[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 17 (Friday, January 25, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4469-4471]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-1250]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 110

[Docket Number CGD11-04-002]
RIN 1625-AA01


Anchorage Regulation; San Francisco Bay, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary anchorage area, 
designated Anchorage 8A, adjacent to existing Anchorage 8 that can be 
activated 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. Anchorage 8A may also be utilized 
during any emergency situation. This rule defines its use and location, 
and establishes procedures for activating the anchorage area and 
notifying the maritime public.

DATES: This rule is effective February 25, 2008.

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 CGD11-04-002 and are available for inspection or 
copying at Waterways Safety Branch, Sector San Francisco, 1 Yerba Buena 
Island, San Francisco, California 94130, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Eric Ramos, U.S. Coast 
Guard Sector San Francisco, Waterways Safety Branch at telephone (415) 
399-7443.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory Information

    We published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled 
``Anchorage Regulation; San Francisco Bay, CA'' in the Federal Register 
on April 1, 2004 (69 FR 17119), under docket number CGD11-04-002. Based 
on the three comments received, we reduced the size of the originally 
proposed Anchorage 8A, and the Coast Guard decided to resubmit the 
proposal to the public for further consideration.
    We published a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) 
entitled ``Anchorage Regulation; San Francisco Bay, CA'' in the Federal 
Register on October 11, 2007 (72 FR 57901). We received no comments in 
response to the SNPRM. No public meeting was requested at any time in 
the rulemaking process, and none was held.

Background and Purpose

    Anchorage 8A is necessary due to the trend toward larger ships 
arriving in San Francisco Bay, the growth of faster Marine 
Transportation Systems, increased large vessel traffic, and increased 
use of Anchorages 8 and 9 in San Francisco Bay. 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.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    The Coast Guard received the following comments in response to the 
NPRM. The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission 
(BCDC) requested that a consistency determination be submitted 
evaluating the proposal in relation to BCDC Coastal Zone Management 
Policies. A 15 CFR 930.35 Negative Determination was submitted to BCDC 
on September 18, 2006. In a letter dated October 17, 2006, BCDC 
suggested that the Coast Guard consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service (USFWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) 
regarding threatened or endangered species. A biological

[[Page 4470]]

evaluation was submitted to the USFWS and NMFS on November 21, 2006.
    On December 4, 2006, USFWS copied the Coast Guard on a 2004 
memorandum in which they found that proposed Anchorage 8A could 
adversely affect the endangered California least tern (Stern antillarum 
browni). The Coast Guard redefined the size and configuration of the 
proposed anchorage based on consultation with USFWS. As a result, USFWS 
concurred with the Coast Guard's determination of ``not likely to 
adversely affect'' as described below. BCDC also concurred that the 
proposed action would be consistent with their Amended Coastal Zone 
Management Program for San Francisco Bay.
    NMFS wrote to the Coast Guard on June 4, 2007, that ``based on the 
best available scientific information, the NMFS has determined that the 
proposed project is not likely to adversely affect listed salmonids or 
green sturgeon,'' populations which are listed as threatened or 
endangered under the Endangered Species Act and which may be present in 
the proposed Anchorage 8A area.
    Based on those comments, we reduced the size of proposed Anchorage 
8A. The NPRM originally proposed that Anchorage 8A be 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 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]45'40'' N 
and longitude 122[deg]21'23'' W; thence northwesterly along the 
southwestern border of Anchorage 8 back to the beginning point (NAD 
83). The proposed perimeter of the original size of Anchorage 8A was 
approximately six and one-half nautical miles.
    The SNPRM proposed that the new perimeter of Anchorage 8A be 
approximately four nautical miles and bounded by the following lines: 
Beginning at latitude 37[deg]47'35'' N and longitude 122[deg]21'50'' W; 
thence south-southwesterly to latitude 37[deg]47'07'' N and longitude 
122[deg]22'09'' W; thence south-southeasterly to latitude 
37[deg]46'30'' N and longitude 122[deg]21'57'' W; thence easterly along 
the northern border of Anchorage 9 to latitude 37[deg]46'26'' N and 
longitude 122[deg]20'42'' W; thence northerly to latitude 
37[deg]46'38'' N and longitude 122[deg]20'42'' W; thence westerly along 
the southern border of Anchorage 8 to latitude 37[deg]46'41'' N and 
longitude 122[deg]21'23'' W; thence northwesterly along the 
southwestern border of Anchorage 8 back to the beginning point (NAD 
83). The Coast Guard received no comments in response to the SNPRM.

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.
    The effect of this regulation will not be significant because the 
anchorage will only be used when unusual circumstances 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 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 not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities for the reasons discussed in the 
Regulatory Evaluation above.

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.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal 
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal 
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory 
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory 
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and 
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to 
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR 
(1-888-734-3247). 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 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 an expenditure, we 
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

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.

[[Page 4471]]

Protection of Children

    We have 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 may 
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. 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not 
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this 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 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 it establishes an anchorage ground.
    A final ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a final 
``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' are available in the docket 
where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110

    Anchorage grounds.

Words of Issuance and Regulatory Text

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

PART 110--ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS

0
1. Revise the authority citation for part 110 to read as follows:

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

0
2. In Sec.  110.224-
0
a. In paragraph (d), amend Table 110.224(D)(1) by adding an entry for 
``8A'' and adding a new paragraph ``n'' to the Notes section 
immediately following the table, and;
0
b. In paragraph (e), re-designate paragraphs (e)(6) through (21) as 
paragraphs (e)(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) * * *

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

    Notes: * * *
    n. This temporary anchorage 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 temporary 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'' N and longitude 
122[deg]21'50'' W; thence south-southwesterly to latitude 
37[deg]47'07'' N and longitude 122[deg]22'09'' W; thence south-
southeasterly to latitude 37[deg]46'30'' N and longitude 
122[deg]21'57'' W; thence easterly along the northern border of 
Anchorage 9 to latitude 37[deg]46'26'' N and longitude 122[deg]20'42'' 
W; thence northerly to latitude 37[deg]46'38'' N and longitude 
122[deg]20'42'' W; thence westerly along the southern border of 
Anchorage 8 to latitude 37[deg]46'41'' 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: December 20, 2007.
C.E. Bone,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard 
District.
 [FR Doc. E8-1250 Filed 1-24-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P