
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 55 (Thursday, March 21, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10420-10430]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-05407]



[[Page 10420]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2017-0448]
RIN 1625-AA87


Security Zone; Potomac River, Montgomery County, MD

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Interim rule and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: This interim rule modifies the existing security zone that 
covers waters of the Potomac River next to Trump National Golf Club at 
Potomac Falls, VA. The security zone prevents waterside threats and 
incidents while persons protected by the Secret Service are at the 
club. This rule reduces the overall length of the existing security 
zone and creates a 250-yard-wide transit lane that provides passage for 
vessels through the zone near the Maryland shoreline with permission of 
the Captain of the Port (COTP) or designated representative. This rule 
continues to prohibit vessels and people from entering the security 
zone unless specifically exempt under the provisions in this rule or 
granted specific permission from the COTP Maryland-National Capital 
Region or designated representative. It also governs activities of 
vessels and persons already in the security zone when activated. The 
security zone enhances the safety and security of persons while 
minimizing, to the extent possible, the impact on commerce and 
legitimate waterway use. We invite your comments on this rulemaking.

DATES: This rule is effective March 21, 2019. Comments and related 
material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before June 19, 
2019.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of Docket 
Number USCG-2017-0448. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as 
being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type 
the docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on 
``Open Docket Folder'' on the line associated with this rulemaking. You 
may submit comments, identified by docket number, using the Federal 
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public 
Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this 
rulemaking, call or email Mr. Ronald L. Houck, at Sector Maryland-
National Capital Region Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast 
Guard; telephone 410-576-2674, email Ronald.L.Houck@uscg.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations

BNM Broadcast Notice to Mariners
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
IFR Interim final rule
MD-DNR Maryland Department of Natural Resources
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code
USSS United States Secret Service

II. Basis and Purpose, and Regulatory History

    The Ports and Waterways Safety Act, as amended, provides the Coast 
Guard the authority to establish water or waterfront safety zones, or 
other measures, for limited, controlled, or conditional access and 
activity when necessary for the protection of any vessel, structure, 
waters, or shore area, 46 U.S.C. 70011(b)(3). On several occasions 
between March 24, 2017, and July 10, 2017, the USSS requested that the 
U.S. Coast Guard close the Potomac River during events held at the 
Trump National Golf Club at Potomac Falls, VA, to protect persons 
protected by the USSS, hereafter referred to as ``USSS protectees.'' 
The Coast Guard did not have sufficient notice of these events to 
provide opportunity for public comment prior to these rules taking 
effect, and advance public notice of specific events could thwart the 
purpose of the security zone. As required by 5 U.S.C. 553, the 
Administrative Procedure Act, the Coast Guard found that good cause 
existed for not providing the normal notice and comment procedure.
    Given the frequency of the past need for a security zone at this 
location and the likelihood for similar events to continue in the 
foreseeable future, the Coast Guard determined that a permanent 
security zone would be the preferable course of action. We would be 
able to provide advance notification to the public that a security zone 
may be enforced in the future at this location and provide the public 
with an opportunity to provide feedback to the agency--neither of which 
we had been able to do before. The Coast Guard published an IFR, 
``Security Zone; Potomac River, Montgomery County, MD'' on July 10, 
2017 (82 FR 31719). The rule was written with the same geographic scope 
and operating requirements as the previous temporary rulemakings, to be 
activated and enforced at the request of the USSS. The rule was made 
immediately effective to prevent the need for additional temporary 
final rules, but provided the public a 30-day comment period.
    In response to the IFR, the Coast Guard received 636 submissions to 
the docket. After reviewing the public input, the COTP Maryland-
National Capital Region is modifying the security zone established by 
the IFR. The legal authority for this rule is 46 U.S.C. 70034, as 
delegated by Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, 
section II, paragraph 70, from the Secretary of Homeland Security to 
the Commandant of the United States Coast Guard and further redelegated 
by 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5 to the Captains of the 
Port. This rule safeguards the lives of persons protected by the Secret 
Service, and of the general public, by enhancing the safety and 
security of navigable waters of the United States during heightened 
security events at the Trump National Golf Club.
    Because this rule relieves a restriction, 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) of the 
Administrative Procedure Act allows this rule to take effect less than 
30 days after publication in the Federal Register. This rule relieves 
the restrictions imposed by the original IFR that created this security 
zone. The Coast Guard is reducing the size of the zone both on the 
upriver portion of the security zone near Sharpshin Island and on the 
downriver portion of the security zone near the dam at Seneca Breaks. 
This reduction in length will allow increased river access from 
Algonkian Park west of the Trump National Golf Club. East of the golf 
course, the reduction in length will allow waterway users to transit 
across the river just upstream from the Seneca Breaks, allowing water 
access to the George Washington (GW) Canal and Patowmack Canal, which 
is popular for paddling.

III. Discussion of Comments

    We received 636 comments on our interim rule published July 10, 
2017. The Coast Guard considered all of these comments and has made 
revisions to the security zone in response. The comments received are 
available for public inspection at www.regulations.gov under docket 
USCG-2017-0448. In addition to changes made in response to the 
comments, we also made small editorial revisions for grammar and to 
clarify language that was potentially unclear.

[[Page 10421]]

Unless specifically described in the preamble to this rule, such 
revisions were not intended to change the meaning of the language that 
was revised.

1. Who is affected by the security zone?

    A large number of commenters expressed concern about the rule's 
impacts on the wide variety of people who regularly use the portion of 
the river within the security zone. Commenters stated veterans, 
specifically disabled veterans, would be impacted because 
rehabilitative kayak/canoe training and classes are held near Riley's 
Lock (Lock 24) and Violette's Lock (Lock 23), both located on the 
Maryland side of the river across from the Trump National Golf Club. We 
were also informed that professional athletic teams use this part of 
the river for training. Many commenters were concerned about impact on 
the two summer camps for local youth that operate on the Maryland side 
across from Trump National Golf Club. Camp attendees for both camps 
access the Potomac River at Riley's Lock for kayaking, canoeing, and 
sailing lessons. Commenters also stated that the security zone impacts 
recreational boaters, jet skiers, swimmers, hunters, fishermen and 
family paddlers that wish to access this popular portion of the river, 
from either Algonkian or Seneca Regional Parks located on the Virginia 
side, as well as the Riley's and Violette's Locks access points on the 
Maryland side. The Coast Guard appreciates all of the commenters who 
took time to provide feedback on this security zone. Through the review 
of the comments, the Coast Guard learned more about how people use this 
busy stretch of the Potomac River.
    One commenter requested to know whether activating this zone would 
affect bikers and hikers on the C&O Canal towpath, which follows along 
the Maryland shoreline. This zone covers navigable waters of the 
Potomac River, shoreline to shoreline; it does not extend shoreward and 
will not affect bikers and hikers on the C&O towpath.

2. Did the Coast Guard need to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking 
before publishing the July 2017 Interim Final Rule?

