```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 1 (Monday, January 3, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12-15]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-33120]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2010-1111]
RIN 1625-AA87

Security Zone; On the Waters in Kailua Bay, Oahu, HI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary security zone on 
the waters south of Kapoho Point and a nearby channel in Kailua Bay 
within the Honolulu Captain of the Port (COTP) Zone. This security zone 
is necessary to ensure the safety of the President of the United 
States, members of his official party, and other senior government 
officials.

DATES: This rule is effective from 10 a.m. (HST) on December 21, 2010 
through 8 p.m. (HST) on January 5, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in 
the docket USCG-2010-1111 are available online by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2010-1111 in the ``Keyword'' box, 
and then clicking ``Search''. They are also available for inspection or 
copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of 
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this 
temporary rule, call or e-mail Lieutenant Commander Marcella Granquist, 
Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Honolulu; 
telephone 808-842-2600, e-mail [email protected]. If you 
have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program 
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior 
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This 
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and 
opportunity to

[[Page 13]]

comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are 
``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'' 
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists 
for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) because the 
Captain of the Port Honolulu (COTP) did not become aware of the need 
for this temporary security zone in a timely manner to publish and seek 
comments on a proposed rule and consider those comments before issuing 
a rule that would be enforceable by December 21, 2010. Publishing an 
NPRM and delaying the effective date would be contrary to the public 
interest since the occasion would occur before a notice-and-comment 
rulemaking could be completed, thereby jeopardizing the safety of the 
President of the United States, members of his official party, and 
other senior government officials. 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 COTP finds 
that this temporary security zone needs to be effective by December 21, 
2010, to ensure the safety of the President of the United States, 
members of his official party, and senior government officials visiting 
the Kailua Bay area on the eastern coast of Oahu, Hawaii.

Background and Purpose

    From December 21, 2010 through January 5, 2011, the President of 
the United States, members of his official party, and senior government 
officials will be residing near the Kailua Bay shoreline on Oahu, 
Hawaii. This position is located adjacent to U.S. navigable waters in 
the Honolulu Captain of the Port Zone. The Coast Guard is establishing 
this security zone to ensure the safety of the President of the United 
States, members of his official party, and senior government officials.

Discussion of Rule

    This temporary security zone is effective from 10 a.m. HST on 
December 21, 2010 through 8 p.m. HST on January 5, 2011. It is located 
within the Honolulu Captain of the Port Zone (See 33 CFR 3.70-10) and 
covers all U.S. navigable waters in the Kailua Bay on the west side of 
a line connecting Kapoho Point and continuing at a bearing of 222[deg] 
True to Namala Place Road; as well as the nearby channel from its 
entrance at Kapoho Point to a point 150 yards along the channel to the 
southwest of the N. Kalaheo Avenue Road Bridge. This zone extends from 
the surface of the water to the ocean floor. This zone will include the 
navigable waters of the channel beginning at point 21[deg]25.6' N, 
157[deg]45' W, then extending the channel way to 21[deg]25.6' N, 
157[deg]44.6' W, then all the waters extending to 21[deg]25.5' N, 
157[deg]44.4' W (Kapoho Point) with all the waters to the west of a 
straight line to 21[deg]25' N, 157[deg]44.6' W (Namala Place), and then 
extending back to the original point 21[deg]25' N, 157[deg]45' W. 
Additionally, three (3) yellow buoys will be placed in proximity of the 
security zone along the east coastline and one (1) yellow buoy will be 
placed as visual aids for mariners and the public to approximate the 
zone.
    In accordance with the general regulations in 33 CFR part 165, 
subpart D, no person or vessel will be permitted to transit into or 
remain in the zone except for authorized support vessels, aircraft and 
support personnel, or other vessels authorized by the Captain of the 
Port or the District Commander. Any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, 
or petty officer, and any other Captain of the Port representative 
permitted by law, may enforce the zone. Vessels, aircraft, or persons 
in violation of this rule would be subject to the penalties set forth 
in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 50 U.S.C. 192.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and 
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses 
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    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. The Coast Guard expects the economic 
impact of this rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation 
under the regulatory policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. 
