Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 85 / Monday, May 4, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 24427

This action necessitates redesignating

the regulations listed in 33 CFR

117.821(a) (3), (4), (5), and (6) for the

drawbridges at Surf City, Figure Eight,

Wrightsville Beach, and Sunset Beach

along the Atlantic Intracoastal

Waterway within North Carolina.

Regulatory Evaluation

This final 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

final rule to be non-existent, therefore,

a full Regulatory Evaluation under

paragraph 10e of the regulatory policies

and procedures of DOT is unnecessary.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), the Coast Guard

must consider whether this final rule

will have a significant economic impact

on a substantial number of small

entities. Small entities include

independently owned and operated

small businesses that are not dominant

in their field and that otherwise qualify

as ‘‘small business concerns’’ under

section 3 of the Small Business Act (15

U.S.C. 632).

This final rule does not affect vessel

navigation on this waterway since it

merely removes regulations for a bridge

which no longer exists. Therefore, the

Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C.

605(b), that this final rule will not have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

Collection of Information

This final rule contains no collection

of information requirement under the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. 3501–3520).

Federalism

The Coast Guard has analyzed this

final rule under the principles and

criteria contained in Executive Order

12612 and has determined that this final

rule does not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant preparation of a

Federalism Assessment.

Environment

The Coast Guard considered the

environmental impact of this final rule

and concluded that under section

2.B.2.b. and item (32)(e) of Figure 2–1 of

Commandant Instruction M16475.1C

dated November 14, 1997, this final rule

is categorically excluded from further

environmental documentation. A

Categorical Exclusion Determination

statement has been prepared and placed

in the rulemaking docket.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

Bridges.

Regulations

In consideration of the foregoing, the

Coast Guard is amending Part 117 of

Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations as

follows:

PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE

OPERATION REGULATIONS

1. The authority citation for Part 117

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 49 CFR 1.46; 33

CFR 1.05–1(g); section 117.255 also issued

under the authority of Pub. L. 102–587, 106

Stat. 5039.

2. In § 117.821, paragraph (a)(2) is

removed and paragraphs (a) (3), (4), (5),

and (6) are redesignated as paragraphs

(a) (2), (3), (4), and (5), respectively.

Dated: April 23, 1998.

J. Carmichael,

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting

Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 98–11774 Filed 5–1–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–M

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army, Corps of

Engineers

33 CFR Part 207

Navigation Regulations

AGENCY: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,

DoD.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Corps is amending the

navigation regulations for the Red River

Waterway, Louisiana and the Yazoo

Diversion Canal at Vicksburg,

Mississippi. The Red River Waterway

navigation regulation is amended to

prescribe the maximum length, width,

and draft of vessel tows that are allowed

to enter the lock chamber for each

lockage. The Yazoo Diversion Canal

navigation regulation is amended to

establish procedures and location for

mooring of vessels along the west bank.

The maximum length of allowable

vessel tow that may enter the lock

chamber for each lockage on the Red

River Waterway, is increased from 685

feet to 705 feet. The maximum

allowable width and draft of tow

remains the same at 80 feet and 9 feet,

respectively. Increasing the usable tow

length to 705 feet will increase the

efficiency of lock operations by

reducing the number of tow breakups

during a locking operation. The

navigation regulation for the Yazoo

Diversion Canal will clarify vessel

mooring locations along the canal west

bank for various river stages and

provide that fairways will be established

by the Vicksburg District Engineer.

Establishing fairways and specifying

locations along the west bank where

vessels may moor during various river

stages will control indiscriminate vessel

moorings and improve navigation

safety.

DATES: The final rule is effective June 3,

1998.

ADDRESSES: HQUSACE, ATTN: CECW–

OD, Washington, D.C. 20314–1000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Jim Hilton, Dredging and Navigation

Branch (CECW–OD) at (202) 761–8830

or Mr. Jim Jeffords, Vicksburg District,

Operations Division at (601) 631–5274.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice

of proposed rulemaking was published

on Wednesday, March 5, 1997, Vol. 62,

No. 43, pages 9996–9997.

