[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 26 (Thursday, February 9, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9978-9982]
[FR Doc No: 2017-02702]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 26 / Thursday, February 9, 2017 /
Proposed Rules

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2015-0051]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zones; Ice Covered Waterways in the Fifth Coast Guard
District

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: On July 9, 2015, the Coast Guard published a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to establish a regulated navigation area
(RNA) on the navigable waters of the Fifth Coast Guard District to
allow the Coast Guard to impose and enforce restrictions on vessels
operating within the RNA where a threat to navigation exists due to ice
covered waterways. Based on consideration of the comments received in
response to that NPRM and further analysis, the Coast Guard is now
proposing to establish 11 safety zones on certain navigable waters of
the Fifth Coast Guard District instead of 1 RNA. This action is
necessary to promote navigational safety, provide for the safety of
life and property, and facilitate the reasonable demands of commerce
when navigation safety is threatened due to ice covered waterways. We
invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before April 10, 2017.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2015-0051 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email LCDR Tiffany Johnson, Fifth Coast Guard District, U.S.
Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
RNA Regulated Navigation Area
SNPRM Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

A. Regulatory History and Information

    The purpose of this proposed regulation is to mitigate the
potential threat ice poses to the maritime public in the Fifth Coast
Guard District by implementing control measures on vessels operating in
certain ice-covered waterways. During an average or severe winter, the
presence of ice in waterways presents numerous hazards to vessels. Such
hazards include vessels becoming beset or dragged off course, sinking
or grounding and creating hazards to navigation. The presence of ice in
a waterway may hamper a vessel's ability to maneuver and impose
additional loads on a vessel's hull, propulsion system and appendages.
Blockage of sea suctions can cause the main engine cooling system to
overheat, requiring reduced power to be used or the engine to be shut
down completely. Visual aids to navigation may become submerged,
destroyed, or moved off station, potentially misleading the vessel
operator to unsafe waters. Vessels operating in these hazardous
conditions could introduce a clear and present danger to the maritime
public and environment.

B. Discussion of Comments on NPRM and Changes

    On July 9, 2015, the Coast Guard published an NPRM titled Regulated
Navigation Area; Ice Covered Waterways in the Fifth Coast Guard
District (80 FR 39403). The purpose of that proposed regulated
navigation area (RNA) was to mitigate the aforementioned potential
threat ice poses to the maritime public in the Fifth Coast Guard
District by implementing control measures on vessels of certain
characteristics. We invited comments on our proposed regulatory action
related to that RNA. During the comment period that ended October 7,
2015, we received a total of six comments coming from six submitters.
No public meeting was requested, and none was held.
    Five comments assert that there is no need for this rule because
existing Coast Guard methods for ensuring vessel safety are adequate
given the practices they have witnessed while operating in the Fifth
Coast Guard District in the past. The Coast Guard disagrees that no
rule is needed to implement and enforce restrictions on vessels
operating where a threat to navigation exists due to ice covered
waterways. In the past, Captains of the Ports (COTP) in the Fifth Coast
Guard District ensured navigation and vessel safety in ice-covered
waterways by establishing temporary safety zones or using other COTP
authorities.
    This proposed rule would establish 11 permanent safety zones and
eliminate the need for the Coast Guard to publish several temporary
final rules throughout future ice seasons. The safety zones proposed in
this SNPRM are the most appropriate from a regulatory perspective and
will ensure consistency throughout the Fifth Coast Guard District.
While the regulatory method may be different, the effect on the
regulated public is largely the same in that there will be restrictions
on navigating based upon prevailing ice conditions and vessel hull,
propulsion, sea suction and appendage characteristics.
    One comment specifically stated that the Coast Guard already has
sufficient authority to control vessel movements under 33 CFR part 6,
and therefore the proposed RNA is not needed. The Coast Guard finds
relying solely on the authority provided by 33 CFR part 6 is not
feasible when ice presents hazardous conditions. Sole reliance on this
authority involving the protection and security of vessels, harbors,
and waterfront facilities would require the COTP to take individualized
action against every vessel desiring to operate in the area, which is
counter to public interest due to the significant amount of time it
would take to issue and administer an effective amount of orders.
    Two comments noted that the decision to transit an ice-covered

