[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 212 (Friday, November 1, 2002)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 66595-66597]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-27849]



[[Page 66595]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[COTP San Diego 02-026]
RIN 2115-AA97


Security Zones; Port of San Diego, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish moving and fixed 
security zones around and under all cruise ships that are located in 
the Port of San Diego. These proposed security zones are needed for 
national security reasons to protect the public and ports from 
potential terrorist acts. Entry into these zones will be prohibited, 
unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port San Diego.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before November 29, 2002.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Coast Guard 
Marine Safety Office San Diego, 2716 North Harbor Drive, San Diego, 
California, 92101. The Port Operations Department 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 the Port Operations Department, 
2716 North Harbor Drive, San Diego, California, 92101, between 8 a.m. 
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Commander Rick Sorrell, 
Chief, Port Operations Department, Marine Safety Office San Diego, 
(619) 683-6495.

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 (COTP San 
Diego 02-026), 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 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.
    In our final rule, we will include a concise general statement of 
the comments received and identify any changes from the proposed rule 
based on the comments. If as we anticipate, we make the final rule 
effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, 
we will explain our good cause for doing so as required by 5 U.S.C. 
553(d)(3).

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a 
request for a meeting by writing to Marine Safety Office San Diego 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

    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 
growing tensions in Iraq have made it prudent for U.S. ports to be on a 
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. The Coast Guard also has authority to establish 
security zones pursuant to the Magnuson Act (50 U.S.C. 191 et seq.) and 
implementing regulations promulgated by the President in subparts 6.01 
and 6.04 of part 6 of Title 33 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
    In this particular rulemaking, to address the aforementioned 
security concerns, and to take steps to prevent the catastrophic impact 
that a terrorist attack against a cruise ship would have on the public 
interest, the Coast Guard proposes to establish security zones around 
and under cruise ships entering, departing, or moored within the port 
of San Diego. These security zones will help the Coast Guard prevent 
vessels or persons from engaging in terrorist actions against cruise 
ships. The Coast Guard believes the establishment of security zones is 
prudent for cruise ships because they carry multiple passengers.
    On November 4, 2001, we issued a rule under docket COTP San Diego 
01-022 which was published in the Federal Register (67 FR 6648, Feb. 
13, 2002) under temporary section 165.T11-030 of Title 33 of the Code 
of Federal Regulations (CFR). In that rulemaking, the Coast Guard 
established a rule creating 100 yard security zones around cruise ships 
that enter, are moored in, or depart from the Port of San Diego.
    On June 12, 2002, a change in effective period temporary rule was 
issued, under docket COTP SD 02-013, and was published in the Federal 
Register (67 FR 41845, June 20, 2002) under the same previous temporary 
section 165.T11-030, which is set to expire at 11:59 pm on December 21, 
2002. The Captain of the Port has determined the need for continued 
security regulations exists. The proposed regulation differs slightly 
from temporary section 165.T11-030 in one way. Although, while implicit 
in the temporary rule, the security zones proposed here will be 
described as extending from the water's surface to the sea floor. This 
more specific description is intended to discourage unidentified scuba 
divers and swimmers from coming within close proximity of a cruise 
ship.
    Accordingly, this rulemaking proposes to make permanent the 
temporary security zones established on November 4, 2001, under docket 
COTP San Diego 01-022, 33 CFR 165.T11-030 published in the Federal 
Register at 67 FR 6648 (February 13, 2002). This temporary rulemaking 
effective period was extended until December 21, 2002 by a notice in 
the Federal Register published June 20, 2002 (67 FR 41845).

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to establish moving and fixed security 
zones around all cruise ships that are anchored, moored, or underway 
within the port of San Diego. These proposed security zones will take 
effect upon the entry of any cruise ship into the waters within the San 
Diego sea buoy and will remain into effect until the cruise ship passes 
the San Diego sea buoy on its departure

[[Page 66596]]

from the Port of San Diego. This proposed rule, for security concerns, 
prohibits entry of any vessel inside the security zone surrounding a 
cruise ship. These security zones are within a 100 yard radius around 
any cruise ship that is anchored at a designated anchorage; that is 
moored, or in the process of mooring, at any berth within the San Diego 
port; and that is underway.
    These security zones are needed for national security reasons to 
protect cruise ships, the public, transiting vessels, adjacent 
waterfront facilities, and the port from potential subversive acts, 
accidents, or other events of a similar nature. Entry into these zones 
will be prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the 
Port or his designated representative. Vessels already moored when 
these security zones take effect are not required to get underway to 
avoid either the moving or fixed zones unless specifically ordered to 
do so by the Captain of the Port or his designated representative.
    This zone will be enforced by the official patrol, (Coast Guard 
commissioned, warrant or petty officers) onboard Coast Guard vessels 
and patrol craft. The official patrol may also be onboard patrol craft 
and resources of any government agency that has agreed to assist the 
Coast Guard in the performance of its duties. The Captain of the Port 
will enforce these zones and may request the use of resources and 
personnel of other government and private agencies to assist 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 and 50 U.S.C. 191.
    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 and 
33 CFR part 27, any violation of the security zone described herein, is 
punishable by civil penalties (not to exceed $27,500 per violation, 
where each day of a continuing violation is a separate violation), 
criminal penalties (imprisonment up to 6 years and a maximum fine of 
$250,000), 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.
    Vessels or persons violating this section are also subject to the 
penalties set forth in 50 U.S.C. 192: seizure and forfeiture of the 
vessel to the United States; a maximum criminal fine of $10,000; and 
imprisonment up to 10 years.

