39256 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 140 /Wednesday, July 22, 1998 / Proposed Rules

aileron control and loss of the airplane,

accomplish the following:

(a) Within the next 100 hours time-inservice (TIS) after the effective date of this

AD, visually inspect the aileron control links

(left-hand and right-hand) at the second 90-

degree angle joint from the second Heim

bearing for a reinforcement gusset in

accordance with the Instructions section of

Engineering Design Service Bulletin (SB) No.

M20–264, Issue Date:

February 1, 1998.

(1) If a reinforcement gusset is found, no

further action is required.

(2) If a reinforcement gusset is not found,

prior to further flight, inspect the aileron

control links, using a magnetic particle

method, for any cracks in accordance with

the Instructions section of Engineering

Design SB No. M20–264, Issue Date: February

1, 1998.

(i) If cracks are found, prior to further

flight, replace the aileron control link with a

part of improved design in accordance with

the Instructions section of Engineering

Design SB No. M20–264, Issue Date: February

1, 1998.

(ii) If no cracks are found, re-inspect for

cracks at intervals not to exceed 100 hours

TIS in accordance with the Instructions

section of Engineering Design SB No. M20–

264, Issue Date: February 1, 1998. If cracks

are found during any inspection required by

paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(2)(ii) of this AD,

prior to further flight, replace the aileron

control link with a part of improved design

in accordance with the Instructions section of

Engineering Design SB No. M20–264, Issue

Date: February 1, 1998.

(b) Replacing the aileron control link in

accordance with Engineering Design SB No.

M20–264, Issue Date: February 1, 1998, is

considered a terminating action for the

repetitive inspections required in paragraph

(a)(2)(ii) of this AD and may be accomplished

at any time.

(c) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

(d) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the initial or repetitive

compliance times that provides an equivalent

level of safety may be approved by the

Manager, Fort Worth Airplane Certification

Office (ACO), 2601 Meacham Boulevard, Fort

Worth, Texas 76193–0150. The request shall

be forwarded through an appropriate FAA

Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Fort Worth ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Fort Worth Aircraft

Certification Office.

(e) All persons affected by this directive

may obtain copies of the document referred

to herein upon request to Mooney Aircraft

Corporation, Louis Schreiner Field, Kerrville,

Texas, 78028; or may examine this document

at the FAA, Central Region, Office of the

Regional Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th

Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on July 16,

1998.

Marvin R. Nuss,

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 98–19486 Filed 7–21–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD 13–98–023]

RIN 2115–AE84

Regulated Navigation Area; Strait of

Juan de Fuca and Adjacent Coastal

Waters of Washington; Makah Whale

Hunting

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard, after

consultation with the Department of

Justice, Department of Interior and the

Department of Commerce, proposes to

establish a permanent regulated

navigation area along the northwest

Washington coast and in a portion of the

entrance of the Strait of Juan de Fuca.

The regulated navigation area would be

used to reduce the danger of life and

property in the vicinity of Makah whale

hunting activities. Within the regulated

navigation area a moving exclusionary

zone around the Makah hunting vessel

would be created for the duration of

each hunt.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast

Guard on or before September 8, 1998.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments to

the Commander(m), Thirteenth Coast

Guard District, 915 Second Avenue,

Seattle, WA 98174, or deliver them to

room 3506 at the same address between

8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except Federal holidays. The

telephone number is 206–220–7210.

The Thirteenth Coast Guard District

Marine Safety Division maintains the

public docket for this rulemaking.

Comments, and documents as indicated

in this preamble, will become part of

this docket and will be available for

inspection or copying at room 3506,

Thirteenth Coast Guard District Offices,

between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lieutenant Chris Woodley (206) 220–

7210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

The Coast Guard encourages

interested persons to participate in this

rulemaking by submitting written data,

views, or arguments. Persons submitting

comments should include their names

and addresses, identify this rulemaking

(CGD98–023) and the specific section of

this document to which each comment

applies, and give the reason for each

comment. Please submit all comments

and attachments in an unbound format,

no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable

for copying and electronic filing.

Persons wanting acknowledgment of

receipt of comments should enclose

stamped, self-addressed postcards or

envelopes.