waterway is best made by an operator that is aware of the prevalent ice
conditions and the proposed RNA is not needed. In addition to the
aforementioned reasons why this rule is needed, the COTP considers the
holistic risk on the waterway when restricting maritime traffic due to
ice-related hazards, which is not the responsibility of any individual
vessel or class of vessels. In fact, despite vessel restrictions being
in place in March of 2015, two commercial vessels operating in the
Fifth Coast Guard District during that time were negatively affected by
ice, resulting in an emergency condition onboard that presented a risk
to other operators and the surrounding marine environment. This SNPRM
proposed rule would afford vessels operators that believe they can
safety operate in the prevailing conditions the opportunity to request
permission from the COTP to deviate from the restrictions.
    Three comments expressed concern regarding the burden this
regulation would place on the Coast Guard. The safety zones established
by this proposed rule would eliminate the need for the Coast Guard to
publish several temporary final rules to establish safety zones
throughout future periods of ice accumulation. The Coast Guard also
concluded that the notification activities associated with this rule do
not place any additional burden on the Coast Guard when compared with
implementing other COTP control measures. Furthermore, this regulation
would be a permanent rule, would provide for public participation in
the rulemaking process, and would establish uniform ice condition
control measures to be implemented in the Fifth Coast Guard District to
facilitate safe navigation.
    One comment received posited the proposed RNA would result in undue
economic hardship for commercial vessels. The Coast Guard weighs many
factors in its decision to restrict vessel operations in a waterway,
specifically focused on ensuring the safe, secure, and environmentally
sound transportation of people, goods, and material by water. The Coast
Guard has and will continue to use all available resources to safely
and efficiently monitor the conditions of the designated waters of the
safety zones to minimize impact to waterway users.
    Two comments were received that the geographic area defined in the
NPRM would be difficult for the Coast Guard to implement or enforce due
its size. As stated in this SNPRM, the proposed regulated area has been
delineated into 11 safety zones rather than 1 RNA. The cognizant COTPs
enforce a wide array of control measures in these same geographic
areas.
    An anonymous commenter focused on North Carolina waters in the
Fifth Coast Guard District. That person's comment recommended that
regulators consider inland ponds, streams, marshes, rivers, lakes,
reservoirs, and other waters, and concluded that the rule proposed in
the NPRM--which would cover all navigable waters in the Fifth Coast
Guard District, including those in North Carolina--appears redundant,
and difficult to interpret or enforce outside of major seaport areas in
North Carolina. We were unable to obtain clarification from this
anonymous commenter regarding the desired consideration to be applied
to the various waters mentioned, but we believe this SNPRM, which does
not propose to regulate any North Carolina waters, addresses this
commenter's concerns.
    Upon review of the comments and further analysis, the Coast Guard
is proposing to change the regulatory method by which control measures
would be implemented from 1 regulated navigation area to 11 safety
zones throughout the navigable waters of the Fifth Coast Guard
District. The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under authority in
33 U.S.C. 1231.

