69128 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 218 / Monday, November 14, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

PART 251—GEOLOGICAL AND 

GEOPHYSICAL (G&G) EXPLORATIONS 

OF THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF 

22. The authority citation for part 251 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.; 31 U.S.C. 

9701. 

23. In § 251.5, revise paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 251.5 Applying for permits or filing 

Notices. 

(a) Permits. You must submit a signed 

original and three copies of the MMS 

permit application form (Form MMS–

327). The form includes names of 

persons, type, location, purpose, and 

dates of activity, and environmental and 

other information. A nonrefundable 

service fee of $ 1,900 must accompany 

your application. The time period for 

extensions is defined on the permit form 

(Form MMS–328 (Geophysical 

Prospecting) or MMS–329 (Geological 

Prospecting)). 

* * * * * 

PART 280—PROSPECTING FOR 

MINERALS OTHER THAN OIL, GAS, 

AND SULPHUR ON THE OUTER 

CONTINENTAL SHELF 

24. The authority citation for part 280 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 

4332 et seq.; 31 U.S.C. 9701. 

25. In § 280.12, revise paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 280.12 What must I include in my 

application or notification? 

(a) Permits. You must submit to the 

RD a signed original and three copies of 

the permit application form (form 

MMS–134) at least 30 days before the 

startup date for activities in the permit 

area. If unusual circumstances prevent 

you from meeting this deadline, you 

must immediately contact the RD to 

arrange an acceptable deadline. The 

form includes names of persons, type, 

location, purpose, and dates of activity, 

as well as environmental and other 

information. A nonrefundable service 

fee of $ 1,900 must accompany your 

application. The time period for 

extensions is defined on the permit form 

(Form MMS–135 (Geophysical 

Exploration) or MMS–136 (Geological 

Exploration)). 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 05–22504 Filed 11–10–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[CGD09–05–131] 

RIN 1625–AA11 

Regulated Navigation Area, Chicago 

Sanitary and Ship Canal, Romeoville, 

IL 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing 

to establish a permanent regulated 

navigation area on the Chicago Sanitary 

and Ship Canal on the Illinois Waterway 

near Romeoville, IL. This permanent 

regulated navigation area will place 

navigational and operational restrictions 

on all vessels transiting through the 

demonstration electrical dispersal 

barrier located on the Chicago Sanitary 

and Ship Canal. This regulated 

navigation area is necessary to protect 

vessels and their crews from harm as a 

result of electrical discharges emitting 

from the electrical dispersal barrier as 

vessels transit over it. 

DATES: Comments and related materials 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

December 14, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments 

and related material to Commander 

(dpw–1) Ninth Coast Guard District, 

1240 E.9th Street, Room 2069, 

Cleveland, OH 44199. The Ninth Coast 

Guard District Planning and 

Development Section (dpw–1) 

maintains the public docket for this 

rulemaking. Comments and material 

received from the public, as well as 

documents indicated in this preamble as 

being available in the docket, will 

become part of this docket and will be 

available for inspection or copying 

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

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have further questions on this rule, 

contact CDR K. Phillips, Planning and 

Development Section, Ninth Coast 

Guard District, Cleveland, OH at (216) 

902–6045. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Request for Comments 

We encourage you to submit 

comments and related materials. If you 

submit a comment, please include your 

name and address, identify the docket 

number for this rulemaking [CGD09–05–

131], indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and give the reason for each 

comment. You may submit your 

comments and material by mail (see 

ADDRESSES). If you submit them by mail 

or delivery, submit them in an unbound 

format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, 

suitable for copying and electronic 

filing. If you submit them by mail and 

would like to know that they reached 

the facility, please enclose a stamped, 

self-addressed postcard or envelope. We 

will consider all comments and material 

received during the comment period, 

which may result in a modification to 

the rule. 

Public Meeting 

We do not now plan to hold a public 

meeting. But you may submit a request 

for a public meeting (see ADDRESSES) 

explaining why one would be 

beneficial. If we determine that one 

would aid this rulemaking, we will hold 

one at a time and place announced by 

a later notice in the Federal Register. 

