Security Zones; Naval Base Point Loma; Naval Mine Anti-Submarine Warfare Command; San Diego Bay, San Diego, CA, 53109-53113 [2013-20781]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2013 / Proposed Rules
compliance, please contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT, above.
The Coast Guard will not retaliate
against small entities that question or
complain about this proposed rule or
any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
4. 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).
5. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. We have
analyzed this proposed rule under that
Order and have determined that it does
not have implications for federalism.
6. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the
person listed in the ‘‘FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT’’ section to
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places or vessels.
7. 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 (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Though this
proposed rule will not result in such an
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of
this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
8. Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not cause a
taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under
Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with
Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
9. 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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 Aug 27, 2013
Jkt 229001
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. Energy Effects
This proposed rule is not a
‘‘significant energy action’’ under
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use.
13. Technical Standards
This proposed rule does not use
technical standards. Therefore, we did
not consider the use of voluntary
consensus standards.
14. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023–01,
and 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 made a preliminary determination
that this action is one of a category of
actions which do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. This proposed
rule simply promulgates the operating
regulations or procedures for
drawbridges. This rule is categorically
excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph
(32)(e), of the Instruction.
Under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of
the Instruction, an environmental
analysis checklist and a categorical
exclusion determination are not
required for this rule. We seek any
comments or information that may lead
to the discovery of significant
environmental impact from the
proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
53109
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:
PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE
OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 117
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
2. From March 1, 2014 until March 1,
2016, suspend § 117.739(b) and add a
new temporary paragraph (p) to read as
follows:
■
§ 117.739
Passaic River.
*
*
*
*
*
(p) The draw of the Route 1 & 9
(Lincoln Highway) Bridge, mile 1.8,
between Kearny and Newark, shall open
on signal if at least a four hour advance
notice is given, except that, the draw
need not open for the passage of vessel
traffic between 6 a.m. and 10 a.m. and
between 2 p.m. and 6 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except holidays. Tide
dependent deep draft vessels may
request bridge openings between 6 a.m.
and 10 a.m. and between 2 p.m. and 6
p.m. provided at least a twelve hour
advance notice is given by calling the
number posted at the bridge.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: August 7, 2013.
D.B. Abel,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2013–20684 Filed 8–27–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG–2013–0580]
RIN 1625–AA87
Security Zones; Naval Base Point
Loma; Naval Mine Anti-Submarine
Warfare Command; San Diego Bay,
San Diego, CA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard proposes
extending a portion of an existing San
Diego Bay security zone at Naval Base
Point Loma to support the construction
of a new Naval fuel pier. In addition to
the extension of the Naval Base Point
Loma security zone, a new security zone
will be established at the Naval Mine
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM
28AUP1
53110
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2013 / Proposed Rules
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
and Anti-Submarine Warfare Command
to protect the relocated marine mammal
program. These security zone
modifications are intended to restrict
vessels from a portion of the San Diego
Bay in order to ensure the safety and
security of Naval assets. Both Security
Zones will safeguard Naval assets, such
as vessels, property and waterfront
facilities from destruction, loss of injury
from sabotage or other subversive acts.
No persons or vessel may enter or
remain in the security zones without
permission of the Captain of the Port,
The Commander of Naval Base Point
Loma, the Commander of the Naval
Mine Anti Submarine Warfare
Command, the Commander of Naval
Region Southwest, or a designated
representative of those individuals.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before October 28, 2013.
Requests for public meetings must be
received by the Coast Guard on or before
September 27, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number using any
one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202–493–2251.
(3) Mail or Delivery: 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. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. The telephone number is 202–
366–9329. See the ‘‘Public Participation
and Request for Comments’’ portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below for further instructions on
submitting comments.
To avoid duplication, please use only
one of these three methods.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this rule, call or
email Lieutenant John Bannon, U.S.
Coast Guard Sector San Diego;
telephone (619) 278–7261 or by email at
John.E.Bannon@uscg.mil. If you have
questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Barbara
Hairston, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone (202) 366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Acronyms
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
A. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 Aug 27, 2013
Jkt 229001
comments and related materials. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided.
1. Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section
of this document to which each
comment applies, and provide a reason
for each suggestion or recommendation.
