FR 2024-29536

The recently issued rule by the U.S. Coast Guard, effective January 15, 2025, establishes a new anchorage ground near Rice Island on the Lower Columbia River. This decision, as detailed in the Federal Register, aims to enhance navigation safety by accommodating the increased commercial vessel traffic in the area. The rule comes after multiple comment periods where interested parties could express their opinions and concerns.

General Summary

The Coast Guard's initiative to establish this anchorage ground reflects the growing demand for safe anchoring spaces due to increased commercial activity on the Lower Columbia River. This rule aims to alleviate safety and navigational concerns by formally designating an area for vessel anchoring. Although the action is deemed not significant in terms of regulatory impact, it involves careful consideration of environmental and operational factors.

Significant Issues and Concerns

A notable issue is the lack of detailed economic impact analysis. While the document suggests minimal economic effects, commercial stakeholders might benefit from clearer insight into cost implications. The absence of in-depth environmental studies, particularly concerning the Green Sturgeon, a threatened fish species, is another concern. Although the rule claims no adverse effects, supporting data or references would strengthen this assertion.

Moreover, the commentary on the horizontal datum change lacks context, leaving stakeholders uncertain about the practical relevance of this technical adjustment. For the general public, the document's technical language around legal and regulatory references could be more accessible if simplified.

There is also uncertainty about future dredging plans. The commentary mentions the potential need but does not provide information on budgeting or timelines, which are crucial for stakeholders involved in river management and vessel operations.

Impact on the Public

Broadly, this document reflects a federal effort to maintain safety and efficiency in navigable waters, which is essential for economic and operational stability in the region. For residents and businesses relying on the Columbia River, ensuring safe navigation can also mean economic benefits, possibly reducing accident-related delays or environmental risks.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

For commercial vessel operators, the designated anchorage ground provides clarity and potentially reduced risks when planning anchorage in a high-traffic area. Meeting safety standards is vital for business continuity and environmental responsibility. However, the lack of clarity on future dredging budgets and operations could affect operators who handle vessels with varying drafts.

Maritime environmental groups and local tribes may feel the need for further engagement or evidence regarding the environmental impact, especially concerning protected species like the Green Sturgeon. Such groups might advocate for more transparent environmental reviews and studies to ensure compliance with conservation efforts.

In summary, while the rulemaking aims to address safety and navigation demands, the Coast Guard could enhance its impact by providing more comprehensive economic and environmental assessments and addressing stakeholder concerns in more depth.

In reviewing the financial references within the Federal Register document concerning the establishment of an anchorage ground near Rice Island on the Lower Columbia River, there are a few notable points and considerations.

Financial References and Obligations

The document mentions the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, which focuses on regulatory actions that may require considerable financial expenditures by state, local, or tribal governments. Specifically, it highlights actions resulting in costs of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. However, it is stated that this rule is not expected to result in such financial burdens. This indicates that, while operational changes might occur, there is not an expected massive expenditure associated with the implementation of this particular anchorage ground.

Relation to Identified Issues

While the document provides clarity that massive expenditures are not expected, it does not address possible smaller-scale costs or budget allocations, particularly in relation to queries regarding potential future dredging operations. If such dredging were to become necessary—due to the varied depths highlighted by at least one commenter—under 33 U.S.C. 365, the United States Army Corps of Engineers could be involved, potentially incurring costs. However, the document does not specify if there is a prepared budget for this possibility or what the timeline might be.

Environmental and Economic Considerations

Another critical aspect is the lack of detailed cost analysis attached to the environmental queries, especially regarding the potential impact on the Green Sturgeon, a threatened species. Decisions on environmental and navigational safety could influence financial allocations despite the document's assurance that costs above $100,000,000 are not anticipated. The lack of detailed environmental assessments potentially leaves room for unforeseen financial implications down the line, should environmental impacts necessitate further action.

In summary, while the document assures that there will not be unfunded mandates exceeding $100,000,000, it leaves some ambiguity around smaller-scale financial implications and potential future expenses, particularly related to dredging operations and environmental impact assessments. This could impact both governmental financial planning and stakeholders involved in the anchorage ground's implementation and maintenance.