[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 48 (Monday, March 11, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17351-17354]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-05089]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG-2024-0139]
RIN 1625-AA87
Security Zone; Cooper River, Charleston County, SC
AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to establish a permanent security
zone for certain waters of the Cooper River between Charleston and
Mount Pleasant, SC. This action is necessary to provide for the
security and protection of life on navigable waters near the
[[Page 17352]]
Arthur Ravenel Jr. Bridge during the annual Cooper River Bridge Run.
This proposed rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels from
entering the security zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port
Charleston or a designated representative. We invite your comments on
this proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before April 10, 2024.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2024-0139 using the Federal Decision-Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments. This notice of proposed rulemaking
with its plain-language, 100-word-or-less proposed rule summary will be
available in this same docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email Marine Science Technician First
Class Thomas J. Welker, Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast
Guard; telephone 843-740-3186, email [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
NOE Notice of Enforcement
Sec. Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis
The Cooper River Bridge Run is a long-standing 10-K race held
annually with over 40,000 participants crossing the Arthur J. Ravenel
Bridge over the Cooper River from Mount Pleasant, SC to Charleston, SC.
Restricting access to waters around the Cooper River in the vicinity of
the event has historically been addressed by the use of special local
regulations or temporary final regulations establishing a security
zone. With the exception of 2020, the Cooper River Bridge Run has
occurred in the same location since 2006 and is anticipated to continue
on an annual basis for the foreseeable future. Issuing individual
regulations for this event each year would create unnecessary
administrative costs and burdens.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of persons
and vessels before, during, and after the scheduled race It would also
reduce administrative overhead while ensuring accurate, timely, and
consistent notification of this recurring security zone. The Coast
Guard is proposing this rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70051
and 70124.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The COTP is proposing to establish a permanent security zone
enforced annually for one day in March or April for a period of
approximately three hours. The security zone would cover all navigable
waters encompassed within the following points beginning at
32[deg]48'32'' N, 079[deg]56'08'' W, thence east to 32[deg]48'20'' N,
079[deg]54'18'' W, thence south to 32[deg]47'20'' N, 079[deg]54'29'' W,
thence west to 32[deg]47'20'' N, 079[deg]55'28'' W, thence north to
origin. All coordinates are in accordance with the 1984 World Geodetic
System (WGS 84). The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the
security and protection of life before, during, and after the scheduled
event. No vessel or person would be permitted to enter, transit
through, anchor in or remain within the security zone without obtaining
permission from the COTP or a designated representative. If
authorization to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within
the security zone is granted by the COTP or a designated
representative, all persons and vessels receiving such authorization
must comply with the instructions of the COTP or a designated
representative. The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end
of this document.
IV. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and
we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This NPRM has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as
amended by Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing Regulatory Review).
Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB).
This regulatory action determination is based on: (1) the security
zone would only be enforced for a total of approximately 3 hours; (2)
although persons and vessels may not enter, transit through, anchor in,
or remain within the zone without authorization from the COTP or a
designated representative, they would be able operate in the
surrounding areas during the enforcement period; (3) persons and
vessels may still enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within
the areas during the enforcement period if authorized by the COTP or a
designated representative; and (4) the Coast Guard will provide advance
notification of the zone to the local maritime community by Marine
Safety Information Bulletin, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, or by on-
scene designated representatives.
B. Impact on Small Entities
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. 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 would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
security zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on any vessel owner or operator.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed 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.
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. 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 call or email the person listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not
retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this
proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
[[Page 17353]]
C. Collection of Information
This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520).
D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism), if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on
the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
Also, 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. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
E. 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 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the potential effects of
this proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves a security
zone lasting approximately 3 hours that would prohibit persons and
vessels from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining
within a limited area of the Cooper River surrounding the Arthur
Ravenel Jr. Bridge over the Cooper River in Charleston County, South
Carolina. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further
review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction
Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A preliminary Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket.
For instructions on locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of
this preamble. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed
rule.
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so
that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places, or vessels.
V. Public Participation and Request for Comments
We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through
the Federal Decision-Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To
do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2024-0139 in the
search box and click ``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the
Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment
option. If you cannot submit your material by using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule for alternate
instructions.
Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this
proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as
described in the previous paragraph, and then select ``Supporting &
Related Material'' in the Document Type column. Public comments will
also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following
instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked
Questions web page. Also, if you click on the Dockets tab and then the
proposed rule, you should see a ``Subscribe'' option for email alerts.
The option will notify you when comments are posted, or a final rule is
published.
We review all comments received, but we will only post comments
that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may choose not to post
off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that we receive.
Personal information. We accept anonymous comments. Comments we
post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal
information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions
to the docket in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).
List of Subjects in 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 is
proposing to amend 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: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051, 70124; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-
1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.3.
0
2. Add Sec. 165.139 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.139 Security Zone; Cooper River, Charleston County, South
Carolina.
(a) Location. The following area is a security zone: All waters of
the Cooper River, and Town Creek Reaches encompassed within the
following points: beginning at 32[deg]48'32'' N, 079[deg]56'08'' W,
thence east to 32[deg]48'20'' N, 079[deg]54'18'' W, thence south to
32[deg]47'20'' N, 079[deg]54'29'' W, thence west to 32[deg]47'20'' N,
079[deg]55'28'' W, thence north to origin. All coordinates are in
accordance with the 1984 World Geodetic System (WGS 84).
(b) Definitions. As used in this section, designated representative
means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain,
petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a
Federal, State, and local officer
[[Page 17354]]
designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port (COTP) Charleston in
the enforcement of the security zone.
(c) Regulations. (1) Under the general security zone regulations in
subpart D of this part, no person or vessel will be permitted to enter,
transit, anchor, or remain within the security zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the
COTP's designated representative.
(2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's
representative by telephone at 843-740-7050 or via VHF radio on channel
16. Those in the security zone must comply with all lawful orders or
directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated
representative.
(d) Enforcement period. (1) This section will be enforced for
approximately 3 hours on one day in March or April.
(2) Notifications of enforcement date and times will be announced
via one or more of the following methods: Notice of Enforcement
published in the Federal Register, local notice to mariners, marine
safety information bulletin, broadcast notice to mariners, or by on-
scene designated representatives.
Dated: February 28, 2024.
F.J. DelRosso,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Charleston.
[FR Doc. 2024-05089 Filed 3-8-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P