You may submit your comments and
material online at https://
www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or
hand delivery, but please use only one
of these means. If you submit a
comment online, it will be considered
received by the Coast Guard when you
successfully transmit the comment. If
you fax, hand deliver, or mail your
comment, it will be considered as
having been received by the Coast
Guard when it is received at the Docket
Management Facility. We recommend
that you include your name and a
mailing address, an email address, or a
telephone number in the body of your
document so that we can contact you if
we have questions regarding your
submission.
To submit your comment online, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number [USCG–2013–0580] in
the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click
‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on ‘‘Submit a
Comment’’ on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
If you submit your comments by mail
or hand delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 8c by 11
inches, suitable for copying and
electronic filing. If you submit
comments 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 and may
change the rule based on your
comments.
2. Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number (USCG–2013–0580) in
the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click
‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket
Folder on the line associated with this
rulemaking. You may also visit the
Docket Management Facility in Room
W12–140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
3. Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic
form of 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 notice regarding our public dockets
in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
4. Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for one, using one of the methods
specified under ADDRESSES. Please
explain why you believe a public
meeting 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.
B. Regulatory History and Information
On October 1, 2009, the U.S. Coast
Guard published a final rule entitled
‘‘Security Zone; Naval Base Point Loma;
San Diego Bay, San Diego, CA’’ in the
Federal Register. At the request of the
U.S. Navy, the revised security zone
combined two existing security zones.
The new security zone also extended
the existing security zone along the
naval base and provided an additional
500 feet of protection for installation of
water barriers to provide a line of
demarcation and defensive measures as
a safety guard from destruction, loss or
injury from sabotage or other subversive
acts, accidents, or other causes of
similar nature.
For more information on existing
regulatory actions for the preexisting
security zone, see docket USCG–2008–
1016 on www.regulations.gov or 74 FR
50708 in the October 1, 2009 edition of
the Federal Register.
The existing security zone in 33 CFR
165.1102, which resides within an
existing U.S. Army Corp of Engineers
Restricted Area (see 33 CFR 334.870), is
now in need of another expansion to
provide the same level of protection for
a new fuel pier being built to replace the
existing pier. The new pier will be built
further out towards the main channel
and allow for deeper draft vessels. The
expansion of the fuel pier and increased
size of the security zone of 500 feet
around the front face of the fuel pier
still allows for safe transit between the
required additional security and the
federal channel, during the new pier
development and after completion, for
commercial and recreational vessels.
E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM
28AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2013 / Proposed Rules
Because of construction activities, the
marine mammal pens will temporarily
be moved from their present location at
Naval Base Point Loma to the Naval
Mine and Anti-Submarine Warfare
Command, and an impermanent
security zone of 100 feet from shore will
be established for their safety and
security.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
C. Basis and Purpose
The legal basis for the rule is the
Coast Guard’s authority to establish
regulated navigation areas and limited
access areas: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191,
195; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6,
160.5; Public Law 107–295, 116 Stat.
2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
The U.S. Navy is requesting an
extension of the existing security zone
for the Naval Base Point Loma Fuel Pier
construction and the establishment of a
security zone at the Naval Mine and
Anti-Submarine Warfare Command to
temporarily house the Navy’s marine
mammal program during the
construction phase of the new fuel pier.
The extended security zone at Naval
Base Point Loma will add an additional
500 feet east to provide standoff from
the new replacement fuel pier which
will exist closer to the federal channel
in deeper water. The marine mammal
pen security zone will also be
established at the Naval Mine and AntiSubmarine Warfare Command to
provide a 100 foot standoff for marine
mammal pens. The marine mammal
pens need to be moved due to the
construction near their current pens.
Both Security Zones will safeguard
Naval assets, such as vessels and
waterfront facilities from destruction,
loss of injury from sabotage, or other
subversive acts, accidents or other
causes of a similar nature and still allow
for safe navigation around the security
zones. No persons or vessel may enter
or remain in the security zones without
permission of the Captain of the Port,
The Commander of Naval Base Point
Loma, the Commander of the Naval
Mine Anti Submarine Warfare
Command, the Commander of Naval
Region Southwest, or a designated
representative of those individuals.
