Security Zones; San Francisco Bay, San Pablo Bay, Carquinez Strait, Suisun Bay, CA, 55536-55539 [05-18936]
Download as PDF
55536
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 183 / Thursday, September 22, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
good cause exists for making this rule
effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register.
Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal
Register we have published a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) under
docket COTP San Francisco Bay 05–007,
in which we will propose to make
permanent these six temporary security
zones. This TFR will provide security
around the marine oil refinery facilities
during the notice-and-comment
rulemaking that proposes to make the
security zones in these same locations
permanent.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[COTP San Francisco Bay 05–008]
RIN 1625–AA87
Security Zones; San Francisco Bay,
San Pablo Bay, Carquinez Strait,
Suisun Bay, CA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is
establishing temporary fixed security
zones in the waters extending
approximately 100 yards around six
separate oil refinery piers in the San
Francisco Bay area. These security
zones are an integral part of the Coast
Guard’s efforts to protect these facilities
and the surrounding areas from
destruction or damage due to accidents,
subversive acts, or other causes of a
similar nature. Entry into the zones is
prohibited, unless specifically
authorized by the Captain of the Port
(COTP) San Francisco Bay, or his
designated representative. These zones
will be subject to discretionary and
random patrol and monitoring by Coast
Guard, Federal, state and local law
enforcement assets.
DATES: This rule is effective from 11:59
p.m. PDT on September 9, 2005, to
11:59 p.m. PST on March 31, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this
preamble, as being available in the
docket, are part of docket COTP 05–008
and are available for inspection or
copying at the Waterways Safety Branch
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lieutenant Ian Callander, Waterways
Safety Branch, U.S. Coast Guard Sector
San Francisco, (510) 437–3401 or the
Sector San Francisco Command Center,
at (415) 399–3547.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
We did not publish a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this
regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B),
the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for not publishing an NPRM
because the threat to U.S. assets and the
public currently exists and is ongoing
and any delay in the effective date of
this temporary final rule (TFR) is
impractical and contrary to the public
interest.
For the same reasons, under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:53 Sep 21, 2005
Jkt 205001
Background and Purpose
In its effort to manage the threat posed
by terrorist activity, the Coast Guard has
increased safety and security measures
on U.S. ports and waterways. The
measures contemplated by this rule are
intended to assist the Coast Guard in
protecting vessels and facilities within
or adjacent to the six marine oil
terminals in San Francisco Bay. 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.
To address the aforementioned
security concerns, and to take steps to
prevent the catastrophic impact that a
terrorist attack against marine oil
terminals within San Francisco Bay
would have on the public interest, the
Coast Guard is establishing temporary
fixed security zones in the waters
extending approximately 100 yards
around six separate oil refinery piers in
the San Francisco Bay, California. These
security zones help the Coast Guard to
prevent vessels or persons from
engaging in terrorist actions against
these facilities. Due to heightened
security concerns, and due to the
catastrophic impact a terrorist attack on
a marine oil terminal would have on the
surrounding waterways, area, and
community, security zones are prudent
for these facilities.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Discussion of Rule
In this temporary final rule, the Coast
Guard is establishing temporary fixed
security zones in the waters extending
from the surface to the sea floor and
approximately 100 yards around six
separate oil refinery piers in the San
Francisco Bay Area. The specific
coordinates defining these zones are
given in paragraph (a) of temporary
section 33 CFR 165.T11–039.
For the Chevron-Texaco oil facility,
the proposed security zone would
extend approximately 100 yards into the
waters of San Francisco Bay around the
Chevron Long Wharf, located in
Richmond, California.
For the Conoco-Phillips oil facility,
the proposed security zone would
extend approximately 100 yards into the
waters of San Pablo Bay around the
Conoco-Philips Wharf, located in
Rodeo, California.
For the Shell Martinez oil facility, the
proposed security zone would extend
approximately 100 yards into the waters
of Carquinez Strait around the Shell
Terminal, located in Martinez,
California.
For the Tesoro-Amorco oil facility, the
proposed security zone would extend
approximately 100 yards into the waters
of Carquinez Strait around the Amorco
Pier, located in Martinez, California.
