54744 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 179 / Friday, September 16, 2005 / Notices 

LIST OF PUMPOUTS IN THE PROPOSED AREA—Continued 

Name Location Contact 

information 

Hours of operation (call 

ahead to verify) 

Mean low 

water depth 

(feet) 

Fee 

Andrews Marina ............ Connecticut River, East 

Haddam.

860–345–2286 ............... May 1–Nov 30, daily 9 

a.m.–6 p.m..

5 Free. 

Hays Haven Marina ....... Connecticut River, 

Chester.

VHF CH 9, 860–526–

9366.

May 1–Oct 31, daily 8 

a.m.–5 p.m..

6 Free. 

Chrisholm Marina .......... Connecticut River, 

Chester.

VHF CH 9, 860–526–

5147.

Apr 1–Nov 30, daily 8 

a.m.–5 p.m..

6 Free. 

Chester Marina .............. Connecticut River, 

Chester.

VHF CH 9, 860–526–

2227.

No data .......................... 6 No data. 

Brewer Deep River Marina.Connecticut River, Deep 

River.

VHF CH 9, 860–526–

5580.

May 1–Oct 31, daily 8 

a.m.–4 p.m..

10 $5. 

Brewer Dauntless Shipyard.Connecticut River, 

Essex.

VHF CH 9, 860–767–

0001.

June 1–Sept 30, daily 

7:30 a.m. to 5 p.m..

12 Free / $5 for nonmembers. 

The Chandlery at Essex Connecticut River, 

Essex.

VHF CH 68, 860–767–

8257.

May 1–Oct 31, M–Th 8 

a.m.–5 p.m., F–Sun 8 

a.m.–6 p.m..

12 Free / $5 for nonmembers. 

Reynold’s Garage and 

Marine.

Hamburg Cove, Lyme ... 860–434–0028 ............... May 1–Oct 31 M–Sat 9–

5.

4–5 $5. 

Niantic Bay Marina ........ Niantic River, Waterford VHF CH 9, 860–782–

3774.

May 1–Oct 31, M–Th 10 

a.m.–4 p.m..

5 $5. 

Port Niantic Marina ........ Niantic River, East Lyme VHF CH 9, 860–739–

2155.

May 1–Oct 15, M–F 8 

a.m.–4:30 p.m., Sat 

and Sun 8 a.m.–12 

p.m..

7 $5. 

Bayreuther’s Boat Yard, 

Inc.

Smith Cove (Niantic), 

East Lyme.

VHF CH 8, 9, 860–739–

6264.

May 1–Oct 31, daily 9 

a.m.–4 p.m..

6 $0.50 per gallon. 

Niantic River Pumpout 

Boat.

Niantic River, East 

Lyme, Waterford.

VHF CH 68 .................... May 30–Nov 1, Sat, Sun 

and Monday holidays 

9 a.m.–5 p.m..

N/A Free. 

Niantic Dockominium ..... Niantic River, East Lyme 860–739–8585 ............... May 15–Nov 15, 8 a.m.–

4 p.m..

...................... $5. 

Burr’s Yacht Haven, Inc Thames River, New 

London.

VHF CH 9, 78, 860–

443–8457.

May 1–Oct 31 M–Th 

8:30 a.m.–5:30 p.m., 

F–Sun 8:30 a.m.–6:30 

p.m..

9 $5. 

Thamesport Marina ....... Thames River, New 

London.

VHF CH 9, 68, 860–

437–7022.

Mar 1–Nov 30, daily 8 

a.m.–8 p.m..

13 $5. 

Crocker’s Boatyard, Inc Thames River, New 

London.

VHF CH 9, 10, 860–

443–6304.

Mar 1–Nov 30, daily 

7:30 a.m.–5 p.m..

12 Free. 

City of Groton Wastewater Treatment Facility.Thames River, New 

London.

VHF CH 72, 860–446–

4806.

May 1–Oct 31, M–F 7 

a.m.–3 p.m., Sat–Sun 

7 a.m.–10 p.m..

20+ $5. 

Marina at American 

Wharf.

Thames River (Norwich 

Harbor), Norwich.

VHF CH 68, 860–886–

6363.

Apr 1–Nov 30, daily 8 

a.m.–8 p.m..

25 $3 (portable), Free 

at gas dock. 

Dated: August 31, 2005. 

