Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 1997 / Proposed Rules 68245

(MS 9300), or Ms. Charlotte Bennett,

Appeals Division, Minerals

Management Service, 1849 C Street,

NW., Washington, D.C. 20240,

telephone number (202) 208–2622, fax

number (202) 219–5565, e:mail: Hugh

Hilliard@mms.gov or Charlotte

lBennett@mms.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In

response to the notice of proposed rule

to amend regulations governing the

administrative appeals process,

published in the Federal Register on

October 28, 1996 (61 FR 55607), MMS

received as a comment a comprehensive

report from the Royalty Policy

Committee (RPC), which adopted a

recommendation from its Appeal and

Alternative Dispute Resolution

Subcommittee. The RPC, which is

composed of representatives from

States, Indian tribes and allottees, the

mineral industries, other Federal

agencies, and the public, advises the

Secretary of the Interior under a charter

authorized by the Federal Advisory

Committee Act. On March 27, 1997, the

RPC sent its report to the Secretary and

requested adoption of its proposal in

lieu of the October 28, 1996, proposed

rule.

The Secretary sent a response to the

RPC on September 22, 1997, stating that

the Department planned to prepare

revised proposed regulations to

implement the RPC proposal, with

several changes. In general, the changes

proposed by the RPC, as modified and

approved by the Secretary, will be as

follows:

• Increase efforts to resolve policy

disputes before conducting audits of

royalty payments;

• Further encourage informal

resolution of disputes;

• Clarify the standing of Indian

lessors and states in the administrative

appeals process; and

• Restructure the appeals process to

encourage earlier development of the

administrative record, facilitate

settlement efforts, impose time

limitations on the appeals process, and

allow for appeals to be filed with the

Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA)

rather than with MMS so that appellants

can obtain a faster, more independent

review of legal issues raised on appeal.

The Secretary also stated that the

public would have the opportunity to

comment on these proposed regulations,

which could change before they become

final.

Thus, MMS intends to withdraw the

October 28, 1996 (61 FR 55607), notice

of proposed rule when it publishes the

revised notice of proposed rule

responding to the RPC report. Since the

revised proposed rule will contain

provisions that will allow for appeals to

be considered by the IBLA much earlier

than they are under current procedures,

MMS plans to rely on regulations for

release of third-party proprietary

information as set out at 43 CFR 4.31.

Consequently, MMS has withdrawn the

April 4, 1997 (62 FR 16116), proposed

rule, but will incorporate in the revised

notice of proposed rule on the appeals

process any contents of the withdrawn

rule that may be needed to supplement

current regulations at 43 CFR 4.31.

The revised notice of proposed rule

will affect not only appeals involving

actions taken by officials of the MMS’s

Royalty Management Program, but also

will affect appeals involving actions

taken by the Offshore Minerals

Management program of MMS under the

regulations at 30 CFR Part 250. In

addition, the rule will affect activities of

the Office of Hearings and Appeals,

Interior Board of Land Appeals, as set

out at 43 CFR Part 4 (though these

effects are expected to be limited to

appeals generated by actions of the

Minerals Management Service).

While MMS and the Department’s

Office of Hearings and Appeals plan to

move quickly to issue a new notice of

proposed rule on this subject, we also

want to take the opportunity to have

further public input by holding a public

workshop.

We invite participation at the

workshop by representatives of states,

Indian tribes and allottees, the minerals

industries, and the general public. We

plan to present our initial views as to

what will be in the revised proposed

rule and to engage in open discussion

with participants about any suggestions

for improvement. The date and location

of the workshop have been coordinated

with the next meeting of the Royalty

Policy Committee in order to facilitate

participation by Committee members.

In order to help us plan for a

successful workshop, we would

appreciate your preregistration by

January 15. If you plan to attend, please

contact Ms. Charlotte Bennett, using the

methods provided in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this

notice, and provide your name, address,

and telephone and fax numbers. This

will help us to ensure sufficient space

for all and to provide you with any

relevant information available in

advance of the meeting. In particular,

we hope to distribute some information

in advance about what we expect to

include in the revised notice of

proposed rule.

Background materials on the subject

can be found on the MMS internet

homepage at http://www.mms.gov/

mmab/rpcsub.htm (also accessible

through the general MMS homepage at

http://www.mms.gov/) of by contacting

the Appeals Division at the address

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section of this notice. Relevant

background would include the prior

notices of proposed rules, the March 27,

1997, RPC report, and the Secretary’s

letter of September 22, 1997.

Dated: December 22, 1997.

Walter D. Cruickshank,

Associate Director for Policy and

Management Improvement.

[FR Doc. 97–34096 Filed 12–30–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–MR–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD11–95–003]

RIN 2115–AE47

Drawbridge Operation Regulations;

Oakland Inner Harbor Tidal Canal, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Proposed rule; termination.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is

terminating rulemaking which would

have amended the regulation for the

draws of the Alameda County vehicular

bridges crossing the Oakland Inner

Harbor Tidal Canal at the following

locations: Park Street, mile 7.3;

Fruitvale Avenue, mile 7.7; High Street,

mile 8.1; as well as the U.S. Army Corps

of Engineers railroad bridge, mile 7.7 at

Fruitvale Avenue. The proposed rule

did not meet the reasonable needs of

navigation. The County apparently is no

longer interested in pursuing this

rulemaking.

