58608 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

The FAA has determined that this 

regulation only involves an established 

body of technical regulations for which 

frequent and routine amendments are 

necessary to keep them operationally 

current. Therefore, this regulation: (1) is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not 

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under Department of 

Transportation (DOT) Regulatory 

Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; 

February 26, 1979); and (3) does not 

warrant preparation of a regulatory 

evaluation as the anticipated impact is 

so minimal. Since this is a routine 

matter that will only affect air traffic 

procedures and air navigation, it is 

certified that this rule, when 

promulgated, will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities under the 

criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. 

Environmental Review 

The FAA has determined that this 

action qualifies for categorical exclusion 

under the National Environmental 

Policy Act in accordance with FAA 

Order 1050.1E, ‘‘Environmental 

Impacts: Policies and Procedures.’’ This 

airspace action is not expected to cause 

any potentially significant 

environmental impacts, and no 

extraordinary circumstances exist that 

warrant preparation of an 

environmental assessment. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 73 

Airspace, Prohibited areas, Restricted 

areas. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

■ In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends 14 CFR part 73, as follows: 

PART 73—SPECIAL USE AIRSPACE 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 73 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 

40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–

1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 73.23 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 73.23 is amended as 

follows: 

* * * * * 

R–3101 PMRFAC Four, HI

[Amended] 

By removing the words ‘‘Controlling 

agency. FAA, Honolulu CERAP.’’ and 

inserting the words ‘‘Controlling agency. 

FAA, Honolulu Control Facility.’’

* * * * * 

R–3103 Humuula, HI [Amended] 

By removing the words ‘‘Controlling 

agency. FAA, Honolulu CERAP.’’ and 

inserting the words ‘‘Controlling agency. 

FAA, Honolulu Control Facility.’’

* * * * * 

R–3107 Kaula Rock, HI [Amended] 

By removing the words ‘‘Controlling 

agency. FAA, Honolulu CERAP.’’ and 

inserting the words ‘‘Controlling agency. 

FAA, Honolulu Control Facility.’’

* * * * * 

R–3109A Schofield-Makua, Oahu, HI

[Amended] 

By removing the words ‘‘Controlling 

agency. FAA, Honolulu ATCT.’’ and 

inserting the words ‘‘Controlling agency. 

FAA, Honolulu Control Facility.’’

* * * * * 

R–3109B Schofield-Makua, Oahu, HI

[Amended] 

By removing the words ‘‘Controlling 

agency. FAA, Honolulu ATCT.’’ and 

inserting the words ‘‘Controlling agency. 

FAA, Honolulu Control Facility.’’

* * * * * 

R–3109C Schofield-Makua, Oahu, HI

[Amended] 

By removing the words ‘‘Controlling 

agency. FAA, Honolulu ATCT.’’ and 

inserting the words ‘‘Controlling agency. 

FAA, Honolulu Control Facility.’’

* * * * * 

R–3110A Schofield-Makua, Oahu, HI

[Amended] 

By removing the words ‘‘Controlling 

agency. FAA, Honolulu ATCT.’’ and 

inserting the words ‘‘Controlling agency. 

FAA, Honolulu Control Facility.’’

* * * * * 

R–3110B Schofield-Makua, Oahu, HI

[Amended] 

By removing the words ‘‘Controlling 

agency. FAA, Honolulu ATCT.’’ and 

inserting the words ‘‘Controlling agency. 

FAA, Honolulu Control Facility.’’

* * * * * 

R–3110C Schofield-Makua, Oahu, HI

[Amended] 

By removing the words ‘‘Controlling 

agency. FAA, Honolulu ATCT.’’ and 

inserting the words ‘‘Controlling agency. 

FAA, Honolulu Control Facility.’’

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC, on October 3, 

2005. 

Edith V Parish, 

Acting Manager, Airspace and Rules. 

[FR Doc. 05–20279 Filed 10–6–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[CGD13–05–037] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone Regulations, Downed 

Aircraft, Browns Bay, WA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a temporary safety zone on 

the waters of Puget Sound around the 

body and debris of a helicopter. The 

Coast Guard is establishing this zone to 

ensure unencumbered access for 

rescuers and investigators, and protect 

the public from numerous dangers 

associated with recovery of this 

submerged aircraft. Entry into this zone 

is prohibited unless authorized by the 

Captain of the Port, Puget Sound or his 

designated representatives. 

