Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 210 / Thursday, October 30, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 58647

1 17 CFR Part 232.

2 15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.

Issued in Kansas City, MO, on September

12, 1997.

Christopher R. Blum,

Acting Manager, Air Traffic Division, Central

Region.

[FR Doc. 97–28749 Filed 10–29–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 97–ASO–10]

Amendment to Class E Airspace;

Anniston, AL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment modifies the

Class E airspace area at Anniston, AL.

Global Positioning System (GPS)

Runway (RWY) 3 and RWY 21 Standard

Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAP)

have been developed for Talladega

Municipal Airport, and a GPS RWY 20

SIAP has been developed for St. Clair

County Airport. Additional controlled

airspace extending upward from 700

feet Above Ground Level (AGL) is

needed to accommodate the SIAPs.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, January 1,

1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Nancy B. Shelton, Airspace Branch, Air

Traffic Division, Federal Aviation

Administration, P.O. Box 20636,

Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone (404)

305–5576.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

On July 29, 1997, the FAA proposed

to amend 14 CFR part 71 by modifying

Class E airspace at Anniston, AL (62 FR

40488). This action would provide

adequate Class E airpsace for Instrument

Flight Rules (IFR) operations at

Talladega Municipal and St. Clair

County Airports.

Designations for Class E airspace

extending upward from 700 feet or more

above the surface of the Earth are

published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA

Order 7400.9E dated September 10,

1997, and effective September 16, 1997,

which is incorporated by reference in 14

CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace

designation listed in this document will

be published subsequently in the Order.

Interested parties were invited to

participate in this rulemaking

proceeding by submitting when

comments on the proposal to the FAA.

No comments objecting to the proposal

were received.

The Rule

This amendment to 14 CFR Part 71

modifies Class E airspace at Anniston,

AL. Global Positioning RWY 3 and RWY

21 SIAPs have been developed for

Talladega Municipal Airport, and a GPS

RWY 20 SIAP has been developed for

St. Clair County Airport. Additional

controlled airspace extending upward

from 700 feet AGL is needed to

accommodate the SIAPs.

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. It, therefore, (1) is not a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a

‘‘significant rule’’ under 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 will not have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference,

Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the

Federal Aviation Administration

amends 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,

CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D AND

CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS;

AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING

POINTS

1. The authority citation for 14 CFR

Part 71 continues to read as follows:

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

40120; EO 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–

1963 Comp., p. 389.

§ 71.1 [Amended]

2. The incorporation by reference in

14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation

Administration Order 7400.9E, Airspace

Designations and Reporting Points,

dated September 10, 1997, and effective

September 16, 1997, is amended as

follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas

extending upward from 700 feet or more

above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

ASO FL E5 Anniston, AL [Revised]

Anniston Metropolitan Airport, AL

(Lat. 33°35′17′′ N, long. 85°51′29′′ W)

Talladega Municipal Airport

(Lat. 33°34′12′′ N, long. 86°03′04′′ W)

St. Clair County Airport

(Lat. 33°33′32′′ N, long. 86°14′57′′ W)

That airspace extending upward from 700

feet above the surface within a 12-mile radius

of Anniston Metropolitan Airport and within

a 9.5-mile radius of Talladega Municipal

Airport and within a 11.5-mile radius of St.

Clair County Airport, excluding that airspace

within Restricted Area R–2101 when the

restricted area is active.

* * * * *

Issued in College Park, Georgia, on October

8, 1997.

Wade T. Carpenter,

Acting Manager, Air Traffic Division Southern

Region.

