commercial traffic, 
the Coast Guard is conducting the PAC-PARS (Washington, Oregon, and 
California). This PAC-PARS will focus on the coastwise shipping routes 
and near coastal users of the Pacific Ocean between the coastal ports 
and the approaches to coastal ports within the EEZ. This PAC-PARS will 
help the Coast Guard determine what impact, if any, the siting, 
construction, and operation of new developments may have on existing 
near coastal users of the Pacific Ocean. To ensure the safety of 
navigation, the Coast Guard will determine the impacts of rerouting 
traffic, funneling traffic, and placement of structures that may 
obstruct navigation. Some of the effects to be considered are increased 
vessel traffic density, offshore vessel routing, fixed navigation 
obstructions, underwater cable hazards, and economic impacts. Analyzing 
the various results will require a thorough understanding of the 
interrelationships of shipping, other commercial and recreational uses, 
Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) development, and port operations.

III. Information Requested

    Timelines, Study Area, Focus, and Process: Coast Guard Eleventh 
District will conduct further analysis in the following areas, which 
may take approximately three to six months to complete. The study will 
focus on vessel traffic and navigation mitigation

[[Page 10759]]

techniques to improve and support safe navigation transits within the 
area. It will encompass the areas bound by the aforementioned 
coordinates.
    This is a Notification of Inquiry (NOI) to assess the vessel 
traffic and routing in the waters indicated by the supplemental PDF, 
``Chart of District Eleven PAC-PARS Focus Areas'' (available in the 
docket), and bound by the following coordinates:

Area 1: BOEM HUMBOLDT BAY WEA:
    40-37.06N 124-35.22W;
    40-37.62N 125-15.54W;
    41-14.16N 125-15.54W;
    41-13.61N 124-15.42W.
Area 2: SAN FRANCISCO BAY:
    36-16.27N 121-54.24W;
    36-10.36N 123-18.54W;
    38-06.78N 124-29.34W;
    38-33.93N 123-30.12W.
Area 3: BOEM MORRO BAY WEA:
    35-53.90N 122-53.22W;
    35-57.09N 121-45.18W;
    35-20.35N 121-17.04W;
    35-18.54N 122-24.60W.
Area 4: POINT MUGU:
    33-46.29N 120-07.80W;
    33-53.04N 119-22.80W;
    33-28.62N 118-36.48W;
    33-2.922N 118-35.10W;
    32-50.54N 119-17.58W;
    32-13.79N 121-44.22W;
    34-19.54N 123-07.02W;
    35-14.83N 121-01.86W;
    34-59.52N 120-41.52W;
    33-58.98N 120-39.48W.

