Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 81 / Wednesday, April 26, 2000 / Proposed Rules 24439

Dated: March 28, 2000.

R. E. Bennis,

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

Port, New York.

[FR Doc. 00–10443 Filed 4–21–00; 4:20 pm]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD 05–00–004]

RIN 2115–AA97

Safety Zone; Transit of S/V Amerigo

Vespucci, Chesapeake Bay, Baltimore,

MD

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to

establish a temporary moving safety

zone in the Chesapeake Bay and the Port

of Baltimore, Maryland during the

transit of the sailing vessel Amerigo

Vespucci through those waters. This

action is necessary to provide for the

safety of life on navigable waters during

the vessel’s transit. This action will

restrict vessel traffic in portions of the

Chesapeake Bay and the Port of

Baltimore.

DATES: Comments and related material

must reach the Coast Guard on or before

May 16, 2000.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments

and related material to Commander,

U.S. Coast Guard Activities, 2401

Hawkins Point Road, Baltimore,

Maryland 21226–1791, or deliver them

to the same address between 8 a.m. and

4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays. Commander, U.S.

Coast Guard Activities, 2401 Hawkins

Point Road, Baltimore, Maryland

21226–1791 maintains the public docket

for this rulemaking. Comments and

materials 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 at the above address between 8

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

Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Chief Warrant Officer Ron Houck, Port

Safety and Security Section, at (410)

576–2674.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

We encourage you to participate in

this rulemaking by submitting

comments and related material. If you

do so, please include your name and

address, identify the docket number for

this rulemaking (CGD05–00–004),

indicate the specific section of this

document to which each comment

applies, and give the reason for each

comment. Please submit all comments

and related material in an unbound

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

suitable for copying. If you would like

to know they reached us, please enclose

a stamped, self-addressed postcard or

envelope. The comment period for this

proposed regulation is 20 days. This

time period is adequate to allow local

input because the event is highly

publicized. The shortened comment

period will allow the full 30-day

publication requirement prior to the

final rule becoming effective. We will

consider all comments and material

received during the comment period.

We may change this proposed rule in

view of them.

Public Meeting

We do not now plan to hold a public

meeting. But you may submit a request

for a meeting by writing to Commander,

(Aoax), Fifth Coast Guard District, 431

Crawford Street, Portsmouth, Virginia

23704–5004, 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

The sailing vessel Amerigo Vespucci

is planning to transit the waters of the

Chesapeake Bay enroute to the Port of

Baltimore, Maryland on June 21, 2000

and enroute from the Port of Baltimore,

Maryland on June 24, 2000. The transits

of this 330-foot sailing vessel are

expected to attract a large fleet of

spectator vessels. The purpose of these

regulations is to promote maritime

safety and protect the sailing vessel and

the boating public during these transits

by establishing a safety buffer around

the sailing vessel.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

The Coast Guard proposes

establishing a temporary moving safety

zone around the 330-foot sailing vessel,

Amerigo Vespucci, during her transit of

Chesapeake Bay enroute to the Port of

Baltimore, Maryland on June 21, 2000

and enroute from the Port of Baltimore

on June 24, 2000. The safety zone will

include all waters within 150 yards

ahead of or 50 yards abeam or astern of

the vessel while she is transiting the

area. No vessels will be allowed to enter

or navigate within this area unless

authorized by the Captain of the Port.

Regulatory Evaluation

This proposed 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

Transportation (DOT) (44 FR 11040;

February 26, 1979).

We expect the economic impact of

this proposed rule to be so minimal that

a full Regulatory Evaluation under

paragraph 10e of the regulatory policies

and procedures of DOT is unnecessary.

These regulations are limited in

duration, affect only a limited area, and

will be well publicized to allow

mariners to make alternative plans for

transiting the affected area.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we 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.

The Coast Guard certifies under 5

U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule

would not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small

entities.

This proposed rule would affect the

following entities, some of which might

be small entities: the owners or

operators of vessels intending to operate

or anchor in portions of the Chesapeake

Bay and the Port of Baltimore,

Maryland. The regulations would not

have a significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities for

the following reasons: the restrictions

are limited in duration, affect only

limited areas, and will be well

publicized to allow mariners to make

alternative plans for transiting the

affected areas.

If you think that your business,

organization or governmental

jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity

and that this proposed rule would have

a significant economic impact on it,

please submit a comment (see

ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it

qualifies and how and to what degree

this proposed rule would economically

affect it.

