Skip to Content
Rule

Safety Zone; Kinnickinnic River Containment and Cleanup; Milwaukee, WI

Action

Temporary Final Rule.

Summary

The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the Kinnickinnic River in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. This zone is intended to restrict vessels from a portion of the Kinnickinnic River due to the petroleum cleanup efforts. This temporary safety zone is necessary to protect the surrounding public and vessels from the hazards associated with the removal of petroleum product from this area of the Kinnickinnic River.

Unified Agenda

Safety Zone Regulations

    • Next Action Undetermined
 

Table of Contents Back to Top

DATES: Back to Top

This rule is effective in the CFR on February 21, 2012. This rule is effective with actual notice for purposes of enforcement at 7 a.m. on January 30, 2012. This rule will remain in effect through 7 a.m. on March 1, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Back to Top

Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket are part of docket USCG-2012-0067 and are available online by going to www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2012-0067 in the “Keyword” box, and then clicking “search.” They are also available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Back to Top

If you have questions on this temporary rule, contact or email BM1 Adam Kraft, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan, at 414-747-7148 or Adam.D.Kraft@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Back to Top

Regulatory Information Back to Top

The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when an agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under U.S.C. 553 (b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because the dangers presented by the containment and cleanup of petroleum product are immediate and do not allow time for a notice and comment period. Thus, waiting for a notice and comment period to run would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest in that it would prevent the Coast Guard from protecting the public and vessels on navigable waters from the aforementioned hazards.

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. For the reasons discussed in the preceding paragraph, a 30-day notice period would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest.

Background and Purpose Back to Top

On January 23, 2012 it was discovered that a large amount of jet fuel is entering the Kinnickinnic River from an underground fuel leak in the vicinity of the airport in Milwaukee, WI. The Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, has determined that the containment and cleanup poses a serious risk of injury to persons and property within this area of the river.

Discussion of Rule Back to Top

Because of the aforesaid hazards, the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, has determined that a safety zone is necessary to protect the public. The safety zone will encompass all U.S. navigable waters of Kinnickinnic River between the West Becher Street Bridge located at 43°00′37″ N 087°54′51″ W and the First street bridge located at 43°00′30″ N 087°54′41″ W (NAD 83). This rule will be enforced from 7 a.m. on January 30, 2012 until 7 a.m. on March 1, 2012.

All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her designated representative. Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her designated representative. The Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her designated representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

Regulatory Analyses Back to Top

We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review Back to Top

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. It is not “significant” under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). We conclude that this rule is not a significant regulatory action because we anticipate that it will have minimal impact on the economy, will not interfere with other agencies, will not adversely alter the budget of any grant or loan recipients, and will not raise any novel legal or policy issues. The safety zone will be in effect along a portion of the river, given the time of year that has minimal traffic. Moreover, the most prominent marine commercial company in the area has been notified of the situation and it has chosen to use an alternate mooring.

Small Entities Back to Top

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this rule will 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 might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor on a portion of Kinnickinnic River between 7 a.m. on January 30, 2012 and 7 a.m. on March 1, 2012.

This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: Vessel traffic will be minimal due to the time of year and the location of the safety zone.

In the event that this temporary safety zone affects shipping, commercial vessels may request permission from the Captain of The Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her designated representative 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 Back to Top

Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer 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 Back to Top

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

Federalism Back to Top

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 Back to Top

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 expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property Back to Top

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 Back to Top

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 Back to Top

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 Back to Top

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.

Energy Effects Back to Top

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 Back to Top

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 Back to Top

We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 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 this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule involves the establishment of a safety zone and is therefore categorically excluded under paragraph 34(g) of the Instruction.

A final environmental analysis checklist and categorical exclusion determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Back to Top

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

begin regulatory text

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS Back to Top

1.The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

Authority:

33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 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.

2.Add § 165.T09-0067 to read as follows:

§ 165.T09-0067 Safety Zone; Kinnickinnic River containment and cleanup, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

(a) Location. All waters of the Kinnickinnic River between the West Becher Street Bridge located at 43°00′37″ N 087°54′51″ W and the First Street Bridge located at 43°00′30″ N 087°54′41″ W (NAD 83).

(b) Effective and Enforcement Period. This rule is effective and will be enforced from 7 a.m. on January 30, 2012 until 7 a.m. on March 1, 2012. The Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her designated representative, may suspend the enforcement of this safety zone.

(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, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her designated representative.

(2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may be permitted by the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her on-scene representative.

(3) The “designated representative” of the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been designated by the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, to act on his or her behalf. The designated representative of the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, will be on land in the vicinity of the safety zone and will have constant communications with the on-scene safety vessels.

(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety zone shall contact the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her designated representative to obtain permission to do so. The Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her designated representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

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, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or her designated representative.

end regulatory text

Dated: January 31, 2012.

C. W. Tenney,

Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, Acting.

[FR Doc. 2012-3866 Filed 2-17-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-04-P

Site Feedback