[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 19 (Thursday, January 29, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4242-4244]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-1856]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD01-03-012]
RIN 1625-AA00 (Formerly RIN 2115-AA97)


Security Zone; General Dynamics, Electric Boat Corporation, 
Groton, CT

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is modifying the existing security zone at the 
General Dynamics Electric Boat Corporation (EB) facility in Groton, CT. 
The rule increases the parameters of the existing security zone around 
the southern portion of the EB facility to fully encompass the facility 
and infrastructure. This rule also changes the coordinates used in the 
existing security zone to North American Datum 1983. The enlargement of 
the zone is necessary to provide continuous coverage for EB, 
safeguarding the facility, U.S. Naval Vessels, and other vessels 
located at the facility, material storage areas, and adjacent 
residential and industrial areas from sabotage or other subversive 
acts, accidents, or incidents of a similar nature. This security zone 
prohibits all persons and vessels from entering or operating within the 
prescribed security zone without first obtaining authorization from the 
Captain of the Port, Long Island Sound.

DATES: This rule is effective March 1, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as 
documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, 
are part of docket CGD01-03-012, and are available for inspection or 
copying at Group/MSO Long Island Sound, New Haven, CT, between 9 a.m. 
and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant A. Logman, Waterways

[[Page 4243]]

Management Officer, Coast Guard Group/Marine Safety Office Long Island 
Sound at (203) 468-4429.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    On May 6, 2003, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 
entitled ``Safety and Security Zones; New London Harbor, Connecticut--
Security Zone'' in the Federal Register (68 FR 23935). We received two 
letters commenting on the proposed rule. No public hearing was 
requested, and none was held.

Background and Purpose

    As a highly visible and vital part of the U.S. Navy submarine 
construction and maintenance, as well as being adjacent to other 
facilities and population centers, the General Dynamics Electric Boat 
Corporation (EB) facility in Groton, CT presents a potential target for 
terrorist attack. To protect this facility from such attack, a 
permanent security zone, located at 33 Code of Federal Regulations 
(CFR) 165.140(a)(1), has been in place around the Electric Boat 
facility for several years. This rule will correct inaccuracies in the 
directional orientation of the current coordinates in 33 CFR 
165.140(a)(1) and revises these coordinates to North American Datum 
1983, providing coordinates consistent with those used by the maritime 
community. This rule will also expand the security zone parameters to 
encompass the southern end of the EB facility. The zone is established 
by reference to coordinates.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    Two comments were received regarding the proposed rule, both from 
commercial fishermen who operate in the Thames River in the vicinity of 
the EB facility. The first letter claims that the security zone will 
have an adverse economic impact on fishermen who have historically 
worked in the area around the EB facility. As provided for in the 
general regulations regarding security zones contained in 33 CFR 
165.33, any vessel may request entry into the security zone from the 
Captain of the Port, Long Island Sound (COTP). The COTP will review 
requests to enter the security zone on a case-by-case basis. Fishermen 
may request permission to enter the zone for a one-time or ongoing 
basis. Permission to enter the zone is subject to review and/or 
revocation by the COTP based upon security concerns. No changes to the 
regulatory text were made in response to this comment.
    The second comment letter also raised concern with the potential 
interference the security zone would have on the operation of 
commercial fishermen in the area of the security zone. Specifically, 
the comment recommended establishing similar conditions at EB to the 
restrictions on transit surrounding Naval Submarine Base New London, 
Groton, Connecticut, and recommends a similar process of registration 
to use the security zone area. The waters of the Thames River adjacent 
to Naval Submarine Base New London contain both a security zone 
immediately adjacent to the Base, as well as a restricted area 
established by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) under 33 CFR 
334.75; the restricted area extends the entire width of the Thames 
River. The purpose of a restricted area, as defined in 33 CFR 334.2(b), 
is to prohibit or limit public access to the area in order to provide 
security for Government property and or protection to the public from 
the risks of damage or injury arising from the Government's use of that 
area. Per the regulation authorizing the establishment of restricted 
areas by the ACOE at 33 CFR 334.3, however, a restricted area shall 
provide for public access to the maximum extent possible. A security 
zone established under the Ports and Waterways Safety Act, 33 United 
States Code (U.S.C.) 1221, et seq, and the Magnuson Act, 50 U.S.C. 191, 
et seq, and the regulations established thereunder, more appropriately 
addresses the security concerns surrounding the EB facility, by 
completely prohibiting access to the security zone area. As discussed 
above, however, fishermen may request permission either on an 
individual trip basis or an ongoing basis from the COTP to fish in 
those areas restricted by the security zone. No changes to the 
regulatory text were made in response to this comment.

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 (DHS).
    We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a 
full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures 
of DHS is unnecessary. This regulation may have some impact on the 
public, but these potential impacts will be minimized for the following 
reasons: The security zone encompasses only a small portion of the 
Thames River, encompassing pier and industrial areas not suitable for 
commercial or recreational vessel transit; there is no impact on the 
navigable channel in the Thames River by the increased security zone 
area at the southern portion of the Electric Boat property; the 
security zone minimally impacts the channel, but this overlap is 
necessary to provide sufficient security for naval vessels and Electric 
Boat infrastructure, and leaves ample room for vessels to navigate 
around the security zone in the channel; and any commercial impact may 
be alleviated by requesting permission to enter the security zone from 
the COTP. While recognizing the potential for some minimal impact from 
the rule, the Coast Guard considers it de minimus in comparison to the 
compelling national interest in protecting the naval vessels under 
construction and undergoing maintenance at the EB Facility, as well as 
protecting adjacent industrial facilities and residential areas from 
possible acts of terrorism, sabotage or other subversive acts, 
accidents, or other causes of a similar nature.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this rule will 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 rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. This rule may affect the following entities, some of which 
may be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to 
transit or anchor in those portions of Long Island Sound and the Thames 
River covered by the RNA and/or safety and security zones.
    For the reasons outlined in the Regulatory Evaluation section 
above, this rule will not have a significant 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 would have 
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see 
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it

[[Page 4244]]

qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically 
affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under subsection 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 rule so that they 
can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the 
rulemaking. If this rule would affect your small business, 
organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions 
concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please call 
Lieutenant A. Logman, Waterways Management Officer, Group/Marine Safety 
Office Long Island Sound, at (203) 468-4429.
    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.

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 an 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 would not concern 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 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.

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, paragraph 34(g), of Commandant 
Instruction M16475.1D, 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:

    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. Amend Sec. 165.140, by revising paragraph (a)(1) and adding 
paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows:


Sec. 165.140  New London Harbor, Connecticut--Security Zone

    (a) Security zones: (1) Security Zone A. The waters of the Thames 
River west of the Electric Boat Corporation Shipyard enclosed by a line 
beginning at a point on the shoreline at 4120'16'' N, 
7204'47'' W; then running west to 
4120'16'' N, 7204'57'' W; then running 
north to 4120'26'' N, 7204'57'' W; then 
northwest to 4120'28.7'' N, 7205'01.7'' 
W; then north-northwest to 4120'53.3'' N, 
7205'04.8'' W; then north-northeast to 
4121'02.9'' N, 7205'04.9'' W; then east 
to a point on shore at 4121'02.9'' N, 
7204'58.2'' W.
* * * * *
    (3) All coordinates are North American Datum 1983.
* * * * *

    Dated: January 15, 2004.
Joseph J. Coccia,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Long Island Sound.
[FR Doc. 04-1856 Filed 1-28-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P