24440 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 81 / Wednesday, April 26, 2000 / Proposed Rules

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 proposed 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 Commander

(Aoax), Fifth Coast Guard District,

431Crawford Street, Portsmouth,

Virginia 23704–5004.

Collection of Information

This proposed 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 proposed rule

under E.O. 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) governs

the issuance of Federal regulations that

require unfunded mandates. An

unfunded mandate is a regulation that

requires a State, local, or tribal

government or the private sector to

incur direct costs without the Federal

Government’s having first provided the

funds to pay those costs. This proposed

rule would not impose an unfunded

mandate.

Taking of Private Property

This proposed rule would not effect a

taking of private property or otherwise

have taking implications under E.O.

12630, Governmental Actions and

Interference with Constitutionally

Protected Property Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

This proposed rule meets applicable

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of

E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to

minimize litigation, eliminate

ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

We have analyzed this proposed rule

under E.O. 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.

Environment

We considered the environmental

impact of this proposed rule and

concluded that, under figure 2–1,

paragraph (34)(g), of Commandant

Instruction M16475.1C; this proposed

rule is categorically excluded from

further environmental documentation.

This rule will have no affect on the

environment.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Security measures,

Waterways.

Regulation

For the reasons discussed in the

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to

amend 33 CFR Part 165 as follows:

PART 165—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 165

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1225 and 1231; 50

U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–

6, and 160.5; 49 CFR 1.46.

2. Add temporary § 165.T05–004 to

read as follows:

§ 165.T05–004 Safety Zone; Transit of S/V

Amerigo Vespucci, Chesapeake Bay,

Baltimore, MD

(a) Definitions: Captain of the Port

means the Commander, Coast Guard

Activities Baltimore or any Coast Guard

commissioned, warrant, or petty officer

who has been authorized by the Captain

of the Port to act on his behalf.

(b) Location. The following area is a

moving safety zone: All waters within

150 yards ahead of or 50 yards abeam

or astern of the sailing vessel Amerigo

Vespucci, while the vessel is operating

on the Chesapeake Bay or its tributaries,

north of the Maryland-Virginia border

and south of latitude 39°35′00′′.

(c) Regulations.

(1) All persons are required to comply

with the general regulations governing

safety zones in § 165.23 of this part.

(2) No person or vessel may enter or

navigate within the regulated areas

unless authorized to do so by the

Captain of the Port. Any person or

vessel authorized to enter the regulated

areas must operate in strict conformance

with any directions given by the Captain

of the Port and leave the regulated area

immediately if the Captain of the Port so

orders.

(3) The Coast Guard vessels enforcing

this section can be contacted on VHF

Marine Band Radio, channels 13 and 16.

The Captain of the Port can be contacted

at telephone number (410) 576–2521 or

2693.

(4) The Captain of the Port will notify

the public of any changes in the status

of this zone by a Marine Safety Radio

Broadcast on VHF–FM marine band

radio, channel 22 (157.1 MHZ).

(d) Effective dates: These regulations

are effective from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. on

June 21, 2000 and June 24, 2000.

Dated: April 21, 2000.

C. L. Miller,

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

Port of Baltimore.

[FR Doc. 00–10500 Filed 4–24–00; 1:23 pm]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–U

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 635

[I.D. 110499B]

RIN 0648–AM79

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species;

Pelagic Longline Management

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of availability; request

for comments.

SUMMARY: On December 15, 1999, NMFS

proposed to prohibit pelagic longline

fishing at certain times and in certain

areas within the Exclusive Economic

Zone of the Atlantic Ocean off the coast

of the Southeastern United States and in

the Gulf of Mexico (64 FR 69982). The

intent of the proposed action is to

reduce bycatch and incidental catch by

pelagic longline fishermen who target

highly migratory species (HMS) and is

necessary to address bycatch and

incidental catch of overfished and

protected species. To address public

comment received concerning the

proposed closed areas and adjustments

to these areas that would help mitigate

the potential economic impacts, NMFS

requests further comment on an

alternative closed area in the Gulf of

Mexico (the DeSoto Canyon area), on

the Initial Regulatory Flexibility

Analysis (IRFA) issued with the

proposed rule, and on the extent to

which delayed effectiveness of the final

rule, if implemented, could mitigate

short-term economic impacts.

DATES: Comments must be received at

the appropriate address or fax number

(see ADDRESSES) no later than 5 p.m.,

eastern standard time, on May 12, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the

alternative of closing the DeSoto Canyon