III. Discussion of SNPRM Proposed Rule

    This proposed rule would establish 11 safety zones on the navigable
waters of the Fifth Coast Guard District. We have placed an
illustration of these safety zones in the docket for this rulemaking.
This proposed rule would allow the Coast Guard to impose and enforce
restrictions on vessels operating within the safety zones where a
threat to navigation exists due to ice covered waterways. This action
is necessary to promote navigational safety, provide for the safety of
life and property, and facilitate the reasonable demands of commerce.
Vessels transiting in protected waters, such as within a marina, harbor
or basin, for the purposes of facilitating icebreaking operations and
protecting infrastructure and property would be exempt from the
controls. Vessels capable of operating in the prevailing ice condition
outside of protected waters may be allowed to operate within the safety
zones if granted permission by the cognizant COTP.
    Under this proposed rule, a vessel would need permission from the
cognizant COTP or the District Commander to enter or continue
transiting a zone if, when approaching or after entering a safety zone,
the vessel encounters ice of a given thickness, unless the COTP or the
District Commander has set an ice condition for the zone and the vessel
meets the associated requirements to transit the zone. Here is a
description of the three ice conditions and vessels requirements to
transit. Under:
     Condition One, when 30 percent of a zone is reported
covered with ice 1 to 3 inches thick, only steel hull vessels would be
allowed to transit the zone;
     Condition Two, when 30 to 90 percent of a zone is reported
covered with ice 3 to 9 inches thick, only steel hull vessels with a
1,500 minimum shaft horsepower and a main engine cooling system design
that prevents blockage from ice would be allowed to transit the zone;
and
     Condition Three, when 90 percent or more of a zone is
reported covered with ice 9 inches thick, only steel hull vessels with
a 1,500 minimum shaft horsepower and a main engine cooling system
design that prevents blockage from ice in a vessel convoy would be
allowed to transit the zone.
    For non-steel-hull vessels, entry into or continuing to transit the
zone would be prohibited without permission from the cognizant COTP or
District Commander if, when approaching the zone or after entering the
safety zone, the vessel encounters ice of \1/2\-inch or more in
thickness. When this thickness of ice is reached in a zone, non-steel
hulled vessels moored or docked in the zone need not exit the zone, but
these vessels may not transit the zone without permission of the
cognizant COTP or District Commander. There would be an exemption for
vessels that need to transit in protected waters, such as within a
marina, harbor, or basin, to facilitate icebreaking operations and
protect infrastructure and property. The regulatory text we are
proposing appears at the end of this document.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive 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. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of

harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This proposed rule has
not been designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under
Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget.
    Although this proposed regulation could limit or prevent marine
traffic from transiting certain waterways in the Fifth Coast Guard
District, the effect of this regulation would not be significant
because there is little vessel traffic associated with recreational
boating and commercial fishing during enforcement periods. The Coast
Guard anticipates only having to implement control measures for limited
durations of time. The cognizant COTP will make notifications of the
regulated areas to the maritime public via Broadcast Notice to Mariners
so mariners can adjust their plans accordingly. Moreover, vessel
traffic capable of operating in such conditions will be allowed to
enter into or transit within the safety zones as specified by the
cognizant COTP.

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.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
regulated areas may be small entities, for the reasons stated in
section IV.A above, 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 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 rule will 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 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 Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, 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
establishing safety zones. Normally such actions are categorically
excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the
Commandant Instruction. A preliminary environmental analysis checklist
supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination
are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek
any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a
significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

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 http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal
Register (70 FR 15086).

    Documents mentioned in this SNPRM as being available in the docket,
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site'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 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.550 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.550  Safety Zones; Ice Covered Waterways Within the Fifth
Coast Guard District.