The Coast Guard is establishing a

forty-five day comment period for this

proposed rule instead of the usual sixty

day comment period. The shortened

comment period should be sufficient to

allow the public to comment on the

proposed rule. The shortened comment

period is needed so that an effective rule

may be put into place by the beginning

of the first Makah whale hunt. The

Coast Guard will consider all comments

received during the comment period. It

may change this proposed rule in view

of the comments.

The Coast Guard plans no public

hearing. Persons may request a public

hearing by writing to the Thirteenth

Coast Guard District at the address

under ADDRESSES. The request should

include the reasons why a hearing

would be beneficial. If it determines that

the opportunity for oral presentations

will aid this rulemaking, the Coast

Guard will hold a public hearing at a

time and place announced by a later

notice in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

The United States Government, on

behalf of the Makah Tribe, obtained a

quota for the Makah Tribe from the

International Whaling Commission to

kill up to five gray whales annually in

the Makah’s usual and accustomed

fishing area off the northwest coast of

Washington and in the entrance of the

Strait of Juan de Fuca. The hunts will

be accomplished using harpoons and a

.50 caliber hunting rifle, fired from a

small boat. The Coast Guard proposes

this regulated navigation area and

moving exclusionary zone to reduce the

dangers to persons and vessels in the

vicinity of each hunt. The uncertain

reactions of a pursued or wounded

whale and the inherent dangers in firing

a hunting rifle from a pitching and

rolling small boat could potentially

endanger life and property if persons

and vessels are not excluded from the
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 140 /Wednesday, July 22, 1998 / Proposed Rules 39257

immediate vicinity of a hunt. In

addition, the Departments of Justice and

the Interior have examined the Makah

Indian Tribe’s Treaty right to hunt

whales and informed the Coast Guard

that physical interference with the hunt

is inconsistent with federal law.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

The proposed rule would establish a

permanent regulated navigation area.

The regulated area would extend out

three nautical miles from shore along

the northwest Washington Coast and

from shore to the edge of the traffic

separation scheme in a portion of the

entrance to the Straight of Juan de Fuca.

The regulation would not affect normal

transit or navigation of the area except

during, and in the immediate vicinity

of, a hunt. Within the regulated

navigation area, a moving exclusionary

zone would surround the Makah

hunting vessel during each whale hunt.

The proposed rule imposes no other

restrictions on navigation.

For the duration of each hunt, vessels

and persons would be excluded from

the column of water from the surface to

the seabed within a radius of 500 yards

centered on the Makah hunting vessel.

This moving exclusionary zone is

proposed in ordered to reduce the

danger to nearly vessels and persons by

minimizing the risks from the uncertain

movements of a pursued or wounded

whale and from the dangers of stray rifle

fire and ricochets off the water. The

activation of the moving exclusionary

zone would be signaled by the flying of

the international numeral pennant five

(5) from a Makah whale hunting vessel.

Only Makah vessels actually engaged in

pursuing, harpooning, shooting,

securing, or towing whales are

authorized to fly pennant five (5) within

the regulated navigation area. The

Makah Tribe would notify mariners of

the moving exclusionary zone by a

SECURITE broadcast made once an hour

on channel 16 VHF–FM beginning one

half hour before the hunt. The moving

exclusionary zone would only be active

while hunting operations are ongoing

and the international numeral pennant

five (5) is flown. The signal flag would

be authorized to be flown from the

Makah hunting vessel only during an

actual whale hunt.

Regulatory Evaluation

This proposed 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 not been reviewed 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).

Because of the limited number of

whales that can be taken annually and

the small size of the moving

exclusionary zone, the Coast Guard

expects the economic impact of this

proposed rule to be so minimal that 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 et seq.), the Coast Guard

considers whether this proposed rule, if

adopted, will have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. ‘‘Small

entities’’ include small businesses, notfor-profit organizations that are

independently owned and operated and

are not dominant in their fields, and

governmental jurisdictions with

populations of less than 50,000.

