[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 117 (Tuesday, June 19, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 33711-33715]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-11748]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD14-07-001]
RIN 1625-AA87


Security Zones; Oahu, Maui, Hawaii, and Kauai, HI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the permanent security 
zones in waters adjacent to the islands of Oahu, Maui, Hawaii, and 
Kauai, Hawaii. Review of the established zones indicates the need for 
some adjustment to better suit vessel and facility security in and 
around Hawaiian ports. The proposed changes are intended to enhance the 
protection of personnel, vessels, and facilities from acts of sabotage 
or other subversive acts, accidents, or other causes of a similar 
nature.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before July 19, 2007.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commanding 
Officer, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Honolulu, Sand Island Parkway, 
Honolulu, Hawaii 96819-4398. Sector Honolulu 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, are available for inspection and copying at 
Coast Guard Sector Honolulu between 7 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant (Junior Grade) Jasmin 
Parker, U. S. Coast Guard Sector Honolulu at (808) 842-2600.

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 (CGD14-07-
001), 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 
81/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know that 
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 now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a 
request for a meeting by writing to Sector Honolulu at the address 
under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine 
that one would aid this rulemaking, we would hold one at a time and 
place announced by separate notice in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

    The terrorist attacks against the United States that occurred on 
September 11, 2001, have emphasized the need for the United States to 
establish heightened security measures in order to protect the public, 
ports and waterways, and the maritime transportation system from future 
acts of terrorism or other subversive acts. The terrorist organization 
al-Qaeda and other similar groups remain committed to conducting armed 
attacks against U.S. interests, including civilian targets within the 
United States. National security and intelligence officials warn that 
future terrorist attacks are likely.
    In response to this threat, on December 19, 2005, the Coast Guard 
published a final rule establishing permanent security zones in 
designated waters surrounding the Hawaiian Islands (70 FR 75036, 
December 19, 2005). These zones replaced the temporary zones that had 
been established, and then extended, in the waters surrounding the 
Hawaiian Islands soon after the attacks (66 FR 52693, October 17, 
2001). The existing permanent security zones have been in operation for 
over a year.
    We have recently completed a periodic review of port and harbor 
security procedures and considered the oral feedback that local vessel 
operators gave to Coast Guard units enforcing the zones. In response, 
the Coast Guard is proposing to reduce the scope of the Honolulu 
International Airport, North Section security zone. The Coast Guard is 
also proposing new zones at

[[Page 33712]]

