[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 103 (Thursday, May 27, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30199-30201]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-12009]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD05-04-057]
RIN 1625-AA00


Security Zone; Potomac River, Washington, DC, and Arlington and 
Fairfax Counties, VA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary security zone, May 
27 through May 30, 2004, encompassing the waters of the Potomac River 
in order to safeguard a large number of high-ranking officials and 
spectators attending the dedication of the National World War II 
Memorial from terrorist acts and incidents. This action is necessary to 
ensure the safety of persons and property, and prevent terrorist acts 
or incidents. This rule prohibits vessels and people from entering the 
security zone and requires vessels and persons in the security zone to 
depart the security zone, unless specifically exempt under the 
provisions in this rule or granted specific permission from the Coast 
Guard Captain of the Port Baltimore.

DATES: This rule is effective from 4 a.m. local time on May 27, 2004, 
through 10 p.m. local time on May 30, 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 [CGD05-04-057] and are available for inspection or 
copying at The Ports and Waterways Department of Coast Guard Activities 
Baltimore between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 
Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ronald L. Houck, at Coast Guard 
Activities Baltimore, Waterways Management Branch, at telephone number 
(410) 576-2674.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    On May 4, 2004, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 
entitled ``Security Zone; Potomac River, Washington, DC and Arlington 
and Fairfax Counties, VA'' in the Federal Register (69 FR 24552). We 
received no letters commenting on the proposed rule. No public meeting 
was requested, and none was held.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause 
exists for

[[Page 30200]]

making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the 
Federal Register. Delaying the effective date past May 27, 2004, would 
be contrary to the public interest because the security zone is needed 
from 4 a.m. May 27 through 10 p.m. May 29, 2004, to protect the public, 
high-ranking officials, and ports and waterways of the United States.

Background and Purpose

    Terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, inflicted catastrophic 
human casualties and property damage. These attacks highlighted the 
terrorists' ability and desire to utilize multiple means in different 
geographic areas to increase their opportunities to successfully carry 
out their mission, thereby maximizing loss of life and destruction of 
property using multiple terrorist acts.
    Since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade 
Center in New York, the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia and Flight 93 
in Pennsylvania, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has issued 
several warnings concerning the potential for additional terrorist 
attacks within the United States. The threat of maritime attacks is 
real as evidenced by the October 2002 attack on a tank vessel off the 
coast of Yemen and the prior attack on the USS COLE. These attacks 
manifest a continuing threat to U.S. assets as described in the 
President's finding in Executive Order 13273 of August 21, 2002 (67 FR 
56215, September 3, 2002) that the security of the U.S. is endangered 
by the September, 11, 2001 attacks and that such disturbances continue 
to endanger the international relations of the United States. See also 
Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to Certain 
Terrorist Attacks (67 FR 58317, September 13, 2002); Continuation of 
the National Emergency With Respect To Persons Who Commit, Threaten To 
Commit, Or Support Terrorism (67 FR 59447, September 20, 2002). The 
ongoing hostilities in Afghanistan and conflict in 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.
    The Captain of the Port is establishing a security zone for the 
dedication of the National World War II Memorial 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 National Mall 
in Washington, D.C., would have. This temporary 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 to the 
Arlington Memorial Bridge and all waters in between, including the 
waters of the Georgetown Channel Tidal Basin from May 27 through May 
30, 2004. Vessels underway at the time this security zone is 
implemented will immediately proceed out of the zone. We will issue 
Broadcast Notices to Mariners to further publicize the security zone. 
This security zone is issued under authority contained in 50 U.S.C. 191 
and 33 U.S.C. 1226.
    Except for Public vessels and vessels at berth, mooring or at 
anchor, this rule temporarily requires all vessels in the designated 
security zone as defined by this rule to depart the security zone. 
However, the COTP may, in his discretion, grant waivers or exemptions 
to this rule, either on a case-by-case basis or categorically to a 
particular class of vessel that otherwise is subject to adequate 
control measures.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    The Coast Guard received no comments on the proposed rule during 
the comment period published in the NPRM. No public meeting was 
requested, and none was held. As a result, no change from the proposed 
rule was made.

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).
    The Coast Guard received no comments on the proposed rule during 
the comment period published in the NPRM. As a result, no change to the 
proposed regulatory text was made.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
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 rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. This rule will affect the following entities, some of which 
may be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to 
operate or transit on 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 
Arlington Memorial Bridge and all waters in between, including the 
waters of the Georgetown Channel Tidal Basin. This security zone will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities because vessels with compelling interests that outweigh the 
port's security needs may be granted waivers from the requirements of 
the security zone.

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 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 Mr. Ronald L. Houck, at Coast 
Guard Sector Baltimore, Waterways Management Branch, at telephone 
number (410) 576-2674.
    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

[[Page 30201]]

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 does not create 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 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.

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. 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not 
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this 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. This regulation establishes a security 
zone. 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. Add Sec.  165.T05-057 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.T05-057  Security Zone; Potomac River, Washington, DC, and 
Arlington and Fairfax Counties, Virginia.

    (a) Location. The following area is a security zone: 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 Arlington Memorial 
Bridge and all waters in between, including the waters of the 
Georgetown Channel Tidal Basin.
    (b) Regulations. (1) Entry into or remaining in this zone is 
prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, 
Baltimore, Maryland. Except for Public vessels and vessels at berth, 
mooring or at anchor, all vessels in this zone are to depart the 
security zone. However, the COTP may, in his discretion grant waivers 
or exemptions to this rule, either on a case-by-case basis or 
categorically to a particular class of vessel that otherwise is subject 
to adequate control measures.
    (2) Persons desiring to transit the area of the security zone may 
contact the Captain of the Port at telephone number 410-576-2693 or on 
VHF channel 16 (157.8 MHz) to seek permission to transit the area. If 
permission is granted, all persons and vessels must comply with the 
instructions of the Captain of the Port or his or her designated 
representative.
    (c) Authority. In addition to 33 U.S.C. 1231 and 50 U.S.C. 191, the 
authority for this section includes 33 U.S.C. 1226.
    (d) Effective period. This section is effective from 4 a.m. local 
time on May 27, 2004, through 10 p.m. local time on May 30, 2004.

    Dated: May 20, 2004.
Evan Q. Kahler,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port, Baltimore, 
Maryland.
[FR Doc. 04-12009 Filed 5-26-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P