Proposed Rule2024-03486
Security Zone; Port Valdez and Valdez Narrows, Valdez, AK
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
February 21, 2024
Issuing agencies
Homeland Security DepartmentCoast Guard
Abstract
The current Trans-Alaska Pipeline (TAPS) Valdez Terminal complex (Terminal) security zone encompasses a waterside portion and 2000 yards inland, which includes the shoreside portion of the terminal and adjacent land. The Coast Guard is proposing to amend the TAPS Terminal security zone to exclude the land portion from the security zone. The Coast Guard has never exercised any legal authority, nor has it enforced regulations within the inland portion of the security zone. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 35 (Wednesday, February 21, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 35 (Wednesday, February 21, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13015-13017]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-03486]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG-2024-0157]
RIN 1625-AA87
Security Zone; Port Valdez and Valdez Narrows, Valdez, AK
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The current Trans-Alaska Pipeline (TAPS) Valdez Terminal
complex (Terminal) security zone encompasses a waterside portion and
2000 yards inland, which includes the shoreside portion of the terminal
and adjacent land. The Coast Guard is proposing to amend the TAPS
Terminal security zone to exclude the land portion from the security
zone. The Coast Guard has never exercised any legal authority, nor has
it enforced regulations within the inland portion of the security zone.
We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before March 22, 2024.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2024-0157 using the Federal Decision-
[[Page 13016]]
Making Portal at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. See the ``Public
Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.
This notice of proposed rulemaking with its plain-language, 100-word-
or-less proposed rule summary will be available in this same docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant Junior Grade Abigail
Ferrara, Marine Safety Unit Valdez, U.S. Coast Guard. Telephone 907-
835-7209, email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7736151e10161e1b593459311205051605163702041410591a1e1b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a0e1c2c9c7c1c9cc8ee38ee6c5d2d2c1d2c1e0d5d3c3c78ecdc9cc">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port Prince William Sound
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec. Section
TAPS Trans-Alaska Pipeline
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis
In response to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the
Coast Guard instituted several temporary security zones in the Trans-
Alaska Pipeline (TAPS) Terminal and Port Valdez areas. Between 2002 and
2004, Coast Guard published several proposed and supplemental proposed
rulemakings to establish security zones in the area. This culminated
with a final rule (71 FR 2152) published on January 13, 2006, which
established the current permanent security zones in 33 CFR 165.1710.
The current TAPS Terminal security zone encompasses a waterside
portion and 2000 yards inland, which includes the shoreside portion of
the terminal and adjacent land. The Coast Guard has never exercised any
legal authority, nor has it enforced regulations within the inland
portion of the security zone. The Captain of the Port Prince William
Sound (COTP) determined that the current practice of non-enforcement
within the inland portion of the security zone could create confusion
for future stakeholders and the public. It would be an arbitrary and
unreasonable burden upon the facility and industry employees who have
freely entered the inland portion without COTP permission for decades
if a COTP were to begin enforcing their authority over the inland
portion of the security zone in the future.
The Coast Guard is proposing this rulemaking under authority in 46
U.S.C. 70051 and 70124.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The COTP is proposing to amend the current security zone found in
33 CFR 165.1710(a)(1) to excise the 2000-yard inland portion of the
zone. This would result in the security zone encompassing only the
water up to the shoreline. The regulatory text we are proposing appears
at the end of this document.
IV. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This NPRM has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as
amended by Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing Regulatory Review).
Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB).
This regulatory action determination is based on the size and
location of the current waterside portion security zone remaining the
same. Moreover, the landside portion of the facility has had other
security regulations in place for roughly two decades.
B. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. 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.
This regulatory change would not affect any small entities, as the
COTP does not enforce the requirements for the landside portion of the
security zone, and the waterside security zone coordinates will remain
unchanged.
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 rulemaking would economically affect it.
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. 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 call or email the person listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not
retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this
proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
C. Collection of Information
This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520).
D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism), if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on
the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
Also, 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. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires
[[Page 13017]]
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 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the potential effects of
this proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves excising
the 2000-yard inland portion TAPS Terminal security zone. Normally such
actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph
L60(b) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01,
Rev. 1. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed
rule.
V. Public Participation and Request for Comments
We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through
the Federal Decision-Making Portal at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. To
do so, go to <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, type USCG-2024-0157 in the
search box and click ``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the
Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment
option. If you cannot submit your material by using <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, call or email the person in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule for alternate
instructions.
Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this
proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as
described in the previous paragraph, and then select ``Supporting &
Related Material'' in the Document Type column. Public comments will
also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following
instructions on the <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> Frequently Asked
Questions web page. Also, if you click on the Dockets tab and then the
proposed rule, you should see a ``Subscribe'' option for email alerts.
The option will notify you when comments are posted, or a final rule is
published.
We review all comments received, but we will only post comments
that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may choose not to post
off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that we receive.
Personal information. We accept anonymous comments. Comments we
post to <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> will include any personal
information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions
to the docket in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).
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 is
proposing to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051, 70124; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-
1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.3.
0
2. Revise Sec. 165.1710(a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 165.1710 Port Valdez and Valdez Narrows, Valdez, Alaska--
security zones.
(a) * * *
(1) Trans-Alaska Pipeline (TAPS) Valdez Terminal complex
(Terminal), Valdez, Alaska and TAPS tank vessels. All waters enclosed
within a line beginning on the southern shoreline of Port Valdez at
61[deg]05'03.6'' N, 146[deg]25'42'' W; thence northerly to yellow buoy
at 61[deg]06'00'' N, 146[deg]25'42'' W; thence east to the yellow buoy
at 61[deg]06'00'' N, 146[deg]21'30'' W; thence south to 61[deg]05'06''
N, 146[deg]21'30'' W; thence west along the shoreline to the beginning
point.
* * * * *
Dated: February 14, 2024.
S.K. Rousseau,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Prince William Sound.
[FR Doc. 2024-03486 Filed 2-20-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on February 21, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.