Kawaihae Harbor, Hawaii and Kahe Point, Oahu to address a new vessel 
operation and recent identification of a critical facility. 
Additionally, we are proposing changes that would clarify the 
application of large cruise ship (LCS) security zones to the new Hawaii 
SuperFerry.
    Our proposal with respect to the Honolulu International Airport, 
North Section zone (33 CFR 165.1407(a)(4)(i)) is to change it from one 
that is perpetually activated and enforced to one that is used only in 
response to a threat. This proposed change, permitting a reduced 
security posture in the waters adjacent to Honolulu International 
Airport, is based on a 2006 reevaluation of airport protection 
requirements. The new arrangement offers us an opportunity to decrease 
disruption to maritime commerce and inconvenience to small entities by 
making the zone subject to activation and enforcement only under 
certain conditions rather than all the time.
    As are the security zones currently in place, this and the revised 
security zones described below would be permanently established. We use 
the word ``activated'' to describe when these permanently established 
zones would be subject to enforcement.
    Our proposal to add a Kawaihae Harbor security zone is due to the 
arrival of the Hawaii SuperFerry. In June 2004, Hornblower Marine 
Services, Inc. signed a Marine Management Operating Agreement and 
Construction Oversight contract for the new Hawaii SuperFerry 
operation, an inter-island ferry service. The service will transport 
passengers and vehicles to Hawaiian island ports, including Kawaihae 
Harbor on the island of Hawaii. Each day, these ferries will carry many 
passengers as well as cargo and vehicles, presenting the same security 
vulnerabilities as the large cruise ships that operate in those areas. 
Kawaihae Harbor, however, lacks a security zone to protect such 
vessels, so our proposal is to create one there.
    Additionally, the definition of large cruise ship (LCS) in 33 CFR 
165.1408(b), 165.1409(b), and 165.1410(b) does not adequately describe 
the Hawaii SuperFerry or any other vessel of similar size and carriage 
capacity. Therefore, the Coast Guard proposes to revise the term large 
cruise ship to clarify that the presence of SuperFerry-type vessels 
triggers the activation and enforcement of the Maui, Hawaii, and Kauai 
security zones described in those three sections.
    Our proposed creation of a Kahe Point security zone is meant to 
protect the Hawaiian Electric Company power plant at Kahe Point, which 
produces a significant portion of the electricity for the island of 
Oahu. This beach-front power plant uses sea water piped in directly 
from the ocean to cool its turbines. Loss or damage to this cooling 
water system due to sabotage would reduce the power-generating capacity 
of the plant and overburden the other island facilities. Our proposed 
zone would enhance its security.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The existing security zones in the Honolulu Captain of the Port 
Zone (see 33 CFR 3.70-10) consist of two categories: (1) Those 
activated and enforced at all times; and (2) those activated and 
enforced only upon the occurrence of an event specified in the rule. 
Whenever a security zone is activated and enforced, persons and vessels 
are prohibited from entering the zone without the express permission of 
the Captain of the Port.
    The security zone located at Honolulu International Airport, North 
Section (33 CFR 165.1407(a)(4)(i)) is currently activated and enforced 
at all times. Our proposal is to decrease disruption to maritime 
commerce and reduce the inconvenience to small entities by re-
designating this zone as one that is activated and enforced only upon 
the occurrence of one of the following events:
    1. Whenever the Maritime Security (MARSEC) level, as defined in 33 
CFR part 101, is raised to 2 or higher; or,
    2. Whenever the Captain of the Port is made aware of any threat 
that may cause a transportation security incident or other serious 
maritime incident, including but not limited to any incident that may 
cause loss of life, environmental damage, transportation system 
disruption, or economic disruption in a particular area.
    The Captain of the Port would cause notice of either of these two 
enforcement-triggering events to be published in the Federal Register. 
The Captain of the Port would use actual notice, local notice to 
mariners, and broadcast notice to mariners to advise the public when 
these security zones are activated and enforced. By the same means, the 
Captain of the Port would also announce suspension of enforcement.
    In order to clarify that SuperFerry-type vessels would receive the 
same protection as large cruse ships in Maui (under 33 CFR 165.1408), 
Hawaii (under 33 CFR 165.1409), and Kauai (under 33 CFR 165.1410), the 
Coast Guard proposes to change the term large cruise ship in those 
sections to large passenger vessel (LPV).
    To protect SuperFerry-type vessels during their use of Kawaihae 
Harbor, the Coast Guard is proposing to create an LPV security zone 
there. This security zone would be activated and enforced upon the 
presence of an LPV. A large passenger vessel would be either a cruise 
ship or ferry that is more than 300 feet in length.
    The zone would encompass the waters extending 100 yards in all 
directions from an LPV. When an LPV is anchored, position-keeping, or 
moored, the security zone would remain fixed, extending 100 yards in 
all directions from the vessel.
    Additionally, the Coast Guard is proposing to create a security 
zone at Kahe Point, Oahu. It would be in the waters adjacent to the 
Hawaiian Electric Company power plant at Kahe Point within 500 yards of 
the lighted tower at specified coordinates. This zone would be 
activated and enforced only upon the occurrence of one of the following 
events:
    1. Whenever the Maritime Security (MARSEC) level, as defined in 33 
CFR part 101, is raised to 2 or higher; or,
    2. Whenever the Captain of the Port is made aware of any threat 
that may cause a transportation security incident or other serious 
maritime incident, including but not limited to any incident that may 
cause loss of life, environmental damage, transportation system 
disruption, or economic disruption in a particular area.
    The Captain of the Port would cause notice of either of these two 
enforcement-triggering events to be published in the Federal Register. 
The Captain of the Port would use actual notice, local notice to 
mariners, and broadcast notice to mariners to advise the public when 
the security zone is activated and enforced. By the same means, the 
Captain of the Port would also announce suspension of enforcement.
    Entry into this proposed security zone while it is activated and 
enforced would be prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard 
Captain of the Port, Honolulu, Hawaii. The Captain of the Port or his 
or her representatives would enforce this security zone. The Captain of 
the Port may be assisted by other federal or state agencies to the 
extent permitted by law.
    For all seaplane traffic entering or transiting the proposed 
security zone, a seaplane's compliance with all Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA) regulations regarding flight-plan approval would 
be deemed adequate permission to transit this waterway security zone. 
No communication between the aircraft and the Coast

[[Page 33713]]

Guard would be necessary upon compliance with FAA regulations regarding 
the flight plan.
    The proposed Kahe Point security zone would be established pursuant 
to the authority of the Magnuson Act, 50 U.S.C. 191, et seq., and 
regulations promulgated by the President under Title 33, Part 6 of the 
Code of Federal Regulations. Vessels or persons violating this section 
would be subject to the penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 50 
U.S.C. 192.

