[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 [www.gpo.gov]
[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 https://www.regulations.gov. 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 https://www.regulations.gov. To 
do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, 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 https://www.regulations.gov, 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 https://www.regulations.gov 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 https://www.regulations.gov 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>