59136 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 191 / Monday, October 4, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

This deviation from the operating 

regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 

117.35.

Dated: September 17, 2004. 

David P. Pekoske, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

First Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 04–22273 Filed 10–1–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[CGD01–04–123] 

Drawbridge Operation Regulations: 

Connecticut River, CT

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation 

from regulations. 

SUMMARY: The Commander, First Coast 

Guard District, has issued a temporary 

deviation from the drawbridge operation 

regulations for the Route 82 Bridge, mile 

16.8, across the Connecticut River at 

East Haddam, Connecticut. This 

deviation from the regulations allows 

the bridge to operate on a fixed opening 

schedule from October 16, 2004 through 

November 30, 2004. Under this 

temporary deviation the bridge must 

open on signal at 5:30 a.m., 1:30 p.m., 

and 8 p.m., daily. The bridge must open 

on signal at all times for commercial 

vessels after at least a two-hour advance 

notice is given. This deviation is 

necessary in order to facilitate necessary 

repairs at the bridge.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 

October 16, 2004 through November 30, 

2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judy 

Leung-Yee, Project Officer, First Coast 

Guard District, at (212) 668–7195.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Route 

82 Bridge, at mile 16.8, across the 

Connecticut River has a vertical 

clearance in the closed position of 22 

feet at mean high water and 25 feet at 

mean low water. The existing 

drawbridge operating regulations are 

listed at 33 CFR 117.205(c). 

The owner of the bridge, Connecticut 

Department of Transportation, requested 

a temporary deviation from the 

drawbridge operating regulations to 

facilitate maintenance repairs at the 

bridge. 

This deviation to the operating 

regulations allows the Route 82 Bridge 

to operate on a fixed opening schedule 

from October 16, 2004 through 

November 30, 2004. Under this 

temporary deviation the bridge must 

open on signal at 5:30 a.m., 1:30 p.m., 

and 8 p.m., daily. At all other times, the 

bridge must open on signal for 

commercial vessels, provided that at 

least a two hour advance notice is given. 

In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(c), 

this work will be performed with all due 

speed in order to return the bridge to 

normal operation as soon as possible. 

This deviation from the operating 

regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 

117.35.

Dated: September 17, 2004. 

David P. Pekoske, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

First Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 04–22272 Filed 10–1–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[COTP San Francisco Bay 04–022] 

RIN 1625–AA87 

Security Zone; Suisun Bay, Concord, 

CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a temporary security zone 

in the navigable waters of the United 

States adjacent to Pier Three at the 

Military Ocean Terminal Concord 

(MOTCO), California (formerly United 

States Naval Weapons Center Concord, 

California). In light of recent terrorist 

actions against the United States, this 

security zone is necessary to ensure the 

safe loading of military equipment and 

to ensure the safety of the public from 

potential subversive acts. The security 

zone will prohibit all persons and 

vessels from entering, transiting through 

or anchoring within a portion of Suisun 

Bay within 500 yards of Pier Three at 

the MOTCO facility unless authorized 

by the Captain of the Port (COTP) or his 

designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 11:59 

p.m. on October 2, 2004, to 11:59 p.m. 

on October 12, 2004. If the need for this 

security zone ends before the scheduled 

termination time, the Captain of the Port 

will cease enforcement of the security 

zone and will announce that fact via 

Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this 

preamble as being available in the 

docket are part of docket [COTP San 

Francisco Bay 04–022] and are available 

for inspection or copying at Coast Guard 

Marine Safety Office San Francisco Bay, 

Coast Guard Island, Alameda, 

California, 94501, between 9 a.m. and 4 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lieutenant Doug L. Ebbers, U.S. Coast 

Guard Marine Safety Office San 

Francisco Bay, at (510) 437–2770.

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 because the 

duration of the NPRM rulemaking 

process would extend beyond the actual 

period of the scheduled operations and 

defeat the protections afforded by the 

temporary rule to the cargo vessels, their 

crews, the public and national security. 

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 as the schedule and other 

logistical details were not known until 

a date fewer than 30 days prior to the 

start date of the military operation. 

Delaying this rule’s effective date would 

be contrary to the public interest since 

the safety and security of the people, 

ports, waterways, and properties of the 

Port Chicago and Suisun Bay areas 

would be jeopardized without the 

protection afforded by this security 

zone. 

