Document ID: USCG-2012-0052-0005
Agency: uscg
Document Type: Rule
Title: TFR:  Security Zones: North Atlantic Treaty Organization Summit, Chicago, IL (Federal Register Publication)
Posted Date: 2012-05-02T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 2, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25892-25893]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10549]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2012-0052]
RIN 1625-AA87

Security Zones; North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Summit, 
Chicago, IL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This document corrects the preamble of the Temporary Final 
Rule (TFR) published in the Federal Register on April 13, 2012. In the 
preamble, the Coast Guard stated that no comments were received 
regarding the proposed rule (77 FR 13232) that would establish four 
separate security zones in the Chicago Harbor and Chicago River during 
the NATO Summit. This statement is incorrect. The Coast Guard received 
one comment.

DATES: Effective May 2, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CWO Jon Grob, Prevention Department, 
Coast Guard Sector Lake Michigan, Milwaukee, WI (414) 747-7188.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Correction: On March 10, 2012, the Burnham 
Park Yacht Club (BPYC) submitted a comment in response to the Coast 
Guard's NPRM that preceded the aforesaid TFR. In its comment, the BPYC 
described itself as a non-profit organization that provides tender 
services, mast stepping, and dining to BPYC members and to the public 
in general. The BPYC explained that it expects the NATO conference to 
have

[[Page 25893]]

two impacts on its business. First, the BPYC expects the NATO 
conference to severely limit the BPYC's income stream, which is 
normally generated from the aforementioned services. Second, the BPYC 
expects the NATO conference to have an impact on the BPYC's membership 
development, which typically occurs in mid April. In light of these 
impacts, the BPYC asked to meet with an agent of the Coast Guard to 
discuss the BPYC's expected losses and to arrive at a reasonable 
compensation. On April 20, 2012, a member of the Coast Guard's offices 
in Cleveland, OH, on behalf of the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake 
Michigan, telephoned the BPYC and confirmed the above understanding of 
the BPYC's comment and its request.
    In light of the BPYC's comment, the Coast Guard will not change the 
TFR published on April 13, 2012. Although the BPYC raised concerns 
about the economic impact of the Coast Guard's security zones, the 
BPYC's comment did not directly speak to the design, the establishment, 
or the enforcement of these security zones. The BPYC did not ask the 
Coast Guard to modify the security zones or to reconsider the manner in 
which they are enforced. Rather, the BPYC simply asked to meet with the 
Coast Guard to discuss compensation. While the Coast Guard takes 
seriously the economic impact that its rules might have on small 
entities, the Coast Guard is unable to provide compensation to small 
entities so impacted.
    Although the Coast Guard is unable to directly compensate small 
entities for the economic impacts of its rules, the BPYC is encouraged 
to contact CWO Jon Grob via the contact information provided above to 
discuss the Coast Guard's enforcement of the security zones discussed 
herein and options for compliance.

    Dated: April 24, 2012.
C.W. Tenney,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, 
Acting.
[FR Doc. 2012-10549 Filed 5-1-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P