    (a) Regulated areas. The following areas are established as safety
zones:
    (1) Coast Guard Sector Delaware Bay-COTP Zone. (i) Delaware Bay:
All waters of Delaware Bay and Delaware River, shoreline to shoreline,
in an area bound to the south by a line drawn across the entrance to
Delaware Bay, commencing at Cape May Light (LLNR 155) latitude
38[deg]55'59'' N., longitude 074[deg]57'37'' W.; thence southwest to
Cape Henlopen, latitude 38[deg]48'20.3'' N., longitude
075[deg]05'44.5'' W. The regulated area is bound to the north by a line
drawn across the Delaware River, commencing at Liston Point, DE,
latitude 39[deg]25'03.07'' N., longitude 075[deg]32'25.5'' W.; thence
northeast to the shoreline at Hope Creek Jetty, latitude
39[deg]27'05.04'' N., longitude 075[deg]30'12.55'' W.
    (ii) Delaware River: All waters of Delaware River, shoreline to
shoreline, in an area bound to the south by a line drawn across the
Delaware River, commencing at Liston Point, DE, latitude
39[deg]25'03.07'' N., longitude 075[deg]32'25.5'' W.; thence northeast
to the shoreline at Hope Creek Jetty, latitude 39[deg]27'05.04'' N.,
longitude 075[deg]30'12.55'' W., including the navigable waters of the
Salem River, Christina River, and Schuylkill River. The regulated area
is bound to the north by a line drawn across the Delaware River, that
is parallel with the Betsy Ross (state route 90) fixed highway Bridge.
    (iii) Upper Delaware River: All waters of Delaware River, shoreline
to shoreline, in an area bound to the south by a line drawn across the
Delaware River, parallel with the Betsy Ross (state route 90) fixed
highway Bridge. The regulated area is bound to the north by a line
drawn across the Delaware River, that is parallel with the Trenton--
Morrisville (state route 1) highway Bridge.
    (iv) New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway: All waters of New Jersey
Intracoastal Waterway (NJICW), shoreline to shoreline, commencing at
entrance to Manasquan Inlet, continuing west along Manasquan River
thence south at Junction Light NJICW (LLNR 34980), to the entrance of
Point Pleasant Canal; and continuing south the entire length of NJICW,
terminating at the entrance to Cape May Inlet, Cape May, NJ.
    (2) Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region-COTP Zone.
(i) Head of Chesapeake Bay to C&D Canal: All waters of the Upper
Chesapeake Bay, shoreline to shoreline, and its tributaries, bound to
the north by a line drawn from Hylands Point, MD, latitude
39[deg]30'18'' N., longitude 075[deg]55'37'' W.; thence east across Elk
River to the shoreline at Old Town Point Wharf, MD, latitude
39[deg]30'11.3'' N., longitude 075[deg]54'57.1'' W. The regulated area
is bound to the south by a line drawn across the Chesapeake Bay,
commencing at North Point, MD, latitude 39[deg]11'43.7'' N., longitude
076[deg]26'32.8'' W.; thence east to the shoreline at Swan Point,
latitude 39[deg]08'41.7'' N., longitude 076[deg]16'42.4'' W.
    (ii) Baltimore Harbor and approaches: All waters of the Chesapeake
Bay, shoreline to shoreline, and its tributaries, bound to the north by
a line drawn across the Chesapeake Bay, commencing at North Point, MD,
