Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 83 /Thursday, April 30, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 23663

Regulation

For the reasons discussed in the

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33

CFR part 110 as follows:

PART 110—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 110

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through

1236, 2030, 2035, 2071; 49 CFR 1.46 and 33

CFR 1.05–1(g).

§ 110.60 [Amended]

2. In section 110.60 paragraph (p–3) is

removed.

Dated: April 13, 1998.

R.M. Larrabee,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,

First Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 98–11514 Filed 4–29–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[COTP Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA; 98–

002]

RIN 2115–AA97

Safety Zone; Santa Barbara Channel,

CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Temporary final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is

establishing a temporary safety zone on

the navigable waters of the Santa

Barbara Channel, California, around the

oil and gas facilities commonly known

as the Seacliff Pier Complex. These

piers are located in Ventura County,

immediately south of Punta Gorda

(Mussel Shoals) and adjacent to

Highway 101. A safety zone is needed

for the pier decommissioning project

which will use explosive charges to

demolish 21 concrete caissons that

currently support the pier. The safety

zone will encompass a water area

extending 500 yards in all directions

from the center of the pier complex,

which is situated at approximately 34°–

21.02′ N, 119°–25.46′ W. Entry into,

transit through, or anchoring within this

Safety Zone is prohibited unless

authorized by the Captain of the Port

Los Angeles/Long Beach.

DATES: This safety zone will be in effect

from 7 a.m. PDT on April 14, 1998 until

7 p.m. PST on January 3, 1999.

Comments must be received on or

before June 29, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

mailed to Commanding Officer, Coast

Guard Marine Safety Office, Los

Angeles-Long Beach, 165 N. Pico

Avenue, Long Beach, CA 90802.

Comments received will be available for

inspection and copying in the Port

Safety Division of Coast Guard Marine

Safety Office, Los Angeles-Long Beach.

Normal office hours are 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.,

PDT, Monday through Friday, except

federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Chief Petty Officer Clarence Rice,

Marine Safety Detachment, Santa

Barbara, California; (805) 962–7430.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553, a

notice of proposed rulemaking was not

published for this regulation and it is

being made effective in less than 30

days after Federal Register publication.

Publishing an NPRM and delaying its

effective date would be contrary to the

public interest since the scope of

activities requiring this safety zone, and

other logistical details surrounding the

event, were not finalized until a date

fewer than 30 days prior to the project

date.

Although this rule is being published

as a temporary final rule without prior

notice, an opportunity for public

comment is nevertheless desirable to

ensure the rule is both reasonable and

workable. Accordingly, persons wishing

to comment may do so by submitting

written comments to the office listed in

ADDRESSES in this preamble. Those

providing comments should identify the

docket number for the regulation (COTP

Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA; 98–002)

and also include their name, address,

and reason(s) for each comment

presented. Based upon the comments

received, the regulation may be

changed.

The Coast Guard plans no public

meeting. Persons may request a public

meeting by writing the Marine Safety

Office, Los Angeles-Long Beach at the

address listed in ADDRESSES in this

preamble.

Background and Purpose

The Seacliff Pier decommissioning

project requires a safety zone because

explosive charges will be used to

demolish 21 concrete structures that

currently support the pier. These

explosions pose a direct threat to the

safety of surrounding vessels, persons,

and property, and they create an

imminent navigational hazard. This

safety zone is necessary to prevent

spectators, recreational and commercial

craft from collecting within 500 yards of

the Seacliff Pier Complex during the

decommissioning project, which is not

scheduled to be completed until January

3, 1999. 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 Angeles/Long Beach.

Regulatory Evaluation

This rule is not a significant

regulatory action under section 3(f) of

the 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). Due to the short

duration and limited scope of the safety

zone, the Coast Guard expects the

economic impact of this proposal to be

so minimal that a full Regulatory

Evaluation under paragraph 10(e) of the

regulatory policies and procedures of

DOT is unnecessary.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Coast Guard

must consider whether this rule will

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

‘‘Small entities’’ may include small

businesses and not-for-profit

organizations that are not dominant in

their respective fields, and

governmental jurisdictions with

populations less than 50,000. For the

same reasons set forth in the above

Regulatory Evaluation, the Coast Guard

certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this

rule is not expected to have a significant

economic impact on any substantial

number of entities, regardless of their

size.

Assistance for Small Entities

In accordance with 213(a) of the

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),

the Coast Guard wants to assist small

entities in understanding this rule so

that they can better evaluate its effects

on them and participate in the

rulemaking process. If your small

business or organization is affected by

this rule and you have questions

concerning its provisions or options for

compliance, please contact Chief Petty

Officer Clarence Rice, Coast Guard

Marine Safety Detachment, Santa

Barbara, CA, at (805) 962–7430.
23664 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 83 /Thursday, April 30, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

Collection of Information

This rule 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

regulation does not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Environmental Assessment

The Coast Guard has considered the

environmental impact of this regulation

and concluded that under section 2.B.2.

of Commandant Instruction M16475.1C

it will have no significant

environmental impact and it is

categorically excluded from further

environmental documentation. A

Categorical Exclusion Determination

and an Environmental Analysis

checklist is available for inspection and

copying in the docket to be maintained

at the address listed in ADDRESSES in the

preamble.