    We received comments stating that the Coast Guard did not have the 
authority to issue the July 2017 IFR without prior notice and comment. 
As discussed in the July 2017 IFR, section 4(a) of the Administrative 
Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)) allows an agency to issue a rule 
without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for 
good cause finds that those procedures are impracticable, unnecessary, 
or contrary to the public interest. The Coast Guard found that good 
cause existed for not publishing an NPRM and discussed those findings 
in the IFR. The Coast Guard found that issuing an NPRM was 
impracticable and contrary to the public interest because immediate 
action was necessary to provide waterway and waterside security and 
protection. If the Coast Guard waited the requisite 30 days for public 
comment, this would have put USSS protectees at the Trump National Golf 
Club and the nearby public at risk. However, the Coast Guard recognizes 
the importance of public comment and allowed for a 30 day, post-
effective comment period on the IFR.

3. Will the Coast Guard extend the comment period on the interim final 
rule or hold a public meeting?

    We received two requests for extension of the comment period on the 
IFR and one request for a public meeting. The Coast Guard has made the 
decision not to extend the comment period on the July 2017 IFR. The 
Administrative Procedure Act does not specify the number of days that 
an agency must provide for public comment. And, based on the number and 
quality of the responses that we received, we believe that the 30-day 
comment period provided adequate opportunity for interested members of 
the public to review the July 2017 IFR and provide us with currently 
available information that would enhance our knowledge about the rule, 
including impacts. The Coast Guard carefully reviewed each of the 
comments we received on the July 2017 IFR and has addressed those 
concerns in this second interim final rule. But, to ensure that all 
concerns of the public have been brought to our attention, the Coast 
Guard is providing for a 90-day public comment period with this second 
interim rule. The Coast Guard believes this provides sufficient 
opportunity for public feedback without the need for public meetings.

4. Do the size or location of the zone need to be adjusted?

    A number of comments questioned the size and location of the 
security zone. Many commenters stated that the security zone needlessly 
interfered with the public's access to the river. Commenters suggested 
that the Coast Guard could reduce the size of the zone while still 
maintaining security. Local paddling clubs, people associated with the 
camps, and recreational kayakers requested we find a way to share the 
river when the security zone is being enforced. A common theme was 
requesting a way for paddlers to enter the water on the Maryland side 
and access the GW Canal on the Virginia side. Many commenters felt that 
the zone could potentially force waterway users close to the dam. The 
president of a local recreational boating association asked for a 100-
foot lane immediately west of Seneca Breaks, so that paddlers can 
safely cross upriver from the dam, as well as access to the Maryland 
side of the river. Additionally, some comments expressed concern over 
what would happen if a paddler launched and went downriver, only to 
find out upon return to that launch site that the security zone was 
activated. Commenters stated that this would leave a paddler stranded 
if the paddler could not access the paddler's launch point and could 
pose a safety risk to the paddler.
    After reviewing the concerns raised by the commenters, we revised 
the security zone to create a 250 yard wide transit lane parallel to 
the Maryland shoreline that may be accessed with permission from the 
COTP or designated representative. While this means waterway users 
accessing the Potomac River from Riley's Lock will immediately enter 
the security zone when entering the river, the transit lane provides 
the opportunity for them to access the Potomac River once granted 
permission from the COTP or the COTP's representative. We moved the 
eastern edge of the security zone approximately 600 yards west. This 
provides approximately 170 yards of clearance between Seneca Falls and 
the edge of the zone. This also means waterway users launching from 
Violette's Lock have almost 400 yards to travel before reaching the 
edge of the zone instead of entering the zone almost immediately as 
they enter the Potomac River. We moved the western edge of the zone 
approximately 500 yards east. This means waterway users launching from 
Algonkian Regional Park boat ramp may travel three quarters of a mile 
due east before reaching the western edge of the zone. These 
modifications, together, should allow waterway users to launch from 
three nearby launch sites (Algonkian Park, Riley's Lock, and Violette's 
Lock), transit through the security zone on the Maryland side to access 
Seneca Falls and the George Washington Canal, and then return to their 
launch site.
    We received comments about the size of this security zone as 
compared to other zones in the area that provide protective measures. 
Many commenters said that this security zone was much

[[Page 10422]]

larger and more restrictive than those other zones. The list of zones 
referenced by commenters includes: Ronald Reagan Washington National 
Airport, White House ``campaign style rallies,'' Camp David, Dahlgren 
Naval Surface Warfare Center, and naval vessels. Of these, the Coast 
Guard is not the issuing authority for zones that implement security 
measures around Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, the White 
House, Camp David, or Dahlgren Naval Surface Warfare Center. The Coast 
Guard has issued temporary security zones for high profile events 
adjacent to waters of the United States, like the Democratic and 
Republican National Conventions. The Coast Guard designed each of these 
zone's size and restrictions based on the unique factors each venue 
presented. Regarding naval vessels, the Coast Guard issues Naval Vessel 
Protective Zones considering both Coast Guard and naval vessel 
capabilities. There are other Coast Guard-issued security zones on 
different portions of the Potomac River, which vary in size, duration, 
and restrictions based on the unique factors each location and event 
presents (33 CFR 165.508). While all of these comments bring up other 
locations and circumstances where security can be an issue, they do not 
address the specific technical security needs for protecting USSS 
protectees on this particular waterfront property. The Coast Guard did 
not make any changes to the zone's size following its analysis of other 
security zones near this location.
    One comment asked about why the Coast Guard is setting up a shore-
to-shore security zone when, previously, USSS was only keeping boaters 
away from the shore. The temporary rules issued prior to the July 2017 
IFR established shore-to-shore security zones which allowed the public 
to request permission to transit from the COTP's representative. The 
July 2017 IFR also provided the opportunity to request permission to 
enter and transit the zone in paragraph (c)(2).

5. Does the security zone make the public less safe?

    Some commenters believed the zone would decrease the public's 
safety. While many of the comments were general in nature and did not 
provide specifics, some stated that they felt unsafe because of fear 
that the eastern edge of the security zone forced waterway users into 
Seneca Falls. One commenter suggested that the Coast Guard provide a 
300-foot wide corridor parallel to the falls.
    The security zone does not negatively impact public safety. The 
Coast Guard's establishment of the security zone allows enforcing 
agencies more time to respond to threats and take the lowest level of 
enforcement needed to protect USSS protectees. As previously discussed 
in the ``size and location'' section above, in an abundance of caution, 
the Coast Guard is moving the zone's eastern edge 500 yards west to 
provide ample room for waterway users to launch from Violette's Lock 
and cross from the Maryland side to the Virginia side of the river. 
But, the Coast Guard does not believe that the original coordinates of 
the safety zone put the public at risk. Under the original IFR people 
could transit the zone parallel to the falls, provided they first 
received permission from the COTP or the COTP's representative and 
followed transit instructions.

6. Is a security zone needed?

    Many comments questioned whether there was a need for the security 
zone given that this segment of the river is almost exclusively used by 
kayaks, canoes, and paddleboards. Commenters stated the rocky, shallow 
bottom, debris, and ever changing water conditions would make it very 
difficult for someone unfamiliar with the area to approach the golf 
course at a high rate of speed without being overtaken or neutralized. 
Several comments suggested that the riverfront cliff in front of the 
Trump National Golf Club could be easily protected with security 
personnel on the shoreline due to its height. Others commented that 
there is a clear line of sight across the Potomac River, and that a 
Coast Guard security zone does not add to the security of the area 
since USSS protectees will be in plain sight of the opposite bank with 
or without the security zone.
    The Coast Guard has authority to take action on the river and, in 
consultation with USSS, has deemed a security zone the most effective 
way to control access to the shores of the Trump National Golf Club. 
The Coast Guard recognizes that anyone can use any waterborne vessel, 
including paddle craft, to operate with malicious intent against USSS 
protectees. Therefore, the agency has concluded the security zone is 
necessary. To accommodate waterway users, the Coast Guard is adding a 
transit lane that allows use of this segment of the river while the 
Coast Guard, along with the USSS, maintains appropriate levels of 
security.

