Quiero saber acerca de...

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 165 / Monday, August 30, 2021 / Proposed Rules occur along the Mississippi River in and around anchorage grounds and impacts to navigation and work-sites, such as the borrow site, are minimal.
6 0.2 miles shift upriver and 0.15
miles expansion of Wills Point Anchorage currently located at MM
66.567.6. The proposed location would be MM 66.767.9. The provided justification was twofold. First, the shift upriver would directly overlap with the footprint of the Mid-Breton Sediment Diversion intake structure located at MM 68 that is intended to convey sediment, fresh water, and nutrients from the Mississippi River into MidBreton Sound Basin to reduce coastal land loss and sustain surrounding wetlands. Second, the anchorage could conflict with a borrow source for marsh restoration.
The Coast Guard agrees that the proposed shift upriver and expansion of the anchorage could pose negative impacts to the Mid-Breton sediment Diversion intake structure. The Coast Guard does not agree with second part of the objection. Operations routinely occur along the Mississippi River in and around anchorage grounds and impacts to navigation and work-sites, such as the borrow site, are minimal.
7 0.5 miles establishment of Bertrandville Anchorage located at MM
68.569.0. The justification was that the anchorage, being directly upriver of the Mid-Breton Sediment Diversion intake structure, would obstruct the intake flowline and could pose a navigational safety concern.
The Coast Guard agrees that the proposed establishment of an anchorage grounds at this location could pose negative impacts to the Mid-Breton sediment Diversion intake structure.
Note: The following anchorages were mentioned in the opposition comment but are not locations that are being considered for amendment by this rulemaking at this time: Myrtle Grove anchorage and Point Celeste Anchorage.
In March 2021, two additional comments were received from stakeholders. Although these comments were received outside of the NOI
comment period, the Coast Guard chose to consider them. In one new comment, the commenter that submitted the opposing comments above withdrew their opposing comments on items 14
listed above Phoenix, Davant, Magnolia, and Boothville Anchorages, but maintained the objections raised in items 57 to the expansions of Wills Point Anchorage and Alliance Anchorage and the establishment of Bertrandville Anchorage. The second new comment proposed to remove the establishment of Bertrandville
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:31 Aug 27, 2021

Jkt 253001

Anchorage from consideration to expand Wills Point Anchorage from MM
66.567.9 and decrease the width of the anchorage to 500 feet.
After considering the stakeholder comments, the Coast Guard has decided that: 1 The width reduction at Wills Point Anchorage will be added to this proposed rulemaking, 2 the length expansions and shift at Wills Point Anchorage and the length expansion at Alliance Anchorage would not be further pursued at this time, and 3 the establishment of a new anchorage ground at Bertrandville would not be further pursued at this time.
The purpose of this proposed rule is to improve navigational safety, providing for the overall safe and efficient flow of vessel traffic and commerce, and bolster the economy through increased anchorage capacity, thus streamlining vessel throughput and increasing ship to port interactions.
The Coast Guard is proposing this rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70006.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule The Commander of Coast Guard District Eight proposes to establish one new anchorage ground and amend nine existing anchorage grounds along the LMR, ranging from MM 12 to MM 85
AHP. There are not currently adequate anchorage grounds along the river system to facilitate the safe anchorage of shallow and deep draft vessels along the LMR. This proposed action would ensure the safety and efficiency of navigation of vessels transiting in and out of the LMR. The specific anchorage boundaries are described in detail in the proposed regulatory text at the end of the document. In general, this proposed rule will have the following effects:
1. Increase the length of the Boothville Anchorage from 5.5 miles to 6.45 miles 33 CFR 110.195a4.
2. Increase the length of the Magnolia Anchorage from 2.1 miles to 2.2 miles 33 CFR 110.195a7.
3. Increase the lengh of the Davant Anchorage from 1.1 miles to 1.4 miles 33 CFR 110.195a9.
4. Decrease the width of the Wills Point Anchorage from 600 feet to 500
feet 33 CFR 110.195a11.
5. Add a note to the text of the Cedar Grove Anchorage 33 CFR
110.195a12.
6. Increase the length of the Belle Chasse Anchorage from 2.1 miles to 2.15
miles, and decrease the width from 575
feet to 500 feet 33 CFR 110.195a13.
7. Add a Note to the text of the Lower 12 Mile Anchorage 33 CFR
110.195a14.

PO 00000

Frm 00011

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

48355

8. Increase the length of the Lower 9
Mile Anchorage from 2.3 miles to 2.4
miles 33 CFR 110.195a15.
9. Increase the length of the Point Michel Anchorage from 1.4 miles to 2.2
miles 33 CFR 110.195a35.
10. Add a new anchorage, the Phoenix Anchorage, to include the area, 0.6
miles in length, along the left descending bank of the river extending from mile 57.82 to mile 58.42 Above Head of Passes. The width of the anchorage is 400 feet. The inner boundary of the anchorage is a line parallel to the nearest bank 400 feet from the waters edge into the river as measured from the LWRP. The outer boundary of the anchorage is a line parallel to the nearest bank 800 feet from the waters edge into the river as measured from the LWRP.
IV. Regulatory Analyses We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits.
This NPRM has not been designated a significant regulatory action, under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget OMB.
This proposed regulatory action is based on minimal impact to routine navigation. The proposed anchorage areas would not restrict traffic as they are located well outside the established navigation channel. Vessels would still be able to maneuver in, around and through the anchorages.
B. Impact on Small Entities The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. 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.
605b that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

E:FRFM30AUP1.SGM

30AUP1