Robert W. Varney, 

Regional Administrator, New England Region. 

[FR Doc. 05–18014 Filed 9–15–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–7969–8] 

State Program Requirements; Revision 

of the Approved National Pollutant 

Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) Program in North Dakota 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Public notice; final approval of 

the revision of the North Dakota NPDES 

Program. 

SUMMARY: On September 9, 2005, the 

Regional Administrator for Region 8 of 

the United States Environmental 

Protection Agency approved a revision 

to the existing North Dakota Pollutant 

Discharge Elimination System program. 

With this revision, the State of North 

Dakota is now authorized to administer 

and enforce a pretreatment program 

where the State has jurisdiction. This 

program will be administered by the 

North Dakota Department of Health 

(NDDH), Division of Water Quality 

Department. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Curt 

McCormick (8P–W–P), U.S. EPA, Region 

8, 999 18th Street, Suite 300, Denver, 

Colorado 80202–2466; telephone 

number (303) 312–6377; e-mail address 

mccormick.curt@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Under section 402 of the Clean Water 

Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1342, the EPA 

may issue permits allowing discharges 

of pollutants from point sources into 

waters of the United States, subject to 

various requirements of the CWA. These 

permits are known as National Pollutant 

Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) 

permits. Section 402(b) of the CWA, 33 

U.S.C. 1342(b), allows states to apply to 

the EPA for authorization to administer 

their own NPDES permit programs. In 

June of 1975, North Dakota’s NPDES 

Program was approved by the EPA. 

Section 402(b) of the CWA, 33 U.S.C. 

1345(c), authorizes any state desiring to 

administer its own industrial 

pretreatment program to do so in 

accordance with section 402(b)(8) and 

(9) of the CWA, following the 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 179 / Friday, September 16, 2005 / Notices 54745 

procedures and requirements set out in 

40 CFR 403.10. On November 12, 2003, 

North Dakota submitted an application 

to EPA requesting that EPA consider a 

revision to the State’s NPDES program 

to include the pretreatment program. 

The EPA, having found that North 

Dakota’s application meets all pertinent 

requirements in the CWA and the EPA’s 

regulations, particularly 40 CFR parts 

123 and 403, has approved North 

Dakota’s application for primary 

authority to administer a pretreatment 

program. 

II. Public Comments 

EPA provided a 30-day public 

comment period in the Federal Register 

notice dated March 29, 2004, and in 

three major newspapers in the State of 

North Dakota for any interested member 

of the public to comment on this 

application. In addition, individual 

mailings were sent to persons who 

would be interested in this action. No 

comments were received. No public 

hearing was requested, and none was 

held. 

III. Indian Country 

North Dakota is not authorized to 

carry out its industrial pretreatment 

program in Indian country, as defined in 

18 U.S.C. 1151. This includes, but is not 

limited to: 

1. Lands within the exterior 

boundaries of the following Indian 

reservations located within the State of 

North Dakota: 

A. Fort Totten Indian Reservation, 

B. Standing Rock Indian Reservation, 

C. Fort Berthold Indian Reservation, 

and 

D. Turtle Mountain Indian 

Reservation, 

2. Land held in trust by the U.S. for 

an Indian Tribe, and 

3. Other land which is ‘‘Indian 

country’’ within the meaning of 18 

U.S.C. 1151. 

IV. Administrative Requirements 

The EPA has long considered a 

determination to approve or deny a state 

NPDES program submission to 

constitute an adjudication, not a 

rulemaking. This is because an 

‘‘approval,’’ as that term is used in the 

Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 

551 et seq., constitutes a ‘‘license,’’

which, in turn, is the product of an 

‘‘adjudication.’’ Therefore, the 

requirements for rules that are 

established by the statutes and 

Executive Orders mentioned below 

would not apply to this action. Even if 

this action were considered a 

rulemaking, the statutes and Executive 

Orders discussed below would not 

apply for the following reasons. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The EPA has determined that there is 

no need for an Information Collection 

Request under the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., because this 

action would not impose any new 

federal reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements. Because the State of 

North Dakota has adopted the EPA’s 

Industrial Pretreatment Regulations at 

40 CFR 403.10(f)(1), the matters subject 

to reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements will remain the same after 

the EPA’s approval of North Dakota’s 

program. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 

as amended by the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., 

generally requires an agency to prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements under the 

