[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 116 (Monday, June 17, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41177-41178]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-15217]
[[Page 41177]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
CGD05-01-071
RIN 2115-AA97
Security Zone; Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Chesapeake
Bay, Calvert County, MD
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.
ACTION: Temporary final rule; change of effective period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is revising the effective period for a
temporary security zone in the waters of the Chesapeake Bay near the
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant in Calvert County, MD. This security
zone is necessary to help ensure public safety and security. The
security zone will prohibit vessels from entering a well-defined area
around Calvert Cliffs nuclear power plant.
DATES: The amendment to Sec. 165.T05-071 (b) in this rule is effective
on June 17, 2002. Section 165.T05-071 added at 67 FR 9205, February 28,
2002, effective January 9, 2002, to 5 p.m. June 15, 2002, as amended in
this rule is extended in effect to 5 p.m. on September 30, 2002.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule or
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call LT
Charles A. Roskam II, Port Safety and Security, Activities Baltimore,
2401 Hawkins Point Road, Building 70, Baltimore, Maryland, 21226-1791,
telephone number (410) 576-2676.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background and Purpose
Due to the terrorist attacks on New York City, New York, and
Washington DC, on September 11, 2001 and continued warnings from
national security and intelligence officials that future terrorist
attacks are possible, there is an increased risk that subversive
activity could be launched by vessels or persons in close proximity to
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant. On October 3, 2001, Constellation
Nuclear-Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant requested a limited access
area to reduce the potential threat that may be posed by vessels that
approach the power plant.
On February 28, 2002, the Coast Guard published a temporary final
rule entitled ``Security Zone; Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant,
Chesapeake Bay, Calvert County, MD,'' in the Federal Register (67 FR
9203). The temporary rule established a security zone around the
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant.
There is a continuing need for the protection of the plant. The
temporary security zone surrounding the plant is only effective to 5
p.m. on June 15, 2002. As a result, the Coast Guard is extending the
effective date of the rule to 5 p.m. on September 30, 2002. There is no
indication that the present rule has been burdensome on the maritime
public; users of the areas surrounding the plant are able to pass
safely outside the zone. No letters commenting on the present rule have
been received from the public.
We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this
rule and it is being made effective less than 30 days after publication
in the Federal Register. When we promulgated the rule, we intended to
either allow it to expire on June 15, 2002, or to cancel it if we made
permanent changes before that date. If we determine that a permanent
rule is warranted, we will follow normal notice and comment rulemaking
procedures, and a final rule should be published before September 30,
2002. Continuing the temporary rule in effect while the permanent rule
rulemaking is in progress will help to ensure the security of this
facility and the safety of the public during that period. Therefore,
the Coast Guard finds good cause under 5 U.S.C 553(b)(B) and (d)(3) for
why a notice of proposed rulemaking and opportunity for comment is not
required and why this rule will be made effective fewer than 30 days
after publication in the Federal Register.
Regulatory Evaluation
This temporary 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 Transportation (DOT) (44 FR 11040, February 26, 1979).
We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a
full Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 10e of the regulatory
policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary. Vessels may transit
around the security zone and may be permitted within the security zone
with the approval of the Captain of the Port or his or her designated
representative.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Coast
Guard considered whether this rule would have a significant economic
effect upon a substantial number of small entities. ``Small entities''
include 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.
This rule was not preceded by a general notice of proposed rulemaking
and, therefore, is exempt from the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. Although this rule is exempt, we have reviewed it for
potential economic impact on small entities.
Therefore, 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. If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule will have a significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment to the office listed under ADDRESSES. In your
comment, explain why you think it qualified and how and to what degree
this rule would economically affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
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.
[[Page 41178]]
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 expenditure, we do
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This 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 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 Security Risks. This
rule is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to security 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.
To help the Coast Guard establish regular and meaningful
consultation and collaboration with Indian and Alaskan Native tribes,
we published a notice in the Federal Register (66 FR 36361, July 11,
2001) requesting comments on how to best carry out the Order. We invite
your comments on how this proposed rule might impact tribal
governments, even if that impact may not constitute a ``tribal
implication'' under the Order.
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
We have considered the environmental impact of this rule and
concluded that under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of Commandant
Instruction M16475.lD, this rule is categorically excluded from further
environmental documentation. This regulation establishes a security
zone. A ``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' is available in the
docket for inspection or copying where indicated under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record
keeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
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
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, 33 CFR 1.05-1(g),
6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; 49 CFR 1.46
2. In temporary Sec. 165.T05-071, revise paragraph (d) to read as
follows:
Sec. 165.T05-071 Security Zone; Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant,
Chesapeake Bay, Calvert County, MD.
* * * * *
(d) Effective period: This section is effective from 5 p.m. on
January 9, 2002 to 5 p.m. on September 30, 2002.
* * * * *
Dated: June 10, 2002.
R.B. Peoples,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland.
[FR Doc. 02-15217 Filed 6-13-02; 11:20 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P