Security Zone; Georgetown Channel, Potomac River, Washington, DC, 15834-15837 [E7-6097]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
15834
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 63 / Tuesday, April 3, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
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.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
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’’
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:32 Apr 02, 2007
Jkt 211001
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
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
and Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 5100.1 which
guides the Coast Guard in complying
with the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321–
4370f), and have concluded 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, this rule is categorically
excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph
(34)(h), of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation. Special
local regulations issued in conjunction
with a regatta or marine event permit
are specifically excluded from further
analysis and documentation under those
sections.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100
Marine safety, Navigation (water),
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 100 as follows:
I
PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON
NAVIGABLE WATERS
1. The authority citation for Part 100
continues to read as follows:
I
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233.
2. Add temporary § 100.35–T05–028
to read as follows:
I
§ 100.35–T05–028 Roanoke River,
Plymouth, North Carolina.
(a) Regulated area. The regulated area
includes all waters of Roanoke River
commencing at the north river bank at
latitude 35°52′20″ N, longitude
076°44′47″ W, thence a line 180 degree
due south across the river to the
shoreline thence west along the
shoreline to a position located at
latitude 35°51′43″ N, longitude
076°43′45″ W, thence 000 degrees due
north across the river to the shoreline
thence east along the shoreline to the
point of origin. All coordinates
reference Datum NAD 1983.
(b) Definitions:
(1) Coast Guard Patrol Commander
means a commissioned, warrant, or
petty officer of the Coast Guard who has
been designated by the Commander,
Coast Guard Sector North Carolina.
(2) Official Patrol means any vessel
assigned or approved by Commander,
Coast Guard Sector North Carolina with
a commissioned, warrant, or petty
officer on board and displaying a Coast
Guard ensign.
(c) Special local regulations:
(1) Except for persons or vessels
authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol
Commander, no person or vessel may
enter or remain in the regulated area.
(2) The operator of any vessel in the
regulated area shall:
(i) Stop the vessel immediately when
directed to do so by any Official Patrol.
(ii) Proceed as directed by any official
patrol.
(d) Enforcement period. This section
will be enforced from 10 a.m. to 8:30
p.m. on May 6, 2007.
Dated: March 20, 2007.
Larry L. Hereth,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E7–6096 Filed 4–2–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD05–06–105]
RIN 1625–AA87
Security Zone; Georgetown Channel,
Potomac River, Washington, DC
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
E:\FR\FM\03APR1.SGM
03APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 63 / Tuesday, April 3, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is
establishing a permanent security zone
on the waters of the upper Potomac
River. This action is necessary to
provide for the security of a large
number of visitors to the annual July 4th
celebration on the National Mall in
Washington, DC. The security zone will
allow for control of a designated area of
the river and safeguard spectators and
high-ranking officials.
DATES: This rule is effective May 3,
2007.
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 CGD05–06–105 and are available
for inspection or copying at Coast Guard
Sector Baltimore, Waterways
Management Division, between 8 a.m.
and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Ronald Houck, at Coast Guard Sector
Baltimore, Waterways Management
Division, at telephone number (410)
576–2674 or (410) 576–2693.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Regulatory Information
On December 1, 2006, we published
a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled ‘‘Security Zone;
Georgetown Channel, Potomac River,
Washington, DC’’ in the Federal
Register (71 FR 69517). We received no
letters commenting on the proposed
rule. No public meeting was requested,
and none was held.
Background and Purpose
Due to increased awareness that
future terrorist attacks are possible,
including continued threats against U.S.
interests by Al-Queda and other terrorist
organizations, the Coast Guard, as lead
federal agency for maritime homeland
security has, determined that the
Captain of the Port Baltimore must have
the means to be aware of, deter, detect,
intercept, and respond to asymmetric
threats, acts of aggression, and attacks
by terrorists on the American homeland
while still maintaining our freedoms
and sustaining the flow of commerce.
This security zone is part of a
comprehensive port security regime
designed to safeguard human life,
vessels, and waterfront facilities against
sabotage or terrorist attacks.
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 large number of
spectators and high-ranking officials
during the annual July 4th celebration
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:32 Apr 02, 2007
Jkt 211001
would have on the public interest, the
Coast Guard is proposing to establish a
security zone upon all waters of the
Georgetown Channel of the Potomac
River, from the surface to the bottom, 75
yards from the eastern shore measured
perpendicularly to the shore, between
the Long Railroad Bridge (the most
eastern bridge of the 5-span, Fourteenth
Street Bridge Complex) to the Theodore
Roosevelt Memorial Bridge and all
waters in between, totally including the
waters of the Georgetown Channel Tidal
Basin. This security zone will help the
Coast Guard to prevent vessels or
persons from engaging in terrorist
actions against a large number of
spectators and high-ranking officials
during the annual July 4th celebration.
