[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 63 (Thursday, April 1, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17119-17122]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-7273]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 110

[CCGD11-04-002]
RIN 1625-AA01


Anchorage Regulation; San Francisco Bay, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to create an anchorage ground 
adjacent to

[[Page 17120]]

existing Anchorage 8 that can be used by Coast Guard Vessel Traffic 
Services (VTS) when the number of vessels requesting to anchor in 
Anchorages 8 and 9 exceeds the capacity of these two anchorages. This 
area has been used twice in the past and the Captain of the Port has 
recognized the potential for needing this anchorage ground in the 
future. Having the anchorage ground published in the Federal Register 
will allow the Coast Guard to define its use and location, and 
establish procedures for notifying the maritime public.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before June 1, 2004.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to the Waterways 
Management Branch, U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office San Francisco 
Bay, Coast Guard Island, Alameda, California 94501. The Waterways 
Management Branch 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 or 
copying at the Waterways Management Branch between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Doug Ebbers, Waterways 
Management Branch, U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office San Francisco 
Bay, (510) 437-3073.

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 (CCGD11-04-
002), 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 
that your submission 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 now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a 
request for a meeting by writing 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 separate notice in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

    Due to the trend toward larger ships arriving in San Francisco Bay 
and the growth of faster marine transportation systems, use of 
Anchorages 8 and 9 in San Francisco Bay has increased. In addition to 
more vessels needing to anchor while awaiting the departure of other 
vessels at berth, periodic labor strikes and disputes have caused 
delays in the turnaround time of cargo, and filled Anchorages 8 and 9 
to capacity. On two occasions, Vessel Traffic Services San Francisco 
has used an anchorage ground around Anchorage 8 to accommodate vessels 
when the safe capacity of Anchorages 8 and 9 has been exceeded. 
According to 33 CFR 160.5, Commanding Officers, Vessel Traffic Services 
are delegated authority under 33 CFR 1.01-30 to issue anchorage orders 
to vessels required to participate in a Vessel Traffic Service.
    In this proposed rulemaking, to address the continuing need for 
additional anchorage space, the Coast Guard is proposing to create a 
new anchorage ground 8A, which can be used by VTS San Francisco when 
needed.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR 110.224 to add Anchorage 
8A, which can be used as needed by VTS San Francisco. This anchorage 
ground, located immediately west and south of existing Anchorage 8, 
will allow VTS San Francisco to accommodate the safe anchoring of 
vessels when the safe capacity of Anchorages 8 and 9 has been exceeded.

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. It is not ``significant'' 
under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of 
Homeland Security (DHS).
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so 
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies 
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. The effect of this regulation 
will not be significant because the anchorage will only be used when 
unusual circumstance require that it be activated, recreational traffic 
can still traverse the anchorage area when necessary, and the temporary 
anchorage area only takes up a small portion of San Francisco Bay. In 
addition, this temporary anchorage area has been used twice in the past 
to accommodate vessels during labor disputes that resulted in 
anchorages 8 and 9 being filled to capacity.

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 not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
for the reasons discussed in the Regulatory Evaluation above.
    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 (Public Law 104-121), we offer to assist small 
entities in understanding the proposed rule so that they could better 
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the 
proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, or 
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its 
provisions or options for compliance, please contact Lieutenant Doug 
Ebbers, Waterways Management Branch, U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety 
Office San Francisco Bay, (510) 437-3073.

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).

[[Page 17121]]

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 will not result in such an 
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this proposed 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 proposed rule is not an economically significant rule and 
does 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.

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction 
M16475.1D, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and 
have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit 
the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the 
Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under 
figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(f), of the Instruction, from further 
environmental documentation because we are changing an anchorage 
regulation.
    A draft ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a draft 
``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' will be available in the docket 
where indicated under ADDRESSES. Comments on this section will be 
considered before we make the final decision on whether the rule should 
be categorically excluded from further environmental review.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110

    Anchorage grounds.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposed 
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(g); Department of Homeland Security Delegation 
No. 0170.1.

    2. In Sec.  110.224--
    a. In paragraph (d), revise Table 110.224(D)(1) by adding 
immediately following entry for Anchorage No. 8, a new entry for 
Anchorage No. 8A and add a new note n'' to notes at the end of the 
table and;
    b. In paragraph (e), renumber paragraphs (6) through (21) as 
paragraphs (7) through (22) and add new paragraph (e)(6) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  110.224  San Francisco Bay, San Pablo Bay, Carquinez Strait, 
Suisun Bay, Sacramento River, San Joaquin River, and connecting waters, 
CA.

* * * * *
    (d)(1) * * *

                                               Table 110.224(D)(1)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Anchorage No.              General location           Purpose               Specific regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
8A...............................  ......do............  ......do............  Notes a, b, c, n.
 
                                                 * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: * * *.

    n. This anchorage ground will be activated by VTS San Francisco 
when Anchorages 8 and 9 are at capacity and additional anchorage 
capacity in the vicinity of Alameda is required. VTS will notify a 
vessel that this anchorage is activated and available for use when 
anchorages 8 and 9 are full, and a vessel requests permission from VTS 
to anchor in anchorage 8 or 9.
    (e) * * *
    (6) Anchorage No. 8A. In San Francisco Bay bounded by the following 
lines: Beginning at latitude 37[deg]47'35.5'' N and longitude 
122[deg]21'50'' W; thence south-southwesterly to latitude 
37[deg]47'05'' N and longitude 122[deg]22'07.5'' W; thence south-
southeasterly to latitude 37[deg]46'30'' N and longitude 
122[deg]21'56'' W; thence easterly along the northern border of 
Anchorage 9 to

[[Page 17122]]

latitude 37[deg]46'21.5'' N and longitude 122[deg]19'07'' W; thence 
northerly to latitude 37[deg]46'34.5'' N and longitude 
122[deg]19'05.5'' W; thence westerly to latitude 37[deg]46'36.5'' N and 
longitude 122[deg]19'52'' W; thence westerly along the southern border 
of anchorage 8 to latitude 37[deg]46'40'' N and longitude 
122[deg]21'23'' W; thence northwesterly along the southwestern border 
of anchorage 8 back to the beginning point (NAD 83).
* * * * *

    Dated: March 1, 2004.
Kevin J. Eldridge,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, District Commander, Eleventh Coast 
Guard District.
[FR Doc. 04-7273 Filed 3-31-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P