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.
    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. This expectation is 
based on the short activation and enforcement duration of the zones 
created or impacted by this proposal, as well as the limited geographic 
area affected by them.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this proposed 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 proposed 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. While we are aware that affected areas have 
small commercial entities, including canoe and boating clubs and small 
commercial businesses that provide recreational services, we anticipate 
that there will be little or no impact to these small entities due to 
the narrowly tailored scope of these proposed changes.
    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 economically affect it.

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 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 (Junior 
Grade) Jasmin Parker, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Honolulu, (808) 842-2600. 
The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question 
or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This proposed 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 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 will not result in such 
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this 
preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed 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 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 proposed 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 proposed 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 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. 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 proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we 
did

[[Page 33714]]

not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

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 made a preliminary determination that this action is not likely to 
have a significant effect on the human environment. Draft documentation 
supporting this preliminary determination is available in the docket 
where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information 
that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact 
from this proposed rule.

List of Subjects 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reports and 
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons set out 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, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation 
No. 0170.1.

    2. Amend Sec.  165.1407 to add paragraph (a)(7) and to revise the 
paragraph (d) heading and paragraph (d)(1) introductory text to read as 
follows:


Sec.  165.1407  Security Zones; Oahu, HI.

    (a) * * *
    (7) Kahe Point, Oahu. All waters adjacent to the Hawaiian Electric 
Company power plant at Kahe Point within 500 yards of 21[deg]21.30' N/
158[deg]07.7' W (lighted tower).
* * * * *
    (d) Notice of enforcement or suspension of enforcement of security 
zones. (1) The security zones described in paragraphs (a)(3) (Kalihi 
Channel and Keehi Lagoon, Oahu), (a)(4)(i) (Honolulu International 
Airport, North Section), (a)(4)(ii) (Honolulu International Airport, 
South Section), and (a)(6) (Barbers Point Harbor, Oahu) of this 
section, will be enforced only upon the occurrence of one of the 
following events--
* * * * *
    3. Amend Sec.  165.1408 to revise paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), (b), 
(c)(1), and (c)(2) to read as follows:


Sec.  165.1408  Security Zones; Maui, HI.

    (a) * * *
    (1) Kahului Harbor, Maui. All waters extending 100 yards in all 
directions from each large passenger vessel in Kahului Harbor, Maui, HI 
or within 3 nautical miles seaward of the Kahului Harbor COLREGS 
DEMARCATION (See 33 CFR 80.1460). This is a moving security zone when 
the LPV is in transit and becomes a fixed zone when the LPV is 
anchored, position-keeping, or moored.
    (2) Lahaina, Maui. All waters extending 100 yards in all directions 
from each large passenger vessel in Lahaina, Maui, whenever the LPV is 
within 3 nautical miles of Lahaina Light (LLNR 28460). The security 
zone around each LPV is activated and enforced whether the LPV is 
underway, moored, position-keeping, or anchored, and will continue in 
effect until such time as the LPV departs Lahaina and the 3-mile 
enforcement area.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, large passenger vessel or 
LPV means a cruise ship more than 300 feet in length that carries 
passengers for hire, and any passenger ferry more than 300 feet in 
length that carries passengers for hire.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under 33 CFR 165.33, entry into the security 
zones created by this section is prohibited unless authorized by the 
Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Honolulu or his or her designated 
representatives. When authorized passage through a large passenger 
vessel security zone, all vessels must operate at the minimum speed 
necessary to maintain a safe course and must proceed as directed by the 
Captain of the Port or his or her designated representatives. No person 
is allowed within 100 yards of an LPV that is underway, moored, 
position-keeping, or at anchor, unless authorized by the Captain of the 
Port or his or her designated representative.
    (2) When conditions permit, the Captain of the Port, or his or her 
designated representative, may permit vessels that are at anchor, 
restricted in their ability to maneuver, or constrained by draft to 
remain within an LPV security zone in order to ensure navigational 
safety.
* * * * *
    4. Amend Sec.  165.1409 to revise paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), (b), 
(c)(1), and (c)(2) and to add paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows:


Sec.  165.1409  Security Zones; Hawaii, HI.