Due to these heightened security
concerns, and the catastrophic impact a
terrorist attack on the National Mall in
Washington, DC during the annual July
4th celebration would have on the large
number of spectators and high-ranking
officials, as well as the surrounding area
and communities, a security zone is
prudent for this type of event.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
The Coast Guard received no
comments on the proposed rule during
the comment period published in the
NPRM. No public meeting was
requested and none was held. As a
result, no change from the proposed
regulatory text was made.
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. The security zone is of limited
size, located along the shoreline, and
will only be enforced for one day of the
year, resulting in minimal disruption to
the maritime community.
The Coast Guard received no
comments on this aspect of the
proposed rule during the comment
period published in the NPRM. As a
result, no change to the proposed
regulatory text was made.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
15835
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 owners or operators of vessels
intending to operate, remain or anchor
in a portion of the Potomac River,
within 75 yards from the eastern shore
measured perpendicularly to the shore,
between the Long Railroad Bridge (the
most eastern bridge of the 5-span,
Fourteenth Street Bridge Complex) to
the Theodore Roosevelt Memorial
Bridge and all waters in between, totally
including the waters of the Georgetown
Channel Tidal Basin from 12:01 a.m. to
11:59 p.m. annually on July 4th. This
security zone will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities for the
following reasons. The zone is of
limited size and located along the
shoreline, therefore, it is expected that
there will be minimal disruption to the
maritime community. Before the
enforcement period, the Coast Guard
will issue maritime advisories widely
available to users of the Potomac River.
The Coast Guard received no
comments on this aspect of the
proposed rule during the comment
period published in the NPRM. As a
result, no change to the proposed
regulatory text was made.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
we offered to assist small entities in
understanding the rule so that they
could better evaluate its effects on them
and participate in the rulemaking
process. However, we received no
requests for assistance from any small
entities.
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).
E:\FR\FM\03APR1.SGM
03APR1
15836
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 63 / Tuesday, April 3, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
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.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:32 Apr 02, 2007
Jkt 211001
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.
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
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD
and Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 5100.1, 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 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, this rule is categorically
excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph
(34)(g), of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation. This
regulation establishes a security zone. A
final ‘‘Environmental Analysis Check
List’’ and a final ‘‘Categorical Exclusion
Determination’’ are available in the
docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
is revised to read as follows:
I
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.
I
Technical Standards
PO 00000
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
I
Sfmt 4700
2. Add § 165.508 to read as follows:
§ 165.508 Security Zone; Georgetown
Channel, Potomac River, Washington, DC.
(a) Definitions. (1) The Captain of the
Port, Baltimore, Maryland means the
Commander, Coast Guard Sector
Baltimore, Maryland or any Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer
who has been authorized by the Captain
of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland to act
on his or her behalf.
(b) Location. The following area is a
security zone: All waters of the
Georgetown Channel of the Potomac
River, from the surface to the bottom, 75
yards from the eastern shore measured
perpendicularly to the shore, between
the Long Railroad Bridge (the most
eastern bridge of the 5-span, Fourteenth
Street Bridge Complex) to the Theodore
Roosevelt Memorial Bridge and all
waters in between, totally including the
waters of the Georgetown Channel Tidal
Basin.
(c) Regulations. (1) All persons are
required to comply with the general
regulations governing security zones
found in § 165.33 of this part.
(2) Entry into or remaining in this
zone is prohibited unless authorized by
the Coast Guard Captain of the Port,
Baltimore, Maryland.
(3) Persons or vessels requiring entry
into or passage through the security
zone must first request authorization
from the Captain of the Port, Baltimore
to seek permission to transit the area.
The Captain of the Port, Baltimore,
Maryland can be contacted at telephone
number (410) 576–2693. The Coast
Guard vessels enforcing this section can
be contacted on VHF Marine Band
Radio, VHF channel 16 (156.8 MHz).
Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast
Guard vessel by siren, radio, flashing
light, or other means, the operator of a
vessel shall proceed as directed. If
permission is granted, all persons and
vessels must comply with the
instructions of the Captain of the Port,
Baltimore, Maryland and proceed at the
minimum speed necessary to maintain a
safe course while within the zone.
E:\FR\FM\03APR1.SGM
03APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 63 / Tuesday, April 3, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
(d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast
Guard may be assisted in the patrol and
enforcement of the zone by Federal,
State, and local agencies.
