[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 115 (Friday, June 14, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40853-40854]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-15128]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD09-01-125]
RIN 2115-AA97


Security Zone; Lake Ontario, Rochester, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Temporary final rule; change in effective period.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is revising the effective period for a 
temporary security zone in the Captain of the Port Buffalo zone for the 
Ginna Nuclear Power Plant. This security zone is necessary to protect 
this nuclear power plant from possible sabotage or other subversive 
acts, accidents, or possible acts of terrorism. This security zone is 
intended to restrict vessel traffic from a portion of Lake Ontario.

DATES: The amendment to Sec. 165.T09-101(b) in this rule is effective 
on June 14, 2002. Section 165.T09-101, added at 66 FR 49285, September 
27, 2001, effective September 12, 2001, through June 15, 2002, as 
amended in this rule, is extended in effect through August 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 Buffalo, 1 Fuhrmann Blvd., 
Buffalo, NY 14203 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Commander David Flaherty, 
U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Buffalo, 1 Fuhrmann Blvd., 
Buffalo, NY 14203. The telephone number is (716) 843-9574.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    On September 27, 2001, we published a temporary final rule entitled 
Security Zone: Lake Ontario, Rochester, NY in the Federal Register (66 
FR 49284). The temporary final rule established a temporary security 
zone in the Captain of the Port Buffalo zone for the Ginna Nuclear 
Power Plant. This security zone is necessary to protect this nuclear 
power plant from possible sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, 
or possible acts of terrorism.
    We are extending the effective period of the temporary final rule 
so that we can complete a rulemaking entitled ``Security Zones; Captain 
of the Port Buffalo Zone'' (67 FR 37748, May 30, 2002; docket number 
CGD09-02-005) to permanently establish four security zones on the 
navigable waters of Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River in the 
Captain of the Port Buffalo Zone. These security zones are necessary to 
protect the nuclear power plants and the St. Lawrence Seaway system 
from possible acts of terrorism. Extending the effective date until 
August 15, 2002 should provide us enough time to complete the 
rulemaking.
    We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this 
rule and it is being made effective less than 30 days after publication 
in the Federal Register. When we promulgated the September 12, 2001 
rule, we intended to either allow it to expire on June 15, 2002, or to 
cancel it if we made permanent changes before that date. We published 
an NPRM on May 30, 2002 to propose permanent security zones for this 
and other power plants (67 FR 37748). That rulemaking will follow 
normal notice and comment procedures, and a final rule should be 
published before August 15, 2002. Continuing the temporary final rule 
in effect while the permanent rulemaking is in progress will help 
ensure the safety of critical infrastructure that may be the subject of 
subversive activity. Nuclear power plants are important means of 
electrical energy in the region. In addition, they could be a source of 
severe radiological contamination throughout the region. Therefore, the 
Coast Guard finds good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) and (d)(3) for 
why a notice of proposed rulemaking and opportunity for comment is not 
required and why this rule will be made for comment is not required and 
why this rule will be made effective fewer than 30 days after 
publication in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

    A temporary security zone is necessary to ensure the security of 
the security of the Ginna nuclear power plant, as a result of the 
terrorist attacks on the United States on 11 September 2001. The 
security zone consists of all navigable waters of Lake Ontario bounded 
by the following area, starting at 43 deg.16.9' N, 077 deg.18.9' W; 
then north to 43 deg.17.3' N, 077 deg.18.9' W; then east to 
43 deg.17.3' N, 077 deg.18.3' W; then south to 43 deg.16.7' N, 
077 deg.18.3' W; then following the shoreline back to starting point 
(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

[[Page 40854]]

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 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 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 M16475.1C, 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 Subject in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record 
keeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.


    For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 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. 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. In Sec. 165.T09-101, paragraph (b) is revised to read as 
follows:


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

* * * * *
    (b) Effective time and date. This section is effective from 
September 12, 2001, through August 15, 2002.
* * * * *

    Dated: June 10, 2002.
S.D. Hardy,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 02-15128 Filed 6-12-02; 12:37 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P