7. Has the Coast Guard considered alternatives?

    Several commenters requested that the Coast Guard consider 
alternatives to rulemaking.
    Physical barriers. Some non-Coast Guard alternatives proposed by 
commenters included having the Trump National Golf Club establish 
visible barriers on shore to provide security or replant vegetation 
along the shoreline to provide a barrier. Another commenter suggested 
the Coast Guard put up physical barriers to provide security. The Coast 
Guard cannot require land owners to alter their property as an 
alternative to creating and enforcing a security zone. Such alterations 
would need to be at the landowner's discretion. And, providing physical 
barriers is not a method the Coast Guard uses to mitigate ports and 
waterways security concerns.
    Land-based security. One commenter suggested having land-based 
security on the golf course, either private security or federal law 
enforcement. The USSS in consultation with the Coast Guard has 
determined that waterborne security is required when USSS protectees 
are present at Trump National Golf Club.
    Skipping holes. Other commenters suggested that USS protectees skip 
the golf holes that are closest to the river's edge. The Coast Guard 
does not direct movements of USSS protectees on the golf course.
    Random searches. One commenter requested that instead of a security 
zone, the Coast Guard patrol and conduct random searches. Random 
searches would not provide an adequate level of security that is 
required for these events.
    Assistance from community members. One comment requested that the 
Coast Guard develop a partnership with the local paddling community and 
request assistance from paddlers in securing the waterway. Only the 
Coast Guard has authority to enforce a security zone.
    Inspections. One comment asked if the Coast Guard could conduct 
security inspections at ``popular launch sites'' instead, and also 
provide a permit or pass that allows that paddler to use that segment 
of the river. Such an inspection process does not currently exist, and 
if implemented, would not account for paddlers already on this segment 
of the river. The COTP, in consultation with the USSS, has determined 
that a security zone is the most effective means to mitigate security 
concerns at the Trump National Golf Club.

8. Has the Coast Guard considered only applying the security zone to 
specific people or vessels?

    There were numerous comments requesting that the security zone not 
apply to human powered kayaks, canoes, or paddleboards, and only to 
motorized watercraft. Commenters

[[Page 10423]]

argued that paddle craft are slow, easily tracked, and easily overtaken 
for security boardings. Other commenters requested that the security 
zone only apply to vessels above a certain speed, allowing kayaks and 
canoes to operate without restriction. A few proposals requested that 
permits be available to provide ongoing exemptions to future security 
zones. These permits would apply to local businesses and groups that 
are deemed not threatening and rely heavily on this particular segment 
of the river.
    These recommendations would undermine the security measures this 
rule intends to provide. An exemption for paddle craft would allow 
persons with harmful intent immediate access to the Trump National Golf 
Club shoreline while USSS protectees were present. Organizations 
exempted by permit could be exploited, similarly allowing persons with 
harmful intent access to the shoreline. Instead, the Coast Guard will 
continue maintaining a shoreline-to-shoreline security zone activated 
when USSS protectees are present and will continue to allow vessels to 
use the transit lane as conditions permit. This helps the Coast Guard 
manage waterborne security risk by maintaining positive control of 
entry into the zone and keeping a minimum stand-off distance from the 
Virginia shoreline for all vessels.

9. Does the Coast Guard have authority to create a security zone in 
Maryland state waters?

    Many comments questioned the Coast Guard's authority to establish a 
security zone in Maryland State waters. The Coast Guard's legal 
authority to establish security zone regulations comes from 33 
U.S.C.1221. A discussion of the geographic application of security 
zones is provided in regulation in 33 CFR 165.9(c), and explains that 
security zones may be established in ``waters subject to the 
jurisdiction of the United States,'' defined in 33 CFR 2.38. This 
definition incorporates ``navigable waters of the United States'' as 
defined in 33 CFR 2.36, which are further described to include: (1) 
Territorial seas of the United States; (2) internal waters of the 
United States that are subject to tidal influence; and (3) internal 
waters not subject to tidal influence that: are or have been used, or 
are or have been susceptible for use, by themselves or in connection 
with other waters, as highways for substantial interstate or foreign 
commerce. This portion of the Potomac River is a navigable waterway of 
the United States and meets the definition described in 33 CFR 
2.36(a)(3)(i). Because this portion of the river is a navigable 
waterway, the Coast Guard has authority stemming from 33 U.S.C. 1221 to 
issue a security zone on these waters.

10. For whom will the security zone be activated?

    The July 2017 IFR said that the safety zone was for the protection 
of ``high ranking government officials.'' Several comments requested 
clarification about who is considered a ``high ranking government 
official.'' Commenters were concerned about the frequency of 
enforcement if ``high ranking government officials'' covered a very 
large group of individuals. Some commenters wanted the security zone to 
be activated only for the President of the United States, while others 
thought the zone should be able to be activated only for the Vice 
President of the United States, Speaker of the House, and other members 
of Congress in addition to the President. Many commenters were 
concerned that President Trump's business partners or other non-
governmental persons would trigger the security zone's activation.
    The Coast Guard will only activate the security zone when requested 
by the USSS for the protection of those who qualify for USSS 
protection. The list of personnel who qualify for USSS protection is 
found in 18 U.S.C 3056(a). This list includes the President of the 
United States, Vice President of the United States, President-elect and 
Vice President-elect, immediate families of those individuals, former 
Presidents and Vice Presidents, major United States Presidential 
candidates, and visiting heads of state or foreign governments. The 
Coast Guard has amended the regulatory text to clarify this for the 
public.

11. Can the Coast Guard close a public waterway for private 
recreational activities?

    Many commenters argued that the right of USSS protectees to use 
private land for recreational activities does not take precedence over 
the right of taxpayers to use publicly owned land and waterways. 
Comments stated that a golf game for USSS protectees would limit a wide 
range of rehabilitative, recreational, educational and conservation 
activities for many citizens and stakeholders. Other comments expressed 
frustration that the interests and activities of the public were not 
taken in to consideration when the location and size of the security 
zone was established. Comments pointed out that there are few areas on 
the Potomac River that offer such varied public access and usage 
opportunities as the area initially covered by the security zone, and 
that there are other options for USSS protectees to play golf.
    The Coast Guard cannot change the location and travel choices of 
USSS protectees. The USSS is tasked with providing the highest level of 
security for certain individuals, and has requested the Coast Guard's 
assistance in this location. The need for and level of security does 
not change based on the activities of protected individuals. Shortening 
the size of the security zone and adding the transit lane along the 
Maryland shore provides an opportunity for the public to enjoy the 
river while USSS protectees participate safely in their chosen 
activities.
    Many commenters stated that taxpayer money should not be used to 
obtain security services for a private business or to engage in 
activities that would unfairly benefit a private entity. The security 
zone is not intended to support a private business. It will only be 
activated as needed to protect USSS protectees, not the Trump National 
Golf Club generally.

