32080 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 7, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

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 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 

temporary safety zone. An 

environmental analysis checklist and a 

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. 

■ 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 

■ 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, 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 a new temporary § 165.T11– 

210 to read as follows: 

§ 165.T11–210 Safety Zone; San Clemente 

Island Northwest Harbor August and 

September Training; Northwest Harbor, San 

Clemente Island, CA. 

(a) Location. The limits of the safety 

zone will include the navigable waters 

of the Northwest Harbor of San 

Clemente Island bounded by the 

following coordinates: 33°02′06′′ N, 

118°35′36′′ W; 33°02′00′′ N, 118°34′36′′ 

W; thence along the coast of San 

Clemente Island to 33°02′06′′ N, 

118°35′36′′ W. 

(b) Enforcement Period. This section 

will be enforced from August 1, 2009 

through September 30, 2009 during 

naval training exercises. If the training 

is concluded prior to the scheduled 

termination time, the COTP will cease 

enforcement of this safety zone and will 

announce that fact via Broadcast Notice 

to Mariners. 

(c) Definitions. The following 

definitions apply to this section: (1) 

Designated representative means any 

Commissioned, Warrant, or Petty 

Officers of the Coast Guard, Coast Guard 

Auxiliary, or local, state, and federal 

law enforcement vessels who have been 

authorized to act on behalf of the COTP. 

(2) Non-authorized personnel and 

vessels, means any civilian boats, 

fishermen, divers, and swimmers. 

(d) Regulations. (1) Entry into, transit 

through or anchoring within this safety 

zone is prohibited unless authorized by 

the COTP San Diego or his designated 

representative. 

(2) Non-authorized personnel and 

vessels requesting permission to transit 

through the safety zone may request 

authorization to do so from the COTP 

San Diego or his designated 

representative. They may be contacted 

on VHF–FM Channel 16, or at telephone 

number (619) 278–7033. 

(3) Naval units involved in the 

exercise are allowed in the confines of 

the established safety zone. 

(4) All persons and vessels shall 

comply with the instructions of the 

Coast Guard COTP or his designated 

representative. 

(5) Upon being hailed by the U.S. 

Coast Guard or other official personnel 

by siren, radio, flashing light, or other 

means, the operator of a vessel shall 

proceed as directed. 

(6) The Coast Guard may be assisted 

by other federal, state, or local agencies 

and the U.S. Navy. 

Dated: June 22, 2009. 

D.L. LeBlanc, 

Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting 

Captain of the Port San Diego. 

[FR Doc. E9–15885 Filed 7–6–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2009–0399] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone, Kinnickinnic River 

Sediment Removal Project, Milwaukee, 

WI 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary interim rule with 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a temporary safety zone on 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 7, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 32081 

the Kinnickinnic River in Milwaukee, 

WI. This temporary interim rule places 

navigational and operational restrictions 

on all vessels transiting the navigable 

waters located between the West Becher 

Street Bridge and the South 

Kinnickinnic Avenue Bridge located in 

Milwaukee, WI. 

DATES: This temporary interim rule is 

effective from June 12, 2009 until 

December 31, 2009. Comments and 

related material must reach the Docket 

Management Facility on or before 

August 6, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2009–0399 using any one of the 

following methods: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Fax: 202–493–2251. 

Mail: 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– 

0001. 

Hand delivery: Same as mail address 

above, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. The telephone number is 202– 

366–9329. 

To avoid duplication, please use only 

one of these methods. For instructions 

on submitting comments, see the 

‘‘Public Participation and Request for 

Comments’’. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this temporary 

interim rule, call BM2 Adam Kraft, 

Waterways Management Division, Coast 

Guard Sector Lake Michigan, telephone 

414–747–7154. If you have questions on 

viewing the docket, call Renee V. 

Wright, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 

comments and related materials. All 

comments received will be posted, 

without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. 

Submitting Comments 

If you submit a comment, please 

include the docket number for this 

rulemaking (USCG–2009–0399), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and provide a reason for each 

suggestion or recommendation. You 

may submit your comments and 

material online, or by fax, mail or hand 

delivery, but please use only one of 

these means. We recommend that you 

include your name and a mailing 

address, an e-mail address, or a 

telephone number in the body of your 

document so that we can contact you if 

we have questions regarding your 

submission. 