D. Discussion of Proposed Rule
As stated above, to safeguard portions
of the San Diego Bay in direct support
of the U.S. Navy, the Coast Guard
proposes the expansion of a portion of
the existing San Diego Bay naval
security zone at Naval Base Point Loma
surrounding the existing and planned
rebuilt fuel pier and the creation of a
security zone indefinitely at Naval Mine
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 Aug 27, 2013
Jkt 229001
and Anti-Submarine Warfare Command
for the U.S. Navy to house relocated
marine mammal pens. The proposed
security zone at the Naval Base Point
Loma Fuel Pier would entirely overlap
the existing security zone at 33 CFR
165.1102, which would be amended to
reflect the additional coordinates from
the additional 500 feet of standoff
distance adjacent to the fuel pier. The
limits of the expanded Naval Base Point
Loma Fuel Pier security zone will be
bound by the following coordinates:
32°42′28.8″ N, 117°14′13.2″ W
32°42′ 28.8″N, 117°14′12.6″ W
32°42′ 10.2″ N, 117°14′3″ W
32°42′6.2″ N, 117°14′1.5″ W
32°41′49.5″ N, 117°14′7″ W
32°41′47.4″ N, 117°14′11.4″ W
32°41′43.8″ N, 117°14′12.6″ W
32°41′31.8″ N, 117°14′13.8″ W
32°41′33″ N, 117°14′1.2″ W
32°41′10.2″ N, 117°13′57″ W
32°41′10.2″ N, 117°13′58.2″ W
The proposed security zone at the
Naval Mine and Anti-Submarine
Warfare Command would provide for
100 feet of standoff distance. The limits
of the new Naval Mine and AntiSubmarine Warfare Command security
zone will be bound by the following
coordinates:
32°43′40.9″ N, 117°12′54.9″ W
32°43′40.6″ N, 117°12′52.3″ W
32°43′22.5″ N, 117°12′ 57.8″ W
32°43′23.4″ N, 117°13′ 1.3″ W
Both Security Zones will safeguard
Naval assets, such as vessels and
waterfront facilities from destruction,
loss of injury from sabotage, or other
subversive acts, accidents or other
causes of a similar nature and still allow
for safe navigation around the security
zones. No persons or vessel may enter
or remain in the security zones without
permission of either the Captain of the
Port, the Commander of Naval Base
Point Loma, the Commander of the
Naval Mine Anti Submarine Warfare
Command, the Commander of Naval
Region Southwest, or a designated
representative of those individuals.
E. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after
considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes or
executive orders.
1. 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, as supplemented
by Executive Order 13563, Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review, and
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
53111
does not require an assessment of
potential costs and benefits under
section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866
or under section 1 of Executive Order
13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those
Orders.
This determination is based on the
size and location of the security zones.
Vessels that may operate for recreational
or commercial purposes within the area
encompassed by the security zone
expansion and establishment, will not
be impacted by the proposed regulation.
Sufficient navigable water exists
adjacent to the security zones and the
Federal channel.
2. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended,
requires federal agencies to consider the
potential impact of regulations on small
entities during rulemaking. 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 will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
(1) This proposed rule would affect
the following entities, some of which
might be small entities: the owners or
operators of vessels intending to transit
or anchor in a portion of the San Diego
Bay.
(2) This proposed rule would not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
because vessel traffic can pass safely
around the security zones.
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.
3. 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. If the
rule would affect your small business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will
not retaliate against small entities that
E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM
28AUP1
53112
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2013 / Proposed Rules
question or complain about this
proposed rule or any policy or action of
the Coast Guard.
4. Collection of Information
This proposed rule will not call for a
new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520.).
5. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. We have
analyzed this proposed rule under that
Order and determined that this rule
does not have implications for
federalism.
6. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places or vessels.
7. 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 (adjusted for inflation) 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.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
8. Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not cause a
taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under
Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with
Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
9. 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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 Aug 27, 2013
Jkt 229001
10. Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks
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.
11. 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.
12. Energy Effects
This proposed rule is not a
‘‘significant energy action’’ under
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use.
13. Technical Standards
This proposed rule does not use
technical standards. Therefore, we did
not consider the use of voluntary
consensus standards.
14. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023–01
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
that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment.
