71706 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

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 proposed rule does not use 

technical standards. Therefore, we did 

not consider the use of voluntary 

consensus standards.

Environment 

We have analyzed this final 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 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 (32)(e), of the 

Instruction, from further environmental 

documentation. It has been determined 

that this final rule does not significantly 

impact the environment.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

Bridges.

Regulations

■ For the reasons set out in the preamble, 

the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 117 

as follows:

PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE 

OPERATION REGULATIONS

■ 1. The authority citation for part 117 

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1; 33 

CFR 1.05–1(g); section 117.255 also issued 

under the authority of Pub. L. 102–587, 106 

Stat. 5039.

■ 2. From December 1, 2004 through 

March 31, 2006, § 117.205 is temporarily 

amended by suspending paragraph (c) 

and adding a new paragraph (d) to read 

as follows:

§ 117.205 Connecticut River.

* * * * *

(d) The draw of the Route 82 Bridge, 

mile 16.8, at East Haddam shall operate 

as follows: 

(1) From November 1 through July 6 

the draw shall open on signal at 5:30 

a.m., 1:30 p.m., and 8 p.m., daily. 

(2) From July 7 through October 31, 

Monday through Thursday, the draw 

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

p.m., and 8 p.m. On Friday the draw 

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

p.m., 8 p.m., and 11:30 p.m. On 

Saturday and Sunday the draw shall 

open on signal at 5:30 a.m., 8:30 a.m., 

1:30 p.m., 4 p.m., 8 p.m., and 11:30 p.m. 

(3) The draw need not open for the 

passage of vessel traffic on the following 

dates: March 21, 2005 through March 

28, 2005; October 18, 19 and 20, 2005; 

and December 14, 2005. 

(4) At all times, other than the dates 

identified in paragraph (d)(3) of this 

section, the draw shall open on signal 

for commercial vessels provided at least 

a two-hour advance notice is given.

Dated: November 29, 2004. 

David P. Pekoske, 

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

First Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 04–27101 Filed 12–9–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD08–04–018] 

RIN 1625–AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; St. 

Croix River, Wisconsin, MN

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is changing 

the regulation governing the Prescott 

Highway Bridge, across the St. Croix 

River at Mile 0.3, at Prescott, Wisconsin. 

Under the rule, the drawbridge need not 

open for river traffic and may remain in 

the closed-to-navigation position from 

November 1, 2005, to April 1, 2006. 

This rule allows the bridge owners to 

make necessary repairs to the bridge.

DATES: This rule is effective November 

1, 2005, to April 1, 2006.

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 [CGD08–04–018] and are 

available for inspection or copying at 

room 2.107f in the Robert A. Young 

Federal Building at Eighth Coast Guard 

District, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Roger K. Wiebusch, Bridge 

Administrator, (314) 539–3900, 

extension 2378.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory Information 

On September 21, 2004, we published 

a notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM) entitled Drawbridge Operation 

Regulation; St. Croix River, Wisconsin 

and Minnesota in the Federal Register

(69 FR 56379). We received no comment 

letters on the proposed rule. No public 

hearing was requested, and none was 

held. 

Background and Purpose 

On May 3, 2004, the Wisconsin 

Department of Transportation requested 

a temporary change to the operation of 

the Prescott Highway Bridge across the 

St. Croix River, Mile 0.3, at Prescott, 

Wisconsin, to allow the drawbridge to 

remain in the closed-to-navigation 

position for a 5-month period while the 

electrical and hydraulic systems are 

overhauled. Navigation on the waterway 

consists of both commercial (excursion 

boat) and recreational watercraft, which 

may be minimally impacted by the 

closure period. Currently, the draw 

opens on signal for passage of river 

traffic from April 1 to October 31, 8 a.m. 

to midnight, except that from midnight 

to 8 a.m. the draw shall open on signal 

if notification is made prior to 11 p.m. 

From November 1 to March 31, the draw 

shall open on signal if at least 24 hours 

notice is given. The Wisconsin 

Department of Transportation requested 

the drawbridge be permitted to remain 

closed to navigation from November 1, 

2005, to April 1, 2006. 

Discussion of Comments and Changes 

The Coast Guard received no 

comment letters. No changes will be 

made to this final rule. 

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). 

The Coast Guard expects this 

temporary change to operation of the 

Prescott Highway Bridge to have 

minimal economic impact on 

commercial traffic operating on the St. 

Croix River such that a full regulatory 

evaluation under the regulatory policies 

and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. 

This temporary change will cause 

minimal interruption of the 

drawbridge’s regular operation, since 

the change is only in effect during the 

winter months while the river is frozen. 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 71707

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 would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

This rule would be in effect for 5 

months during the early winter months 

when the river is frozen over and 

navigation is practically at a standstill. 

The Coast Guard expects the impact of 

this action to be minimal. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), 

we want to assist small entities in 

understanding this rule so that they 

could better evaluate its effects on them 

and participate in the rulemaking. 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–

800–REG–FAIR (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 

expenditure, we do discuss the effects of 

this rule elsewhere in this preamble. 