Pursuant to its authorities in Section

7 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1917

(40 Stat. 266; 33 U.S.C. 1), the Corps is

amending the regulations in 33 CFR Part

207. The Commanding Officer, Lower

Mississippi Valley Division, Vicksburg,

Mississippi has requested an

amendment to the regulations in 33 CFR

207.249(b)(5)(iv) and 33 CFR 207.260 (c)

and (g). The 685 feet maximum tow

length currently allowed in the Red

River Waterway lock chamber is based

on the design vessel tow length.

Increasing the tow length that may

safely enter the lock chamber for each

lockage to 705 feet, will not affect the

safety of either the lock structure or the

tow in the chamber during a filling or

emptying operation, if the tow is

properly secured and positioned.

Discussion of Public Comments and

Changes

Section 207.249(b)(5)(iv). Two

comments were received to the March 5,

1997, Federal Register notice to

increase the tow length. These

individuals supported the proposed

increase in vessel tow length from 685

feet to 705 feet for vessels attempting to

pass through the lock during normal

pool stages in a single passage.

Section 207.260 (c) and (g). Five

comments were received to the

proposed amendment to regulate

mooring along the east and west banks

of the Yazoo Diversion Canal based on

water level stages at the Vicksburg gage.
24428 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 85 / Monday, May 4, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

All individuals recognized the danger of

mooring along the banks in close

proximity to the confluence of the

Yazoo Diversion Canal and the

Mississippi River. However, there was

no consensus on what distance from the

confluence vessels could be safely

moored along the banks of the canal.

Several individuals requested that the

proposed mooring location on the west

bank be modified, since restricting

mooring would cause economic

hardship to adjacent property owners. A

meeting with the five affected parties

resulted in a resolution satisfactory to

all. All agreed that no vessel or raft shall

be moored along the east bank of the

Yazoo Diversion Canal at any stage for

approximately 750 feet from the mouth

of the canal where it enters into the

Mississippi River. Mooring along the

west bank would be regulated as

follows: At stages below 20 feet on the

Vicksburg Gage, no vessel or raft shall

be moored along the west bank of the

canal between points Latitude

32°21′16′′, Longitude 90°53′05′′ and

Latitude 32°20′55′′, Longitude

90°53′18′′, which is approximately 1200

feet above and 1200 feet below the

public boat launch (foot of Clay Street)

at Vicksburg City Front. No vessel or raft

shall be moored along the west bank of

the canal at any stage from the mouth

of the Yazoo Diversion Canal where it

enters into the Mississippi River to

Latitude 32°20′21′′, Longitude

90°53′44′′, which is approximately 1200

feet from the mouth.

Procedural Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

This final rule is not a significant

regulatory action under E.O. 12866. The

economic impact of this rule is so

minimal that further regulatory

evaluation is unnecessary. We conclude

this because the change benefits the

commercial towing industry.

B. Review Under the Regulatory

Flexibility Act

These final rules were reviewed under

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L.

96–354), which requires the preparation

of a regulatory flexibility analysis for

any regulation that will have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

(i.e., small businesses and small

Governments). The economic impact of

the change to the tow length on the Red

River Waterway and mooring locations

on the Yazoo Diversion Canal, will have

a positive affect on the towing industry

and the general public, with no

anticipated navigational safety or

interference with existing waterway

traffic and accordingly certifies that this

final rule has no significant economic

impact on small entities.

C. Review Under the National

Environmental Policy Act

An environmental assessment has

been prepared for this action. We

concluded, based on the Red River

Waterway increase in tow length and

Yazoo Diversion Canal mooring

locations, that there is no significant

impact to the human environment, and

preparation of an environmental impact

statement is not required. The

environmental assessment was available

for review during the public comment

period at the Corps Vicksburg District

Office, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

D. Collection of Information

This final rule contains no collection

of information under the Paperwork

Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

E. Federalism

The Corps has analyzed this final rule

under principles and criteria in E.O.

12612 and determined that this final

rule has no sufficient federalism

implications to warrant preparation of a

Federalism Assessment.

F. Unfunded Mandates Act

This final rule does not impose an

enforceable duty among the private

sector and therefore, is not a Federal

private sector mandate and is not

subject to the requirements of Section

202 or 205 of the Unfunded Mandates

Act. We also found, under Section 203

of the Act, that small Governments are

not significantly and uniquely affected

by this rulemaking.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 207

Navigation (water), Transportation,

and Lockages.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, 33 CFR Part 207 is amended,

as follows:

PART 207—NAVIGATION

REGULATIONS

1. Authority citation for Part 207

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 40 Stat. 266 (33 U.S.C. 1).

