
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 245 (Friday, December 21, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65609-65612]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-27699]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 110

[Docket Number USCG-2018-0388]
RIN 1625-AA01


Anchorage Ground; Sabine Pass, TX

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to amend the anchorage regulations 
for the Sabine Pass Channel, Sabine Pass, TX anchorage ground for the 
navigational safety of vessels entering and exiting a new liquefied 
natural gas terminal mooring basin being constructed on the eastern 
waterfront of the Sabine Pass Channel. This proposed rulemaking would 
reduce the overall size of the existing anchorage. We invite your 
comments on this proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast 
Guard on or before January 22, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2018-0388 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://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 
proposed rulemaking, call or email Mr. Scott K. Whalen, Marine Safety 
Unit Port Arthur, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 409-719-5086, email: 
Scott.K.Whalen@uscg.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
LNG Liquefied natural gas
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    In 1967, the Secretary of the Army transferred responsibility for 
certain functions, power, and duties to the Secretary of 
Transportation. Among the responsibilities transferred to the Secretary 
of Transportation was establishment and administration of water vessel 
anchorages. On December 12, 1967, the regulations for the Sabine Pass 
Anchorage Ground were

[[Page 65610]]

republished in 33 CFR part 110, without change, under this new 
authority (32 FR 17726). The regulations for the Sabine Pass Channel 
Anchorage Ground in Sabine, TX are contained in 33 CFR 110.196.
    The legal basis and authorities for this notice of proposed 
rulemaking are found in 33 U.S.C. 471, 33 CFR 1.05-1, and Department of 
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, which collectively authorize 
the Coast Guard to propose, establish, and define regulatory 
anchorages. As reflected in title 33 CFR 109.05, the Commandant of the 
U.S. Coast Guard has delegated the authority to establish anchorage 
grounds to U.S. Coast Guard District Commanders.
    As discussed earlier, administration of the Sabine Pass Anchorage 
Ground was originally transferred to the Coast Guard in 1967. Under 33 
CFR 110.196, the anchorage ground is ``for the temporary use of vessels 
of all types, but especially for naval and merchant vessels awaiting 
weather and tidal conditions favorable to the resumption of their 
voyages.'' In 2006, Cheniere Energy began construction of a liquefied 
natural gas (LNG) terminal on the eastern waterfront of the Sabine Pass 
Channel, immediately north and adjacent to the Sabine Pass Channel 
Anchorage Ground. On October 3, 2006, the Coast Guard published a 
notice of proposed rulemaking proposing to reduce the area of the 
Sabine Pass Anchorage Ground by 800 feet on the north end of the 
anchorage in order to reduce the risk of collision between anchored 
vessels and berthing and unberthing vessels at Cheniere's terminal, as 
well as to reduce the risk of grounding by providing a larger 
maneuvering area for vessels calling Cheniere's terminal (71 FR 58330). 
Both comments we received during that rulemaking process supported the 
proposed reduction on the basis of enhancing navigation safety. One 
commenter noted that ``the anchorage was infrequently used and would 
have minimal impact on the economy.'' On January 5, 2007, the Coast 
Guard published the final rule reducing the overall size of the 
anchorage consistent with the proposal (72 FR 463).
    On November 8, 2017, we received a request from Sabine Pass LNG 
L.P. to disestablish the Sabine Pass Anchorage Ground in its entirety. 
The request states that the anchorage is rarely used and its 
disestablishment would not significantly impact vessels that use the 
area.
    On June 15, 2018, the Coast Guard published a notice of inquiry; 
request for comments asking for public comments in response to Sabine 
Pass LNG's request to disestablish the anchorage ground titled 
Anchorage Ground; Sabine Pass, TX (83 FR 27932). There, we explained 
that our data showed that the anchorage is utilized an average of 27 
times each year by shallow draft vessels (for example, tows, dredges, 
and work boats) for shortening tow or for use as a staging area for 
local work projects such as dredging, and that deep draft vessels have 
not made use of the anchorage in the last decade. In particular, we 
requested public input on whether there remains a need for a regulated 
anchorage in this area, and if so, to what extent and for what purpose; 
if a reduction in size of the anchorage would meet current and 
anticipated industry needs; or if options other than disestablishment 
should also be considered.
    In response to the above inquiry, the Coast Guard received three 
comments. One commenter observed that the navigation channel and the 
anchorage overlapped, and expressed concern that the elimination of the 
anchorage ground would reduce the federally maintained channel and have 
a negative impact on maritime activities. The Coast Guard consulted 
with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and confirmed that although 
overlapping, the elimination of the anchorage ground would not alter 
the dimensions of the federal channel. Therefore, there would be no 
reduction in the dimensions of the federal channel by the 
disestablishment or the reduction of the anchorage.
    One comment was filed after the deadline, but we have added it to 
the notice of inquiry; request for comments online docket folder. That 
commenter requested additional time to comment in order to study the 
effect that the removal of the anchorage ground might have on its 
proposed upstream facility. That commenter will have an additional 
period to present their comment during the comment period provided in 
this notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
    One commenter expressed support for maintaining anchorages 
generally, and listed pros and cons for maintaining this anchorage 
ground. The Coast Guard agrees that even occasional, or limited use of 
the anchorage supports maintaining a portion of the anchorage, and that 
reducing the size of the anchorage would both provide for the safety of 
vessels using Cheniere's terminal, as well as the needs of the maritime 
community.
    The purpose of this proposed rulemaking is to reduce the overall 
dimensions of the Sabine Pass Channel anchorage ground. This action 
would provide for the safe navigation of vessels entering and exiting 
Cheniere Energy's new vessel berth while retaining a portion of the 
anchorage for use by those vessels that continue to use the anchorage 
grounds.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    Cheniere Energy is constructing a new LNG mooring basin on the 
eastern waterfront of the Sabine Pass Channel. This facility is located 
immediately south and adjacent to the existing mooring basin. Due to 
the angle that the terminal berth lays relative to the channel, vessels 
intending to berth at or depart the LNG terminal would have to utilize 
a portion of the existing anchorage to swing the vessels into position 
for mooring. Vessels anchored in the existing anchorage would be at an 
increased risk for being struck by an arriving or departing vessel.
    In order to reduce this risk, the Coast Guard proposes to reduce 
the overall size of the anchorage area. This action would reduce the 
possible conflict associated with vessels that may anchor too close to 
the entrance of the LNG terminal. It would also provide a larger 
maneuvering area for vessels arriving to or departing from the LNG 
terminal, which consequently would reduce the possibility of a 
grounding or collision with another vessel in the area.
    Vessel Traffic Service data indicates that the anchorage ground 
described in 33 CFR 110.196 is no longer used for the anchoring of 
large sea-going vessels, but that it is used infrequently by a handful 
of smaller vessels each year. The Coast Guard believes that those 
vessels that have been using the anchorage would be able to continue 
anchoring in the remaining portion of the anchorage area.
    This proposed rule would move the ``long side,'' also known as the 
channel side, shoreward and adjacent to the federal channel, shortening 
this side from 5,000 feet to approximately 2,725 feet. No other changes 
to the anchorage would be made. In order to eliminate confusion 
regarding the geographic boundary of the proposed anchorage, the 
current description would be replaced with geographic coordinates that 
would define the boundary of the anchorage. The proposed coordinates of 
the anchorage would be:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Latitude                             Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
29[deg]43'59.0'' N                    93[deg]52'08.1'' W
29[deg]44'06.8'' N                    93[deg]51'57.6'' W
29[deg]43'53.0'' N                    93[deg]51'47.1'' W
29[deg]43'36.7'' N                    93[deg]51'50.9'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A chart depicting the proposed boundaries is included in the docket 
where indicated under ADDRESSES. The