(e) Enforcement period. This section
will be enforced from 12:01 a.m. to
11:59 p.m. local time annually on July
4.
Dated: March 16, 2007.
Brian D. Kelley,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, Baltimore, Maryland.
[FR Doc. E7–6097 Filed 4–2–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CCGD05–07–024]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone: Celebration 2007,
Appomattox River, Hopewell, VA
Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Temporary final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is
establishing a 600 foot radius safety
zone in the vicinity of Hopewell, VA
centered on position 37°–19′–11″ N/
077°–16′–55″ W on May 12, 2007 in
support of the Celebration 2007 event.
This action is intended to restrict vessel
traffic movement on the Appomattox
River to protect mariners from the
hazards associated with fireworks
displays.
This rule is effective from 8:30
p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on May 12, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this
preamble as being available in the
docket are part of docket [CGD05–07–
024] and are available for inspection or
copying at Coast Guard Sector Hampton
Roads, Norfolk Federal Building, 200
Granby St., 7th Floor, Norfolk, VA
23510 between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lieutenant Junior Grade TaQuitia Winn,
Assistant Chief, Waterways
Management Division, Sector Hampton
Roads at (757) 668–5580.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Regulatory Information
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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:32 Apr 02, 2007
Jkt 211001
Insufficient time existed for publication
of an NPRM and a final rule. Delaying
this rule would be contrary to the public
interest since immediate action is
needed to minimize potential danger to
the public during the fireworks
demonstration.
Background and Purpose
On May 12, 2007, the city of
Hopewell, VA will sponsor a fireworks
display on the Appomattox River at
position 37°–19′–11″ N/077°–16′–55″ W.
Due to the need to protect mariners and
spectators from the hazards associated
with the fireworks display, vessel traffic
will be temporarily restricted within a
600 foot radius of the fireworks barge.
Discussion of Rule
The Coast Guard is establishing a 600
foot radius safety zone on specified
waters of the Appomattox River around
the fireworks barge, centered on
position 37°–19′–11″ N/077°–16′–55″ W
in the vicinity of City Point, Hopewell,
VA. This safety zone will be established
in the interest of public safety during
the Celebration 2007 event and will be
enforced from 8:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on
May 12, 2007. General navigation
within the safety zone will be restricted
during the specified date and times.
Except for participants and vessels
authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol
Commander, no person or vessel may
enter or remain in the regulated area.
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. Although this regulation restricts
access to the safety zone, the effect of
this rule will not be significant because:
(i) The safety zone will be in effect for
a limited duration; and (ii) the Coast
Guard will make notifications via
maritime advisories so mariners can
adjust their plans accordingly.
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
15837
The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities
because the zone will only be in place
for a limited duration and maritime
advisories will be issued allowing the
mariners to adjust their plans
accordingly. However, this rule may
affect the following entities, some of
which may be small entities: The
owners and operators of vessels
intending to transit or anchor in that
portion of the Appomattox River subject
to this rule from 8:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m.
on May 12, 2007.
If you think the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact
Lieutenant Junior Grade TaQuitia Winn,
Assistant Chief, Waterways
Management Division, Sector Hampton
Roads at (757) 668–5580.
Assistance for Small Entities
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 the rule so that they can
better evaluate its effects on them and
participate in the rulemaking.
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 action 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
E:\FR\FM\03APR1.SGM
03APR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 63 (Tuesday, April 3, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15834-15837]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-6097]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD05-06-105]
RIN 1625-AA87
Security Zone; Georgetown Channel, Potomac River, Washington, DC
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 15835]]
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a permanent security zone on
the waters of the upper Potomac River. This action is necessary to
provide for the security of a large number of visitors to the annual
July 4th celebration on the National Mall in Washington, DC. The
security zone will allow for control of a designated area of the river
and safeguard spectators and high-ranking officials.
DATES: This rule is effective May 3, 2007.
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 CGD05-06-105 and are available for inspection or
copying at Coast Guard Sector Baltimore, Waterways Management Division,
between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ronald Houck, at Coast Guard
Sector Baltimore, Waterways Management Division, at telephone number
(410) 576-2674 or (410) 576-2693.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory Information
On December 1, 2006, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled ``Security Zone; Georgetown Channel, Potomac River,
Washington, DC'' in the Federal Register (71 FR 69517). We received no
letters commenting on the proposed rule. No public meeting was
requested, and none was held.
Background and Purpose
Due to increased awareness that future terrorist attacks are
possible, including continued threats against U.S. interests by Al-
Queda and other terrorist organizations, the Coast Guard, as lead
federal agency for maritime homeland security has, determined that the
Captain of the Port Baltimore must have the means to be aware of,
deter, detect, intercept, and respond to asymmetric threats, acts of
aggression, and attacks by terrorists on the American homeland while
still maintaining our freedoms and sustaining the flow of commerce.
