![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Security Zone; Bayou Casotte, Pascagoula, MS
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: July 7, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 129)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 40231-40233]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr07jy03-39]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[COTP Mobile-03-013]
RIN 1625-AA00
Security Zone; Bayou Casotte, Pascagoula, MS
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a permanent security
zone encompassing all waters of Bayou Casotte east of a line drawn from
position 30[deg]19'09'' N, 88[deg]30'63'' W to position 30[deg]20'42''
N, 88[deg]30'51'' W at the Chevron Pascagoula Refinery. This security
zone is necessary to protect Chevron Pascagoula refinery, persons, and
vessels from subversive or terrorist acts. Entry of persons or vessels
into this security zone will be prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port Mobile, or a designated representative.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before September 5, 2003.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Marine Safety
Office Mobile, Brookley Complex, Bldg 102, South Broad Street, Mobile,
AL 36615-1390. Marine Safety Office Mobile 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 Mobile, Brookley Complex,
Bldg 102, South Broad Street, Mobile, AL 36615-1390 between 8 a.m. and
4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant (LT) Carolyn Beatty,
Operations Department, Marine Safety Office Mobile, AL, at (251) 441-
5771.
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
[[Page 40232]]
address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking [COTP Mobile-
03-013], 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 Mobile at the
address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we
determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a
time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
On September 11, 2001, both towers of the World Trade Center and
the Pentagon were attacked by terrorists. The President has continued
the national emergency he declared following those attacks (67 FR
58317, Sept. 13, 2002) (continuing the emergency declared with respect
to terrorist attacks) and (67 FR 59447, Sept. 20, 2002) (continuing
emergency with respect to persons who commit, threaten to commit or
support terrorism). The President also has found pursuant to law,
including the Magnuson Act (50 U.S.C. 191 et seq.), that the security
of the United States is and continues to be endangered following the
terrorist attacks (E.O. 13,273, 67 FR 56215, Sept. 3, 2002) (security
of U.S. endangered by disturbances in international relations of U.S
and such disturbances continue to endanger such relations). National
security and intelligence officials have warned that future terrorist
attacks against civilian targets are anticipated. In response to these
terrorist acts and warnings, heightened awareness for the security and
safety of all vessels, ports, and harbors is necessary.
On March 22, 2003, the Captain of the Port Mobile established a
temporary security zone for the Chevron Pascagoula Refinery (COTP
Mobile-03-009, 68 FR 23594). That temporary final rule was published in
the Federal Register on May 5, 2003, and expires on September 22, 2003.
The Captain of the Port has determined there is a need for this
security zone to remain in effect indefinitely because of the continued
threat of terrorism and the nature of the material handled at the
refinery. The proposed rule would establish a permanent security zone
identical to the existing temporary zone.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
A security zone is proposed for all waters of Bayou Casotte east of
a line drawn from position 30[deg]19'09'' N, 88[deg]30'63'' W; to
position 30[deg]20'42'' N, 88[deg]30'51'' W, at the Chevron Pascagoula
Refinery. These coordinates are based upon [NAD 83]. All persons and
vessels would be prohibited from entering or remaining in this zone
without permission of the Captain of the Port Mobile or a designated
representative.
The zone is designed to increase protection around the Chevron
Pascagoula Refinery in Pascagoula, MS. It increases the opportunity for
detection of a waterborne attack on the facility and consequently
enhances public health and safety, 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 safety 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
Homeland Security (DHS).
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary.
This proposed rule would 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 have received no
comments or objections regarding the existing security zone covering
the same area.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed rule
would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment
(see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to
what degree this rule would economically affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
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 Carolyn Beatty,
Operations Department, Marine Safety Office Mobile, AL, at (251) 441-
5771.
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
[[Page 40233]]
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 will 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
does not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that
may disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. We
invite your comments on how this proposed rule might impact tribal
governments, even if that impact may not constitute a ``tribal
implication'' under the Order.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction
M16475.1D, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit
the use of categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the
Instruction. Therefore, this proposed rule is categorically excluded,
under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the instruction, from further
environmental documentation because this rule is not expected to result
in any significant environmental impact as described in NEPA. A final
``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a final ``Categorical
Exclusion Determination'' are available where indicated under
ADDRESSES. Comments on this section will be considered before we make
the final decision on whether the rule should be categorically excluded
from further environmental review.
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; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.
2. Add Sec. 165.824 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.824 Security Zone; Chevron Pascagoula Refinery, Pascagoula,
MS.
(a) Location. The following area is a security zone: all waters of
Bayou Casotte east of a line drawn from position 30[deg]19'09'' N,
88[deg]30'63'' W to position 30[deg]20'42'' N 88[deg]30'51'' W at the
Chevron Pascagoula Refinery. These coordinates are based upon [NAD 83].
(b) Regulations: (1) Entry into or remaining in this zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port
Mobile or a designated representative.
(2) Persons desiring to transit the area of the security zone may
contact the Captain of the Port Mobile at telephone number (251) 441-
5121 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 Mobile or a designated
representative.
(c) Authority. In addition to 33 U.S.C. 1231, the authority for
this section includes 33 U.S.C. 1226.
Dated: June 19, 2003.
Gary T. Croot,
Commander, Coast Guard, Acting, Captain of the Port Mobile.
[FR Doc. 03-16972 Filed 7-3-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-U