[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 188 (Thursday, September 27, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 49284-49285]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-24241]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD09-01-125]
RIN 2115-AA97


Security Zone; Lake Ontario, Rochester, New York

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary security zone 
encompassing the navigable waters of Lake Ontario in the vicinity of 
the Ginna nuclear power plant. This security zone is necessary to 
prevent damage to this nuclear power plant. Unauthorized entry into 
this security zone is prohibited.

DATES: This rule is effective from September 12, 2001, through June 15, 
2002.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as 
documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, 
are part of docket CGD09-01-125 and are available for inspection or 
copying at U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Buffalo, 1 Fuhrmann 
Blvd., Buffalo, New York 14203 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant David Flaherty, U.S. Coast 
Guard Marine Safety Office Buffalo, (716) 843-9574.

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, and, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), 
good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days 
after publication in the Federal Register. The Coast Guard had 
insufficient advance notice to publish an NPRM followed by a temporary 
final rule that would be effective before the necessary date. 
Publication of a notice of proposed rulemaking and delay of effective 
date would be contrary to the public interest because immediate action 
is necessary to prevent possible loss of life, injury, or damage to 
property.

Background and Purpose

    This temporary security zone is necessary to ensure the security of 
the Ginna nuclear power plant, as a result of the terrorist attacks on 
the United States on September 11, 2001. This security zone consists of 
all navigable waters of Lake Ontario within a line from 43 deg.16.9' N, 
77 deg.18.9' W; north to 43 deg.17.5' N, 77 deg.18.9' W; east to 
43 deg.17.5' N, 77 deg.18.3' W; south to 43 deg.16.7' N, 77 deg.18.3' 
W; back to the starting point 43 deg.16.9' N, 77 deg.18.9' W. (NAD 83). 
Entry into, transit through or anchoring within this security zone is 
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his 
designated on-scene representative. The designated on-scene 
representative will be the Patrol Commander and may be contacted via 
VHF/FM Marine Channel 16.

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 Transportation 
(DOT) (44 FR 11040, February 26, 1979).

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.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 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 would affect your small business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or 
options for compliance, please contact Marine Safety Office Buffalo 
(see ADDRESSES.)
    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 an 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

[[Page 49285]]

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 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. 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.

Environment

    The Coast Guard considered the environmental impact of this 
regulation and concluded that, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g) of 
Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, it is categorically excluded from 
further environmental documentation. A ``Categorical Exclusion 
Determination'' is available in the docket for inspection or copying 
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 set out in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 
CFR part 165 as follows:
    1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 
6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; 49 CFR 1.46.

    2. A new temporary Sec. 165.T09-101 is added to read as follows:


Sec. 165.T09-101  Security Zone; Lake Ontario, Rochester, NY.

    (a) Location. The following area is a temporary security zone: all 
navigable waters of Lake Ontario within a line from 43 deg.16.9' N, 
77 deg.18.9' W; north to 43 deg.17.5' N, 77 deg.18.9' W; east to 
43 deg.17.5' N, 77 deg.18.3' W; south to 43 deg.16.7' N, 77 deg.18.3' 
W; back to the starting point 43 deg.16.9' N, 77 deg.18.9' W. (NAD 83).
    (b) Effective time and date. This section is effective from 
September 12, 2001, through June 15, 2002.
    (c) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations in 
Sec. 165.33 of this part, entry into this zone is prohibited unless 
authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Buffalo, or the 
designated Patrol Commander. The designated Patrol Commander on scene 
may be contacted on VHF-FM Channel 16.

    Dated: September 12, 2001.
S. D. Hardy,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 01-24241 Filed 9-26-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P