Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Coast Guard proposes to establish a permanent security zone in the vicinity of the HOVENSA refinery facility on St. Croix, U. S. Virgin Islands. The security zone is needed for national security reasons to protect the public and the HOVENSA facility from potential subversive acts. The proposed rule would exclude entry into the proposed permanent security zone by all vessels without permission of the U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the Port San Juan or a scheduled arrival in accordance with the Notice of Arrival requirements of 33 CFR part 160, subpart C.
Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before March 28, 2005.
You may mail comments and related material to Sector San Juan, 5 Calle La Puntilla, San Juan, PR 00901. Sector San Juan Waterways Management will maintain 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 Resident Inspections Office in St. Croix, United States Virgin Island between 7 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lieutenant Junior Grade Katiuska Pabon of Sector San Juan Waterways Management at 787-289-0739.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 Juan-05-007), 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 that 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.
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a request for a meeting by writing to SECTOR San Juan 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 Coast Guard has published similar temporary security zones in the Federal Register at 67 FR 2332, January 17, 2002; 67 FR 57952, September 13, 2002; 68 FR 22296, April 28, 2003; 68 FR 41081, July 10, 2003; 69 FR 6150, February 10, 2004; 69 FR 29232, May 21, 2004; and 70 FR 2950, January 19, 2005. Given the highly volatile nature of the substances stored at the HOVENSA facility, the Coast Guard recognizes that it could be a potential terrorist target and there is a continuing risk that subversive activity could be launched by vessels or persons in close proximity to the facility. This activity could be directed against tank vessels and the waterfront facility. This security zone is necessary to decrease the risk that subversive activity could be launched against the HOVENSA facility. The Captain of the Port San Juan is reducing risk by prohibiting all vessels without a scheduled arrival in accordance with the Notice of Arrival requirements of 33 CFR part 160, subpart C from entering within approximately 2 miles of the HOVENSA facility unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port San Juan.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed permanent security zone around the HOVENSA facility would be encompassed by a line connecting the following coordinates: 17°41′31″ North, 64°45′09″ West; 17°39′36″ North, 64°44′12″ West; 17°40′00″ North, 64°43′36″ West; and 17°41′48″ North, 64°44′25″ West, and back to the point of origin. The security zone includes the waters extending approximately 2 miles seaward from the HOVENSA facility, Limetree Bay Channel and Limetree Bay. All coordinates are based upon North American Datum 1983 (NAD 1983). All vessels without a scheduled arrival in accordance with the Notice of Arrival requirements of 33 CFR part 160, subpart C are excluded from the zone unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port San Juan.
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 under the regulatory policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. The burden imposed on the public by this rule is minimal and mariners may obtain permission to enter the zone from the Coast Guard Captain of the Port San Juan or by scheduling vessel arrival in accordance with the Notice of Arrival requirements of 33 CFR part 160, subpart C.
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.
The factual basis for this certification is as follows:
(1) Owners of small charter fishing or diving operations that operate near the HOVENSA facility may be affected by the existence of this security zone.Start Printed Page 7066
(2) This rule will not have a significant economic impact on the above mentioned or a substantial number of small entities because this zone covers an area that is not typically used by commercial fisherman.
Additionally, vessels may be allowed to enter the zone on a case-by-case basis with the permission of the Captain of the Port San Juan.
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 LTJG Katiuska Pabon, Sector San Juan Waterways Management, 787-289-0739. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
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 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.
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies.
This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
We have analyzed this proposed 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. The proposed rule satisfies the criteria for paragraph (34)(g) because it is a security zone.
Under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction, an “Environmental Analysis Check List” and a “Categorical Exclusion Determination” are not required for this rule. Comments on this section will be considered before we make the final decision on whether to categorically exclude this rule from further environmental review.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 § 165.766 to read as follows:
(a) Regulated area. The Coast Guard is establishing a security zone in and around the HOVENSA Refinery on south coast of St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands. This security zone includes all waters from surface to bottom, encompassed by an imaginary line connecting the following points: Point 1: 17°41′31″ North, 64°45′09″ West, Point 2: 17°39′36″ North, 64°44′12″ West, Point 3: 17°40′00″ North, 64°43′36″ West, Point 4: 17°41′48″ North, 64°44′25″ West, and returning to the point of origin. These coordinates are based upon North American Datum 1983 (NAD 1983).
(b) Regulations. (1) Under § 165.33, entry into or remaining in the security zone in paragraph (a) of this section is prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Port of San Juan or vessels have a scheduled arrival in accordance with the Notice of Arrival requirements of 33 CFR part 160, subpart C.
(2) Persons and vessels desiring to transit the Regulated Area may contact the U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the Port, San Juan, at telephone number 787-289-0739 or on VHF 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.
Dated: January 31, 2005.
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Sector San Juan.
[FR Doc. 05-2595 Filed 2-9-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P