Background and Purpose 

Since the September 11, 2001 terrorist 

attacks on the World Trade Center in 

New York; the Pentagon in Arlington, 

Virginia; and Flight 93; the Federal 

Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has issued 

several warnings concerning the 

potential for additional terrorist attacks 

within the United States. In addition, 

the ongoing hostilities in Afghanistan 

and the conflict in Iraq have made it 

prudent for U.S. ports to be on a higher 

state of alert because Al-Qaeda and 

other organizations have declared an 

ongoing intention to conduct armed 

attacks on U.S. interests worldwide. 

The threat of maritime attacks is real 

as evidenced by the attack on USS 

COLE and the subsequent attack in 

October 2002 against a tank vessel off 

the coast of Yemen. These threats 

manifest a continuing threat to U.S. 

assets as described in the President’s 

finding in Executive Order 13273 of 

August 21, 2002 (67 FR 56215, 

September 3, 2002) that the security of 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 191 / Monday, October 4, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 59137

the U.S. is endangered by the September 

11, 2001, attacks and that such 

aggression continues to endanger the 

international relations of the United 

States. See also Continuation of the 

National Emergency with Respect to 

Certain Terrorist Attacks (67 FR 58317, 

September 13, 2002), and Continuation 

of the National Emergency with Respect 

to Persons Who Commit, Threaten To 

Commit, Or Support Terrorism (67 FR 

59447, September 20, 2002). The U.S. 

Maritime Administration (MARAD) in 

Advisory 02–07 advised U.S. shipping 

interests to maintain a heightened status 

of alert against possible terrorist attacks. 

MARAD more recently issued Advisory 

03–05 informing operators of maritime 

interests of increased threat possibilities 

to vessels and facilities and a higher risk 

of terrorist attack to the transportation 

community in the United States. 

Ongoing foreign hostilities have made it 

prudent for U.S. ports and waterways to 

be on a higher state of alert because the 

Al-Qaeda organization and other similar 

organizations have declared an ongoing 

intention to conduct armed attacks on 

U.S. interests worldwide.

In its effort to thwart terrorist activity, 

the Coast Guard has increased safety 

and security measures on U.S. ports and 

waterways. As part of the Diplomatic 

Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986 

(Pub. L. 99–399), Congress amended 

section 7 of the Ports and Waterways 

Safety Act (PWSA), 33 U.S.C. 1226, to 

allow the Coast Guard to take actions, 

including the establishment of security 

and safety zones, to prevent or respond 

to acts of terrorism against individuals, 

vessels, or public or commercial 

structures. The Coast Guard also has 

authority to establish security zones 

pursuant to the Act of June 15, 1917, as 

amended by the Magnuson Act of 

August 9, 1950, (50 U.S.C. 191 et seq.) 

and implementing regulations 

promulgated by the President in 

subparts 6.01 and 6.04 of part 6 of Title 

33 of the Code of Federal Regulations. 

In this particular rulemaking, to 

address the aforementioned security 

concerns, United States Army officials 

have requested that the Captain of the 

Port, San Francisco Bay, California, 

establish a temporary security zone in 

the navigable waters of the United 

States within 500 yards of Pier Three at 

the Military Ocean Terminal Concord 

(MOTCO), California, to safeguard 

vessels, cargo and crew engaged in 

military operations. This temporary 

security zone is necessary to safeguard 

the MOTCO terminal and the 

surrounding property from sabotage or 

other subversive acts, accidents or 

criminal acts. This zone is also 

necessary to protect military operations 

from compromise and interference and 

to specifically protect the people, ports, 

waterways, and properties of the Port 

Chicago and Suisun Bay areas. 

Discussion of Rule 

In this temporary rule, the Coast 

Guard is establishing a fixed security 

zone encompassing the navigable 

waters, extending from the surface to 

the sea floor, within 500 yards of any 

portion of Pier Three at Military Ocean 

Terminal Concord (MOTCO), California. 

There are three existing piers at the 

MOTCO facility. Originally there were 

four piers, numbered One through Four 

from west to east, but Pier One was 

destroyed in an explosion in 1944. 

Therefore, Pier Three is the middle of 

the 3 remaining piers. The area 

encompassed by this security zone 

includes a portion of the Port Chicago 

Reach section of the deepwater channel. 

Persons and vessels are prohibited from 

entering, transiting through or 

anchoring within this security zone 

unless authorized by the Captain of the 

Port (COTP) or his designated 

representative. 

