Safety Zone; Offshore Marine Terminal, El Segundo, CA, 30638-30640 [05-10594]

Agencies

• Coast Guard
• DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 102 (Friday, May 27, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30638-30640]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-10594]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[COTP Los Angeles-Long Beach 03-002]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone; Offshore Marine Terminal, El Segundo, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone surrounding the 
El Segundo offshore marine terminal near Los Angeles, California. This 
action is necessary to ensure public safety and reduce the likelihood 
of a collision or other casualty involving a tank vessel moored at the 
offshore marine terminal. Entry into this zone will be prohibited 
unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Los Angeles-
Long Beach.

DATES: This rule is effective June 27, 2005.

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 COTP Los Angeles-Long Beach 03-002 and are available 
for inspection or copying at U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office/
Group Los Angeles-Long Beach, Waterways Management Division, 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 Peter Gooding, Chief of 
Waterways Management Division, (310) 732-2020.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    On July 10, 2003, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) entitled ``Safety Zone; Offshore Marine Terminal, El Segundo, 
CA'' in the Federal Register (68 FR 41091). We received nine letters 
commenting on the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and 
none was held.

Background and Purpose

    The Chevron Texaco Shipping Company requested that the Coast Guard 
establish a safety zone around the El Segundo offshore marine terminal 
near Los Angeles, California, to promote the safety of life and 
property at the facility and on the adjacent waters within the safety 
zone--including tank vessels and their crews, their apparatuses, and 
attending vessels and their crews.
    El Segundo offshore marine terminal is located approximately 1 
nautical mile offshore El Segundo in Santa Monica Bay, between Marina 
Del Rey and Redondo Beach, California. The offshore marine terminal 
consists of several tanker mooring buoys and seafloor pipelines 
connected to the mainland terminal. Large tank vessels are secured to 
tanker mooring buoys using multiple sets of mooring lines. Underwater 
pipelines that extend seaward from the mainland terminal rise up from 
the ocean bottom and are secured to both the buoys and the tankers. As 
a result, there are numerous mooring lines, pipelines, and other 
critical apparatuses that exist above, below, and on the surface of the 
water presenting an especially hazardous condition for other vessels 
transiting through this area. The hazards have contributed to vessel 
casualties resulting in pollution and in at least one case, a fatality. 
These conditions are present at all times, whether or not a tanker is 
in the offshore marine terminal.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    The Coast Guard received a total of nine letters in response to the 
notice of proposed rulemaking. What follows is a review of, and the 
Coast Guard's response to, the issues and questions that were presented 
by these commenters concerning the proposed regulations.
    (1) Four commenters indicated that buoys should be placed at the 
corners of the safety zone to give a visual indication to boaters 
passing nearby.
    The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 
publishes charts of this area. A notation of the safety zone will be 
placed on the chart to advise mariners of the safety zone. In addition, 
NOAA is publishing a new chart for the El Segundo area that will show 
much greater detail of the surrounding area. This chart should provide 
sufficient aid for boaters to identify the safety zone without the 
placement of buoys which may interfere with vessels permitted to enter 
the zone.
    (2) Two commenters indicated that publication of the safety zone 
needed to be widespread to ensure boaters are aware of the new zone.
    In addition to appearing in the Federal Register, news of this 
safety zone will be published in the Notice to Mariners, Coast Pilot, 
and local boating publications to ensure wide dissemination of 
information about this safety zone.

[[Page 30639]]

    (3) Two commenters indicated that the enforcement of the safety 
zone would not be adequate to keep vessels out of the zone.
    As stated in the Background and Purpose section above, this zone is 
for the safety of the vessels transiting in the vicinity of the 
offshore moorings. It is not envisioned that enforcement of the safety 
zone will be a heavy burden on the Coast Guard.
    (4) One commenter indicated that the safety zone should only be in 
place while tank vessels are present.
    The presence of large mooring buoys, approximately 13 feet long and 
6 feet in diameter, are hazardous to vessels operating in this area. 
These conditions are present at all times, whether or not a tanker is 
in the offshore marine terminal.
    (5) One commenter indicated that the size of the safety zone should 
be larger than proposed and that it should extend to shore.
    We feel as though the area prescribed is large enough to provide 
safe operations, while allowing a corridor for vessels to safely pass 
between the safety zone and the shoreline.
    After reviewing all comments, we made no changes in the rule. Our 
final rule remains the same as our proposed rule.

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).
    This safety zone will encompass only a small portion of the 
waterway and vessel traffic can pass safely around the affected area. 
In addition, vessels may be allowed to enter this zone on a case-by-
case basis with permission of the Captain of the Port.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this rule will 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. We expect this rule will 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 Santa Monica Bay 
near El Segundo. The impact to these entities will not, however, be 
significant since this zone encompasses a small portion of the waterway 
and vessels may safely pass around the affected area. In addition, 
vessels may be allowed to enter this zone on a case-by-case basis with 
permission of the Captain of the Port.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small 
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its 
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. However, we 
received no requests for assistance from any small entities.

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.

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.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards 
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, 
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why 
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, procedures; and related 
management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by 
voluntary consensus standards bodies.

[[Page 30640]]

    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not 
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

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 proposing to establish a 
safety zone.
    A final ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a final 
``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' are 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.

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 Sec.  165.1156 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.1156  Safety Zone; Offshore Marine Terminal, El Segundo, CA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of 
Santa Monica Bay, from surface to bottom, enclosed by a line beginning 
at latitude 33[deg]54[min]59[sec] N, longitude 118[deg]26[min]50[sec] 
W; then to latitude 33[deg]54[min]59[sec] N, longitude 
118[deg]27[min]34[sec] W; then to latitude 33[deg]54[min]00[sec] N, 
longitude 118[deg]27[min]34[sec] W; then to latitude 
33[deg]54[min]00[sec] N, longitude 118[deg]26[min]50[sec] W; then to 
the point of beginning (NAD 1983).
    (b) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in 
Sec.  165.23 of this part, entry into or movement within this zone is 
prohibited except for:
    (i) Commercial vessels authorized to use the offshore marine 
terminal for loading or unloading;
    (ii) Commercial tugs, lighters, barges, launches, or other vessels 
authorized to engage in servicing the offshore marine terminal or 
vessels therein;
    (iii) Public vessels of the United States.
    (2) Persons desiring to transit the area of the safety zone may 
contact the Captain of the Port at telephone number 1-800-221-8724 or 
on VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz). 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.
    (3) Nothing in this section shall be construed as relieving the 
owner or person in charge of any vessel from complying with the 
Navigation Rules as defined in 33 CFR chapter I, subchapters D and E 
and safe navigation practice.

    Dated: May 13, 2005.
Peter V. Neffenger,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Los Angeles-Long Beach.
[FR Doc. 05-10594 Filed 5-26-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P