Small entities that might be affected

could include whale-watching ventures,

tugboats and their tows, small passenger

vessels, and commercial fishermen. The

small size of the moving exclusionary

zone should minimize any effects from

the proposed rule on these small

entities. Therefore, the Coast Guard

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

proposed rule, if adopted, will not have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities. If,

however, you think that your business

or organization qualifies as a small

entity and that this proposed rule will

have a significant economic impact on

your business or organization, please

submit a comment (see ADDRESSES)

explaining why you think it qualifies

and in what way and to what degree this

proposed rule will economically affect

it.

Collection of Information

This proposed rule does not provide

for a collection of information under the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

Federalism

The Coast Guard has analyzed this

proposed rule under the principles and

criteria contained in Executive Order

12612 and has determined that this

proposed rule does not have sufficient

implications for federalism to warrant

the preparation of a Federalism

Assessment.

Environment

The Coast Guard considered the

environmental impact of this proposed

rule and concluded that under figure 2–

1, paragraph (34)(g) of COMDTINST

M16475.1C, this proposed rule is

categorically excluded from further

environmental documentation because

it establishes a regulated navigation

area. A ‘‘Categorical Exclusion

Determination’’ is available in the

docket for inspection or copying where

indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation

(water), Reports and recordkeeping

requirements, Security measures,

Waterways.

Proposed Regulation

For the reasons discussed in the

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to

amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165—[AMENDED]

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. Add § 165.1310 to read as follows:

§ 165.1310 Strait of Juan de Fuca and

adjacent coastal waters of Northwest

Washington; Makah whale hunting—

regulated navigation area.

(a) The following area is a regulated

navigation area: From 48°10–0′ N,

124°44.0′ W northward and eastward

along the shoreline of Washington State

to 48°20.0′ N, 124°29.5′ W; thence due

north to the southern boundary of the

traffic separation scheme in the Strait of

Juan de Fuca at 48°23.0′ N, 124°29.0′ W;

thence westerly and southerly along the

southern boundary of the traffic

separation scheme to its intersection

with the three nautical mile line at

48°22.5′ N, 124°49.0′ W; thence

southerly along the three nautical mile

line to 48°10.0′ N, 124°51.5′ W; thence

due east back to the shoreline of

Washington at 48°10.0′ N, 124°44.0′ W.

Datum: NAD 1983.

(b) During a whale hunt, the following

area within the regulated navigation

area is a moving exclusionary zone: The

column of water from the surface to the

seabed with a radius of 500 yards

centered on a Makah hunting vessel

displaying pennant five (5). This zone is

activated for the duration of the hunt

and subsequent movement of the whale

to shore.

(c) Unless otherwise authorized by the

Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard

District or his representative, the area

within the moving exclusionary zone is

closed to all vessels and persons

whenever the Makah Tribe is engaged in

a whale hunt and flying pennant five
39258 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 140 /Wednesday, July 22, 1998 / Proposed Rules

(5), with the exception that the master

of a Makah whale hunting vessel

displaying pennant five (5) may

authorize vessels assisting the hunt to

enter the moving exclusionary zone.

(d) The activation of the moving

exclusionary zone described in

paragraph (b) of this section is signaled

by the display of the international

numeral pennant five (5) is from the

Makah hunting vessel. This numeral

pennant five (5) is authorized to be

displayed only from the Mekah hunting

vessel during an actual whale hunt.

(e) The Mekah Tribe will make hourly

SECURITE broadcasts notifying

mariners of the hunt and the moving

exclusionary zone on channel 16 VHF–

FM while the hunt is in effect.

J. David Spade,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander,

13th Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 98–19423 Filed 7–21–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[AZ 072–0085; FRL–6125–6]

Approval and Promulgation of

Maintenance Plan and Designation of

Area for Air Quality Planning Purposes

for Carbon Monoxide; State of Arizona

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to

redesignate the Tucson Air Planning

Area (TAPA) to attainment for the

carbon monoxide (CO) National

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)

and to approve a maintenance plan that

will insure that the area remains in

attainment. Under the 1990

amendments of the Clean Air Act

(CAA), designations can be revised if

sufficient data is available to warrant

such revisions. In this action, EPA is

proposing to approve the TAPA

redesignation as meeting the

requirements set forth in the CAA.

DATES: Written comments on this

proposal must be postmarked on or

before August 21, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

addressed to Eleanor Kaplan at the

Region 9 address listed.