This proposed rule involves
modifying an already existing security
zone to provide for greater vessel
protection for a new fuel pier and the
adding of a new security zone
indefinitely for the protection of
relocated U.S. Navy marine mammal
pens. This rule only relates to the
establishment and modification of
limited access areas, and not to the
environmental impacts with the
development of a new pier.
This rule is categorically excluded
from further review under paragraph
34(g) of Figure 2–1 of the Commandant
Instruction. A preliminary
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
environmental analysis checklist
supporting this determination and a
Categorical Exclusion Determination are
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. 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 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. Revise § 165.1102 to read as
follows:
■
§ 165.1102 Security Zone; Naval Base
Point Loma; San Diego Bay, San Diego, CA.
(a) Location. The following area is a
security zone: The water adjacent to the
Naval Base Point Loma, San Diego, CA,
enclosed by the following coordinates:
32°42′28.8″ N, 117°14′13.2″ W, (Point A)
32°42′28.8″ N, 117°14′12.6″ W, (Point B)
32°42′10.2″ N, 117°14′3″ W, (Point C)
32°42′6.2″ N, 117°14′1.5″ W, (Point D)
32°41′49.5″ N, 117°14′7″ W, (Point E)
32°41′47.4″ N, 117°14′11.4″ W, (Point F)
32°41′43.8″ N, 117°14′12.6″ W, (Point G)
32°41′31.8″ N, 117°14′13.8″ W, (Point H)
32°41′33″ N, 117°14′1.2″ W, (Point I)
32°41′10.2″ N, 117°13′57″ W, (Point J)
32°41′10.2″ N, 117°13′58.2″ W, (Point K)
Thence running generally north along
the shoreline to Point A.
(b) Regulations. (1) The general
regulations governing security zones
found in 33 CFR 165.33 apply to the
security zone described in paragraph (a)
of this section.
(2) Entry into, or remaining in, the
areas of either zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port
San Diego; Commanding Officer, Naval
Base Point Loma; or Commander, Naval
Region Southwest.
(3) Persons desiring to transit the area
of the security zone may request
permission from the Captain of the Port
San Diego at telephone number (619)
278–7033 or on VHF channel 16 (156.8
MHz) or from either the Commanding
Officer, Naval Base Point Loma or the
E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM
28AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2013 / Proposed Rules
Commanding Officer Navy Region
Southwest by calling the Navy Port
Operation Dispatch at telephone
number (619) 556–1433 or on VHF–FM
channels 16 or 12. If permission is
granted, all persons and vessels must
comply with the instructions of the
Captain of the Port San Diego or his or
her designated representative.
(c) Definitions. For purposes of this
section: Captain of the Port San Diego,
means the Commanding Officer of the
Coast Guard Sector San Diego;
Commander, Navy Region Southwest,
means the Navy Region Commander
responsible for the Southwest Region;
Commanding Officer, Naval Base Point
Loma, means the Installation
Commander of the naval base located on
Point Loma, San Diego, California;
Designated Representative, means any
U.S. Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer who has been
designated by the Captain of the Port
San Diego to assist in the enforcement
of the security zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section.
(d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast
Guard may be assisted in the patrol and
enforcement of the security zone
described in paragraph (a) of this
section by the U.S. Navy and local law
enforcement agencies.
■ 3. Add § 165.1103 to read as follows:
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 165.1103 Security Zone; Naval Mine Anti
Submarine Warfare Command; San Diego
Bay, San Diego, CA.
(a) Location. (1) The following area is
a security zone: The water adjacent to
the Naval Mine Anti Submarine Warfare
Command, bound by the following
coordinates:
32°43′40.9″ N, 117°12′54.9″ W (A)
32°43′40.6″ N, 117°12′52.3″ W (B)
32°43′22.5″ N, 117°12′57.8″ W (C)
32°43′23.4″ N, 117°13′1.3″ W (D)
Thence running generally northwest
along the shoreline to Point A.
(2) The proposed security zone at the
Naval Mine Anti Submarine Warfare
Command would be established to
provide for the 100 feet of standoff
distance.
(b) Regulations. (1) The general
regulations governing security zones
found in 33 CFR 165.33 apply to the
security zone described in paragraph (a)
of this section.
(2) Entry into, or remaining in, the
areas of either zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port
San Diego; Commanding Officer, Naval
Mine Anti Submarine Warfare
Command; or Commander, Naval
Region Southwest.