latitude 39[deg]11'43.7'' N., longitude 076[deg]26'32.8'' W.; thence
east to the shoreline at Swan Point, latitude 39[deg]08'41.7'' N.,
longitude 076[deg]16'42.4'' W. The regulated area is bound to the south
by a line drawn across the Chesapeake Bay, parallel with the north span
of the William P. Lane, Jr (US-50/301) Memorial Bridges.
    (iii) Chesapeake Channel to Cove Point: All waters of the
Chesapeake Bay, shoreline to shoreline, and its tributaries, bound to
the north by a line drawn across the Chesapeake Bay, parallel with the
north span of the William P. Lane, Jr (US-50/301) Memorial Bridges. The
regulated area is bound to the south by a line drawn across the
Chesapeake Bay along latitude 38[deg]23'10.5'' N., commencing at Cove
Point, in Calvert County, MD.
    (iv) Chesapeake Channel between Cove Point and Smith Point, and
Lower Potomac River: All waters of Chesapeake Bay, shoreline to
shoreline, and its tributaries, bound to the north by a line drawn
across the Chesapeake Bay along latitude 38[deg]23'10.5'' N.,
commencing at Cove Point, in Calvert County, MD; and all waters of the
Potomac River, shoreline to shoreline, bound to the north by a line
drawn across the Potomac River, parallel with the Governor Harry W.
Nice (US-301) Memorial Bridge, connecting King George County, VA and
Charles County, MD. The regulated area is bound to the south by a line
drawn across the Chesapeake Bay along the Virginia/Maryland state
boundary line, commencing at Smith Point, VA.
    (v) Potomac River: All waters of the Potomac River, shoreline to
shoreline, bound to the north by a line drawn across the Potomac River,
parallel with the Woodrow Wilson Memorial (I-95/I-495) Bridge,
connecting Alexandria, VA and Prince George's County, MD. The regulated
area is bound to the south by a line drawn across the Potomac River,
parallel with the Governor Harry W. Nice (US-301) Memorial Bridge,
connecting King George County, VA and Charles County, MD.
    (vi) Upper Potomac River and Anacostia River: All waters of Potomac
River, shoreline to shoreline, bound to the north by a line drawn
across the Potomac River, parallel with the Francis Scott Key (US-29)
Bridge, connecting Rosslyn, VA and Georgetown, Washington, DC, and
bound to the south by a line drawn across the Potomac River, parallel
with the Woodrow Wilson Memorial (I-95/I-495) Bridge, connecting
Alexandria, VA and Prince George's County, MD. All waters of Anacostia
River and Washington Channel, shoreline to shoreline, bound to the
north by a line drawn across the Anacostia River, parallel with the
John Philip Sousa (Pennsylvania Avenue SE) Bridge, and bound to the
south by a line drawn across the mouth of the Anacostia River, from
Hains Point, south across Anacostia River Channel to Giesboro Point at
latitude 38[deg]50'51'' N., longitude 077[deg]01'14'' W. at Joint Base
Anacostia--Bolling military installation.
    (3) Coast Guard Sector Hampton Roads-COTP Zone. (i) Chesapeake Bay
and Tangier Sound: All waters of Chesapeake Bay, shoreline to
shoreline, and its tributaries, bound to the north by a line drawn
across the Chesapeake Bay along the Virginia/Maryland state boundary
line, commencing at Smith Point, in Northumberland County, VA.

