[Federal Register: December 5, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 234)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 67946-67948]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05de03-7]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[COTP San Diego 03-032]
RIN 1625-AA00
Security Zone: Coronado Bay Bridge, San Diego, CA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Temporary final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing temporary security zones
encompassing navigable waters 25 yards around all piers, abutments,
fenders and pilings of the Coronado Bay Bridge. These temporary
security zones are needed for national security reasons to protect the
public and ports from potential subversive actions. Persons and vessels
are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, loitering, or
anchoring within these security zones unless authorized by the Captain
of the Port, or his designated representative.
DATES: This rule is effective from November 7, 2003, until May 1, 2004.
ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket, are part of docket [COTP San Diego 03-032] and are
available for inspection or copying at Marine Safety Office San Diego,
2716 North Harbor Drive, San Diego, CA 92101-1064 between 8 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Petty Officer Austin Murai, USCG, c/o
U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the Port, telephone (619) 683-6495
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory 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. Also, for the same reasons,
under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists
for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in
the Federal Register. The threat of maritime attacks is real as
evidenced by the October 2002 attack of a tank vessel off the coast of
Yemen and the continuing threat to U.S. assets as described in the
President's finding in Executive Order 13273 of August 21, 2002 (67 FR
56215, September 3, 2002) that the security of the U.S. is endangered
by the September, 11, 2001 attacks and that such disturbances continue
to endanger the international relations of the United States. See also
Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to Certain
Terrorist Attacks, (67 FR 58317, September 13, 2002); Continuation of
the National Emergency With Respect To Persons Who Commit, Threaten To
Commit, Or Support Terrorism, (67 FR 59447, September 20, 2002).
As a result, a heightened level of security has been established
around the Coronado Bridge. Maintaining the structural integrity of the
Coronado Bridge, which spans San Diego Bay, is very important to the
local economy and military units within the San Diego Area. The
measures contemplated by this rule are intended to prevent future
terrorist attacks against individuals on or near the Coronado Bridge.
Any delay in the effective date of this TFR is impractical and contrary
to the public interest.
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
the war with Iraq have made it prudent to U.S. ports to be on 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.
In this particular rulemaking, to address the aforementioned
security concerns, and to take steps to prevent the catastrophic impact
that a terrorist attack against the Coronado Bridge would have on the
public interest, the Coast Guard is establishing security zones around
the Coronado Bridge. These security zones help the Coast Guard to
prevent vessels or persons from engaging in terrorist actions against
these bridges. Due to these heightened security concerns, and the
catastrophic impact a terrorist attack on this bridge would have on the
public,
[[Page 67947]]
the transportation system and surrounding areas and communities,
security zones are prudent for these structures.
Discussion of Rule
In this temporary rule, the Coast Guard is establishing fixed
security zones encompassing, from the surface to the sea floor,
navigable waters 25 yards around all piers, abutments, fenders and
pilings of the Coronado Bridge, San Diego Bay, California. Entry into
these security zones is prohibited unless doing so is necessary for
safe navigation or to conduct official business such as scheduled
maintenance or retrofit operations. Vessels and people may be allowed
to enter an established security zone on a case-by-case basis with
authorization from the Captain of the Port.
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, any
violation of the security zone described herein is punishable by civil
penalties, criminal penalties (including imprisonment up to 6 years),
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.
Coast Guard personnel will enforce this regulation and the Captain
of the Port may be assisted by other Federal, State, or local agencies
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.
Regulatory Evaluation
This 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).
Although this regulation restricts access to portions of the
navigable waterways around the bridge, the effect of this regulation
will not be significant because: (i) The zones will encompass only a
small portion of the waterway; (ii) Vessels will be able to pass safely
around the zones; and (iii) Vessels may be allowed to enter these zones
on a case-by-case basis with permission of the Captain of the Port, or
his designated representative.
The sizes of the zones are the minimum necessary to provide
adequate protection for the bridges, vessels operating in the vicinity,
adjoining areas and the public. The entities most likely to be affected
are commercial vessels transiting the main ship channel en route the
southern San Diego Bay and Chula Vista ports and pleasure craft engaged
in recreational activities and sightseeing.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
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 rule will affect the following entities, some of which
may be small entities: the owners or operators of commercial vessels
transiting the main ship channel en route the southern San Diego Bay
and Chula Vista ports and pleasure craft engaged in recreational
activities and sightseeing. The security zones will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
for several reasons: small vessel traffic can pass safely around the
security zones and vessels engaged in recreational activities,
sightseeing and commercial fishing have ample space outside of the
security zones to engage in these activities. Small entities and the
maritime public will be advised of these security zones via public
notice to mariners.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. If the
rule will affect your small business, organization, or government
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact Lieutenant Commander Rick
Sorrell, USCG, c/o U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the Port, telephone
(619) 683-6495 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 rule calls 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 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 rule will not result in such expenditure, we do
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
[[Page 67948]]
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.
Energy Effects
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. 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 because we are establishing a security zone.
A final ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a final
``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' will be available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR Part 165 as follows:
PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
0
2. Add new Sec. 165.T11-030 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T11-030 Security Zone: Coronado Bay Bridge, San Diego, CA.
(a) Location. All navigable waters, extending from the surface to
the sea floor, 25 yards around all piers, abutments, fenders and
pilings of the Coronado Bay Bridge spanning San Diego Bay. This
security zone will not restrict the main navigational channel and
vessels will not be restricted from transiting through the channel.
(b) Effective period. This section is effective from November 7,
2003, until May 1, 2004. If the Coast Guard terminates enforcement of
this security zone prior to the scheduled termination time, the Captain
of the Port will cease enforcement of this safety zone and will
announce that fact via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
(c) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec. 165.33 of this part, entry into, transit through, loitering, or
anchoring within this security zone by all persons and vessels is
prohibited, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his
designated representative. Mariners are advised that the security zones
will not restrict the main navigational channel and transit through the
channel is not prohibited. Mariners requesting permission to transit
through the security zone may request authorization to do so from
Captain of the Port or his designated representative. The Coast Guard
can be contacted on San Diego Bay via VHF-FM channel 16.
(d) Authority. In addition to 33 U.S.C. 1231, the authority for
this section includes 33 U.S.C. 1226.
Dated: November 4, 2003.
Stephen P. Metruck,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, San Diego.
[FR Doc. 03-30277 Filed 12-4-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P