19 March 2003 Source: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/fr-cont.html ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Federal Register: March 19, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 53)] [Notices] [Page 13282] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr19mr03-48] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary Strategic Advisory Group Meeting of the U.S. Strategic Command AGENCY: USSTRATCOM, DoD. ACTION: Notice of closed meeting. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Strategic Advisory Group (SAG) will meet in a closed session on April 24 and 25, 2003. The mission of the SAG is to provide timely advice on scientific, technical, intelligence, and policy-related issues to the Commander, U.S. Strategic Command during the development of the Nation's war plans. Full development of the topics will require discussion of information classified in accordance with Executive Order 12958, dated April 17, 1995. Access to this information must be strictly limited to personnel having the requisite security clearances and specific need- to-know. Unauthorized disclosure of the information to be discussed at the SAG meeting could have exceptionally grave impact on national defense. In accordance with section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), it has been determined that this SAG meeting concerns matters listed in 5 U.S.C., section 552b(c), and that, accordingly, this meeting will be closed. DATES: April 24 and 25, 2003. ADDRESSES: USSTRATCOM, 901 SAC Boulevard, Suite 1F7, Offutt Air Force Base, NE 68113-6030. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Connie Druskis, SAG, (402) 294-4102; Jerome Mahar, Joint Staff, (703) 614-6465. Dated: March 10, 2003. Patricia L. Toppings, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. [FR Doc. 03-6384 Filed 3-18-03; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-08-M ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Federal Register: March 19, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 53)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 13228-13231] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr19mr03-10] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [COTP San Francisco Bay 03-003] RIN 1625-AA00 Security Zones; San Francisco Bay, CA AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Temporary final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing fixed security zones extending 25 yards in the U.S. navigable waters around all piers, abutments, fenders and pilings of the Golden Gate Bridge and the San Francisco- Oakland Bay Bridge, San Francisco Bay, California. These security zones are needed for national security reasons to protect the public and ports from potential subversive acts. Entry into these security zones is prohibited, unless doing so is necessary for safe navigation, to conduct official business such as scheduled maintenance or retrofit operations, or unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port San Francisco Bay, or his designated representative. DATES: This regulation is effective from 11 a.m. PST on February 13, 2003 to 11:59 p.m. PDT on September 30, 2003. ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket are part of docket [COTP San Francisco Bay 03-003] and are available for inspection or copying at Coast Guard Marine Safety Office San Francisco Bay, Coast Guard Island, Alameda, California, 94501, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Diana Cranston, U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office San Francisco Bay, at (510) 437-3073. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory Information We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), for the reasons set forth below, the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. Also, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register because the threat of maritime attacks is real as evidenced by the October 2002 attack of a tank vessel off the coast of [[Page 13229]] Yemen and the continuing threat to U.S. assets as described in the President's finding in Executive Order 13273 of August 21, 2002 (67 FR 56215, September 3, 2002) that the security of the U.S. is endangered by the September, 11, 2001 attacks and that such disturbances continue to endanger the international relations of the United States. See also Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to Certain Terrorist Attacks, (67 FR 58317, September 13, 2002); Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect To Persons Who Commit, Threaten To Commit, Or Support Terrorism, (67 FR 59447, September 20, 2002). Moreover, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and the Attorney General recently elevated the Threat Level to Orange--High Condition. A High Condition is declared when there is a high risk of terrorist attacks. As a result, many agencies, like the Coast Guard, that will be a part of the new Department of Homeland Security on March 1, are taking additional steps to increase their protective measures. Under High Condition, among other things, federal agencies are to consider the following protective measures: Coordinate necessary security efforts with federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies, National Guard or other security and armed forces; and Restrict access to a threatened facility to essential personnel only. As a result, a heightened level of security has been established around the Golden Gate Bridge and the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge. Additionally, the measures contemplated by this rule are intended to prevent future terrorist attacks against individuals on or near the Golden Gate Bridge and