Security Zone; Port of Mayaguez, Puerto Rico, 54757-54760 [E8-22242]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 23, 2008 / Proposed Rules PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 by removing amendment 39–15522 (73 FR 29042, May 20, 2008) and adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2008–1006; Directorate Identifier 2008–NM–110–AD. Comments Due Date (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by November 7, 2008. Affected ADs (b) This AD supersedes AD 2008–10–15. Applicability (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 747– 100, 747–100B, 747–200B, 747–200C, 747– 200F, 747–300, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2748, dated May 9, 2008. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from a report of cracked fastener holes at the right stringer 6 (S–6) lap splice between station (STA) 340 and STA 380. We are issuing this AD to prevent cracking in the fuselage skin, which could result in rapid decompression and loss of structural integrity of the airplane. Compliance (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done. Requirements of AD 2008–10–15 jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Service Bulletin Reference Paragraph (f) The term ‘‘alert service bulletin,’’ as used in this AD, means the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2748, dated May 9, 2008. Inspection for Acceptable External Skin Doublers (g) For airplanes identified as Group 1, Configuration 2, in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2748, dated May 9, 2008: At the latest of the times specified in paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD, do an external general visual inspection to determine if acceptable external skin doublers are installed at the left- and rightside S–6 lap splices, in accordance with Part 1 of the alert service bulletin. (1) Prior to the accumulation of 10,000 total flight cycles. (2) Within 8,000 flight cycles after a modification was done in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53–2253. (3) Within 15 days or 100 flight cycles after May 20, 2008 (the effective date of AD 2008– 10–15), whichever occurs first. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:39 Sep 22, 2008 Jkt 214001 Acceptable External Skin Doublers Found at Both Sides (h) If, during the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, acceptable external skin doublers in accordance with the alert service bulletin are found installed at both the left- and right-side S–6 lap splices, no further work is required by this AD. Acceptable External Skin Doublers Not Found—Repetitive Related Investigative Actions and Corrective Actions (i) If, during the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, acceptable external skin doublers in accordance with alert service bulletin are not found installed at either the left- or right-side S–6 lap splice: Before further flight, do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions by doing all actions specified in Part 2 of the alert service bulletin. Repeat the applicable related investigative actions thereafter at intervals not to exceed 300 flight cycles until the modification specified in paragraph (j) of this AD is done. New Requirement of This AD Terminating Modification (j) If, during the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, acceptable external skin doublers as specified in the alert service bulletin are not found installed at either the left- or right-side S–6 lap splice: Within 3,000 flight cycles after doing the initial related investigative actions in paragraph (i) of this AD, or within 300 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, install acceptable external skin doublers at both the left- and right-side S–6 lap splices, as applicable. The installation of the acceptable skin doublers is required on the side of the airplane that does not have the doublers already. The installation includes doing an open-hole high-frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection of the skin for cracking, and trimming out cracking as applicable. Do all actions in accordance with the alert service bulletin. Doing this installation terminates the repetitive related investigative actions required by paragraph (i) of this AD. Note 1: The alert service bulletin refers to Boeing Service Bulletins 747–53–2253, Revision 3, dated March 24, 1994; and 747– 53–2272, Revision 18, dated May 16, 2002; as additional sources of service information for accomplishment of the modification (installation of acceptable external skin doublers). Note 2: AD 90–06–06, amendment 39– 6490, requires, among other actions, a modification as specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53–2253, dated December 14, 1984. Note 3: AD 90–23–14, amendment 39– 6801, requires inspections as specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53–2253, Revision 2, dated March 29, 1990. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (k)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, ATTN: Ivan Li, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 54757 ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057– 3356; telephone (425) 917–6437; fax (425) 917–6590; has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis of the airplane and the approval must specifically refer to this AD. (4) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2008–10–15 are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 12, 2008. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E8–22211 Filed 9–22–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG–2008–0070] RIN 1625–AA87 Security Zone; Port of Mayaguez, Puerto Rico Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish moving and fixed security zones around cruise ships entering, departing, mooring or anchoring at the Port of Mayaguez, Puerto Rico. This proposed regulation is necessary to protect cruise ships operating in this port. All vessels, with the exception of servicing pilot boat and assisting tug boats, would be prohibited from entering the security zones without the express permission of the Captain of the Port San Juan or a designated representative. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before November 24, 2008. E:\FR\FM\23SEP1.SGM 23SEP1 54758 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 23, 2008 / Proposed Rules You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket number USCG–2008–0070 to the Docket Management Facility at the U.S. Department of Transportation. To avoid duplication, please use only one of the following methods: (1) Online: http:// www.regulations.gov. (2) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590– 0001. (3) Hand delivery: Room W12–140 on the Ground Floor of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is 202–366–9329. (4) Fax: 202–493–2251. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed rule, call Ensign Rachael Love of Sector San Juan, Prevention Operations Department at (787) 289–2071. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ADDRESSES: Public Participation and Request for Comments We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted, without change, to http:// www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. We have an agreement with the Department of Transportation (DOT) to use the Docket Management Facility. jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Submitting Comments If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG–2008–0070), indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an e-mail address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission. You may submit your comments and material by electronic means, mail, fax, or delivery to the Docket Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES; but please submit your comments and material by only one means. If you submit them by mail or delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:39 Sep 22, 2008 Jkt 214001 than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, 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. Viewing Comments and Documents To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time, click on ‘‘Search for Dockets,’’ enter the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG–2008–0070) in the Docket ID box, and click enter. You may also visit either the Docket Management Facility in Room W12–140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays; or the U.S. Coast Guard, Sector San Juan, 5 Calle La Puntilla, San Juan, Puerto Rico 00901 between 7 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Privacy Act Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act, system of records notice regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008 issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316). Public Meeting We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a request for one to the Docket Management Facility 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 Since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York, the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, and Flight 93, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has issued several warnings concerning the potential for additional terrorist attacks within the United States. In addition, the ongoing operations in the Middle East have made it prudent for U.S. ports to be on a higher state of alert because the Al-Qaeda organization and other PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 similar organizations have declared an ongoing intention to conduct armed attacks on U.S. interests worldwide. Due to these concerns, security zones around passenger vessels are necessary to ensure the safety and protection of the passengers aboard. 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 zones, to prevent or respond to acts of terrorism against individuals, vessels, or public or commercial structures. Moreover, the Coast Guard 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.) (the ‘‘Magnuson Act’’), and implementing the regulations promulgated by the President in subparts 6.01 and 6.04 of part 6 of title 33 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The Coast Guard has established similar rules in the ports of San Juan, St. Thomas (33 CFR 165.762), and Frederiksted (33 CFR 165.763). This regulation was not necessary in the past because cruise ships only recently began to hail at the port of Mayaguez. For the aforementioned reasons, the Coast Guard proposes to establish moving and fixed security zones to prevent vessels or persons from accessing the navigable waters around and under passenger vessels in the Port of Mayaguez, Puerto Rico. Due to the continued heightened security concerns, this proposed rule is necessary to provide for the safety of the port, the vessels, and the passengers and crew on the vessels. Discussion of Proposed Rule This proposed rule would require all persons and vessels to remain at least 50 yards from any cruise ship in the Port of Mayaguez while the cruise ship is transiting, anchored, or moored. The main purpose of the proposed rule is to ensure the safety of all persons onboard the cruise ship, the cruise ship itself, the environment, and the Port of Mayaguez during a cruise ship’s presence in the port. Regulatory Analyses We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders. E:\FR\FM\23SEP1.SGM 23SEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 23, 2008 / Proposed Rules Regulatory Planning and Review 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. This rule may impact the public, but these potential impacts would be minimized for the following reason: there is ample room for vessels to navigate around this proposed security zone. Also, the Captain of the Port San Juan may, on a case-by-case basis, allow persons or vessels to enter the proposed security zone. understanding this proposed rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. 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 Ensign Rachael Love of Sector San Juan, Prevention Operations Department at (787) 289–2071. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. 