Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 61631

vessels from the dangers of the dredging

and landfill activities in the project area

and to prevent interference with vessels

engaged in these operations. All persons

and vessels are prohibited from entering

into, transiting through, or anchoring

within the safety zone unless authorized

by the Captain of the Port Los AngelesLong Beach, CA.

Regulatory Assessment

This interim 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. It has been exempted from review

by the Office of Management and

Budget 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). The Coast Guard

expects the economic impact of this

regulation to be so minimal that a full

Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph

10(e) of the regulatory policies and

procedures of the Department of

Transportation is unnecessary. Only

minor delays to mariners are foreseen as

vessel traffic can be directed around the

area of the safety zones.

Collection of Information

This regulation contains no collection

of information requirements under the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.).

Federalism

The Coast Guard has analyzed this

regulation under the principles and

criteria contained in Executive Order

12612 and has determined that this rule

does not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

Environmental Assessment

The Coast Guard considered the

environmental impact of this regulation

and concluded that under paragraph

2.B.2 of Commandant Instruction

M16475.1B, this rule is categorically

excluded from further environmental

documentation. This regulation is

expected to have no significant effect on

the environment. A Categorical

Exclusion Determination and

Environmental Analysis Checklist is

available for inspection and copying in

the docket to be maintained at the

address under ADDRESSES in this

preamble.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Security measures,

Waterways.

Regulation

In consideration of the foregoing,

Subpart F of Part 165 of Title 33, Code

of Federal Regulations, is amended as

follows:

1. The authority citation for Part 165

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 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. Section 165.1110 is revised to read

as follows:

§ 165.1110 Safety Zone: Los Angeles

Harbor—San Pedro Bay, CA.

(a) Location. All waters within the

following boundaries are established as

safety zones:

(1) Pier 400: Those waters of Los

Angeles Harbor and San Pedro Bay in

the vicinity of Pier 400 as defined by the

lines connecting the following

coordinates:

Latitude Longitude

33°–44′–29.06′′ N 118°–14′–17.25′′ W;

thence to

33°–43′–48.06′′ N 118°–13′–59.25′′ W;

thence to

33°–43′–48.50′′ N 118°–14′–11.72′′ W;

thence to

33°–42′–46.17′′ N 118°–15′–04.78′′ W;

thence to

33°–43′–00.00′′ N 118°–15′–29.90′′ W;

thence to

33°–43′–21.94′′ N 118°–15′–41.51′′ W;

thence to

33°–43′–45.04′′ N 118°–15′–30.81′′ W;

thence to

33°–43′–58.55′′ N 118°–14′–44.38′′ W;

thence to

33°–44′–03.70′′ N 118°–14′–26.65′′ W.

and thence to the point of origin. All

coordinates referred use Datum: NAD 83.

(2) Shallow Water Habitat: Those

waters of Los Angeles Harbor and San

Pedro Bay as defined by the lines

connecting the following coordinates.

Latitude Longitude

33°–42′–32.10′′ N 118°–15′–00.00′′ W;

thence to

33°–42′–49.84′′ N 118°–15′–41.51′′ W;

thence to

33°–42′–47.06′′ N 118°–15′–58.26′′ W;

thence to

33°–42′–24.99′′ N 118°–15′–23.59′′ W.

and thence to the point of origin. All

coordinate referred use Datum: NAD 83.

(3) Moving Safety Zone: Dredge

FLORIDA. All waters within 50 yards

on all sides of the Dredge FLORIDA

when it is in the waters of Los Angeles

Harbor and San Pedro Bay, CA, and

engaged in dredging operations

associated with the Pier 400 project.

(b) Effective Date. This section is

effective from 6 A.M. PDT on July 22,

1997 until 11:59 P.M. PST on December

31, 1999, unless canceled earlier by the

Captain of the Port.

(c) Regulations. In accordance with

the general regulations in § 165.23 of the

part, entry into, transit through, or

anchoring within any of these safety

zones is prohibited unless authorized by

the Captain of the Port Los AngelesLong Beach, CA.

Dated: July 21, 1997.

G.F. Wright,

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

Port, Los Angeles-Long Beach, California.