(3) Persons desiring to transit the area
of the security zone may request
permission from the Captain of the Port
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 Aug 27, 2013
Jkt 229001
San Diego at telephone number (619)
278–7033 or on VHF channel 16 (156.8
MHz) or from either the Commanding
Officer, Naval Mine Anti Submarine
Warfare Command or the Commander,
Navy Region Southwest by calling the
Navy Port Operation Dispatch at
telephone number (619) 556–1433 or on
VHF–FM channels 16 or 12. If
permission is granted, all persons and
vessels must comply with the
instructions of the Captain of the Port
San Diego or his or her designated
representative.
(c) Definitions. For purposes of this
section: Captain of the Port San Diego,
means the Commanding Officer of the
Coast Guard Sector San Diego;
Commander, Navy Region Southwest,
means Navy Region Commander
responsible for the Southwest Region;
Commanding Officer, Naval Mine Anti
Submarine Warfare Command, means
the Installation Commander of the naval
base located on Point Loma, San Diego,
California; Designated Representative,
means any U.S. Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer
who has been designated by the Captain
of the Port San Diego to assist in the
enforcement of the security zone
described in paragraph (a) of this
section.
(d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast
Guard may be assisted in the patrol and
enforcement of the security zone
described in paragraph (a) of this
section by the U.S. Navy and local law
enforcement agencies.
Dated: July 30, 2013.
J.A. Janszen,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting,
Captain of the Port San Diego.
[FR Doc. 2013–20781 Filed 8–27–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0534; FRL–9900–35–
Region 9]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; California; San
Joaquin Valley; Contingency Measures
for the 1997 PM2.5 Standards
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
a state implementation plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of
California to address Clean Air Act
nonattainment area contingency
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
53113
measure requirements for the 1997
annual and 24-hour fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) national ambient air
quality standards in the San Joaquin
Valley. Final approval of this SIP
revision would terminate the sanctions
clocks and a federal implementation
plan clock that were triggered by EPA’s
partial disapproval of a related SIP
submission on November 9, 2011 (76 FR
69896).
DATES: Any comments must arrive by
September 27, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2013–0534, by one of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions.
• Email: wicher.frances@epa.gov.
• Mail or deliver: Frances Wicher,
Office of Air Planning (AIR–2), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105.
Instructions: All comments will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Information that
you consider CBI or otherwise protected
should be clearly identified as such and
should not be submitted through
www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA
will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send
email directly to EPA, your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the public
comment. If EPA cannot read your
comments due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment.
Docket: The index to the docket
(docket number EPA–R09–OAR–2013–
0534) for this action is available
electronically on the
www.regulations.gov Web site and in
hard copy at EPA Region 9, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,
California, 94105. While all documents
in the docket are listed in the index,
some information may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location
(e.g., copyrighted material), and some
may not be publicly available at either
location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard
copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM
28AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 167 (Wednesday, August 28, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53109-53113]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-20781]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG-2013-0580]
RIN 1625-AA87
Security Zones; Naval Base Point Loma; Naval Mine Anti-Submarine
Warfare Command; San Diego Bay, San Diego, CA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes extending a portion of an existing
San Diego Bay security zone at Naval Base Point Loma to support the
construction of a new Naval fuel pier. In addition to the extension of
the Naval Base Point Loma security zone, a new security zone will be
established at the Naval Mine
[[Page 53110]]
and Anti-Submarine Warfare Command to protect the relocated marine
mammal program. These security zone modifications are intended to
restrict vessels from a portion of the San Diego Bay in order to ensure
the safety and security of Naval assets. Both Security Zones will
safeguard Naval assets, such as vessels, property and waterfront
facilities from destruction, loss of injury from sabotage or other
subversive acts. No persons or vessel may enter or remain in the
security zones without permission of the Captain of the Port, The
Commander of Naval Base Point Loma, the Commander of the Naval Mine
Anti Submarine Warfare Command, the Commander of Naval Region
Southwest, or a designated representative of those individuals.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before October 28, 2013.
Requests for public meetings must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before September 27, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number using
any one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202-493-2251.
(3) Mail or Delivery: 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. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-366-9329. See the
``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for further instructions on
submitting comments.