For the Valero oil facility, the
proposed security zone would extend
approximately 100 yards into the waters
of Carquinez Strait around the Valero
Pier, located in Benicia, California.
For the Tesoro-Avon oil facility, the
proposed security zone would extend
approximately 100 yards into the waters
of Suisun Bay around the Avon Pier,
located in Martinez, California.
These zones will be subject to
discretionary and random patrol and
monitoring by Coast Guard, Federal,
State and local law enforcement assets.
Vessels and people may be allowed to
enter these security zones on a case-bycase basis with authorization from the
COTP or his designated representative.
Vessels or persons violating this rule
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 $32,500 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
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 183 / Thursday, September 22, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
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 may enlist the
aid and cooperation of any Federal,
State, county, municipal, or private
agency to assist in the enforcement of
the regulation.
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).
We expect the impact of this rule to
be so minimal that a full regulatory
evaluation under the regulatory policies
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary.
Although this rule restricts access to the
waters encompassed by the security
zones, the effect of this rule is not
significant because: (i) The zones
encompass only small portions of the
waterways; (ii) vessels are 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.
The size of the zones is the minimum
necessary to provide adequate
protection for all of the six marine oil
facilities. The entities most likely to be
affected are fishing vessels and pleasure
craft engaged in recreational activities
and sightseeing.
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:53 Sep 21, 2005
Jkt 205001
substantial number of small entities. We
expect this rule may affect owners and
operators of vessels, some of which may
be small entities, intending to fish,
sightsee, transit, or anchor in the waters
affected by these security zones. These
security zones will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for
several reasons: small vessel traffic will
be able to pass safely around the
security zones and vessels engaged in
recreational activities, sightseeing and
commercial fishing have space outside
of the zones to engage in these activities.
Small entities and the maritime public
will be advised of these security zones
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 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.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
55537
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
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
55538
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 183 / Thursday, September 22, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
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, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling
procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
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
establishing a security zone.
An ‘‘Environmental Analysis Check
List’’ and a ‘‘Categorical Exclusion
Determination’’ (CED) will be 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 amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
I
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
I
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.
2. Add temporary § 165.T11–039, to
read as follows:
I
§ 165.T11–039 Security Zones; San
Francisco Bay, San Pablo Bay, Carquinez
Strait, Suisun Bay, California.
(a) Locations. The following areas are
security zones:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:53 Sep 21, 2005
Jkt 205001
(1) Chevron Richmond Long Wharf,
San Francisco Bay. This security zone
includes all waters extending from the
surface to the sea floor within
approximately 100 yards of the Chevron
Richmond Long Wharf and
encompasses all waters in San Francisco
Bay within a line connecting the
following geographical positions—
Latitude
37°55′52.2″
37°55′41.8″
37°55′26.8″
37°55′47.1″
37°55′42.9″
37°55′11.2″
37°55′14.4″
37°55′19.7″
37°55′22.2″
37°55′38.5″
37°55′47.8″
Longitude
122°24′04.7″
122°24′07.1″
122°24′35.9″
122°24′55.5″
122°25′03.5″
122°24′32.8″
122°24′27.5″
122°24′23.7″
122°24′26.2″
122°23′56.9″
122°23′53.3″
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
and along the shoreline back to the
beginning point.
(2) Conoco-Phillips, San Pablo Bay.
This security zone includes all waters
extending from the surface to the sea
floor within approximately 100 yards of
the Conoco-Phillips Rodeo Terminal
and encompasses all waters in San
Pablo Bay within a line connecting the
following geographical positions—
Latitude
38°03′06.0″
38°03′20.7″
38°03′21.8″
38°03′29.1″
38°03′23.8″
38°03′16.8″
38°03′18.6″
38°03′04.0″
Longitude
122°15′32.4″
122°15′35.8″
122°15′29.8″
122°15′31.8″
122°15′55.8″
122°15′53.2″
122°15′45.2″
122°15′42.0″
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
and along the shoreline back to the
beginning point.
