Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 68335 

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 

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, 

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)(h), of the 

Instruction, from further environmental 

documentation. An ‘‘Environmental 

Analysis Check List’’ and a ‘‘Categorical 

Exclusion Determination’’ are not 

required for this rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100 

Marine safety, Navigation (water), 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, waterways. 

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 100 as follows: 

PART 100—MARINE EVENTS & 

REGATTAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 100 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. A new temporary section 100.35T–

07–116 is added to read as follows: 

§ 100.35T–07–116 Offshore Super Series 

Boat Race; St. Petersburg Beach, FL. 

(a) Regulated Area. The regulated area 

for the Offshore Super Series Boat Race 

encompasses all waters of St. Petersburg 

Beach, Florida in the vicinity of the Don 

Cesar Hotel, located within a line 

connecting the following points (NAD 

83): 

1: 27°43′26′′ N, 82°44′35′′ W; 

2: 27°43′37′′ N, 82°46′03′′ W; 

3: 27°43′12′′ N, 82°46′12′′ W; 

4: 27°41′27′′ N, 82°45′32′′ W. 

5: 27°41′14′′ N, 82°44′20′′ W; along the 

contour of the shore and returning 

to point 1. 

(b) Special local Regulations. Nonparticipant vessels and persons are 

prohibited from entering the Regulated 

Area as defined in paragraph (a) unless 

authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol 

Commander or their designated 

representative. 

(c) Enforcement Period. This rule will 

be enforced from 10:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. 

on November 16, 17, 19, and 20, 2005. 

(d) Effective Period. This rule is 

effective from 10:30 a.m. on November 

16, 2005 through 5:30 p.m. on 

November 20, 2005. 

Dated: October 28, 2005. 

D. B. Peterman, 

RADM, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

Seventh Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 05–22390 Filed 11–9–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[CGD05–05–049] 

RIN 1625–AA09 

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; 

Elizabeth River, Eastern Branch, VA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is changing 

the regulations that govern the operation 

of the Berkley Bridge across the Eastern 

Branch of the Elizabeth River, mile 0.4, 

in Norfolk, Virginia. The final rule will 

extend the morning and evening rush 

hour closure periods so that the 

morning rush hour period starts at 5 

a.m. and ends at 9 a.m., and the evening 

rush hour starts at 3 p.m. and ends at 

7 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The rule will also 

reduce the deep-draft commercial vessel 

requirement to 18 feet and the advance 

notice period to 6 hours. This change 

will relieve vehicular traffic congestion 

during the weekday rush hours while 

still providing for the reasonable needs 

of navigation. 

DATES: This rule is effective December 

12, 2005. 

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 CGD05–05–049 and are available 

for inspection or copying at Commander 

(obr), Fifth Coast Guard District, Federal 

Building, 1st Floor, 431 Crawford Street, 

Portsmouth, VA 23704–5004 between 8 

a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The 

Fifth Coast Guard District maintains the 

public docket for this rulemaking. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary 

S. Heyer, Bridge Management Specialist, 

Fifth Coast Guard District, at (757) 398–

6629. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulatory History 

On June 8, 2005, we published a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

entitled ‘‘Drawbridge Operation 

Regulations; Elizabeth River, Eastern 

Branch, VA’’ in the Federal Register (70 

FR 33405). We received two comments 

on the proposed rule. No public meeting 

was requested, and none was held. 

Background and Purpose 

On behalf of the City of Norfolk, the 

Virginia Department of Transportation 

68336 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

(VDOT) who owns and operates this lifttype bridge, requested a change to the 

existing regulations for the Berkley 

Bridge. The current regulation, found at 

33 CFR 117.1007, allows the Berkley 

Bridge, at mile 0.4 in Norfolk, to remain 

closed one hour prior to the published 

start of a scheduled marine event 

regulated under § 100.501, and remain 

closed until one hour following the 

completion of the event unless the 

Patrol Commander designated under 

§ 100.501 allows the bridge to open for 

commercial vessel traffic. It also 

mandates that the bridge shall open on 

signal any time except from 5:30 a.m. to 

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

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays; shall open at any time for 

commercial vessels with a draft of 22 

feet or more, provided at least 12 hours 

advance notice has been given to the 

Berkley Bridge Traffic Control Room at 

(804) 494–2424, and open on signal at 

any time for a vessel in distress. 

This final rule changes the regulations 

by extending the rush hour closure 

periods, by reducing the advance notice 

requirement to 6 hours for deep-draft 

vessels, and by ‘‘cleaning up’’ the 

remaining regulatory text to remove 

redundancy. These changes will help to 

alleviate the current traffic congestion. 