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). jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS Small Entities Federalism 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. This rule would affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit, anchor, or moor within 50 yards of a cruise ship in the Port of Mayaguez. This proposed regulation will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because cruise ships infrequently visit the Port of Mayaguez and small vessel traffic would be able to safely transit around the security zones. The Captain of the Port San Juan may, on a case-by-case basis, allow persons or vessels to enter the proposed security zone. If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this 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. 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. 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 VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:39 Sep 22, 2008 Jkt 214001 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 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 would 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 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 54759 Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might 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. 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, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. E:\FR\FM\23SEP1.SGM 23SEP1 54760 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 23, 2008 / Proposed Rules Environment We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have made a preliminary determination under the Instruction that this action is not likely to have a significant effect on the human environment. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this preliminary determination is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule. 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. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 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 § 165.778 to read as follows: Designated representative means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels and Federal, State, and local officers designated by or assisting the COTP San Juan in the enforcement of the safety zone. Vessel means every description of watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of transportation on water, except U.S. Coast Guard or U.S. naval vessels and servicing pilot and tug boats. (c) Regulations. (1) No person or vessel may enter into the security zone under this section unless authorized by the Captain of the Port San Juan. (2) Vessels seeking to enter a security zone established in this section, may contact the COTP on VHF channel 16 or by telephone at (787) 289–2041 to request permission. (3) All persons and vessels granted permission to enter the security zone must comply with the orders of the COTP and designated on-scene U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel. On-scene U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel include commissioned, warrant, and petty officers of the U.S. Coast Guard. Dated: September 2, 2008. E. Pino, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Juan. [FR Doc. E8–22242 Filed 9–22–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–15–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS § 165.778 Security Zone; Port of Mayaguez, Puerto Rico. 40 CFR Part 261 (a) Security zone. A moving and fixed security zone is established around all cruise ships entering, departing, mooring, or anchoring in the Port of Mayaguez, Puerto Rico. The regulated area includes all waters from surface to bottom within a 50-yard radius of the vessel. The zone is activated when a cruise ship on approach to the Port of Mayaguez enters within 1 nautical mile of the Bahia de Mayaguez Range Front Light located in position 18°13′12″ N, 067°10′46″ W. The zone is deactivated when a cruise ship departs the Port of Mayaguez and is no longer within 1 nautical mile of the Bahia de Mayaguez Range Front Light. (b) Definitions. As used in this section: Cruise ship means a passenger vessel greater than 100 feet in length that is authorized to carry more than 150 passengers for hire, except for a ferry. [EPA–R06–RCRA–2008–0456; SW FRL– 8713–2] VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:39 Sep 22, 2008 Jkt 214001 Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste; Proposed Exclusion Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule and request for comment. AGENCY: SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to grant a petition submitted by BAE Systems, Inc. (BAE) to exclude (or delist) a certain solid waste generated by its Sealy, Texas, facility from the lists of hazardous wastes. EPA used the Delisting Risk Assessment Software (DRAS) Version 3.0 in the evaluation of the impact of the petitioned waste on human health and the environment. DATES: We will accept comments until October 23, 2008. We will stamp PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 comments received after the close of the comment period as late. These late comments may not be considered in formulating a final decision. Your requests for a hearing must reach EPA by October 8, 2008. The request must contain the information prescribed in 40 CFR 260.20(d) (hereinafter all CFR cites refer to 40 CFR unless otherwise stated). ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R06– RCRA–2008–0456 by one of the following methods: 1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. E-mail: jacques.wendy@epa.gov. 3. Mail: Wendy Jacques, Environmental Protection Agency, Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, RCRA Branch, Mail Code: 6PD–F, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202. 4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to: Wendy Jacques, Environmental Protection Agency, Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, RCRA Branch, Mail Code: 6PD–F, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202. Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA–R06–RCRA–2008– 0456. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http:// www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through http:// www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. E:\FR\FM\23SEP1.SGM 23SEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 185 (Tuesday, September 23, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54757-54760]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22242]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2008-0070]
RIN 1625-AA87


