14420 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 28, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

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, 

and Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 5100.1, 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. Under 

figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of the 

Instruction, an ‘‘Environmental Analysis 

Check List’’ and a ‘‘Categorical 

Exclusion Determination’’ are not 

required for this rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 

Bridges. 

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard temporarily 

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); § 117.255 also issued under 

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

5039. 

■ 2. In § 117.631, from 6 a.m. on April 

18 until 6:30 p.m. on December 15, 2007 

temporarily suspend paragraph (a) and 

temporarily add paragraph (d) to read as 

follows: 

§ 117.631 Detroit River (Trenton Channel). 

* * * * * 

(d) The draw of the Grosse Ile Toll 

Bridge (Grosse Ile Parkway), mile 8.80, 

at Grosse Ile, shall operate as follows: 

(1) Between the hours of 6 a.m. and 

9 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. and 6:30 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, the bridge need 

not open. At all other times, Monday 

through Friday, the draw must open for 

commercial vessels upon signal and 

only from three minutes before until 

three minutes after the hour for pleasure 

craft. 

(2) On Saturday, Sunday and 

holidays, the bridge must open for 

commercial vessels upon signal and 

only from three minutes before until 

three minutes after the hour for pleasure 

craft. 

Dated: March 16, 2007. 

John E. Crowley, Jr., 

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

Ninth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. E7–5717 Filed 3–27–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[CGD05–06–104] 

RIN 1625–AA87 

Security Zone; Chesapeake Bay, 

Between Sandy Point and Kent Island, 

MD 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a permanent security zone 

on the waters of the Chesapeake Bay, 

within 250 yards north of the north span 

and 250 yards south of the south span 

of the William P. Lane Jr. Memorial 

Bridge, located between Sandy Point 

and Kent Island, Maryland. This action 

is necessary to provide for the security 

of a large number of participants during 

the annual Bay Bridge Walk across the 

William P. Lane Jr. Memorial Bridge, 

held annually on the first Sunday in 

May. The security zone will allow for 

control of vessels or persons within a 

specified area of the Chesapeake Bay 

and safeguard the public at large. 

DATES: This rule is effective April 27, 

2007. 

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 CGD05–06–104 and are available 

for inspection or copying at Coast Guard 

Sector Baltimore, Waterways 

Management Division, between 8 a.m. 

and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Ronald Houck, at Coast Guard Sector 

Baltimore, Waterways Management 

Division, at telephone number (410) 

576–2674 or (410) 576–2693. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory Information 

On December 1, 2006, we published 

a notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM) entitled ‘‘Security Zone; 

Chesapeake Bay, Between Sandy Point 

and Kent Island, MD’’ in the Federal 

Register (71 FR 69514). We received no 

letters commenting on the proposed 

rule. No public meeting was requested, 

and none was held. 

Background and Purpose 

The ongoing hostilities in Afghanistan 

and Iraq 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. Due to 

increased awareness that future terrorist 

attacks are possible, the Coast Guard, as 

lead federal agency for maritime 

homeland security, has determined that 

the Captain of the Port, Baltimore must 

have the means to be aware of, deter, 

detect, intercept, and respond to 

asymmetric threats, acts of aggression, 

and attacks by terrorists on the 

American homeland while still 

maintaining our freedoms and 

sustaining the flow of commerce. This 

security zone is part of a comprehensive 

port security regime designed to 

safeguard human life, vessels, and 

waterfront facilities against sabotage or 

terrorist attacks. 

In this particular rulemaking, to 

address the aforementioned security 

concerns during the highly-publicized 

public event, and to take steps to 

prevent the catastrophic impact that a 

terrorist attack against a large number of 

participants during the annual Bay 

Bridge Walk would have on the public 

interest, the Captain of the Port, 

Baltimore, Maryland is establishing a 

security zone upon all waters of the 

Chesapeake Bay, within 250 yards north 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 28, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 14421 

of the north (westbound) span of the 

William P. Lane Jr. Memorial Bridge, 

and 250 yards south of the south 

(eastbound) span of the William P. Lane 

Jr. Memorial Bridge, from the western 

shore at Sandy Point to the eastern 

shore at Kent Island, Maryland. This 

security zone will help the Coast Guard 

to prevent vessels or persons from 

engaging in terrorist actions against a 

large number of participants during the 

event. Due to these heightened security 

concerns, and the catastrophic impact a 

terrorist attack on the Chesapeake Bay 

Bridge during the annual Bay Bridge 

Walk would have on the large number 

of participants, and the surrounding 

area and communities, a security zone 

is prudent for this type of event. 

Discussion of Comments and Changes 

The Coast Guard received no 

comments on the proposed rule during 

the comment period published in the 

NPRM. No public meeting was 

requested and none was held. As a 

result, no change to the proposed 

regulatory text was made. 

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. 

The operational restrictions of the 

security zone are tailored to provide the 

minimal disruption of vessel operations 

necessary to provide immediate, 

improved security for persons, vessels, 

and the waters of the Chesapeake Bay, 

within 250 yards of the William P. Lane 

Jr. Memorial Bridge, located between 

Sandy Point and Kent Island, Maryland. 

