Safety Zone, Kenosha Harbor, Kenosha, WI, 20089-20092 [E7-7628]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 77 / Monday, April 23, 2007 / Proposed Rules Indian Tribal Governments This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Energy Effects We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ‘‘significant energy action’’ under that order because it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS Technical Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(g), of the VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:49 Apr 20, 2007 Jkt 211001 Instruction, from further environmental documentation. This rule establishes safety zones which have duration of no more than three hours each. A final ‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’ and a final ‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’ will be available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, Security measures, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 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. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6 and 160.5; Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 20089 (i) Location. All water of the Columbia River forming a 800 foot radius from the land launching point: 45°22′21″ N, 122°36′34″ W. (ii) Enforcement Period. This section is enforced annually on July fourth from 8:30 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. (PDT). (b) * * * (2) Designated representative means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers or other officers operating Coast Guard vessel and a Federal, State, and local officers designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Portland (COTP) in the enforcement of the safety zone. * * * * * Dated: March 20, 2007. Patrick G. Gerrity, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Portland, OR. [FR Doc. E7–7634 Filed 4–20–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–15–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 2. Amend § 165.1315 by adding paragraphs (a)(15) through (18) and (b)(2) to read as follows. Coast Guard § 165.1315 Safety Zones: Fireworks displays in the Captain of the Port Portland Zone. [CGD09–07–013] (a) * * * (15) Hillman 4th of July Fireworks Display, Vancouver WA: (i) Location. All water of the Columbia River forming a 600 foot radius from the land launching point of: 45°35′46″ N, 122°32′22″ W. (ii) Enforcement Period. This section is enforced annually on July fourth from approximately 8:30 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. (PDT). (16) East County 4th of July Fireworks Gresham, OR (i) Location. All water of the Columbia River forming a 600 foot radius from the land launching point: 45°33′ 33″ N, 122°27′03″ W in the vicinity of Blue Lake Park. (ii) Enforcement Period. This section is enforced annually on July fourth from 8:30 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. (PDT). (17) Port of Cascade Locks July 4th Display, Cascade Locks OR. (i) Location. All water of the Columbia River forming a 600 foot radius from the land launching point: 45°40′16″ N 121°53′38″ W the North point of Thunder Island. (ii) Enforcement Period. This section is enforced annually on July fourth from 8:30 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. (PDT). (18) Gladstone 4th of July Celebration, Gladstone, OR Safety Zone, Kenosha Harbor, Kenosha, WI PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 33 CFR Part 165 RIN 1625–AA00 Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone near Kenosha Harbor, Kenosha, Wisconsin. This zone is intended to control the movement of vessels on portions of Lake Michigan during the Spill Of National Significance (SONS) exercise on June 19 and 20, 2007. This zone is necessary to protect the public from the hazards associated with ships and boats deploying oil containment equipment. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before May 8, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander, Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan (spw), 2420 South Lincoln Memorial Drive, Milwaukee, WI 53207. The Sector Lake Michigan Prevention Department maintains the public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 20090 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 77 / Monday, April 23, 2007 / Proposed Rules the Sector Lake Michigan Prevention Department between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CWO Brad Hinken, Prevention Department, Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan, Milwaukee, WI at (414) 747– 7154. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Request for Comments We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking [CGD09–07–013], indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them. pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS Public Meeting We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a request for a meeting by writing to the Sector Lake Michigan Prevention Department at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register. Background and Purpose This temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of vessels and people from hazards associated with numerous vessels deploying oil containment boom and conducting diving operations. Based on the experiences in other Captain of the Port zones, the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan has determined numerous vessels engaged in the deployment of oil containment boom in close proximity to watercraft pose significant risk to public safety and property. The likely combination of large numbers of recreation vessels and congested waterways could result in serious injuries or fatalities. Establishing a safety zone to control vessel movement around the location of the SONS exercise will help ensure the safety of persons and property at these events and help minimize the associated risks. The comment period for this rule is only 15 days because the request for the VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:49 Apr 20, 2007 Jkt 211001 safety zone was not received in time to allow for a longer period. Delaying this rule would be contrary to the public interest of ensuring the safety of vessels during this event and immediate action is necessary to prevent possible loss of life or property. Discussion of Proposed Rule A temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of vessels during the deployment and recovery of oil containment boom in conjunction with the SONS exercise. The zone will be enforced between 8 a.m. (local) and 6 p.m. (local) on June 19 and 20, 2007. The safety zone for the SONS exercise will encompass all waters of Lake Michigan 2,300 yards north of Kenosha Breakwater Light (Lightlist number 20430) and from the shoreline to 1,500 yards east Kenosha Breakwater Light (Lightlist number 20430) and bounded by a line with of point origin at 42°36′29″ N, 087°47′17″ W; then west to 42°36′29″ N, 087°49′07″ W; then south along the shoreline to 42°35′19″ N, 087°48′41″ W; then east, northeast to 42°35′24″ N, 087°47′17″ W; then north to the point of origin (NAD 83). All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the designated onscene representative. Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his designated onscene representative. The Captain of the Port or his designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16. Regulatory Evaluation This proposed 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. We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. The Coast Guard will only use this safety zone for 10 hours a day on the two days specified. This safety zone has been designed to allow vessels to transit unrestricted to portions of the harbor not affected by the zone. The Captain of the Port will allow vessel to enter and depart Kenosha Harbor. The Coast Guard expects insignificant adverse impact to mariners from the activation of this zone. PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners of vessels intending to transits or anchor in a portion of Lake Michigan between 8 p.m. (local) and 6 p.m. (local) on June 19, 2007 and June 20, 2007. The safety zone would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This rule would be in effect for only 20 hours. Vessel traffic can safely pass around the safety zone and enter and depart Kenosha Harbor. If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact CWO Brad Hinken, Prevention Department, Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan, Milwaukee, WI at (414) 747–7154. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. Collection of Information This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 77 / Monday, April 23, 2007 / Proposed Rules 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 proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This proposed rule would not effect the 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 proposed 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. pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS Protection of Children We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments The Coast Guard recognizes the treaty rights of Native American Tribes. Moreover, the Coast Guard is committed to working with Tribal Governments to implement local policies and to mitigate tribal concerns. We have determined that this safety zone and fishing rights protection need not be incompatible. We have also determined that this proposed Rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:49 Apr 20, 2007 Jkt 211001 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. Nevertheless, Indian Tribes that have questions concerning the provisions of this Proposed Rule or options for compliance are encourage to contact the point of contact listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Energy Effects We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ‘‘significant energy action’’ under that order because it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. Technical Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 20091 exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, we believe that this rule should be categorically excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. This proposed rule establishes a regulated navigation area and as such is covered by this paragraph. A preliminary ‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’ is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. Comments on this section will be considered before we make the final decision on whether this rule should be categorically excluded from further environmental review. 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 proposes to amend 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. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add § 165.T09–013 to read as follows: § 165.T09–013 Safety Zone, Kenosha Harbor, Kenosha, WI. (a) Location. The following area is a temporary safety zone: all waters of Lake Michigan 2,300 yards north of Kenosha Breakwater Light (Lightlist number 20430) and from the shoreline to 1,500 yards east Kenosha Breakwater Light (Lightlist number 20430) and bounded by a line with of point origin at 42°36′29″ N, 087°47′17″ W; then west to 42°36′29″ N, 087°49′07″ W; then south along the shoreline to 42°35′19″ N, 087°48′41″ W; then east, northeast to 42°35′24″ N, 087°47′17″ W; then north to the point of origin (NAD 83). (b) Effective period. This regulation is effective from 8 a.m. (local) on June 19, 2007 to 6 p.m. (local) on June 20, 2007. (c) Enforcement period. This regulation will be enforced from 8 a.m. (local) to 6 p.m. (local) on June 19, 2007 and from 8 a.m. (local) to 6 p.m. (local) on June 20, 2007. (d) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in section 165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 20092 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 77 / Monday, April 23, 2007 / Proposed Rules Captain of the Port Lake Michigan, or his designated on-scene representative. (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may be permitted by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his designated onscene representative. (3) The ‘‘on-scene representative’’ of the Captain of the Port is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been designated by the Captain of the Port to act on his behalf. The on-scene representative of the Captain of the Port will be aboard either a Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel. The Captain of the Port or his designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16. (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety zone shall contact the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his on-scene representative to obtain permission to do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his on-scene representative. Dated: April 3, 2007. Bruce C. Jones, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Lake Michigan. [FR Doc. E7–7628 Filed 4–20–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–15–P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 48 CFR Parts 2, 3, and 52 [FAR Case 2006–007; Docket 2007–0001; Sequence 1; FAR Case 2006–007, Contractor Code of Ethics and Business Conduct] RIN 9000–AK67 Federal Acquisition Regulation; FAR Case 2006–0007, Contractor Code of Ethics and Business Conduct; Reopening of Comment Period Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). ACTION: Proposed rule; Reopening of comment period. pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS AGENCIES: SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense Acquisition Regulations Council (Councils) are proposing to amend the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:49 Apr 20, 2007 Jkt 211001 address Contractor Code of Ethics and Business Conduct and the display of Federal agency Office of the Inspector General (OIG) Fraud Hotline Poster. The comment period is extended an additional 30 days to provide additional time for interested parties to review the proposed FAR changes. Dated: April 17, 2007 Al Matera, Acting Director,Acquisition Policy Division. [FR Doc. 07–1985 Filed 4–20–07; 8:45 am] Interested parties should submit comments in writing on or before May 23, 2007 to be considered in the formulation of a proposed rule. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION DATES: Submit comments identified by FAR case 2006–007 by any of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Search for any document by first selecting the proper document types and selecting ‘‘Federal Acquisition Regulation’’ as the agency of choice. At the ‘‘Keyword’’ prompt, type in the FAR case number (for example, FAR Case 2006–007) and click on the ‘‘Submit’’ button. Please include any personal and/or business information inside the document.You may also search for any document by clicking on the ‘‘Advanced search/ document search’’ tab at the top of the screen, selecting from the agency field ‘‘Federal Acquisition Regulation’’, and typing the FAR case number in the keyword field. Select the ‘‘Submit’’ button. • Fax: 202–501–4067. • Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat (VIR), 1800 F Street, NW., Room 4035, ATTN: Laurieann Duarte, Washington, DC 20405. Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite FAR case 2006–007 in all correspondence related to this case. All comments received will be posted without change to http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential information provided. ADDRESSES: Mr. Ernest Woodson, Procurement Analyst, at (202) 501–3775 for clarification of content. For information pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the FAR Secretariat at (202) 501–4755. Please cite FAR case 2006–007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Councils published a proposed rule in the Federal Register at 72 FR 7588, February 16, 2007. To allow additional time for interested parties to review the proposed FAR changes, the comment period is extended for an additional 30– days. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 BILLING CODE 6820–EP–S DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 48 CFR Parts 2, 4, 12, 14, 15, 16, 19, 27, 30, 31, 32, 42, 44, 49, and 52 [FAR Case 2005–036; Docket 2007-001, Sequence 7] RIN: 9000–AK74 Federal Acquisition Regulation; FAR Case 2005–036, Definition of Cost or Pricing Data Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCIES: SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense Acquisition Regulations Council (Councils) are proposing to amend the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to revise the definition of ‘‘cost or pricing data’’; change the term ‘‘information other than cost or pricing data’’ to ‘‘data other than certified cost or pricing data’’; add a definition of ‘‘certified cost or pricing data’’ to make the terms and definitions consistent with 10 U.S.C. 2306a and 41 U.S.C. 254b and more understandable to the general reader; change terminology throughout the FAR; and clarify the need to obtain data other than certified cost or pricing data when there is no other means to determine fair and reasonable pricing during price analysis. DATES: Interested parties should submit written comments to the FAR Secretariat on or before June 22, 2007 to be considered in the formulation of a final rule. ADDRESSES: Submit comments identified by FAR case 2005–036 by any of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Search for any document by first selecting the proper document types and selecting ‘‘Federal Acquisition Regulation’’ as the agency of choice. At the ‘‘Keyword’’ prompt, type in FAR Case number Case 2005– 036 and click on the ‘‘Submit’’ button. Please include any personal and/or E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 77 (Monday, April 23, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20089-20092]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-7628]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD09-07-013]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone, Kenosha Harbor, Kenosha, WI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone 
near Kenosha Harbor, Kenosha, Wisconsin. This zone is intended to 
control the movement of vessels on portions of Lake Michigan during the 
Spill Of National Significance (SONS) exercise on June 19 and 20, 2007. 
This zone is necessary to protect the public from the hazards 
associated with ships and boats deploying oil containment equipment.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before May 8, 2007.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander, 
Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan (spw), 2420 South Lincoln Memorial 
Drive, Milwaukee, WI 53207. The Sector Lake Michigan Prevention 
Department maintains the public docket for this rulemaking. Comments 
and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated 
in this preamble as being available in the docket, will become part of 
this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at

[[Page 20090]]

the Sector Lake Michigan Prevention Department between 8 a.m. and 3 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CWO Brad Hinken, Prevention 
Department, Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan, Milwaukee, WI at (414) 
747-7154.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name 
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking [CGD09-07-
013], indicate the specific section of this document to which each 
comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit 
all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than 
8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know 
they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or 
envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during 
the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them.

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a 
request for a meeting by writing to the Sector Lake Michigan Prevention 
Department at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be 
beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will 
hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal 
Register.

Background and Purpose

    This temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of 
vessels and people from hazards associated with numerous vessels 
deploying oil containment boom and conducting diving operations. Based 
on the experiences in other Captain of the Port zones, the Captain of 
the Port Lake Michigan has determined numerous vessels engaged in the 
deployment of oil containment boom in close proximity to watercraft 
pose significant risk to public safety and property. The likely 
combination of large numbers of recreation vessels and congested 
waterways could result in serious injuries or fatalities. Establishing 
a safety zone to control vessel movement around the location of the 
SONS exercise will help ensure the safety of persons and property at 
these events and help minimize the associated risks.
    The comment period for this rule is only 15 days because the 
request for the safety zone was not received in time to allow for a 
longer period. Delaying this rule would be contrary to the public 
interest of ensuring the safety of vessels during this event and 
immediate action is necessary to prevent possible loss of life or 
property.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    A temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of 
vessels during the deployment and recovery of oil containment boom in 
conjunction with the SONS exercise. The zone will be enforced between 8 
a.m. (local) and 6 p.m. (local) on June 19 and 20, 2007.
    The safety zone for the SONS exercise will encompass all waters of 
Lake Michigan 2,300 yards north of Kenosha Breakwater Light (Lightlist 
number 20430) and from the shoreline to 1,500 yards east Kenosha 
Breakwater Light (Lightlist number 20430) and bounded by a line with of 
point origin at 42[deg]36'29'' N, 087[deg]47'17'' W; then west to 
42[deg]36'29'' N, 087[deg]49'07'' W; then south along the shoreline to 
42[deg]35'19'' N, 087[deg]48'41'' W; then east, northeast to 
42[deg]35'24'' N, 087[deg]47'17'' W; then north to the point of origin 
(NAD 83).
    All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the 
Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the designated on-scene 
representative. Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety 
zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Lake 
Michigan or his designated on-scene representative. The Captain of the 
Port or his designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF 
Channel 16.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This proposed 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.
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so 
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
    The Coast Guard will only use this safety zone for 10 hours a day 
on the two days specified. This safety zone has been designed to allow 
vessels to transit unrestricted to portions of the harbor not affected 
by the zone. The Captain of the Port will allow vessel to enter and 
depart Kenosha Harbor. The Coast Guard expects insignificant adverse 
impact to mariners from the activation of this zone.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small 
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations 
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their 
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 
50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed 
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities.
    This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of 
which might be small entities: The owners of vessels intending to 
transits or anchor in a portion of Lake Michigan between 8 p.m. (local) 
and 6 p.m. (local) on June 19, 2007 and June 20, 2007. The safety zone 
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities for the following reasons. This rule would be in effect 
for only 20 hours. Vessel traffic can safely pass around the safety 
zone and enter and depart Kenosha Harbor.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have 
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see 
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what 
degree this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small 
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better 
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the 
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or 
options for compliance, please contact CWO Brad Hinken, Prevention 
Department, Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan, Milwaukee, WI at (414) 
747-7154. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities 
that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of 
the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

[[Page 20091]]

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 proposed rule 
under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications 
for federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary 
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may 
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any 
one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an 
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this 
preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not effect the 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 proposed 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 proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, 
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not 
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might 
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    The Coast Guard recognizes the treaty rights of Native American 
Tribes. Moreover, the Coast Guard is committed to working with Tribal 
Governments to implement local policies and to mitigate tribal 
concerns. We have determined that this safety zone and fishing rights 
protection need not be incompatible. We have also determined that this 
proposed 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. Nevertheless, Indian 
Tribes that have questions concerning the provisions of this Proposed 
Rule or options for compliance are encourage to contact the point of 
contact listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, 
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant 
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to 
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use 
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy 
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects 
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards 
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, 
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why 
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or 
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management 
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus 
standards bodies.
    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we 
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction 
M16475.lD and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 
5100.1, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have 
made a preliminary determination that there are no factors in this case 
that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 
of the Instruction. Therefore, we believe that this rule should be 
categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g) of the 
Instruction, from further environmental documentation. This proposed 
rule establishes a regulated navigation area and as such is covered by 
this paragraph.
    A preliminary ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' is available in 
the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. Comments on this section 
will be considered before we make the final decision on whether this 
rule should be categorically excluded from further environmental 
review.

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 proposes 
to amend 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. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. 
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.1.

    2. Add Sec.  165.T09-013 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.T09-013  Safety Zone, Kenosha Harbor, Kenosha, WI.

    (a) Location. The following area is a temporary safety zone: all 
waters of Lake Michigan 2,300 yards north of Kenosha Breakwater Light 
(Lightlist number 20430) and from the shoreline to 1,500 yards east 
Kenosha Breakwater Light (Lightlist number 20430) and bounded by a line 
with of point origin at 42[deg]36'29'' N, 087[deg]47'17'' W; then west 
to 42[deg]36'29'' N, 087[deg]49'07'' W; then south along the shoreline 
to 42[deg]35'19'' N, 087[deg]48'41'' W; then east, northeast to 
42[deg]35'24'' N, 087[deg]47'17'' W; then north to the point of origin 
(NAD 83).
    (b) Effective period. This regulation is effective from 8 a.m. 
(local) on June 19, 2007 to 6 p.m. (local) on June 20, 2007.
    (c) Enforcement period. This regulation will be enforced from 8 
a.m. (local) to 6 p.m. (local) on June 19, 2007 and from 8 a.m. (local) 
to 6 p.m. (local) on June 20, 2007.
    (d) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in 
section 165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring 
within this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the

[[Page 20092]]

Captain of the Port Lake Michigan, or his designated on-scene 
representative.
    (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may 
be permitted by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his designated 
on-scene representative.
    (3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the Captain of the Port is 
any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been 
designated by the Captain of the Port to act on his behalf. The on-
scene representative of the Captain of the Port will be aboard either a 
Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel. The Captain of the Port or 
his designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 
16.
    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety 
zone shall contact the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his on-
scene representative to obtain permission to do so. Vessel operators 
given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply 
with all directions given to them by the Captain of the Port Lake 
Michigan or his on-scene representative.

    Dated: April 3, 2007.
Bruce C. Jones,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Lake Michigan.
 [FR Doc. E7-7628 Filed 4-20-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P