Background and Purpose 

On January 7, 2005, the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers, in close 

coordination with the U. S. Coast Guard, 

conducted preliminary safety tests on 

the electrical dispersal barrier located at 

Mile Marker 296.5 of the Chicago 

Sanitary and Ship Canal near 

Romeoville, IL. This barrier was 

constructed to prevent Asian Carp from 

entering Lake Michigan through the 

Illinois River system by generating a 

low-voltage electric field across the 

canal. The Coast Guard and Army Corps 

of Engineers conducted field tests to 

ensure the continued safe navigation of 

commercial and recreational traffic 

across the barrier; however, results 

indicated a significant arcing risk and 

hazardous electrical discharges as 

vessels transited the barrier posing a 

significant risk to navigation through 

the barrier. To mitigate these risks, the 

proposed rule would place navigational 

and operational restrictions on all 

vessels transiting through the vicinity. 

On January 26, 2005 a regulated 

navigational area (RNA) was published 

in the Federal Register (70 FR 3625) as 

a temporary final rule. The temporary 

final rule was extended on August 10, 

2005 (70 FR 46407). Testing has 

continued since the regulation was first 

proposed in January 2005, but has not 

yet been completed. Preliminary results 

indicate that further tests and analysis 

are warranted and that this process may 

continue for an undetermined period of 

time. Therefore, the Coast Guard is 

proposing to establish a permanent 

RNA. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 218 / Monday, November 14, 2005 / Proposed Rules 69129 

Discussion of Rule 

Until the potential electrical hazards 

can be rectified, the Coast Guard will 

require vessels transiting the regulated 

navigation area to adhere to specified 

operational and navigational 

requirements. The regulated navigation 

area encompasses all waters of the 

Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal from 

the north side of the Romeo Highway 

Bridge at Mile Marker 296.1 to the aerial 

pipeline arch located at Mile Marker 

296.7. The requirements placed on 

vessels include: All vessels are 

prohibited from loitering in the 

regulated navigation area, vessels may 

enter the regulated navigation area for 

the sole purpose of transiting to the 

other side, and must maintain headway 

throughout the transit, all personnel on 

open decks must wear a Coast Guard 

approved Type I personal flotation 

device while in the regulated navigation 

area, vessels may not moor or lay up on 

the right or left descending banks in the 

regulated navigation area, towboats may 

not make or break tows in the regulated 

navigation area, vessels may not pass 

(meet or overtake) in the regulated 

navigation area and must make a 

SECURITE call when approaching the 

barrier to announce intentions and work 

out passing arrangements on either side, 

and commercial tows transiting the 

regulated navigation area must be made 

up with wire rope to ensure electrical 

connectivity between all segments of the 

tow. 

These restrictions are necessary for 

safe navigation of the regulated 

navigation area and to ensure the safety 

of vessels and their personnel as well as 

the public’s safety due to the electrical 

discharges noted during recent safety 

tests conducted by the Army Corps of 

Engineers. Deviation from this rule is 

prohibited unless specifically 

authorized by the Commander, Ninth 

Coast Guard District or his designated 

representative. The Commander, Ninth 

Coast Guard District will designate 

Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan as 

his designated representative for the 

purposes of this rule. 

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. It has not been reviewed by the 

Office of Management and Budget 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. This determination 

is based on the fact that traffic will still 

be able to transit through the RNA. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered 

whether this proposed 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. 

We suspect that there may be small 

entities affected by this rule but are 

unable to provide more definitive 

information as to the number of small 

entities that may be affected. The risk, 

outlined above, is severe and requires 

that immediate action be taken. The 

Coast Guard will evaluate whether a 

substantial number of small entities are 

affected as more information becomes 

available. 

If you think that your business, 

organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity 

and that this rule will have a significant 

economic impact on it, please submit a 

comment to the Docket Management 

Facility at the address under ADDRESSES. 

