[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 113 (Wednesday, June 13, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32522-32524]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-11339]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD09-07-008]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone; Milwaukee Harbor, Milwaukee, WI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has established a safety zone in Milwaukee 
Harbor near Lakeshore State Park. This zone will 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: This rule is effective June 28, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as 
documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, 
are part of docket [CGD09-07-008] and are available for inspection or 
copying at Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan (spw), 2420 South Lincoln 
Memorial Drive, Milwaukee, WI 53207 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: 

Regulatory Information

    On May 4, 2007, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 
entitled Safety Zone, Milwaukee Harbor, Milwaukee, WI in the Federal 
Register (72 FR 25226). We received no letters commenting on the 
proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was held.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause 
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after 
publication in the Federal Register. Any delay encountered in the 
regulation's effective date would be contrary to the public interest 
since the safety zone is needed to prevent traffic from transiting a 
portion of Milwaukee Harbor during fireworks displays, thus ensuring 
that the maritime public is protected from any potential harm 
associated with such an event.

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. This rule establishes 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 Comments and Changes

    No comments were received concerning this final rule. However, the 
published Notice of Proposed Rule Making contained an error concerning 
the coordinates for this safety zone. The northeast coordinate of the 
safety zone was incorrect and has been changed to 43[deg]02'00'' N, 
087[deg]53'25'' W. No other changes have been made.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This 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 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 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 rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small 
entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate 
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. 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). 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 rule calls 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 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 rule will not result in such an expenditure, we 
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

[[Page 32523]]

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will 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 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 rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule 
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an 
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may 
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 
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 rule or options 
for compliance are encouraged to contact the point of contact listed 
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not 
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this 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 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 Instruction, from further environmental 
documentation. This rule establishes a safety zone and as such is 
covered by this paragraph.
    A final ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a final 
Categorical Exclusion Determination'' are 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.


0
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: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation 
No. 0170.1.


0
2. 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]53'25'' 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 zone 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) Notice of Enforcement or Suspension of Enforcement. The safety 
zone established by this section will be enforced only upon notice of 
the Captain of the Port. The Captain of the Port will cause notice of 
enforcement of the safety zone established by this section to be made 
by all appropriate means to the affected segments of the public 
including publication in the Federal Register as practicable, in 
accordance with 33 CFR 165.7(a). Such means of notification may also 
include, but are not limited to Broadcast Notice to Mariners or Local 
Notice to Mariners. The Captain of the Port will issue a

[[Page 32524]]

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: June 5, 2007.
Bruce C. Jones,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Lake Michigan.
[FR Doc. E7-11339 Filed 6-12-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P