Security Zone; Port Valdez and Valdez Narrows, Valdez, AK

AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION:

Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard proposes establishing a security zone encompassing the Trans-Alaska Pipeline (TAPS) Valdez Terminal Complex, Valdez, Alaska and TAPS Tank Vessels and a security zone in the Valdez Narrows, Port Valdez, Alaska. The security zones are necessary to protect the Alyeska Marine Terminal and Vessels from damage or injury from sabotage, destruction or other subversive acts. Entry of vessels into these security zones is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port, Prince William Sound, Alaska.

DATES:

Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before December 23, 2002.

ADDRESSES:

You may mail comments and related material to U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office, P.O. Box 486, Valdez, Alaska 99686. Marine Safety Office Valdez, AK, maintains the public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at Marine Safety Office Valdez, AK between 7:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lt. Chris Beadle, U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Valdez, Alaska, (907) 835-7222.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (COTP Prince William Sound 02-011), indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than 81/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know that your submission reached us, 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.

Public Meeting

We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a request for a meeting by writing to Marine Safety Office Valdez 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 separate notice in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

The Coast Guard is taking this action for the immediate protection of the national security interests in light of terrorist acts perpetrated on September 11, 2001. The port of Valdez is a vital national commercial port, supporting the transfer and transport of a significant percentage of oil used in the United States. As such, it is crucial that actions be taken to protect the flow of commerce from possible terrorist or subversive acts designed to damage maritime facilities and vessels transiting to and from the Port of Valdez. The proposed rule would replace existing regulations in 33 CFR 165.1701 and the temporary rule issued in July, which will expire December 31, 2002, that created temporary § 165.T17-010, entitled “Port Valdez and Valdez Narrows, Valdez, Alaska.” The proposed rule would work to safely control the flow of commercial traffic and protect vital maritime facilities by creating security zones and check-in procedures designed to identify threats for response by appropriate law enforcement resources.

On November 7, 2001, we published three temporary final rules in the Federal Register (66 FR 56208, 56210, 56212) that created security zones effective through June 1, 2002. The section numbers and titles for these security zone regulations are—

§ 165.T17-003—Security zone; Trans-Alaska Pipeline Valdez Terminal Complex, Valdez, Alaska,

§ 165.T17-004—Security zone; Port Valdez, and

§ 165.T17-005—Security zones; Captain of the Port Zone, Prince William Sound, Alaska.

Then on June 4, 2002, we published a temporary final rule (67 FR 38389) that established security zones to replace those security zones that expired June 1, 2002. That rule issued in June, which expired July 30, 2002, created temporary § 165.T17-009, entitled “Port Valdez and Valdez Narrows, Valdez, Alaska”.

Then on July 26, 2002 we published a temporary final rule (67 FR 49582-84) that established security zones to replace temporary § 165.T17-009 that expired July 30, 2002. That rule issued in July, which will expire December 31, 2002, created temporary § 165.T17-010, entitled “Port Valdez and Valdez Narrows, Valdez, Alaska”. This proposed rule would remove the temporary security zones in § 165.T17-010 and add permanent security zones in a new 33 CFR 165.1701.

Comments received regarding the temporary final rules currently in place will be taken into consideration.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

This proposed rule would establish three security zones in new 33 CFR 165.1701(a) and move the current safety zone in existing 33 CFR 165.1701 to new 33 CFR 165.1701(b). This proposed rule also would establish procedures for vessel entry into the security and safety zones for management of the natural resources administered by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources.

The Trans-Alaska Pipeline (TAPS) Valdez Marine Terminal security zone encompasses the waters of Port Valdez between Allison Creek to the east and Sawmill Spit to the west and offshore to marker buoys A and B (approximately 1.5 nautical miles offshore from the TAPS Terminal). The Tank Vessel moving security zone encompasses the waters within 200 yards of a TAPS tanker within the Captain of the Port, Prince William Sound Zone. The Valdez Narrows security zone encompasses the waters 200 yards either side of the Tanker Optimum Trackline through Valdez Narrows between Entrance Island and Tongue Point. This zone is enforced only when a TAPS tanker is in the zone. The TAPS safety zone encompasses all waters within 200 yards of on shore and off shore facilities of the TAPS Terminal and is a safety buffer between potentially hazardous terminal operating areas and areas to which vessels may be permitted entry by the Captain of the Port, Prince William Sound, during State of Alaska managed fisheries openings and/or closings.

The Coast Guard has worked closely with local and regional users of Port Valdez and Valdez Narrows waterways to develop these security zones and the NPRM in order to mitigate the impact on commercial and recreational users. The limited size of the terminal security zone is designed to minimize impact on mariners while ensuring public safety by preventing interference with terminal operations. The Tank Vessel moving security zone and the Valdez Narrows security zone will be enforced only while vessels are transiting the area and are designed to provide a safe operating distance while minimizing threats to tanker operations.

Regulatory Evaluation

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. It is not “significant” under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Transportation (DOT)(44 FR 11040, February 26, l979). We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 10e of the regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary. This finding is based on the limited size of the zones and the limited duration of the Tank Vessel moving security zone and the Valdez Narrows security zone. Additionally, vessels will not be precluded from transiting and operating in these areas as The Captain of The Port will consider requests for entry on a case-by-case basis and requests for entry will be approved as appropriate. Those desiring to transit the area of the security or safety zones must contact the Captain of the Port under the provisions of proposed 33 CFR 165.1701(d).

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. The proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners and operators of commercial fishing vessels and native subsistence fishermen. Some of the areas that these entities might desire to use for fishing may fall within the security or safety zones. However, The Captain of The Port will consider requests for entry into the security or safety zones on a case-by-case basis and requests for entry will be approved as appropriate; therefore, it is likely that very few, if any, small entities will be impacted by this rule.

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 (Public Law 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 Lt. Chris Beadle, U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Valdez, Alaska, (907) 835-7222.

Collection of Information

This proposed rule contains information collection requirements that have not been approved by OMB. This proposed rule would modify an existing collection of information requirement under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). As defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(c), “collection of information” comprises reporting, recordkeeping, monitoring, posting, labeling, and other similar actions. The Captain of the Port, Prince William Sound, Alaska requires information on vessel owners and operators, and their vessels, crews and passengers desiring entry into the proposed security and safety zones in Port Valdez and Valdez Narrows, Alaska. This information is required to ensure port and vessel safety and security, uninterrupted fishing industry openings, control vessel traffic, develop contingency plans and enforce applicable laws and regulations.

You are not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number from OMB.

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. It has not been designated by the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.

Environment

We have considered the environmental impact of this proposed rule and concluded that, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, this rule is categorically excluded from further environmental documentation since implementation of this action will not result in any inconsistencies with any Federal, State, or Local laws or administrative determinations relating to the environment. A “Categorical Exclusion Determination” is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

• Harbors
• Marine safety
• Navigation (water)
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
• Security measures
• Waterways

For the reasons set forth 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; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; 49 CFR 1.46.