[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 198 (Friday, October 11, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63264-63265]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-25793]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD01-01-227]
RIN 2115-AA97


Safety and Security Zones; High Interest Vessels--Boston Harbor, 
MA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing safety and security zones for 
vessels determined to be in need of a Coast Guard escort by the Captain 
of the Port (COTP), Boston. The safety and security zones close all 
waters of Boston Harbor one thousand (1000) yards ahead and astern and 
one hundred (100) yards on each side of an escorted vessel (EV) in 
transit. The zone prohibits entry into or movement within this portion 
of the COTP Boston zone without COTP authorization. The safety and 
security zone is needed to safeguard the vessels, the public, and the 
surrounding area from sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, or 
other events of a similar nature. The zones will prohibit entry into or 
movement within this portion of the COTP Boston zone without COTP 
authorization.

DATES: This final rule is effective November 12, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Documents as indicated in this preamble are part of docket 
CGD01-01-227 and are available for inspection or copying at Marine 
Safety Office Boston, 455 Commercial Street, Boston, MA between the 
hours of 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chief Daniel Dugery, Marine Safety 
Office Boston, Waterways Safety and Response Division, at (617) 223-
3000.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    On April 29, 2002, we published ``Interim rule with request for 
comments'' in the Federal Register (67 FR 20909). As of the end of the 
comment period, June 28, 2002, the Coast Guard has not received 
additional comments on this rule. No additional public hearings were 
requested, and none were held. Public comments received in response to 
the NPRM, published on January 18, 2002 at 67 FR 2614, were 
incorporated into the interim final rule. No comments were received on 
the interim final rule and, therefore, no changes have been made in 
this final rule

Background and Purpose

    The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on New York City and 
Washington, DC inflicted catastrophic human casualties and property 
damage. National security and intelligence officials warn that future 
terrorist attacks are likely. Due to these heightened security 
concerns, safety and security zones are necessary for vessels that may 
be targets of terrorist acts. This final rule establishes safety and 
security zones for vessels the Captain of the Port (COTP) Boston 
determines are in need of a Coast Guard escort.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    In the interim rule with requests for comments (67 FR 20909), the 
Coast Guard incorporated 22 comments from the public regarding this 
proposal. All comments received were considered in the development of 
this Final Rule. As of June 28, 2002 no additional changes have been 
proposed

Regulatory Evaluation

    This final rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 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).
    The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this rule to be 
minimal enough that a full Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 10e of 
the regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary.
    Although this final rule will prevent some traffic from moving 
within a portion of Boston Harbor during EV transits, the effect of 
this regulation will not be significant due to the minimal time that 
vessels will be restricted from the area; vessels can pass safely 
around the zones at most points in the Harbor; vessels will only have 
to wait a short time for the EV to pass if they cannot safely pass 
outside the zones; and advance notifications will be made to the local 
maritime community by marine information broadcasts.

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 
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 final 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. This final rule will affect the following 
entities, some of which may be small entities: the owners or operators 
of vessels intending to transit or anchor in a portion of Boston Harbor 
during EV transits. This final rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities due to the 
minimal time that vessels will be restricted from the area of the 
zones; vessels can pass safely around the zones at most points in 
Boston Harbor; vessels will only have to wait a short time for the EV 
to pass if they cannot safely pass outside the zones; and advance 
notifications will be made to the local maritime community by marine 
information broadcasts.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), the Coast Guard wants to assist 
small entities in understanding this final rule so that they can better 
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the 
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or 
options for compliance, please contact Chief Daniel Dugery at the 
address listed under ADDRESSES.

Collection of Information

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

Federalism

    The Coast Guard analyzed this final rule under Executive Order 
13132 and has determined that this rule does not have implications for 
federalism under that Order.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
governs the issuance of Federal regulations that

[[Page 63265]]

require unfunded mandates. An unfunded mandate is a regulation that 
requires a State, local, or tribal government or the private sector to 
incur direct costs without the Federal Government's having first 
provided the funds to pay those costs. This rule would not impose an 
unfunded mandate.

Taking of Private Property

    This 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 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

    The Coast Guard 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 
pose an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may 
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This final rule does not have tribal implications under Executive 
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments. A rule with tribal implications has a substantial direct 
effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the 
Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant 
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to 
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use 
of energy. 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

    The Coast Guard considered the environmental impact of this rule 
and concluded that, under figure 2-1, (34)(g), of Commandant 
Instruction M16475.lD, this proposed 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 record 
keeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    Accordingly, the interim rule amending 33 CFR part 165 which was 
published at 67 FR 20909 on April 29, 2002, is adopted as a final rule 
with the following change:

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, and 160.5; 49 CFR 1.

    2. Revise Sec.  165.114(b) to read as follows:


Sec.  165.114  Safety and Security Zones: Escorted Vessels--Boston 
Harbor, Massachusetts.

* * * * *
    (b) Escorted vessel definition. For the purposes of this section, 
escorted vessels operating in Boston Harbor include the following: Any 
vessels deemed to be in need of escort protection by the Captain of the 
Port, Boston for security reasons.
* * * * *

    Dated: September 24, 2002.
B.M. Salerno,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Boston, Massachusetts.
[FR Doc. 02-25793 Filed 10-10-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P