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 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 71709

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 would not result in 

such expenditure, we do discuss the 

effects of this rule elsewhere in this 

preamble. 

Taking of Private Property 

This rule would 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 

would not create an environmental risk 

to health or risk to safety that might 

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 by the 

Administrator of the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs as a 

significant energy action. 

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. 

Under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(g) of 

the Instruction, an ‘‘Environmental 

Analysis Check List’’ and a ‘‘Categorical 

Exclusion Determination’’ are not 

required for this rule. Comments on this 

section will be considered before we 

make the final decision on whether to 

categorically exclude this rule 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:

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. In § 165.910, revise paragraph (a)(5) 

to read as follows:

§ 165.910 Security Zones; Captain of the 

Port Chicago, Zone, Lake Michigan. 

(a) * * *

(5) Hammond Intake Crib. All 

navigable waters bounded by the arc of 

a circle with a 100-yard radius with its 

center in approximate position 

41°42′15′′ N, 087°29′49′′ W (NAD 83).

* * * * *

Dated: November 16, 2004. 

D.S. Fish, 

Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting 

Captain of the Port.

[FR Doc. 04–27099 Filed 12–9–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[CGD13–04–040] 

RIN 1625–AA87 

Security Zones; Protection of Military 

Cargo, Captain of the Port Zone Puget 

Sound, WA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a security zone in Budd 

Inlet, Olympia, WA to protect 

Department of Defense assets and 

military cargo in Puget Sound, 

Washington. This security zone, when 

enforced by the Captain of the Port 

Puget Sound, will regulate traffic in the 

vicinity of military cargo loading 

operations in the navigable waters of the 

United States.

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 CGD13–04–040 and are available 

for inspection or copying at 

Commanding Officer, Marine Safety 

Office Puget Sound, 1519 Alaskan Way 

South, Seattle, Washington 98134 

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

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LTjg 

T. Thayer, c/o Captain of the Port Puget 

Sound, Seattle, WA, (206) 217–6232. 

For specific information concerning 

enforcement of this rule, call Marine 

Safety Office Puget Sound at (206) 217–

6200 or (800) 688–6664.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information 

On October 12, 2004, we published a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

entitled ‘‘Security Zones; Protection of