Coast Guard, DOT.
Temporary final rule.
The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary security zone encompassing all water extending 200 feet from the shoreline of the left descending bank on the Ohio River, beginning from mile marker 119.0 and ending at mile marker 119.8. This security zone is necessary to protect the PPG Plant in Natrium, West Virginia from any and all subversive actions from any groups or individuals whose objective it is to cause disruption to the daily operations of the PPG Plant. Entry of vessels into this security zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port Pittsburgh or his designated representative.
This rule is effective from 8 a.m. on February 8, 2002 through 8 a.m. on June 15, 2002.
Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of docket [COTP Pittsburgh-02-001] and are available for inspection or copying at Marine Safety Office Pittsburgh, Suite 1150 Kossman Bldg., 100 Forbes Ave. Pittsburgh, PA between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Chief Petty Officer, Brian Smith, Marine Safety Office Pittsburgh at (412) 644-5808.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM, and, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. The catastrophic nature of, and resulting devastation from, the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center towers in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington D.C., makes this rulemaking necessary for the protection of national security interests. National security and intelligence officials warn that future terrorist attacks against United States interests are likely. Any delay in making this regulation effective would be contrary to the public interest because immediate action is necessary to protect against the possible loss of life, injury, or damage to property.
Background and Purpose
On September 11, 2001, both towers of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were attacked by terrorists. In response to these terrorist acts, heightened awareness and security of our ports and harbors is necessary. To enhance that security the Captain of the Port, Pittsburgh is establishing a temporary security zone.
This security zone includes all water extending 200 feet from the shoreline of the left descending bank on the Ohio River beginning from mile marker 119.0 and ending at mile marker 119.8. This security zone is necessary to protect the public, facilities, and surrounding area from possible acts of terrorism at the PPG Plant. All vessels and persons are prohibited from entering the zone without the permission of the Captain of the Port Pittsburgh or his designated representative.
This rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 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. It is not “significant” under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Transportation (DOT)(44 FR 11040, February 26, 1979).
The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this proposal to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 10 (e) of the regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary. This rule will not obstruct the regular flow of vessel traffic and will allow vessel traffic to pass safely around the security zone and vessels may be permitted to enter the security zone on a case-by-case basis.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we 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 security zone will not have an impact on a substantial number of small entities because this rule will not obstruct the regular flow of vessel traffic and will allow vessel traffic to pass safely around the security zone.
If you are a small business entity and are significantly affected by this regulation please contact Chief Petty Officer Brian Smith, U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Pittsburgh, Suite 1150 Kossman Bldg. 100 Forbes Ave. Pittsburgh, PA at (412) 644-5808.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they can 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).
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).
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 Start Printed Page 9589determined 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 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.
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.
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. It has not been designated by the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.
We have considered the environmental impact of this rule and concluded that under figure 2-1, paragraph 34(g), of Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is categorically excluded from further environmental documentation. A “Categorical Exclusion Determination” is available for inspection or copying where indicated under ADDRESSES.Start List of Subjects
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
- Marine safety
- Navigation (water)
- Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
- Security measures
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amendsEnd Amendment Part Start Part
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREASEnd Part Start Amendment Part
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:End Amendment Part Start Amendment Part
2. A new temporary § 165.T08-009 is added to read as follows:End Amendment Part
(a) Location. The following area is a security zone: The waters of the Ohio River, extending 200 feet from the shoreline of the left descending bank beginning from mile marker 119.0 and ending at mile marker 119.8.
(b) Effective date. This section is effective from 8 a.m. on February 8, 2002 through 8 a.m. on June 15, 2002.
(d) Regulations. (1) Entry into this security zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port Pittsburgh or his designated representative.
(2) Persons or vessels requiring entry into or passage through the zone must request permission from the Captain of the Port Pittsburgh, or his designated representative. They may be contacted via VHF Channel 16 or via telephone at (412) 644-5808.
(3) All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port Pittsburgh and designated on-scene U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel. On-scene U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel include commissioned, warrant, and petty officers of the U.S. Coast Guard.
Dated: February 8, 2002.
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Pittsburgh.
[FR Doc. 02-5090 Filed 3-1-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P