Coast Guard, DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Coast Guard proposes to establish moving and fixed security zones around and under all cruise ships that are located in the Port of San Diego. These proposed security zones are needed for national security reasons to protect the public and ports from potential terrorist acts. Entry into these zones will be prohibited, unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port San Diego.
Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before November 29, 2002.
You may mail comments and related material to Coast Guard Marine Safety Office San Diego, 2716 North Harbor Drive, San Diego, California, 92101. The Port Operations Department maintains the public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at the Port Operations Department, 2716 North Harbor Drive, San Diego, California, 92101, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lieutenant Commander Rick Sorrell, Chief, Port Operations Department, Marine Safety Office San Diego, (619) 683-6495.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (COTP San Diego 02-026), indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than 81/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know your submission reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them.
In our final rule, we will include a concise general statement of the comments received and identify any changes from the proposed rule based on the comments. If as we anticipate, we make the final rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, we will explain our good cause for doing so as required by 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a request for a meeting by writing to Marine Safety Office San Diego at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a separate notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
Since the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York, the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, and Flight 93, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has issued several warnings concerning the potential for additional terrorist attacks within the United States. In addition, the ongoing hostilities in Afghanistan and growing tensions in Iraq have made it prudent for U.S. ports to be on a higher state of alert because the Al Qaeda organization and other similar organizations have declared an ongoing intention to conduct armed attacks on U.S. interests worldwide.
In its effort to thwart terrorist activity, the Coast Guard has increased safety and security measures on U.S. ports and waterways. As part of the Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986 (Pub. L. 99-399), Congress amended section 7 of the Ports and Waterways safety Act (PWSA), 33 U.S.C. 1226, to allow the Coast Guard to take actions, including the establishment of security and safety zones, to prevent or respond to acts of terrorism against individuals, vessels, or public or commercial structures. The Coast Guard also has authority to establish security zones pursuant to the Magnuson Act (50 U.S.C. 191 et seq.) and implementing regulations promulgated by the President in subparts 6.01 and 6.04 of part 6 of Title 33 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
In this particular rulemaking, to address the aforementioned security concerns, and to take steps to prevent the catastrophic impact that a terrorist attack against a cruise ship would have on the public interest, the Coast Guard proposes to establish security zones around and under cruise ships entering, departing, or moored within the port of San Diego. These security zones will help the Coast Guard prevent vessels or persons from engaging in terrorist actions against cruise ships. The Coast Guard believes the establishment of security zones is prudent for cruise ships because they carry multiple passengers.
On November 4, 2001, we issued a rule under docket COTP San Diego 01-022 which was published in the Federal Register (67 FR 6648, Feb. 13, 2002) under temporary section 165.T11-030 of Title 33 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). In that rulemaking, the Coast Guard established a rule creating 100 yard security zones around cruise ships that enter, are moored in, or depart from the Port of San Diego.
On June 12, 2002, a change in effective period temporary rule was issued, under docket COTP SD 02-013, and was published in the Federal Register (67 FR 41845, June 20, 2002) under the same previous temporary section 165.T11-030, which is set to expire at 11:59 pm on December 21, 2002. The Captain of the Port has determined the need for continued security regulations exists. The proposed regulation differs slightly from temporary section 165.T11-030 in one way. Although, while implicit in the temporary rule, the security zones proposed here will be described as extending from the water's surface to the sea floor. This more specific description is intended to discourage unidentified scuba divers and swimmers from coming within close proximity of a cruise ship.
Accordingly, this rulemaking proposes to make permanent the temporary security zones established on November 4, 2001, under docket COTP San Diego 01-022, 33 CFR 165.T11-030 published in the Federal Register at 67 FR 6648 (February 13, 2002). This temporary rulemaking effective period was extended until December 21, 2002 by a notice in the Federal Register published June 20, 2002 (67 FR 41845).
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The Coast Guard proposes to establish moving and fixed security zones around all cruise ships that are anchored, moored, or underway within the port of San Diego. These proposed security zones will take effect upon the entry of any cruise ship into the waters within the San Diego sea buoy and will remain into effect until the cruise ship passes the San Diego sea buoy on its departure Start Printed Page 66596from the Port of San Diego. This proposed rule, for security concerns, prohibits entry of any vessel inside the security zone surrounding a cruise ship. These security zones are within a 100 yard radius around any cruise ship that is anchored at a designated anchorage; that is moored, or in the process of mooring, at any berth within the San Diego port; and that is underway.
These security zones are needed for national security reasons to protect cruise ships, the public, transiting vessels, adjacent waterfront facilities, and the port from potential subversive acts, accidents, or other events of a similar nature. Entry into these zones will be prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port or his designated representative. Vessels already moored when these security zones take effect are not required to get underway to avoid either the moving or fixed zones unless specifically ordered to do so by the Captain of the Port or his designated representative.
This zone will be enforced by the official patrol, (Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officers) onboard Coast Guard vessels and patrol craft. The official patrol may also be onboard patrol craft and resources of any government agency that has agreed to assist the Coast Guard in the performance of its duties. The Captain of the Port will enforce these zones and may request the use of resources and personnel of other government and private agencies to assist in the patrol and enforcement of the regulation. This regulation is proposed under the authority of 33 U.S.C. 1226 in addition to the authority contained in 33 U.S.C. 1231 and 50 U.S.C. 191.