12. How long will the security zone be in effect?

    Many commenters requested clarification on how long the security 
zone would be in effect, including whether the security zone would be 
terminated after the current President's term. After reviewing any 
comments received on this second IFR, the Coast Guard will issue a 
final rule addressing any new comments that we receive during the 
comment period. The security zone will remain in place until the Coast 
Guard conducts a future rulemaking to withdraw it. But, the security 
zone will only be enforced at the request of USSS.

13. How frequently and for how long will the security zone be enforced 
when activated?

    Many commenters requested clarification about how frequently the 
zone would be activated and the length of enforcement. Several comments 
asked about whether the security zone could ever be enforced for a 
multi-day event. Additionally, other comments asked if the security 
zone could be activated only when recreational river users were less 
likely to be present, such as from Monday through Friday. One commenter 
requested that the security zone be activated no more than 3 times each 
year.
    The Coast Guard will activate this security zone in consultation 
with the USSS whenever deemed needed to protect USSS protectees. There 
is a possibility that the security zone could

[[Page 10424]]

be enforced multiple days at a time. But, to date, the USSS has not 
requested multi-day enforcement.

14. Who enforces the security zone?

    Many comments indicated confusion over how and by whom the security 
zone would be enforced. Some stated that the MD-DNR has enforcement 
jurisdiction over the security zone and would be able to make changes 
to the size of the security zone. This is not correct. While the CG may 
be assisted by Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies in 
the patrol and enforcement of the security zone, only the CG is 
authorized to establish or modify the size of the zone. MD-DNR is a 
vital partner, present while the zone is being enforced. Currently, the 
Coast Guard partners with MD-DNR, placing Coast Guard personnel on MD-
DNR vessels to provide on-scene enforcement capabilities.

15. How will the public know when the zone is going to be enforced?

    Many comments requested advance notice of when the security zone is 
going to be enforced. Specific suggestions included advance notice 
durations of two weeks, two days, and twenty-four hours. Several other 
comments requested a website, application development, or text 
notification. Many comments requested signs be posted at popular launch 
sites, indicating in advance that the security zone is activated. Some 
requested a dedicated telephone line with a pre-recorded message. Some 
comments asked if local paddling clubs could be notified when the 
security zone is activated.
    The Coast Guard can only provide minimal advance notice of 
activation. Announcing the arrival of USSS protectees, even twenty-four 
hours in advance, would put their security at risk. The USSS will 
request enforcement of the security zone when required. The Coast Guard 
will provide the public with notice of enforcement of the security zone 
by Broadcast Notice to Mariners (BNM), updated information at 
www.news.uscg.mil/Baltimore/ and by a recorded message at telephone 
number (410) 576-2675. Local businesses, recreational boaters, and 
recreational associations should check the website and phone message 
prior to making plans that may be impacted by enforcement of the 
security zone, but should keep in mind that enforcement could begin at 
any time at the request of USSS. The Coast Guard does not intend to use 
shore-based signage as a means to notify the public of security zone 
enforcement.
    It was of great concern to many commenters that they would not know 
when the security zone was activated, particularly if the only means of 
communication is by means of Marine Band Radio, VHF-FM. And, some 
comments stated that paddlers do not carry cellular telephones on the 
river. For river users who do not carry a Marine Band Radio, a 
telephone, or have other means of access to the internet while on the 
river, the COTP or designated representative will be on scene to 
provide notification. At the time of enforcement, the Coast Guard will 
provide instructions to persons and vessels in the security zone on how 
to depart the zone. Vessels may request permission to remain in the 
zone from the COTP or designated representative.
    Commenters asked if the use of installed air horns, loud hailers, 
flags or special lights at the Trump National Golf Club could be used 
to indicate when the security zone is activated. The designated 
representative of the COTP on scene will decide on the most appropriate 
and feasible method of communication; however, the Coast Guard cannot 
require land owners to alter their private property. Commenters also 
asked about paddlers with hearing impairments and those speaking 
different languages. The Coast Guard will use visual signals or other 
alternative means of non-verbal communication as needed for these 
paddlers. A designated representative of the COTP on scene will ensure 
that all vessels and people within the security zone recognize that the 
security zone is activated, and that they must either immediately 
depart the security zone or transit through it in accordance with 
directions from the COTP or designated representative. It was also 
requested that temporary buoys be established to mark a transit lane. 
The Coast Guard does not intend to use buoys, however, the COTP's 
designated representative on scene will inform waterway users how to 
proceed while within the security zone.

16. Does this security zone impact First Amendment rights?

    Some commenters argued that the security zone impacts First 
Amendment rights, specifically freedom to assemble and freedom of 
speech. Many commenters felt that the security zone was not promulgated 
to keep USSS protectees secure, but to keep protestors away from the 
Trump National Golf Club. The commenters stated that the Potomac River 
was a public forum and that kayakers had a right to peaceably assemble 
there and petition the Government.
    The Coast Guard agrees that First Amendment considerations must be 
evaluated during the rulemaking process. The Coast Guard believes that 
this zone is narrowly tailored and minimizes intrusion into the rights 
of protestors while providing necessary security measures for USSS 
protectees. As stated in the ``Protest Activities'' section of the 
Regulatory Analysis portion of both the July 2017 IFR and this current 
action, the Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of 
protestors. Protesters are asked to contact 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.

17. Does the security zone result in the taking of private property?

    We received some comments arguing that the security zone violates 
the Fifth Amendment. Specifically, comments argued that the Coast Guard 
was taking private property because the security zone overlaps part of 
Sharpshin Island, which is owned by the Potomac Conservancy. This would 
not amount to a regulatory taking because the Coast Guard's actions did 
not permanently diminish the value of the property, did not physically 
invade the property and did not permanently eliminate the economic 
value of the property. However, this second interim rule shortens the 
area of the security zone, so that the island is not located within the 
security zone.

18. What are the economic impacts on local businesses and waterway 
uses?

    Commenters raised concerns about possible economic impact of the 
security zone on local businesses and waterway users. Commenters stated 
that the many different waterway users contribute significantly to the 
local economy--local retailers, restaurants and river related 
businesses depend on these patrons. Comments also stated that the Coast 
Guard is privileging a private business, the Trump National Golf Club, 
by allowing for their financial gain while closing the river to many 
smaller businesses and organizations that could also make a profit off 
tourists and the public. There was significant concern in many comments 
that without advanced notice of the security zone, paddlers and other 
vessel operators would undergo a financial burden after traveling to 
their planned destination only to find that the river is closed. 
Changing plans last minute would cost time, fuel, and possibly other 
incidentals while groups or individuals