To submit your comment online, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, select the 

Advanced Docket Search option on the 

right side of the screen, insert ‘‘USCG– 

2009–0399’’ in the Docket ID box, press 

Enter, and then click on the balloon 

shape in the Actions column. If you 

submit your comments by mail or hand 

delivery, submit them in an unbound 

format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, 

suitable for copying and electronic 

filing. If you submit them by mail and 

would like to know that they reached 

the Facility, please enclose a stamped, 

self-addressed postcard or envelope. We 

will consider all comments and material 

received during the comment period 

and may change this rule based on your 

comments. 

Viewing Comments and Documents 

To view comments, as well as 

documents mentioned in this preamble 

as being available in the docket, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, select the 

Advanced Docket Search option on the 

right side of the screen, insert USCG– 

2009–0399 in the Docket ID box, press 

Enter, and then click on the item in the 

Docket ID column. You may also visit 

the Docket Management Facility in 

Room W12–140 on the ground floor of 

the Department of Transportation West 

Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. We have an 

agreement with the Department of 

Transportation to use the Docket 

Management Facility. 

Privacy Act 

Anyone can search the electronic 

form of comments received into any of 

our dockets by the name of the 

individual submitting the comment (or 

signing the comment, if submitted on 

behalf of an association, business, labor 

union, etc.). You may review a Privacy 

Act notice regarding our public dockets 

in the January 17, 2008 issue of the 

Federal Register (73 FR 3316). 

Public Meeting 

We do not now plan to hold a public 

meeting. But you may submit a request 

for one to the Docket Management 

Facility 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. 

Regulatory Information 

The Coast Guard is issuing this 

temporary interim 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 the agency for good 

cause finds that those procedures are 

‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest.’’ Under 5 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 of the 

importance of removing harmful 

polychlorinated biphenyls from this 

area of water. Also, this project has been 

opened to the community for comment 

via numerous public meetings, local 

news, and comment cards that were 

given to the local marinas. No feedback 

was received. Likewise, 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 

because of the safety risk to commercial 

and recreational boaters who could 

possibly transit this area. The following 

discussion and the Background and 

Purpose section below provides 

additional support of the Coast Guard’s 

determination that good causes exists 

for not publishing a NPRM and for 

making this rule effective less than 30 

days after publication. 

The Kinnickinnic Sediment Removal 

Project is a 22 million dollar dredging 

project that’s main purpose is to remove 

harmful polychlorinated biphenyls from 

the sediment in this area of water. This 

is an Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) sponsored project which has 

joined with the Army Corp of Engineers 

for coordination and completion. This 

project has been in the planning stages 

since 2002 and has incorporated many 

local stakeholders into their meetings, 

including: Southwind Marine, 

Milwaukee Marine, Canadian Pacific 

Railroad, Ryba Marine, United States 

Coast Guard and the Gillen Company to 

ensure all issues that could arise from 

a project of this magnitude are 

addressed. They also have involved the 

public through the use of the local 

news, public comment forums, 

informational handouts, and public 

open houses. They have received no 

negative feedback from any of this 

public outreach. The area that is 

affected by this project does not affect 

32082 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 7, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

any commercial traffic and rarely 

encounters any type of recreational 

traffic. The area of river where this 

project is occurring only affects one 

winter storage marina and the owner of 

that marina has been involved in all 

aspects of this planning. 

Background and Purpose 

U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Great Lakes National Program 

Office and state partner Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources are 

heading up the dredging of 

contaminated sediment from 

Milwaukee’s Kinnickinnic River. The 

$22 million project is being funded 

under the Great Lakes Legacy Act 

(GLLA). The Act provides federal 

money that along with local matching 

dollars are used to clean up polluted 

sediment (mud) along the U.S. shores of 

the Great Lakes. The Kinnickinnic River 

project calls for the removal of about 

170,000 cubic yards of sediment 

contaminated with PCBs and PAHs 

(polychlorinated biphenyls and 

polyaromatic hydrocarbons). 

