Ports and waterways safety; regulated navigation areas, safety zones, security zones, etc.: Milwaukee Harbor, WI,
[Federal Register: May 4, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 86)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 25226-25228]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr04my07-14]
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
[CGD09-07-008]
RIN 1625-AA00
Safety Zone; Milwaukee Harbor, Milwaukee, WI
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a safety Zone in Milwaukee Harbor near Lakeshore State Park. This zone is intended to restrict vessels from portions of Milwaukee Harbor during fireworks displays. This zone is necessary to protect the public from the hazards associated with fireworks displays.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before June 4, 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 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- 008], 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
There are approximately twenty fireworks displays launched annually at Lakeshore State Park in Milwaukee, WI. The fireworks displays are sponsored festivals located at Henry W. Maier Festival Park. The fireworks displays impact the navigable waters of Milwaukee Harbor and pose a hazard to vessels and people. The purpose of this proposed rule it to establish a limited access area around the fireworks launch site to protect vessels and people from the hazards associated with fireworks displays. Such hazards include the explosive danger of fireworks and debris falling into the water that may cause death or serious bodily harm.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of spectators and vessels during the setup, loading, and launching of fireworks displays at Lakeshore State Park in Milwaukee, WI. in conjunction with festivals at Henry W. Maier Festival Park. The proposed safety zone encompasses the waters of Lake Michigan within Milwaukee Harbor adjacent to the Lakeshore State Park and Henry W. Maier Festival Park. The proposed safety zone will be enforced only immediately before and during fireworks displays and only
[[Page 25227]]
upon notice by the Captain of the Port. If the event concludes prior to the scheduled termination time, the Coast Guard will cease enforcement of the safety zone and will announce that fact via Broadcast Notice to Mariners or Local notice to Mariners.
The safety zone will encompass the waters of Lake Michigan within Milwaukee Harbor including the Harbor Island Lagoon enclosed by a line connecting the following points: beginning at 43[deg]02'00'' N, 087[deg]53'53'' W; then south to 43[deg]01'44'' N, 087[deg]53'53'' W; then east to 43[deg]01'44'' N, 087[deg]53'25'' W; then north to 43[deg]02'00'' N, 087[deg]53'53'' W; then west to the point of origin.
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's use of this safety zone will be periodic in nature and will likely not exceed twenty, three-hour events, per year. This safety zone has been designed to allow vessels to transit unrestricted to portions of the harbor not affected by the zone. 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 Milwaukee Harbor during the dates and times the safety zone will be enforced. 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 3 hours each time the safety zone is implemented. Vessel traffic can safely pass around the safety zone.
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).
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 proposed 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
[[Page 25228]]
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 safety zone and as such is covered by this paragraph.
A preliminary ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and ``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' are 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 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
-
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.
-
Add Sec. 165.935 to read as follows:
Sec. 165.935 Safety Zone, Milwaukee Harbor, Milwaukee WI.
(a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: the waters of Lake Michigan within Milwaukee Harbor including the Harbor Island Lagoon enclosed by a line connecting the following points: Beginning at 43[deg]02'00'' N, 087[deg]53'53'' W; then south to 43[deg]01'44'' N, 087[deg]53'53'' W; then east to 43[deg]01'44'' N, 087[deg]53'25'' W; then north to 43[deg]02'00'' N, 087[deg]53'53'' W; then west to the point of origin.
(b) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section:
(1) Designated representative means any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer designated by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan to monitor this safety zone, permit entry into this zone, give legally enforceable orders to persons or vessels within this zones and take other actions authorized by the Captain of the Port.
(2) Public vessel means vessels owned, chartered, or operated by the United States, or by a State or political subdivision thereof.
(c) Regulations. (1) The general regulations in 33 CFR 165.23 apply.
(2) All persons and vessels must comply with the instructions of the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or a designated representative. Upon being hailed by the U.S. Coast Guard by siren, radio, flashing light or other means, the operator of a vessel shall proceed as directed.
(3) All vessels must obtain permission from the Captain of the Port or a designated representative to enter, move within or exit the safety zone established in this section when this safety zone is enforced. Vessels and persons granted permission to enter the safety zone shall obey all lawful orders or directions of the Captain of the Port or a designated representative. While within a safety zone, all vessels shall operate at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course.
(d) Suspension of Enforcement. If the event concludes earlier than scheduled, the Captain of the Port or a designated representative will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners notifying the public when enforcement of the safety zone established by this section is suspended.
(e) Exemption. Public vessels as defined in paragraph (b) of this section are exempt from the requirements in this section.
(f) Waiver. For any vessel, the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or a designated representative may waive any of the requirements of this section, upon finding that operational conditions or other circumstances are such that application of this section is unnecessary or impractical for the purposes of safety or environmental safety.
Dated: March 12, 2007. Bruce C. Jones, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan. [FR Doc. E7-8614 Filed 5-3-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