The Captain of the Port will enforce 

this zone and may enlist the aid and 

cooperation of any Federal, State, 

county, municipal, and private agency 

to assist in the enforcement of the 

regulation. Section 165.33 of Title 33, 

Code of Federal Regulations, prohibits 

any unauthorized person or vessel from 

entering or remaining in a security zone. 

Vessels or persons violating this section 

may be subject to the penalties set forth 

in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 50 U.S.C. 192. 

Pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 1232, any 

violation of the security zone described 

herein, is punishable by civil penalties 

(not to exceed $32,500 per violation, 

where each day of a continuing 

violation is a separate violation), 

criminal penalties (imprisonment from 

5 to 10 years and a maximum fine of 

$250,000), and in rem liability against 

the offending vessel. Any person who 

violates this section using a dangerous 

weapon, or who engages in conduct that 

causes bodily injury or fear of imminent 

bodily injury to any officer authorized 

to enforce this regulation, will also face 

imprisonment from 10 to 25 years. 

Vessels or persons violating this section 

are also subject to the penalties set forth 

in 50 U.S.C. 192: Seizure and forfeiture 

of the vessel to the United States, a 

maximum criminal fine of $10,000, 

imprisonment up to 10 years, and a civil 

penalty of not more than $25,000 for 

each day of a continuing violation.

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). 

Although this regulation restricts 

access to a portion of navigable waters, 

the effect of this regulation will not be 

significant because mariners will be 

advised about the security zone via 

public notice to mariners, and the zone 

will encompass only a small portion of 

the waterway for a short duration. In 

addition, vessels and persons may be 

allowed to enter this zone on a case-bycase basis with permission of the 

Captain of the Port or his designated 

representative. 

The size of the zone is the minimum 

necessary to provide adequate 

protection for MOTCO, vessels engaged 

in operations at MOTCO, their crews, 

other vessels operating in the vicinity, 

and the public. The entities most likely 

to be affected are commercial vessels 

transiting to or from Suisun Bay via the 

Port Chicago Reach section of the 

channel. 

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 anchor or transit to 

or from Suisun Bay via the Port Chicago 

Reach section of the channel. Although 

the security zone will occupy a section 

of the navigable channel (Port Chicago 

Reach) adjacent to the Marine Ocean 

Terminal Concord (MOTCO), vessels 

may receive authorization to transit 

through the zone by the Captain of the 

Port or his designated representative on 

a case-by-case basis. Additionally, 

vessels engaged in recreational 

activities, sightseeing and commercial 

fishing will have ample space outside of 

the security zone to engage in those 

59138 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 191 / Monday, October 4, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

activities. Small entities and the 

maritime public will be advised of this 

security zone via public notice to 

mariners. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 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. If the rule will affect your small 

business, organization, or government 

jurisdiction and you have questions 

concerning its provisions or options for 

compliance, please contact the person 

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT for assistance in understanding 

this rule. 

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 

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 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

which guides 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 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 because we are 

establishing a security zone. 

A final ‘‘Environmental Analysis 

Check List’’ and a final ‘‘Categorical 

Exclusion Determination’’ will be 

available in the docket where located 

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; 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.T11–041 to read as 

follows:

§ 165.T11–041 Security Zone; Navigable 

Waters of the United States Surrounding 

Pier Three at Military Ocean Terminal 

Concord (MOTCO), Concord, California. 

(a) Location. The security zone will 

encompass the navigable waters, 

extending from the surface to the sea 

floor, within 500 yards of any portion of 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 191 / Monday, October 4, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 59139

Pier Three at Military Ocean Terminal 

Concord (MOTCO), California. 

(b) Regulations. (1) In accordance 

with the general regulations in § 165.33 

of this part, entering, transiting through 

or anchoring in this zone is prohibited 

unless authorized by the Coast Guard 

Captain of the Port, San Francisco Bay, 

or his designated representative. 

(2) Persons desiring to transit the area 

of this security zone may contact the 

Patrol Commander on scene on VHF–

FM channel 13 or 16 or the Captain of 

the Port at telephone number 415–399–

3547 to seek permission to transit the 

area. If permission is granted, all 

persons and vessels must comply with 

the instructions of the Captain of the 

Port or his designated representative. 