[[Page 10425]]

assess and analyze options and then travel to other kayaking locations. 
Commenters stated several times that there are no other local kayaking 
spots that offer such diverse opportunities for many different levels 
of paddlers. Whitewater race coordinators were also concerned that 
there would be a significant economic impact if a planned event has to 
be cancelled or rescheduled because of activation of the security zone. 
Comments stated that lack of advance notice precludes river-related 
businesses from making alternative arrangements for sailing classes, 
kayak lessons, planned group outings, or major events.
    The Coast Guard views this current security zone rulemaking as 
distinct from other existing or potential protective security 
regulations at other locations. The shortening of the security zone and 
the addition of the transit lane is intended to allow for many of the 
above mentioned river related activities to continue even when the 
security zone is activated. In other words it was designed to minimize 
to the extent possible, the impact on commerce and legitimate waterway 
use. The security zone does not negatively impact public safety. More 
importantly the Coast Guard's establishment of the security zone allows 
enforcing agencies more time to respond to threats and take the lowest 
level of enforcement needed to protect USSS protectees. Ultimately the 
Coast Guard deems the benefits and need for this security zone to 
provide protection the pertinent protectees to exceed the indirect 
impacts on the entities the commenters noted.
    One comment also specified that use of the Trump National Golf Club 
Bedminster in Bedminster, New Jersey, has damaged the local economy, 
because in that situation, hot air balloons and small airports have to 
cancel reservations when the President and other high level government 
officials use the golf course. The Coast Guard views this current 
security zone rulemaking as distinct from other existing or potential 
protective security regulations at other locations or by other 
agencies; economic impacts are considered on a case-by-case basis.
    Another comment stated that the security zone would limit access to 
Camp Calleva's private property. The shortening of the security zone 
and the addition of the transit lane is intended to allow for many of 
the above mentioned river related activities to continue even when the 
security zone is activated. These modifications are intended to reduce 
the economic impact that the security zone will have on river-based 
businesses, local residents, and paddlers coming to this segment of the 
Potomac River.

19. What are the impacts to small entities?

    Many small entities have already been mentioned, but this section 
addresses more specific concerns relating to the security zone's impact 
on them. The Director of Camp Calleva gave detailed comments addressing 
the camp's status as a 501(c)(3) educational non-profit organization 
that provide summer camp, field trips, and other programming for youth 
and adults in the area. The director stated that if the camp could not 
obtain access to the river at Riley's Lock, there would be a daily 
economic impact of $14,000 Monday-Friday for each cancelled day of 
children's camps and $2,800 on Sunday for other classes offered. It was 
also stated that there are many difficulties associated with moving the 
camp's operations, because of the amount of equipment and watercraft. 
Also, retraining the employees for different activities or areas, as 
well as learning new outdoor skills in order to change programming, 
would be difficult and cost time and money. One comment noted that most 
day camps are only 5 days long, so if a child misses one day on the 
water during a paddling camp, they will be missing 20% of what they 
paid for and camp staff would have to fill these days with alternate 
activities. Using the new transit lane, camp operations may continue 
within 250 yards of the Maryland shore when the security zone is 
activated, pending permission from the COTP's designated 
representative. Comments mentioned transportation to Calleva Camp at 
Riley's Lock location from the Virginia side includes a canoe trip from 
the Trump National Golf Club for some attendees and that if the 
security zone goes into effect, children using this mode of 
transportation would have to find another route to camp. This is true. 
Persons intending to travel to Camp Calleva from a canoe that departs 
from Trump National Golf Club will have to commute to camp through 
another means when the security zone is activated. At the time of this 
publication, the Calleva Camp website states that they provide bus 
transportation to camp at Riley's Lock from 17 locations, including one 
in McLean, VA, which is roughly 25 minutes from Trump National Golf 
Club.
    Another small entity that would be effected by the security zone is 
Valley Mill Camp that operates on a lake and 60 acres of forested land 
in Germantown, MD. Valley Mill also offers canoeing and kayaking 
programs on the Potomac River. According to their website, river trips 
leave camp daily and access the Potomac from the Maryland side. Valley 
Mill's paddling programs will be able to use the security zone's 
transit lane pending permission from the COTP's representative. Another 
small entity that commented about the security zone's impact was Swift 
water Rescue Instructors. They state that volunteer instructors access 
the Potomac through either Riley's or Violette's Locks, and cross the 
Potomac just upriver from the Seneca Breaks with their students to 
access the old Patowmack Canal, where there is a historic set of rapids 
ideal for training all levels of paddlers in rescue methods. The 
transit lane and shortened security zone will allow Swift water Rescue 
Operations to continue, even when the security zone is activated, 
pending permission from the COTP's representative.
    Another small entity, sailing instructors, stated that they conduct 
lessons on this segment of the river and that closing the river 
entirely would put them out of business. Using the transit lane will 
allow for sailing lessons to continue across from Trump National Golf 
Club with permission from the COTP's designated representative when the 
security zone is activated.
    Finally, the Program Manager at Riverbend Park, a Fairfax County 
Park Authority Park in Great Falls, VA, commented that they use 
Algonkian Regional Park, on the Virginia side upstream from Trump 
National Golf Club, as a launch site for an 8-mile paddling trip back 
to Riverbend Park. The shortened security zone and transit lane on the 
Maryland side of the river would allow paddlers that enter at Algonkian 
Regional Park to cross the Potomac from the Virginia side when the 
security zone is activated and access the transit lane on the Maryland 
side of the river, pending permission from the COTP's representative. 
Then paddlers could cross back to the Virginia side near Seneca Breaks 
to continue the trip back to Riverbend Park.
    In conclusion, the Coast Guard has reduced the length of the 
security zone on the Potomac River, and added in a transit lane in 
order to accommodate the above small entities and their operations that 
depend heavily on access to the Potomac River.

20. Was there an error in the original coordinates?

    Some comments pointed out that the original coordinates submitted 
for the corners of the security zone were incorrect. The Coast Guard 
agrees that the latitude was erroneously entered as

[[Page 10426]]

degrees West, instead of degrees North. This second interim rule makes 
that correction.

21. Does the Coast Guard have to display firearms?

    One commenter recommended against law enforcement agencies 
displaying firearms as to not alarm the many children that operate in 
this part of the river. The Coast Guard appreciates this comment's 
concern and will operate as agency policy and security needs dictate.

22. What if signs were placed in the river?

    One commenter stated that if structures would be erected on the 
Potomac River pursuant to demarking or providing other information 
about the security zone, then U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should be 
consulted to conduct Section 10 Clean Water Act review. Currently, 
there is no intention of installing fixed structures. If such 
structures are deemed necessary in the future, the Coast Guard would 
follow its processes for establishing aids to navigation.

23. Is the Coast Guard complying with Executive Order 13771?

    One commenter asked which two regulations were being removed to add 
this one. Per Executive Order 13771 of January 30, 2017, ``Reducing 
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs'' agencies should identify 
two regulations to be eliminated for every new one issued. Executive 
Order 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs) 
directs agencies to reduce regulation and control regulatory costs and 
provides that ``for every one new regulation issued, at least two prior 
regulations be identified for elimination, and that the cost of planned 
regulations be prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting 
process.'' The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated 
this rule a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of 
Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, OMB has not reviewed it. Because 
this rule is not a significant regulatory action, this rule is exempt 
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771. See the OMB Memorandum 
titled ``Guidance Implementing Executive Order 13771, titled `Reducing 
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs' '' (April 5, 2017).