Administrative Procedure Act or any 

other statute unless the agency certifies 

that the rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

As Regional Administrator for EPA 

Region VIII, I hereby certify, pursuant to 

5 U.S.C. 605(b), that this action will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act (UMRA), Public Law 104–4, 

establishes requirements for Federal 

agencies to assess the effects of their 

regulatory actions on State, local, and 

tribal governments and the private 

sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, 

the EPA is generally required to prepare 

a written statement, including a costbenefit analysis, for proposed and final 

rules with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may 

result in expenditures to State, local, 

and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 

or to the private sector, of $100 million 

or more in any one year. The EPA’s 

approval of North Dakota’s program is 

not a ‘‘Federal mandate,’’ because there 

is no federal mandate for states to 

establish pretreatment programs. 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104–

113 section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note), 

directs the EPA to use voluntary 

consensus standards in its regulatory 

activities unless to do so would be 

inconsistent with applicable law or 

otherwise impractical. Voluntary 

consensus standards are technical 

standards, e.g., material specifications, 

test methods, sampling procedures, and 

business practices, that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. This action does not 

involve the use of technical standards 

subject to the NTTAA. 

Executive Order 12866 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), the EPA must 

determine whether its regulatory actions 

are ‘‘significant’’ and therefore subject to 

review by the OMB. The EPA has 

determined that this approval action is 

not ‘‘significant’’ for purposes of 

Executive Order 12866 because, as 

mentioned above, North Dakota has 

adopted the EPA’s pretreatment 

regulations. 

Executive Order 12898—Environmental 

Justice 

Executive Order 12898, entitled 

‘‘Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority 

Populations and Low-Income 

Populations,’’ dated February 11, 1994, 

focuses federal attention on the 

environmental and human health 

conditions of minority populations and 

low-income populations with the goal of 

achieving environmental protection for 

all communities. Today’s action will not 

diminish the health protection to 

minority and low-income populations 

because, as mentioned above, it will not 

impose any different requirements than 

those already in effect for industrial 

pretreatment facilities. 

Executive Order 13045—Protection of 

Children 

Executive Order 13045, dated April 

23, 1997 (62 FR 19885), applies to any 

rule that (1) is determined to be 

‘‘economically significant’’ as defined in 

Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns 

an environmental health or safety risk 

that the EPA has reason to believe may 

have a disproportionate effect on 

children. This action is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 because it is not 

economically significant as defined in 

Executive Order 12866. 

Executive Order 13175—Consultation 

With Tribes 

Under Executive Order 13175, no 

Federal agency may issue a regulation 

that has tribal implications, that 

imposes substantial direct compliance 

costs on Indian tribal governments, and 

that is not required by statute, unless 

the Federal Government provides the 

funds necessary to pay the direct 

54746 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 179 / Friday, September 16, 2005 / Notices 

compliance costs incurred by the tribal 

governments or the agency consults 

with tribal officials early in the process 

of developing the proposed regulation. 

This action will not significantly affect 

any Indian tribe. As indicated above, 

North Dakota is not authorized to 

implement its pretreatment program in 

Indian country. The EPA will continue 

to administer the existing pretreatment 

program in Indian country in North 

Dakota. 

Executive Order 13132—Federalism 

Executive Order 13132, entitled 

‘‘Federalism,’’ dated August 10, 1999 

(64 FR 43255), requires the EPA to 

develop an accountable process to 

ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by 

State and local officials in the 

development of regulatory policies that 

have federalism implications.’’ The 

phrase ‘‘policies that have federalism 

implications’’ is defined in the 

Executive Order to include regulations 

that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on 

States, on the relationship between the 

National Government and States, or on 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government.’’ This action does 

not have federalism implications. It will 

not have any substantial direct effects 

on the states, on the relationship 

between States and the National 

Government, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government, as 

specified in Executive Order 13132. It 

will merely put in place a state 

regulatory program that is identical to 

the existing federal program. 

Executive Order 13211—Energy Effects 

Because it is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under Executive 

Order 12866, this action is not subject 

to Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use,’’ 66 FR 28355 (May 

22, 2001). 

Dated: September 9, 2005. 