    (a) * * *
    (1) Hilo Harbor, Hawaii. All waters extending 100 yards in all 
directions from each large passenger vessel in Hilo Harbor, Hawaii, HI 
or within 3 nautical miles seaward of the Hilo Harbor COLREGS 
DEMARCATION (See 33 CFR 80.1480). This is a moving security zone when 
the LPV is in transit and becomes a fixed zone when the LPV is 
anchored, position-keeping, or moored.
    (2) Kailua-Kona, Hawaii. All waters extending 100 yards in all 
directions from each large passenger vessel in Kailua-Kona, Hawaii, 
whenever the LPV is within 3 nautical miles of Kukailimoku Point. The 
100-yard security zone around each LPV is activated and enforced 
whether the LPV is underway, moored, position-keeping, or anchored and 
will continue in effect until such time as the LPV departs Kailua-Kona 
and the 3-mile enforcement area.
    (3) Kawaihae Harbor, Hawaii. All waters extending 100 yards in all 
directions from each large passenger vessel in Kawaihae Harbor, Hawaii, 
or within 3 nautical miles seaward of the Kawaihae Harbor COLREGS 
DEMARCATION (See 33 CFR 80.1470). The 100-yard security zone around 
each LPV is activated and enforced whether the LPV is underway, moored, 
position-keeping, or anchored.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, large passenger vessel or 
LPV means a cruise ship more than 300 feet in length that carries 
passengers for hire, and any passenger ferry more than 300 feet in 
length that carries passengers for hire.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under 33 CFR 165.33, entry into the security 
zones created by this section is prohibited unless authorized by the 
Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Honolulu or his or her designated 
representative. When authorized passage through a large passenger 
vessel security zone, all vessels must operate at the minimum speed 
necessary to maintain a safe course and must proceed as directed by the 
Captain of the Port or his or her designated representatives. No person 
is allowed within 100 yards of a large passenger vessel that is 
underway, moored, position-keeping, or at anchor, unless authorized by 
the Captain of the Port or his or her designated representatives.
    (2) When conditions permit, the Captain of the Port, or his or her 
designated representatives, may permit vessels that are at anchor, 
restricted in their ability to maneuver, or constrained by draft to 
remain within an LPV

[[Page 33715]]

security zone in order to ensure navigational safety.
* * * * *
    5. Amend Sec.  165.1410 to revise paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), (b), 
(c)(1), and (c)(2) to read as follows:


Sec.  165.1410  Security Zones; Kauai, HI.

    (a) * * *
    (1) Nawiliwili Harbor, Lihue, Kauai. All waters extending 100 yards 
in all directions from each large passenger vessel in Nawiliwili 
Harbor, Kauai, HI or within 3 nautical miles seaward of the Nawiliwili 
Harbor COLREGS DEMARCATION (See 33 CFR 80.1450). This is a moving 
security zone when the LPV is in transit and becomes a fixed zone when 
the LPV is anchored, position-keeping, or moored.
    (2) Port Allen, Kauai. All waters extending 100 yards in all 
directions from each large passenger vessel in Port Allen, Kauai, HI or 
within 3 nautical miles seaward of the Port Allen COLREGS DEMARCATION 
(See 33 CFR 80.1440). This is a moving security zone when the LPV is in 
transit and becomes a fixed zone when the LPV is anchored, position-
keeping, or moored.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, large passenger vessel or 
LPV means a cruise ship more than 300 feet in length that carries 
passengers for hire, and any passenger ferries more than 300 feet in 
length that carries passengers for hire.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under 33 CFR 165.33, entry into the security 
zones created by this section is prohibited unless authorized by the 
Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Honolulu or his or her designated 
representative. When authorized passage through an LPV security zone, 
all vessels must operate at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a 
safe course and must proceed as directed by the Captain of the Port or 
his or her designated representative. No person is allowed within 100 
yards of a large passenger vessel that is underway, moored, position-
keeping, or at anchor, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or 
his or her designated representative.
    (2) When conditions permit, the Captain of the Port, or his or her 
designated representative, may permit vessels that are at anchor, 
restricted in their ability to maneuver, or constrained by draft to 
remain within an LPV security zone in order to ensure navigational 
safety.
* * * * *

    Dated: June 6, 2007.
Sally Brice-O'Hara,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fourteenth Coast Guard 
District.
 [FR Doc. E7-11748 Filed 6-18-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P