[FR Doc. 97–30292 Filed 11–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–14–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

36 CFR Part 4

RIN 1024–AC63

Safety Belt Use Within the NPS System

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The National Park Service

(NPS) is amending its regulations

concerning seatbelt use within units of

the NPS. Currently, the NPS has

regulations requiring seatbelt use by the

operator and each front seat passenger.

On April 16, 1997, President Clinton

signed Executive Order 13043 directing

NPS and other Federal agencies to

promulgate regulations that require all

occupants of motor vehicles to use

safety belts or child restraint devices at

all times within units of the NPS when

the vehicle is in motion.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule becomes

effective on December 19, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dennis Burnett, Ranger Activities

Division, National Park Service, at (202)

208–4874.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

NPS administers 375 areas throughout

the country under the statutory mandate

to conserve the scenery, the natural and

cultural objects and the wildlife therein;

and to provide for their enjoyment in

such manner as will leave them

unimpaired for the enjoyment of future

generations. Although the nearly 300

million annual visitors to the National

Park System use a variety of access

methods, the vast majority rely on motor

vehicles and roadways to reach park

areas and to circulate within them.
61632 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Consequently, NPS is involved in road

construction and maintenance, traffic

safety and traffic law enforcement.

NPS currently administers over 8,000

miles of roads within the National Park

System that are open to the public.

These 8,000 miles compare in

magnitude to the State of Arizona’s state

road system, except that they are

scattered throughout the United States

and its territories. There is great variety

in the nature and extent of park roads,

ranging from very short lengths of

unpaved secondary roadways, to welldeveloped road systems complete with

spur roads, parking areas and overlooks,

to parkways running for hundreds of

miles through several States, to

parkways used primarily as commuter

routes in the Washington, DC area. In

addition, many park areas contain State

and/or county highways and roads over

which the NPS may exercise varying

degrees of jurisdiction.

On December 13, 1989, the NPS

promulgated a final rule (36 CFR 4.15)

concerning the use of safety belts (54 FR

51199). That rule requires the operator

of a motor vehicle and each front seat

passenger to wear a safety belt at all

times when the vehicle is in motion,

unless (1) the vehicle was not originally

equipped by the manufacturer with a

safety belt or (2) the operator or front

seat passenger has a medical condition

that prevents the use of a safety belt.

The regulation is applicable in park

areas located within States that do not

have a mandatory seatbelt law in effect

and can be enforced only when another

traffic violation had occurred. The

regulation is implemented primarily

through signing, text in brochures and

incidental public contact.

Executive Order 13043, signed by

President Clinton on April 16, 1997 (62

FR 19217, April 18, 1997), directed NPS

to propose rules and take other

appropriate measures to further the use

of safety belts in the national parks. This

initiative includes, but is not limited to,

conducting education, awareness and

other appropriate programs about the

importance of wearing safety belts and

the consequences of not wearing them.

In addition, NPS was directed to

consider implementing regulations to

enhance safety belt use requirements

and begin primary enforcement of such

requirements in park areas. The order

also required NPS to consider

publicizing and actively enforcing such

regulations. Under the final rule as

adopted after consideration of public

comment, each operator and passenger

occupying any seating position of a

motor vehicle in a park area, whose seat

is equipped with a seatbelt or child

restraint system, shall have the seatbelt

or child restraint system properly

fastened at all times when the vehicle is

in motion. Primary enforcement means

that a motor vehicle may be stopped and

seatbelt regulations enforced when the

operator or any occupant is not wearing

their seatbelt. The rule would not

require another traffic violation to occur

before the vehicle may be stopped. The

seatbelt regulation in this rulemaking is

intended to apply in all NPS areas.

The President, the Department of the

Interior and NPS strongly support the

use of appropriate restraint systems by

all motor vehicle occupants and view

the potential reduction in personal

injuries and fatalities that may result

from the promulgation of this regulation

as highly desirable. The benefits of

wearing seatbelts have been

documented extensively.

Summary of Comments

During the public review period for

the proposed regulation (62 FR 40317,

July 28, 1997), two written comments

were received. Both commenters

supported the regulation from a safety

perspective, but had other concerns

about the proposed rule.