Unfunded Mandates

Under the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4), the

Coast Guard must consider whether this

rule will result in an annual

expenditure by state, local, and tribal

governments, in the aggregate of $100

million (adjusted annually for inflation).

If so, the Act requires that a reasonable

number of regulatory alternatives be

considered, and that from those

alternatives, the least costly, most costeffective, or least burdensome

alternative that achieves the objective of

the rule be selected.

No state, local, or tribal government

entities will be effected by this rule, so

this rule will not result in annual or

aggregate costs of $100 million or more.

Therefore, the Coast Guard is exempt

from any further regulatory

requirements under the Unfunded

Mandates Act.

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 33 CFR

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. A new § 165.T11–052 is added to

read as follows:

§ 165.T11–052 Safety Zone; Santa Barbara

Channel, CA.

(a) Location. The safety zone will

encompass a water area extending 500

yard in all directions from the center of

the Seacliff pier complex in the Santa

Barbara Channel, which is situated at

approximately 34°¥21.02′ N,

119°¥25.46′ W. All coordinates in this

paragraph use Datum: NAD 83.

(b) Effective Date. This section will be

in effect from 7 a.m. PDT on April 14,

1998 until 7 p.m. PST on January 3,

1999.

(c) Regulations. In accordance with

the general regulations in § 165.23 of

this Part, entry into, transit through, or

anchoring within this safety zone is

prohibited unless authorized by the

Captain of the Port.

Dated: April 13, 1998.

G.P. Wright,

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

Port, Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA.

[FR Doc. 98–11229 Filed 4–29–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–M

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS

AFFAIRS

38 CFR Part 47

RIN 2900–AI78

Reporting Health Care Professionals to

State Licensing Boards

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: It continues to be the policy

of the Department of Veterans Affairs

(VA) to report to State Licensing Boards

any separated physician, dentist, or

other licensed health care professional

whose clinical practice so significantly

failed to meet generally accepted

standards of clinical practice as to raise

reasonable concern for the safety of

patients. This document provides that,

in addition, VA will report to State

Licensing Boards any currently

employed physician, dentist, or other

licensed health care professional (one

who is on VA rolls) whose clinical

practice so significantly failed to meet

generally accepted standards of clinical

practice during VA employment as to

raise reasonable concern for the safety of

patients. Some health care professionals

who are VA employees also provide

health care outside VA’s jurisdiction.

Accordingly, the reporting of currently

employed licensed health care

professionals who meet the standard for

reporting is necessary so that State

Licensing Boards can take action as

appropriate to protect the public.

Examples of actions that meet the

criteria for reporting are set forth in the

text portion of this rulemaking. Also,

nonsubstantive changes are made for

purposes of clarity.

DATES: Effective Date: June 1, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ruth-Ann Phelps, Ph.D., Veterans

Health Administration, Patient Care

Services (11B), Department of Veterans

Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave. NW,

Washington, DC 20420, at (202) 273–

8473 (this is not a toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a

document published in the Federal

Register on October 8, 1997 (62 FR

52519), we proposed to expand our

policy of reporting to State Licensing

Boards to include any currently

employed physician, dentist, or other

licensed health care professional (one

who is on VA rolls) whose clinical

practice so significantly failed to meet

generally accepted standards of clinical

practice during VA employment as to

raise reasonable concern for the safety of

patients. Previously, the regulations

only allowed the VA to report separated

employees. The comment period ended

on December 8, 1997. We received one

comment.

The regulations, among other things,

provide that VA will report individuals

to State Licensing Boards for ‘‘substance

abuse when it affects the individual’s

ability to perform appropriately as a

health care provider or in the patient

care environment.’’ The commenter

asserted that individuals should be

reported for any substance abuse that is

identified, and that any reporting

should include a recommendation that

the individual be required to obtain

assistance at a substance abuse

rehabilitation program.

No changes are made based on this

comment. The provisions of Section 204

of Public Law 99–166 set forth the basic

authority for reporting separated

individuals to State Licensing Boards.

This Statutory authority to report

separated individuals to State Licensing

Boards is limited to reporting based on

a finding concerning an individual’s

clinical competence. We believe the

policy for reporting should be the same

for separated and currently employed

individuals. Therefore, the final rule

provides for reporting only if the finding

of substance abuse reflects a finding that

the clinical practice of the individual so

significantly failed to meet generally