Security Zones; Lewes and Rehoboth Canal and Atlantic Ocean, Rehoboth, DE, 47574-47580 [2021-18427]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
47574
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
BILLING CODE 6717–01–C
United States of America
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Data Collection for Analytics and
Surveillance and Market-Based Rate
Purposes
Docket No. RM16–17–000
(August 19, 2021)
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
DANLY, Commissioner, dissenting:
1. I dissent from today’s order
adopting the proposal to collect
additional information for the relational
database.1 With this issuance, the
Commission now requires further
submissions from market-based rate
sellers with upstream affiliates holding
blanket authorizations under Federal
Power Act (FPA) section 203(a)(2).2 This
additional administrative burden which
we now foist upon these entities is
unnecessary (and therefore
unjustifiable) because the information
we will glean simply cannot aid us as
the majority supposes.
2. Earlier this year, in a separate
proceeding, Commissioner Chatterjee
and I concurred in an order denying a
petition for declaratory order filed by
NextEra Energy, Inc. and a number of
other utilities. In that order, the
Commission seized upon the
opportunity to reiterate public utilities’
reporting obligations regarding the
informational database.3 Although we
concurred in the result of that order, we
objected to inclusion of institutional
investors in the relational database as a
pointless regulatory burden with little to
no value.4 Many of the objections we
offered in that concurrence are equally
applicable to this order. I recite those
objections in large measure here.
3. As today’s order recognizes, in
NextEra, the Commission found that as
a result of the conditions in a section
203(a)(2) blanket authorization,
institutional investors subject to a
section 203(a)(2) blanket authorization
lack the ability to control the utilities
whose voting securities they acquire.
59 The North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) is an industry classification system
that Federal statistical agencies use to categorize
businesses for the purpose of collecting, analyzing,
and publishing statistical data related to the U.S.
economy. United States Census Bureau, North
American Industry Classification System, https://
www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/.
60 13 CFR 121.201 (Sector 22—Utilities). To be
conservative, we are using a small business
threshold of 1,000 employees.
1 Data Collection for Analytics & Surveillance &
Mkt.-Based Rate Purposes, 176 FERC ¶ 61,109
(2021) (August 2021 Order); see also Data
Collection for Analytics & Surveillance & Mkt.Based Rate Purposes, 174 FERC ¶ 61,214 (2021);
Data Collection for Analytics & Surveillance & Mkt.Based Rate Purposes, Order No. 860, 168 FERC
¶ 61,039 (2019), order on reh’g and clarification,
Order No. 860–A, 170 FERC ¶ 61,129 (2020).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:08 Aug 25, 2021
Jkt 253001
The Commission concluded that,
because those conditions prevent
institutional investors from exercising
control over those utilities, utilities
commonly owned by an institutional
investor are not affiliates of each other
under 18 CFR 35.36(a)(9)(iv), so long as
their common institutional investor
owner complies with the conditions
imposed as part of a section 203(a)(2)
blanket authorization.5
The Commission thus acknowledged
that, in conditioning those blanket
authorizations, institutional investors
were prevented from exercising control
over utilities by acquiring their
securities.
4. That determination remains true.
Under our current regime, there is little
to no value in listing institutional
investors as the ultimate upstream
affiliate of market-based rate sellers in
the relational database. The Commission
grants blanket authorizations premised
on the finding that the institutional
investors can exercise no control over
the utilities whose securities they have
purchased and that the acquisition
would not adversely affect
competition.6 The conclusion that the
institutional investors cannot exercise
control or influence sellers so as to
affect market power is confirmed by our
holding that sellers under common
control of an institutional investor are
not affiliates. Indeed, it could not be
otherwise.
5. Given those predicate
determinations, I cannot understand
why the Commission believes it
important to include institutional
investors in a database that is designed
to enable the Commission to monitor
the opportunity for market-based rate
sellers to exercise market power. For the
same reason, I do not understand why
the Commission should require change
in status filings to be made whenever an
institutional investor’s ownership of the
seller’s voting securities crosses the
10% threshold. To the extent that a
particular institutional investor’s
ownership of voting securities ever
becomes relevant to the Commission
because it may have violated the
conditions of its authorization, that
information is easily ascertainable from
the quarterly informational filings we
require as a condition of granting the
blanket authorizations.7
6. There is a simple solution that
would allow the Commission to
eliminate the requirement to include
5 August 2021 Order, 176 FERC ¶ 61,109 at P 4
(citations omitted).
6 See, e.g., Legg Mason, Inc., 121 FERC ¶ 61,061,
at P 26 (2007).
7 See, e.g., id. P 30.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
institutional investors in the relational
database and in change of status filings
without waiving the applicability of
section 35.36(a)(9)(i) of our regulations.
Section 35.36(b) provides: ‘‘The
provisions of this subpart apply to all
Sellers authorized, or seeking
authorization, to make sales for resale of
electric energy, capacity or ancillary
services at market-based rates unless
otherwise ordered by the
Commission.’’ 8 Here the Commission
could have—and in my opinion should
have—used this authority to order that
sellers are not obligated to report
institutional investors in the relational
database or to make change in status
filings when institutional investor
holdings cross the 10% voting security
threshold. The Commission would also
need to make a minor amendment to its
relational database regulations to
provide that when an institutional
investor is the ultimate upstream
affiliate, sellers should instead list the
next highest upstream affiliate in the
database. For example, subsidiaries of
NextEra should list NextEra as the
ultimate upstream affiliate in the
database if any institutional investor
owns 10% or more of NextEra pursuant
to a blanket authorization.
7. I appreciate that the Commission
has acted to reduce the burden on
sellers resulting from the requirement to
include institutional investors in the
relational database and in change-instatus filings. But a pointless regulatory
burden is a pointless regulatory burden,
no matter how small.
For these reasons, I respectfully
dissent.
llllllllllllllllll
James P. Danly,
Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 2021–18283 Filed 8–25–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG–2021–0208]
RIN 1625–AA87
Security Zones; Lewes and Rehoboth
Canal and Atlantic Ocean, Rehoboth,
DE
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
8 18
E:\FR\FM\26AUR1.SGM
CFR 35.36(b) (emphasis added).
26AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
The Coast Guard is
establishing two security zones for
certain waters of Rehoboth Beach to
prevent waterside threats and incidents
for persons under the protection of the
United States Secret Service (USSS) in
the vicinity of Rehoboth Beach,
Delaware. These security zones will be
enforced intermittently and only for the
protection of persons protected by USSS
when in the area and will restrict vessel
traffic while the zone is being enforced.
This rule prohibits vessels and people
from entering the zones unless
specifically exempt under the
provisions of this rule or granted
specific permission from the Captain of
the Port (COTP) Delaware Bay or a
designated representative. Any vessel
requesting to transit the zones without
pause or delay will typically be
authorized to do so by on-scene
enforcement vessels.
DATES: This rule is effective August 26,
2021.
ADDRESSES: To view documents
mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://
www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2021–
0208 in the search box and click
‘‘Search.’’ Next, in the Document Type
column, select ‘‘Supporting & Related
Material.’’
SUMMARY:
If
you have questions about this
rulemaking, call or email Petty Officer
Edmund Ofalt, U.S. Coast Guard, Sector
Delaware Bay, Waterways Management
Division; telephone 215–271–4889,
email Edmund.J.Ofalt@usccg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
II. Background Information and
Regulatory History
On occasion the USSS has requested
heightened security measures for
persons protected by the USSS in the
vicinity of Rehoboth Beach, Delaware.
