Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Coast Guard 

          - 33 CFR Part 165 
          - [CGD09-05-142] 
          - RIN 1625-AA00 

# AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS. 

# ACTION:

Temporary final rule. 

# SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal on the Illinois Waterway near Romeoville, Illinois. This safety zone is necessary to close the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal during safety testing of the permanent electrical dispersal barrier. This safety zone intended to restrict vessels from a portion of the Canal in Romeoville, IL, at various times over a 45 day period. 

# DATES:

This rule is in effect during intermittent periods, as announced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners, from 7 a.m. (local) on January 30, 2006 until 7 a.m. (local) on February 28, 2006. Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his on scene representative will inform mariners of enforcement periods via Broadcast Notice to Mariners. 

# 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 the docket (CGD09-05-142], and are available for inspection or copying at Commanding Officer, U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Unit Chicago, 215 W. 83rd Street Suite D, Burr Ridge, IL, 60527, between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

MST1 Kenneth Brockhouse, U.S. Coast Guard, Marine Safety Unit Chicago, at (630) 986-2155. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Regulatory Information 

                    We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. This safety zone is temporary in nature and limited time existed for an NPRM. The Coast Guard was not made aware that this operation was to take place with sufficient time to allow for publication of an NPRM followed by a final rule. 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 impracticable and immediate action is necessary to ensure the safety of personnel and vessels during the operational period. During the enforcement of this safety zone, comments will be accepted and reviewed and may result in a modification to the rule.                 

## Background and Purpose 

A temporary electrical dispersal barrier is in operation at mile marker 296.5 on the Chicago Sanitary Ship Canal to prevent Asian Carp from entering Lake Michigan. 

A second permanent electrical dispersal barrier is being constructed and operational and safety testing must be completed prior to placing the permanent barrier in service. Also, additional safety tests need to be conducted for the temporary electrical dispersal barrier. These tests are scheduled to commence in January 2006. As such, the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan has determined that intermittent closures of the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal are necessary to ensure the integrity of the operational and safety tests, as well as the safety of the testing crews. Closures will occur between January 30, 2006 and February 28, 2006. Mariners will be notified of enforcement periods by Broadcast Notice to Mariners. Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his designated on scene representative via VHF-FM radio Channel 16. 

## Discussion of Rule 

Operational and safety tests are required to determine the electrical parameters of the permanent electrical dispersal barrier, and to evaluate the health and safety risks of the electrical fields generated by both barriers in this portion of the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal. Restricting vessel movement through this portion of the Canal is necessary to ensure accurate test results, and to protect the equipment and crews conducting the tests. 

The safety zone will encompass all waters of the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal from the Romeo Road Bridge at Mile Marker 296.1 to the aerial pipeline arch at Mile Marker 296.7. All commercial and recreational vessels will be prohibited from entering the zone during enforcement periods. Enforcement periods will be announced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners. Vessels may contact the Coast Guard via VHF-FM radio Channel 16 to request permission to transit through the safety zone. 

## 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. It is not “significant” under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

We expect the economic impact of this established rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. 

This finding is based on the relatively small percentage of vessels that would fall within the applicability of the regulation, the relatively small size of the limited area around the zone, the minimal amount of time that vessels will be restricted when the zone is being enforced. In addition, vessels that will need to enter the zone may request permission on a case-by-case basis from the Captain of the Port or the designated on-scene representative. 

## 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                           ( print page 4489)                        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 may affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit through the safety zone in and around the area. 

This rule would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because the restrictions affect only a limited area for a brief amount of time as this safety zone is effective only when operations are underway. Further, transit through the zone may be permitted with proper authorization from the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or his designated representative. Additionally, the opportunity to engage in recreational activities outside the limits of the safety zone will not be disrupted. 

                    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 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 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 1-800-734-3247. 

## 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 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.

## Taking of Private Property 

This rule will not effect 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 

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 

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 proposed rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guides 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 event establishes a safety zone therefore paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction applies. 

                    A preliminary “Environmental Analysis Check List” is available in the docket where indicated under                     **ADDRESSES**                    . Comments on this section will be considered before we make the final decision on whether the 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 amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: 

      ( print page 4490)    

# 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. Add § 165.T09-142 to read as follows: 

§ 165.T09-142 

                            (a)                             *Location.*                             The following is a safety zone: All waters, bank-to-bank, from the Romeo Road Bridge at Mile Marker 296.1 to the aerial pipeline arch at Mile Marker 296.7 on Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal.                         

                            (b)                             *Effective time and date.*                             This rule is in effect from 7 a.m. (local) on January 30, 2006 until 7 a.m. (local) on February 28, 2006. Enforcement periods will be announced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners. Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or the on scene representative may terminate this operation at anytime.                         

                            (c)                             *Regulations.*                             In accordance with § 165.23, entry into this zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port Lake Michigan, or the designated on-scene representative. Section 165.23 also contains other general requirements.                         

Dated: January 11, 2006. 

S.P. LaRochelle, 

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

[FR Doc. 06-768 Filed 1-26-06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P