This security zone is part of a comprehensive port security regime
designed to safeguard human life, vessels, and waterfront facilities
against sabotage or terrorist attacks.
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 large number of spectators and high-
ranking officials during the annual July 4th celebration would have on
the public interest, the Coast Guard is proposing to establish a
security zone upon all waters of the Georgetown Channel of the Potomac
River, from the surface to the bottom, 75 yards from the eastern shore
measured perpendicularly to the shore, between the Long Railroad Bridge
(the most eastern bridge of the 5-span, Fourteenth Street Bridge
Complex) to the Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Bridge and all waters in
between, totally including the waters of the Georgetown Channel Tidal
Basin. This security zone will help the Coast Guard to prevent vessels
or persons from engaging in terrorist actions against a large number of
spectators and high-ranking officials during the annual July 4th
celebration. Due to these heightened security concerns, and the
catastrophic impact a terrorist attack on the National Mall in
Washington, DC during the annual July 4th celebration would have on the
large number of spectators and high-ranking officials, as well as the
surrounding area and communities, a security zone is prudent for this
type of event.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
The Coast Guard received no comments on the proposed rule during
the comment period published in the NPRM. No public meeting was
requested and none was held. As a result, no change from the proposed
regulatory text was made.
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. The security zone is of limited size,
located along the shoreline, and will only be enforced for one day of
the year, resulting in minimal disruption to the maritime community.
The Coast Guard received no comments on this aspect of the proposed
rule during the comment period published in the NPRM. As a result, no
change to the proposed regulatory text was made.
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 owners or operators of vessels intending to operate,
remain or anchor in a portion of the Potomac River, within 75 yards
from the eastern shore measured perpendicularly to the shore, between
the Long Railroad Bridge (the most eastern bridge of the 5-span,
Fourteenth Street Bridge Complex) to the Theodore Roosevelt Memorial
Bridge and all waters in between, totally including the waters of the
Georgetown Channel Tidal Basin from 12:01 a.m. to 11:59 p.m. annually
on July 4th. This security zone will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following
reasons. The zone is of limited size and located along the shoreline,
therefore, it is expected that there will be minimal disruption to the
maritime community. Before the enforcement period, the Coast Guard will
issue maritime advisories widely available to users of the Potomac
River.
The Coast Guard received no comments on this aspect of the proposed
rule during the comment period published in the NPRM. As a result, no
change to the proposed regulatory text was made.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. However,
we received no requests for assistance from any small entities.
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).
[[Page 15836]]
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. 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 Commandant Instruction M16475.lD
and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1, 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
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, this rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1,
paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further environmental
documentation. This regulation establishes a security zone. A final
``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a final ``Categorical
Exclusion Determination'' are available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
0
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 is revised 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. 165.508 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.508 Security Zone; Georgetown Channel, Potomac River,
Washington, DC.
(a) Definitions. (1) The Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland
means the Commander, Coast Guard Sector Baltimore, Maryland or any
Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been
authorized by the Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland to act on
his or her behalf.
(b) Location. The following area is a security zone: All waters of
the Georgetown Channel of the Potomac River, from the surface to the
bottom, 75 yards from the eastern shore measured perpendicularly to the
shore, between the Long Railroad Bridge (the most eastern bridge of the
5-span, Fourteenth Street Bridge Complex) to the Theodore Roosevelt
Memorial Bridge and all waters in between, totally including the waters
of the Georgetown Channel Tidal Basin.
(c) Regulations. (1) All persons are required to comply with the
general regulations governing security zones found in Sec. 165.33 of
this part.
(2) Entry into or remaining in this zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland.
(3) Persons or vessels requiring entry into or passage through the
security zone must first request authorization from the Captain of the
Port, Baltimore to seek permission to transit the area. The Captain of
the Port, Baltimore, Maryland can be contacted at telephone number
(410) 576-2693. The Coast Guard vessels enforcing this section can be
contacted on VHF Marine Band Radio, VHF channel 16 (156.8 MHz). Upon
being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel by siren, radio, flashing
light, or other means, the operator of a vessel shall proceed as
directed. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels must comply
with the instructions of the Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland
and proceed at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course
while within the zone.
[[Page 15837]]
(d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol
and enforcement of the zone by Federal, State, and local agencies.
(e) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 12:01
a.m. to 11:59 p.m. local time annually on July 4.
Dated: March 16, 2007.
Brian D. Kelley,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland.
[FR Doc. E7-6097 Filed 4-2-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