In response, on June 3, 2021, the Coast
guard published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) titled ‘‘Security
Zones; Lewes and Rehoboth Canal and
Atlantic Ocean, Rehoboth, DE’’ (86 FR
29727). There, we stated why we issued
the NPRM, and invited comments on
our proposed regulatory action related
to these visits by USSS protectees.
During the comment period that ended
July 19, 2021, we received no
comments.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:08 Aug 25, 2021
Jkt 253001
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. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable and
contrary to the public interest. This rule
must be immediately effective to guard
against potential acts of terrorism,
sabotage, subversive acts, accidents, or
other causes of a similar nature.
III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule
Under the Ports and Waterways Safety
Act, the Coast Guard has authority to
establish water or waterfront safety
zones, or other measures, for limited,
controlled, or conditional access and
activity when necessary for the
protection of any vessel, structure,
waters, or shore area, 46 U.S.C.
70011(b)(3). This rule safeguards the
lives of persons protected by the Secret
Service, and of the general public, by
enhancing the safety and security of
navigable waters of the United States
during USSS protectee presence in
Rehoboth, Delaware. The Coast Guard
will activate the security zone when
requested by the USSS for the
protection of persons the USSS protects
under 18 U.S.C. 3056 or pursuant to
Presidential memorandum. The Coast
Guard is issuing this rule under
authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously
33 U.S.C. 1231), as delegated by
Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No.00170.1(II)(70), Revision
No. 01.2, from the Secretary of DHS to
the Commandant of the U.S. Coast
Guard, and further redelegated by 33
CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5
to the Captains of the Port. The Captain
of the Port Delaware Bay (COTP) has
determined that recurring presence of
persons under the protection of the
USSS, which started in January of 2021,
presents a potential target for terrorist
acts, sabotage, or other subversive acts,
accidents, or other causes of a similar
nature. This security zone is necessary
to protect these persons, the public, and
the surrounding waterways.
IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes,
and the Rule
As noted above, we received no
comments on our NPRM published June
3, 2021. There are no changes in the
regulatory text of this rule from the
proposed rule in the NPRM, other than
a correction of a minor grammatical
error in paragraph (a).
This rule establishes two security
zones for the protection of USSS
protectees when present in the vicinity
of Rehoboth Beach, Delaware. This rule
is necessary to expedite the
establishment and enforcement of these
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
47575
security zones when short notice is
provided to the COTP for USSS
protectees who may be present in the
area.
Security Zone One is bounded on the
north by a line drawn from 38°44.36′
North Latitude (N), 075°5.32′ West
Longitude (W), thence easterly to
38°44.37′ N, 075°5.31′ W proceeding
from shoreline to shoreline on the
Lewes and Rehoboth Canal in a
Southeasterly direction where it is
bounded by a line drawn from 38°43.89′
N, 075°5.31′ W, thence easterly to
38°43.90′ N, 075°5.07′ W thence
northerly across the entrance to the
yacht basin to 38°43.93′ N, 075°5.09′ W.
Security Zone Two extends 500 yards
seaward from the shoreline, into the
Atlantic Ocean beginning at 38° 44.86′
N, 075° 4.83′ W, proceeding southerly
along the shoreline to 38°43.97′ N,
075°4.70′ W.
These security zones may be activated
individually or simultaneously with
respect to the presence of USSS
protectees. These zones will be enforced
intermittently. Enforcement of these
zones will be broadcast via Broadcast
Notice to Mariners (BNM) and/or local
Safety Marine Information Broadcast
(SMIB) on VHF–FM marine channel 16,
as well as actual notice via on-scene
Coast Guard Personnel. The public can
learn the status of the security zone via
an information release for the public via
website https://homeport.uscg.mil/myhomeport/coast-guard-prevention/
waterway-management?cotpid=40.
No vessel or person is permitted to
enter either security zone without first
obtaining permission from the COTP or
a designated representative. However,
we anticipate that vessels requesting to
transit these zones will typically be
authorized to transit without pause or
delay by on-scene enforcement vessels.
When a vessel or person is permitted to
enter the security zone after obtaining
permission from the COTP or a
designated representative, the vessel or
person must proceed as directed by onscene enforcement vessels. Any vessel
or person permitted to transit the
security zone will be required to
continue through the zone without
pause or delay as directed by on-scene
enforcement vessels. No vessel or
person will be permitted to stop or
anchor in the security zone. At times,
for limited duration, it is anticipated
that vessels may be prohibited from
entering the zone due to movement of
persons protected by USSS. During
those times, actual notice will be given
to vessels in the area.
When these security zones are
enforced, the COTP will issue a BNM
and/or SMIB via VHF–FM channel 16.
E:\FR\FM\26AUR1.SGM
26AUR1
47576
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
The public can learn the status of the
security zone via an information release
for the public via website https://
homeport.uscg.mil/my-homeport/coastguard-prevention/waterwaymanagement?cotpid=40.
V. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this 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, and we discuss First
Amendment rights of protestors.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 (‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’) and 13563
(‘‘Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review’’) 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
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). Executive Order 13563
emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of
reducing costs, of harmonizing rules,
and of promoting flexibility.
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has not designated this rule a
significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, OMB has not reviewed it.
A combined regulatory analysis (RA)
and Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
follows.
This rule will establish the following
two security zones: (1) A half-mile
stretch of the Lewes and Rehoboth
Canal; and (2) a one-mile section of
Rehoboth Beach stretching 500 yards
from the shoreline. The enforcement of
these two security zones is expected to
be intermittent. Vessels will normally be
allowed to transit but not stop within
the security zones. However, when
persons protected by the USSS are
moving in or out of the area, the Coast
Guard may halt traffic in these two
security zones. The Coast Guard expects
such instances to happen relatively
infrequently and for a short duration (1–
3 hours).
The Coast Guard will station Coast
Guard personnel at the borders of the
security zones with the authority to
enforce this security zone. In the few
instances where USSS protectees are in
transit, these Coast Guard personnel
will ensure that no traffic transits
through the security zones. Recreational
boaters wishing to transit the area may
inquire directly with the Coast Guard
personnel posted at the boundaries of
the security zones, rather than being
required to contact the COTP.
Table 1 provides a summary of the
rule’s costs and qualitative benefits.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF THE RULE’S IMPACTS
Category
Summary
Potentially Affected Population .......
This rule will impact recreational boaters wishing to use the Lewes and Rehoboth Canal or the North
Shores section of Rehoboth Beach.
Recreational boaters of the Lewes and Rehoboth Canal will need to speak with Coast Guard personnel
stationed at the entrances of the security zones. These recreational boaters will be informed that they
will be unable to stop or loiter inside the security zone. In certain instances where persons protected by
USSS are in transit, traffic may be halted on the Lowes and Rehoboth Canal. In these instances, recreational boaters wishing to use the canal will instead need to take a circuitous route or forgo their trip
all together.
This rule will secure the area to meet objectives of the USSS and keep USSS protectees safe.
Unquantified Costs ..........................
Unquantified Benefits ......................
Affected Population
The Coast Guard does not collect data
on the vessels and individuals using
either the Lewes and Rehoboth Canal or
the North Shores Section of Rehoboth
Beach, the areas that would be impacted
by this rule. To estimate the affected
population, we used information
directly observable from Google Maps,
as well as the subject-matter expertise of
Coast Guard personnel with knowledge
of the area.
