02-7355. Security Zone; Operation Native Atlas 2002, Waters Adjacent to Camp Pendleton, CA

AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION:

Temporary final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary security zone in the waters adjacent to Camp Pendleton, California. This action is taken at the request of the United States Navy and is needed to safeguard U.S. Naval vessels and property from sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, criminal actions or other causes of a similar nature. Entry into this zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) San Diego, or his designated representative.

In addition, the U.S. Navy will be installing 1260 feet of elevated causeway pier (ELCAS) at Red Beach, and conducting Offshore Petroleum Discharge System (OPDS) operations offshore from Red Beach. Both operations present a significant hazard to vessel's transiting within the zone.

DATES:

This rule is effective from 12:01 a.m. (PDT) on March 22, 2002, to 11:59 p.m. (PDT) on April 15, 2002.

ADDRESSES:

Any comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of docket COTP San Diego 02-004, and are available for inspection or copying at U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office San Diego, 2716 N. Harbor Drive, San Diego California 92101, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lieutenant Commander Rick Sorrell, Chief of Port Operations, Marine Safety Office San Diego, at [phone].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

The Coast Guard recently issued a similar temporary final rule under docket COTP San Diego 02-001, and published that rule in the Federal Register on February 22, 2002 (67 FR 8197). Also on February 22, 2002, because the exercise was postponed, the Captain of the Port ceased enforcement of that security zone and announced that fact via Broadcast Notice to Mariners and Local Notice to Mariners.

This rulemaking action was taken at the request of the United States Navy and is considered necessary to safeguard U.S. Naval vessels and property from sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, criminal actions, or other causes of a similar nature. This temporary security zone is necessary for protection of the public from the hazards of upcoming Naval operations in support of Operation Native Atlas 2002 in the area and for the protection of the operations from compromise and interference.

We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this temporary regulation. In keeping with the requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. In keeping with the requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553 (d)(3), the Coast Guard also finds that good cause exists for making this regulation effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. Due to the complex planning, national security reasons, and the coordination involved with Naval scheduling, final details for the Operation Native Atlas 2002 were not provided to the Coast Guard in time to draft and publish a NPRM or a final rule 30 days in advance of its effective date. Any delay in implementing this rule would be contrary to the public interest since immediate action is necessary to ensure the protection of the Naval vessels, their crew and national security.

Furthermore, in order to protect the interests of national security, the Coast Guard is promulgating this temporary regulation to provide for the safety and security of U.S. Naval vessels in the navigable waters of the United States. As a result, the establishment and enforcement of this security zone is a function directly involved in, and necessary to military operations. Accordingly, based on the military function exception set forth in the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), notice and comment rule-making and advance publication, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b) and (d), are not required for this regulation.

Background and Purpose

United States Navy officials have requested that the Captain of the Port, San Diego, California establish a temporary security zone in the area of Camp Pendleton, California. This request was made to improve security of Naval facilities and operations at this location and to protect the public from hazardous operations. Several hazardous or classified Naval operations, including activities related to Operation Native Atlas 2002 will be conducted near this location that are vital to national security and require protection of the public or protection of the operation from compromise and interference. The Captain of the Port concurs with the need for this security zone. The security zone is needed to protect persons and property from sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, criminal actions, or other causes of a similar nature, and to secure the interests of the United States.

This security zone is necessary to provide for the safety and security of the United States of America. This security zone, prohibiting all vessel traffic from entering, transiting or anchoring within the areas defined by the security zone, is necessary for the security and protection of national assets. U.S. Navy personnel and U.S. Coast Guard vessels will enforce this zone.

Persons and vessels are prohibited from entering into this security zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or his designated representative. Each person and vessel in a security zone shall obey any direction or order of the COTP. The COTP may remove any person, vessel, article, or thing from a security zone. No person may board, or take or place any article or thing on board, any vessel in a security zone without the permission of the COTP.

This security zone is established pursuant to the authority of The Magnuson Act regulations promulgated by the President under 50 U.S.C. 191, including Subparts 6.01 and 6.04 of Part 6 of Title 33 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Vessels or persons violating this section are subject to the penalties set forth in 50 U.S.C. 192: seizure and forfeiture of the vessel, a monetary penalty of not more than $10,000, and imprisonment for not more than 10 years.

Regulatory Evaluation

This temporary final 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).

Due to national security interests, the implementation of this security zone is necessary for the protection of the United States and its people. The size of the zone is the minimum necessary to provide adequate protection for U.S. Naval vessels, their crews, adjoining areas, and the public. The entities most likely to be affected, if any, are pleasure craft engaged in recreational activities and sightseeing. Any hardships experienced by persons or vessels are considered minimal compared to the national interest in protecting U.S. Naval vessels, their crews, and the public.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Coast Guard considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term “small entities” include small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations less than 50,000.

This security zone will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because these security zones are only closing small portions of the navigable waters adjacent to Camp Pendleton, California. In addition, there are no small entities shoreward of the security zone. For these reasons, and the ones discussed in the previous section, the Coast Guard certifies, under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), that this temporary final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Assistance for Small Entities

In accordance with § 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), the Coast Guard offers to assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. If your small business or organization is affected by this rule and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact Lt Rick Sorrell, Chief of Port Operations, Marine Safety Office San Diego, at [phone].

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 rule calls 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 rule and have determined that this rule 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 rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

This 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 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 rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This 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 rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does 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.

Energy Effects

We have analyzed this 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 rule and concluded that under figure 2-1, paragraph (34), of Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, this rule, which establishes a security zone, is categorically excluded from further environmental documentation. A “Categorical Exclusion Determination” is available in the docket for inspection or copying 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 amends 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, 160.5; 49 CFR 1.46.

2. Add new § 165.T11-036 to read as follows:

§ 165.T11-036

Security Zone: Waters Adjacent to Camp Pendleton, California

(a) Location. The following area is a security zone: All waters and shoreline areas within the following boundaries: A point on the shore at 33°-15′30″ N, 117°-26′14″- W (Point A); proceeding westward to 33°-15′24″ N, 117°-30′45″ W (Point B); then north westward to 33°-18′30″ N, 117°32′55″ W (Point C); then eastward to the shore at 33°-18′42″ N, 117°-29′00″ W (Point D); thence along the shoreline to the point of beginning.

(b) Effective dates. This security zone will be in effect from 12:01 a.m. (PDT) on March 22, 2002, to 11:59 p.m. (PST) on April 15, 2002. If the need for this security zone ends before the scheduled termination time and date, the Captain of the Port will cease enforcement of the security zones and will also announce that fact via Broadcast Notice to Mariners and Local Notice to Mariners.

(c) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.33 of this part, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the security zone established by this temporary regulation, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated representative. All other general regulations of § 165.33 of this part apply in the security zone established by this temporary regulation. Mariners requesting permission to transit through the security zones must request authorization to do so from the Captain of the Port, who may be contacted at [phone], or U.S. Navy Force Security Officer (FSO), who may be reached during normal working hours at [phone]. After normal working hours the FSO can be reached at [phone].

(d) The U.S. Navy may assist the U.S. Coast Guard in the patrol and enforcement of this security zone.

Dated: March 15, 2002.

S.P. Metruck,

Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, San Diego, California.