[Federal Register: January 29, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 19)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 4242-4244]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr29ja04-11]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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