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    In the first interim rule, the security zone included all navigable 
waters of the Potomac River, from shoreline to shoreline, within an 
area bounded on the east by a line connecting the following points: 
latitude 39[deg]04'02'' W, longitude 077[deg]19'48'' W, thence south to 
latitude 39[deg]03'39'' W, longitude 077[deg]20'02'' W, and bounded on 
the west by longitude 077[deg]22'06'' W, located between Pond Island 
and Sharpshin Island, in Montgomery County, MD. This second interim 
rule amends the security zone at 33 CFR 165.557 to include all 
navigable waters of the Potomac River, from shoreline to shoreline, 
within an area bounded on the west by a line connecting the following 
points: latitude 39[deg]03'44.7'' N, longitude 077[deg]21'47'' W, 
thence north to latitude 39[deg]04'03'' N, longitude 077[deg]21'47'' W, 
and bounded on the east by a line connecting the following points: 
latitude 39[deg]04'04'' N, longitude 077[deg]19'58'' W, thence south to 
latitude 39[deg]03'41.35'' N, longitude 077[deg]20'05.30'' W. Although 
the length of the security zone is decreased at both the eastern and 
western ends, creating a waterside area for recreational egress and 
access, the width of the security zone is unchanged, remaining from 
shoreline to shoreline. This rule provides additional information about 
an area within the security zone along the Maryland shoreline, 
designated the ``Transit lane,'' including a definition and the 
restrictions that apply within the lane to waterway users. However, 
permission for waterways users to operate within this lane will be 
determined by the COTP, or designated representative. The public can 
learn the status of the security zone via an information release for 
the public via website www.news.uscg.mil/Baltimore/ and a recorded 
message at telephone number (410) 576-2675
    Entry into the security zone is prohibited, unless public use of 
the transit lane is specifically authorized by the COTP Maryland-
National Capital Region or a designated representative. Except for 
public vessels, this rule will require all vessels in the designated 
security zone to immediately depart the security zone. Federal, State, 
and local agencies may assist the Coast Guard in the enforcement of 
this rule. The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the security 
of USSS protectees while at Trump National Golf Club. The COTP 
Maryland-National Capital Region will notify waterway users and the 
boating community of the security zone, via Broadcast Notice to 
Mariners (BNM), an information release at the website: 
www.news.uscg.mil/Baltimore/ and a recorded message at telephone number 
(410) 576-2675.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    Coast Guard developed this interim final rule after considering 
numerous statutes and Executive Orders (E.O.s) related to rulemaking. 
Below Coast Guard summarizes its analyses based on a number of these 
statutes and E.O.s.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and 13563 
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review) 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 (including potential economic, environmental, public 
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive 
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and 
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting 
flexibility. Executive Order 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling 
Regulatory Costs) directs agencies to reduce regulation and control 
regulatory costs and provides that ``for every one new regulation 
issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination, 
and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently managed and 
controlled through a budgeting process.''
    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated this 
rule a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive 
Order 12866. Accordingly, OMB has not reviewed it. Because this rule is 
not a significant regulatory action, this rule is exempt from the 
requirements of Executive Order 13771. This rule is considered to be an 
Executive Order 13771 non-significant regulatory action. See OMB's 
Memorandum titled ``Guidance Implementing Executive Order 13771, titled 
`Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs' '' (April 5, 
2017). A regulatory evaluation follows.
    A combined regulatory evaluation and Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis follows and provides an evaluation of the economic impacts 
associated with this rule. In this interim final rule, USCG revised the 
security zone to include a dedicated transit lane. The public can move 
through the area using the dedicated transit lane during the 
enforcement of the security zone, with permission from the COTP or 
COTP's designated representative as proscribed by the interim final 
rule. This interim final rule also includes changes to the geographic 
boundaries of the security zone from the boundaries in the interim 
final rule of July 10, 2017. The following

[[Page 10427]]

table provides a summary of the rule's costs and qualitative benefits.

                 Table 1--Summary of the Rule's Impacts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Category                              Summary
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Potentially Affected Population...  Operators and attendees of summer
                                     camps; operators of kayak and
                                     watercraft instruction schools;
                                     recreational boaters including
                                     canoeists, kayakers and, stand up
                                     paddle boarders (SUPs); fishermen;
                                     waterfowl hunters; \1\ nonprofit
                                     organizations; exercisers, as well
                                     as federal agencies such as Coast
                                     Guard and the Secret Service. The
                                     rule also may indirectly impact
                                     some federal agencies. State \2\
                                     and local law enforcement and
                                     recreational/park authorities in
                                     the area may have interests.
Costs/Cost Savings................  * Does not impose additional direct
                                     costs on the public or to the USCG.
                                    * Reduces impacts or creates leisure
                                     time savings on entities impacted
                                     by the 2017 IFR.
Unquantified Benefits.............  * Reinforces an established
                                     Presidential Security Zone.
                                    * Helps secure area to meet
                                     objectives of the USSS.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Affected Population
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Based on public comments, USCG has developed this list of 
parties in the potentially affected population; these may be groups 
that are affected either directly or indirectly. Please see comments 
including USCG-2017-0448-0036, USCG-2017-0448-0026, USCG-2017-0448-
0163, USCG-2017-0448-0453, USCG-2017-0448-0481, USCG-2017-0448-0330, 
USCG-2017-0448-0332, USCG-2017-0448-0385, USCG-2017-0448-0335, USCG-
2017-0448-0479 USCG-2017-0448-0537, USCG-2017-0448-0541, USCG-2017-
0448-0579 and USCG-2017-0448-0079.
    \2\ The Potomac River falls in the State of Maryland. Maryland 
law enforcement personnel and vessels (http://dnr.maryland.gov/nrp/Pages/default.aspx) of the Maryland Natural Resources Police (MNRP) 
have participated in past security zone enforcements. A CG officer 
will deploy on a MNRP boat during an enforcement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Data is not collected by USCG on the vessels and individuals that 
use this area of the Potomac River. Based on comments to the Coast 
Guard's original interim final rule (dated July 10, 2017), USCG 
estimates that this rule affects recreational boaters including 
kayakers, personal water crafts (PWCs) operators,\3\ stand up paddle 
boarders (SUPs); persons using the area for exercise activities; 
fishermen; commercial vessel operators; and political protesters. This 
interim final rule impacts the Coast Guard and the U.S. Secret Service 
(USSS) directly; other Federal governmental agencies may be impacted 
indirectly by this rulemaking. No governmental jurisdictions at the 
State, Tribal or municipal level will be impacted directly by this 
interim final rule
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Predominately this includes jet ski users.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exact numbers are not available, but the Coast Guard estimates the 
total size of the population affected by this interim final rule to be 
in the hundreds. USCG attempted to collect further data by using USGS's 
\4\ satellite technology. The technology was not accurate enough to do 
a count of individuals such as swimmers or inner tube users. Likewise, 
the technology was not precise enough to do a count of a vessel as 
small as a kayak or SUP. The comments suggested these counts ranged 
from ``a dozen'' to ``thousands.'' The most often cited of these 
estimates was ``hundreds.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ U.S. Geological Survey maintains a repository of archived 
and live satellite imagery. USCG had contact with U.S. Geological 
Survey's Science Information Services via email in June 2018 on this 
issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    USCG also sought an estimate from its personnel who manage the 
enforcements of the security zone. Data are not collected normally by 
USCG on the number of vessels and individuals that use this area. But, 
USCG onsite personnel estimate of up to six recreational vessels and up 
to 25 kayakers transiting during the enforcement of the security zone.
Costs
    This interim final rule modifies the existing security zone 
established by the IFR, ``Security Zone; Potomac River, Montgomery 
County, MD'' on July 10, 2017 (82 FR 31719). The security zone covers 
waters of the Potomac River next to Trump National Golf Club at Potomac 
Falls, VA, and prevents waterside threats and incidents while persons 
protected by the Secret Service are at the club. The modification due 
to this interim final rule reduces the overall length of the existing 
security zone and formalizes a 250-yard-wide transit lane that provides 
passage for vessels through the zone near the Maryland shoreline with 
permission of the COTP or designated representative. It continues to 
prohibit vessels and people from entering the security zone unless 
specifically exempt under the provisions in this rule or granted 
specific permission from the COTP Maryland-National Capital Region or 
designated representative. This interim final rule also governs 
activities of vessels and persons already in the security zone when 
activated. The modification of this rule will not require any entity to 
take action beyond what was already required under the 2017 interim 
final rule. As a result, this interim final rule does not impose 
additional direct costs on the public or to the USCG. A description of 
the purpose of the rule's provisions follows.
    Section 165.557(a) establishes the definitions to be used to 
understand the provisions of the regulations. These definitions do not 
add direct cost to the public or Government. The definition of vessel 
establishes the applicability of these regulations on a multitude of 
watercraft including but not limited to kayaks, stand up paddleboards 
and inner tubes. Therefore, users of these types of vessels would be 
applicable to the provisions of the interim final rule.
    Section 165.557(b) describes where the security zone is located. 
The location of the security zone does not cause costs to be incurred 
by the public nor the Government. In Sec.  165.557(b), this interim 
final rule establishes where the Potomac River security zone is and, 
thereby, declares that area to be a security zone which is defined by 
the regulations. Actions that are necessitated when a security zone is 
declared are specified in existing regulations. Under 33 CFR 165.7(a), 
when the establishment of these limited access areas occurs, 
notification may be made by marine broadcasts, local notice to 
mariners, local news media, distribution in leaflet form, and on-scene 
oral notice, as well as publication in the Federal Register. These 
requirements are akin to but in addition to the authorization 
requirements specified in this interim final rule; under Sec.  
165.557(c)(1), entry into or remaining in the security zone is 
prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or a designated representative 
in consultation with the USSS when the security zone is being enforced. 
Section 165.557(d) requires that the COTP provide notice of enforcement 
of security zone by Broadcast Notice to Mariners (BNM), information 
release at the website and pre-recorded message at

[[Page 10428]]

telephone number as well as on-scene notice.
    Although this interim final rule does result in actions being taken 
by the Coast Guard and USSS directly it does not result in any new 
costs or burdens. The impact that this interim final rule will have on 
these two federal agencies is considered part of their mission and 
responsibility, and thus part of their current responsibilities to the 
public and other Federal entities.
Benefits
    Upon request by the USSS to close down this section of the river to 
ensure the safety of individuals under USSS protection, USCG created a 
security zone in certain waters of the Potomac River adjacent to Trump 
National Golf Course Club at Potomac Falls, Virginia. This security 
zone is necessary to prevent waterside threats and incidents for events 
held at Trump National Golf Clubhouse when persons protected by the 
USSS are at the club.
Regulatory Alternatives Considered
    Within the agency's consideration, alternatives to the regulatory 
action were considered to determine if any alternative could accomplish 
the stated objectives of applicable statutes and could minimize any 
significant economic impact on small entities. In developing this rule, 
the Coast Guard considered the following alternatives:
    (1) Issue a rulemaking that would not require any vessel to get 
permission from the Coast Guard prior to entering the transit lane, 
with or without changes to the zone's boundaries described in the July 
10, 2017, interim final rule.
    (2) Issue a rulemaking that would not require human-powered vessels 
to get permission from the Coast Guard prior to entering the transit 
lane, with or without changes to the zone's boundaries described in the 
July 10, 2017, interim final rule.
    (3) Keep boundaries as noted in the July 10, 2017, interim final 
rule.
    Alternative 1: Issue a rulemaking that would not require any vessel 
to get permission from the Coast Guard prior to entering the transit 
lane, with or without changes to the zone's boundaries described in the 
July 10, 2017, interim final rule.
    The Coast Guard considered issuing a rulemaking that did not 
require any vessel to get permission from the COTP or the designated 
representative prior to entering the transit lane. But, we rejected 
this option because this approach would undermine the security measures 
this rule intends to provide. This option would allow persons with 
harmful intent immediate access to the Trump National Golf Club 
shoreline while USSS protectees were present. Instead, the Coast Guard 
chose to continue to allow vessels to use the transit lane as 
conditions permit with approval from the COTP or designated 
representative. This helps the Coast Guard manage waterborne security 
risk by maintaining positive control of entry into the zone and keeping 
a minimum stand-off distance from the Virginia shoreline for all 
vessels.
    Alternative 2: Issue a rulemaking that would not require human-
powered vessels to get permission from the Coast Guard prior to 
entering the transit lane, with or without changes to the zone's 
boundaries described in the July 10, 2017, interim final rule.
    The Coast Guard considered amending the security zone to require 
only powered vessels to get permission from the COTP or the designated 
representative prior to entering the transit lane. Under this option 
human-powered vessels such as kayaks, canoes, and paddleboards would 
not need permission from the COTP or designated representative before 
entering the transit lane. We rejected this option because this 
approach would undermine the security measures this rule intends to 
provide. An exemption for paddle craft would allow persons with harmful 
intent immediate access to the Trump National Golf Club shoreline while 
USSS protectees were present. Instead, the Coast Guard will continue 
maintaining a shoreline-to-shoreline security zone activated when USSS 
protectees are present and will continue to allow vessels to use the 
transit lane as conditions permit. This helps the Coast Guard manage 
waterborne security risk by maintaining positive control of entry into 
the zone and keeping a minimum stand-off distance from the Virginia 
shoreline for all vessels.
    Alternative 3: Keep boundaries as noted in the July 10, 2017, 
interim final rule.
    For this alternative USCG considered releasing a rule which would 
use the boundaries as promulgated in the interim final rule of July 10, 
2017. The boundaries of the previous interim final rule are wider than 
the boundaries of this interim final rule. This alternative would 
exclude a provision which was favored by the public \5\ and is part of 
the preferred alternative (e.g., this interim final rule). The 
alternative would continue the status quo from the 2017 interim final 
rule. It also would also have higher costs for the public as the 
opportunity costs of lost leisure time would magnify. This alternative 
does not provide any increased security over the preferred alternative 
of this interim final rule. For these reasons, USCG has chosen not to 
continue the status quo and continue with this alternative.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Commenters (USCG-2017-0448-0059, USCG-2017-0448-0038, USCG-
2017-0448-0008, USCG-2017-0448-0067, USCG-2017-0448-0050, USCG-2017-
0448-0144, USCG-2017-0448-0099, USCG-2017-0448-0104, USCG-2017-0448-
0172, USCG-2017-0448-0183) supported a transit lane; albeit it may 
have not been referred to as such in their comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Impact on Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, we 
considered whether this interim final 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 fewer than 50,000 people.
    As described in the ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' section, the 
Coast Guard expects this interim final rule to result no direct costs 
to any entities, including small entities. It does note that there are 
potential indirect costs from the July 2017 interim final rule, for 
some entities. The affected population for the indirect costs consists 
of private individuals who own recreational vessels or who engage in 
recreational activities in this area of the Potomac River, commercial 
entities and nonprofits which have activities or operate vessels in 
this area of the Potomac and governmental entities. The indirect costs 
are opportunity costs for loss leisure time to access to the restricted 
area of the Potomac River. Since indirect are not considered when 
determining the impacts on small entities for regulatory flexibility 
assessment purposes, this rulemaking will have no significant economic 
impact on any small entities. In actuality this interim final rule 
reduces the impact on entities from the 2017 interim final rule because 
it reduces the overall length of the existing security zone and creates 
a 250-yard-wide transit lane that provides passage for vessels through 
the zone near the Maryland shoreline with permission of the Captain of 
the Port (COTP) or designated representative.
    This interim final rule also indirectly may impact four 
governmental units \6\ in

