Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
The Coast Guard is establishing a moving and fixed security zone around the Queen Mary II while in the Portland, Maine, Captain of the Port zone. This security zone is necessary to ensure public safety and prevent potential sabotage or terrorist acts against the vessel. Persons and vessels will be prohibited from entering this security zone without the permission of the Captain of the Port, Portland, Maine during the specified closure period.Start Printed Page 58835
This rule is effective from 12:01 a.m. EDT on September 27, 2004, through 12:01 a.m. EDT on October 10, 2004.
Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of docket CGD01-04-117 and are available for inspection or copying at Marine Safety Office Portland, 27 Pearl Street, Portland, ME 04101 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ensign J. B. Bleacher, Port Operations Department, Marine Safety Office Portland at (207) 780-3251.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. Due to the warnings given by national security and intelligence officials that there is an increased risk that further subversive or terrorist activity may be launched against the United States, a heightened level of security has been established around the Queen Mary II while in the Portland, Maine, Captain of the Port zone. This security zone is needed to protect the passenger vessel, persons aboard the passenger vessel, the public, waterways, ports and adjacent facilities from potential sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, or other events of a similar nature taken upon the Queen Mary II while in the Portland, Maine, Captain of the Port zone. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. It is necessary and prudent to enact this temporary security zone in order to properly protect the vessel, passengers, crew and others in the maritime community from possible terrorist actions. Any delay in the effective date of this rule is impractical and contrary to the public interest.
Background and Purpose
Since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York, the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, and Flight 93, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has issued several warnings concerning the potential for additional terrorist attacks within the United States. In addition, the ongoing operations in the Middle East have made it prudent for U.S. ports 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, Portland, Maine, will notify the maritime community of the periods during which the security zone will be enforced. Broadcast notifications will also advise the maritime community of the boundaries of the zone.
No person or vessel may enter or remain in the prescribed security zone at any time without the permission of the Captain of the Port, Portland, Maine. Each person or vessel in a security zone must obey any direction or order of the Captain of the Port or the designated Coast Guard on-scene representative. The Captain of the Port may take possession and control of any vessel in a security zone and/or remove any person, vessel, article or thing from a security zone. No person may board, take or place any article or thing on board any vessel or waterfront facility in a security zone without permission of the Captain of the Port. Any violation of any security zone described herein, is punishable by, among others, civil penalties (not to exceed $32,500 per violation, where each day of a continuing violation is a separate violation), criminal penalties (imprisonment for not more than 6 years and a fine of not more than $250,000 for an individual and $500,000 for an organization), in rem liability against the offending vessel, and license sanctions. This regulation is established under the authority contained in 50 U.S.C. 191, 33 U.S.C. 1223, 1225 and 1226.
Due to these concerns, a temporary security zone around the Queen Mary II is necessary to ensure the safety and protection of the passengers aboard. As part of the Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986 (Pub. L. 99-399), Congress amended section 7 of the Ports and Waterways Safety Act (PWSA), 33 U.S.C. 1226, to allow the Coast Guard to take actions, including the establishment of security zones, to prevent or respond to acts of terrorism against individuals, vessels, or public or commercial structures. Moreover, the Coast Guard has authority to establish security zones pursuant to the Act of June 15, 1917, as amended by the Magnuson Act of August 9, 1950 (50 U.S.C. 191 et seq.) (the “Magnuson Act”), and implementing regulations promulgated by the President in subparts 6.01 and 6.04 of Part 6 of Title 33 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
Discussion of Rule
This rule establishes a security zone around the Queen Mary II while the vessel is underway, anchored, moored, or in the process of mooring in the Captain of the Port, Portland, Maine zone between September 27, 2004, and October 10, 2004. This temporary security zone is necessary to ensure public safety and prevent potential sabotage or terrorist acts against the vessel and the surrounding area.
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 the DHS is unnecessary.
This rule is not significant for the following reasons: the impact on navigation will be for a minimal amount of time, and delays, if any, will be short in length as vessels will have ample space to navigate around the zone. Moreover, broadcast notifications will be made to the maritime community advising them of the boundaries of the zone and Coast Guard and other law enforcement assets will be on-scene to direct vessels away from the zone. These law enforcement assets will be recognizable by law enforcement insignia, markings, and warning lights.
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.
For reasons enumerated in the Regulatory Evaluation section above, 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 transit or anchor in the zone during the specified closure period. However, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a Start Printed Page 58836substantial number of small entities due to the minimal time that vessels will be restricted from the area of the zone, and the vessels' ability to navigate safely around the zone.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under subsection 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. If this rule would affect your small business, organization or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact Ensign Jarrett B. Bleacher at Marine Safety Office Portland, (207) 780-3251.
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 (1-888-734-3427). 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 rule calls for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
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 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 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 create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might 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.
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.
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 system 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.
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, since implementation of this action will not result in any: (1) Significant cumulative impacts on the human environment; (2) Substantial controversy or substantial change to existing environmental conditions; (3) Impacts on properties protected under the National Historic Preservation Act or (4) Inconsistencies with any Federal, State or local laws or administrative determinations relating to the environment. A final “Environmental Analysis Checklist” and a final “Categorical Exclusion Determination” are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.Start List of Subjects
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
- Marine safety
- Navigation (water)
- Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
- Security measures
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amendsEnd Amendment Part Start Part
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREASEnd Part Start Amendment Part
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:End Amendment Part Start Amendment Part
2. Add § 165.T01-117 to read as follows:End Amendment Part
(a) Location. The following area is a security zone:
All navigable waters within the Portland, Maine, Captain of the Port Zone, extending from the surface to the sea floor, within a 300-yard radius of the Queen Mary II while it is underway, anchored, moored, or in the process of mooring.
(b) Effective period. This section is effective from 12:01 a.m. EDT on September 27, 2004, through 12:01 a.m. EDT on October 10, 2004.
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations contained in § 165.33 of this part, entry into or movement within these zones is prohibited unless previously authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port (COTP), Portland, Maine or his designated representative.
(2) All persons and vessels must comply with the instructions of the COTP, or the designated on-scene Coast Guard patrol personnel. On-scene Coast Guard patrol personnel include commissioned, warrant and petty officers of the Coast Guard on board Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, and local, state and federal law enforcement vessels.
(3) The Captain of the Port, Portland Maine or his designated representative will notify the maritime community of periods during which these zones will be enforced. Emergency response vessels are authorized to move within the zone, but must abide by restrictions imposed by the COTP or his designated representative.
(d) Enforcement. The COTP will enforce this zone and may enlist the aid and cooperation of any Federal, state, county, municipal, or private agency to assist in the enforcement of the regulation.
Dated: September 23, 2004.
Stephen P. Garrity,
Captain, U. S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Portland, Maine.
[FR Doc. 04-22138 Filed 9-30-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-U