[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 9 (Thursday, January 13, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2353-2355]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-655]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 110

[CGD01-04-004]
1625-AA01


Anchorage Grounds; Buzzards Bay, MA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard hereby establishes anchorage regulations for 
Buzzards Bay, Nantucket Sound, and adjacent waters of Massachusetts by 
relocating anchorage ground ``L'' in Buzzards Bay to an area near 
Naushon Island, MA. This action is intended to increase the safety of 
life and property on Buzzards Bay, improve the safety of anchored 
vessels in anchorage ``L'', and provide for the overall safe and 
efficient flow of vessel traffic and commerce along the newly 
established Recommended Traffic Route for Deep Draft Vessels. This 
regulation will maintain the original shape and dimension of anchorage 
``L'' but move the anchorage to a new location within Buzzards Bay.

DATES: This rule is effective February 14, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as 
documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, 
are part of docket [CGD01-02-027] and are available for inspection or 
copying at First Coast Guard District, 408 Atlantic Ave., Boston, 
Massachusetts 02110 between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. John J. Mauro, Commander (oan), 
First Coast Guard District, 408 Atlantic Ave., Boston, MA 02110, 
Telephone (617) 223-8355, e-mail: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory Information

    On April 16, 2004, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) entitled Anchorage Grounds; Buzzards Bay, MA in the Federal 
Register (69 FR 20568). We received one comment on the proposed rule. 
No public hearing was requested and none was held.

Background and Purpose

    In light of significant oil spills in Rhode Island Sound in 1996 
and Buzzards Bay in 2003, the Coast Guard investigated methods of 
improving navigational safety in Buzzards Bay. The Coast Guard 
conducted a Port and Waterways Safety Assessment (PAWSA) to collect 
input on potential navigational safety improvements in Buzzards Bay 
from the local maritime community. After studying the issue and 
collecting mariner input, the Coast Guard concluded that a Recommended 
Traffic Route for Deep Draft vessels in Buzzards Bay should be 
implemented to improve navigation safety in this area.
    Presently, there are two designated anchorage grounds in Buzzards 
Bay; anchorage ``L'' and anchorage ``M'', whose locations are described 
in 33 CFR 110.140(b)(3) and 33 CFR 110.140(b)(4), respectively. The 
present location of anchorage ``L'' puts it directly in the path of the 
Recommended Route for Deep Draft vessels entering or leaving the Cape 
Cod Canal via Cleveland Ledge Channel depicted on current versions of 
NOAA nautical charts in the area. Thus, this rule is needed to move 
anchorage ``L'' to a new and safer location. Although the location of 
anchorage ``L'' will change, its size and shape will remain the same.
    The Coast Guard has defined the anchorage areas contained herein 
with the advice and consent of the Army Corps of Engineers, New England 
District, located at 696 Virginia Rd., Concord, MA 01742.
    This regulation will not exclude fishing activity or the transit of 
vessels in the anchorage grounds. The Coast Guard expects no increase 
in the amount of vessels utilizing anchorage ``L'' as a result of this 
change in its location.

[[Page 2354]]

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    We received one letter commenting on the proposed rule. The 
Coalition for Buzzards Bay wrote to support the proposed new location. 
The language in the final rule is changed from the proposed language 
only to make the bounds of the anchorage more clear. The location, 
size, and shape of the anchorage are unaltered by the change in 
language.

    Note: That this language varies slightly from that for anchorage 
``M'', at 33 CFR 110.140(b)(4). We intend to issue a separate 
technical correction in the future to align the description of 
anchorage ``M'' with anchorage ``L''.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This 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).
    This conclusion is based upon the fact that there are no fees, 
permits, or specialized requirements for the maritime industry to 
utilize this anchorage area. The regulation is solely for the purpose 
of advancing the safety of maritime commerce.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this 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 rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.
    This rule will have minimal economic impact on vessels operated by 
small entities. This conclusion is based upon the fact that there are 
no restrictions for entry or use of the anchorage targeting small 
entities. This regulation only relocates one existing anchorage area.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small 
entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate 
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. If the 
rule will affect your small business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or 
options for compliance, please contact John J. Mauro at the address 
listed in ADDRESSES above.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls 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 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 rule will not result in such expenditure, we do 
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. This rule 
will not impose an unfunded mandate.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will 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 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

    The Coast Guard has analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, 
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks. This 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 rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, 
because it does 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 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. It has not been designated by the Administrator of the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not 
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    The Coast Guard has considered the environmental impact of this 
rule and concluded that, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(f) of 
Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is categorically excluded 
from further environmental documentation. A ``Categorical Exclusion 
Determination'' is available in the docket for inspection

[[Page 2355]]

or copying where indicated under ADDRESSES.
    This rule relocates one existing anchorage area to the East of the 
Recommended Traffic Route for Deep Draft Vessels. This designated 
anchorage will enhance safety in the waters of Buzzards Bay, MA by 
relieving vessel congestion within the bay. Thus, relocating this 
designated anchorage would provide a safer approach to the Cape Cod 
Canal by deep draft vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110

    Anchorage grounds.


0
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 
CFR part 110 as follows:

PART 110--ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows:

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


0
2. Section 110.140(b)(3) is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  110.140  Buzzards Bay, Nantucket Sound, and adjacent waters, 
Mass.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) Anchorage L. The area of water bounded by lines connecting the 
following points: 41[deg]30'11'' N, 070[deg]48'10'' W to 41[deg]30'46'' 
N, 070[deg]48'45'' W, to 41[deg]32'24'' N, 070[deg]45'50'' W to 
41[deg]31'48'' N, 070[deg]45'15'' W and thence to start.
* * * * *

    Dated: December 22, 2004.
David P. Pekoske,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 05-655 Filed 1-12-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P