To avoid duplication, please use only one of these three methods.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Lieutenant John Bannon, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San
Diego; telephone (619) 278-7261 or by email at John.E.Bannon@uscg.mil.
If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket,
call Barbara Hairston, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
(202) 366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Acronyms
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
A. 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 https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.
1. Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online at
https://www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but
please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online, it
will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully
transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment,
it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when
it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you
include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a
telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact
you if we have questions regarding your submission.
To submit your comment online, go to https://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number [USCG-2013-0580] in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8[frac12] by 11 inches, suitable
for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments 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 and may change
the rule based on your comments.
2. Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number (USCG-2013-0580) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
3. Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic form of 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 notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
4. Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one, using one of the methods specified under ADDRESSES.
Please explain why you believe a public meeting 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.
B. Regulatory History and Information
On October 1, 2009, the U.S. Coast Guard published a final rule
entitled ``Security Zone; Naval Base Point Loma; San Diego Bay, San
Diego, CA'' in the Federal Register. At the request of the U.S. Navy,
the revised security zone combined two existing security zones. The new
security zone also extended the existing security zone along the naval
base and provided an additional 500 feet of protection for installation
of water barriers to provide a line of demarcation and defensive
measures as a safety guard from destruction, loss or injury from
sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, or other causes of
similar nature.
For more information on existing regulatory actions for the
preexisting security zone, see docket USCG-2008-1016 on
www.regulations.gov or 74 FR 50708 in the October 1, 2009 edition of
the Federal Register.
The existing security zone in 33 CFR 165.1102, which resides within
an existing U.S. Army Corp of Engineers Restricted Area (see 33 CFR
334.870), is now in need of another expansion to provide the same level
of protection for a new fuel pier being built to replace the existing
pier. The new pier will be built further out towards the main channel
and allow for deeper draft vessels. The expansion of the fuel pier and
increased size of the security zone of 500 feet around the front face
of the fuel pier still allows for safe transit between the required
additional security and the federal channel, during the new pier
development and after completion, for commercial and recreational
vessels.
[[Page 53111]]
Because of construction activities, the marine mammal pens will
temporarily be moved from their present location at Naval Base Point
Loma to the Naval Mine and Anti-Submarine Warfare Command, and an
impermanent security zone of 100 feet from shore will be established
for their safety and security.
C. Basis and Purpose
The legal basis for the rule is the Coast Guard's authority to
establish regulated navigation areas and limited access areas: 33
U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33
CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
The U.S. Navy is requesting an extension of the existing security
zone for the Naval Base Point Loma Fuel Pier construction and the
establishment of a security zone at the Naval Mine and Anti-Submarine
Warfare Command to temporarily house the Navy's marine mammal program
during the construction phase of the new fuel pier.
The extended security zone at Naval Base Point Loma will add an
additional 500 feet east to provide standoff from the new replacement
fuel pier which will exist closer to the federal channel in deeper
water. The marine mammal pen security zone will also be established at
the Naval Mine and Anti-Submarine Warfare Command to provide a 100 foot
standoff for marine mammal pens. The marine mammal pens need to be
moved due to the construction near their current pens.
Both Security Zones will safeguard Naval assets, such as vessels
and waterfront facilities from destruction, loss of injury from
sabotage, or other subversive acts, accidents or other causes of a
similar nature and still allow for safe navigation around the security
zones. No persons or vessel may enter or remain in the security zones
without permission of the Captain of the Port, The Commander of Naval
Base Point Loma, the Commander of the Naval Mine Anti Submarine Warfare
Command, the Commander of Naval Region Southwest, or a designated
representative of those individuals.