Security Zone; Port of Mayaguez, Puerto Rico

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish moving and fixed 
security zones around cruise ships entering, departing, mooring or 
anchoring at the Port of Mayaguez, Puerto Rico. This proposed 
regulation is necessary to protect cruise ships operating in this port. 
All vessels, with the exception of servicing pilot boat and assisting 
tug boats, would be prohibited from entering the security zones without 
the express permission of the Captain of the Port San Juan or a 
designated representative.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before November 24, 2008.

[[Page 54758]]


ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket 
number USCG-2008-0070 to the Docket Management Facility at the U.S. 
Department of Transportation. To avoid duplication, please use only one 
of the following methods:
    (1) Online: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of 
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (3) Hand delivery: Room W12-140 on the Ground Floor of the West 
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The 
telephone number is 202-366-9329.
    (4) Fax: 202-493-2251.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed 
rule, call Ensign Rachael Love of Sector San Juan, Prevention 
Operations Department at (787) 289-2071. If you have questions on 
viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, 
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted, 
without change, to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided. We have an agreement with the 
Department of Transportation (DOT) to use the Docket Management 
Facility.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking (USCG-2008-0070), indicate the specific section of this 
document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each 
comment. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, 
an e-mail address, or a phone number in the body of your document so 
that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission. 
You may submit your comments and material by electronic means, mail, 
fax, or delivery to the Docket Management Facility at the address under 
ADDRESSES; but please submit your comments and material by only one 
means. If you submit them by mail or delivery, submit them in an 
unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for 
copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would 
like to know that they reached the Facility, 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.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble 
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov at 
any time, click on ``Search for Dockets,'' enter the docket number for 
this rulemaking (USCG-2008-0070) in the Docket ID box, and click enter. 
You may also visit either the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-
140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey 
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays; or the U.S. Coast Guard, 
Sector San Juan, 5 Calle La Puntilla, San Juan, Puerto Rico 00901 
between 7 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into 
any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment 
(or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, 
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act, system of 
records notice regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008 
issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a 
request for one to the Docket Management Facility 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

    Since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade 
Center in New York, the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, and Flight 93, 
the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has issued several warnings 
concerning the potential for additional terrorist attacks within the 
United States. In addition, the ongoing operations in the Middle East 
have made it prudent for U.S. ports to be on a higher state of alert 
because the Al-Qaeda organization and other similar organizations have 
declared an ongoing intention to conduct armed attacks on U.S. 
interests worldwide. Due to these concerns, security zones around 
passenger vessels are necessary to ensure the safety and protection of 
the passengers aboard. 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 zones, to prevent or respond to acts of terrorism against 
individuals, vessels, or public or commercial structures. Moreover, the 
Coast Guard 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.) (the ``Magnuson Act''), and implementing the 
regulations promulgated by the President in subparts 6.01 and 6.04 of 
part 6 of title 33 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
    The Coast Guard has established similar rules in the ports of San 
Juan, St. Thomas (33 CFR 165.762), and Frederiksted (33 CFR 165.763). 
This regulation was not necessary in the past because cruise ships only 
recently began to hail at the port of Mayaguez.
    For the aforementioned reasons, the Coast Guard proposes to 
establish moving and fixed security zones to prevent vessels or persons 
from accessing the navigable waters around and under passenger vessels 
in the Port of Mayaguez, Puerto Rico. Due to the continued heightened 
security concerns, this proposed rule is necessary to provide for the 
safety of the port, the vessels, and the passengers and crew on the 
vessels.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    This proposed rule would require all persons and vessels to remain 
at least 50 yards from any cruise ship in the Port of Mayaguez while 
the cruise ship is transiting, anchored, or moored. The main purpose of 
the proposed rule is to ensure the safety of all persons onboard the 
cruise ship, the cruise ship itself, the environment, and the Port of 
Mayaguez during a cruise ship's presence in the port.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes 
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our 
analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