The regulated area is bound to the south by a line drawn across the
Chesapeake Bay along latitude 37[deg]45'00.0'' N., commencing at
Chesconessex, in Accomack County, VA.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section:
    Convoy means a group of vessels led by U.S. Coast Guard assets or
COTP-designated vessels to assist vessels moving through the ice.
    COTP means the Coast Guard Captain of the Port with jurisdiction
over the geographic area as defined in 33 CFR subpart 3.25.
    Designated representative means any Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer who has been authorized by the cognizant COTP
to assist in enforcing the safety zones described in paragraph (a) of
this section.
    Horsepower means the total maximum continuous shaft horsepower of a
vessel's main propulsion machinery.
    Ice Condition One means when the COTP or District Commander has
received reports that approximately 30 percent of a safety zone defined
in paragraph (a) has been covered with ice whose thickness is
approximately 1 to 3 inches.
    Ice Condition Two means when the COTP or District Commander has
received reports that approximately 30 percent to 90 percent of a
safety zone defined in paragraph (a) has been covered with ice whose
thickness is approximately 3 to 9 inches.
    Ice Condition Three means when the COTP or District Commander has
received reports that approximately 90 percent or more of a safety zone
defined in paragraph (a) has been covered with ice whose thickness is 9
inches or thicker.
    Protected waters means sheltered waters such as harbors or basins
that present no special hazards.
    Public vessel means a vessel that is owned and operated by the
United States Government and is not engaged in commercial service, as
defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Non-steel hull vessels. Non-steel hull vessels
may not enter or transit within a safety zone described in paragraph
(a) of this section without permission from the cognizant COTP or
District Commander if, when approaching the zone or after entering the
zone, the vessel encounters ice of \1/2\-inch or more in thickness.
When ice in a zone is \1/2\-inch thick or more, non-steel hull vessels
moored or docked in the zone need not exit the zone. Except for as
described in paragraph (d)(4), non-steel hull vessels may not enter or
transit the zone without permission of the cognizant COTP or District
Commander.
    (2) Steel hull vessels. Except as provided in paragraph (d)(1) of
this section, steel hull vessels may not enter or transit within a
safety zone described in paragraph (a) of this section without
permission from the cognizant COTP or District Commander in the
following circumstances:
    (i) The vessel has less than 1,500 minimum shaft horsepower and
encounters ice 1 inch or more thick.
    (ii) The vessel has a 1,500 minimum shaft horsepower and a main
engine cooling system design that prevents blockage from ice and
encounters ice 3 inches or more thick.
    (iii) The vessel is part of a vessel convoy and has a 1,500 minimum
shaft horsepower and a main engine cooling system design that prevents
blockage from ice and encounters ice 9 inches or more thick.
    (d) Permission to enter or transit. (1) The COTP may set ice
conditions, as defined in paragraph (b) of this section, for any zone
described in paragraph (a) of this section, and announce those
conditions via Broadcast Notice to Mariners and other methods described
in 33 CFR 165.7. Steel hull vessels prohibited from entering or
continuing transiting a safety zone under paragraph (c) of this section
may nonetheless enter or continuing transiting the safety zone without
contacting the COTP if the vessel is a public vessel, engaged in law
enforcement, or the COTP has set an ice condition for the safety zone
and the vessel meets these restrictions:
    (i) Ice Condition One. Only steel hull vessels may enter, operate
in, or transit though a safety zone when Ice Condition One has been set
for that zone.
    (ii) Ice Condition Two. Only steel hull vessels with a 1,500
minimum shaft horsepower and a main engine cooling system design that
prevents blockage from ice, may enter, operate in, or transit though a
safety zone when Ice Condition Two has been set for that zone.
    (iii) Ice Condition Three. Only steel hull vessels with a 1,500
minimum shaft horsepower and a main engine cooling system design that
prevents blockage from ice, and that are part of a vessel convoy, may
enter, operate in, or transit though a safety zone when Ice Condition
Three has been set for that zone. These vessels may only transit an Ice
Condition Three zone during daylight hours.
    (2) Vessels prohibited from entering or transiting a safety zone
under paragraph (c) of this section may request permission to enter or
continuing transiting by contacting the cognizant COTP on VHF-FM
channel 16 (156.8 MHZ) or via telephone, as follows:
    (i) COTP Delaware Bay:<PHONE_NUMBER>
    (ii) COTP Maryland-National Capital Region:<PHONE_NUMBER>
    (iii) COTP Hampton Roads:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Vessels granted permission to enter, operate in, or transit
though a safety zone must do so in accordance with the directions
provided by the cognizant COTP or designated representative.
    (4) Vessels may transit within protected waters to facilitate
icebreaking operations and protect infrastructure and property without
COTP permission.
    (e) Enforcement. The Coast Guard vessels enforcing this section can
be contacted on marine band radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHZ). The
cognizant COTP and his or her designated representatives can be
contacted at telephone number listed in paragraph (d)(2) of this
section.

    Dated: January 23, 2017.
Meredith L. Austin,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2017-02702 Filed 2-8-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 73 (Monday, April 19, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20389-20390]
[FR Doc No: 2021-07922]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4507-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

Ohio; Amendment No. 3 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Ohio (FEMA-4507-DR), dated March 31, 2020, and related
determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued February 2, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the
President's Memorandum to Extend Federal Support to Governors' Use of
the National Guard to Respond to COVID-19 and to Increase Reimbursement
and Other Assistance Provided to States, dated January 21, 2021 and the
President's Memorandum on Maximizing Assistance from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, dated February 2, 2021 FEMA is amending
the cost-sharing arrangements regarding Federal funds provided under
the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5207 (the ``Stafford Act'') for all of
the COVID-19 emergency and major disaster declarations. FEMA is
amending this declaration as follows:

    Federal funds for emergency protective measures (Category B),
including direct Federal assistance, under the Public Assistance
program (Section 403) are authorized at 100 percent of total
eligible costs for work performed from January 20, 2020 through
September 30, 2021.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals

and Households--Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public
Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard
Mitigation Grant.)

Robert J. Fenton,
Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Administrator, Federal
Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-07922 Filed 4-16-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P