The two security zones—a half-mile
section of the Lowes Rehoboth Canal
and a one-mile section of Rehoboth
Beach—are distinct. As such, we assess
the affected populations for these two
areas separately.
(1) Security Zone 1: Lewes Rehoboth
Canal
This regulation will impact any
recreational boater wishing to transit the
Lewes Rehoboth Canal. The Lewes
Rehoboth Canal is about 10 miles long
and connects the Broadkill River and
the Delaware Bay to Rehoboth Bay. The
security zone begins approximately twothirds of the way through the canal (if
starting from the Delaware Bay) and
lasts for about a half mile. As such,
recreational boaters wishing to transit
the canal from the communities of
Lewes, Dewey Beach, North Shores,
Rehoboth Beach, and West Rehoboth
may be impacted by this rule.1
These communities are seasonal; their
populations are much larger and more
active in the summer than in the winter.
Vessel traffic in the canal follows the
same pattern. Coast Guard officers
stationed in this region estimated the
numbers of vessels transiting this zone
per day by season. We present these
estimates in table 2.
TABLE 2—VESSEL TRAFFIC BY TIME OF YEAR
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Months
Vessels transiting the canal per day
January through March ............................................................................
April ...........................................................................................................
May through September ...........................................................................
October through December ......................................................................
1 Dewey Beach lies on the isthmus between
Rehoboth Bay and the Atlantic Ocean south of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:08 Aug 25, 2021
Jkt 253001
20 vessels per
75 vessels per
More than 200
50 vessels per
day.
day.
vessels per day.
day.
Rehoboth beach and north of the Delaware Seashore
State Park.
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\26AUR1.SGM
26AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
The vessel traffic in the canal is
entirely recreational. There are no
commercial vessels that transit the
canal. Moreover, the canal is quite
shallow. The Coast Guard’s 27-foot
vessels navigate the canal with
difficulty because of the depth. Kayaks,
canoes, and other manually powered
watercraft are frequently used in the
canal (not counted in the daily vessel
traffic estimates).
In addition to the daily traffic of
recreational boaters wishing to transit
the security zone, there are a number of
boat slips located either within the
security zone or that require transiting
the security zone to access. There are
also houses that border sections of the
canal wholly inside the security zone.
We reviewed satellite images from
Google Maps to identify the number of
boat slips within the security zone or
that require transiting the security zone
to access. Based on these satellite
images, we estimate that 17 private
houses that lie entirely within the canal
security zone contain either a boat slip
or dock. The boat slips indicate that
recreational vessel usage might be
undertaken by the owners or occupiers
of these properties. Because they lie
fully inside the security zone, they will
be impacted every time they take out
their vessels.
Additionally, a small man-made canal
branches off the main Lewes and
Rehoboth Canal and leads into a small
man-made lake. The southern edge of
the safety zone continues just past the
entrance to this second canal. Private
houses and the North Shores Marina
inhabit the land surrounding the second
canal and its adjoining lake. Some of
these houses contain docks or boat slips.
Recreational vessel operations will
require transiting through the security
zone to reach either the boat slips at
these private homes or the North Shores
Marina. Use of this canal and lake is
primarily local and by small
recreational vessels, as this second canal
may only be 3 feet deep in certain
places. Using Google Maps, we count 14
boat slips or docks connected to private
houses and 30 spaces for recreational
vessels at the North Shores Marina.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
(2) Security Zone 2: Rehoboth Beach
This rule will also impact any
recreational boaters that transit the area
1 mile by 500 yards offshore of the
North Shores section of Rehoboth
Beach. Because of its proximity to the
shore, the Coast Guard does not estimate
any recreational boaters or commercial
vessels routinely operate in this section
of the ocean. Vessels operating this
close to shore could face additional
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:08 Aug 25, 2021
Jkt 253001
hazards due to the surf and other marine
currents and would avoid this area.
Costs
As above, we assess the costs of the
two security zones separately.
(1) Security Zone 1: Lewes and
Rehoboth Canal
In table 2, we present the Coast
Guard’s estimate of the average vessel
traffic. Under normal course of
operations, the Coast Guard anticipates
that recreational boaters transiting the
canal would have a brief conversation
with the Coast Guard official stationed
at the entrance to the security zone.
Recreational boaters would then
proceed through the security zone
(without stopping or loitering) and exit
the security zone. We anticipate that
this conversation would last between 15
and 30 seconds per recreational boater.
Because we do not know how many
recreational boaters are on the average
boat and because of how small the
amount of time per recreational boaters
is likely to be, we do not estimate the
total costs of these conversations.
Additionally, above we discussed that
there are a number of houses and a
marina that are contained within the
security zone or would require
transiting the security zone in order to
access. Recreational vessel operators
who reside or are visiting a location
inside the security zone should be able
to relay this information to the Coast
Guard personnel stationed at the
entrance of the security zone. When
recreational boaters provide this
additional information, it may increase
the duration of the conversation.
However, there are only 17 houses with
private docks or boat slips contained
within the security zone. It is likely,
therefore, that the Coast Guard
personnel stationed at either end of the
security zone would become aware of
these vessels and their owners and
operators. As a result, conversations
may become more brief over time.
In order to access the private docks
and boat slips of the 14 houses and the
North Shores Marina, recreational vessel
operators will need to transit through a
small portion of the security zone. The
Coast Guard will interpret the vessels
seeking to access this second canal as
innocent passage. As a result, the Coast
Guard personnel do not intend to
converse with recreational boaters
intending to access the second canal
unless they notice suspicious activity.
Instead, Coast Guard personnel will
report vessels transiting the second
canal to the USSS representatives.
Because Coast Guard personnel will not
converse with the recreational vessel
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
47577
operators transiting this region, we
estimate that there would be no costs on
boaters who only pass through the lower
stretch of the canal security zone in
order to access the North Shores Marina
or the private houses on the canal or
lake.
The costs discussed above cover the
normal operations when access to the
canal is still permitted. However, when
certain individuals protected by the
USSS are transiting the area, the Coast
Guard may shut down access to the
canal. Such closures could last from 1
to 3 hours, or longer. If the security zone
is closed to all traffic, recreational
boaters will not be able to transit the
length of the canal. Recreational boaters
wishing to transit through the security
zone will be unable to do so.
If this closure happens suddenly,
recreational boaters could be stranded
on either side of the canal. The distance
through the canal is about 10 miles, but
to avoid the canal by taking a more
circuitous route around Rehoboth Beach
would add 25 miles to the journey.
Additionally, a significant portion of
this distance requires operating in the
Atlantic Ocean. The Atlantic Ocean is
considerably rougher than the
intracoastal waterways. As a result,
many of the recreational watercraft
unable to transit the security zone may
be unable to take an alternate route,
either because they may not have a
vessel suitable to a coastwise route or
may not have the time to add an
additional 25 miles on to the journey.
Because we do not know the
frequency or duration of full closures of
the security zone, we are unable to
quantitatively assess the costs to either
temporarily stranded vessel operators or
to vessel operators wishing to transit the
closed waterway.
(2) Security Zone 2: North Shores
Section of Rehoboth Beach on the
Atlantic Ocean
We do not estimate that any vessels
routinely operate in this section of
Rehoboth Beach, as discussed in the
Affected Population section above.
Additionally, were recreational vessel
operators to transit this security zone, it
is far easier to exit or avoid the security
zone than in the canal. Recreational
boaters merely will need to be greater
than 500 yards from shore. As a result,
we do not estimate any costs incurred
by the second security zone.