(3) Shell Martinez, Carquinez Strait.
This security zone includes all waters
extending from the surface to the sea
floor within approximately 100 yards of
the Shell Martinez Terminal and
encompasses all waters in San Pablo
Bay within a line connecting the
following geographical positions—
Latitude
38°01′39.8″
38°01′54.0″
38°01′56.9″
38°02′02.7″
38°01′49.5″
38°01′43.7″
38°01′50.1″
38°01′36.3″
Longitude
122°07′40.3″
122°07′43.0″
122°07′37.9″
122°07′42.6″
122°08′08.7″
122°08′04.2″
122°07′50.5″
122°07′47.6″
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
and along the shoreline back to the
beginning point.
(4) Tesoro-Amorco, Carquinez Strait.
This security zone includes all waters
extending from the surface to the sea
floor within approximately 100 yards of
the Tesoro-Amorco oil terminal wharf
and encompasses all waters in the
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Carquinez Strait within a line
connecting the following geographical
positions—
Latitude
38°02′03.1″
38°02′05.6″
38°02′07.9″
38°02′13.0″
38°02′05.7″
38°02′00.5″
38°02′01.8″
38°01′55.0″
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Longitude
122°07′11.9″
122°07′18.9″
122°07′14.9″
122°07′19.4″
122°07′35.9″
122°07′31.1″
122°07′27.3″
122°07′11.0″
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
and along the shoreline back to the
beginning point.
(5) Valero, Carquinez Strait. This
security zone includes all waters
extending from the surface to the sea
floor within approximately 100 yards of
the Valero Benicia Pier and
encompasses all waters in the Carquinez
Strait within a line connecting the
following geographical positions—
Latitude
38°02′37.6″
38°02′34.7″
38°02′44.1″
38°02′48.0″
38°02′47.7″
N
N
N
N
N
Longitude
122°07′51.5″
122°07′48.9″
122°07′34.9″
122°07′37.9″
122°07′42.1″
W
W
W
W
W
and along the shoreline back to the
beginning point.
(6) Tesoro-Avon, Suisun Bay. This
security zone includes all waters
extending from the surface to the sea
floor within approximately 100 yards of
the Tesoro-Avon Wharf and
encompasses all waters in Suisun Bay
within a line connecting the following
geographical positions—
Latitude
38°02′24.6″ N
38°02′54.0′ N
38°02′55.8″ N
38°03′02.1″ N
38°02′55.1″ N
38°02′48.8″ N
38°02′52.4″ N
38°02′46.5″ N
Longitude
122°04′52.9″
122°05′19.5″
122°05′16.1″
122°05′19.4″
122°05′42.6″
122°05′39.2″
122°05′27.7″
122°05′22.4″
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
and along the shoreline back to the
beginning point.
(b) Regulations. (1) In accordance
with the general regulations in § 165.33,
entry into the security zones described
in paragraph (a) of this section is
prohibited, unless specifically
authorized by the Captain of the Port
San Francisco Bay, or his designated
representative.
(2) Persons desiring to transit the area
of a security zone may contact the
Captain of the Port at telephone number
415–399–3547 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
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 183 / Thursday, September 22, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
the Port or his designated
representative.
(c) Enforcement. All persons and
vessels must comply with the
instructions of the Coast Guard Captain
of the Port or the designated on-scene
patrol personnel. Patrol personnel
comprise commissioned, warrant, and
petty officers of the Coast Guard
onboard Coast Guard, Coast Guard
Auxiliary, local, state, and federal law
enforcement vessels. Upon being hailed
by U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel by
siren, radio, flashing light, or other
means, the operator of a vessel must
proceed as directed.
The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted
in the patrol and enforcement of these
security zones by local law enforcement
as necessary.
(d) Effective period. This section
becomes effective at 11:59 p.m. PDT on
September 9, 2005, and will terminate at
11:59 p.m. PST on March 31, 2006.
Dated: September 9, 2005.
W.J. Uberti,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, San Francisco Bay, California.