[FR Doc. 97–28748 Filed 10–29–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

17 CFR Part 232

[Release No. 33–7472; 34–39269]

Rule to Provide That the Commission

Will Not Accept Paper Filings That are

Required To Be Filed Electronically

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange

Commission is adding a rule to the

series of rules governing the submission

of filings and other documents through

the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis,

and Retrieval system. The new rule

provides that the Commission will not

accept any paper filing that is required

to be filed electronically, unless it

satisfies the requirements for a

temporary or continuing hardship

exemption.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The rule is effective on

January 1, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Margaret R. Black, Division of

Corporation Finance, (202) 942–2933, or

Ruth Armfield Sanders, Division of

Investment Management, (202) 942–

0633, U.S. Securities and Exchange

Commission, Washington, D.C. 20549.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S.

Securities and Exchange Commission

(the ‘‘Commission’’) is adding new Rule

14 to Regulation S–T1 under the

Securities Act of 1933 (‘‘Securities

Act’’).2
58648 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 210 / Thursday, October 30, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

3Rules 101 and 102 of Regulation S–T [17 CFR

232.101 and 17 CFR 232.102].

4Rule 101(a) of Regulation S–T [17 CFR

232.101(a)] specifically excepts ‘‘foreign private

issuers and foreign governments’’ from the persons

and entities subject to mandated electronic filing.

In the future, the Commission will consider

whether such filings should be required to be made

electronically.

5The other paper filings were filings from foreign

private issuers or foreign governments, filings

submitted in paper pursuant to a hardship

exemption, and filings on forms not yet required to

be filed electronically.

6The Commission staff screens all paper filings

to determine if they should have been filed on

EDGAR. If the submission should have been filed

electronically, the staff calls or writes to the filer,

and asks the filer to file an electronic copy of the

document, or to apply for a hardship exemption if

appropriate.

7Rule 201 of Regulation S–T (temporary hardship

exemption) [17 CFR 232.201] and Rule 202 of

Regulation S–T (continuing hardship exemption)

[17 CFR 232.202].

8Rule 201 requires paper filings relying on the

temporary hardship exemption to be accompanied

by a Form TH, Notification of Reliance on

Temporary Hardship Exemption, and in the case of

exhibits, Form SE, Form for Submission of Paper

Format Exhibits by Electronic Filers.

9Rule 202(a) states that requests for a continuing

hardship exemption must be submitted at least ten

days in advance of filing. Requests must be

submitted by either filers or their counsel, and the

request may be submitted by fax to the Office of

EDGAR Policy in the Division of Corporation

Finance at (202) 942–9542. Questions about

hardship exemptions should be directed to that

Office at (202) 942–2940. Investment company filers

should direct their requests and inquiries to the

Investment Management EDGAR Branch at (202)

942–0591.

10See, e.g., Instruction I.H to Form S–2 [17 CFR

239.12]. Forms S–3 [17 CFR 239.13], S–8 [17 CFR

239.16b], F–2 [17 CFR 239.32] and F–3 [17 CFR

239.33] contain similar provisions. See also the note

to Rule 101(a) of Regulation S–T [17 CFR

232.101(a)], Note 1 to Rule 201(b) of Regulation S–

T [17 CFR 232.101(b)] and Note 3 to Rule 202(d)

of Regulation S–T [17 CFR 232.101(d)].

11Rule 303 of Regulation S–T [17 CFR 232.303].

12Rule 13e–4(f)(12) [17 CFR 240.13e–4(f)(12)] and

Rule 14e–1(e) [17 CFR 240.14e–1(e)].

13Filers submitting paper filings in reliance on a

hardship exemption must include on the first page

of the filing the legend stating that the filer is

relying on a hardship exemption. See Rule 201(a)(2)

of Regulation S–T [17 CFR 232.201(a)(2)] and Rule

202(c) of Regulation S–T [17 CFR 232.202(c)].

I. Discussion

The Commission’s filing rules

mandate electronic filing by registrants

and certain others via the Commission’s

Electronic Data Gathering and Retrieval

(‘‘EDGAR’’) system.3 Most companies

were phased into the electronic system

in groups between 1993 and 1996; by

May, 1997, when small business filers

were completely phased into the

electronic filing system, all domestic

issuers were required to file most

documents electronically.4 EDGAR

filings are available on the

Commission’s Internet web site within

24 to 48 hours of filing, and commercial

databases provide the information even

sooner. The electronic filing system has

made filings more easily and more

quickly available to the investing

public.