One commenter, who operates a tour

bus equipped with seatbelts, was

concerned about the difficulty in getting

passengers to buckle-up and whether

the driver would be responsible, and

therefore liable, if passengers do not

buckle-up.

NPS believes that the responsibility of

the bus driver is to announce to all

passengers that the use of seatbelts is

required whenever the bus is in motion.

After that, it is the responsibility of each

passenger, and not the driver, to ensure

that they keep their seatbelts fastened.

NPS does not intend this rule to be

overly cumbersome, but rather to

encourage the use of seatbelts.

The other commenter had several

points to address. First, the commenter

was concerned about the penalty for not

using a seatbelt. Under Title 36 of the

Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR),

§ 1.3, penalties for ‘‘all’’ violations of 36

CFR shall be punished as provided by

law, which means a fine up to $5,000,

or by imprisonment not exceeding 6

months, or both. This maximum penalty

is in accordance with the Criminal Fine

Improvements Act of 1987 (18 U.S.C.

3571). However, every unit of the NPS

is located within a U.S. Judicial District

that has established fines for seatbelt

and child restraint regulations for that

specific District. These fines range from

$10 to $100 Servicewide, depending on

the Judicial District in which the park

is located. The most common fine is

$50. These fines will not change with

the new regulation.

Second, the commenter was

concerned that the seatbelt rule would

create confusion and a new layer of

regulation in those States where there is

already a seatbelt rule in effect. The

commenter requested that the NPS post

this new regulation at the entrance to all

park areas. NPS agrees with the

comment that prior notice is best course

of action to ensure compliance with this

regulation. NPS will therefore encourage

all park areas to post, or otherwise make

this information readily available to this

visiting public. The commenter’s

concerns about the additional layer of

regulations is understandable, but E.O.

13043 is clear that the rule apply to all

occupants of motor vehicles in motion

in all NPS units.

Drafting information: The primary

author of this rule is Dennis Burnett,

Ranger Activities Division, National

Park Service, Washington, D.C. 20240.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rulemaking does not contain

collections of information requiring

approval by the Office of Management

and Budget under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995.

Compliance With Other Laws

This rule was not subject to Office of

Management and Budget review under

Executive Order 12866. The Department

of the Interior determined that this

document will not have a significant

economic effect on a substantial number

of small entities under the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et. seq.).

The economic effects of this rulemaking

are negligible.

NPS has determined and certifies

pursuant to the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq., that

this rule will not impose a cost of $100

million or more in any given year on

local, State or tribal governments or

private entities.

The Department has determined that

this rule meets the applicable standards

provided in Section 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of

Executive Order 12988.

This rule is not a major rule under the

Congressional review provisions of the

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act (5 U.S.C. 8–4(2)).

The NPS has determined that this

rulemaking will not have a significant

effect on the quality of the human

environment, health and safety because

it is not expected to:

(a) Increase public use to the extent of

compromising the nature and character

of the area or causing physical damage

to it;

(b) Introduce incompatible uses

which compromise the nature and
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 61633

characteristics of the area or cause

physical damage to it;

(c) Conflict with adjacent ownership

or land uses; or

(d) Cause a nuisance to adjacent

owners or occupants.

Based on this determination, this

rulemaking is categorically excluded

from the procedural requirements of the

National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA) by Departmental guidelines in

516 DM 6 (49 FR 21438). As such,

neither an Environmental Assessment

nor an Environmental Impact Statement

has been prepared.

List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 4

National parks, Traffic regulations.

In consideration of the foregoing, 36

CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 4—VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC

SAFETY

1. The authority citation for Part 4

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1, 3, 9a, 462(k).

2. Section 4.15 is revised to read as

follows:

§ 4.15 Safety belts.

(a) Each operator and passenger

occupying any seating position of a

motor vehicle in a park area will have

the safety belt or child restraint system

properly fastened at all times when the

vehicle is in motion. The safety belt and

child restraint system will conform to

applicable United States Department of

Transportation standards.

(b) This section does not apply to an

occupant in a seat that was not

originally equipped by the manufacturer

with a safety belt nor does it apply to

a person who can demonstrate that a

medical condition prevents restraint by

a safety belt or other occupant

restraining device.