Additionally, this security zone is 

temporary in nature and any hardship 

experienced by persons or vessels are 

outweighed by the national interest in 

protecting the public at large from the 

devastating consequences of acts of 

terrorism, and from sabotage or other 

subversive acts, accidents, or other 

causes of a similar nature. 

The Coast Guard received no 

comments on this aspect of the 

proposed rule during the comment 

period published in the NPRM. As a 

result, no change to the proposed 

regulatory text was made. 

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: the 

owners or operators of vessels intending 

to operate, remain or anchor within 250 

yards of the William P. Lane Jr. 

Memorial Bridge, located between 

Sandy Point and Kent Island, Maryland. 

This security zone will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

because vessels desiring to transit 

through the security zone without 

loitering or those vessels with 

compelling interests to remain in the 

zone may seek authorization to enter the 

security zone from the Captain of the 

Port. Before the enforcement period, the 

Coast Guard will issue maritime 

advisories widely available to users of 

the Chesapeake Bay. 

The Coast Guard received no 

comments on this aspect of the 

proposed rule during the comment 

period published in the NPRM. As a 

result, no change to the proposed 

regulatory text was made. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

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

we offered to assist small entities in 

understanding the rule so that they 

could better evaluate its effects on them 

and participate in the rulemaking 

process. However, we received no 

requests for assistance from any small 

entities. 

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 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
14422 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 28, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

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 

and Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 5100.1, 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 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. This 

regulation establishes a security zone. A 

final ‘‘Environmental Analysis Check 

List’’ and a final ‘‘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; 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 § 165.507 to read as follows: 

§ 165.507 Security Zone; Chesapeake Bay, 

between Sandy Point and Kent Island, MD. 

(a) Definitions. The Captain of the 

Port, Baltimore, Maryland means the 

Commander, Coast Guard Sector 

Baltimore, Maryland or any Coast Guard 

commissioned, warrant, or petty officer 

who has been authorized by the Captain 

of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland to act 

on his or her behalf. 

(b) Location. The following area is a 

security zone: All waters of the 

Chesapeake Bay, from the surface to the 

bottom, within 250 yards north of the 

north (westbound) span of the William 

P. Lane Jr. Memorial Bridge, and 250 

yards south of the south (eastbound) 

span of the William P. Lane Jr. 

Memorial Bridge, from the western 

shore at Sandy Point to the eastern 

shore at Kent Island, Maryland. 

(c) Regulations. (1) All persons are 

required to comply with the general 

regulations governing security zones 

found in § 165.33 of this part. 

(2) Entry into or remaining in this 

zone is prohibited unless authorized by 

the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, 

Baltimore, Maryland. 

(3) Persons or vessels requiring entry 

into or passage through the security 

zone must first request authorization 

from the Captain of the Port, Baltimore 

to seek permission to transit the area. 

The Captain of the Port, Baltimore, 

Maryland can be contacted at telephone 

number (410) 576–2693. The Coast 

Guard vessels enforcing this section can 

be contacted on VHF Marine Band 

Radio, VHF channel 16 (156.8 MHz). 

Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast 

Guard vessel by siren, radio, flashing 

light, or other means, the operator of a 

vessel shall proceed as directed. If 

permission is granted, all persons and 

vessels must comply with the 

instructions of the Captain of the Port, 

Baltimore, Maryland and proceed at the 

minimum speed necessary to maintain a 

safe course while within the zone. 

(d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast 

Guard may be assisted in the patrol and 

enforcement of the zone by Federal, 

State, and local agencies. 

(e) Enforcement period. This section 

will be enforced annually on the first 

Sunday in May from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. 

local time. 

Dated: March 16, 2007. 

Brian D. Kelley, 

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

Port, Baltimore, Maryland. 

[FR Doc. E7–5718 Filed 3–27–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 81 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2006–AZ–0558; FRL–8292–

6] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Designation of 

Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; State of Arizona; Boundary 

Redesignation; Finding of Attainment 

for Miami Particulate Matter of 10 

Microns or Less (PM10) Nonattainment 

Area; Determination Regarding 

Applicability of Certain Clean Air Act 

Requirements; Correction 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to approve the State of Arizona’s 

boundary redesignation of the Hayden/ 

Miami PM10 nonattainment area into 

two separate PM10 nonattainment areas: 

Hayden and Miami. EPA is also finding 

that the Miami PM10 nonattainment area 

is attaining the PM10 national ambient 

air quality standard, and, based on this 

attainment finding, EPA is determining 

that certain Clean Air Act requirements 

are not applicable for so long as the 

Miami area shows continued attainment 

of the standard based on current, 

publicly available, quality-assured 

monitoring data. EPA is taking this 

action consistent with obligations under 

the Clean Air Act to act on State 

redesignations. Lastly, EPA is correcting 

two errors in previous rulemakings that 

involved the designations of PM10 areas 

within the State of Arizona. 

DATES: This rule is effective on May 29, 

2007, without further notice, unless 

EPA receives adverse comments by 

April 27, 2007. If adverse comment is 

received, EPA will publish a timely 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES