Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 18 /Wednesday, January 28, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 4195

undertake various actions in association

with any proposed or final rule that

includes a Federal mandate that may

result in estimated costs to state, local,

or tribal governments in the aggregate;

or to the private sector, of $100 million

or more. This Federal action approves

pre-existing requirements under state or

local law, and imposes no new Federal

requirements. Accordingly, no

additional costs to state, local, or tribal

governments, or the private sector,

result from this action.

F. Submission to Congress and the

General Accounting Office

Under section 801(a)(1)(A) of the

Administrative Procedure Act (APA) as

amended by the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of

1996, EPA submitted a report containing

this rule and other required information

to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of

Representatives and the Comptroller

General of the General Accounting

Office prior to publication of the rule in

today’s Federal Register. This rule is

not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by section

804(2) of the APA as amended.

G. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,

petitions for judicial review of this

action must be filed in the United States

Court of Appeal for the appropriate

circuit by March 30, 1998. Filing a

petition for reconsideration by the

Administrator of this final rule does not

affect the finality of this rule for the

purposes of judicial review, nor does it

extend the time within which a petition

for judicial review may be filed and

shall not postpone the effectiveness of

such rule or action. This action may not

be challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements (see section

307(b)(2)).

VII. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone.

Dated: January 9, 1998.

Michelle D. Jordan,

Acting Regional Administrator.

For the reasons stated in the

preamble, part 52, chapter I, title 40 of

the Code of Federal Regulations is

amended as follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 52

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

2. Section 52.1885 is amended by

adding paragraph (z) to read as follows:

§ 52.1885 Control Strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *

(z) The 15 percent rate-of-progress

requirement of section 182(b) of the

Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990, is

satisfied for the Ohio portion of the

Cincinnati-Hamilton ozone

nonattainment area.

[FR Doc. 98–2081 Filed 1–27–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 97–27; RM–8901]

Radio Broadcasting Services; Salome,

Arizona

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document allots Channel

241A to Salome, Arizona, as that

community’s first local aural

transmission service in response to a

petition filed on behalf of Browns Well

Broadcasting. See 62 FR 4226, January

29, 1997. Coordinates used for Channel

241A at Salome, Arizona, are 33–46–54

and 113–36–42. As Salome is located

within 320 kilometers (199 miles) of the

U.S.-Mexico border, concurrence of the

Mexican government to this allotment

was requested but has not been

received. Therefore, Channel 241A has

been alloted to Salome with the

following interim condition: ‘‘Operation

with the facilities specified herein is

subject to modification, suspension, or

termination without right to a hearing if

found by the Commission to be

necessary in order to conform to the

1992 USA-Mexico FM Broadcast

Agreement’’ (‘‘Agreement’’). The

condition is a temporary measure as we

have determined that Channel 241A at

Salome complies with the Agreement.

Once an official response from the

Mexican government has been obtained,

the interim condition may be removed.

With this action, the proceeding is

terminated.

DATES: Effective March 9, 1998. A filing

window for Channel 241A at Salome,

Arizona, will not be opened at this time.

Instead, the issue of opening a filing

window for this channel will be

addressed by the Commission in a

separate Order.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Nancy Joyner, Mass Media Bureau, (202)

418–2180. Questions related to the

window application filing process

should be addressed to the Audio

Services Division, (202) 418–2700.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Report

and Order, MM Docket No. 97–27,

adopted January 14, 1998, and released

January 23, 1998. The full text of this

Commission decision is available for

inspection and copying during normal

business hours in the FCC’s Reference

Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW.,

Washington, DC. The complete text of

this decision may also be purchased

from the Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service,

Inc., 1231 20th Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20036, (202) 857–3800.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

Part 73 of Title 47 of the Code of

Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 73—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 73

reads as follows:

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336.

§ 73.202 [Amended]

2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM

Allotments under Arizona, is amended

by adding Salome, Channel 241A.

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 98–2034 Filed 1–27–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

49 CFR Part 10

[Docket No. OST–96–1472]

RIN: 2105–AC68

Privacy Act; Implementation

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: DOT amends its rules

implementing the Privacy Act of 1974 to

exempt from certain provisions of the

Act the Coast Guard’s Marine Safety

Information System.

DATES: This amendment is effective

February 27, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert I. Ross, Office of the General

Counsel, C–10, Department of

Transportation, Washington, DC 20590,

telephone (202) 366–9156, FAX (202)

366–9170.
4196 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 18 /Wednesday, January 28, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory History

On November 28, 1997, the

Department published a notice of

proposed rulemaking entitled, Privacy

Act; Implementation in the Federal

Register (62 FR 63304). The Department

did not receive any comments on the

proposed rulemaking.

Background

The Coast Guard’s Marine Safety

Information System (MSIS) collects

selected information on commercial

and/or documented vessels operating in

US waters, and collects and manages the

data needed to monitor the safety

performance of maritime vessels and

facilities with which the Coast Guard

comes into contact while performing its

marine safety functions. It also monitors

the identities of individuals and

corporations that own or operate these

vessels, and, if appropriate, aids the

Coast Guard to develop law enforcement

actions against such vessels, facilities,

individuals, and corporations.

MSIS consolidates information from

three other Coast Guard Privacy Act

record systems: DOT/CG 561, Port

Safety Reporting System (Individual

Violation Histories); and DOT/CG 587,

Investigations of Violations of Marine

Safety Laws, and the automated, but not

the manual, portions of DOT/CG 590,

Merchant Vessel Casualty Reporting

System. It also encompasses the

automated, but not the manual, portions

of DOT/CG 591, Merchant Vessel

Documentation System.

