[Federal Register: May 6, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 87)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 23948-23950]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06my05-16]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[CGD05-05-033]
RIN 1625-AA87
Security Zone; Georgetown Channel, Potomac River, Washington, DC
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary security
zone on the waters of the upper Potomac River. This action is necessary
to provide for the security of a large number of visitors to the annual
July 4th celebration on the National Mall in Washington, DC. The
security zone will allow for control of a designated area of the river
and safeguard spectators and high-ranking officials.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before May 26, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander,
Coast Guard Sector Baltimore, 2401 Hawkins Point Road, Building 70,
Waterways Management Division, Baltimore, Maryland 21226-1791. Coast
Guard Sector Baltimore, Waterways Management Division, maintains the
public docket for this rulemaking. You may also submit comments
electronically to rlhouck@actbalt.uscg.mil. Comments and material
received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this
preamble as being available in the docket, will become part of this
docket and will be available for inspection or copying at Coast Guard
Sector Baltimore, Waterways Management Division, between 8 a.m. and 3
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ronald Houck, at Coast Guard
Sector Baltimore, Waterways Management Division, at telephone number
(410) 576-2674 or (410) 576-2693.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 (CGD05-05-
033), indicate the specific section of this document to which each
comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit
all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than
8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. You may also submit comments
electronically to rlhouck@actbalt.uscg.mil. If you would like to know
that your submission 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
proposed rule in view of them.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to Coast Guard Sector Baltimore,
Waterways Management Division, at the address under ADDRESSES
explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would
aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by
a separate notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
The U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD) in Advisory 02-07 advised
U.S. shipping interests to maintain a heightened state of alert against
possible terrorist attacks. MARAD more recently issued Advisory 03-06
informing operators of maritime interests of increased threat
possibilities to vessels and facilities and a higher risk of terrorist
attack to the transportation community in the United States. The
ongoing hostilities in Afghanistan and Iraq have made it prudent for
U.S. ports and waterways to be on a higher state of alert because the
al Qaeda organization and other similar organizations have declared an
ongoing intention to conduct armed attacks on U.S. interests worldwide.
Due to increased awareness that future terrorist attacks are
possible, the Coast Guard as lead federal agency for maritime homeland
security, has determined that the Captain of the Port Baltimore must
have the means to be aware of, deter, detect, intercept, and respond to
asymmetric threats, acts of aggression, and attacks by terrorists on
the American homeland while still maintaining our freedoms and
sustaining the flow of commerce. This security zone is part of a
comprehensive port security regime designed to safeguard human life,
vessels, and waterfront facilities against sabotage or terrorist
attacks.
In this particular rulemaking, to address the aforementioned
security concerns, and to take steps to prevent the catastrophic impact
that a terrorist attack against a large number of spectators and high-
ranking officials during the annual July 4th celebration would have on
the public interest, the Coast Guard is proposing to establish a
security zone upon all waters of the Georgetown Channel of the Potomac
River, from the surface to the bottom, between the Long Railroad Bridge
(the most eastern bridge of the 5-span, Fourteenth Street Bridge
Complex) to the Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Bridge and all waters in
between, including the waters of the Georgetown Channel Tidal Basin.
This security zone will help the Coast Guard to prevent vessels or
persons from engaging in terrorist actions against a large number of
spectators and high-ranking officials during the annual July 4th
celebration. Due to these heightened security concerns, and the
catastrophic impact a
[[Page 23949]]
terrorist attack on the National Mall in Washington, DC during the
annual July 4th celebration would have on the large number of
spectators and high-ranking officials, and the surrounding area and
communities, a security zone is prudent for this type of event.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
It is very likely that hundreds of thousands of visitors will
attend the July 4th celebration on the National Mall in Washington, DC.
The Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland proposes to establish a
security zone for the highly-publicized public event in Washington, DC
to address the aforementioned security concerns and to take steps to
prevent the catastrophic impact that a terrorist attack against a large
gathering of spectators and high-ranking officials at or near the July
4th celebration on the National Mall in Washington, DC, would have.
