[Federal Register: April 27, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 81)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 22751-22753]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr27ap04-15]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD05-04-016]
RIN 1625-AA00
Security Zone; Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point and Lower Cape
Fear River, Brunswick County, NC
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes implementing a permanent security
zone on the Cape Fear River at Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point
(MOTSU), North Carolina. Entry into or movement within the security
zone will be prohibited without authorization from the Captain of the
Port (COTP). This action is necessary to safeguard the vessels and the
facility from sabotage, subversive acts, or other threats.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before May 27, 2004.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Coast Guard
Marine Safety Office, 721 Medical Center Drive, Suite 100, Wilmington,
North Carolina 28401. The Port Operations Department, Waterways
Management Division 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 Coast Guard Marine Safety Office, 721 Medical Center Drive,
Suite 100, Wilmington, North Carolina 28401, between 7:30 a.m. and 3
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LCDR Charles A. Roskam II, Chief Port
Operations (910) 772-2200 or toll free (877) 229-0770.
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 (CGD05-04-
016), 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
8\1/2\ 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.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to Coast Guard Marine Safety Office,
Wilmington 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
Vessels frequenting the Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point (MOTSU)
facility serve as a vital link in the transportation of military
munitions and explosives in support of Department of Defense missions
at home and abroad. This vital transportation link is potentially at
risk to acts of terrorism, sabotage and other criminal acts. Munitions
and explosive laden vessels also pose a unique threat to the safety and
security of the MOTSU facility, vessel crews, and others in the
maritime community and the surrounding community should the vessels be
[[Page 22752]]
subject to acts of terrorism or sabotage, or other criminal acts. The
ability to control waterside access to munitions and explosive laden
vessels moored to the MOTSU facility is critical to national defense
and security, as well as to the safety and security of the MOTSU
facility, vessel crews, and others in the maritime community and the
surrounding community. Therefore, the Coast Guard proposes to establish
this security zone to safeguard human life, vessels and facilities from
sabotage, terrorist acts or other criminal acts.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed rule is for a permanent security zone located on the
Cape Fear River, North Carolina adjacent to the MOTSU facility and
includes the area bound by the following points: beginning at a point
located at 34[deg]02.03[min] N, 077[deg]56.60[min] W near Cape Fear
River Channel Lighted Buoy 9 (LLNR 30355), extending south along the
shore to 34[deg]00.00[min] N, 077[deg]57.25[min] W, proceeding to the
southern most tip of the Zone at 33[deg]59.16[min] N,
077[deg]57.00[min] W at then proceeding north to 34[deg]00.65[min] N,
077[deg]56.41[min] W at Cape Fear River Channel Lighted Buoy 31(LLNR
30670 & 39905) back to the point of origin at 34[deg]02.03[min] N,
077[deg]56.60[min] W.
The security zone is necessary to protect MOTSU and vessels moored
at the facility, their crews, others in the maritime community and the
surrounding communities from subversive or terrorist attack that could
cause serious negative impact to vessels, the port, or the environment,
and result in numerous casualties.
No person or vessel may enter or remain in the security zone at any
time without the permission of the Captain of the Port, Wilmington.
Each person or vessel operating within the security zone must obey any
direction or order of the Captain of the Port. The Captain of the Port
may take possession and control of any vessel in a security zone and/or
remove any person, vessel, article or thing from this security zone.
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 under the regulatory policies
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary.
Although this regulation restricts access to the security zone, the
effect of this regulation will not be significant because: (i) The COTP
or his or her representative may authorize access to the security zone;
(ii) the security zone will be enforced for limited duration; and (iii)
the Coast Guard will make notifications via maritime advisories so
mariners can adjust their plans accordingly.
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.
This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: The owners and operators of vessels intending to
transit or anchor in the vicinity of Military Ocean Terminal Sunny
Point. This includes owners and operators of vessels entering the zone.
This security zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. The
security zone is not located in an area that would impede commercial or
recreational traffic.
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 LCDR Charles A.
Roskam II, Chief, Port Operations (910) 772-2200 or toll free (877)
229-0770.
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. Though this proposed rule would not result in such
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.
[[Page 22753]]
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. A final ``Environmental Analysis Check
List'' and a final ``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' are
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.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
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.
2. Add Sec. 165.T05-016 to read as follow:
Sec. 165.T05-016--Security Zone: Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point
and Lower Cape Fear River, NC.
(a) Location. The following area is a security zone: the area and
waters bound by the following points: beginning at a point located at
34[deg]02.03' N, 077[deg]56.60' W near Cape Fear River Channel Lighted
Buoy 9 (LLNR 30355), extending south along the shore to 34[deg]00.00'
N, 077[deg]57.25' W, proceeding south to 33[deg]59.16' N,
077[deg]57.00' W at then proceeding north to 34Sec. 00.65' N,
077[deg]56.41' W at Cape Fear River Channel Lighted Buoy 31(LLNR 30670
& 39905) back to the point of origin at 34[deg]02.03' N, 077[deg]56.60'
W.
(b) Captain of the Port. As used in this section, Captain of the
Port means the Commanding Officer of the Marine Safety Office
Wilmington, NC, or any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty
officer who has been authorized to act on his or her behalf.
(c) Regulations. (1) All persons are required to comply with the
general regulations governing security zones in 33 CFR 165.33.
(2) Persons or vessels with a need to enter into or pass through
the security zone, must first request authorization from the Captain of
the Port. The Captain of the Port's representative enforcing the zone
can be contacted on VHF marine band radio, channel 16. The Captain of
the Port can be contacted at (910) 772-2000 or toll free (877) 229-
0770.
(d) Enforcement. The Captain of the Port may be assisted by the
U.S. Army in the patrol and enforcement of this security zone.
Dated: April 8, 2004.
Jane M. Hartley,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Wilmington, North
Carolina.
[FR Doc. 04-9481 Filed 4-26-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P