DATES: This rule is effective from 4 p.m. 

(PDT) October 3, 2005 until 8 a.m. (PDT) 

October 17, 2005 unless sooner 

cancelled by the Captain of the Port. 

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this 

preamble as being available in the 

docket are part of docket CGD13–05–

037 and are available for inspection or 

copying at the Waterways Management 

Division, Coast Guard Sector Seattle, 

1519 Alaskan Way South, Seattle, WA, 

98134, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

LTJG Jes Hagen, c/o Captain of the Port 

Puget Sound, 1519 Alaskan Way South, 

Seattle, Washington 98134, (206) 217–

6040. 

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) and 

5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds 

that good cause exists for not publishing 

an NPRM and for making this rule 

effective less than 30 days after 

publication in the Federal Register. 

Publishing a NPRM would be contrary 

to public interest since immediate 

action is necessary to ensure the safety 

of vessels and persons that transit in the 

vicinity of the submerged helicopter in 

Browns Bay, WA. If normal notice and 

comment procedures were followed, 

this rule would not become effective 

until after the date of the event. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58609 

Background and Purpose 

The Coast Guard is establishing a 

temporary safety zone to allow for the 

safe recovery of a downed helicopter 

submerged in the waters of Puget 

Sound. The Coast Guard is establishing 

this zone to ensure unencumbered 

access for rescuers and investigators, 

and protect the public from numerous 

dangers associated with recovery of this 

submerged aircraft. The safety zone is 

needed to protect watercraft and their 

occupants from safety hazards 

associated with the recovery efforts. 

Discussion of Rule 

This rule, for safety concerns, will 

control vessels, personnel and 

individual movements in a safety zone 

surrounding the recovery operations 

indicated in section 2 of this Temporary 

Final Rule. The safety zone includes all 

waters with a radius of 1 nautical mile 

from the point at 47 degrees, 51.0 

minutes North, 122 degrees, 21.0 

minutes West [datum: NAD 1983], 

approximately three nautical miles 

northeast of Edwards Point, Edmonds, 

WA, where a submerged helicopter, tail 

number A–109, is located. The safety 

zone does not extend on land. 

The Coast Guard, through this action, 

intends to promote the safety of 

personnel, vessels, and facilities in the 

area. Entry into this zone will be 

prohibited unless authorized by the 

Captain of the Port. This safety zone 

will be enforced by Coast Guard 

personnel. The Captain of the Port may 

be assisted by other Federal, State, or 

local agencies. 

Regulatory Evaluation 

This temporary rule is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 

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 temporary rule to be so minimal 

that a full Regulatory Evaluation under 

paragraph 10(e) of the regulatory 

policies and procedures of DHS is 

unnecessary. This expectation is based 

on the fact that the regulated area 

established by the regulation would 

encompass a small area that should not 

significantly impact commercial or 

recreational traffic. For the above 

reasons, the Coast Guard does not 

anticipate any significant economic 

impact. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), we considered 

whether this rule would have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The term ‘‘small entities’’ include 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. 

This rule will affect the following 

entities, some of which may be small 

entities: the owners or operators of 

vessels intending to transit this portion 

of Browns Bay during the time this 

regulation is in effect. The zone will not 

have a significant economic impact due 

to its short duration and small area. 

Because the impacts of this rule are 

expected to be so minimal, the Coast 

Guard certifies under 605(b) of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.) that this temporary rule will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

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 can 

better evaluate its effects on them and 

participate in the rulemaking. If the rule 

would affect your small business, 

organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction and you have questions 

concerning its provisions or options for 

compliance, please contact the person 

listed in the (FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT) section. 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). 

Collection of Information 

This temporary rule would call for no 

new collection of information under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3520). 

Federalism 

We have analyzed this temporary rule 

under Executive Order 13132 and have 

determined that this rule does not have 

implications for federalism under that 

Order. 

