![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Security Zone; Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant, Seabrook, NH
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: July 31, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 147)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 49643-49645]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr31jy02-29]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD01-02-092]
RIN 2115-AA97
Security Zone; Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant, Seabrook, NH
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a permanent security
zone around the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant in Seabrook, New
Hampshire. This security zone will close off public access to all land
and waters within 250-yards of the waterside property boundary of the
plant. This action is
[[Page 49644]]
necessary to ensure public safety and prevent sabotage or terrorist
acts. Entry into this security zone is prohibited unless authorized by
the Captain of the Port, Portland, Maine.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before September 30, 2002.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Marine Safety
Office Portland, 103 Commercial Street, Portland, ME 04101. Marine
Safety Office Portland maintains the public docket for this rulemaking.
Comments and materials received from the public, as well as documents
indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, will
become part of the docket and will be available for inspection or
copying at Marine Safety Office Portland between the hours of 8 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant (Junior Grade) R. F.
Pigeon, Port Operations Department, Marine Safety Office Portland at
(207) 780-3092.
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 (CGD01-02-
092), 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
your comments 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 Portland at
the address listed under ADDRESSES explaining why one may be
beneficial. If we determine that one would aid in this rulemaking, we
will hold one at a time and place announced by a separate notice in the
Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
In light of terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C.
on September 11, 2001 a permanent security zone is being proposed to
safeguard the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant, persons at the facility,
the public and surrounding communities from sabotage or other
subversive acts, accidents, or other events of a similar nature. The
Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant presents a possible target of terrorist
attack due to the potential catastrophic impact nuclear radiation would
have on the surrounding area, its large destructive potential if
struck, and its proximity to a population center. This proposed
security zone prohibits entry into or movement within the specified
area.
This proposed rulemaking will establish a security zone
encompassing all land and waters within 250 yards of the waterside
property boundary of Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant identified as
follows: Beginning at position 42 deg.53'58'' N, 070 deg.51'06'' W;
then running along the property boundaries of Seabrook Nuclear Power
Plant to position 42 deg.53'46'' N, 070 deg.51'06'' W.
We propose to establish a permanent security zone identical to one
we created in a temporary final rule entitled ``Security Zone: Seabrook
Nuclear Power Plant, Seabrook, New Hampshire'' that was published
December 31, 2001 in the Federal Register (66 FR 67487). That temporary
rule originally was effective until June 15, 2002. Its effective period
was extended until August 15, 2002 by a temporary final rule with the
same title published May 8, 2002 (67 FR 30807). Another extension will
be published in the future to accommodate the time necessary for notice
and comment rulemaking on this proposed rule. This proposed rulemaking
is necessary to provide permanent protection of the waterfront areas of
the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant.
No person or vessel may enter or remain in the prescribed security
zone at any time without the permission of the Captain of the Port,
Portland, Maine. Each person or vessel in a security zone shall obey
any direction or order of the Captain of the Port or designated Coast
Guard representative on-scene. The Captain of the Port may take
possession and control of any vessel in a security zone and/or remove
any person, vessel, article or thing from a security zone. No person
may board, take or place any article or thing on board any vessel or
waterfront facility in a security zone without permission of the
Captain of the Port.
Any violation of the security zone proposed herein is punishable
by, among others, civil penalties (not to exceed $25,000 per violation,
where each day of a continuing violation is a separate violation),
criminal penalties (imprisonment for not more than 10 years and a fine
of not more than $250,000), in rem liability against the offending
vessel, and license sanctions. This regulation is proposed under the
authority contained in 50 U.S.C. 191, 33 U.S.C. 1223, 1225 and 1226.
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 10e of the
regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary. The effect of
this proposed regulation will not be significant for several reasons:
there is ample room for vessels to navigate around the zone,
notifications will be made to the local maritime community, and signs
will be posted informing the public of the boundaries of the zone.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Coast
Guard 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 will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. For the reasons enumerated in the Regulatory
Evaluation section above, we feel this security zone will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
If you think 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.
[[Page 49645]]
Assistance for Small Entities
Under subsection 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 [Publ. 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 Lieutenant (Junior
Grade) R. F. Pigeon, Marine Safety Office Portland, at (207) 780-3092.
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees
who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247).
Collection of Information
This 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 proposed 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. 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 record
keeping 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. 165.106 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.106 Security Zone: Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant, Seabrook,
New Hampshire.
(a) Location. The following area is a security zone: All land and
waters within 250 yards of the waterside property boundary of Seabrook
Nuclear Power Plant identified as follows: beginning at position
42 deg.53[min]58[sec]N, 70 deg.51[min]06[sec]W; then running along the
property boundaries of Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant to position
42 deg.53[min]46[sec]N, 70 deg.51[min]06[sec]W. All coordinates
reference 1983 North American Datum (NAD 83)
(b) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec. 165.33 of this part, entry into or movement within this zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, Portland,
Maine (COTP).
(2) All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of
the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Portland, Maine or designated on-
scene U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel. On-scene Coast Guard patrol
personnel include commissioned, warrant, and petty officers of the
Coast Guard on board Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, local, state
and federal law enforcement vessels.
(3) No person may swim upon or below the surface of the water
within the boundaries of this security zone.
(c) Authority: In addition to 33 U.S.C. 1231 and 50 U.S.C. 191, the
authority for this section includes 33 U.S.C. 1223, 1225 and 1226.
Dated: July 23, 2002.
M.P. O'Malley,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Portland, Maine.
[FR Doc. 02-19360 Filed 7-30-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P