Benefits
Upon request by the USSS for the
Coast Guard to implement security
measures in certain sections of the
Lewes and Rehoboth Canal and certain
sections offshore from Rehoboth Beach,
E:\FR\FM\26AUR1.SGM
26AUR1
47578
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
the Coast Guard is establishing two
security zones covering these areas. The
security zones are necessary to prevent
waterside threats and incidents that
could impact the safety and security of
USSS protectees when present in the
area.
Both security zones aid the USSS in
controlling the area and preventing
actors wishing to cause harm to the
functioning of the U.S. Government by
attacking persons protected by the
USSS. Were such an attack to be
attempted or to occur, the societal
impacts could be sizable and potentially
severe to the Nation’s Government.
Additionally, the local impacts would
be substantial as well. The area could be
closed for a significant period as any
necessary investigations occur. This
regulatory action will greatly decrease
the likelihood of these potential
impacts. The Coast Guard has no way to
quantify the frequency of malfeasant
actors or the extent to which this rule
will diminish the frequency of their
attempted or successful actions.
However, we believe that the value of
these benefits justify the costs of the
regulation.
Regulatory Alternatives Considered
We considered alternatives to the
regulatory action to determine if an
alternative could accomplish the stated
objectives of applicable statutes and
could minimize any economic impact
on small entities. In developing this
rule, the Coast Guard considered the
following alternatives:
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Alternative 1: No Action/Status Quo
Without this rule, malfeasant actors
could have unfettered access to
locations near persons protected by
USSS. We believe that this unfettered
access presents an unacceptable security
risk to the United States. As such, we
rejected this alternative.
Alternative 2: Do Not Permit any Traffic
Inside the Security Zone
The Coast Guard considered closing
the security zone to traffic entirely,
which would have had the added cost
of making it impossible to fully transit
the canal. We rejected this alternative
because there are potentially over 200
recreational boaters a day transiting the
security zones in the summer. These
boaters would lose their ability to have
recreational access of the waterway and
any enjoyment that provides them.
Additionally, 31 homes with boat slips
and a marina with 30 spots are
inaccessible without transiting the
security zones. These homes, despite
existing on the canal with a dock, would
be unable to use the waterway.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:08 Aug 25, 2021
Jkt 253001
Consequently, we rejected this
alternative because the costs would be
too high.
Alternative 3: Allow Vessels To Transit
the Waterway, but Do Not Permit
Vessels To Transit During the
Movement of Certain Individuals
Protected by USSS
This is our preferred alternative and
discussed throughout the regulatory
analysis. We believe it balances the
costs to public in the form of quick
conversations with transiting
recreational vessels and the occasional
inconvenience of a temporary canal
closure due to USSS protectees moving
around the area with the benefits of
ensuring the security of these protected
persons.
B. Impact on Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
5 U.S.C. 601–612, we have considered
whether this rule would have a
significant economic effect 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 people.
As discussed above, the affected
population is entirely recreational. As a
result, the individuals directly regulated
by this rule are not small entities as
defined by the Regulatory Flexibility
Act. Based on this analysis, we found
this rulemaking will not affect a
substantial number of small entities.
Therefore, 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. If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this 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 rule 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 rule. If the 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.
Small businesses may send comments
on the actions of Federal employees
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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.
C. Collection of Information
This rule will 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 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 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.
E. 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 (adjusted for inflation) 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.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023–01, Rev. 1, associated
E:\FR\FM\26AUR1.SGM
26AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
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
determined 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 rule involves two
security zones for the protection of
USSS protectees while present in the
vicinity of Rehoboth Beach, Delaware. It
is categorically excluded from further
review under paragraph L[60a] of
Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction
Manual 023–01–001–01, Rev. 1. A
Record of Environmental Consideration
supporting this determination is
available in the docket. For instructions
on locating the docket, see the
ADDRESSES section of this preamble.
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places or vessels.
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 amending
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: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.2.
■
2. Add § 165.561 to read as follows:.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
§ 165.561 Security Zones; Lewes and
Rehoboth Canal and Atlantic Ocean,
Rehoboth Beach, DE.
(a) Location. The following areas are
security zones; these coordinates are
based on North American Datum 83
(NAD83):
(1) Security zone one: All waters of
the Lewes and Rehoboth Canal bounded
on the north by a line drawn from 38°
44.35′ North Latitude (N), 075°5.32′
West Longitude (W), thence easterly to
38°44.37′ N, 075°5.31′ W proceeding
from shoreline to shoreline on the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:08 Aug 25, 2021
Jkt 253001
Lewes and Rehoboth Canal in a
Southeasterly direction where it is
bounded by a line drawn from 38°43.89′
N, 075°5.31′ W, thence easterly to
38°43.90′ N, 075°5.07′ W thence
northerly across the entrance to the
yacht basin to 38°43.93′ N, 075° 5.09′ W.
(2) Security zone two: All waters of
the Atlantic Ocean extending 500 yards
seaward from a line beginning at
38°44.86′ N, 075°4.86′ W, proceeding
southerly along the shoreline to
38°43.97′ N, 075°4.70′ W.
(b) Definitions. As used in this
section—
Designated representative means a
Coast Guard Patrol Commander,
including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty
officer, or other officer operating a Coast
Guard vessel and a Federal, State, and
local officer designated by or assisting
the Captain of the Port Delaware Bay
(COTP) in the enforcement of the
security zone.
USSS protectee means any person for
whom the United States Secret Service
requests implementation of a security
zone in order to supplement protection
of said person(s).
Official patrol vessel means any Coast
Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, State, or
local law enforcement vessel assigned or
approved by the COTP.
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with
the general regulations contained in
§ 165.33 of this part, entry into or
movement within this zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the
COTP, Sector Delaware Bay, or
designated representative.
(2) Entry into or remaining in a
security zone described in paragraph (a)
of this section is prohibited unless
authorized by the COTP or designated
representative when the security zones
are being enforced. At the start of each
enforcement, all persons and vessels
within the security zone must depart the
zones immediately or obtain
authorization from the COTP or
designated representative to remain
within either zone. All vessels
authorized to remain in the zone(s) must
proceed as directed by the COTP or
designated representative.
(3) A person or vessel operator who
intends to enter or transit the security
zones while the zones are being
enforced must obtain authorization from
the COTP or designated representative.
While the zones are being enforced the
COTP or designated representative will
determine access to the zones on a caseby-case basis. A person or vessel
operator requesting permission to enter
or transit the security zone may contact
the COTP or designated representative
at 215–271–4807 or on marine band
radio VHF–FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz),
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
47579
or by visually or verbally hailing the onscene law enforcement vessel enforcing
the zone. On-scene Coast Guard
personnel enforcing this section can be
contacted on marine band radio, VHF–
FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz). The
operator of a vessel must proceed as
directed upon being hailed by a U.S.
Coast Guard vessel, or other Federal,
State, or local law enforcement agency
vessel, by siren, radio, flashing light, or
other means. When authorized by the
COTP or designated representative to
enter the security zone all persons and
vessels must comply with the
instructions of the COTP or designated
representative and proceed at the
minimum speed necessary to maintain a
safe course while within the security
zone.
(4) Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast
Guard vessel, or other Federal, State, or
local law enforcement agency vessel, by
siren, radio, flashing light or other
means, a person or operator of a vessel
must proceed as directed. Failure to
comply with lawful direction may result
in expulsion from the regulated area,
citation for failure to comply, or both.