Vessels or persons violating this section will be subject to the penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232. Pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 33 CFR part 27, any violation of the security zone described herein, is punishable by civil penalties (not to exceed $27,500 per violation, where each day of a continuing violation is a separate violation), criminal penalties (imprisonment up to 6 years and a maximum fine of $250,000), and in rem liability against the offending vessel. Any person who violates this section, using a dangerous weapon, or who engages in conduct that causes bodily injury or fear of imminent bodily injury to any officer authorized to enforce this regulation, also faces imprisonment up to 12 years.
Vessels or persons violating this section are also subject to the penalties set forth in 50 U.S.C. 192: seizure and forfeiture of the vessel to the United States; a maximum criminal fine of $10,000; and imprisonment up to 10 years.
This proposed rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, 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, l979).
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 10e of the regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary.
The effect of this regulation will not be significant due to the minimal time that vessels will be restricted from the area. Also, the zones will encompass only a small portion of the waterway. The Port of San Diego can accommodate only a few cruise ships moored at the same time. Most cruise ship calls at each location occur on only one day each week, and are generally less than 18 hours in duration. Furthermore, vessels will be able to pass safely around the zones, and vessels and people may be allowed to enter these zones on a case-by-case basis with permission of the Captain of the Port.
The sizes of the zones are the minimum necessary to provide adequate protection for the cruise ships, their crews and passengers, other vessels operating in the vicinity of the cruise ships and their crews, adjoining areas, and the public. The entities most likely to be affected are commercial vessels transiting the main ship channel en route the Port of San Diego and pleasure craft engaged in recreational activities and sightseeing. The security zones will prohibit any commercial vessels from meeting or overtaking a cruise ship in the main ship channels, effectively limiting the use of the channel. However, the moving security zones will only be effective during cruise ship transits, which will last for approximately 60 minutes. In addition, vessels are able to safely transit around the zones while a vessel is moored or at anchor in the Port of San Diego.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this proposed 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 proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. We expect this proposed rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners and operators of private and commercial vessels intending to transit or anchor in these small portions near the cruise ships covered by these security zones, of the port of San Diego. The impact to these entities would not be significant since these zones are proposed to encompass only small portions of the waterway for limited period of times (while the cruise ships are transiting, moored). Delays, if any, are expected to be less than sixty minutes in duration. Small vessel traffic can pass safely around the area and vessels engaged in recreational activities, sightseeing and commercial fishing have ample space outside of the security zone to engage in these activities. When a cruise ship is at anchor, vessel traffic will have ample room to maneuver around the security zone. The outbound or inbound transit of a cruise ship will last about 60 minutes. Although this regulation prohibits simultaneous use of portions of the channel, this prohibition is of short duration. While a cruise ship is moored, commercial traffic and small recreational traffic will have an opportunity to coordinate movement through the security zone with the patrol commander.
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.
Assistance for Small Entities
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 so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact Start Printed Page 66597LTJG Joseph Brown, Marine Safety Office San Diego, (619) 683-6495
Collection of Information
This proposed rule would call 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 proposed rule under that Order and have determined 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 proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would 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 proposed 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 proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
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. We invite your comments on how this proposed rule might impact tribal governments, even if that impact may not constitute a “tribal implication” under the Order.
We have analyzed this proposed 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 proposed rule and concluded that, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, this rule is categorically excluded from further environmental documentation because we are proposing to establishing a security zone. A “Categorical Exclusion Determination” is available in the docket 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 proposes to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:Start Part
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:
2. Add § 165.1108 to read as follows:
(a) Definition. “Cruise ship” as used in this section means a passenger vessel, except for a ferry, over 100 feet in length, authorized to carry more than 12 passengers for hire; capable of making international voyages lasting more than 24 hours, any part of which is on the high seas; and for which passengers are embarked, disembarked or at a port of call in the San Diego port.
(b) Location. The following areas are security zones:
(1) All waters, extending from the surface to the sea floor, within a 100 yard radius around any cruise ship that is anchored at a designated anchorage within the San Diego port area inside the sea buoys bounding the port of San Diego.
(2) The shore area and all waters, extending from the surface to the sea floor, within a 100 yard radius around any cruise ship that is moored at any berth within the San Diego port area inside the sea buoys bounding the Port of San Diego; and
(3) All waters, extending from the surface to the sea floor, within a 100 yard radius around any cruise ship that is underway on the waters inside the sea buoys bounding the Port of San Diego.
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulation in § 165.33 of the part, entry into or remaining in this zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, San Diego or his designated representative.
(2) Persons desiring to transit the area of the security zone may contact the Captain of the Port at telephone number (619) 683-6495 or on VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) to seek permission to transit the area. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port or his or her designated representative.
(e) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol and enforcement of the security zone by the San Diego Port Police.
Dated: October 11, 2002.
Commander, US Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, San Diego, California.
[FR Doc. 02-27849 Filed 10-31-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P