2. Section 207.249 is amended by

revising paragraphs (b)(5)(iv) to read as

follows:

§ 207.249 Ouachita and Black Rivers, Ark.

and La. Mile 0.0 to Mile 338.0 (Camden, Ark.)

above the mouth of the Black River; the Red

River, La., Mile 6.7 (Junction of Red,

Atchafalaya and Old Rivers) to Mile 228.0

(Shreveport, La.); use, administration, and

navigation.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(5) * * *

(iv) The maximum dimensions on the

Red River Waterway of a vessel tow

attempting to pass through the lock

during normal pool stages in a single

passage are 80 feet wide, 705 feet long,

and 9 feet draft. Tows requiring

breaking into two or more sections to

pass through the lock may transit the

lock at such time as the lockmaster/lock

operator determines that they will

neither unduly delay the transit of craft

of lesser dimensions, nor endanger the

lock structure and appurtenances

because of wind, current, or other

adverse conditions. These craft are also

subject to such special handling

requirements as the lockmaster/lock

operator finds necessary at the time of

transit.

* * * * *

3. Section 207.260 is amended by

revising paragraphs (c) and (g) to read as

follows:

§ 207.260 Yazoo Diversion Canal,

Vicksburg, Miss., from its mouth to the

entrance of the upper Vicksburg Harbor

Extension.

* * * * *

(c) Mooring. At stages below 20 feet

on the Vicksburg Gage, no vessel or raft

shall be moored along the west bank of

the canal between points Latitude

32°21′16′′, Longitude 90°53′05′′ and

Latitude 32°20′55′′, Longitude

90°53′18′′, which is approximately 1200

feet above and 1200 feet below the

public boat launch (foot of Clay Street)

at Vicksburg City Front. No vessel or raft

shall be moored along the west bank of

the canal at any stage from the mouth

of the Yazoo Diversion Canal where it

enters into the Mississippi River to

Latitude 32°20′21′′, Longitude

90°53′44′′, which is approximately 1200

feet from the mouth of the canal. No

vessel or raft shall be moored along the

east bank of the canal at any stage from

the mouth of the Yazoo Diversion Canal

where it enters into the Mississippi

River to Latitude 32°20′12′′, Longitude

90°53′41′′, which is approximately 750

feet from the mouth of the canal. When

tied up, boats, barges, or rafts shall be

moored by bow and stern lines parallel

to the bank and as close in as

practicable. Lines shall be secured at

sufficiently close intervals to insure the

vessel or raft will not be drawn away

from the bank by winds, current, or

other passing vessels. No vessel or raft

shall be moored along the banks of the

canal for a period longer than five (5)

calendar days without written

permission from the District Engineer,

Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg District
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 85 / Monday, May 4, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 24429

Office, 4155 E. Clay St., Vicksburg,

Mississippi 39180–3435.

* * * * *

(g) Fairway. A clear channel not less

than 175 feet wide as established by the

District Engineer shall be left open at all

times to permit free and unobstructed

navigation by all types of vessels.

Dated: March 25, 1998.

Approved:

Robert W. Burkhardt,

Colonel, Corps of Engineers, Executive

Director of Civil Works.

[FR Doc. 98–11689 Filed 5–1–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3710–92–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 51 and 85

[AMS–FRL–6007–3]

RIN 2060–AE19

IM Program Requirement—On-Board

Diagnostic Checks; Amendment to the

Final Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: Today’s action revises the

federal vehicle inspection and

maintenance (I/M) rules relating to the

implementation deadline by which

states are required to begin On-Board

Diagnostic Checks (OBD) as a routine

part of basic and enhanced I/M

programs. This rule change delays to

January 1, 2001, the required

implementation date for OBD in basic

and enhanced I/M program areas in the

Ozone Transport Region (OTR) and in

all other areas. During this time

extension the Agency will generate,

collect and analyze the data necessary to

accord OBD checks the appropriate

level of emission reduction credits.

Additionally, certain clarifying

amendments are being made to this rule

to allow for updates to the Code of

Federal Regulations which are crossreferenced in the OBD rule.