In your comment, explain why you 

think it qualifies and how and to what 

degree this rule would economically 

affect it. 

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 can 

better evaluate its effects on them and 

participate in the rulemaking process. 

Small businesses may send comments 

on 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 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 

69130 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 218 / Monday, November 14, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

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 made a preliminary determination 

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 we believe this 

rule should be categorically excluded, 

under figure 2–1, paragraph 34(g) from 

further environmental documentation. 

This temporary rule establishes a 

regulated navigation area and as such is 

covered by this paragraph. 

A final ‘‘Environmental Analysis 

Check List’’ and a final ‘‘Categorical 

Exclusion Determination’’ are available 

in the docket where indicated under 

ADDRESSES. Comments on this section 

will be considered before we make the 

final decision on whether the rule 

should be categorically excluded 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 proposes to 

amend 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 § 165.923 to read as follows: 

§ 165.923 Regulated Navigation Area 

between mile markers 296.1 and 296.7 of 

the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal 

located near Romeoville, IL. 

(a) Location. The following is a 

Regulated Navigation Area: All waters 

of the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, 

Romeoville, IL between the north side of 

Romeo Road Bridge Mile Marker 296.1, 

and the south side of the Aerial Pipeline 

Mile Marker 296.7. 

(b) Regulations. (1) The general 

regulations contained in 33 CFR 165.13 

apply. 

(2) All vessels are prohibited from 

loitering in the regulated navigation 

area. 

(3) Vessels may enter the regulated 

navigation area for the sole purpose of 

transiting to the other side, and must 

maintain headway throughout the 

transit. 

(4) All personnel on open decks must 

wear a Coast Guard approved Type I 

personal flotation device while in the 

regulated navigation area. 

(5) Vessels may not moor or lay up on 

the right or left descending banks of the 

regulated navigation area. 

(6) Towboats may not make or break 

tows in the regulated navigation area. 

(7) Vessels may not pass (meet or 

overtake) in the regulated navigation 

area and must make a SECURITE call 

when approaching the barrier to 

announce intentions and work out 

passing arrangements on either side. 

(8) Commercial tows transiting the 

regulated navigation area must be made 

up with wire rope to ensure electrical 

connectivity between all segments of the 

tow. 

(c) Compliance. All persons and 

vessels shall comply with this rule and 

any additional instructions of the Ninth 

Coast Guard District Commander, or his 

designated representative. The Captain 

of the Port, Lake Michigan is a 

designated representative of the District 

Commander for the purposes of this 

rule. 

Dated: October 31, 2005. 

T.W. Sparks, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

Ninth Coast Guard District, Acting. 

[FR Doc. 05–22497 Filed 11–10–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[R05–OAR–2005–IN–0009; FRL–7996–1] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and Designation 

of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; Indiana; Redesignation of 

Greene County and Jackson County 8- 

Hour Ozone Nonattainment Areas to 

Attainment for Ozone 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to make 

determinations that the Greene County 

and Jackson County ozone 

nonattainment areas have attained the 8- 

hour ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS). These 

proposed determinations are based on 

three years of complete, quality-assured 

ambient air quality monitoring data for 

the 2002–2004 seasons that demonstrate 

that the 8-hour ozone NAAQS has been 

attained in the areas. 

EPA is proposing to approve requests 

from the State of Indiana to redesignate 

the Greene County and Jackson County 

areas to attainment of the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. These requests were submitted 

by the Indiana Department of 

Environmental Management (IDEM) on 

July 15, 2005 and supplemented on 

September 6, 2005, September 7, 2005, 

October 6, 2005, and October 20, 2005. 

In proposing to approve these requests, 

EPA is also proposing to approve the 

State’s plans for maintaining the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS through 2015 in these 

areas as a revision to the Indiana State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). EPA is also 

proposing to find adequate and approve 

the State’s 2015 Motor Vehicle Emission 

Budgets (MVEBs) for these areas. 

In the final rules section of this 

Federal Register, EPA is approving the 

SIP revisions as a direct final rule 

without prior proposal, because EPA