[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 107 (Wednesday, June 4, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33382-33384]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-14015]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[COTP San Francisco Bay 03-010]
RIN 1625-AA00


Security Zone; Suisun Bay, Concord, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary security zone in 
the navigable waters of the United States adjacent to the Military 
Ocean Terminal Concord (MOTCO), California (formerly United States 
Naval Weapons Center Concord, California). The need for this security 
zone is based on recent terrorist actions against the United States and 
for national security reasons to protect the public and areas 
surrounding MOTCO from potential terrorist attacks. The security zone 
will prohibit all persons and vessels from entering, transiting through 
or anchoring within a portion of the Suisun Bay surrounding MOTCO 
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP), or his designated 
representative.

DATES: This regulation is effective from 7 a.m. PDT on May 29, 2003 to 
11:59 p.m. PDT on June 6, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in 
the docket are part of docket [COTP San Francisco Bay 03-010] and are 
available for inspection or copying at Coast Guard Marine Safety Office 
San Francisco Bay, Coast Guard Island, Alameda, California 94501, 
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Doug Ebbers, U.S. Coast 
Guard Marine Safety Office San Francisco Bay, at (510) 437-3073.

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. This action was taken at the 
request of the United States Army and is a joint military operation 
with the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy and U.S. Coast Guard. This temporary 
security zone is necessary to safeguard the MOTCO terminal and the 
surrounding property from sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, 
criminal actions, or other causes of similar nature. This zone is also 
necessary to protect military operations from compromise and 
interference. Additionally, 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). 
Additionally, a Maritime Advisory was issued to: Operators of U.S. Flag 
and Effective U.S. controlled Vessels and other Maritime Interests, 
detailing the current threat of attack, MARAD 02-07 (October 10, 2002). 
As a result, this security zone is needed for national security reasons 
to protect the United States and more specifically the people, ports, 
waterways, and properties of the Port Chicago and Suisun Bay areas. Any 
delay in implementing this rule would be contrary to the public 
interest since immediate action is necessary to ensure the protection 
of all cargo vessels, their crews, the public and national security.
    Furthermore, in order to protect the interests of national 
security, the Coast Guard is promulgating this temporary regulation to 
provide for the safety and security of operations in the navigable 
waters of the United States. As a result, the establishment and 
enforcement of this security zone is a function directly involved in, 
and necessary to military operations. Also, 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 
for the same reasons outlined above.

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 conflict in Iraq have made it prudent for U.S. ports to be on a 
higher state of alert because Al-Qaeda and other 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 Act of June 15, 1917, as amended by the 
Magnuson Act of August 9, 1950 (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, United States Army officials have requested that the 
Captain of the Port, San Francisco Bay, California establish a 
temporary security zone in the navigable waters of the United States 
surrounding the Military Ocean Terminal Concord (MOTCO), California, to 
safeguard vessels, cargo and crew engaged in military operations.

[[Page 33383]]

Discussion of Rule

    In this temporary rule, the Coast Guard is establishing a fixed 
security zone around Military Ocean Terminal Concord (MOTCO), 
California, encompassing the navigable waters, extending from the 
surface to the sea floor, bounded by the following coordinates: 
latitude 38[deg]03'07''N and longitude 122[deg]03'00''W; thence to 
latitude 38[deg]03'15''N and longitude 122[deg]03'04''W; thence to 
latitude 38[deg]03'30''N and longitude 122[deg]02'35''W; thence to 
latitude 38[deg]03'50''N and longitude 122[deg]01'15''W; thence to 
latitude 38[deg]03'43''N and longitude 122[deg]00'28''W; thence to 
latitude 38[deg]03'41''N and longitude 122[deg]00'03''W; thence to 
latitude 38[deg]03'18''N and longitude 121[deg]59'31''W, and along the 
shoreline back to the beginning point.
    Vessels or persons violating this section will be subject to the 
penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 50 U.S.C. 192. Pursuant to 33 
U.S.C. 1232, 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, and a civil penalty 
of not more than $25,000 for each day of a continuing violation.
    The Captain of the Port will enforce this zone and may enlist the 
aid and cooperation of any Federal, State, county, municipal, and 
private agency to assist in the enforcement of the regulation. This 
regulation is proposed under the authority of 33 U.S.C. 1226 in 
addition to the authority contained in 50 U.S.C. 191 and 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 the zone, the effect 
of this regulation will not be significant because the zone will 
encompass only a small portion of the waterway for a short duration. 
Vessels and persons 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 size of the zone is the minimum necessary to provide adequate 
protection for MOTCO, vessels engaged in operations at MOTCO, their 
crews, other vessels operating in the vicinity, their crews and 
passengers, adjoining areas, and the public. The entities most likely 
to be affected are commercial vessels transiting to or from Suisun Bay 
via the Port Chicago Reach section of the channel.

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 because, although the security zone will occupy a section of 
the navigable channel (Port Chicago Reach) adjacent to the Marine Ocean 
Terminal Concord (MOTCO), vessels will receive authorization to transit 
through the zone by the Captain of the Port or his designated 
representative on a case-by-case basis. Additionally, vessels engaged 
in recreational activities, sightseeing and commercial fishing have 
ample space outside of the security zone to engage in these activities. 
Small entities and the maritime public will be advised of this security 
zone via public notice to mariners.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we offer 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 the person listed under FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 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 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 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.

[[Page 33384]]

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

    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'' are available in the docket 
where located under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reports and record 
keeping 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. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 
6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.


0
2. Add Sec.  165.T11-084 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.T11-084  Security Zone; Navigable Waters of the United States 
Surrounding Military Ocean Terminal Concord (MOTCO), Concord, 
California.

    (a) Location. The security zone, which will be marked by lighted 
buoys, will encompass the navigable waters, extending from the surface 
to the sea floor, surrounding the Military Ocean Terminal Concord, 
Concord, California, bounded by the following coordinates: latitude 
38[deg]03'07''N and longitude 122[deg]03'00''W; thence to latitude 
38[deg]03'15''N and longitude 122[deg]03'04''W; thence to latitude 
38[deg]03'30''N and longitude 122[deg]02'35''W; thence to latitude 
38[deg]03'50''N and longitude 122[deg]01'15''W; thence to latitude 
38[deg]03'43''N and longitude 122[deg]00'28''W; thence to latitude 
38[deg]03'41''N and longitude 122[deg]00'03''W; thence to latitude 
38[deg]03'18''N and longitude 121[deg]59'31''W, and along the shoreline 
back to the beginning point.
    (b) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in 
Sec.  165.33 of this part, entering, transiting through or anchoring in 
this zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of 
the Port, San Francisco Bay, 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 510-437-3073 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.
    (c) Authority. In addition to 33 U.S.C. 1231 and 50 U.S.C. 191, the 
authority for this section includes 33 U.S.C. 1226.
    (d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol 
and enforcement of the security zone by local law enforcement and the 
MOTCO police as necessary.
    (e) Effective Dates. This section becomes effective at 7 a.m. PDT 
on May 29, 2003, and will terminate at 11:59 p.m. PDT on June 6, 2003.

    Dated: May 27, 2003.
Gerald M. Swanson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, San Francisco Bay, 
California.
[FR Doc. 03-14015 Filed 6-3-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P