![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Security Zone; Ohio River Mile 119.0 to 119.8, Natrium, West Virginia
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: December 16, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 241)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 77008-77010]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr16de02-19]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[COTP Pittsburgh-02-019]
RIN 2115-AA97
Security Zone; Ohio River Mile 119.0 to 119.8, Natrium, West Virginia
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a security zone
encompassing all waters extending 200 feet from the water's edge of the
left descending bank of the Ohio River, beginning from mile marker
119.0 and ending at mile marker 119.8. This security zone is necessary
to protect Pittsburgh Plate Glass Industries (PPG), persons, and
vessels from subversive or terrorist acts. Entry of persons or vessels
into this security zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Coast
Guard Captain of the Port Pittsburgh or designated representative.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before February 14, 2003.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Marine Safety
Office Pittsburgh, Suite 1150 Kossman Bldg., 100 Forbes Ave.,
Pittsburgh, PA 15222-1371. Marine Safety Office Pittsburgh 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
Pittsburgh, Suite 1150 Kossman Bldg., 100 Forbes Ave., Pittsburgh, PA
between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Petty Officer (PO) Michael Marsula,
Marine Safety Office Pittsburgh at (412) 644-5808 x2114.
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
Pittsburgh 02-019], 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 8\1/2\ 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 Pittsburgh 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 Captain of the Port Pittsburgh established a temporary security
zone for the area adjacent to PPG that expired on June 15, 2002. [COTP
Pittsburg-02-001, 67 FR 9589]
No comments or objections were received
concerning this rule. National security and intelligence officials have
warned that future terrorist attacks against civilian targets are
anticipated. In response to those continued threats, heightened
awareness and security of our ports and harbors is necessary. The
Captain of the Port has established a temporary security zone for this
area [COTP Pittsburgh-02-019, 67 FR 58332]. That temporary final rule
was published in the Federal Register on September 16, 2002 and remains
in effect until February 15, 2003.
The Captain of the Port has determined that there is a need for
this security zone to remain in effect indefinitely because of the
continued threat of terrorism and the nature of material handled at
PPG. The proposed rule will establish a permanent security zone
identical to the previous and existing zones.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
A security zone is proposed for all water extending 200 feet from
the water's edge of the left descending bank of the Ohio River from
mile marker 119.0 to 119.8. All persons and vessels would be prohibited
from entering or remaining in this zone without the permission of the
Captain of the Port
[[Page 77009]]
Pittsburgh or his designated representative.
The zone is designed to increase protection around the PPG facility
in Natrium, West Virginia. It increases the opportunity for detection
of a waterborne attack on the facility and consequently enhances public
health and safety through providing greater defense and security at
this location and its surrounding areas. The location of this security
zone will limit access to only the waters immediately adjacent to the
facility and will permit vessels to safely navigate around the zone.
The establishment of this security zone will have minimal impact on
maritime traffic in the vicinity of the facility.
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, 1979).
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 10(e) of the
regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary. This rule
will not obstruct the regular flow of vessel traffic and will allow
vessel traffic to pass safely around the security zone. Vessels may be
permitted to enter the security zone on a case-by-case basis.
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 Coast Guard is unaware of any small
entities that would be impacted by this proposed rule. The navigable
channel remains open to all vessel traffic. We received no comments or
objections regarding the previous security zone covering the same area.
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 Petty Officer
Michael Marsula, Marine Safety Office Pittsburgh at (412) 644-5808
x2114.
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. 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 because this rule is not expected to result
in any significant adverse environmental impact as described in the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). A ``Categorical
Exclusion
[[Page 77010]]
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 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; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g),
6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; 49 CFR 1.46.
2. Add Sec. 165.822 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.822 Security Zone; Ohio River Mile 119.0 to 119.8, Natrium,
West Virginia.
(a) Location. The following area is a security zone: the waters of
the Ohio River, extending 200 feet from the water's edge of the left
descending bank beginning from mile marker 119.0 and ending at mile
marker 119.8.
(b) Regulations. (1) Entry into or remaining in this zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port
Pittsburgh or his designated representative.
(2) Persons or vessels desiring to transit the area of the security
zone may contact the Captain of the Port Pittsburgh at telephone number
412-644-5808 or on VHF channel 16 to seek permission to transit the
area. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels must comply
with the instructions of the Captain of the Port Pittsburgh or
designated representative.
(c) Authority. In addition to 33 U.S.C. 1231, the authority for
this section includes 33 U.S.C. 1226.
Dated: November 18, 2002.
S.L. Hudson,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Pittsburgh.
[FR Doc. 02-31539 Filed 12-13-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P