(5) Unless specifically authorized by
on-scene enforcement vessels, no vessel
or person will be permitted to stop or
anchor in the security zone. A vessel
granted permission to enter or transit
within the security zone(s) must do so
without delay or pause for the entirety
of its time within the boundaries of the
security zone(s). At times, for limited
duration, it is anticipated that vessels
may be prohibited from entering the
zone due to movement of persons
protected by USSS. During those times,
the Coast Guard will provide actual
notice to vessels in the area.
(6) The U.S. Coast Guard may secure
the entirety of either or both security
zones if deemed necessary to address
security threats or concerns.
(7) The U.S. Coast Guard may be
assisted by Federal, State, and local law
enforcement agencies in the patrol and
enforcement of the security zone
described in paragraph (a) of this
section.
(d) Enforcement. (1) The Coast Guard
activates the security zones when
requested by the U.S. Secret Service for
the protection of individuals who
qualify for protection under 18 U.S.C
3056(a) or Presidential memorandum.
The COTP will provide the public with
notice of enforcement of security zone
by Broadcast Notice to Mariners (BNM),
information release at the website:
https://homeport.uscg.mil/myhomeport/coast-guard-prevention/
waterway-management?cotpid=40 as
well as on-scene notice by designated
E:\FR\FM\26AUR1.SGM
26AUR1
47580
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 163 / Thursday, August 26, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
representative or other appropriate
means in accordance with 33 CFR 165.7.
(2) These security zones may be
enforced individually or
simultaneously.
Dated: August 20, 2021.
Jonathan D. Theel,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, Delaware Bay.
[FR Doc. 2021–18427 Filed 8–25–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2021–0341; FRL–8728–02–
R9]
Severe Area Submission Requirements
for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS; California;
Eastern Kern Nonattainment Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
is establishing a schedule for the the
California Air Resources Board (CARB)
to submit revisions to the state
implementation plan (SIP) addressing
‘‘Severe’’ area requirements for the 2008
8-hour ozone national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS) for the
Eastern Kern nonattainment area
(‘‘Eastern Kern’’). CARB will be required
to submit SIP revisions addressing
Severe area requirements for Eastern
Kern, including revisions to new source
review (NSR) rules, no later than
January 7, 2023. Submittal of any
necessary revisions to the title V rules
that apply in Eastern Kern are due no
later than January 7, 2022. Lastly, the
EPA is establishing a deadline for
implementation of new reasonably
available control technology (RACT)
rules as expeditiously as practicable but
no later than July 7, 2024.
DATES: This rule is effective September
27, 2021.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R09–OAR–2021–0341. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov
website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., confidential business
information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:08 Aug 25, 2021
Jkt 253001
Publicly available docket materials are
available through https://
www.regulations.gov, or please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section for
additional availability information. If
you need assistance in a language other
than English or if you are a person with
disabilities who needs a reasonable
accommodation at no cost to you, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben
Leers, Air Planning Office (AIR–2), EPA
Region IX, (415) 947–4279, leers.ben@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Public Comment Period
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
On June 7, 2021, the EPA issued a
final rulemaking granting a request by
CARB to reclassify Eastern Kern from
‘‘Serious’’ to Severe for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS under section 181(b)(3) of the
Clean Air Act (CAA).1 Our
reclassification of Eastern Kern from
Serious to Severe is in effect as of July
7, 2021. In a separate document
published on June 7, 2021, the EPA
proposed a schedule for CARB to submit
revisions to the California SIP
addressing Severe area requirements for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS and to submit
revisions to the title V operating permit
rules for Eastern Kern.2
Our June 7, 2021 proposed rule
includes background information
concerning the EPA’s promulgation of
the 2008 ozone NAAQS and history of
the designation and classification of
Eastern Kern for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS. Our proposed rule also
describes the Severe area SIP
requirements that apply to Eastern Kern
as a result of the reclassification and
proposes a schedule for CARB to submit
Severe area SIP requirements and title V
rule revisions.
More specifically, in our proposed
rule, we proposed to establish a
deadline for CARB to submit SIP
revisions addressing Severe area
requirements for Eastern Kern,
including revisions to NSR rules, no
later than 18 months from the effective
date of the EPA’s final rule reclassifying
Eastern Kern to Severe for the 2008
ozone NAAQS. We also proposed to
1 86
2 86
PO 00000
FR 30204.
FR 30234.
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
establish a deadline of no later than six
months from the effective date of the
reclassification for CARB to submit any
corresponding revisions to title V rules
for Eastern Kern. Lastly, we proposed to
establish a deadline for implementation
of new RACT rules in Eastern Kern as
expeditiously as practicable but no later
than 18 months from the date when the
Severe area RACT SIP is due. The
effective date of the EPA’s final rule
reclassifying Eastern Kern to Severe for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS is July 7, 2021.
In this final rule, we are taking final
action to establish the various deadlines
based on the July 7, 2021 effective date
for reclassification.
II. Public Comment Period
The public comment period on the
proposed rule opened on June 7, 2021,
the date of its publication in the Federal
Register, and closed on July 7, 2021.
During this period, the EPA did not
receive any comments on our proposed
action.
III. Final Action
For the reasons described in our June
7, 2021 proposed rule, the EPA is
invoking its CAA section 301(a)
authority to establish a deadline of no
later than January 7, 2023 (i.e., 18
months from the effective date of our
final rule reclassifying Eastern Kern as
Severe) for CARB to submit SIP
revisions addressing all Severe area SIP
elements for the Eastern Kern ozone
nonattainment area. We are also
establishing a deadline of January 7,
2022 (i.e., six months from the effective
date of reclassification to Severe) for
CARB to submit any necessary revisions
to title V rules for Eastern Kern. Lastly,
the EPA is establishing a deadline for
implementation of Severe area RACT
controls in Eastern Kern as
expeditiously as practicable but no later
than July 7, 2024 (i.e., 18 months from
the date when the Severe area RACT SIP
is due, or 36 months from the effective
date of reclassification to Severe).
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76
FR 3821, January 21, 2011), this action
is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
and therefore is not subject to review by
the Office of Management and Budget.
Because the statutory requirements are
clearly defined with respect to the
differently classified areas, and because
those requirements are automatically
triggered by classification, the timing of
the submittal of the Severe area
requirements does not impose a
materially adverse impact under
E:\FR\FM\26AUR1.SGM
26AUR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 163 (Thursday, August 26, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47574-47580]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-18427]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG-2021-0208]
RIN 1625-AA87
Security Zones; Lewes and Rehoboth Canal and Atlantic Ocean,
Rehoboth, DE
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 47575]]
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing two security zones for certain
waters of Rehoboth Beach to prevent waterside threats and incidents for
persons under the protection of the United States Secret Service (USSS)
in the vicinity of Rehoboth Beach, Delaware. These security zones will
be enforced intermittently and only for the protection of persons
protected by USSS when in the area and will restrict vessel traffic
while the zone is being enforced. This rule prohibits vessels and
people from entering the zones unless specifically exempt under the
provisions of this rule or granted specific permission from the Captain
of the Port (COTP) Delaware Bay or a designated representative. Any
vessel requesting to transit the zones without pause or delay will
typically be authorized to do so by on-scene enforcement vessels.
DATES: This rule is effective August 26, 2021.
ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2021-0208 in the search box and click ``Search.'' Next, in the Document
Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
rulemaking, call or email Petty Officer Edmund Ofalt, U.S. Coast Guard,
Sector Delaware Bay, Waterways Management Division; telephone 215-271-
4889, email [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec. Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background Information and Regulatory History
On occasion the USSS has requested heightened security measures for
persons protected by the USSS in the vicinity of Rehoboth Beach,
Delaware. In response, on June 3, 2021, the Coast guard published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled ``Security Zones; Lewes and
Rehoboth Canal and Atlantic Ocean, Rehoboth, DE'' (86 FR 29727). There,
we stated why we issued the NPRM, and invited comments on our proposed
regulatory action related to these visits by USSS protectees. During
the comment period that ended July 19, 2021, we received no comments.
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. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest.
This rule must be immediately effective to guard against potential acts
of terrorism, sabotage, subversive acts, accidents, or other causes of
a similar nature.
III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule
Under the Ports and Waterways Safety Act, the Coast Guard has
authority to establish water or waterfront safety zones, or other
measures, for limited, controlled, or conditional access and activity
when necessary for the protection of any vessel, structure, waters, or
shore area, 46 U.S.C. 70011(b)(3). This rule safeguards the lives of
persons protected by the Secret Service, and of the general public, by
enhancing the safety and security of navigable waters of the United
States during USSS protectee presence in Rehoboth, Delaware. The Coast
Guard will activate the security zone when requested by the USSS for
the protection of persons the USSS protects under 18 U.S.C. 3056 or
pursuant to Presidential memorandum. The Coast Guard is issuing this
rule under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231), as
delegated by Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No.00170.1(II)(70), Revision No. 01.2, from the Secretary of DHS to the
Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard, and further redelegated by 33 CFR
1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5 to the Captains of the Port. The
Captain of the Port Delaware Bay (COTP) has determined that recurring
presence of persons under the protection of the USSS, which started in
January of 2021, presents a potential target for terrorist acts,
sabotage, or other subversive acts, accidents, or other causes of a
similar nature. This security zone is necessary to protect these
persons, the public, and the surrounding waterways.
IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule
As noted above, we received no comments on our NPRM published June
3, 2021. There are no changes in the regulatory text of this rule from
the proposed rule in the NPRM, other than a correction of a minor
grammatical error in paragraph (a).
This rule establishes two security zones for the protection of USSS
protectees when present in the vicinity of Rehoboth Beach, Delaware.
This rule is necessary to expedite the establishment and enforcement of
these security zones when short notice is provided to the COTP for USSS
protectees who may be present in the area.
Security Zone One is bounded on the north by a line drawn from
38[deg]44.36' North Latitude (N), 075[deg]5.32' West Longitude (W),
thence easterly to 38[deg]44.37' N, 075[deg]5.31' W proceeding from
shoreline to shoreline on the Lewes and Rehoboth Canal in a
Southeasterly direction where it is bounded by a line drawn from
38[deg]43.89' N, 075[deg]5.31' W, thence easterly to 38[deg]43.90' N,
075[deg]5.07' W thence northerly across the entrance to the yacht basin
to 38[deg]43.93' N, 075[deg]5.09' W.
Security Zone Two extends 500 yards seaward from the shoreline,
into the Atlantic Ocean beginning at 38[deg] 44.86' N, 075[deg] 4.83'
W, proceeding southerly along the shoreline to 38[deg]43.97' N,
075[deg]4.70' W.
These security zones may be activated individually or
simultaneously with respect to the presence of USSS protectees. These
zones will be enforced intermittently. Enforcement of these zones will
be broadcast via Broadcast Notice to Mariners (BNM) and/or local Safety
Marine Information Broadcast (SMIB) on VHF-FM marine channel 16, as
well as actual notice via on-scene Coast Guard Personnel. The public
can learn the status of the security zone via an information release
for the public via website https://homeport.uscg.mil/my-homeport/coast-guard-prevention/waterway-management?cotpid=40.
No vessel or person is permitted to enter either security zone
without first obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated
representative. However, we anticipate that vessels requesting to
transit these zones will typically be authorized to transit without
pause or delay by on-scene enforcement vessels. When a vessel or person
is permitted to enter the security zone after obtaining permission from
the COTP or a designated representative, the vessel or person must
proceed as directed by on-scene enforcement vessels. Any vessel or
person permitted to transit the security zone will be required to
continue through the zone without pause or delay as directed by on-
scene enforcement vessels. No vessel or person will be permitted to
stop or anchor in the security zone. At times, for limited duration, it
is anticipated that vessels may be prohibited from entering the zone
due to movement of persons protected by USSS. During those times,
actual notice will be given to vessels in the area.
When these security zones are enforced, the COTP will issue a BNM
and/or SMIB via VHF-FM channel 16.
[[Page 47576]]
The public can learn the status of the security zone via an information
release for the public via website https://homeport.uscg.mil/my-homeport/coast-guard-prevention/waterway-management?cotpid=40.
V. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this 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, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review'') and
13563 (``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'') 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 (including potential economic, environmental,
public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity).
Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both
costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of
promoting flexibility.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated this
rule a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866. Accordingly, OMB has not reviewed it. A combined
regulatory analysis (RA) and Regulatory Flexibility Analysis follows.
This rule will establish the following two security zones: (1) A
half-mile stretch of the Lewes and Rehoboth Canal; and (2) a one-mile
section of Rehoboth Beach stretching 500 yards from the shoreline. The
enforcement of these two security zones is expected to be intermittent.
Vessels will normally be allowed to transit but not stop within the
security zones. However, when persons protected by the USSS are moving
in or out of the area, the Coast Guard may halt traffic in these two
security zones. The Coast Guard expects such instances to happen
relatively infrequently and for a short duration (1-3 hours).
The Coast Guard will station Coast Guard personnel at the borders
of the security zones with the authority to enforce this security zone.
In the few instances where USSS protectees are in transit, these Coast
Guard personnel will ensure that no traffic transits through the
security zones. Recreational boaters wishing to transit the area may
inquire directly with the Coast Guard personnel posted at the
boundaries of the security zones, rather than being required to contact
the COTP.
Table 1 provides a summary of the rule's costs and qualitative
benefits.
Table 1--Summary of the Rule's Impacts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Summary
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Potentially Affected Population... This rule will impact recreational
boaters wishing to use the Lewes
and Rehoboth Canal or the North
Shores section of Rehoboth Beach.
Unquantified Costs................ Recreational boaters of the Lewes
and Rehoboth Canal will need to
speak with Coast Guard personnel
stationed at the entrances of the
security zones. These recreational
boaters will be informed that they
will be unable to stop or loiter
inside the security zone. In
certain instances where persons
protected by USSS are in transit,
traffic may be halted on the Lowes
and Rehoboth Canal. In these
instances, recreational boaters
wishing to use the canal will
instead need to take a circuitous
route or forgo their trip all
together.
Unquantified Benefits............. This rule will secure the area to
meet objectives of the USSS and
keep USSS protectees safe.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Affected Population
The Coast Guard does not collect data on the vessels and
individuals using either the Lewes and Rehoboth Canal or the North
Shores Section of Rehoboth Beach, the areas that would be impacted by
this rule. To estimate the affected population, we used information
directly observable from Google Maps, as well as the subject-matter
expertise of Coast Guard personnel with knowledge of the area.
The two security zones--a half-mile section of the Lowes Rehoboth
Canal and a one-mile section of Rehoboth Beach--are distinct. As such,
we assess the affected populations for these two areas separately.