[FR Doc. 05–18936 Filed 9–21–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD01–05–085]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; Blasting Operations,
Demolition of Bridge Piers: Sikorsky
Bridge Over the Housatonic River
Between Stratford and Milford, CT
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is
establishing a temporary safety zone
within 300-yards of the Sikorsky Bridge,
which runs between Milford and
Stratford, CT. This temporary safety
zone is necessary to protect the
maritime community transiting the area
from the potential safety hazards
associated with the demolition and
blasting operations of the piers of the
old Sikorsky Bridge. Entry into this zone
is prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port, Long Island Sound,
New Haven, Connecticut.
DATES: This rule is effective from 6 a.m.
September 26, 2005 through 6 p.m.
October 6, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Comments and material
received from the public, as well as
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:53 Sep 21, 2005
Jkt 205001
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. The Coast
Guard was notified by the bridge owner,
Connecticut Department of
Transportation, of the dates of blasting
and demolition operations on August
24, 2005, leaving insufficient time to
draft and publish an NPRM and to
publish a final rule more than 30 days
prior to the effective date. Under 5
U.S.C. (d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists for making this rule
effective in less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Any
delay in the effective date of this rule
would be contrary to the public interest
as immediate action is necessary to
close a portion of the Housatonic River
within the vicinity of the Sikorsky
Bridge to protect the maritime public
from the hazards associated with
blasting and debris removal operations
for four piers from the old Sikorsky
Bridge.
Background and Purpose
AGENCY:
ACTION:
documents indicated in this preamble as
being available in the docket, are part of
docket CGD01–05–085 and are available
for inspection or copying at Coast Guard
Sector Long Island Sound, New Haven,
CT, between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lieutenant A. Logman, Chief,
Waterways Management Division, Coast
Guard Sector Long Island Sound at (203)
468–4429.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Connecticut Route 15 Bridge over
the Housatonic River, also known as the
Sikorsky Bridge, is currently being
rebuilt. Part of this process has included
the demolition of the old Sikorsky
Bridge. Piers from the old Bridge remain
as hazards to navigation in the
waterway and must be removed prior to
further construction of the southern
span of the new bridge. When
detonated, spread of the debris will be
minimized by a containment structure
around each bridge pier. The blasting
and demolition activities have been
approved by the Connecticut
Department of Environmental Protection
to conduct blasting operations. This
blasting will also require a Coast Guard
explosives handling permit in
accordance with 46 Code of Federal
Regulations Part 176 as the explosives
being used are being loaded onto vessels
prior to being placed on the respective
piers. The explosives loads onto vessels
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
55539
will be monitored by Coast Guard
personnel.
Discussion of Rule
This rule establishes a temporary
safety zone on all waters within 300yards of the Piers of the old Sikorsky
Bridge, Route 15 Bridge over the
Housatonic River running between
Milford and Stratford, CT. This action is
intended to prohibit entry of persons
and vessel traffic in a portion of the
Housatonic River for the protection of
life and property of the maritime public
from the potential hazards associated
with blasting operations and demolition
of four piers of the old Sikorsky Bridge.
The safety zone will be in effect for
approximately 8 days; however, the
zone will only be enforced for
approximately four-30 minute periods
during the blasting of each of the four
bridge piers being demolished. Public
notifications will be made of this safety
zone via marine information broadcasts
beginning 1 hour prior to the detonation
of the explosives for each of the four
piers. The detonations will take place
during daylight hours, and will be
conducted during high tide.
Any violation of the safety zone
described herein, is punishable by,
among others, civil and criminal
penalties, in rem liability against the
offending vessel, and license sanctions.
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).