DATES: This rule change is effective May

4, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Materials relevant to this

rulemaking are contained in the Public

Docket No. A–94–21. The docket is

located at the Air Docket, Room M–1500

(6102), Waterside Mall SW, Washington,

DC 20460. The docket may be inspected

between 8:30 a.m. and 12 noon and

between 1:30 p.m. until 5:30 p.m. on

weekdays. A reasonable fee may be

charged for copying docket material.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Buddy Polovick, Office of Mobile

Sources, National Vehicle and Fuel

Emissions Laboratory, 2565 Plymouth

Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48105.

Telephone (734) 741–7928.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

preamble, regulatory language and a

regulatory announcement are available

electronically from the EPA internet

Web site. This service is free of charge,

except for any cost one may already

incur for internet connectivity. An

electronic version is made available on

the day of publication on the primary

Web site listed below. The EPA Office

of Mobile Sources also publishes these

notices on the secondary Web site listed

below.

http://www.epa.gov/EPA-AIR/

(either select desired date or use Search

feature)

http://www.epa.gov/OMSWWW/

(look in What’s New or under the

specific rulemaking topic)

Please note that due to differences

between the software used to develop

the document and the software into

which the document may be

downloaded, minor changes in format,

pagination, etc. may occur. The version

published in the Federal Register is the

official version of this document.

Regulated Entities

Entities potentially regulated by the

minor amendment to the I/M rule are

those which adopt, approve, fund or

implement I/M programs. Regulated

categories and entities include:

Category Examples of regulated entities

Local government ..... Local air quality agencies.

State government ...... State air quality agencies responsible for

I/M programs.

Federal government .. DOT.

This table is not intended to be

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide

for readers regarding entities likely to be

regulated by this action. This table lists

the types of entities of which EPA is

now aware that could potentially be

regulated by this I/M amendment. Other

types of entities not listed in the table

could also be regulated. To determine

whether your organization is regulated

by this action, you should carefully

examine the applicability criteria of 40

CFR 51.350 of the I/M rule. If you have

any questions regarding the

applicability of this action to a

particular entity, consult the person

listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section.

I. Summary of Rule

Under the Clean Air Act as amended

in 1990 (the Act), 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.,

the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) published in the Federal

Register on November 5, 1992, (40 CFR

part 51, subpart S) rules relating to

motor vehicle inspection and

maintenance (I/M) programs (hereafter

referred to as the I/M rule; see 57 FR

52950). Subsequent to that rule, the EPA

published in the Federal Register on

August 6, 1996, (40 CFR parts 51 and

85) rules relating to the implementation

of On-Board Diagnostic (OBD) checks as

a routine part of I/M programs (hereafter

referred to as the I/M OBD rule; see 61

FR 40940). EPA published a proposed

rulemaking proposing changes to those

rules in the Federal Register on

December 22, 1997 (62 FR 66841). For

a full description of all relevant

background information please see that

notice. EPA today takes final action to

amend those OBD rules to delay to

January 1, 2001, the deadline by which

OBD checks must be implemented in

I/M programs.

Today, EPA amends 40 CFR 51.373 to

delay the implementation deadline for

OBD checks in all I/M areas, including

OTR low enhanced areas. Additionally,

certain clarifying amendments have

been made to allow for updates to Part

86 of the Code of Federal Regulations

which are cross-referenced in the OBD

rule. The requirement shall remain that

states revise their I/M SIPs by August 6,

1998, to include the requirement to

implement OBD checks by the January

1, 2001 deadline. For further

information on this issue please see the

Public Participation section of this rule.

Additionally, EPA amends here today

two sections of the I/M OBD rule which

were not proposed to be amended in the

notice of proposed rulemaking for this

rule. Those sections, 40 CFR

51.357(b)(4) and 85.2222(c), were

inadvertently not identified as sections

which also had dates that needed to be

realigned with the new testing deadline

of January 2001. Those sections

indicated that by January 1, 2000, an

incomplete readiness evaluation of the

automobile’s OBD system or a failure of

the OBD diagnostic check were required

to result in failure of the I/M test. Both

of these sections should be amended to

require failure under these

circumstances by January 1, 2001, to be

consistent with the change of the start

of OBD testing. EPA regards this late

addition to the rules to be amended as

noncontroversial because such a

timeline was implied by moving the

start dates for those tests to January 1,

2001. Obviously vehicles could not be