Most filers either regularly and

promptly submit filings via the EDGAR

system or apply for an exemption before

the required filing date. The high level

of compliance with the rules requiring

electronic filing draws attention to the

fact that some filers have continued to

make their filings in paper without

requesting a hardship exemption. In

May 1997, for example, when

approximately 23,750 filings were

submitted electronically, the

Commission received approximately

8,850 paper filings, of which

approximately 500 should have been

filed electronically.5 These paper filings

create a gap in the EDGAR database

because all paper filings, whether or not

filed pursuant to an exemption, are

currently accepted and treated as valid

filings.6 The gap in the electronic

database is detrimental to an investing

public that relies on the prompt

availability and dissemination of filed

information. Those who rely primarily

on the EDGAR database may not even be

aware that the information is on file

with the Commission.

The Commission’s rules take into

account the possibility that under

certain circumstances electronic filing

may be difficult or impossible by

allowing filers relief from electronic

filing through hardship exemptions.

Filers may claim or request, as

appropriate, hardship exemptions based

on certain criteria, including, for

example, technical difficulties in filing,

and undue burden and expense of

conversion to electronic format.7 A

temporary hardship exemption,

generally for unanticipated technical

difficulties, is available automatically

but must be followed, within six

business days, by a confirming

electronic copy so that the electronic

database is complete.8 A continuing

hardship exemption is also available,

but must be granted by the staff. It may

be granted for a specific period (after

which a confirming electronic copy

must be filed) or for an indefinite

period.9

While the rules acknowledge the

possible impediments to electronic

filing, they also impose sanctions on

issuers that do not comply with the

electronic filing rules (and that fail to

request an exemption, or fully comply

with the requirements of the

exemption). The sanctions include the

inability to use certain short form

registration statements,10 the inability to

incorporate the paper filing by reference

into other filings,11 and the tolling of

certain tender offer periods.12

Neither the availability of the

hardship exemptions nor the sanctions

provided by the rules have completely

eliminated paper filings that are filed

inappropriately without a hardship

exemption. The Commission believes

that there is a strong public interest in

decreasing the number of non-compliant

filings. First, electronic filing makes

information available more quickly than

paper filing. The electronic filing system

is the most efficient and effective way

of disseminating filed information to the

public. Each filing in paper format that

is not the subject of an exemption

creates an information gap for a

marketplace that has come to rely on

EDGAR for immediate and complete

access. Second, it appears unfair to

those filers who comply with the filing

rules to accept the filings of those who

do not. Finally, paper filings are more

costly to the Commission because they

require more staff time to process,

maintain, track and retrieve. Paper

filings prevent the Commission’s staff

from taking full advantage of the

efficiencies of electronic filing for

processing, tracking and staff review of

filings. Paper filings also disrupt the

continuity of preserving records

permanently in an electronic format.

The Commission has determined,

therefore, that the EDGAR filing rules

should be revised to provide that

documents that are required to be filed

electronically will not be accepted for

filing in paper format in the absence of

an available exemption. In reaching this

decision, the Commission also

considered that the phase-in period for

electronic filing has been complete for

over a year, giving filers ample time to

become familiar with and to comply

with the electronic filing requirements.

The Commission believes that a specific

rule providing for the rejection of noncompliant filings will help to decrease

the number of paper filings. The Office

of Filings and Information Services will

be instructed not to accept paper

submissions that should have been filed

electronically.13 Those brought by

courier will be given back to the courier,

and those sent by mail or other delivery

service will be returned by mail. If a

filing is required to be filed within a

certain period (e.g., ninety days from the

end of the fiscal year for annual reports

on Form 10–K), the rejection of an

improper paper filing would result in a

filer failing to meet its disclosure

obligations unless the document is
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 210 / Thursday, October 30, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 58649

14The only date the Commission will consider in

determining compliance with the disclosure

requirements will be the filing date of the

electronically transmitted document.

