environmental purposes, access is limited to authorized persons, vehicles, or vessels.”9 They may be stationary or encompass a moving vessel.10 Largely the same, security zones are prescribed for different purposes. For example, a safety zone might be used to keep spectators from get- ting too close to a fireworks display, while a security zone might be used to prevent nefarious actors from get- ting too close to a high interest vessel or person.11 While these zones are great tools, domestic and international law has limited their establishment to the waters of the territorial seas,12 meaning they can only be established within 12 miles of shore.13,14 That presented a problem with recovery operations like that of the Demo-2 because the recovery site was outside that boundary line. Luckily, Congress was quick to act. Within months of the Demo-2 recovery, the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act of 2021 was passed, and the Coast Guard was granted authority to begin the aforementioned pilot program, and test out its newly granted authorities. However, the statutory language, domestic precedent, and established international law left significant room for interpretation. If the Coast Guard moved forward with these zones, what other equities could be implicated? Ultimately, the relevant Coast Guard entities met in September 2021 for the inaugural Coast Guard Judge Advocate General Space Conclave, a meeting covering a wide array of legal and space-related issues, where this was a featured topic of conversation. Within a few weeks of that meeting, consensus was reached that the Coast Guard had the authority to enforce these safety zones on U.S. vessels in the EEZ, but not on foreign vessels. The Coast Guard could, however, still warn foreign vessels to stay away from the planned recovery sites during recov- ery operations. With this knowledge in mind, staff at the Seventh and Eighth Coast Guard Districts and the Office of Regulations and Administrative Law (CG-LRA) were on a tight deadline to publish a safety zone regulation. The Crew-3 mission launched on November 11, 2021, and was expected to re-enter in April 2022.15 While the Coast Guard publishes hundreds of safety and security zone regulations in the Federal Register every year, this one was different. Not only would the zones be very large, but they would be in the EEZ, and the Coast Guard may not know which landing site would be used until a few days before the recovery operation. All of those considerations, in addition to the previously discussed issues, meant this would be a highly novel rulemaking. Over the course of the next few months, Seventh District and CG-LRA considered several drafts. Both parties knew it was critical to balance the Coast Guard’s operational constraints with the safety concerns of NASA and SpaceX. However, they also needed to consider the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), the Paperwork Reduction Act, and other relevant laws that are implicated in the Coast Guard rulemaking process. In its initial iteration, the Coast Guard determined the best course of action was to publish a Temporary Final Rule (TFR) without notice and comment, so there would be a safety zone in place for the Crew-3 and Axiom-1 mission recoveries. 16 Based on the authorities held by the district commanders, two rules were published; one for the Seventh District and one for the Eighth District. These rules created seven safety zones that encompassed NASA and SpaceX pre-approved recovery sites. They were published in late April and early May 2022, and were in effect until May 15, 2022.17,18 Naming Space Missions NASA and SpaceX name their missions after the program and the number of the mission. For instance, the moon landing was the 11th mission of the Apollo program, so it was called Apollo­11. This naming convention is still used today. All of the missions discussed here employed the SpaceX Dragon capsule, but they are part of different programs. For the purposes of the missions discussed here, the Demo program was to demonstrate SpaceX was capable of safely taking crew to the International Space Station, the Crew missions are part of the Commercial Crew Program, the CRS missions are part of the Commercial Resupply Services Program, and the Ax missions are contracted by the commercial space operator Axiom. —NASA After the recovery of the Axiom-1 capsule, the Coast Guard had some time to contemplate its next move. The CRS-25 mission was expected to splash down some- time in late summer. 19 Additionally, Crew-4 launched in the same period as the previous TFR, but recovery was not expected until fall 2022. 20 The Coast Guard needed to leverage the lessons learned from the previ- ous rulemaking and ensure there were still safety zones in place for these recovery missions. A second Space Conclave was convened in May 2022 to help iron out the details. The Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which allowed it to meet its obliga- tions under the APA and receive feedback from the pub- lic on the original rule. The Coast Guard also proposed for the rule to last for a much longer period, so it signifi- cantly narrowed the scope of the safety zones. Under the initial rule, all five landing sites were considered safety zones for the entire period the regulation was in effect.21 Summer 2023 Proceedings 43