[Federal Register: December 31, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 250)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 75425-75427]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr31de03-19]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[COTP Charleston-03-171]
RIN 1625-AA00
Security Zones; Charleston Harbor, Cooper River, SC
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Temporary final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary fixed security
zone in the waters under the Don Holt I-526 Bridge on the Cooper River
to the entrance of Foster Creek on the Cooper River. This security zone
is needed for national security reasons to protect the public and ports
from potential subversive acts during port embarkation operations.
Vessels are prohibited from entering, transiting, anchoring, mooring,
or loitering within this zone, unless specifically authorized by the
Captain of the Port, Charleston, South Carolina or his designated
representative.
DATES: This regulation is effective from 8 a.m. on December 10, 2003,
until 8 a.m. on June 1, 2004. Comments and related material must reach
the Coast Guard on or before March 30, 2004.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Coast Guard
Marine Safety Office Charleston, 196 Tradd Street, Charleston, South
Carolina 29401. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Charleston maintains
the public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and material received
from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as
being available in the docket, are part of (COTP Charleston 03-171),
will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or
copying at Marine Safety Office Charleston, between 7:30 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LT Kevin Floyd, Coast Guard Marine
Safety Office Charleston, at (843) 720-3272.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (CGD07-03-
171), indicate the specific section of this document to which each
comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. The Coast Guard
is especially interested in comments concerning the size and boundaries
of this security zone and any economic impact this rule may have on you
.
Please submit all comments and related material in an unbound
format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If
you would like to know they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-
addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period. We may change this rule in
view of them.
Good Cause
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for not publishing a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM).
Publishing an NPRM would be contrary to public safety interests and
national security. These regulations are needed to protect the public,
the ports and waterways and the national security of the United States
from the potential of subversive acts against vessels and port
facilities and infrastructure during port embarkation operations
occurring within the security zone. For the security concerns noted, it
is in the public interest to have these regulations in effect during
the port embarkation operations. In addition, notifications will be
made via marine information broadcasts.
For the same reasons, 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.
Background and Purpose
Based on the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the World
Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, there
is an increased risk that subversive terrorist activity could be
launched by vessels or persons in close proximity to the Port of
Charleston, South Carolina, against military installations or
operations occurring within the security zone. This temporary security
zone is necessary to protect the safety of life and property on the
navigable waters, prevent potential terrorist threats aimed at military
[[Page 75426]]
installations during strategic port of embarkation operations occurring
within the security zone. The temporary security zone will encompass
all waters under the Don Holt I-526 Bridge over the Cooper River to the
entrance of Foster Creek on the Cooper River.
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. It is not significant under the
regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland
Security.
We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal so that
a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies and
procedures of DHS is unnecessary. The limited geographic area impacted
by the security zone will not restrict the movement or routine
operation of commercial or recreational vessels through the Port of
Charleston. Also, an individual may request a waiver of these
regulations from the Coast Guard Captain of the Port.
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.
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 because the limited geographic area encompassed by the
security zone will not restrict the movement or routine operation of
commercial or recreational vessels through the Port of Charleston.
Also, an individual may request a waiver of these regulations from the
Coast Guard Captain of the Port of Charleston.
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. If the
rule will affect your small business and you have questions concerning
its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Small businesses may also 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 requirements
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
Federalism
A rule has implication 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. Although this rule will not result in such 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 relationships 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. It has not been designated by the Administrator of the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
Environment
We considered the environmental impact of this rule and concluded
that, under Figure 2-1, paragraph 34(g) of Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, this rule is categorically excluded from further
environmental documentation. A ``Categorical Exclusion Determination''
is 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 continues to read as follows:
[[Page 75427]]
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 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. A new temporary Sec. 165.T07-171 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T07-171 Security Zone; Charleston Harbor, Cooper River,
South Carolina.
(a) Regulated area. The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary
fixed security zone on all waters of the Cooper River, from bank to
bank, under the Don Holt I-526 Bridge to the entrance of Foster Creek.
(b) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations Sec.
165.33 of this part, vessels are prohibited from entering, transiting,
mooring, anchoring, or loitering within this zone unless specifically
authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston, South Carolina or his
designated representative.
(c) Effective period. This section is effective from 8 a.m. on
December 10, 2003, until 8 a.m. on June 1, 2004.
Dated: December 1, 2003.
Gary W. Merrick,
Commander, U. S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port.
[FR Doc. 03-32079 Filed 12-30-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P