    We will analyze current and historical vessel traffic, fishing 
vessel information, agency and stakeholder experience in vessel traffic 
management, navigation, ship handling, and effects of weather. We 
encourage you to participate by submitting comments in response to this 
proposed rule.
    We will publish the results of the inquiry in the Federal Register 
under the same docket USCG-2021-0345. It is possible that the results 
may validate existing vessel routing measures and conclude that no 
changes are necessary. It is also possible that the study may recommend 
one or more changes to enhance navigational safety and the efficiency 
of vessel traffic. The recommendations may consider the development of 
future rulemakings or appropriate international agreements.
    Possible Scope of the Recommendations: We are attempting to 
determine the scope of any safety concerns associated with vessel 
transits in the focus areas. The information gathered during the study 
should help us identify concerns and mitigating solutions. 
Considerations might include: (1) Maintain the current vessel routing 
measures; (2) modify the existing traffic separation schemes; (3) 
create one or more precautionary areas; (4) create one or more inshore 
traffic zones; (5) establish area(s) to be avoided; (6) create deep-
draft routes; (7) establish Regulated Navigation Areas (RNA) with 
specific vessel operating requirements to ensure safe navigation near 
shallow water; (8) identify any other appropriate ships' routing 
measures; (9) use this study for future decisions on routing measures 
or other maritime traffic considerations and; (10) use this study to 
inform other agencies concerning the impacts of their future endeavors.
    Questions: To help us conduct the area study, we request 
information that will help answer the following questions, although 
comments on other issues addressed in this notice are also welcome. In 
responding to a question, please explain your reasons for each answer 
and follow the instructions under ``Public Participation and Request 
for Comments'' below.
    These questions were generated with the purpose of eliciting 
information for the four focus areas alone. Any information provided 
should be directly related to one or more of the four focus areas.
    General Questions (all four areas):
    (1) What are the demographics of the vessel your organization 
represents? (Vessel length, vessel draft, vessel type, etc.)
    (2) Which of the four areas do you transit through? Where are your 
transit routes?
    (3) What criteria are used in determining your transit routes?
    (4) How are your vessel routes affected by seasonal weather 
patterns, storms, or other adverse environmental conditions you have 
experienced in the focus areas? Please explain.
    (5) What navigational hazards do vessels operating in the focus 
areas face? Please describe.
    (6) Are there strains on the current vessel routing systems?
    (7) Do you perceive increasing traffic density to cause increased 
navigational risk?
    (8) What is your prediction of future growth with traffic density? 
Please describe.
    (9) What is the minimum safe width of coastwise traffic separation 
schemes and lanes considering the traffic density and other conditions 
of the focus areas?
    (10) Are modifications to existing vessel routing measures needed 
to address hazards and improve traffic efficiency in the study area? If 
so, please describe.
    (11) Is your organization open to traffic management strategies 
(TSS, Fairways, IMO recommended routes)? Please elaborate.
    (12) What costs and benefits are associated with traffic management 
strategies?
    (13) What traffic management strategies do you think are most cost-
effective?
    (14) What traffic management strategies do you think are most 
detrimental to cost-effectiveness?
    (15) What impacts, both positive and negative, would changes to 
existing routing measures or new routing measures have on the study 
area?
    (16) What improvements to waterway management would you like to 
see? If none, why?
    (17) What current waterway operations affect navigation? How 
(details please)?
    (18) Do the marine sanctuaries affect your navigation routing 
plans?
    (19) What is a safe and appropriate distance between vessel traffic 
and major projects such as aquaculture farms and wind farms?
    (20) Are there any results you would like to see in the completed 
PAC-PARS study?
    (21) Would you be interested in attending virtual presentations of 
findings?
    Pacific Missile Range off Point Mugu and Vandenberg Space Force 
Base:
    (22) Do you typically transit to the north or to the south of the 
Channel Islands?
    (23) Do the operations surrounding the Pacific Missile Range off 
Vandenberg Space Force Base and the Point Mugu zone affect your routing 
plans and vessel movement? How?
    (24) How often are you displaced by hazardous operations, testing, 
and military training in the Pacific Missile Range? Please describe.
    BOEM Wind Energy Areas (Humboldt Bay and Morro Bay)
    (25) What navigational challenges do you foresee with the 
implementation of BOEM's Wind Energy Areas (WEAs)?
    (26) Do you currently transit through the proposed BOEM WEAs? 
Please describe.
    (27) Do you think the Coast Guard should create designated 
fairways, traffic separation schemes for vessels, or exclusion/
restricted areas around wind farms?
    (28) Would you prefer wind farm exclusion/restricted areas where 
you can navigate anywhere outside of the wind farm, or would you prefer 
to restrict your navigation inside designated coastwise fairways and 
traffic separation schemes through the wind farms? Please explain.
    Is there any additional information, unrelated to any specific 
question

[[Page 10760]]

above, that you believe the USCG needs to consider?

IV. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments in response to this 
notification of inquiry through the Federal Decision Making portal at 
https://www.regulations.gov. To do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2021-0345 in the search box, and click 
``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the Search Results column, 
and click on it. Then click on the Comment option. In your submission, 
please include the docket number for this notice of inquiry and provide 
a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. If your material cannot 
be submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in 
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for 
alternate instructions.
    To view documents mentioned in this notice of inquiry as being 
available in the docket, find the docket as described in the previous 
paragraph, and then select ``Supporting & Related Material'' in the 
Document Type column. Public comments will also be placed in our online 
docket and can be viewed by following instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked Questions web page. We review all 
comments received, but we may choose not to post off-topic, 
inappropriate, or duplicate comments that we receive.
    We accept anonymous comments. Comments we post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal information you have 
provided. For more about privacy and submissions in response to this 
document, see DHS's eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, 
March 11, 2020).
    Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up for email 
alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted.
    This notice is published under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 552(a).

    Dated: February 17, 2022.
B.K. Penoyer,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eleventh District.
[FR Doc. 2022-03990 Filed 2-24-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P