D. Discussion of Proposed Rule
As stated above, to safeguard portions of the San Diego Bay in
direct support of the U.S. Navy, the Coast Guard proposes the expansion
of a portion of the existing San Diego Bay naval security zone at Naval
Base Point Loma surrounding the existing and planned rebuilt fuel pier
and the creation of a security zone indefinitely at Naval Mine and
Anti-Submarine Warfare Command for the U.S. Navy to house relocated
marine mammal pens. The proposed security zone at the Naval Base Point
Loma Fuel Pier would entirely overlap the existing security zone at 33
CFR 165.1102, which would be amended to reflect the additional
coordinates from the additional 500 feet of standoff distance adjacent
to the fuel pier. The limits of the expanded Naval Base Point Loma Fuel
Pier security zone will be bound by the following coordinates:
32[deg]42'28.8'' N, 117[deg]14'13.2'' W
32[deg]42' 28.8''N, 117[deg]14'12.6'' W
32[deg]42' 10.2'' N, 117[deg]14'3'' W
32[deg]42'6.2'' N, 117[deg]14'1.5'' W
32[deg]41'49.5'' N, 117[deg]14'7'' W
32[deg]41'47.4'' N, 117[deg]14'11.4'' W
32[deg]41'43.8'' N, 117[deg]14'12.6'' W
32[deg]41'31.8'' N, 117[deg]14'13.8'' W
32[deg]41'33'' N, 117[deg]14'1.2'' W
32[deg]41'10.2'' N, 117[deg]13'57'' W
32[deg]41'10.2'' N, 117[deg]13'58.2'' W
The proposed security zone at the Naval Mine and Anti-Submarine
Warfare Command would provide for 100 feet of standoff distance. The
limits of the new Naval Mine and Anti-Submarine Warfare Command
security zone will be bound by the following coordinates:
32[deg]43'40.9'' N, 117[deg]12'54.9'' W
32[deg]43'40.6'' N, 117[deg]12'52.3'' W
32[deg]43'22.5'' N, 117[deg]12' 57.8'' W
32[deg]43'23.4'' N, 117[deg]13' 1.3'' W
Both Security Zones will safeguard Naval assets, such as vessels
and waterfront facilities from destruction, loss of injury from
sabotage, or other subversive acts, accidents or other causes of a
similar nature and still allow for safe navigation around the security
zones. No persons or vessel may enter or remain in the security zones
without permission of either the Captain of the Port, the Commander of
Naval Base Point Loma, the Commander of the Naval Mine Anti Submarine
Warfare Command, the Commander of Naval Region Southwest, or a
designated representative of those individuals.
E. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes or executive orders.
1. 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,
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
This determination is based on the size and location of the
security zones. Vessels that may operate for recreational or commercial
purposes within the area encompassed by the security zone expansion and
establishment, will not be impacted by the proposed regulation.
Sufficient navigable water exists adjacent to the security zones and
the Federal channel.
2. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. 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 will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
(1) This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of
which might be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels
intending to transit or anchor in a portion of the San Diego Bay.
(2) This proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities because vessel traffic can
pass safely around the security zones.
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.
3. 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. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that
[[Page 53112]]
question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.
4. Collection of Information
This proposed rule will not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520.).
5. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
determined that this rule does not have implications for federalism.
6. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.
7. 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 (adjusted for
inflation) 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.
8. Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not cause a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.
9. 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.
10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks
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.
11. 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.
12. Energy Effects
This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.
13. Technical Standards
This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
14. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 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 that this action is one of a category
of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment.
This proposed rule involves modifying an already existing security
zone to provide for greater vessel protection for a new fuel pier and
the adding of a new security zone indefinitely for the protection of
relocated U.S. Navy marine mammal pens. This rule only relates to the
establishment and modification of limited access areas, and not to the
environmental impacts with the development of a new pier.
This rule is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. A
preliminary environmental analysis checklist supporting this
determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are 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
0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 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.
0
2. Revise Sec. 165.1102 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.1102 Security Zone; Naval Base Point Loma; San Diego Bay,
San Diego, CA.
(a) Location. The following area is a security zone: The water
adjacent to the Naval Base Point Loma, San Diego, CA, enclosed by the
following coordinates:
32[deg]42'28.8'' N, 117[deg]14'13.2'' W, (Point A)
32[deg]42'28.8'' N, 117[deg]14'12.6'' W, (Point B)
32[deg]42'10.2'' N, 117[deg]14'3'' W, (Point C)
32[deg]42'6.2'' N, 117[deg]14'1.5'' W, (Point D)
32[deg]41'49.5'' N, 117[deg]14'7'' W, (Point E)
32[deg]41'47.4'' N, 117[deg]14'11.4'' W, (Point F)
32[deg]41'43.8'' N, 117[deg]14'12.6'' W, (Point G)
32[deg]41'31.8'' N, 117[deg]14'13.8'' W, (Point H)
32[deg]41'33'' N, 117[deg]14'1.2'' W, (Point I)
32[deg]41'10.2'' N, 117[deg]13'57'' W, (Point J)
32[deg]41'10.2'' N, 117[deg]13'58.2'' W, (Point K)
Thence running generally north along the shoreline to Point A.
