Skip to Content

Proposed Rule

Security Zones; Tampa Bay, Florida

Document Details

Information about this document as published in the Federal Register.

Published Document

This document has been published in the Federal Register. Use the PDF linked in the document sidebar for the official electronic format.

Start Preamble

AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard proposes to establish security zones in the waters immediately adjacent to power facilities at Big Bend, and Weedon Island in Tampa Bay, Florida. These zones are needed to ensure public safety and security in the greater Tampa Bay area. Entry into these zones would be prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or their designated representative.

DATES:

Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before June 17, 2003.

ADDRESSES:

You may mail comments and related material to Marine Safety Office Tampa, U.S. Coast Guard, 155 Columbia Drive, Tampa, Florida 33606. The Operations Department of Marine Safety Office Tampa 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 [COTP Tampa 03-060] and will be available for inspection or copying at Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Tampa between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Start Further Info

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

LCDR David McClellan, Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Tampa, at (813) 228-2189 extension 102.

End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information

SUPPLEMENTARY 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 Tampa 03-060], indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. If you submit them by mail and would like to know that they reached the Marine Safety Office, 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.

Public Meeting

We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a request for one to the Coast Guard 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 later notice in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, killed thousands of people and heightened the need for development of various security measures throughout the seaports of the United States, particularly those vessels and facilities which are frequented by foreign nationals and are of interest to national security. Following these attacks by well-trained and clandestine terrorists, national security and intelligence officials have warned that future terrorists attacks are likely. The Captain of the Port of Tampa has determined that these proposed security zones would protect the public, ports, and waterways of the United States from potential subversive acts.

These proposed security zones are similar to the existing temporary security zones established for these waterfront facilities that will soon expire.

On March 7, 2003, the Captain of the Port issued a temporary rule titled “Security Zones; Tampa Bay, Port of Start Printed Page 19167Tampa, Port of Saint Petersburg, Port Manatee, Rattlesnake, Old Port Tampa, Big Bend, Weedon Island, and Crystal River, FL” that was published in the Federal Register on March 25, 2003 (68 FR 14328; correction published April 9, 2003, 68 FR 17291). This temporary final rule created a security zone, from surface to bottom, extending 50 yards from the shore, seawalls and piers around the Big Bend Power Facility, prohibiting persons or vessels from entering the Big Bend Power Facility. The same temporary final rule created a security zone, from surface to bottom, extending 50 yards from the shore, seawalls and piers around the Weedon Island Power Facility, prohibiting persons or vessels from entering the suction and discharge canals at the power facility.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

The Coast Guard proposes to make the following security zones permanent:

(1) Big Bend, Tampa Bay, Florida. All waters of Tampa Bay, from surface to bottom, adjacent to the Big Bend Power Facility, and within an area bounded by a line connecting the following points: 27°47.85′ N, 082°25.02′ W then east and south along the shore and pile to 27°47.63′ N, 082°24.70′ W then north along the shore to 27°48.02′ N, 082°24.70′ W then north and west along a straight line to 27°48.12′ N, 082°24.88′ W then south along the shore and pile to 27°47.85′ N, 082°25.02′ W, closing off entrance to the Big Bend Power Facility.

(2) Weedon Island, Tampa Bay, Florida. All waters of Tampa Bay, from surface to bottom, extending 50 yards from the shore, seawall and piers around the Power Facility at Weedon Island encompassed by a line connecting the following points: 27°51.52′ N, 082°35.82′ W then north and east along the shore to 27°51.54′ N, 082°35.78′ W then north to 27°51.68′ N, 082°35.78′ W then north to 27°51.75′ N, 082°35.78′ W closing off entrance to the canal then north to 27°51.89′ N, 082°35.82′ W then west along the shore to 27°51.89′ N, 082°36.10′ W then west to 27°51.89′ N, 082°36.14′ W closing off entrance to the canal.

Entry into or remaining within these zones would be prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Tampa, Florida or that officer's designated representative. Persons desiring to transit the area of the security zone would have to contact the Captain of the Port at telephone number 727-824-7531 or on VHF channel 16 to seek permission to transit the area. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels would need to comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port or their designated representative.

Regulatory Evaluation

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 Homeland Security (DHS).

We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary because there is ample room for vessels to navigate around the security zones and the Captain of the Port may allow vessels to enter the zones, on a case-by-case basis with the express permission of the Captain of the Port of Tampa or their designated representative.

Small Entities

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 because the zones are limited in size and leave ample room for vessels to navigate around the zones. The zones will not significantly impact commuter and passenger vessel traffic patterns, and vessels may be allowed to enter the zones, on a case-by-case basis, with the express permission of the Captain of the Port of Tampa or their designated representative.

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 (Public Law 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 the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT for assistance in understanding this rule. 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 proposed rule would call for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

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. Although 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.Start Printed Page 19168

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.

Energy Effects

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. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.

Environment

We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation.

Start List of Subjects

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

End List of Subjects

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:

Start Authority

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.

End Authority

2. Add § 165.764 to read as follows:

Security Zones; Big Bend and Weedon Island Power Facilities, Tampa Bay, Florida.

(a) Location. The following areas, denoted by coordinates fixed using the North American Datum of 1983 (World Geodetic System 1984), are security zones:

(1) Big Bend, Tampa Bay, Florida. All waters of Tampa Bay, from surface to bottom, adjacent to the Big Bend Power Facility, and within an area bounded by a line connecting the following points: 27°47.85′ N, 082°25.02′ W then east and south along the shore and pile to 27°47.63′ N, 082°24.70′ W then north along the shore to 27°48.02′ N, 082°24.70′ W then north and west along a straight line to 27°48.12′ N, 082°24.88′ W then south along the shore and pile to 27°47.85′ N, 082°25.02′ W, closing off entrance to the Big Bend Power Facility.

(2) Weedon Island, Tampa Bay, Florida. All waters of Tampa Bay, from surface to bottom, extending 50 yards from the shore, seawall and piers around the Power Facility at Weedon Island encompassed by a line connecting the following points: 27°51.52′ N, 082°35.82′ W then north and east along the shore to 27°51.54′ N, 082°35.78′ W then north to 27°51.68′ N, 082°35.78′ W then north to 27°51.75′ N, 082°35.78′ W closing off entrance to the canal then north to 27°51.89′ N, 082°35.82′ W then west along the shore to 27°51.89′ N, 082°36.10′ W then west to 27°51.89′ N, 082°36.14′ W closing off entrance to the canal.

(b) Regulations. (1) Entry into or remaining within these zones is prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Tampa, Florida or that officer's designated representative.

(2) Persons desiring to transit the area of the security zone may contact the Captain of the Port at telephone number 727-824-7531 or on VHF channel 16 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 their designated representative.

(c) Authority. In addition to 33 U.S.C. 1231 and 50 U.S.C. 191, the authority for this section includes 33 U.S.C. 1226.

Start Signature

Dated: April 10, 2003.

James. M. Farley,

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of The Port, Tampa, Florida.

End Signature End Part End Supplemental Information

[FR Doc. 03-9650 Filed 4-17-03; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P