Because of the capability to retrieve

information by the names or other

unique identifiers of individuals, MSIS

is subject to the Privacy Act, which

imposes many restrictions on the use

and dissemination of information in the

system. However, because MSIS can be

used for law enforcement purposes, it is

exempted from some of these

restrictions.

This rule is being published as a final

rule and is being made effective on

February 15, 1998. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C.

553, good cause exists for promulgating

this rule and for making this rule

effective less than 30 days after

publication in the Federal Register. The

Coast Guard is scheduled to commence

Operational Testing and Evaluation for

the Vessel Identification System (VIS), a

congressionally mandated project, on

February 15, 1998. VIS will incorporate

specific vessel documentation

information from the MSIS. The

completion of this operational test is

essential to the deployment of the VIS.

Making the final rule effective at the

time of the commencement of the

operational test will significantly

improve the transition to the VIS and

negate any unintended consequences of

not meeting the Congressional Mandate.

Delaying the test may have adverse

effects on the development and

implementation of the VIS. Further,

because the test will only involve a

limited number of state administrators,

and the information contained in VIS

will be destroyed following the

completion of the test, no adverse

impacts are expected. For these reasons,

the Coast Guard finds good cause, under

5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), that the effective date

of this rule should be made effective in

less than 30 days after publication.

Privacy Act exemption

Under subsection (k) of the Privacy

Act (5 USC 552a(k)), qualifying records

may be exempted from various

provisions of the Act. Among these

provisions are the requirement in

subsection (c)(3) to maintain an

accounting of disclosures of information

from a system of records and make that

accounting available on request to the

record subject; in subsection (d) to grant

to a record subject access to information

maintained on him/her under the Act;

in subsection (e)(1) to maintain only

such information as is relevant and

necessary to accomplish a purpose of

the agency under statute or Executive

Order; in subsection (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H),

and (e)(4)(I) to advise record subjects of

the agency procedures to request if a

system of records contains records

pertaining to them, how they can gain

access to such records and contest their

content, and the categories of sources of

such records; and in subsection (f) to

establish rules governing the procedures

above.

Under Subsection (k)(2) of the Privacy

Act (5 USC 552a(k)(2)), investigatory

material compiled for law enforcement

purposes, other than material

encompassed within Subsection (j)(2),

may be exempted from these provisions,

and DOT proposes to exempt MSIS

accordingly; however, if an individual

would be denied any right, privilege, or

benefit to which he/she would

otherwise be entitled by Federal law, of

for which he/she would otherwise be

eligible, as a result of the maintenance

of such material, such material shall be

provided to such individual, except to

the extent that the disclosure of such

material would reveal the identity of a

source who furnished information to the

Government under an express promise

that the identity of the source would be

held in confidence.

DOT proposed to exempt MSIS from

these provisions and invited public

comment; none was received. DOT

therefore is making its proposal final as

written.

Analysis of regulatory impacts

This rule is not a ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ within the meaning

of Executive Order 12866. It is also not

significant within the definition in

DOT’s Regulatory Policies and

Procedures, 49 FR 11034 (1979), in part

because it does not involve any change

in important Departmental policies.

Because the economic impact should be

minimal, further regulatory evaluation

is not necessary. Moreover, I certify that

this rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities, because the

reporting requirements, themselves, are

not changed and because it applies only

to information on individuals.

This rule does not significantly affect

the environment, and therefore an

environmental impact statement is not

required under the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969. It has

also been reviewed under Executive

Order 12612, Federalism, and it has

been determined that it does not have

sufficient implications for federalism to

warrant preparation of a Federalism

Assessment.

Collection of Information

This rule contains no collection of

information requirements under the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.).

Unfunded Mandates

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), (Pub. L.

104–4, 109 Stat. 48), requires Federal

agencies to assess the effects of certain

regulatory actions on State, local, and

tribal governments, and the private

sector. UMRA requires a written

statement of economic and regulatory

alternatives for proposed and final rules

that contain Federal mandates. A

‘‘Federal mandate,’’ is a new or

additional enforceable duty, imposed on

any State, local, or tribal government, or

the private sector. If any Federal

mandate causes those entities, to spend,

in aggregate, $100 million or more in

any one year the UMRA analysis is

required. This rule does not impose

Federal mandates on any State, local or

tribal governments or the private sector.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 10

Penalties, Privacy.

Accordingly, DOT amends 49 CFR

part 10 as follows:

PART 10—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation to part 10

continues to read as follows:
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 18 /Wednesday, January 28, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 4197

Authority: 5 USC 552a; 49 USC 322.

2. Part II.A of the Appendix is

amended by republishing the

introductory text and by adding a new

paragraph 16, to read as follows:

* * * * *

APPENDIX TO PART 10—EXEMPTIONS

* * * * *

Part II. Specific exemptions.

A. The following systems of records are

exempt from subsection (c)(3) (Accounting of

Certain Disclosures), (d) (Access to Records),

(e)(4)(G), (H), and (I) (Agency Requirements),

and (f) (Agency Rules) of 5 USC 552a, to the

extent that they contain investigatory

material compiled for law enforcement

purposes in accordance with 5 USC

552a(k)(2):

* * * * *

16. Marine Safety Information System,

maintained by the Operations Systems

Center, U.S. Coast Guard (DOT/CG 588). The

purpose of this exemption is to prevent

persons who are the subjects of criminal

investigations from learning too early in the

investigative process that they are subjects,

what information there is in Coast Guard files

that indicates that they may have committed

unlawful conduct, and who provided such

information.

* * * * *

Issued in Washington, DC, on January 20,

1998.

Rodney Slater,

Secretary of Transportation.

[FR Doc. 98–1923 Filed 1–27–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–62–P