(b) Regulations. (1) The general regulations governing security
zones found in 33 CFR 165.33 apply to the security zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section.
(2) Entry into, or remaining in, the areas of either zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port San Diego;
Commanding Officer, Naval Base Point Loma; or Commander, Naval Region
Southwest.
(3) Persons desiring to transit the area of the security zone may
request permission from the Captain of the Port San Diego at telephone
number (619) 278-7033 or on VHF channel 16 (156.8 MHz) or from either
the Commanding Officer, Naval Base Point Loma or the
[[Page 53113]]
Commanding Officer Navy Region Southwest by calling the Navy Port
Operation Dispatch at telephone number (619) 556-1433 or on VHF-FM
channels 16 or 12. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels
must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port San Diego
or his or her designated representative.
(c) Definitions. For purposes of this section: Captain of the Port
San Diego, means the Commanding Officer of the Coast Guard Sector San
Diego; Commander, Navy Region Southwest, means the Navy Region
Commander responsible for the Southwest Region; Commanding Officer,
Naval Base Point Loma, means the Installation Commander of the naval
base located on Point Loma, San Diego, California; Designated
Representative, means any U.S. Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or
petty officer who has been designated by the Captain of the Port San
Diego to assist in the enforcement of the security zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section.
(d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol
and enforcement of the security zone described in paragraph (a) of this
section by the U.S. Navy and local law enforcement agencies.
0
3. Add Sec. 165.1103 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.1103 Security Zone; Naval Mine Anti Submarine Warfare
Command; San Diego Bay, San Diego, CA.
(a) Location. (1) The following area is a security zone: The water
adjacent to the Naval Mine Anti Submarine Warfare Command, bound by the
following coordinates:
32[deg]43'40.9'' N, 117[deg]12'54.9'' W (A)
32[deg]43'40.6'' N, 117[deg]12'52.3'' W (B)
32[deg]43'22.5'' N, 117[deg]12'57.8'' W (C)
32[deg]43'23.4'' N, 117[deg]13'1.3'' W (D)
Thence running generally northwest along the shoreline to Point A.
(2) The proposed security zone at the Naval Mine Anti Submarine
Warfare Command would be established to provide for the 100 feet of
standoff distance.
(b) Regulations. (1) The general regulations governing security
zones found in 33 CFR 165.33 apply to the security zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section.
(2) Entry into, or remaining in, the areas of either zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port San Diego;
Commanding Officer, Naval Mine Anti Submarine Warfare Command; or
Commander, Naval Region Southwest.
(3) Persons desiring to transit the area of the security zone may
request permission from the Captain of the Port San Diego at telephone
number (619) 278-7033 or on VHF channel 16 (156.8 MHz) or from either
the Commanding Officer, Naval Mine Anti Submarine Warfare Command or
the Commander, Navy Region Southwest by calling the Navy Port Operation
Dispatch at telephone number (619) 556-1433 or on VHF-FM channels 16 or
12. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels must comply with
the instructions of the Captain of the Port San Diego or his or her
designated representative.
(c) Definitions. For purposes of this section: Captain of the Port
San Diego, means the Commanding Officer of the Coast Guard Sector San
Diego; Commander, Navy Region Southwest, means Navy Region Commander
responsible for the Southwest Region; Commanding Officer, Naval Mine
Anti Submarine Warfare Command, means the Installation Commander of the
naval base located on Point Loma, San Diego, California; Designated
Representative, means any U.S. Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or
petty officer who has been designated by the Captain of the Port San
Diego to assist in the enforcement of the security zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section.
(d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol
and enforcement of the security zone described in paragraph (a) of this
section by the U.S. Navy and local law enforcement agencies.
Dated: July 30, 2013.
J.A. Janszen,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting, Captain of the Port San Diego.
[FR Doc. 2013-20781 Filed 8-27-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P