[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 129 (Monday, July 7, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40231-40233]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-16972]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[COTP Mobile-03-013]
RIN 1625-AA00


Security Zone; Bayou Casotte, Pascagoula, MS

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a permanent security 
zone encompassing all waters of Bayou Casotte east of a line drawn from 
position 30[deg]19'09'' N, 88[deg]30'63'' W to position 30[deg]20'42'' 
N, 88[deg]30'51'' W at the Chevron Pascagoula Refinery. This security 
zone is necessary to protect Chevron Pascagoula refinery, persons, and 
vessels from subversive or terrorist acts. Entry of persons or vessels 
into this security zone will be prohibited unless authorized by the 
Captain of the Port Mobile, or a designated representative.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before September 5, 2003.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Marine Safety 
Office Mobile, Brookley Complex, Bldg 102, South Broad Street, Mobile, 
AL 36615-1390. Marine Safety Office Mobile 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 Marine Safety Office Mobile, Brookley Complex, 
Bldg 102, South Broad Street, Mobile, AL 36615-1390 between 8 a.m. and 
4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant (LT) Carolyn Beatty, 
Operations Department, Marine Safety Office Mobile, AL, at (251) 441-
5771.

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

[[Page 40232]]

address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking [COTP Mobile-
03-013], 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 Marine Safety Office Mobile 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 later notice in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

    On September 11, 2001, both towers of the World Trade Center and 
the Pentagon were attacked by terrorists. The President has continued 
the national emergency he declared following those attacks (67 FR 
58317, Sept. 13, 2002) (continuing the emergency declared with respect 
to terrorist attacks) and (67 FR 59447, Sept. 20, 2002) (continuing 
emergency with respect to persons who commit, threaten to commit or 
support terrorism). The President also has found pursuant to law, 
including the Magnuson Act (50 U.S.C. 191 et seq.), that the security 
of the United States is and continues to be endangered following the 
terrorist attacks (E.O. 13,273, 67 FR 56215, Sept. 3, 2002) (security 
of U.S. endangered by disturbances in international relations of U.S 
and such disturbances continue to endanger such relations). National 
security and intelligence officials have warned that future terrorist 
attacks against civilian targets are anticipated. In response to these 
terrorist acts and warnings, heightened awareness for the security and 
safety of all vessels, ports, and harbors is necessary.
    On March 22, 2003, the Captain of the Port Mobile established a 
temporary security zone for the Chevron Pascagoula Refinery (COTP 
Mobile-03-009, 68 FR 23594). That temporary final rule was published in 
the Federal Register on May 5, 2003, and expires on September 22, 2003.
    The Captain of the Port has determined there is a need for this 
security zone to remain in effect indefinitely because of the continued 
threat of terrorism and the nature of the material handled at the 
refinery. The proposed rule would establish a permanent security zone 
identical to the existing temporary zone.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    A security zone is proposed for all waters of Bayou Casotte east of 
a line drawn from position 30[deg]19'09'' N, 88[deg]30'63'' W; to 
position 30[deg]20'42'' N, 88[deg]30'51'' W, at the Chevron Pascagoula 
Refinery. These coordinates are based upon [NAD 83]. All persons and 
vessels would be prohibited from entering or remaining in this zone 
without permission of the Captain of the Port Mobile or a designated 
representative.
    The zone is designed to increase protection around the Chevron 
Pascagoula Refinery in Pascagoula, MS. It increases the opportunity for 
detection of a waterborne attack on the facility and consequently 
enhances public health and safety, providing greater defense and 
security at this location and its surrounding areas. The location of 
this security zone will limit access to only the waters immediately 
adjacent to the facility and will permit vessels to safety navigate 
around the zone. The establishment of this security zone will have 
minimal impact on maritime traffic in the vicinity of the facility.

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.
    This proposed rule would not obstruct the regular flow of vessel 
traffic and will allow vessel traffic to pass safely around the 
security zone. Vessels may be permitted to enter the security zone on a 
case-by-case basis.

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. The Coast Guard is unaware of any small 
entities that would be impacted by this proposed rule. The navigable 
channel remains open to all vessel traffic. We have received no 
comments or objections regarding the existing security zone covering 
the same area.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed 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 they can better 
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. 
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 LT Carolyn Beatty, 
Operations Department, Marine Safety Office Mobile, AL, at (251) 441-
5771.

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

[[Page 40233]]

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 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 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 proposed 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 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 proposed rule under Commandant Instruction 
M16475.1D, 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 categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the 
Instruction. Therefore, this proposed rule is categorically excluded, 
under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the instruction, from further 
environmental documentation because this rule is not expected to result 
in any significant environmental impact as described in NEPA. A final 
``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a final ``Categorical 
Exclusion Determination'' are available where indicated under 
ADDRESSES. Comments on this section will be considered before we make 
the final decision on whether the rule should be categorically excluded 
from further environmental review.

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; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.

    2. Add Sec.  165.824 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.824  Security Zone; Chevron Pascagoula Refinery, Pascagoula, 
MS.

    (a) Location. The following area is a security zone: all waters of 
Bayou Casotte east of a line drawn from position 30[deg]19'09'' N, 
88[deg]30'63'' W to position 30[deg]20'42'' N 88[deg]30'51'' W at the 
Chevron Pascagoula Refinery. These coordinates are based upon [NAD 83].
    (b) Regulations: (1) Entry into or remaining in this zone is 
prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port 
Mobile or a designated representative.
    (2) Persons desiring to transit the area of the security zone may 
contact the Captain of the Port Mobile at telephone number (251) 441-
5121 or on VHF channel 16 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 Mobile or a designated 
representative.
    (c) Authority. In addition to 33 U.S.C. 1231, the authority for 
this section includes 33 U.S.C. 1226.

    Dated: June 19, 2003.
Gary T. Croot,
Commander, Coast Guard, Acting, Captain of the Port Mobile.
[FR Doc. 03-16972 Filed 7-3-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-U