the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge. Any delay in the effective date of this TFR is impractical and contrary to the public interest. Background and Purpose Since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York, the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia and Flight 93, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has issued several warnings concerning the potential for additional terrorist attacks within the United States. In addition, the ongoing hostilities in Afghanistan and growing tensions in Iraq have made it prudent to U.S. ports to be on a higher state of alert because the Al-Qaeda organization and other similar organizations have declared an ongoing intention to conduct armed attacks on U.S. interests worldwide. In its effort to thwart terrorist activity, the Coast Guard has increased safety and security measures on U.S. ports and waterways. As part of the Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986 (Pub. L. 99-399), Congress amended section 7 of the Ports and Waterways Safety Act (PWSA), 33 U.S.C. 1226, to allow the Coast Guard to take actions, including the establishment of security and safety zones, to prevent or respond to acts of terrorism against individuals, vessels, or public or commercial structures. In this particular rulemaking, to address the aforementioned security concerns, and to take steps to prevent the catastrophic impact that a terrorist attack against the Golden Gate Bridge and the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge would have on the public interest, the Coast Guard is establishing security zones around the Golden Gate Bridge and the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge. These security zones help the Coast Guard to prevent vessels or persons from engaging in terrorist actions against these bridges. Due to these heightened security concerns, and the catastrophic impact a terrorist attack on these bridges would have on the public, the transportation system, and surrounding areas and communities, security zones are prudent for these structures. Discussion of Rule In this temporary rule, the Coast Guard is establishing fixed security zones extending from the surface to the sea floor, 25 yards in the waters around all piers, abutments, fenders and pilings of the Golden Gate Bridge and the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, San Francisco Bay, California. Entry into these security zones is prohibited, unless doing so is necessary for safe navigation, or to conduct official business such as scheduled maintenance or retrofit operations. Vessels and people may be allowed to enter an established security zone on a case-by-case basis with authorization from the Captain of the Port. Vessels or persons violating this section will be subject to the penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232. Pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 1232, any violation of the security zone described herein, is punishable by civil penalties (not to exceed $27,500 per violation, where each day of a continuing violation is a separate violation), criminal penalties (imprisonment up to 6 years and a maximum fine of $250,000), and in rem liability against the offending vessel. Any person who violates this section, using a dangerous weapon, or who engages in conduct that causes bodily injury or fear of imminent bodily injury to any officer authorized to enforce this regulation, also faces imprisonment up to 12 years. Coast Guard personnel will enforce this regulation and the Captain of the Port may be assisted by other Federal, State, or local agencies in the patrol and enforcement of the regulation. This regulation is proposed under the authority of 33 U.S.C. 1226 in addition to the authority contained in 33 U.S.C. 1231. Regulatory Evaluation This 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). Although this regulation restricts access to the zones, the effect of this regulation will not be significant because: (i) The zones will encompass only a small portion of the waterway; (ii) vessels will be able to pass safely around the zones; and (iii) vessels may be allowed to enter these zones on a case-by-case basis with permission of the Captain of the Port, or his designated representative. The sizes of the zones are the minimum necessary to provide adequate protection for the bridges, vessels operating in the vicinity, their crews and passengers, adjoining areas and the public. The entities most likely to be affected are commercial vessels transiting the main ship channel en route the San Francisco Bay and Delta ports and pleasure craft engaged in recreational activities and sightseeing. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this 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 rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The security zones will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for several reasons: small vessel traffic can pass safely around the security zones and vessels engaged in recreational [[Page 13230]] activities, sightseeing and commercial fishing have ample space outside of the security zones to engage in these activities. Small entities and the maritime public will be advised of these security zones via public notice to mariners. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. If the rule will affect your small business, organization, or government jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT for assistance in understanding this rule. 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 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 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)(g), of Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, this rule is categorically excluded from further environmental documentation because we are establishing a security zone. 