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 

State, local, or tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or 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 temporary rule would 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 temporary 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 concern an environmental risk 

to health or risk to safety that may 

disproportionately affect children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

The Coast Guard recognizes the rights 

of Native American Tribes under the 

Stevens Treaties. Moreover, the Coast 

Guard is committed to working with 

Tribal Governments to implement local 

policies to mitigate tribal concerns. We 

have determined that these security 

zones and fishing rights protection need 

not be incompatible. We have also 

determined that this Temporary Final 

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. 

Nevertheless, Indian Tribes that have 

questions concerning the provisions of 

this Temporary Final Rule or options for 

58610 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

compliance are encouraged to contact 

the point of contact listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

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. 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 M16475.1D, 

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 (34)(g), of the 

Instruction, from further environmental 

documentation. A final ‘‘Environmental 

Analysis Check List’’ and a final 

‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’

will be available in the docket where 

indicated under ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and record keeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

■ For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends part 

165 of title 33, Code of Federal 

Regulations, 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. From 4 p.m. (PDT) October 3, 2005 

until 8 a.m. (PDT) October 17, 2005 

unless sooner cancelled by the Captain 

Of the Port, a temporary §165.T13–05–

017 is added to read as follows: 

§ 165.T13–05–017 Safety Zone: Downed 

Aircraft, Browns Bay, Puget Sound, WA. 

(a) Location. The following area is a 

safety zone: The waters within a one 

nautical mile radius of 47 degrees, 51.0 

minutes North, 122 degrees, 21.0 

minutes West [datum: NAD 1983], 

approximately three nautical miles 

northeast of Edwards Point, Edmonds, 

Washington, where a submerged 

helicopter, tail number A–109, is 

located. 

(b) Regulations. In accordance with 

the general regulations in 33 CFR part 

165, subpart C, no person or vessel may 

enter or remain in this safety zone, 

except for vessels involved in the 

salvage and investigation operations, 

supporting personnel, or other vessels 

authorized by the Captain of the Port or 

his designated representatives. 

(c) Enforcement Period. From 4 p.m. 

(PDT) October 3, 2005 until 8 a.m. (PDT) 

October 17, 2005 unless sooner 

cancelled by the Captain of the Port. 

Dated: October 3, 2005. 

Stephen P. Metruck, 

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

Port, Puget Sound. 

[FR Doc. 05–20342 Filed 10–5–05; 2:13 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

43 CFR Part 3140 

[WO–310–1310–PP–241A] 

RIN 1004–AD76 

Leasing in Special Tar Sand Areas 

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 

Department of the Interior. 

ACTION: Interim final rule with request 

for comments. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM or ‘‘we’’) is issuing 

this interim final rule to amend 

regulations for the leasing of 

hydrocarbons, except coal, gilsonite and 

oil shale, in special tar sand areas. In 

this rule, BLM amends our regulations 

to respond to provisions of the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005 that allow separate 

oil and gas leases and tar sand leases in 

special tar sand areas, specify several oil 

and gas leasing practices that apply to 

tar sand leases, increase the maximum 

size for combined hydrocarbon leases 

and tar sand leases, and set the 

minimum acceptable bid for tar sand 

leases at $2.00 per acre. The law 

requiring these changes also requires 

that this rule be published as a final rule 

within 45 days of enactment. 

This is an interim final rule. Although 

the rule is effective upon publication, 

there is a 60-day comment period that 

starts on the date of publication. After 

the comment period, we will review the 

comments and may issue a further final 

rule making any necessary changes. 

DATES: The interim final rule is effective 

October 7, 2005. 

Comments 

You should submit your comments on 

or before December 6, 2005. The BLM 

will not necessarily consider any 

comments received after the above date 

during its decision-making on the 

interim final rule. 

ADDRESSES: 

Comments 

You may mail comments to Director 

(630), Bureau of Land Management, 

Eastern States Office, 7450 Boston 

Boulevard, Springfield, Virginia 22153. 

Hand delivery: 1620 L Street NW., Suite 

401, Washington, DC 20036. For 

information about filing comments 

electronically, see the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section under ‘‘Electronic 

access and filing address.’’

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron 

Teseneer in the Solid Minerals Group at 

(202) 452–5094. For assistance in