(c) Effective period. This section 

becomes effective at 11:59 p.m. on 

October 2, 2004, and terminates at 11:59 

p.m. on October 12, 2004. If the need for 

this security zone ends before the 

scheduled termination time, the Captain 

of the Port will cease enforcement of the 

security zone and will announce that 

fact via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

Dated: September 27, 2004. 

Gordon A. Loebl, 

Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting 

Captain of the Port, San Francisco Bay, 

California.

[FR Doc. 04–22271 Filed 10–1–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

POSTAL SERVICE

39 CFR Part 111 

General Information on Postal Service

AGENCY: Postal Service.

ACTION: Final Rule.

SUMMARY: This rule amends the Postal 

Service regulations to reflect current 

information regarding the publication 

and availability of the Domestic Mail 

Manual (DMM).

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is 

effective on October 4, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sherry L. Freda, (202) 268–7259.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule 

amends 39 CFR part 111 to conform to 

the yearly publication schedule of the 

Domestic Mail Manual, and to reflect 

the publication and availability of the 

DMM to all users on the Internet at 

http://pe.usps.gov. The table of contents 

of the DMM previously set forth in 

§ 111.5 is removed as superfluous.

List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 111 

Administrative practice and 

procedure.

■ In view of the considerations 

discussed above, the Postal Service 

hereby amends 39 CFR part 111 as 

follows:

■ 1. The authority citation for part 111 

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 39 U.S.C. 101, 

401, 403, 414, 416, 3001–3011, 3201–3219, 

3403–3406, 3621, 3626, 5001.

§ 111.1 [Amended]

■ 2. Amend § 111.1 by removing the 

words ‘‘published twice each year in 

January and July, unless otherwise 

determined by the Postal Service’’ and 

adding the words ‘‘published and 

maintained by the Postal Service’’ in 

their place.

§ 111.2 [Amended]

■ 3. Amend § 111.2—

■ A. In paragraph (a) by adding at the 

end the following sentence: ‘‘The 

Domestic Mail Manual is available for 

examination on the Internet at http://

pe.usps.gov.’’; and

■ B. In paragraph (c) by removing the 

words ‘‘A 1-year subscription to the 

Domestic Mail Manual for two 

consecutive issues’’ and adding the 

words ‘‘Subscriptions to the Domestic 

Mail Manual’’ in their place.

§ 111.5 [Removed and reserved]

■ 4. Remove and reserve § 111.5.

Stanley F. Mires, 

Chief Counsel, Legislative.

[FR Doc. 04–22231 Filed 10–1–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–12–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 271 

[FRL–7823–8] 

Nebraska: Final Authorization of State 

Hazardous Waste Management 

Program Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Immediate final rule.

SUMMARY: Nebraska has applied to the 

EPA for final authorization of the 

changes to its hazardous waste program 

under the Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act (RCRA). The EPA has 

determined that these changes satisfy all 

requirements needed to qualify for final 

authorization, and is authorizing the 

State’s changes through this immediate 

final action. The EPA is publishing this 

rule to authorize the changes without a 

prior proposal because we believe this 

action is not controversial and do not 

expect comments that oppose it. Unless 

we receive written comments which 

oppose this authorization during the 

comment period, the decision to 

authorize Nebraska’s changes to its 

hazardous waste program will take 

effect. If we receive comments that 

oppose this action, we will publish a 

document in the Federal Register

withdrawing this rule before it takes 

effect, and a separate document in the 

proposed rules section of this Federal 

Register will serve as a proposal to 

authorize the changes.

DATES: This final authorization will 

become effective on December 3, 2004 

unless the EPA receives adverse written 

comment by November 3, 2004. If the 

EPA receives such comment, it will 

publish a timely withdrawal of this 

immediate final rule in the Federal 

Register and inform the public that this 

authorization will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments by 

one of the following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: haugen.lisa@epa.gov.

3. Mail: Lisa Haugen, Environmental 

Protection Agency, ARTD/RESP, 901 

North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 

66101. 

4. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver 

your comments to Lisa Haugen, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

ARTD/RESP, 901 North 5th Street, 

Kansas City, Kansas 66101. 

Instructions: Do not submit 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected through 

regulations.gov, or e-mail. The Federal 

regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means the EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an e-mail 

comment directly to the EPA without 

going through regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, the EPA recommends that 

you include your name and other 

contact information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If the EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

the EPA may not be able to consider 

your comment. Electronic files should 

avoid the use of special characters, any 

form of encryption, and be free of any 

defects or viruses.