[[Page 10429]]

two governmental jurisdictions; none are considered by RFA definitions 
to be small governmental jurisdictions. Thus, the compliance with this 
interim final rule does not represent a significant economic impact on 
small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Great Falls National Historic Park and the Chesapeake & Ohio 
Canal National Historic Park of the U.S. National Park Service of 
the U.S. Department of the Interior; Riverbend Park, Seneca Regional 
Park and Algonkian Golf Course of the Fairfax County Virginia Park 
Authority. The State legislators for District 20 of Maryland 
expressed comments about the 2017 interim final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that 
this interim final rule will not have a significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities.

C. Collection of Information

    This 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 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 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 rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, 
please contact 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 rule would not result 
in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule 
elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security 
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 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 
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 rule involves the reduction in size of a security 
zone that prohibits entry on specified waters of the Potomac River 
during frequently occurring heightened security events. It is 
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(b) of 
Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A 
Memorandum for Record for Categorically Excluded Actions supporting 
this determination is available in the docket where indicated under 
ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. 
Protesters are asked to contact 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.

VI. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    Although this interim rule is effective upon publication, we are 
seeking further public comment on it. 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 USCG-2017-0448 for this rulemaking, indicate 
the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, 
and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be 
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate 
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted 
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the 
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal 
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal 
Register (70 FR 15086).
    Documents mentioned in this rule as being available in the docket, 
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's 
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up 
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a 
final rule is published.

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 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:  46 U.S.C. 70034; 46 U.S.C. 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 
6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.1.


0
2. Revise Sec.  165.557 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.557  Security Zone; Potomac River, Montgomery County, MD.

    (a) Definitions. As used in this section:
    Captain of the Port (COTP) means the Commander, U.S. Coast Guard 
Sector Maryland-National Capital Region or any Coast Guard 
commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been authorized by the 
Captain of the Port to act on his or her behalf.
    Designated representative means a Coast Guard commissioned, 
warrant, or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the 
Port to enforce the security zone described in paragraph (b)(1) of this 
section.
    Public vessel has the same meaning as that term is defined under 46 
U.S.C. 2101.
    (b) Location. Coordinates used in this section are based on datum 
NAD 83.
    (1) Security zone. The following area is a security zone: all 
navigable waters of the Potomac River, from shoreline to shoreline, 
within an area bounded on the west by a line connecting the following 
points: latitude 39[deg]03'44.7'' N, longitude 077[deg]21'47'' W, 
thence north to latitude 39[deg]04'03'' N, longitude

[[Page 10430]]

077[deg]21'47'' W, and bounded on the east by a line connecting the 
following points: latitude 39[deg]04'04'' N, longitude 077[deg]19'58'' 
W, thence south to latitude 39[deg]03'41.35'' N, longitude 
077[deg]20'05.30'' W.
    (2) Transit lane. All waters within the Potomac River, contiguous 
with the Maryland shoreline and extending out into the Potomac River 
approximately 250 yards, within an area bounded by a line connecting 
the following points: beginning at the Maryland shoreline at latitude 
39[deg]04'03'' N, longitude 077[deg]21'47'' W, thence south to latitude 
39[deg]03'55.3'' N, longitude 077[deg]21'47'' W, thence east to 
latitude 39[deg]03'56.8'' N, longitude 077[deg]20'00.3'' W, thence 
north to the Maryland shoreline at latitude 39[deg]04'04'' N, longitude 
077[deg]19'58'' W, thence back along the shoreline to the originating 
point.
    (c) Regulations. The general security zone regulations found in 
Sec.  165.33 apply to the security zone created by this section.
    (1) Except for public vessels, entry into or remaining in the 
security zone described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section is 
prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or designated representative 
when the aforementioned security zone is being enforced. At the start 
of each enforcement, all persons and vessels within the security zone 
must depart the zone immediately or obtain authorization from the COTP 
or designated representative to remain within the zone. All vessels 
authorized to remain in the zone shall proceed as directed by the COTP 
or designated representative.
    (2) Persons and vessel operators who intend to enter or transit the 
security zone while the zone is being enforced must obtain 
authorization from the COTP or designated representative. Access to the 
zone will be determined by the COTP or designated representative on a 
case-by-case basis when the zone is enforced. Persons and vessel 
operators requesting permission to enter or transit the security zone 
may contact the COTP or designated representative at telephone number 
410-576-2675, on marine band radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz), or by 
visually or verbally hailing the on-scene law enforcement vessel 
enforcing the zone. On-scene Coast Guard personnel enforcing this 
section can be contacted on marine band radio, VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 
MHz). The operator of a vessel shall proceed as directed upon being 
hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel, or other Federal, State, or local 
law enforcement agency vessel, by siren, radio, flashing light, or 
other means. When authorized by the COTP or designated representative 
to enter the security zone all persons and vessels must comply with the 
instructions of the COTP or designated representative and proceed at 
the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course while within the 
security zone.
    (3) The transit lane, described in paragraph (b)(2) of this 
section, is the only part of the security zone through which persons 
and vessels may travel. Before entering the transit lane, persons or 
vessels must have authorization as described in paragraph (c)(2) of 
this section. All persons and vessels shall operate at bare steerage or 
no-wake speed while transiting through the lane, and must not loiter, 
stop, or anchor, unless authorized or otherwise instructed by the COTP 
or a designated representative.
    (4) The U.S. Coast Guard may secure the entire security zone, 
including transit lane, if deemed necessary to address security threats 
or concerns.
    (5) The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted by Federal, State, and 
local law enforcement agencies in the patrol and enforcement of the 
security zone described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
    (d) Enforcement. The Coast Guard activates the security zone when 
requested by the U.S. Secret Service for the protection of individuals 
who qualify for protection under 18 U.S.C 3056(a). The COTP will 
provide the public with notice of enforcement of security zone by 
Broadcast Notice to Mariners (BNM), information release at the website: 
www.news.uscg.mil/Baltimore/ and via a recorded message at telephone 
number (410) 576-2675 as well as on-scene notice by designated 
representative or other appropriate means in accordance with Sec.  
165.7.

    Dated: March 18, 2019.
Joseph B. Loring,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Maryland-National 
Capital Region.
[FR Doc. 2019-05407 Filed 3-20-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