(1) Security Zone 1: Lewes Rehoboth Canal
This regulation will impact any recreational boater wishing to
transit the Lewes Rehoboth Canal. The Lewes Rehoboth Canal is about 10
miles long and connects the Broadkill River and the Delaware Bay to
Rehoboth Bay. The security zone begins approximately two-thirds of the
way through the canal (if starting from the Delaware Bay) and lasts for
about a half mile. As such, recreational boaters wishing to transit the
canal from the communities of Lewes, Dewey Beach, North Shores,
Rehoboth Beach, and West Rehoboth may be impacted by this rule.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Dewey Beach lies on the isthmus between Rehoboth Bay and the
Atlantic Ocean south of Rehoboth beach and north of the Delaware
Seashore State Park.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These communities are seasonal; their populations are much larger
and more active in the summer than in the winter. Vessel traffic in the
canal follows the same pattern. Coast Guard officers stationed in this
region estimated the numbers of vessels transiting this zone per day by
season. We present these estimates in table 2.
Table 2--Vessel Traffic by Time of Year
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vessels transiting the canal
Months per day
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January through March.................. 20 vessels per day.
April.................................. 75 vessels per day.
May through September.................. More than 200 vessels per day.
October through December............... 50 vessels per day.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 47577]]
The vessel traffic in the canal is entirely recreational. There are
no commercial vessels that transit the canal. Moreover, the canal is
quite shallow. The Coast Guard's 27-foot vessels navigate the canal
with difficulty because of the depth. Kayaks, canoes, and other
manually powered watercraft are frequently used in the canal (not
counted in the daily vessel traffic estimates).
In addition to the daily traffic of recreational boaters wishing to
transit the security zone, there are a number of boat slips located
either within the security zone or that require transiting the security
zone to access. There are also houses that border sections of the canal
wholly inside the security zone. We reviewed satellite images from
Google Maps to identify the number of boat slips within the security
zone or that require transiting the security zone to access. Based on
these satellite images, we estimate that 17 private houses that lie
entirely within the canal security zone contain either a boat slip or
dock. The boat slips indicate that recreational vessel usage might be
undertaken by the owners or occupiers of these properties. Because they
lie fully inside the security zone, they will be impacted every time
they take out their vessels.
Additionally, a small man-made canal branches off the main Lewes
and Rehoboth Canal and leads into a small man-made lake. The southern
edge of the safety zone continues just past the entrance to this second
canal. Private houses and the North Shores Marina inhabit the land
surrounding the second canal and its adjoining lake. Some of these
houses contain docks or boat slips. Recreational vessel operations will
require transiting through the security zone to reach either the boat
slips at these private homes or the North Shores Marina. Use of this
canal and lake is primarily local and by small recreational vessels, as
this second canal may only be 3 feet deep in certain places. Using
Google Maps, we count 14 boat slips or docks connected to private
houses and 30 spaces for recreational vessels at the North Shores
Marina.
(2) Security Zone 2: Rehoboth Beach
This rule will also impact any recreational boaters that transit
the area 1 mile by 500 yards offshore of the North Shores section of
Rehoboth Beach. Because of its proximity to the shore, the Coast Guard
does not estimate any recreational boaters or commercial vessels
routinely operate in this section of the ocean. Vessels operating this
close to shore could face additional hazards due to the surf and other
marine currents and would avoid this area.
Costs
As above, we assess the costs of the two security zones separately.
(1) Security Zone 1: Lewes and Rehoboth Canal
In table 2, we present the Coast Guard's estimate of the average
vessel traffic. Under normal course of operations, the Coast Guard
anticipates that recreational boaters transiting the canal would have a
brief conversation with the Coast Guard official stationed at the
entrance to the security zone. Recreational boaters would then proceed
through the security zone (without stopping or loitering) and exit the
security zone. We anticipate that this conversation would last between
15 and 30 seconds per recreational boater. Because we do not know how
many recreational boaters are on the average boat and because of how
small the amount of time per recreational boaters is likely to be, we
do not estimate the total costs of these conversations.
Additionally, above we discussed that there are a number of houses
and a marina that are contained within the security zone or would
require transiting the security zone in order to access. Recreational
vessel operators who reside or are visiting a location inside the
security zone should be able to relay this information to the Coast
Guard personnel stationed at the entrance of the security zone. When
recreational boaters provide this additional information, it may
increase the duration of the conversation. However, there are only 17
houses with private docks or boat slips contained within the security
zone. It is likely, therefore, that the Coast Guard personnel stationed
at either end of the security zone would become aware of these vessels
and their owners and operators. As a result, conversations may become
more brief over time.
In order to access the private docks and boat slips of the 14
houses and the North Shores Marina, recreational vessel operators will
need to transit through a small portion of the security zone. The Coast
Guard will interpret the vessels seeking to access this second canal as
innocent passage. As a result, the Coast Guard personnel do not intend
to converse with recreational boaters intending to access the second
canal unless they notice suspicious activity. Instead, Coast Guard
personnel will report vessels transiting the second canal to the USSS
representatives. Because Coast Guard personnel will not converse with
the recreational vessel operators transiting this region, we estimate
that there would be no costs on boaters who only pass through the lower
stretch of the canal security zone in order to access the North Shores
Marina or the private houses on the canal or lake.
The costs discussed above cover the normal operations when access
to the canal is still permitted. However, when certain individuals
protected by the USSS are transiting the area, the Coast Guard may shut
down access to the canal. Such closures could last from 1 to 3 hours,
or longer. If the security zone is closed to all traffic, recreational
boaters will not be able to transit the length of the canal.
Recreational boaters wishing to transit through the security zone will
be unable to do so.
If this closure happens suddenly, recreational boaters could be
stranded on either side of the canal. The distance through the canal is
about 10 miles, but to avoid the canal by taking a more circuitous
route around Rehoboth Beach would add 25 miles to the journey.
Additionally, a significant portion of this distance requires operating
in the Atlantic Ocean. The Atlantic Ocean is considerably rougher than
the intracoastal waterways. As a result, many of the recreational
watercraft unable to transit the security zone may be unable to take an
alternate route, either because they may not have a vessel suitable to
a coastwise route or may not have the time to add an additional 25
miles on to the journey.
Because we do not know the frequency or duration of full closures
of the security zone, we are unable to quantitatively assess the costs
to either temporarily stranded vessel operators or to vessel operators
wishing to transit the closed waterway.
(2) Security Zone 2: North Shores Section of Rehoboth Beach on the
Atlantic Ocean
We do not estimate that any vessels routinely operate in this
section of Rehoboth Beach, as discussed in the Affected Population
section above. Additionally, were recreational vessel operators to
transit this security zone, it is far easier to exit or avoid the
security zone than in the canal. Recreational boaters merely will need
to be greater than 500 yards from shore. As a result, we do not
estimate any costs incurred by the second security zone.
Benefits
Upon request by the USSS for the Coast Guard to implement security
measures in certain sections of the Lewes and Rehoboth Canal and
certain sections offshore from Rehoboth Beach,
[[Page 47578]]
the Coast Guard is establishing two security zones covering these
areas. The security zones are necessary to prevent waterside threats
and incidents that could impact the safety and security of USSS
protectees when present in the area.
Both security zones aid the USSS in controlling the area and
preventing actors wishing to cause harm to the functioning of the U.S.
Government by attacking persons protected by the USSS. Were such an
attack to be attempted or to occur, the societal impacts could be
sizable and potentially severe to the Nation's Government.