[[Page 54759]]

Regulatory Planning and Review

    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.
    This rule may impact the public, but these potential impacts would 
be minimized for the following reason: there is ample room for vessels 
to navigate around this proposed security zone. Also, the Captain of 
the Port San Juan may, on a case-by-case basis, allow persons or 
vessels to enter the proposed security zone.

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. This rule would affect the following 
entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or 
operators of vessels intending to transit, anchor, or moor within 50 
yards of a cruise ship in the Port of Mayaguez. This proposed 
regulation will not have a significant impact on a substantial number 
of small entities because cruise ships infrequently visit the Port of 
Mayaguez and small vessel traffic would be able to safely transit 
around the security zones. The Captain of the Port San Juan may, on a 
case-by-case basis, allow persons or vessels to enter the proposed 
security zone.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this 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 that they can better 
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. 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 Ensign Rachael 
Love of Sector San Juan, Prevention Operations Department at (787) 289-
2071. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that 
question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the 
Coast Guard.

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 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 would 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 rule is not an economically significant rule and would not 
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might 
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.

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, performance, design, or 
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management 
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus 
standards bodies.
    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we 
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

[[Page 54760]]

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland 
Security Management Directive 5100.1 and Commandant Instruction 
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and 
have made a preliminary determination under the Instruction that this 
action is not likely to have a significant effect on the human 
environment. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this 
preliminary determination is available in the docket where indicated 
under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to 
the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed 
rule.

 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. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 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 Sec.  165.778 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.778  Security Zone; Port of Mayaguez, Puerto Rico.

    (a) Security zone. A moving and fixed security zone is established 
around all cruise ships entering, departing, mooring, or anchoring in 
the Port of Mayaguez, Puerto Rico. The regulated area includes all 
waters from surface to bottom within a 50-yard radius of the vessel. 
The zone is activated when a cruise ship on approach to the Port of 
Mayaguez enters within 1 nautical mile of the Bahia de Mayaguez Range 
Front Light located in position 18[deg]13[min]12[sec] N, 
067[deg]10[min]46[sec] W. The zone is deactivated when a cruise ship 
departs the Port of Mayaguez and is no longer within 1 nautical mile of 
the Bahia de Mayaguez Range Front Light.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section:
    Cruise ship means a passenger vessel greater than 100 feet in 
length that is authorized to carry more than 150 passengers for hire, 
except for a ferry.
    Designated representative means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders 
including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers and other officers 
operating Coast Guard vessels and Federal, State, and local officers 
designated by or assisting the COTP San Juan in the enforcement of the 
safety zone.
    Vessel means every description of watercraft or other artificial 
contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of 
transportation on water, except U.S. Coast Guard or U.S. naval vessels 
and servicing pilot and tug boats.
    (c) Regulations. (1) No person or vessel may enter into the 
security zone under this section unless authorized by the Captain of 
the Port San Juan.
    (2) Vessels seeking to enter a security zone established in this 
section, may contact the COTP on VHF channel 16 or by telephone at 
(787) 289-2041 to request permission.
    (3) All persons and vessels granted permission to enter the 
security zone must comply with the orders of the COTP and designated 
on-scene U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel. On-scene U.S. Coast Guard 
patrol personnel include commissioned, warrant, and petty officers of 
the U.S. Coast Guard.

    Dated: September 2, 2008.
E. Pino,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Juan.
[FR Doc. E8-22242 Filed 9-22-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P