This expectation is based on the limited duration of the zone, the 
limited geographic area affected by it, and that the general public 
will be permitted to transit the security zone as necessary but will 
not be permitted to loiter.

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. We expect that there will be little to no impact to small 
entities due to the narrow scope, nature of this security zone, and 
that the general public will be permitted to transit the security zone 
as necessary but will not be permitted to loiter. Additionally, before 
and during the effective period, the Coast Guard will issue verbal 
maritime advisories, and distribute a written notice to waterway users 
and online at http://homeport.uscg.mil/honolulu.

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 can better evaluate its 
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    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). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small 
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or 
action of the Coast Guard.

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.

[[Page 14]]

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. 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.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards 
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, 
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why 
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or 
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management 
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus 
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not 
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security 
Management Directive 5100.1 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which 
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded 
under the Instruction that there are no factors in this case that would 
limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the 
Instruction. Therefore, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g) of the 
Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is categorically excluded 
from further environmental documentation because implementation of this 
security zone will not result in any: (1) Significant cumulative 
impacts on the human environment, (2) substantial controversy or 
substantial change to existing environmental conditions, (3) impacts 
which are more than minimal on properties under Section 106 of the 
National Historic Preservation Act, or (4) inconsistencies with any 
Federal, State, local laws or administrative determinations relating to 
the environment.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine security, Navigation (water), Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and 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

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation 
No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T14-215 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T14-215  Security Zone; On the Waters in Kailua Bay, Oahu, 
HI.

    (a) Location. The following area, within the Honolulu Captain of 
the Port Zone (See 33 CFR 3.70-10), from the surface of the water to 
the ocean floor is a temporary security zone: All waters in Kailua Bay 
to the west of a line connecting the following points beginning at 
Kapoho Point and thence westward at a bearing of 222[deg] True to the 
shoreline at Namala Place Road; in addition the adjacent channel 
beginning at Kapoho Point, and continuing thence to a point 150 yards 
down the channel way and ending southwest of the N. Kalaheo Avenue Road 
Bridge. This zone will include the navigable waters of the channel 
beginning at point 21[deg]25' N, 157[deg]45' W, then extending the 
channel way to 21[deg]25.6' N, 157[deg]44.6' W, then all the waters 
extending to 21[deg]25.5' N, 157[deg]44.4' W (Kapoho Point) with all 
the waters to the west of a straight line to 21[deg]25' N, 
157[deg]44.6' W (Namala Place), and then extending back to the original 
point 21[deg]25' N, 157[deg]45' W.
    (b) Effective period. This section is effective from 10 a.m. HST on 
December 21, 2010, through 8 p.m. HST on January 5, 2011.
    (c) Regulations. (1) The general regulations governing security 
zones contained in 33 CFR 165.33 apply.
    (2) Entry, transit, or anchoring within the security zone described 
in paragraph (a) of this section is prohibited unless authorized by the 
Captain of the Port Honolulu or the District Commander.
    (d) Notice of enforcement. The Captain of the Port Honolulu will 
cause notice of the enforcement of the security zone described in this 
section to be made by verbal broadcasts and written notice to mariners 
and the general public.
    (e) Authority to enforce. Any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or 
petty officer, and any other Captain of the Port representative 
permitted by law, may enforce the security zone described in this 
section.
    (f) Waiver. The Captain of the Port may waive any of the 
requirements of this rule for any person, vessel, or class of vessel 
upon finding that application

[[Page 15]]

of the security zone is unnecessary or impractical for the purpose of 
maritime security.
    (g) Penalties. Vessels or persons violating this rule are subject 
to the penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 50 U.S.C. 192.

    Dated: December 16, 2010.
J.M. Nunan,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Honolulu.
[FR Doc. 2010-33120 Filed 12-30-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
```