Copies of the documents relevant to

this action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the following locations between

8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. on weekdays. A

reasonable fee may be charged for

copying parts of the docket.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 9, Air Division, Air Planning

Office, (AIR–2), 75 Hawthorne Street,

San Francisco, California 94105–3901,

(415) 744–1159

Arizona Department of Environmental

Quality, Library 3033 N. Central

Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85012,

(602) 207–2217

Pima County Department of

Environmental Quality, 130 West

Congress, Tucson, Arizona 85701,

(520) 740–3340.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Eleanor Kaplan, Air Planning Office

(AIR–2), Air Division, United States US

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San

Francisco, CA 94105–3901, (415) 744–

1159.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air

Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990 were

enacted. Pub. L., 101–549, 104 Stat.

2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. Sections

7401–7671q. Section 107(d)(1)(C) of the

amended Act provides that each CO

area designated nonattainment,

attainment, or unclassifiable

immediately before the date of

enactment of the Act is designated, by

operation of law, as a nonattainment,

attainment, or unclassifiable area,

respectively. On November 6, 1991, the

Tucson Area of Pima County was

classified by operation of law as

nonattainment, not classified. See 56 FR

56716 (November 6, 1991). The extent of

the Tucson Area is described in 40 CFR

81.303 as the Tuscon [sic] Area, Pima

County (part) by Township and Range.

EPA describes areas as ‘‘not

classified’’ if they were designated

nonattainment both prior to enactment

of the CAAA and (pursuant to section

107(d)(1)(C)) at enactment, and if they

did not violate the primary NAAQS for

CO in either year for the 2-year period

1988 through 1989. See 57 FR 13535

(April 16, 1992).

The Pima Association of Governments

(PAG), as the designated air planning

agency for Pima County, has collected

ambient monitoring data that show no

violation of the CO NAAQS in the

TAPA during the years 1993 through the

present. (See discussion in Section III

below.) Therefore, in an effort to comply

with the CAA and to ensure continued

attainment of the NAAQS, on August

21, 1996 the Arizona Department of

Environmental Quality (ADEQ)

requested redesignation of the area to

attainment with respect to the CO

NAAQS and submitted a CO limited

maintenance plan (LMP)for the TAPA.

The PAG’s Regional Council had

prepared and adopted the LMP on June

26, 1996. ADEQ submitted evidence that

public hearings were held on April 22,

1996 and June 20, 1996. In accordance

with section 110(k)(1)(B) of the Act, the

TAPA CO redesignation request and

maintenance plan was deemed complete

by operation of law on February 27,

1997. On October 6, 1997 ADEQ

submitted an amended CO LMP for the

TAPA including evidence that a public

hearing was held on August 20, 1997 on

the amendments to the plan.

II. Redesignation Evaluation Criteria

Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA

provides specific requirements that an

area must meet in order to be

redesignated from nonattainment to

attainment.

1. The area must have attained the

applicable NAAQS;

2. the area has met all relevant

requirements under section 110 and part

D of the Act;

3. the air quality improvement must

be permanent and enforceable; and

4. the area must have a fully approved

maintenance plan pursuant to section

175A of the Act.

Section 107(d)(3)(D) allows a

Governor to initiate the redesignation

process for an area to apply for

attainment status.

III. Review of State Submittal

The Arizona redesignation request for

the TAPA meets the requirements of

section 107(d)(3)(E) noted above. The

following is a brief description of how

the State has fulfilled each of these

requirements.

1. Attainment of the CO NAAQS

Arizona has quality assured ambient

air monitoring data showing that the

TAPA has met the CO NAAQS. The

Arizona request is based on an analysis

of quality assured CO air monitoring

data which is relevant to the

maintenance plan and to the

redesignation request. To attain the CO

NAAQS, an area must have complete

quality-assured data showing no more

than one exceedance of the standard per

year over at least two consecutive years.

The ambient air CO monitoring data for

the period from July 1, 1993 through

December 31, 1995 relied upon by

Arizona in its redesignation request

shows no exceedances of the CO

NAAQS in the TAPA. Additionally,

based on data retrieved from the

Aerometric Information and Retrieval

System (AIRS), there have been no

exceedances of the CO standard from

1995 to the present. Because the area

has complete quality assured data