Kerrigan G. Clough, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 05–18422 Filed 9–15–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 

Formations of, Acquisitions by, and 

Mergers of Bank Holding Companies 

The companies listed in this notice 

have applied to the Board for approval, 

pursuant to the Bank Holding Company 

Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) 

(BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 

225), and all other applicable statutes 

and regulations to become a bank 

holding company and/or to acquire the 

assets or the ownership of, control of, or 

the power to vote shares of a bank or 

bank holding company and all of the 

banks and nonbanking companies 

owned by the bank holding company, 

including the companies listed below. 

The applications listed below, as well 

as other related filings required by the 

Board, are available for immediate 

inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank 

indicated. The application also will be 

available for inspection at the offices of 

the Board of Governors. Interested 

persons may express their views in 

writing on the standards enumerated in 

the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the 

proposal also involves the acquisition of 

a nonbanking company, the review also 

includes whether the acquisition of the 

nonbanking company complies with the 

standards in section 4 of the BHC Act 

(12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise 

noted, nonbanking activities will be 

conducted throughout the United States. 

Additional information on all bank 

holding companies may be obtained 

from the National Information Center 

website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/. 

Unless otherwise noted, comments 

regarding each of these applications 

must be received at the Reserve Bank 

indicated or the offices of the Board of 

Governors not later than October 13, 

2005. 

A. Federal Reserve Bank of 

Richmond (A. Linwood Gill, III, Vice 

President) 701 East Byrd Street, 

Richmond, Virginia 23261-4528: 

1. SCBT Financial Corporation, 

Columbia, South Carolina, to acquire 

100% of the voting shares of Sun 

Bancshares, Inc., Murrells Inlet, South 

Carolina, and thereby indirectly acquire 

SunBank, National Association, 

Murrells Inlet, South Carolina. 

B. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago 

(Patrick M. Wilder, Assistant Vice 

President) 230 South LaSalle Street, 

Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414: 

1. Capitol Bancorp, Ltd., Lansing, 

Michigan, to acquire 100 percet of the 

voting shares of Capitol Development 

Bancorp Limited III, Lansing, Michigan, 

and thereby indirectly acquire Bank of 

Belleville (in organization), Belleville, 

Illinois. In connection with this 

application Capitol Development 

Bancorp Limited III has applied to 

become a bank holding company. 

C. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas 

(W. Arthur Tribble, Vice President) 2200 

North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201- 

2272: 

1. FC Holdings, Inc., Houston, Texas, 

and FC Holdings of Delaware, Inc., 

Wilmington, Delaware; to acquire 100 

percent of the voting shares of Lake 

Area National Bank, Trinity, Texas. 

D. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta 

(Andre Anderson, Vice President) 1000 

Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 

30303: 

1. Omni Bancshares, Inc., Metairie, 

Louisiana, to acquire 100 percent of the 

voting shares of Omni Bank, Baton 

Rouge, Louisiana (in organization). 

Comments on this application must be 

received by September 29, 2005. 

2. West Alabama Capital Corp., 

Reform, Alabama, to merge with West 

Alabama Bancshares, Inc., and thereby 

indirectly acquire Merchants and 

Farmers Bank, both of Millport, 

Alabama. 

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System, September 13, 2005. 

Robert deV. Frierson, 

Deputy Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. 05–18467 Filed 9–15–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6210–01–S 

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 

Notice of Proposals to Engage in 

Permissible Nonbanking Activities or 

to Acquire Companies that are 

Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking 

Activities 

The companies listed in this notice 

have given notice under section 4 of the 

Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 

1843) (BHC Act) and Regulation Y (12 

CFR Part 225) to engage de novo, or to 

acquire or control voting securities or 

assets of a company, including the 

companies listed below, that engages 

either directly or through a subsidiary or 

other company, in a nonbanking activity 

that is listed in § 225.28 of Regulation Y 

(12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has 

determined by Order to be closely 

related to banking and permissible for 

bank holding companies. Unless 

otherwise noted, these activities will be 

conducted throughout the United States. 

Each notice is available for inspection 

at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. 

The notice also will be available for 

inspection at the offices of the Board of 

Governors. Interested persons may 

express their views in writing on the 

question whether the proposal complies 

with the standards of section 4 of the 

BHC Act. Additional information on all 

bank holding companies may be 

obtained from the National Information 

Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/. 

Unless otherwise noted, comments 

regarding the applications must be 

received at the Reserve Bank indicated 

or the offices of the Board of Governors 

not later than October 3, 2005.