Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 27695

10. A new § 550.58 is added to read

as follows:

§ 550.58 Consideration for early release.

An inmate who completes a

residential drug abuse treatment

program during his or her current

commitment may be eligible for early

release by a period not to exceed 12

months, in accordance with paragraph

(a) of this section, unless the inmate is

an INS detainee, a pretrial inmate, a

contractual boarder (for example, a D.C.,

State, or military inmate), or eligible for

parole, or unless the inmate’s current

offense is determined to be a crime of

violence as defined in 18 U.S.C.

924(c)(3), or unless the inmate has a

prior federal and/or state conviction for

homicide, forcible rape, robbery, or

aggravated assault.

(a) Eligibility. (1) An inmate who had

successfully completed a Bureau of

Prisons residential drug abuse treatment

program before October 1, 1989 is

otherwise eligible if:

(i) Staff confirm that the completed

program matches the treatment required

by statute;

(ii) The inmate signs an agreement

acknowledging his/her program

responsibility;

(iii) The inmate completes a refresher

treatment program and all applicable

transitional services programs; and

(iv) Since completion of the program,

the inmate has not been found to have

committed a 100 level prohibited act

and has not been found to have

committed a prohibited act involving

alcohol or drugs.

(2) An inmate who has successfully

completed a Bureau of Prisons

residential drug abuse treatment

program on or after October 1, 1989 is

otherwise eligible if:

(i) The inmate completes all

applicable transitional services

programs; and

(ii) Since completion of the program,

the inmate has not been found to have

committed a 100 level prohibited act

and has not been found to have

committed a prohibited act involving

alcohol or drugs.

(b) Application. (1) Inmates currently

enrolled. Eligible inmates currently

enrolled in a residential drug abuse

treatment program shall automatically

be considered for early release.

(2) Inmates who had previously

completed program requirements.

Eligible inmates who have previously

completed a residential drug abuse

treatment program (or which matches

the treatment required by statute) must

notify the institution’s drug abuse

program coordinator via a Request to

Staff in order to be considered for early

release.

(c) Length of reduction. (1) Except as

specified in paragraphs (c)(2) and (3) of

this section, an inmate who is approved

for early release may receive a reduction

of up to 12 months.

(2) If the inmate has less than 12

months to serve after completion of all

required transitional services, the

amount of reduction may not exceed the

amount of time left on service of

sentence.

(3) If, based upon a disciplinary

finding or based on program needs (for

example, the inmate has not established

an adequate release plan), the

Community Corrections Regional

Administrator may retard or disallow

any portion of the maximum 12 months

for an inmate in a community-based

program.

11. Section 550.60 is added to read as

follows:

§ 550.60 Inmate appeals.

(a) Administrative remedy procedures

for the formal review of a complaint

relating to any aspect of an inmate’s

confinement (including the operation of

the drug abuse treatment programs) are

contained in 28 CFR 542, subpart B.

(b) In order to expedite staff response,

an inmate who has previously been

found to be eligible for early release

must, when filing an administrative

remedy request pursuant to 28 CFR 542,

subpart B on an action which would

result in the inmate’s loss of early

release eligibility, indicate in the first

sentence of the request that the request

affects the inmate’s early release.

[FR Doc. 95–12802 Filed 5–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–05–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 110

[CGD05–93–103]

RIN 2115–AA98

Anchorage Grounds; Spa Creek,

Annapolis, MD

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is

consolidating Anchorages A and B in

Spa Creek Anchorage in Annapolis

Harbor, Md. into one anchorage. This

action is necessary because the City of

Annapolis has experienced difficulty

enforcing safe boating operations within

the separate anchorages. Consolidation

of the two anchorages tightens control

over the use and access to the composite

anchorage, thereby increasing the

efficiency of mooring operations and

vessel safety.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This is effective June

26, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

LCDR Tom Flynn (804) 398–6690.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

action follows completion of an Army

Corps of Engineers study of the

Annapolis Harbor conducted in

December 1990, under the authority of

Section 4(i) of the Water Resources

Development Act of 1988, Public Law

100–676. The Corps of Engineers’ study

recommended a realignment of the

channel in Annapolis Harbor by

nonstructural, nondredging measures, in

order to promote more efficient mooring

operations in the harbor. Recognizing

the desirability of accommodating

existing users, increasing harbor safety

by making mooring operations more

efficient, and doing so in a cost effective

manner, the study determined that the

existing anchorage configuration should

be revised by consolidating anchorages

A and B, in Spa Creek, Annapolis, MD,

into a single anchorage. The City of

Annapolis, MD and asked the Coast

Guard to initiate the process for

effecting a consolidation. Pursuant to

this request, the Coast Guard published

a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

concerning this section in the Federal

Register (58 FR 57769; October 27,

1993). The Commander, Fifth Coast

Guard District, also published the

proposal in Local Notice to Mariners

45–93 dated November 9, 1993. Each

notice allowed interested persons to

submit comments through December 13,

1993. Total comment on the rule

consisted of one letter, the substance of

which was beyond the scope of this

rulemaking and contained no

constructive recommendations. The

comment was considered, discussed

and forwarded to the City of Annapolis.

There are no substantive differences

between the proposed rule and the final

rule.

Drafting Information

The drafters of this rule are LCDR

Tom Flynn, project officer, Fifth Coast

Guard District, Aids to Navigation and

Waterways Management Branch and

LCDR Bill Shelton, project attorney,

Fifth Coast Guard District Legal Office.

Regulatory Evaluation

This rule is not a significant

regulatory action under section 3(f) of

Executive Order 12866 and does into

require an assessment of potential costs
27696 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

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

proposal to be so minimal that a full

Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph

10e of the regulatory policies and

procedures of DOT is unnecessary.

Although the regulation enhances

control over the harbor and promotes

the efficiency of mooring operations,

harbor access will not be reduced, nor

will vessel traffic within the harbor be

diverted or impeded.

Environment

This final rule has been thoroughly

reviewed by the Coast Guard and

determined to be categorically excluded

from further environmental

documentation in accordance with

section 2.B.2.e of Commandant

Instruction M16475.1B.

Collection of Information

This regulation contains no collection

of information requirements under the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.).

Federalism Assessment

This action has been analyzed in

accordance with the principles and

criteria contained in Executive Order

12612, and it has been determined that

it does not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110

Anchorage grounds.

Final Regulation

In consideration of the foregoing, Part

110 of Title 33, Code of Federal

Regulations, is amended as follows:

PART 110—ANCHORAGE

REGULATIONS

1. The authority citation for part 110

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 2030, 2035 and

2071; 49 CFR 1.46 and 33 CFR 1.05–1(g).

Section 110.1a and each section listed in

110.1a are also issued under 33 U.S.C. 1223

and 1231.

2. Section 110.159 is amended by

removing paragraph (a)(6) , by removing

‘‘(a)(3), (a)(5), and (a)(6)’’ in the note at

the end of paragraph (a) and adding in

its place ‘‘(a)(3), and (a)(5)’’and by

revising paragraph (a)(5) to read as

follows:

§ 110.159 Annapolis Harbor, Md.

(a) * * *

(5) Spa Creek Anchorage. In Spa

Creek, those waters bounded by a line

connecting the following points:

Latitude Longitude

38°58′37.3′′ N 76°28′48.1′′ W

36°58′36.1′′ N 76°28′57.8′′ W

38°58′31.6′′ N 76°29′03.3′′ W

38°58′26.7′′ N 76°28′59.5′′ W

Datum: NAD 83

* * * * *

Dated: May 16, 1995.

M.K. Cain,

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting

Commander, fifth Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 95–12733 Filed 5–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–14–M

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD02–95–013]

RIN 2115–AA97

Safety Zone; Wolf River Chute,

Memphis, TN

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is

establishing a temporary safety zone on

the Wolf River Chute between mile

markers 0.0 and 1.0 in proximity of

Lower Mississippi River mile 735.0. The

zone is needed to control vessel traffic

during the USS WHIRLWIND’s

commissioning ceremony. Entry of

vessels or persons into this zone is

prohibited unless specifically

authorized by the Captain of the Port.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This regulation is

effective from 8 a.m. until 1 p.m. on July

1, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

LTJG Joel Roberts, Assistant Chief of

Port Operations, Coast Guard Captain of

the Port Memphis, 200 Jefferson

Avenue, Suite 1301, Memphis, TN,

38103, Phone: (901) 544–3941.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background and Purpose

At approximately 8 a.m. on July 1,

1995, the U.S. Navy will commence

preparations for the commissioning of

the USS WHIRLWIND on the Wolf River

Chute mile 0.5. The commissioning

ceremony will take place that morning

with a large contingency of public and

private spectators. The navigable

channel may be blocked by spectator

craft during the ceremony. A safety zone

is being established on the Wolf River

Chute from mile marker 0.0 to 1.0 in

order to ensure the safety of spectator

vessels observing the commissioning

ceremony. All vessels shall establish

passing arrangements with the Coast

Guard Patrol Commander on scene, or

via VHF Marine Band Radio, Channel

81, prior to transiting the zone and shall

abide by the conditions of the

arrangement. Entry of vessels or persons

into this zone without a passing

arrangement with the Coast Guard

Patrol Commander is prohibited except

as authorized by the Captain of the Port,

Memphis, TN.

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

notice of proposed rulemaking was not

published for this regulation.

Publication of a notice of proposed

rulemaking would be contrary to the

public interest because immediate

action is necessary to control vessel

traffic in order to prevent vessel

collisions, loss of life and property

damage.

Regulatory Evaluation

This 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). The

Coast Guard expects the economic

impact of this proposal to be so minimal

that a full Regulatory Evaluation under

paragraph 10e of the regulatory policies

and procedures of DOT is unnecessary.

Collection of Information

This rule contains no information

collection requirements under the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.).

Federalism

The Coast Guard has analyzed this

rule under the principles and criteria

contained in Executive Order 12612 and

has determined that this rule does not

have sufficient federalism implications

to warrant the preparation of a

Federalism Assessment.

Environment

The Coast Guard considered the

environmental impact of this rule and

concluded that, under paragraph 2.B.2

of Commandant Instruction M16475.1B,

this rule is categorically excluded from

further environmental documentation.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping