[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 201 (Friday, October 17, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 59752-59754]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-26305]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD09-03-277]
RIN 2115-AA00


Security Zone; Captain of the Port Milwaukee Zone, Lake Michigan

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to revise the security zone size of 
the Kewanuee Nuclear Power Plant on Lake Michigan. This security zone 
is necessary to protect the nuclear power plant from possible sabotage 
or other subversive acts, accidents, or possible acts of terrorism. The 
zone is intended to restrict vessel traffic from a portion of Lake 
Michigan.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or 
before December 16, 2003.

[[Page 59753]]


ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to U.S. Coast 
Guard Marine Safety Office (MSO) Milwaukee, 2420 South Lincoln Memorial 
Drive, Milwaukee, WI 53207. MSO Milwaukee 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 MSO Milwaukee between 7 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MSTC Dave McClintock, MSO Milwaukee, 
at 1 (414) 747-7155.

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 (CGD09-03-
277), 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 U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety 
Office Milwaukee 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

    On September 11, 2001, the United States was the target of 
coordinated attacks by international terrorists resulting in 
catastrophic loss of life, the destruction of the World Trade Center, 
and significant damage to the Pentagon. Current events indicate that 
significant threats of this type of attack still exist. National 
security and intelligence officials warn that future terrorists attacks 
are likely. The Coast Guard is responding by, amongst many other 
things, enacting security zones around critical infrastructure.
    This regulation proposes to revise the size of the security zone 
for the Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant. This security zone is necessary 
to protect the public, facilities, and the surrounding area from 
possible sabotage or other subversive acts. All persons other than 
those approved by the Captain of the Port Milwaukee, or his on-scene 
representative, are prohibited from entering or moving within the zone. 
The Captain of the Port Milwaukee may be contacted via VHF Channel 16 
for further instructions to request permission before transiting 
through the restricted area. The Captain of the Port Milwaukee's on-
scene representative would be the patrol commander.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    On July 31, 2002, the Coast Guard created a permanent security zone 
around the Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant (67 FR 49578, July 31, 2002). 
This rulemaking proposes to change the location of that security zone 
to the following: All navigable waters of Western Lake Michigan 
encompassed by a line commencing from a point on the shoreline at 
44[deg]20.715' N, 087[deg]32.080' W; then easterly to 44[deg]20.720' N, 
087[deg]31.630' W; then southerly to 44[deg]20.480' N, 087[deg]31.630' 
W; then westerly to 44[deg]20.480' N, 087[deg]31.970' W; then northerly 
following the shoreline back to the point of origin. These coordinates 
are based upon North American Datum 1983 (NAD 83).

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. It is not ``significant'' 
under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of 
Homeland Security (DHS).
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so 
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies 
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. Since this security zone would 
not be located near commercial vessel shipping lanes, there would be no 
impact on commercial vessel traffic.

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 security zone would not have a significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This 
proposed rule would not obstruct the regular flow of traffic and would 
allow vessel traffic to pass around the security zone.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed 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 proposed rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 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 
proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, or 
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its 
provisions or options for compliance, please contact the office listed 
in ADDRESSES in this preamble.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal 
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal 
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory 
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory 
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and 
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to 
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR 
(1-888-734-3247).

Collection of Information

    This 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

[[Page 59754]]

13132, 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 affect a taking of private property or 
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, 
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected 
Property Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This 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

    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. It has not been designated by the Administrator of the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy 
action.

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 proposed rule is categorically excluded, under figure 
2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further environmental 
documentation.
    Under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction, an 
``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a ``Categorical Exclusion 
Determination'' are not required for this proposed rule. Comments on 
this section will be considered before we make the final decision on 
whether to categorically exclude this rule 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 revise 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. Revise paragraph (a)(1) of Sec.  165.916 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.916  Security Zones; Captain of the Port Milwaukee Zone, Lake 
Michigan.

    (a) Location. * * *
    (1) Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant--All navigable waters of Western 
Lake Michigan encompassed by a line commencing from a point on the 
shoreline at 44[deg]20.715' N, 087[deg]32.080' W; then easterly to 
44[deg]20.720' N, 087[deg]31.630' W; then southerly to 44[deg]20.480' 
N, 087[deg]31.630' W; then westerly to 44[deg]20.480' N, 
087[deg]31.970' W, then northerly following the shoreline back to the 
point of origin. (NAD 83).
* * * * *

    Dated: 24 September 2003.
H.M. Hamilton,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Milwaukee.
[FR Doc. 03-26305 Filed 10-16-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P