15 5 U.S.C. 553(b).

16 5 U.S.C. 601–612.

17 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

18 5 CFR 1320.5(g).

19 15 U.S.C. 78w(a)(2).

20 15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.

21 15 U.S.C. 77b.

22 15 U.S.C. 78c.

23Pub. L. No. 104–290, § 106, 110 Stat. 3416

(1996).

24 15 U.S.C. 79a et seq.

25 15 U.S.C. 77aaa et seq.

26 15 U.S.C. 80a–1 et seq.

submitted electronically by the due

date.14

The Commission is aware that the

immediate result of returning a paper

submission will be that access to the

information will be delayed until the

sender re-submits it in electronic

format, because the filing will not be

available even in paper format through

the Commission’s public reference

facilities. In order to minimize this

delay, the staff will use its best efforts

to notify senders of the problem

promptly so they can take immediate

steps to re-submit the documents. As

filers become accustomed to this policy,

improved compliance with the EDGAR

rules can be expected. The result will be

an improvement in the timeliness of

information available to the public.

The Commission also considered

whether to revise the rules providing for

sanctions. It has been argued that the

current rules create an inference that the

Commission will accept paper filings

because the penalty is imposed in the

event a filing is improperly submitted in

paper format. The Commission believes

that the creation of a general rule

providing for the rejection of paper

filings where the filing does not satisfy

the requirements of a hardship

exemption will clear up any possible

misinterpretation of the rules. As with

its other rules, the Commission will use

any appropriate means, including its

authority to bring legal actions, to

enforce the electronic filing rules. In

addition, keeping the current sanctions

will provide a backup system of

penalties that would apply to a paper

filing that is accepted in error. The

Commission therefore believes that a

change to the rules imposing sanctions

is not necessary or appropriate at this

time.

II. Effective Date

The new rule is effective on January

1, 1998, and applies to filings made after

that date, including amendments to

filings made earlier.

III. Certain Findings

Since the new rule relates solely to

agency organization, procedure, or

practice, publication for notice and

comment is not required under the

Administrative Procedure Act.15 It

follows that the requirements of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act 16 do not

apply.

The new rule does not come within

the scope of the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995 17 because the new rule is

not a substantive or material change to

a collection of information.18

Under 5 U.S.C. 804, this rule is

exempt from the definition of the term

‘‘rule’’ for purposes of Chapter 8,

entitled ‘‘Congressional Review of

Agency Rulemaking,’’ since the rule is

a rule of agency organization,

procedure, or practice that does not

substantially affect the rights or

obligations of non-agency parties.

Section 23(a)(2) 19 of the Securities

Exchange Act of 1934 (the ‘‘Exchange

Act’’) 20 requires the Commission to

consider the anti-competitive effects of

any rules it adopts thereunder, if any,

and the reasons for its determination

that any burden on competition

imposed by such rules is necessary or

appropriate to further the purposes of

the Exchange Act. Because the new rule

does not effect any substantive change,

it will not impose any burden on

competition that is not necessary or

appropriate in furtherance of the

purposes of the Exchange Act.

IV. Cost-Benefit Analysis

The benefits of this new procedural

rule clearly exceed the costs. The

amendment should benefit the investing

public by increasing the number of

documents filed electronically and

therefore the public’s knowledge of and

timely access to the information in the

documents. Based on filings made in

May of 1997, the rule could result in an

additional 500 filings per month being

made electronically rather than on

paper. This assumes that all paper

filings made without a hardship

exemption would have been filed

electronically if the new rules had been

in effect. Of course, it is possible that

one result of the rule will be that more

filers will request and receive hardship

exemptions. However, any burden

resulting from an increase in

applications for hardship exemptions is

likely to be minimal and only

constitutes the costs of complying with

an existing standard.