The Berkley Bridge is a principle 

arterial route that serves as the major 

evacuation highway in the event of 

emergencies or evacuations. Weekday 

vehicular traffic counts submitted by 

VDOT revealed that in 2002 and 2003, 

the Berkley Bridge has experienced a six 

percent (or 78,898 car) increase in traffic 

flow during the morning and evening 

rush hours. 

Also on September 18, 2003, the 

Hampton Roads area experienced severe 

damage as a result of Hurricane Isabel. 

Due to a heavy storm surge along the 

entire coastal area, the Portsmouth 

Midtown Tunnel was flooded. While 

the tunnel was undergoing an 

evaluation and repairs, a significant 

amount of vehicular traffic that used the 

tunnel on a daily basis was shifted onto 

the Berkley Bridge. In its attempt to 

manage this increase in road traffic and 

associated safety concerns, VDOT 

requested an immediate expansion of 

the current authorized rush hour closure 

periods of the Berkley Bridge. Until the 

repairs were completed, the Coast Guard 

responded by issuing a temporary final 

rule that extended the morning and 

evening closure periods and suspended 

the provision allowing openings for 

deep-draft commercial vessels. The 

temporary final rulemaking 

implemented for the Berkley Bridge to 

stay open a little longer in the morning 

and evening was successful in easing 

the commute for thousands of motorists. 

Therefore, this final rule will help 

alleviate the growing vehicular traffic 

congestion and to increase public safety, 

while still balancing the needs of 

marine and vehicular traffic. 

Discussion of Comments and Changes 

The Coast Guard received one 

comment on the NPRM from the 

Hampton Roads Maritime Association 

and one from the C&P Tug and Barge 

Company. Both respondents opposed 

further restrictions to the Berkley Bridge 

presented in the NPRM and requested 

changes. The changes offered by the 

respondents would reduce the deepdraft commercial vessel requirement 

from 22 feet to 18 feet and the advance 

notice period from 12 hours to 6 hours. 

These changes would give deep-draft 

commercial vessel operators more 

flexibility to manage tide restrictions. 

The Coast Guard considered these 

changes to be safer to navigation and the 

final rule was changed to reflect these 

modifications. 

Regulatory Evaluation 

This final 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 final rule to be so minimal that a 

full Regulatory Evaluation under the 

regulatory policies and procedures of 

DHS is unnecessary. We reached this 

conclusion based on the fact that this 

rule will have only a minimal impact on 

maritime traffic transiting the bridge. 

Mariners can plan their trips in 

accordance with the scheduled bridge 

openings, to minimize delays. 

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. 

For the reasons stated above, 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. 

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 process. 

No assistance was requested from any 

small entity. 

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 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, eliminates 

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 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 68337 

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 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. 

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 M16475.1D, 

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 because it has been 

determined that the promulgation of 

operating regulations for drawbridges 

are categorically excluded. 

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. In § 117.1007, remove paragraphs 

(c)(3) and (c)(4) and revise paragraphs 

(c)(1) and (c)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 117.1007 Elizabeth River—Eastern 

Branch. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(1) Shall open on signal at any time, 

except from 5 a.m. to 9 a.m. and from 

3 p.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

(2) From 5 a.m. to 9 a.m. and from 3 

p.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays, shall open at 

any time for commercial vessels with a 

draft of 18 feet or more, provided that 

at least 6 hours advance notice has been 

given to the Berkley Bridge Traffic 

Control room at (757) 494–2490. 

Dated: November 2, 2005. 

L.L. Hereth, 

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

Fifth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 05–22388 Filed 11–9–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[R09–OAR–2005–AZ–0007, FRL–7994–6] 

Interim Final Determination to Stay 

and/or Defer Sanctions, Pinal County 

Air Quality Control District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Interim final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is making an interim 

final determination to stay and/or defer 

imposition of sanctions based on a 

proposed approval of a revision to the 

Pinal County Air Quality Control 

District (PCAQCD) portion of the 

Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

published elsewhere in today’s Federal 

Register. The revisions concern 

PCAQCD Rule 2–8–300. 

DATES: This interim final determination 

is effective on November 10, 2005. 

However, comments will be accepted 

until December 12, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number R09–OAR–

2005–AZ–0007, by one of the following 

methods: 

• Agency Website: http:// 

docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. EPA prefers 

receiving comments through this 

electronic public docket and comment 

system. Follow the on-line instructions 

to submit comments. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

• E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

• Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air–4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at 

http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through the 

agency website, eRulemaking portal, or 

e-mail. The agency website and 

eRulemaking portal are Aanonymous 

access’’ systems, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send e-mail 

directly to EPA, your e-mail address 

will be automatically captured and 

included as part of the public comment. 

If EPA cannot read your comment due 

to technical difficulties and cannot 

contact you for clarification, EPA may 

not be able to consider your comment. 

Docket: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub and in 

hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 

California. While all documents in the 

docket are listed in the index, some 

information may be publicly available 

only at the hard copy location (e.g.,