We expect the economic impact of
this rule to be so minimal that a full
Regulatory Evaluation under the
regulatory policies and procedures of
DHS is unnecessary. This rule may have
some impact on the public, but these
potential impacts will be minimized for
the following reasons: This zone covers
only a portion of the waters of the
Housatonic River, and does not impact
commercial vessels. Although this
safety zone is in effect for 8 days, the
safety zone will only be enforced during
blasting operations, encompassing
approximately 4 thirty minute periods
over the 8 days.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 183 (Thursday, September 22, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55536-55539]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18936]
[[Page 55536]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[COTP San Francisco Bay 05-008]
RIN 1625-AA87
Security Zones; San Francisco Bay, San Pablo Bay, Carquinez
Strait, Suisun Bay, CA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Temporary final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing temporary fixed security zones
in the waters extending approximately 100 yards around six separate oil
refinery piers in the San Francisco Bay area. These security zones are
an integral part of the Coast Guard's efforts to protect these
facilities and the surrounding areas from destruction or damage due to
accidents, subversive acts, or other causes of a similar nature. Entry
into the zones is prohibited, unless specifically authorized by the
Captain of the Port (COTP) San Francisco Bay, or his designated
representative. These zones will be subject to discretionary and random
patrol and monitoring by Coast Guard, Federal, state and local law
enforcement assets.
DATES: This rule is effective from 11:59 p.m. PDT on September 9, 2005,
to 11:59 p.m. PST on March 31, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble, as being available in
the docket, are part of docket COTP 05-008 and are available for
inspection or copying at the Waterways Safety Branch between 9 a.m. and
4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Ian Callander, Waterways
Safety Branch, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Francisco, (510) 437-3401 or
the Sector San Francisco Command Center, at (415) 399-3547.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this
regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), the Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM because the threat to U.S.
assets and the public currently exists and is ongoing and any delay in
the effective date of this temporary final rule (TFR) is impractical
and contrary to the public interest.
For the same reasons, 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.
Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register we have published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) under docket COTP San Francisco
Bay 05-007, in which we will propose to make permanent these six
temporary security zones. This TFR will provide security around the
marine oil refinery facilities during the notice-and-comment rulemaking
that proposes to make the security zones in these same locations
permanent.
Background and Purpose
In its effort to manage the threat posed by terrorist activity, the
Coast Guard has increased safety and security measures on U.S. ports
and waterways. The measures contemplated by this rule are intended to
assist the Coast Guard in protecting vessels and facilities within or
adjacent to the six marine oil terminals in San Francisco Bay. 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.
To address the aforementioned security concerns, and to take steps
to prevent the catastrophic impact that a terrorist attack against
marine oil terminals within San Francisco Bay would have on the public
interest, the Coast Guard is establishing temporary fixed security
zones in the waters extending approximately 100 yards around six
separate oil refinery piers in the San Francisco Bay, California. These
security zones help the Coast Guard to prevent vessels or persons from
engaging in terrorist actions against these facilities. Due to
heightened security concerns, and due to the catastrophic impact a
terrorist attack on a marine oil terminal would have on the surrounding
waterways, area, and community, security zones are prudent for these
facilities.
Discussion of Rule
In this temporary final rule, the Coast Guard is establishing
temporary fixed security zones in the waters extending from the surface
to the sea floor and approximately 100 yards around six separate oil
refinery piers in the San Francisco Bay Area. The specific coordinates
defining these zones are given in paragraph (a) of temporary section 33
CFR 165.T11-039.
For the Chevron-Texaco oil facility, the proposed security zone
would extend approximately 100 yards into the waters of San Francisco
Bay around the Chevron Long Wharf, located in Richmond, California.
For the Conoco-Phillips oil facility, the proposed security zone
would extend approximately 100 yards into the waters of San Pablo Bay
around the Conoco-Philips Wharf, located in Rodeo, California.
For the Shell Martinez oil facility, the proposed security zone
would extend approximately 100 yards into the waters of Carquinez
Strait around the Shell Terminal, located in Martinez, California.
For the Tesoro-Amorco oil facility, the proposed security zone
would extend approximately 100 yards into the waters of Carquinez
Strait around the Amorco Pier, located in Martinez, California.
For the Valero oil facility, the proposed security zone would
extend approximately 100 yards into the waters of Carquinez Strait
around the Valero Pier, located in Benicia, California.
For the Tesoro-Avon oil facility, the proposed security zone would
extend approximately 100 yards into the waters of Suisun Bay around the
Avon Pier, located in Martinez, California.