Furthermore, Section 2 of the

Securities Act 21 and Section 3 of the

Exchange Act,22 as amended by the

recently enacted National Securities

Markets Improvement Act of 1996,23

provide that whenever the Commission

is engaged in rulemaking and is

required to consider or determine

whether an action is necessary or

appropriate in the public interest, the

Commission also shall consider, in

addition to the protection of investors,

whether the act will promote efficiency,

competition, and capital formation.

Because the amendments will increase

the amount of information available on

a timely basis to the investing public,

the new rule is in the public interest and

will promote the efficient dissemination

of such information. The new rule will

not affect efficiency, competition or

capital formation because it does not

result in a material change in capital

raising or regulatory compliance costs.

V. Statutory Basis

The rule is proposed pursuant to

Sections 6, 7, 8, 10 and 19(a) of the

Securities Act, Sections 3, 12, 13, 14,

15(a), 23(a) and 35A of the Exchange

Act, Sections 3, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12, 13, 14,

17 and 20 of the Public Utility Holding

Company Act of 1935,24 Section 319 of

the Trust Indenture Act of 1939,25 and

Sections 8, 30, 31 and 38 of the

Investment Company Act of 1940.26

List of Subjects in 17 CFR Parts 232

Administrative practice and

procedure, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Securities.

Text of the Amendments

In accordance with the foregoing,

Title 17, Chapter II of the Code of

Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 232—REGULATION S–T—

GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS

FOR ELECTRONIC FILINGS

The authority citation for Part 232

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j,

77s(a), 77sss(a), 78c(b), 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o(d),

78w(a), 78ll(d), 79t(a), 80a–8, 80a–29, 80a–30

and 80a–37.

2. By adding § 232.14 to read as

follows:

§ 232.14 Paper filings not accepted

without exemption.

The Commission will not accept in

paper format any filing required to be

submitted electronically under Rules

100 and 101 of Regulation S–T

(§§ 232.100 and 232.101 respectively),

unless the filing satisfies the

requirements for a temporary or

continuing hardship exemption under
58650 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 210 / Thursday, October 30, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Rule 201 or 202 of Regulation S–T

(§§ 232.201 or 232.202 respectively).

By the Commission.

Dated: October 24, 1997.

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–28704 Filed 10–29–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–P

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND

HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

29 CFR Part 2200

Rules of Procedure; E–Z Trial

CFR Correction

In title 29 of the Code of Federal

Regulations, part 1927 to end, revised as

of July 1, 1997, on page 261, in

§ 2200.203, paragraph (a) should be

removed and reserved.

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CCGD08–97–020]

RIN 2115–AE84

Regulated Navigation Area

Regulations; Mississippi River, LARegulated Navigation Area

ACTION: Interim rule with request for

comments.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is revising

the Regulated Navigation Area (RNA)

for vessels operating in the Mississippi

River below Baton Rouge, Louisiana

including South Pass and Southwest

Pass by adding additional requirements

for vessels of 1,600 gross tons or greater

operating in the RNA. This revision

requires enhanced safety procedures for

vessels of 1,600 gross tons or greater

operating on the Mississippi River. The

Coast Guard is also requiring moored or

anchored passenger vessels with

embarked passengers to maintain a

manned pilothouse watch for the safety

of the vessel, crew and passengers.

DATES: This interim rule is effective

October 30, 1997. Comments must reach

the Coast Guard on or before December

29, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Documents as indicated in

this preamble are available for

inspection or copying at the office of the

Eighth Coast Guard District Marine

Safety Division, 501 Magazine Street,

Room 1341, New Orleans, LA during

normal office hours between 7:30 a.m.

and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays. The telephone

number is (504) 589–4686.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

M. M. Ledet, Vessel Traffic Management

Specialist, at the Eighth Coast Guard

District Marine Safety Division, New

Orleans, LA or by telephone at (504)

589–4686.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

The Coast Guard encourages

interested persons to participate in this

rulemaking by submitting written data,

views, or arguments specifically

pertaining to 33 CFR § 165.810(f)(3)(iii)

of this rule. Persons submitting

comments should include their names

and addresses, identify this rulemaking

(CGD08–97–020) and the specific

section of this document to which each

comment applies, and give the reason

for each comment. Please submit two

copies of all comments and attachments

in an unbound format, no larger than

81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying

and electronic filing. Persons wanting

acknowledgment of receipt of comments

should enclose stamped, self-addressed

postcards or envelopes.