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), Reports and record keeping 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, and 160.5; 49 CFR 1.46. 2. Add Sec. 165.T11-078 to read as follows: Sec. 165.T11-078 Security Zones; Golden Gate Bridge and the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, San Francisco Bay, California. (a) Location. All waters extending from the surface to the sea floor, 25 yards around all piers, abutments, fenders and pilings of the Golden Gate Bridge and the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, San Francisco Bay, California. (b) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in Sec. 165.33 of this part, entry into these security zones is prohibited, unless doing so is necessary for safe navigation, to conduct official business such as scheduled maintenance or retrofit operations, or unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port San Francisco Bay, or his designated representative. (2) Persons desiring to transit the area of the security zone may contact the Captain of the Port at telephone number 510-437-3073 or on VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) 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 or his or her designated representative. (d) Authority. In addition to 33 U.S.C. 1231, the authority for this section includes 33 U.S.C. 1226. (e) Enforcement. All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the designated on-scene patrol personnel. Patrol personnel comprise commissioned, warrant, and petty officers of the Coast Guard onboard Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, local, state, and federal law enforcement vessels. Upon being hailed by U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel by [[Page 13231]] siren, radio, flashing light, or other means, the operator of a vessel shall proceed as directed. (f) Effective Dates. This section becomes effective at 11 a.m. PST on February 13, 2003, and will terminate at 11:59 p.m. PDT on September 30, 2003. Dated: February 13, 2003. Steven J. Boyle, Commander, Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port, San Francisco Bay, California. [FR Doc. 03-6630 Filed 3-18-03; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Federal Register: March 19, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 53)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 13231-13233] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr19mr03-11] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [COTP Los Angeles-Long Beach 02-005] RIN 1625-AA00 [Formerly RIN 2115-AA97] Security Zone; Liquefied Hazardous Gas Tank Vessels San Pedro Bay, CA AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is revising current safety zone regulations by establishing security zones around and under all liquefied hazardous gas (LHG) tank vessels located on San Pedro Bay, California, in and near the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. These security zones are needed for national security reasons to protect the public and ports from potential subversive acts. Entry into these zones will be prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Los Angeles-Long Beach. DATES: This rule is effective March 21, 2003. ADDRESSES: 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 Los Angeles-Long Beach 02-005] and are available for inspection or copying at U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office/Group Los Angeles-Long Beach, 1001 South Seaside Avenue, Building 20, San Pedro, California, 90731 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Junior Grade Rob Griffiths, Assistant Chief of Waterways Management Division, at (310) 732-2020. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory Information On December 27, 2002, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled ``Security Zones; Liquefied Hazardous Gas Tank Vessels San Pedro Bay, CA'' in the Federal Register (67 FR 79014). We received no letters commenting on the proposed rule. No public hearing was requested, and none was held. Current regulations issued under 33 CFR 165.1151 provide for safety zones around LHG tank vessels that are anchored, moored, or underway near the Los Angeles-Long Beach port areas. However, these safety zones are inadequate to address increased security requirements for LHG tank vessels. On January 28, 2002, we published a temporary final rule (TFR) entitled ``Security Zones; San Pedro Bay, California'' in the Federal Register (67 FR 3814) that expired on June 15, 2002. On June 19, 2002, we published a similar TFR entitled ``Security Zones; Liquefied Hazardous Gas Tank Vessels, San Pedro Bay, CA'' in the Federal Register (67 FR 41625) that expired on December 21, 2002. On December 31, 2002, we published a similar TFR entitled ``Security Zones; Liquefied Hazardous Gas Tank Vessels, San Pedro Bay, CA'' in the Federal Register (67 FR 79856) that is set to expire on March 21, 2003. The Captain of the Port has determined the need for continued security regulations exists. Accordingly, this rulemaking makes permanent the temporary security zones published in the Federal Register on December 31, 2002. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. The Maritime Administration recently issued a MARAD Advisory (03-01 (071900Z FEB 03)) informing operators of maritime interests of increased threat possibilities to vessels and facilities and a higher risk of terrorist attack to the transportation community in the United States. The current TFR is set to expire March 21, 2003 and any delay in the effective date of this final rule is impractical and contrary to the public interest. Background and Purpose Since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York, the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia and Flight 93, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has issued several warnings concerning the potential for additional terrorist attacks within the United States. In addition, the ongoing hostilities in Afghanistan and growing tensions in Iraq have made it prudent for U.S. ports to be on a higher state of alert because the al Qaeda organization and other similar organizations have declared an ongoing intention to conduct armed attacks on U.S. interests worldwide. In its effort to thwart terrorist activity, the Coast Guard has increased safety and security measures on U.S. ports and waterways. As part of the Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986 (Pub. L. 99-399), Congress amended section 7 of the Ports and Waterways Safety Act (PWSA), 33 U.S.C. 1226, to allow the Coast Guard to take actions, including the establishment of security and safety zones, to prevent or respond to acts of terrorism against individuals, vessels, or public or commercial structures. The Coast Guard also has authority to establish security zones pursuant to the Act of June 15, 1917, as amended by the Magnuson Act of August 9, 1950 (50 U.S.C. 191 et seq.) and implementing regulations promulgated by the President in subparts 6.01 and 6.04 of Part 6 of Title 33 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Section 104 of the Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) of 2002 (Pub. L. 107- 295, 116 Stat. 2064) extended the geographical reach of the Magnuson Act to twelve nautical miles seaward of the baseline of the United States and added civil penalty liability for violation. However, this rulemaking does not exercise the full extent of the geographical limit allowed by the PWSA and the recently amended Magnuson Act. The Coast Guard retains discretion to extend the geographical reach of this rule via notice and comment procedures to the twelve nautical mile limit should circumstances warrant such action. In this particular rulemaking, to address the aforementioned security concerns and to take steps to prevent the catastrophic impact that a terrorist attack against a LHG tank vessel would have on the public interest, the Coast Guard is revising current LHG safety zone regulations by establishing security zones around and under LHG tank vessels entering, departing, or moored within the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. These security zones help the Coast Guard to prevent vessels or persons from engaging in terrorist actions against LHG tank vessels. The Coast Guard has determined the establishment of security zones is prudent for LHG tank vessels because they carry LHG cargoes in bulk. Discussion of Comments and Changes We received no letters commenting on the proposed rule. No public hearing was requested, and none was held. [[Page 13232]] Therefore, we have made no changes and will implement the provision of the proposed rule as written. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Federal Register: March 14, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 50)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 12304-12306] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr14mr03-6] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [CGD01-01-187] RIN 2115-AA00, AA11 Regulated Navigation Area, Safety and Security Zones; Long Island Sound Marine Inspection and Captain of the Port Zone AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Temporary final rule; change in effective period. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is extending the effective period of a regulated navigation area (RNA) and certain safety and security zones published January 4, 2002. This change will extend the effective period of the temporary final rule through August 15, 2003, allowing adequate time for informal rulemaking to develop a permanent rule. This rule will continue to regulate the conditions under which certain vessels may enter, transit or operate within the regulated navigation area and will exclude all vessels from operating within 700 yards of the Millstone Nuclear Power Plant or 100 yards of anchored Coast Guard vessels. [[Page 12305]] DATES: The amendments of Sec. Sec. 165.T01-153 and 165.T01.154 in this rule are effective March 15, 2003. Sections 165.T01-153 and 165.T01- 154, added at 67 FR 519 and 520, January 4, 2002, effective December 10, 2001, until June 15, 2002, extended at 67 FR 40861, June 14, 2002, through November 15, 2002, and extended at 67 FR 69132, November 15, 2002, through March 15, 2003, as amended in this rule, are extended in effect through August 15, 2003. ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble are available for inspection and copying at Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Group/ Marine Safety Office (MSO) Long Island Sound, 120 Woodward Ave., New Haven, CT 06512, between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant A. Logman, Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Group/MSO Long Island Sound at (203) 468- 4429. Regulatory Information On January 4, 2002, we published a temporary final rule (TFR) entitled ``Regulated Navigation Areas, Safety And Security Zones: Long Island Sound Marine Inspection Zone and Captain of the Port Zone'' in the Federal Register (67 FR 517). The effective period for that rule was from December 10, 2001, until June 15, 2002. The effective period for that rule was extended through November 15, 2002 (67 FR 40861, June 14, 2002), and it was then extended through March 15, 2003 (67 FR 69132, November 15, 2002). We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. The original TFR was urgently required to prevent terrorist strikes within and adjacent to waters within the Long Island Sound Marine Inspection Zone and Captain of the Port Zone. It was anticipated that we would assess the security environment at the end of the effective period to determine whether continuing security precautions were required and, if so, propose regulations responsive to existing conditions. We have determined that the need for continued security regulations exists. The Coast Guard will utilize the extended effective period of this TFR to engage in notice and comment rulemaking to develop permanent regulations tailored to the present and foreseeable security environment within the ports of Long Island Sound. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. The measures contemplated by the rule were intended to prevent future terrorist attacks. The delay inherent in the NPRM process for developing a permanent rule is contrary to the public interest insofar as it may render individuals, vessels and facilities within and adjacent to the Long Island Sound Marine Inspection Zone and Captain of the Port Zone vulnerable to subversive activity, sabotage or terrorist attack. The Coast Guard will be publishing an NPRM to establish permanent safety and security zones that are temporarily effective under this rule. This revision preserves the status quo within the Port while permanent rules are developed. The present TFR has not been burdensome on the maritime public. The Coast Guard has not received written comments or suggestions to modify the scope of the existing TFR. Background and Purpose On September 11, 2001, two commercial aircraft were hijacked from Logan Airport in Boston, MA and flown into the World Trade Center in New York, NY inflicting catastrophic human casualties and property damage. A similar attack was conducted on the Pentagon with a plane launched from Newark, NJ on the same day. National security and intelligence officials warn that future terrorist attacks against civilian targets may be anticipated. The Coast Guard established RNAs and safety and security zones within defined areas of water as part of a comprehensive, port security regime designed to safeguard human life, vessels and waterfront facilities from sabotage or terrorist acts. As mentioned in the original TFR, these regulations were designed to provide the Captain of the Port of Long Island Sound with maximum flexibility to respond to emergent threats and dangerous conditions. When less stringent security measures are required, the Captain of the Port communicates relaxed enforcement policies to the public. As a result, the full scope of these regulations is rarely imposed. Nevertheless, the flexibility to utilize those measures permitted by the TFR and required by the circumstances is vital to ensure port security in the present environment. A change in the effective period of this rule was published on June 14, 2002 (67 FR 40859), which extended the rule through November 15, 2002. A second change in effective period of this rule was published on November 15, 2002 (67 FR 69132), which extended the rule through March 15, 2003. This change was necessary in order to conduct rulemaking for the establishment of permanent safety and security zones and regulated navigation area. Additional time is necessary to ensure the public has sufficient time to participate in the rulemaking process. The Coast Guard is therefore extending the effective date of this rule until August 15, 2003, to allow the establishment of permanent safety and security zones and a regulated navigation area by notice and comment rulemaking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Federal Register: March 19, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 53)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 13250-13251] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr19mr03-28] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 49 CFR Part 397 [Docket No. FMCSA-02-11650 (HM-232A)] RIN 2137-AD70 Security Requirements for Motor Carriers Transporting Hazardous Materials ACTION: Notice. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: This notice advises the public that the Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA) has assumed the lead role from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) for rulemaking addressing the security of motor carrier shipments of hazardous materials. On July 16, 2002, the two agencies published a joint advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM), requesting comments on technological and operational measures to enhance hazardous materials transportation security. Because the Homeland Security Act of 2002 provides RSPA with enhanced authority to regulate hazardous materials transportation security, RSPA will lead further rulemaking development on this subject. DATES: This notice is effective March 19, 2003. ADDRESSES: You can mail, fax, hand deliver or electronically submit written comments to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Dockets Management Facility, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001, FAX (202) 493-2251, on-line at http://dmses.dot.gov/ submit. You must include in your comment the docket number that appears in the heading of this document. You can examine and copy all comments at the above address from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., EDT, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. You can also view all comments or download an electronic copy of this document from the DOT Docket Management System (DMS) at http://dms.dot.gov/search.htm by typing the last five digits of the document number appearing at the heading of this document. The DMS is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. You can get electronic submission and retrieval help and guidelines at the ``Help'' section of the Web site. If you want us to notify you that we received your comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard, or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting comments on-line. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Gorsky, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards, Research and Special Programs Administration, 202- 366-8553. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 16, 2002, FMCSA and RSPA published a joint ANPRM entitled ``Security Requirements for Motor Carriers Transporting Hazardous Materials'' (67 FR 46622). In the ANPRM, RSPA and FMCSA sought information on the feasibility of imposing specific security requirements on motor carriers that transport hazardous materials in commerce. The ANPRM noted that certain government agencies, including the Department of Defense, the Department of Energy, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, as well as some private companies, employ rigorous security measures to protect sensitive shipments and suggested that some of these security measures could also be appropriate for broader application to commercial motor carrier shipments of hazardous materials. In addition, the ANPRM described technological solutions for tracking shipments, communicating with drivers, or securing shipments within trailers that can protect shipments from hijacking or provide an early indication of a potential security problem. The ANPRM asked for comments on the feasibility of mandating technological or operational measures such as escorts, vehicle tracking and monitoring systems, emergency warning systems, remote shut-offs, direct short-range communications, and advance notification of shipments to state and local authorities. After an extension, the comment period for the ANPRM closed November 15, 2002. Comments received in response to the ANPRM are accessible through DOT's Dockets Management System under Docket No. FMCSA-01-11650 (HM-232A). [[Page 13251]] RSPA's lead role in addressing hazardous materials transportation security was clarified with an amendment to the Federal hazardous materials transportation law (Federal hazmat law; 49 CFR 5101 et seq.) in the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Pub. Law. 107-296). Under section 1711 of the Homeland Security Act, the Secretary of Transportation's authority to regulate hazardous materials, which is delegated to RSPA, was expanded to include hazardous materials transportation security. Section 1711 amended section 5103 of Federal hazmat law to require the Secretary to ``prescribe regulations for the safe transportation, including security, of hazardous material in intrastate, interstate, and foreign commerce'' and to provide that the regulations ``shall govern safety aspects, including security, of the transportation of hazardous material the Secretary considers appropriate.'' Accordingly, RSPA and FMCSA determined that RSPA should take the lead in future rulemaking to address the security of hazardous materials shipments transported by motor carriers. The Spring 2003 edition of the Semi- Annual Regulatory Agenda will reflect that RSPA has assumed leadership of this rulemaking project. Once RPSA develops its next regulatory action on this subject, it will establish its own docket number. RSPA plans to provide public access to that regulatory action, through a hyperlink connecting the current FMCSA docket number to the new RSPA docket number. Thus, parties searching for updated information on this rulemaking through the former docket number will be apprised of RSPA's rulemaking. Issued on: March 14, 2003. Pamela M. Pelcovits, Acting Associate Administrator, Policy, Plans, and Regulation. [FR Doc. 03-6628 Filed 3-18-03; 8:45 am] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Federal Register: March 19, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 53)] [Notices] [Page 13334-13335] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr19mr03-124] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION Information Security Oversight Office; National Industrial Security Program Policy Advisory Committee: Notice of Meeting In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. APP. 2) and implementing regulation 41 CFR 101.6, announcement is made for the following committee meeting: Name of Committee: National Industrial Security Program Policy Advisory Committee (NISPPAC) Date of Meeting: April 23, 2003. Time of Meeting: 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. Place of Meeting: National Archives and Records Administration, 700 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 105, Washington, DC 20408. [[Page 13335]] Purpose: To discuss National Industrial Security Program policy matters. This meeting will be open to the public. However, due to space limitations and access procedures, the name and telephone number of individuals planning to attend must be submitted to the Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO) no later than April 4, 2003. ISOO will provide additional instructions for gaining access to the location of the meeting. For Further Information Contact: J. William Leonard, Director, Information Security Oversight Office, National Archives Building, 700 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 100, Washington, DC 20408, telephone (202) 219-5250. Dated: March 13, 2003. Mary Ann Hadyka, Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. 03-6516 Filed 3-18-03; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7515-01-P -----------------------------------------------------------------------