These zones will be subject to discretionary and random patrol and
monitoring by Coast Guard, Federal, State and local law enforcement
assets. Vessels and people may be allowed to enter these security zones
on a case-by-case basis with authorization from the COTP or his
designated representative.
Vessels or persons violating this rule 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 $32,500 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
[[Page 55537]]
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 may enlist the aid and cooperation of any
Federal, State, county, municipal, or private agency to assist in the
enforcement of the regulation.
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).
We expect the impact of this rule to be so minimal that a full
regulatory evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures of
DHS is unnecessary. Although this rule restricts access to the waters
encompassed by the security zones, the effect of this rule is not
significant because: (i) The zones encompass only small portions of the
waterways; (ii) vessels are 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.
The size of the zones is the minimum necessary to provide adequate
protection for all of the six marine oil facilities. The entities most
likely to be affected are fishing vessels and pleasure craft engaged in
recreational activities and sightseeing.
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. We expect this rule may affect owners and operators of
vessels, some of which may be small entities, intending to fish,
sightsee, transit, or anchor in the waters affected by these security
zones. These security zones will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities for several reasons: small
vessel traffic will be able to pass safely around the security zones
and vessels engaged in recreational activities, sightseeing and
commercial fishing have space outside of the zones to engage in these
activities. Small entities and the maritime public will be advised of
these security zones 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 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.
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.
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
[[Page 55538]]
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, performance, design, or operation;
test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems
practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
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 establishing a security
zone.
An ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a ``Categorical
Exclusion Determination'' (CED) will be 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 temporary Sec. 165.T11-039, to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T11-039 Security Zones; San Francisco Bay, San Pablo Bay,
Carquinez Strait, Suisun Bay, California.
(a) Locations. The following areas are security zones:
(1) Chevron Richmond Long Wharf, San Francisco Bay. This security
zone includes all waters extending from the surface to the sea floor
within approximately 100 yards of the Chevron Richmond Long Wharf and
encompasses all waters in San Francisco Bay within a line connecting
the following geographical positions--
Latitude Longitude
37[deg]55'52.2'' N 122[deg]24'04.7'' W
37[deg]55'41.8'' N 122[deg]24'07.1'' W
37[deg]55'26.8'' N 122[deg]24'35.9'' W
37[deg]55'47.1'' N 122[deg]24'55.5'' W
37[deg]55'42.9'' N 122[deg]25'03.5'' W
37[deg]55'11.2'' N 122[deg]24'32.8'' W
37[deg]55'14.4'' N 122[deg]24'27.5'' W
37[deg]55'19.7'' N 122[deg]24'23.7'' W
37[deg]55'22.2'' N 122[deg]24'26.2'' W
37[deg]55'38.5'' N 122[deg]23'56.9'' W
37[deg]55'47.8'' N 122[deg]23'53.3'' W
and along the shoreline back to the beginning point.
(2) Conoco-Phillips, San Pablo Bay. This security zone includes all
waters extending from the surface to the sea floor within approximately
100 yards of the Conoco-Phillips Rodeo Terminal and encompasses all
waters in San Pablo Bay within a line connecting the following
geographical positions--
Latitude Longitude
38[deg]03'06.0'' N 122[deg]15'32.4'' W
38[deg]03'20.7'' N 122[deg]15'35.8'' W
38[deg]03'21.8'' N 122[deg]15'29.8'' W
38[deg]03'29.1'' N 122[deg]15'31.8'' W
38[deg]03'23.8'' N 122[deg]15'55.8'' W
38[deg]03'16.8'' N 122[deg]15'53.2'' W
38[deg]03'18.6'' N 122[deg]15'45.2'' W
38[deg]03'04.0'' N 122[deg]15'42.0'' W
and along the shoreline back to the beginning point.