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 
Transportation (DOT) (44 FR 11040, February 26, l979).
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so 
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 10e of the 
regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary.
    The effect of this regulation will not be significant due to the 
minimal time that vessels will be restricted from the area. Also, the 
zones will encompass only a small portion of the waterway. The Port of 
San Diego can accommodate only a few cruise ships moored at the same 
time. Most cruise ship calls at each location occur on only one day 
each week, and are generally less than 18 hours in duration. 
Furthermore, vessels will be able to pass safely around the zones, and 
vessels and people may be allowed to enter these zones on a case-by-
case basis with permission of the Captain of the Port.
    The sizes of the zones are the minimum necessary to provide 
adequate protection for the cruise ships, their crews and passengers, 
other vessels operating in the vicinity of the cruise ships and their 
crews, adjoining areas, and the public. The entities most likely to be 
affected are commercial vessels transiting the main ship channel en 
route the Port of San Diego and pleasure craft engaged in recreational 
activities and sightseeing. The security zones will prohibit any 
commercial vessels from meeting or overtaking a cruise ship in the main 
ship channels, effectively limiting the use of the channel. However, 
the moving security zones will only be effective during cruise ship 
transits, which will last for approximately 60 minutes. In addition, 
vessels are able to safely transit around the zones while a vessel is 
moored or at anchor in the Port of San Diego.

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. We expect this proposed rule may affect the 
following entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners and 
operators of private and commercial vessels intending to transit or 
anchor in these small portions near the cruise ships covered by these 
security zones, of the port of San Diego. The impact to these entities 
would not be significant since these zones are proposed to encompass 
only small portions of the waterway for limited period of times (while 
the cruise ships are transiting, moored). Delays, if any, are expected 
to be less than sixty minutes in duration. Small vessel traffic can 
pass safely around the area and vessels engaged in recreational 
activities, sightseeing and commercial fishing have ample space outside 
of the security zone to engage in these activities. When a cruise ship 
is at anchor, vessel traffic will have ample room to maneuver around 
the security zone. The outbound or inbound transit of a cruise ship 
will last about 60 minutes. Although this regulation prohibits 
simultaneous use of portions of the channel, this prohibition is of 
short duration. While a cruise ship is moored, commercial traffic and 
small recreational traffic will have an opportunity to coordinate 
movement through the security zone with the patrol commander.
    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

[[Page 66597]]

LTJG Joseph Brown, Marine Safety Office San Diego, (619) 683-6495

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 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 
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. 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

    We have considered the environmental impact of this proposed rule 
and concluded that, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of Commandant 
Instruction M16475.lD, this rule is categorically excluded from further 
environmental documentation because we are proposing to establishing a 
security zone. A ``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' is 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. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 
6.04-1, 6.04-6 and 160.5; 49 CFR 1.46.

    2. Add Sec.  165.1108 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.1108  Security Zones; Cruise Ships, Port of San Diego, 
California.

    (a) Definition. ``Cruise ship'' as used in this section means a 
passenger vessel, except for a ferry, over 100 feet in length, 
authorized to carry more than 12 passengers for hire; capable of making 
international voyages lasting more than 24 hours, any part of which is 
on the high seas; and for which passengers are embarked, disembarked or 
at a port of call in the San Diego port.
    (b) Location. The following areas are security zones:
    (1) All waters, extending from the surface to the sea floor, within 
a 100 yard radius around any cruise ship that is anchored at a 
designated anchorage within the San Diego port area inside the sea 
buoys bounding the port of San Diego.
    (2) The shore area and all waters, extending from the surface to 
the sea floor, within a 100 yard radius around any cruise ship that is 
moored at any berth within the San Diego port area inside the sea buoys 
bounding the Port of San Diego; and
    (3) All waters, extending from the surface to the sea floor, within 
a 100 yard radius around any cruise ship that is underway on the waters 
inside the sea buoys bounding the Port of San Diego.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulation in 
Sec.  165.33 of the part, entry into or remaining in this zone is 
prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, 
San Diego or his designated representative.
    (2) Persons desiring to transit the area of the security zone may 
contact the Captain of the Port at telephone number (619) 683-6495 or 
on VHF-FM 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 or his or her 
designated representative.

    (d) Authority: In addition to 33 U.S.C. 1231, the authority for 
this section includes 33 U.S.C. 1226.

    (e) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol 
and enforcement of the security zone by the San Diego Port Police.

    Dated: October 11, 2002.
S.P. Metruck,
Commander, US Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, San Diego, California.
[FR Doc. 02-27849 Filed 10-31-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P