The Coast Guard will consider all

comments received during the comment

period. It may change this rule in view

of the comments.

The Coast Guard plans no public

hearing. Persons may request a public

hearing by writing to the Marine Safety

Council at the address under

ADDRESSES. The request should include

the reasons why a hearing would be

beneficial. If it determines that the

opportunity for oral presentations will

aid this rulemaking, the Coast Guard

will hold a public hearing at a time and

place announced by a later notice in the

Federal Register.

Regulatory Information

On August 29, 1997 (62 FR 45775),

the Coast Guard published a notice of

proposed rulemaking entitled

‘‘Regulated Navigation Area

Regulations; Mississippi River, LARegulated Navigation Area’’ in the

Federal Register. No public hearing was

requested and none was held. The Coast

Guard received 2 letters commenting on

the proposed rulemaking. Based on

information presented in one of the

comments, concerning proposed 33 CFR

165.810(f)(3)(iii), the Coast Guard is

reconsidering this provision. This rule

is being published as an interim rule

and the Coast Guard requests all

interested parties to comment on 33

CFR 165.810(f)(3)(iii).

On December 14, 1996, the 36,000

gross ton M/V BRIGHT FIELD, while

transiting the Lower Mississippi River,

allided with the Riverwalk store

complex in New Orleans, Louisiana

causing extensive damage and

numerous injuries. This marine casualty

prompted the Captain of the Port New

Orleans to issue Captain of the Port

Orders to moored or anchored high

capacity passenger vessels operating on

the Mississippi River. These orders

required those vessels to maintain a

manned pilothouse watch in order to

monitor river activity and to be

immediately available to activate

emergency procedures to protect the

vessel, crew and passengers in the event

of an emergency radio broadcast, danger

signal or other visual indication of a

problem. The initial intent of this order

was to establish an interim measure to

prevent future allisions and collisions.

On March 18, 1997 (62 FR 14637,

March 27, 1997), the Coast Guard

established a temporary regulated

navigation area affecting the operation

of downbound tows in the Lower

Mississippi River from mile 437 at

Vicksburg, MS to mile 88 above Head of

Passes. These regulations were

subsequently amended on March 21 (62

FR 15398, April 1, 1997), March 29 (62

FR 16081, April 4, 1997), April 4 (62 FR

17704, April 11, 1997) and April 20 (62

FR 23358, April 30, 1997). The

amendments added additional operating

requirements for vessels of 1,600 gross

tons or greater; increased the operating

limitations on tank barges and ships

carrying hazardous chemicals and

gasses; and extended the RNA to the

boundary of the territorial sea at the

approaches to Southwest Pass and

South Pass of the Mississippi River.

This RNA and its subsequent

amendments was also prompted by

unprecedented high waters on the

Mississippi River. Conditions on the

Lower Mississippi River became so

sever that it necessitated the opening of

the Bonnet Carre Spillway by the Army

Corps of Engineers in order to ease highwater conditions and partially combat

very strong river currents. The highwater conditions contributed to

numerous barge breakaways and a

marked increase in vessel accidents.

The additional operating requirements

were designed to provide a greater

margin of safety for vessels of 1,600

gross tons or greater operating on this

waterway.

On April 20 (62 FR 23358, April 30,

1997), the towboat and barge limitations

and the chemical and gas ship operating

restrictions expired. The regulations

affecting self-propelled vessels of 1,600

gross tons or greater were extended until