[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 153 (Friday, August 8, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 47277-47279]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-20196]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD07-03-127]
RIN 1625-AA11


Regulated Navigation Areas; Charleston Harbor, Cooper River, 
South Carolina

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rule making.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to create regulated navigation areas 
for waters in the Charleston Harbor under the Highway 17 bridges and in 
the Cooper River under the Don Holt I-526 bridge. These regulated 
navigation areas are needed for national security reasons to help 
ensure public safety and prevent sabotage or terrorist acts aimed at 
these bridges that cross the main shipping channel and link the city 
and port of Charleston with the mainland. Vessels would be prohibited 
from anchoring, mooring, or loitering within these areas, unless 
specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port, Charleston, South 
Carolina or his designated representative.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before October 7, 2003.

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, 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: Lieutenant Kevin D. 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-
127], 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. If you would like to know 
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 plan to hold a public meeting. However, you may submit a 
request for a meeting by writing to the Coast Guard Marine Safety 
Office Charleston at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why a 
meeting would be beneficial. If we determine that a public meeting will 
aid this rulemaking, a meeting will be held at a time and place 
announced by separate notice in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

    Based on the continuing threat of terrorism against the United 
States, and in light of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on 
the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Arlington, 
Virginia, there is an increased risk that terrorist action that would 
adversely affect the Port of Charleston could be initiated against 
bridges over the regulated navigation areas by persons on vessels or 
otherwise in close proximity to these bridges. If a bridge were damaged 
or destroyed, the Port of Charleston would be isolated from access to 
the sea, crippling the local economy and negatively impacting national 
security. These regulated navigation areas would help to protect the 
safety of life and property on the navigable waters, prevent potential 
terrorist threats aimed at the bridges crossing the main shipping 
channels in the Port of Charleston, South Carolina, and ensure 
continued unrestricted access to the sea from the Port.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The proposed rule would establish regulated navigation areas for 
the waters in the Charleston Harbor under the Highway 17 bridges and in 
the Cooper River under the Don Holt I-526 bridge. These regulated 
navigation areas are needed for national security reasons to promote 
public safety and help to prevent sabotage or terrorist acts against 
bridges in these ports. Vessels would be prohibited from anchoring, 
mooring, or loitering within these areas, unless specifically 
authorized by the Captain of the Port, Charleston, South Carolina or 
his designated representative.

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

[[Page 47278]]

Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The Coast Guard expects 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, because these zones encompass only a small segment 
of the waterway, and vessels are allowed to transit through these 
zones. This proposed rule would simply prohibit vessels from mooring, 
anchoring, or loitering within these zones unless specifically 
authorized by the Captain of the Port.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Coast 
Guard must consider 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 
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities. The proposed rule encompasses very limited geographic 
areas encompassed by the regulated navigation areas and does not 
restrict the movement or routine operation of commercial or 
recreational vessels through the Port of Charleston. Additionally, 
persons may request permission from the Coast Guard Captain of the Port 
of Charleston to deviate from these regulations.
    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 affect it economically.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small 
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better 
evaluate its proposed 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 
Lieutenant Kevin D. Floyd, Marine Safety Office Charleston, at (843) 
720-3272.

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 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. 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 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. A ``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' 
is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects 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.

    1. Add Sec.  165.715 to read as follows:

[[Page 47279]]

Sec.  165. 715  Regulated Navigation Areas; Charleston Harbor, Cooper 
River, S.C.

    (a) Location--(1) Highway 17 bridges. A regulated navigation area 
is established for the waters around the Highway 17 bridges, to 
encompass all waters of the Cooper River within a line connecting the 
following points: 32[deg] 48.23'N, 079[deg] 55.3'W; 32[deg] 48.1'N, 
079[deg] 54.35'W; 32[deg] 48.34'N, 079[deg] 55.25'W; 32[deg] 48.2'N, 
079[deg] 54.35'W, then back to the point of origin.
    (2) Interstate 526 bridge (Don Holt bridge). Another fixed 
regulated navigation area is established for the waters around the 
Interstate 526 bridge spans (Don Holt bridge) in Charleston Harbor and 
on the Cooper River encompassing all waters within a line connecting 
the following points: 32[deg] 53.49'N, 079[deg] 58.05'W; 32[deg] 
53.42'N, 079[deg] 57.48'W; 32[deg] 53.53'N, 079[deg] 58.05'W; 32[deg] 
53.47'N, 079[deg] 57.47'W, then back to the point of origin. All 
coordinates reference 1983 North American Datum (NAD 83).
    (b) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in 
Sec.  165.33 of this part, vessels are allowed to transit through these 
regulated navigation areas but are prohibited from mooring, anchoring, 
or loitering within these zones unless specifically authorized by the 
Captain of the Port.
    (2) All vessel operators shall comply with the instructions of the 
Captain of the Port or designated on-scene Coast Guard patrol 
personnel. On-scene Coast Guard patrol personnel include commissioned, 
warrant, and petty officers of the Coast Guard.

    Dated: July 29, 2003.
F.M. Rosa,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, Seventh Coast Guard 
District.
[FR Doc. 03-20196 Filed 8-7-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P