Taking of Private Property 

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 

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 would 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. It has not been designated a 

significant energy action by the 

Administrator of the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs. 

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 considered the 

environmental impact of this rule and 

concluded that under figure 2–1, 

paragraph (32)(e), of Commandant 

Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is 

categorically excluded from further 

environmental documentation. 

Paragraph 32(e) excludes the 

promulgation of operating regulations or 

procedures for drawbridges from the 

environmental documentation 

requirements of the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). 

Since this regulation would alter the 

normal operating conditions of the 

drawbridge, it falls within this 

exclusion.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

Bridges.

Regulations

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE 

OPERATION REGULATIONS

■ 1. The authority citation for part 117 

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1; 33 

CFR 1.05–1(g); section 117.255 also issued 

under the authority of Pub. L. 102–587, 106 

Stat. 5039.

■ 2. From November 1, 2005, to April 1, 

2006, in § 117.667, suspend paragraph 

(a) and add new paragraphs (d) and (e) 

to read as follows:

§ 117.667 St. Croix River.

* * * * *

71708 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

(d) The draws of the Burlington 

Northern Santa Fe Railroad Bridge, Mile 

0.2, and the Hudson Railroad Bridge, 

Mile 17.3, shall operate as follows: 

(1) From April 1 to October 31: 

(i) 8 a.m. to midnight, the draws shall 

open on signal; 

(ii) Midnight to 8 a.m., the draws shall 

open on signal if notification is made 

prior to 11 p.m. 

(2) From November 1 through March 

31, the draw shall open on signal if at 

least 24 hours notice is given. 

(e) The draw of the Prescott Highway 

Bridge, Mile 0.3, need not open for river 

traffic and may be maintained in the 

closed-to-navigation position from 

November 1, 2005, to April 1, 2006.

Dated: November 18, 2004. 

R.F. Duncan, 

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

Eighth Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 04–27102 Filed 12–9–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD09–04–020] 

RIN 1625–AA87 (Formerly RIN 2115–AA00) 

Security Zone; Captain of the Port 

Chicago Zone, Lake MI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is removing 

the security zone around the Byron 

Nuclear Power Plant and adding a 

security zone around the Hammond 

Intake Crib on Lake Michigan. The Coast 

Guard has determined that the removal 

of the security zone for the Byron 

Nuclear Power Plant would not increase 

the plant’s vulnerability. The Hammond 

Intake Crib Security Zone is necessary 

to protect the fresh water supply from 

possible sabotage or other subversive 

acts, accidents, or possible acts of 

terrorism. The zone is intended to 

restrict vessel traffic from a portion of 

Lake Michigan.

DATES: This rule is effective December 

10, 2004.

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 

docket CGD09–04–020 and are available 

for inspection or copying at U.S. Coast 

Guard Marine Safety Office Chicago, 

215 West 83rd Street, Suite D, Burr 

Ridge, IL, 60527 between 7 a.m. and 

3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

LTJG Christopher Brunclik, MSO 

Chicago, at (630) 986–2155.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information 

On August 4, 2004 we published a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

entitled, Security Zone; Captain of the 

Port Chicago Zone, Lake Michigan, in 

the Federal Register (69 FR 47047). We 

received no letters commenting on this 

proposed rule. No public meeting was 

requested, and none was held. 

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. The reason being that the 

Hammond Intake Crib Security Zone is 

necessary to protect the public, 

facilities, and the surrounding area from 

possible sabotage or other subversive 

acts. 

Background and Purpose 

On September 11, 2001, the United 

States was the target of coordinated 

attacks by international terrorists 

resulting in catastrophic loss of life, the 

destruction of the World Trade Center, 

and significant damage to the Pentagon. 

Current events indicate that significant 

threats still exist for this type of attack. 

In fact, National security and 

intelligence officials warn that future 

terrorists attacks are likely. The Coast 

Guard is responding by, amongst many 

other things, establishing security zones 

around critical infrastructure. 

We are removing the Byron Nuclear 

Power Plant Security Zone and adding 

a security zone around the Hammond 

Intake Crib. It has been determined that 

the removal of the security zone for the 

Byron Nuclear Power Plant would not 

increase its vulnerability. The 

Hammond Intake Crib security zone is 

necessary to protect the public, 

facilities, and the surrounding area from 

possible sabotage or other subversive 

acts. All persons other than those 

approved by the Captain of the Port 

Chicago, or his on-scene representative, 

are prohibited from entering or moving 

within the zone. The Captain of the Port 

Chicago may be contacted via phone at 

the above contact number. 

Discussion of Comments and Changes 

No comments were received, no 

issues were identified and no changes 

were added. 

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 rule to be so minimal that a full 

Regulatory Evaluation under the 

regulatory policies and procedures of 

DHS is unnecessary. Since this security 

zone is not located near commercial 

vessel shipping lanes, there will be no 

impact on commercial vessel traffic as a 

result of this security zone. 

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 security zone will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities for 

the following reasons. This rule will not 

obstruct the regular flow of traffic and 

will allow vessel traffic to pass around 

the security zone. 

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, 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