[[Page 65611]]

above coordinates would be the new west, north, east, and south corners 
of the anchorage, respectively.
    The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this 
document.

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.

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. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control 
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. 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), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt 
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on current 
information, which indicates that the anchorage area is rarely used, 
and that the overall reduction in anchorage area would not 
significantly impact those vessels desiring to use the anchorage.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, 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. 605(b) that this 
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.
    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.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small 
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect 
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you 
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, 
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that 
question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action 
of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of 
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and 
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism 
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 
13132.
    Also, 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. If 
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or 
Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. 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 (adjusted for 
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not 
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule 
elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland 
Security Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which 
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary 
determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do 
not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human 
environment. This proposed rule involves the reduction of size of the 
Sabine Pass Channel anchorage ground. It is categorically excluded from 
further review under paragraph L59(b) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS 
Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. We seek any comments or 
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant 
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, 
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment 
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If 
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which 
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or 
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be 
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate 
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted 
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the 
docket, visit https://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice.
    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, 
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's 
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up 
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a 
final rule is published.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110

    Anchorage grounds.


[[Page 65612]]


    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes 
to amend 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, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05-
1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. In Sec.  110.196, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec.  110.196   Sabine Pass Channel, Sabine Pass, TX.

    (a) The anchorage area. The water bounded by a line connecting the 
following coordinates:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Latitude                             Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
29[deg]43'59.0'' N                    93[deg]52'08.1'' W
29[deg]44'06.8'' N                    93[deg]51'57.6'' W
29[deg]43'53.0'' N                    93[deg]51'47.1'' W
29[deg]43'36.7'' N                    93[deg]51'50.9'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

    Dated: December 3, 2018.
Paul F. Thomas,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2018-27699 Filed 12-20-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


