[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 157 (Thursday, August 14, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48555-48557]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-20770]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[COTP Los Angeles-Long Beach 03-007]
RIN 1625-AA00


Security Zone; Long Beach, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a security zone in the 
waters adjacent to Pier T126 in San Pedro Bay, Long Beach, CA. This 
action is needed to protect the U.S. Naval vessel(s) and their crew(s) 
during military outload evolutions at Pier T126 from sabotage, or other 
subversive acts, accidents, criminal actions or other causes of a 
similar nature. Entry, transit, or anchoring in this zone is prohibited 
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) Los Angeles-Long 
Beach, or his designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 6 a.m. (PDT) on August 2, 2003, to 6 
a.m. (PDT) on September 1, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in 
the docket are part of docket [COTP Los Angeles-Long Beach 03-007] and 
are available for inspection or copying at U.S. Coast Guard Marine 
Safety Office/

[[Page 48556]]

Group Los Angeles-Long Beach, 1001 South Seaside Avenue, Building 20, 
San Pedro, California, 90731 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Ryan Manning, USCG, Chief 
of Waterways Management Division, at (310) 732-2020.

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. Final dates and other 
logistical details for the event were not provided to the Coast Guard 
in time to draft and publish an NPRM or a temporary final rule 30 days 
prior to the event, as the event would occur before the rulemaking 
process was complete. Any delay in implementing this rule would be 
contrary to the public interest since immediate action is necessary to 
protect persons, vessels and others in the maritime community from the 
hazards associated with the offloading operations.
    For the same reasons stated above, 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.

Background and Purpose

    The United States Navy will conduct military outload operations 
from Long Beach Pier T126. These operations involve the offloading of 
equipment onboard a Military Sealift Command (MSC) vessel for the 
furtherance of our national security. These offload evolutions are 
often directed at a moments notice. In an effort to protect the offload 
evolution and provide adequate notice to the public, the Captain of the 
Port of Los Angeles-Long Beach proposes to establish a temporary 
security zone around the Long Beach Pier T126 which will be actively 
enforced when the military offload evolution occurs.
    As part of the Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986 
(Pub. L. 99-399), Congress amended The Ports and Waterways Safety Act 
(PWSA) 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. 33 U.S.C. 1226. The terrorist acts against the United 
States on September 11, 2001, have increased the need for safety and 
security measures on U.S. ports and waterways.
    In response to these terrorist acts, and in order to prevent 
similar occurrences, the Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary 
security zone in the navigable waters of the United States adjacent to 
the Long Beach Pier T126. The action proposed under this rule is 
necessary to protect the U.S. Naval vessel(s) and their crew(s) during 
these military outload evolutions at Long Beach Pier T126 from 
sabotage, or other subversive acts, accidents, criminal actions or 
other causes of a similar nature.

Discussion of Rule

    Due to National Security interests, the implementation of this 
security zone is necessary for the protection of the United States and 
its people. The size of the zone is the minimum necessary to provide 
adequate protection for the U.S. Naval vessel(s), their crew(s), 
adjoining areas, and the public.
    The military outload evolutions involve the transfer of military 
equipment from a MSC vessel to a shore side staging area. The security 
zone will accompany other security measures implemented at Long Beach 
Pier T126 waterfront facility.
    Due to complex planning, national security reasons, and 
coordination with all military schedules, information regarding the 
precise location and date of the military outload will not be 
circulated, however, prior to the outload evolution, the public will be 
notified that the security zone is in effect and will be enforced 
actively. The notice of active enforcement of the security zone will be 
announced via broadcast notice to mariners, local notice to mariners, 
or by any other means that is deemed appropriate.
    This security zone is established pursuant to the authority of the 
Magnuson Act regulations promulgated by the President under 50 U.S.C. 
191, including subparts 6.01 and 6.04 of part 6 of title 33 of the Code 
of Federal Regulations. Vessels or persons violating this section are 
subject to he penalties set forth in 50 U.S.C. 192 which include 
seizure and forfeiture of the vessel, a monetary penalty of not more 
than $12,500, and imprisonment for not more than 10 years.

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: (i) The zone will 
encompass only a small portion of the waterway; (ii) vessels will be 
able to pass safely around the zones; and (iii) vessels 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.
    Most of the entities likely to be affected are pleasure craft 
engaged in recreational activities and sightseeing. Any hardships 
experienced by persons or vessels are considered minimal compared to 
the national interest in protecting the U.S. Naval vessel, their crew, 
and the public. Accordingly, full regulatory evaluation under the 
regulatory policies and procedures of the DHS is unnecessary.

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. Most of the traffic in this area is recreational traffic and 
sightseers. The economic impact is minimal by having them gain 
permission to transit through the zone from the COTP or his 
representative. The Coast Guard has coordinated with known private 
business owners in an effort to reduce any substantial impact on 
business.

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 your 
small business or organization is affected by this rule 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.

[[Page 48557]]

    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 affect 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. 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 considered the environmental impact of this 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 establishing a security 
zone. A ``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' and checklist are 
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.


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. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. 
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.1.


0
2. Add a new Sec.  165.T11-075 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.T11-075  Security Zone; Waters Adjacent to Long Beach Pier 
T126.

    (a) Location. The security zone consists of all waters, extending 
from the surface to the sea floor, within a 500-yard radius of a MSC 
vessel, while the vessel is moored at Long Beach T126.
    (b) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in 
Sec.  165.33 of this part, entry into, transit through, or anchoring 
within the security zone by all vessels is prohibited during military 
outloads, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his 
designated representative. All other general regulations of Sec.  
165.33 of this part apply in the security zone established by this 
section.
    (2) Persons desiring to transit the area of the security zone may 
contact the Captain of the Port at telephone number 1-800-221-USCG 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) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol 
and enforcement of the security zone by the Long Beach Police 
Department.

    Dated: July 30, 2003.
Peter V. Neffenger,
Captain, Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Los Angeles-Long Beach, 
California.
[FR Doc. 03-20770 Filed 8-13-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P