Dated: November 6, 1997.

Donald J. Barry,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and

Wildlife and Parks.

[FR Doc. 97–30135 Filed 11–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–70–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[LA–33–1–7357; FRL–5924–6]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Implementation Plans (SIP) for

Louisiana: Motor Vehicle Inspection

and Maintenance Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final disapproval.

SUMMARY: This EPA rulemaking

addresses comments received in

response to the proposed disapproval of

the SIP revision submitted by Louisiana

for establishing and operating a motor

vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/

M) Program, and finalizes disapproval

of the plan. An enhanced I/M program

is required in the Baton Rouge serious

ozone nonattainment area under the

Clean Air Act (the Act) as amended in

1990. The State lacks the legal authority

to establish and operate an I/M program

in the ozone nonattainment area. This

action is being taken under section 110

of the Act.

DATES: This final rule is effective

December 19, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents

relevant to this action are available for

public inspection during normal

business hours at the following

locations. Persons interested in

examining these documents should

make an appointment with the

appropriate office at least 24 hours

before the visiting day. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 6, Air

Planning Section (6PD–L), 1445 Ross

Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–

2733. Louisiana Department of

Environmental Quality, Air Quality

Compliance Division, 7290 Bluebonnet,

2nd Floor, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Louisiana Department of Environmental

Quality Capital Regional Office, 11720

Airline Highway, Baton Rouge,

Louisiana.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Sandra G. Rennie, Air Planning Section

(6PD–L), EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross

Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733,

telephone (214) 665–7367.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On July 31, 1997 (62 FR 41002), EPA

published a Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (NPR) for the State of

Louisiana. The NPR withdrew the

previous conditional approval proposed

June 9, 1997 (62 FR 31388), and

proposed disapproval of the State’s I/M

program SIP submitted to satisfy

requirements of section 182(c)(3) of the

Act concerning serious ozone

nonattainment areas.

The proposed conditional approval

was withdrawn and disapproval

proposed because the State Legislature

did not reauthorize and provide

continuous authorization for an I/M

program during the 1997 Regular

Legislative Session. Bills to reauthorize

the I/M program for two more years, and

to fund the program, were introduced,

but neither was enacted. The I/M

program start date, as stated in the SIP,

is January 1, 1999. Program

reauthorization was needed to develop

the program in time to meet the January

1999 start date. Continuous program

authorization is needed to satisfy I/M

Rule 40 CFR 51.372 that requires states

to provide legal authority for the I/M

program until such time as it is no

longer necessary. Legal authority in the

revised Louisiana SIP is limited to

reauthorization by the State Legislature

in odd-numbered years starting in 1997.

The EPA considered this a major

deficiency in the SIP.

Other specific requirements of the

Louisiana I/M SIP and the rationale for

EPA’s proposed action are explained in

the NPRs and will not be restated here.

II. Public Comments/Response to

Comments

This section discusses the content of

the comments submitted to the docket

during the Federal comment period for

the notice of proposed rulemaking

published in the July 31, 1997, Federal

Register (FR), and provides EPA’s

response to those comments. The

comment period closed September 2,

1997. One comment was received by the

Region. The comment was from the

Louisiana Department of Environmental

Quality (LDEQ).

Comment—Transportation Conformity

Rule

The LDEQ commented that the

inclusion of transportation conformity

sanctions in the proposed rulemaking is

an error. The stated sanctions were in

the form of a Transportation

Improvement Plan lapse or freeze

following final disapproval. The

transportation conformity rule (58 FR

62216, November 24, 1993), clearly

defines control strategy implementation

plan. The Louisiana I/M SIP is not a

control strategy implementation plan.

Therefore, the State’s I/M SIP should

not include transportation conformity

sanctions.

Response to Comment

The EPA agrees with LDEQ’s

comment adding the following

explanation: When the previous NPR

was being developed, and at the time of

its publication, the transportation

conformity rule was undergoing

revision. The Region chose to include

transportation conformity sanctions at

that time as a precautionary measure,

pending the publication of the revised

transportation conformity rule.

Subsequently, the revised transportation

conformity rule was published (August

15, 1997, 62 FR 43779). Since the I/M