[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 116 (Monday, June 18, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33393-33395]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-11635]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD09-07-032]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone; Recovery of Aircraft, Lake Michigan, Milwaukee, WI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone in 
Lake Michigan, Milwaukee, WI. This zone is intended to restrict vessels 
from a portion of Lake Michigan during the recovery of an aircraft that 
crashed in Lake Michigan. This temporary safety zone is necessary to 
protect divers and recovery workers and restrict spectators and vessels 
from the recovery site.

DATES: This rule is effective from 8:30 p.m. on June 5, 2007 to 10 p.m. 
on June 29, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in 
the docket, are part of docket CGD09-07-032 and are available for 
inspection or copying at U.S. Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan, 2420 
South Lincoln Memorial Drive, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53207 between 8:30 
a.m. and 3:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chief Warrant Officer Brad Hinken, 
U.S. Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan, Prevention Department, 2420 
South Lincoln Memorial Drive, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53207, (414) 747-
7154.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this 
regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), the Coast Guard finds that 
good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. Publishing an NPRM would 
be impracticable as this safety zone was implemented for an emergency 
situation and required immediate activation. 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. 
Delaying this rule would be contrary to the public interest of ensuring 
the safety of spectators and vessels during this event and immediate 
action is necessary to prevent possible loss of life or property.

Background and Purpose

    This temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of 
divers and other recovery workers recovering the wreckage of an 
aircraft that crashed in Lake Michigan on June 4, 2007. This safety 
zone is also intended to restrict spectators and media during the 
recovery of human remains. Establishing a safety zone to control vessel 
movement around the location of the crash site will help ensure the 
safety of persons and property involved in the recovery operation and 
provide privacy to the families of the persons deceased in the aircraft 
crash.

Discussion of Rule

    A temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of divers 
and recovery workers during the recovery of aircraft wreckage and human 
remains. The safety zone will be in effect from 8:30 p.m. on June 5, 
2007 to 10 p.m. on June 29, 2007. The safety zone encompasses all 
waters of Lake Michigan within a 1000-yard radius from the aircraft 
crash site located at position 43[deg]01'52'' N, 087[deg]51'23'' W (NAD 
83).
    All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the 
Coast Guard Captain of the Port or his 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 on-
scene representative. The Captain of the Port or his on-scene 
representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

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 under the regulatory policies and procedures 
of DHS is unnecessary. This determination is based on the minimal time 
that vessels will be restricted from the zone

[[Page 33394]]

and the zone is an area where the Coast Guard expects insignificant 
adverse impact to mariners from the zone's activation.

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.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be 
small entities: the owners and operators of vessels intending to 
transit or anchor in a portion of Lake Michigan from 8:30 a.m. (local) 
on June 5, 2007 to 10 p.m. (local) on June 29, 2007.
    This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: Vessel 
traffic can safely pass outside the safety zone during the recovery 
operations. In the event that this temporary safety zone affects 
shipping, commercial vessels may request permission from the Captain of 
the Port Lake Michigan to transit through the safety zone. The Coast 
Guard will give notice to the public via a Broadcast to Mariners that 
the regulation is in effect.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 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).

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 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 would not result in such expenditure, we do 
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

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 concern 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 procedure; and related management 
system 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

[[Page 33395]]

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 event establishes a safety zone; 
therefore paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction applies.
    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.T09-032 to read as follows:


Sec.  165.T09-032  Safety Zone; Recovery of Aircraft, Lake Michigan, 
Milwaukee, WI.

    (a) Location. The following area is a temporary safety zone: all 
waters of Lake Michigan within a 1000-yard radius from an aircraft 
crash site located at position 43[deg]01'52'' N, 087[deg]51'23'' W (NAD 
83).
    (b) Effective period. This regulation is effective from 8:30 p.m. 
on June 5, 2007 to 10 p.m. on June 29, 2007.
    (c) 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 Captain 
of the Port Lake Michigan, or his 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 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 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: June 5, 2007.
Bruce C. Jones,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Lake Michigan.
 [FR Doc. E7-11635 Filed 6-15-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P