(3) Shell Martinez, Carquinez Strait. This security zone includes
all waters extending from the surface to the sea floor within
approximately 100 yards of the Shell Martinez Terminal and encompasses
all waters in San Pablo Bay within a line connecting the following
geographical positions--
Latitude Longitude
38[deg]01'39.8'' N 122[deg]07'40.3'' W
38[deg]01'54.0'' N 122[deg]07'43.0'' W
38[deg]01'56.9'' N 122[deg]07'37.9'' W
38[deg]02'02.7'' N 122[deg]07'42.6'' W
38[deg]01'49.5'' N 122[deg]08'08.7'' W
38[deg]01'43.7'' N 122[deg]08'04.2'' W
38[deg]01'50.1'' N 122[deg]07'50.5'' W
38[deg]01'36.3'' N 122[deg]07'47.6'' W
and along the shoreline back to the beginning point.
(4) Tesoro-Amorco, Carquinez Strait. This security zone includes
all waters extending from the surface to the sea floor within
approximately 100 yards of the Tesoro-Amorco oil terminal wharf and
encompasses all waters in the Carquinez Strait within a line connecting
the following geographical positions--
Latitude Longitude
38[deg]02'03.1'' N 122[deg]07'11.9'' W
38[deg]02'05.6'' N 122[deg]07'18.9'' W
38[deg]02'07.9'' N 122[deg]07'14.9'' W
38[deg]02'13.0'' N 122[deg]07'19.4'' W
38[deg]02'05.7'' N 122[deg]07'35.9'' W
38[deg]02'00.5'' N 122[deg]07'31.1'' W
38[deg]02'01.8'' N 122[deg]07'27.3'' W
38[deg]01'55.0'' N 122[deg]07'11.0'' W
and along the shoreline back to the beginning point.
(5) Valero, Carquinez Strait. This security zone includes all
waters extending from the surface to the sea floor within approximately
100 yards of the Valero Benicia Pier and encompasses all waters in the
Carquinez Strait within a line connecting the following geographical
positions--
Latitude Longitude
38[deg]02'37.6'' N 122[deg]07'51.5'' W
38[deg]02'34.7'' N 122[deg]07'48.9'' W
38[deg]02'44.1'' N 122[deg]07'34.9'' W
38[deg]02'48.0'' N 122[deg]07'37.9'' W
38[deg]02'47.7'' N 122[deg]07'42.1'' W
and along the shoreline back to the beginning point.
(6) Tesoro-Avon, Suisun Bay. This security zone includes all waters
extending from the surface to the sea floor within approximately 100
yards of the Tesoro-Avon Wharf and encompasses all waters in Suisun Bay
within a line connecting the following geographical positions--
Latitude Longitude
38[deg]02'24.6'' N 122[deg]04'52.9'' W
38[deg]02'54.0' N 122[deg]05'19.5'' W
38[deg]02'55.8'' N 122[deg]05'16.1'' W
38[deg]03'02.1'' N 122[deg]05'19.4'' W
38[deg]02'55.1'' N 122[deg]05'42.6'' W
38[deg]02'48.8'' N 122[deg]05'39.2'' W
38[deg]02'52.4'' N 122[deg]05'27.7'' W
38[deg]02'46.5'' N 122[deg]05'22.4'' W
and along the shoreline back to the beginning point.
(b) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec. 165.33, entry into the security zones described in paragraph (a)
of this section is prohibited, unless specifically authorized by the
Captain of the Port San Francisco Bay, or his designated
representative.
(2) Persons desiring to transit the area of a security zone may
contact the Captain of the Port at telephone number 415-399-3547 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
[[Page 55539]]
the Port or his designated representative.
(c) Enforcement. All persons and vessels must comply with the
instructions of the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the designated
on-scene patrol personnel. Patrol personnel comprise commissioned,
warrant, and petty officers of the Coast Guard onboard Coast Guard,
Coast Guard Auxiliary, local, state, and federal law enforcement
vessels. Upon being hailed by U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel by
siren, radio, flashing light, or other means, the operator of a vessel
must proceed as directed.
The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol and enforcement
of these security zones by local law enforcement as necessary.
(d) Effective period. This section becomes effective at 11:59 p.m.
PDT on September 9, 2005, and will terminate at 11:59 p.m. PST on March
31, 2006.
Dated: September 9, 2005.
W.J. Uberti,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, San Francisco Bay,
California.
[FR Doc. 05-18936 Filed 9-21-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P