Discussion of Rule 

The proposed safety zone will 

encompass all waters of the 

Kinnickinnic River between the West 

Becher Street Bridge located at 

43°00′37′′ N 087°54′51′′ W and the South 

Kinnickinnic Avenue Bridge located at 

43°00′29′′ 087°54′30′′. (NAD 83). Vessels 

will be permitted to transit the zone 

with the permission of the Captain of 

the Port Lake Michigan or his on-scene 

representative. Periods during which 

transit of the zone will be permitted will 

be communicated to the public daily via 

Broadcast Notice to Mariners. These 

Broadcasts can be heard daily via VHF 

Channel 16. 

All persons and vessels shall comply 

with the instructions of the Coast Guard 

Captain of the Port or the on-scene 

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 on-scene representative. 

The Captain of the Port or his on-scene 

representative may be contacted via 

VHF Channel 16. 

Regulatory Analyses 

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 

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. 

This determination is based on the 

following: (1) Commercial vessel traffic 

is non-existent in this area and 

recreational traffic is very minimal; (2) 

the public is very well informed about 

this project via local news, public 

comment forums, and public open 

houses; (3) all local marinas have been 

involved in every aspect of the seven 

years of planning that have lead up to 

this project; and (4) the safety zone 

almost always will have daily four hour 

openings for traffic to pass through if 

needed. 

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 would affect the following 

entities, some of which might be small: 

The owners and operators of vessels 

intending to transit or anchor in a 

portion of the Kinnickinnic River, 

Milwaukee, WI between 7 a.m. on June 

12, 2009 and 11:59 p.m. (local) on 

December 31, 2009. 

This safety zone will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities for 

the following reasons: (1) Commercial 

vessel traffic is non-existent in this area 

and recreational traffic is very minimal; 

(2) the public is very well informed 

about this project via local news, public 

comment forums, and public open 

houses; (3) all local marinas have been 

involved in every aspect of the seven 

years of planning that have lead up to 

this project; and (4) the safety zone 

almost always will have daily four hour 

openings for traffic to pass through if 

needed. The Coast Guard will give 

notice to the public, using all 

appropriate means to inform them when 

the safety zone is enforced and when 

openings are authorized. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

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 can 

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. 

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 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 7, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 32083 

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 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 that this action is one 

of the category of actions which do not 

individually or cumulatively have 

significant effect on the human 

environment. Therefore, this rule is 

categorically excluded, under section 

2.B.2 Figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(g), of 

the Instruction and neither an 

environmental assessment nor an 

environmental impact statement is 

required. This rule involves the 

establishing, disestablishing, or 

changing of a safety zone. An 

environmental analysis checklist and a 

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. 

■ 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 

■ 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, 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 temporary § 165.T09–0399 to 

read as follows: 

§ 165.T09–0399 Safety Zone, Kinnickinnic 

River Sediment Removal Project, 

Milwaukee, WI. 

(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 

South Kinnickinnic Avenue Bridge 

located at 43°00′29′′ N, 087°54′30′′ W 

(NAD 83). 

(b) Enforcement period. This 

regulation is enforced from 7 a.m. local 

on June 12, 2009 until 11:59 p.m. on 

December 31, 2009. The Captain of the 

Port, Sector Lake Michigan may 

terminate this zone at any time. 

(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with 

the general regulations in § 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 on-scene 

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 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. 

(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter 

or operate within the safety zone shall 

contact the Captain of the Port Sector 

Lake Michigan or his on-scene 

representative to obtain permission to 

do so. The Captain of the Port or his onscene 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 

on-scene representative. 

Dated: June 12, 2009. 

B.C. Jones, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Sector Lake Michigan. 

[FR Doc. E9–15953 Filed 7–6–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2009–0469] 

Security and Safety Zone Regulations, 

Large Passenger Vessel Protection, 

Portland, OR Captain of the Port Zone 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of 

regulation. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce 

the security and safety zone in 33 CFR 

165.1318 for large passenger vessels 

operating in the Portland, Oregon 

Captain of the Port Zone during the 

dates and times listed in DATES. This 

action is necessary to ensure the