DATES: This proposed rulemaking is

terminated December 12, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry

P. Olmes, Bridge Section, Eleventh

Coast Guard District, Building 50–6,

Coast Guard Island, Alameda, CA

94501–5100, telephone (510) 437–3515.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory History

On May 9, 1995, the Coast Guard

published the NPRM in the Federal

Register (60 FR 24599). The Coast Guard

received 18 letters in response to the

NPRM, 6 of which requested a public

hearing. The Coast Guard then decided

to reopen the comment period and hold

a public hearing; a notice of reopening

of the comment period and of the public

hearing was published in the Federal
68246 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 1997 / Proposed Rules

Register on September 12, 1995 (60 FR

47317). The comment period was

extended until October 31, 1995, and a

public hearing was held on October 5,

1995.

The majority of respondents objected

to the proposal for reasons of safety and

inconvenience to waterway users. Based

on the comments received, the Coast

Guard denied the request. The Coast

Guard offered a counter proposal, but

the County did not respond to the

counter proposal.

For the reasons stated in the

preamble, the Coast Guard is

terminating all further rulemaking

under docket number CGD11–95–003.

Dated: December 12, 1997.

J.C. Card,

Vice Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander,

Eleventh Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 97–34081 Filed 12–30–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–14–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[CO–001–0006b & CO–001–0021b; FRL–

5934–3]

Clean Air Act Approval and

Promulgation of PM10 Implementation

Plan for Colorado; Designation of

Areas for Air Quality Planning

Purposes; Steamboat Springs

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve the

State implementation plan (SIP)

submitted by the State of Colorado to

achieve attainment and maintenance of

the National Ambient Air Quality

Standards (NAAQS) for particulate

matter with an aerodynamic diameter

less than or equal to a nominal 10

micrometers (PM10), including among

other things, control measures, technical

analyses, quantitative milestones and

contingency measures. The SIP was

submitted by the Governor of Colorado

with a letter dated September 16, 1997

to satisfy certain Federal requirements

for an approvable SIP for the Steamboat

Springs, Colorado moderate PM10

nonattainment area, as designated

effective January 20, 1994. In addition,

EPA proposes to approve the Steamboat

Springs emergency episode plan. EPA

also proposes to amend the boundary

for the Steamboat Springs

nonattainment area to clarify the

original description.

In the Final Rules Section of this

Federal Register, EPA is approving the

State’s SIP revisions as a direct final

rule without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial

revision and anticipates no adverse

comments. A detailed rationale for

EPA’s actions is set forth in the direct

final rule. If no adverse comments are

received in response to this proposed

rule, no further activity is contemplated

and the direct final rule will become

effective. If EPA receives adverse

comments, the direct final rule will be

withdrawn and all public comments

received will be addressed in a

subsequent final rule based on this

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a

second comment period on this action.

Any parties interested in commenting

on this document should do so at this

time.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule

must be received in writing by January

30, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this

action should be addressed to Richard

R. Long, 8P2–A, at the EPA Regional

Office listed below. Copies of the State’s

submittal and documents relevant to

this proposed rule are available for

inspection during normal business

hours at the following locations: Air

Program, Environmental Protection

Agency, Region VIII, 999 18th Street,

suite 500, Denver, Colorado 80202–

2405; and Colorado Department of

Health, Air Pollution Control Division,

4300 Cherry Creek Drive South, Denver,

Colorado 80222–1530.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Amy Platt, Air Program, EPA, Region

VIII, at (303) 312–6449.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the

information provided in the Direct Final

action which is located in the Rules

Section of this Federal Register.

Dated: November 4, 1997.

Jack W. McGraw,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97–33959 Filed 12–30–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 622

[I.D. 121197E]

RIN 0648–AJ16

Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of

Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish

Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico;

Resubmission of Disapproved and

Revised Measure in Amendment 11

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of availability of a

revised, previously disapproved

measure in an amendment to a fishery

management plan; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: NMFS announces that the

Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management

Council (Council) has resubmitted a

previously disapproved measure,

originally contained in Amendment 11

to the Fishery Management Plan for the

Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of

Mexico, for review, approval, and

implementation by NMFS. The measure

would define optimum yield (OY).

Written comments are requested from

the public.

DATES: Written comments must be

received on or before March 2, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

mailed to the Southeast Regional Office,

NMFS, 9721 Executive Center Drive N.,

St. Petersburg, FL 33702.

Requests for copies of the

Resubmission of the Previously

Disapproved Measure, Originally

Contained in Amendment 11, which

includes an environmental assessment

and a regulatory impact review, should

be sent to the Gulf of Mexico Fishery

Management Council, 3081 U.S.

Highway 301 North, Suite 1000, Tampa,

FL 33619–2266; Phone: 888–883–1844;

Fax: 813-225-7015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Sadler, 813-570-5305.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery

Conservation and Management Act

(Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires each

regional fishery management council to

submit any fishery management plan or

amendment to NMFS for review and

approval, disapproval, or partial

approval. The Magnuson-Stevens Act

also requires that NMFS, upon receiving

an amendment, immediately publish a

document in the Federal Register