Additionally, the local impacts would be substantial as well. The area
could be closed for a significant period as any necessary
investigations occur. This regulatory action will greatly decrease the
likelihood of these potential impacts. The Coast Guard has no way to
quantify the frequency of malfeasant actors or the extent to which this
rule will diminish the frequency of their attempted or successful
actions. However, we believe that the value of these benefits justify
the costs of the regulation.
Regulatory Alternatives Considered
We considered alternatives to the regulatory action to determine if
an alternative could accomplish the stated objectives of applicable
statutes and could minimize any economic impact on small entities. In
developing this rule, the Coast Guard considered the following
alternatives:
Alternative 1: No Action/Status Quo
Without this rule, malfeasant actors could have unfettered access
to locations near persons protected by USSS. We believe that this
unfettered access presents an unacceptable security risk to the United
States. As such, we rejected this alternative.
Alternative 2: Do Not Permit any Traffic Inside the Security Zone
The Coast Guard considered closing the security zone to traffic
entirely, which would have had the added cost of making it impossible
to fully transit the canal. We rejected this alternative because there
are potentially over 200 recreational boaters a day transiting the
security zones in the summer. These boaters would lose their ability to
have recreational access of the waterway and any enjoyment that
provides them. Additionally, 31 homes with boat slips and a marina with
30 spots are inaccessible without transiting the security zones. These
homes, despite existing on the canal with a dock, would be unable to
use the waterway. Consequently, we rejected this alternative because
the costs would be too high.
Alternative 3: Allow Vessels To Transit the Waterway, but Do Not Permit
Vessels To Transit During the Movement of Certain Individuals Protected
by USSS
This is our preferred alternative and discussed throughout the
regulatory analysis. We believe it balances the costs to public in the
form of quick conversations with transiting recreational vessels and
the occasional inconvenience of a temporary canal closure due to USSS
protectees moving around the area with the benefits of ensuring the
security of these protected persons.
B. Impact on Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic effect
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
people.
As discussed above, the affected population is entirely
recreational. As a result, the individuals directly regulated by this
rule are not small entities as defined by the Regulatory Flexibility
Act. Based on this analysis, we found this rulemaking will not affect a
substantial number of small entities.
Therefore, 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. If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this 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 rule 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 rule. If the 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.
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.
C. Collection of Information
This rule will 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 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 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.
E. 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 (adjusted for
inflation) 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.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated
[[Page 47579]]
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
determined 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 rule involves two security zones for the protection
of USSS protectees while present in the vicinity of Rehoboth Beach,
Delaware. It is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph L[60a] of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-
01-001-01, Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting
this determination is available in the docket. For instructions on
locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so
that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.
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
amending 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; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.2.
0
2. Add Sec. 165.561 to read as follows:.
Sec. 165.561 Security Zones; Lewes and Rehoboth Canal and Atlantic
Ocean, Rehoboth Beach, DE.
(a) Location. The following areas are security zones; these
coordinates are based on North American Datum 83 (NAD83):
(1) Security zone one: All waters of the Lewes and Rehoboth Canal
bounded on the north by a line drawn from 38[deg] 44.35' North Latitude
(N), 075[deg]5.32' West Longitude (W), thence easterly to 38[deg]44.37'
N, 075[deg]5.31' W proceeding from shoreline to shoreline on the Lewes
and Rehoboth Canal in a Southeasterly direction where it is bounded by
a line drawn from 38[deg]43.89' N, 075[deg]5.31' W, thence easterly to
38[deg]43.90' N, 075[deg]5.07' W thence northerly across the entrance
to the yacht basin to 38[deg]43.93' N, 075[deg] 5.09' W.
(2) Security zone two: All waters of the Atlantic Ocean extending
500 yards seaward from a line beginning at 38[deg]44.86' N,
075[deg]4.86' W, proceeding southerly along the shoreline to
38[deg]43.97' N, 075[deg]4.70' W.
(b) Definitions. As used in this section--
Designated representative means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander,
including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer
operating a Coast Guard vessel and a Federal, State, and local officer
designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Delaware Bay (COTP)
in the enforcement of the security zone.
USSS protectee means any person for whom the United States Secret
Service requests implementation of a security zone in order to
supplement protection of said person(s).
Official patrol vessel means any Coast Guard, Coast Guard
Auxiliary, State, or local law enforcement vessel assigned or approved
by the COTP.
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations
contained in Sec. 165.33 of this part, entry into or movement within
this zone is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP, Sector Delaware
Bay, or designated representative.
(2) Entry into or remaining in a security zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section is prohibited unless authorized by the
COTP or designated representative when the security zones are being
enforced. At the start of each enforcement, all persons and vessels
within the security zone must depart the zones immediately or obtain
authorization from the COTP or designated representative to remain
within either zone. All vessels authorized to remain in the zone(s)
must proceed as directed by the COTP or designated representative.
(3) A person or vessel operator who intends to enter or transit the
security zones while the zones are being enforced must obtain
authorization from the COTP or designated representative. While the
zones are being enforced the COTP or designated representative will
determine access to the zones on a case-by-case basis. A person or
vessel operator requesting permission to enter or transit the security
zone may contact the COTP or designated representative at 215-271-4807
or on marine band radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz), or by visually
or verbally hailing the on-scene law enforcement vessel enforcing the
zone. On-scene Coast Guard personnel enforcing this section can be
contacted on marine band radio, VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz). The
operator of a vessel must proceed as directed upon being hailed by a
U.S. Coast Guard vessel, or other Federal, State, or local law
enforcement agency vessel, by siren, radio, flashing light, or other
means. When authorized by the COTP or designated representative to
enter the security zone all persons and vessels must comply with the
instructions of the COTP or designated representative and proceed at
the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course while within the
security zone.
(4) Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel, or other
Federal, State, or local law enforcement agency vessel, by siren,
radio, flashing light or other means, a person or operator of a vessel
must proceed as directed. Failure to comply with lawful direction may
result in expulsion from the regulated area, citation for failure to
comply, or both.
(5) Unless specifically authorized by on-scene enforcement vessels,
no vessel or person will be permitted to stop or anchor in the security
zone. A vessel granted permission to enter or transit within the
security zone(s) must do so without delay or pause for the entirety of
its time within the boundaries of the security zone(s). At times, for
limited duration, it is anticipated that vessels may be prohibited from
entering the zone due to movement of persons protected by USSS. During
those times, the Coast Guard will provide actual notice to vessels in
the area.
(6) The U.S. Coast Guard may secure the entirety of either or both
security zones if deemed necessary to address security threats or
concerns.
(7) The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted by Federal, State, and
local law enforcement agencies in the patrol and enforcement of the
security zone described in paragraph (a) of this section.
(d) Enforcement. (1) The Coast Guard activates the security zones
when requested by the U.S. Secret Service for the protection of
individuals who qualify for protection under 18 U.S.C 3056(a) or
Presidential memorandum. The COTP will provide the public with notice
of enforcement of security zone by Broadcast Notice to Mariners (BNM),
information release at the website: https://homeport.uscg.mil/my-homeport/coast-guard-prevention/waterway-management?cotpid=40 as well
as on-scene notice by designated
[[Page 47580]]
representative or other appropriate means in accordance with 33 CFR
165.7.
(2) These security zones may be enforced individually or
simultaneously.
Dated: August 20, 2021.
Jonathan D. Theel,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Delaware Bay.
[FR Doc. 2021-18427 Filed 8-25-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
