[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 116 (Monday, June 17, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41177-41178]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-15217]



[[Page 41177]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

CGD05-01-071
RIN 2115-AA97


Security Zone; Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Chesapeake 
Bay, Calvert County, MD

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Temporary final rule; change of effective period.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is revising the effective period for a 
temporary security zone in the waters of the Chesapeake Bay near the 
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant in Calvert County, MD. This security 
zone is necessary to help ensure public safety and security. The 
security zone will prohibit vessels from entering a well-defined area 
around Calvert Cliffs nuclear power plant.

DATES: The amendment to Sec. 165.T05-071 (b) in this rule is effective 
on June 17, 2002. Section 165.T05-071 added at 67 FR 9205, February 28, 
2002, effective January 9, 2002, to 5 p.m. June 15, 2002, as amended in 
this rule is extended in effect to 5 p.m. on September 30, 2002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule or 
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call LT 
Charles A. Roskam II, Port Safety and Security, Activities Baltimore, 
2401 Hawkins Point Road, Building 70, Baltimore, Maryland, 21226-1791, 
telephone number (410) 576-2676.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background and Purpose

    Due to the terrorist attacks on New York City, New York, and 
Washington DC, on September 11, 2001 and continued warnings from 
national security and intelligence officials that future terrorist 
attacks are possible, there is an increased risk that subversive 
activity could be launched by vessels or persons in close proximity to 
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant. On October 3, 2001, Constellation 
Nuclear-Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant requested a limited access 
area to reduce the potential threat that may be posed by vessels that 
approach the power plant.
    On February 28, 2002, the Coast Guard published a temporary final 
rule entitled ``Security Zone; Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, 
Chesapeake Bay, Calvert County, MD,'' in the Federal Register (67 FR 
9203). The temporary rule established a security zone around the 
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant.
    There is a continuing need for the protection of the plant. The 
temporary security zone surrounding the plant is only effective to 5 
p.m. on June 15, 2002. As a result, the Coast Guard is extending the 
effective date of the rule to 5 p.m. on September 30, 2002. There is no 
indication that the present rule has been burdensome on the maritime 
public; users of the areas surrounding the plant are able to pass 
safely outside the zone. No letters commenting on the present rule have 
been received from the public.
    We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this 
rule and it is being made effective less than 30 days after publication 
in the Federal Register. When we promulgated the rule, we intended to 
either allow it to expire on June 15, 2002, or to cancel it if we made 
permanent changes before that date. If we determine that a permanent 
rule is warranted, we will follow normal notice and comment rulemaking 
procedures, and a final rule should be published before September 30, 
2002. Continuing the temporary rule in effect while the permanent rule 
rulemaking is in progress will help to ensure the security of this 
facility and the safety of the public during that period. Therefore, 
the Coast Guard finds good cause under 5 U.S.C 553(b)(B) and (d)(3) for 
why a notice of proposed rulemaking and opportunity for comment is not 
required and why this rule will be made effective fewer than 30 days 
after publication in the Federal Register.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This temporary 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 Transportation (DOT) (44 FR 11040, February 26, 1979).
    We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a 
full Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 10e of the regulatory 
policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary. Vessels may transit 
around the security zone and may be permitted within the security zone 
with the approval of the Captain of the Port or his or her designated 
representative.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Coast 
Guard considered whether this rule would have a significant economic 
effect upon a substantial number of small entities. ``Small entities'' 
include 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. 
This rule was not preceded by a general notice of proposed rulemaking 
and, therefore, is exempt from the requirements of the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act. Although this rule is exempt, we have reviewed it for 
potential economic impact on 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 will have a significant economic impact on it, 
please submit a comment to the office listed under ADDRESSES. In your 
comment, explain why you think it qualified and how and to what degree 
this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal 
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal 
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory 
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory 
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and 
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to 
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR 
(1-888-734-3247).

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local 
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial 
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under 
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for 
federalism.

[[Page 41178]]

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary 
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may 
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any 
one year. Though this rule will not result in such expenditure, we do 
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not affect 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 Security Risks. This 
rule is not an economically significant rule and does not create an 
environmental risk to health or risk to security that may 
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, 
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more 
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and 
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
    To help the Coast Guard establish regular and meaningful 
consultation and collaboration with Indian and Alaskan Native tribes, 
we published a notice in the Federal Register (66 FR 36361, July 11, 
2001) requesting comments on how to best carry out the Order. 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 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 have 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. This regulation establishes a security 
zone. A ``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' is available in the 
docket for inspection or copying where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record 
keeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    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

    1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 
6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; 49 CFR 1.46


    2. In temporary Sec. 165.T05-071, revise paragraph (d) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 165.T05-071  Security Zone; Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, 
Chesapeake Bay, Calvert County, MD.

* * * * *
    (d) Effective period: This section is effective from 5 p.m. on 
January 9, 2002 to 5 p.m. on September 30, 2002.
* * * * *

    Dated: June 10, 2002.
R.B. Peoples,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland.
[FR Doc. 02-15217 Filed 6-13-02; 11:20 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P