This security zone applies to all waters of the Georgetown Channel of
the Potomac River, from the surface to the bottom, between the Long
Railroad Bridge (the most eastern bridge of the 5-span, Fourteenth
Street Bridge Complex) to the Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Bridge and
all waters in between, including the waters of the Georgetown Channel
Tidal Basin from 12:01 a.m. through 11:59 p.m. local time on July 4,
2005. Vessels underway at the time this security zone is implemented
must immediately proceed out of the zone. We will issue Broadcast
Notices to Mariners to further publicize the security zone. This
security zone is necessary to prevent vessels or persons on designated
waters of the Potomac River (including the waters of the Georgetown
Channel Tidal Basin) from going ashore and thereby bypassing the
security perimeter established by the U.S. Park Police of the National
Park Service for the event.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed 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 (DHS).
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. This proposed rule would affect the following
entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or
operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in a portion of the
Potomac River (including the waters of the Georgetown Channel Tidal
Basin) from 12:01 a.m. to 11:59 p.m. on July 4, 2005.
This security zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This
rule will be in effect for less than 24 hours. Although the security
zone will apply to the entire width of the river, traffic may be
allowed to pass through the zone at the direction of the Coast Guard
Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland. Additionally, before the
effective period, the Coast Guard will issue maritime advisories widely
available to users of the river to allow mariners to make alternative
plans for transiting the affected areas. Because the zone is of limited
size, it is expected that there will be minimal disruption to the
maritime community. Smaller vessels not constrained by their draft,
which are more likely to be small entities, may request permission from
the Captain of the Port Baltimore, Maryland on a case-by-case basis to
enter the zone.
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.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its
provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. The Coast Guard will not
retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this
rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
Collection of Information
This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule
under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications
for federalism.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any
one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would 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 proposed 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 proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to
[[Page 23950]]
safety that might disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. We
invite your comments on how this proposed rule might impact tribal
governments, even if that impact may not constitute a ``tribal
implication'' under the Order.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit
the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the
Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under
figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation because this rulemaking is a security zone
less than one week in duration. A draft ``Environmental Analysis Check
List'' and a draft ``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' (CED) are
available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. Comments on
this section will be considered before we make the final decision on
whether the rule should be categorically excluded from further
environmental review.
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 proposes
to amend 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: 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.
2. Add Sec. 165.507 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.507 Security Zone; Georgetown Channel, Potomac River,
Washington, DC.
(a) Definitions. For purposes of this section, Captain of the Port,
Baltimore, Maryland means the Commander, Coast Guard Sector Baltimore,
Maryland or any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who
has been authorized by the Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland to
act on his or her behalf.
(b) Location. The following area is a security zone: All waters of
Georgetown Channel of the Potomac River, from surface to bottom,
between the Long Railroad Bridge (the most eastern bridge of the 5-
span, Fourteenth Street Bridge complex) to the Theodore Roosevelt
Memorial Bridge and all waters in between, including the waters of the
Georgetown Channel Tidal Basin.
(c) Regulations. (1) The general regulations governing security
zones, found in Sec. 165.33 of this part, apply to the security zone
described in paragraph (b) of this section.
(2) Entry into or remaining in this zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland.
(3) Persons or vessels seeking entry into or passage through the
security zone described in paragraph (b) of this section must first
request authorization from the Captain of the Port, Baltimore to seek
permission to transit the area. The Captain of the Port, Baltimore,
Maryland can be contacted at telephone number (410) 576-2693. The Coast
Guard vessels enforcing this section can be contacted on VHF Marine
Band Radio, VHF channel 16 (156.8 MHz). Upon being hailed by a U.S.
Coast Guard vessel by siren, radio, flashing light, or other means, the
operator of a vessel must proceed as directed. If permission is
granted, all persons and vessels must comply with the instructions of
the Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland and proceed at the minimum
speed necessary to maintain a safe course while within the zone.
(d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol
and enforcement of the zone by Federal, State, and local agencies.
(e) Effective period. This section will be effective from 12:01
a.m. to 11:59 p.m. local time on July 4, 2005.
Dated: April 25, 2005.
Curtis A. Springer,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland.
[FR Doc. 05-9077 Filed 5-5-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P