31842 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

Regulatory Fairness Boards. The

Ombudsman evaluates these actions

annually and rates each agency’s

responsiveness to small business. If you

wish to comment on actions by

employees of the Coast Guard, call 1–

888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247).

Collection of Information

This rule calls for no new collection

of information under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–

3520).

Federalism

We have analyzed this rule under

Executive Order 13132 and have

determined that this rule does not have

implications for federalism under that

Order.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) governs

the issuance of Federal regulations that

require unfunded mandates. An

unfunded mandate is a regulation that

requires a State, local, or tribal

government or the private sector to

incur direct costs without the Federal

government having first provided the

funds to pay those costs. This rule will

not impose an unfunded mandate.

Taking of Private Property

This rule will not effect a taking of

private property or otherwise have

taking implications under Executive

Order 12630, Governmental Actions and

Interference with Constitutionally

Protected Property Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

This rule meets applicable standards

in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive

Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to

minimize litigation, eliminate

ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

We have analyzed this rule under

Executive Order 13045, Protection of

Children from Environmental Health

Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not

an economically significant rule and

does not concern an environmental risk

to health or risk to safety that may

disproportionately affect children.

Environment

The Coast Guard considered the

environmental impact of this rule and

concluded that under figure 2–1,

paragraph (34)(g), of Commandant

Instruction M16475.lC, this rule is

categorically excluded from further

environmental documentation. A

‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’

is available in the docket for inspection

or copying where indicated under

ADDRESSES.

Indian Tribal Governments

This rule does not have tribal

implications under Executive Order

13175, Consultation and Coordination

with Indian Tribal Governments,

because it does not have a substantial

direct effect on one or more Indian

tribes, on the relationship between the

Federal Government and Indian tribes,

or on the distribution of power and

responsibilities between the Federal

Government and Indian tribes.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Security measures,

Waterways.

For the reasons discussed in the

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33

CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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), 6.04–6, and 160.5; 49 CFR

1.46.

2. Add temporary § 165.T09–915 to

read as follows:

§ 165.T09–915 Safety zone: Ottawa River,

Toledo, Ohio.

(a) Location: All waters and the

adjacent shoreline of the Ottawa River,

Toledo, Ohio, bounded by the arc of a

circle with a 560-foot radius with its

center in approximate position 41°

43.21 N, 083° 28.46 W. (Southeast end

of the Summit Street Bridge.) (NAD

1983).

(b) Effective Period. This regulation is

effective from 6:30 p.m. until 11 p.m.,

June 23, 2001.

(c) Regulations. In accordance with

the general regulations in § 165.23 of

this part, entry into this zone is

prohibited unless authorized by the

Captain of the Port.

Dated: May 30, 2001.

David L. Scott,

Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of

the Port.

[FR Doc. 01–14816 Filed 6–12–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 75

Continuous Emissions Monitoring

CFR Correction

In Title 40 of the Code of Federal

Regulations, Parts 72 to 80, revised as of

July 1, 2000, part 75 is corrected in

§ 75.10 by adding paragraph (g), and in

§ 75.32 by adding a sentence to

paragraph (a)(3) after the second

sentence to read as follows:

§ 75.10 General operating requirements.

* * * * *

(g) Minimum Recording and

Reporting Requirements. The owner or

operator shall record and the designated

representative shall report the hourly,

daily, quarterly, and annual information

collected under the requirements of this

part as specified in subparts F and G of

this part.

§ 75.32 Determination of monitor data

availability for standard missing data

procedures.

* * * * *

(a) * * *

(3) * * * For a unit that has

accumulated less than 8,760 unit

operating hours in the previous three

years (26,280 clock hours), replace the

words ‘‘during previous 8,760 unit

operating hours’’ in Equation 9 with ‘‘in

the previous three years’’ and replace

‘‘8,760’’ with ‘‘total unit operating hours

in the previous three years’’.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 01–55518 Filed 6–12–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

46 CFR Part 1

[USCG 2001–8894]

RIN 2115–AG11

Right To Appeal; Director, Great Lakes

Pilotage

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is amending

its appellate procedures to provide

explicit authority for appeal of decisions

or actions taken by the Director, Great

Lakes Pilotage. The Coast Guard has

consistently applied those procedures

whenever a decision or action taken by

the Director has been appealed to higher

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 31843

authority within the Coast Guard. At

this point, the Coast Guard is simply

amending its rules to reflect its

established policy and practice.

DATES: This rule is effective September

11, 2001, unless an adverse comment, or

notice of intent to submit an adverse

comment, reaches the Docket

Management Facility on or before

August 13, 2001. If an adverse comment,

or notice of intent to submit an adverse

comment, is received, we will withdraw

this direct final rule and publish a

timely notice of withdrawal in the

Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: To make sure that your

comments and related material do not

enter the docket [USCG 2001–8894]

more than once, please submit them by

only one of the following means:

(1) By mail to the Docket Management

Facility, U.S. Department of

Transportation, room PL–401, 400

Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC

20590–0001.

(2) By delivery to room PL–401 on the

Plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400

Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC,

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

The telephone number is 202–366–

9329.

(3) By fax to the Docket Management

Facility at 202–493–2251.

(4) Electronically through the Web

Site for the Docket Management System

at http://dms.dot.gov. 

The Docket Management Facility

maintains the public docket for this

rulemaking. Comments and related

material received from the public, as

well as documents mentioned in this

preamble as being available in the

docket, will become part of this docket

and will be available for inspection or

copying at room PL–401 on the Plaza

level of the Nassif Building, 400

Seventh Street SW., Washington DC,

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

You may also find this docket on the

Internet at http://dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If

you have questions on this rule, call Mr.

John Bennett, Coast Guard, telephone

202–267–2856. If you have questions on

viewing or submitting material to the

docket, call Ms. Dorothy Beard, Chief,

Dockets, Department of Transportation,

telephone 202–366–5149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

We encourage you to participate in

this rulemaking by submitting

comments and related material. If you

do so, please include your name and

address, identify the docket number for

this rulemaking [USCG 2001–8894],

indicate the specific section of this

document to which each comment

applies, and give the reason for each

comment. You may submit your

comments and material by mail,

delivery, fax, or electronic means to the

Docket Management Facility at the

address under ADDRESSES; but please

submit them by only one means. If you

submit them by mail or delivery, submit

them in an unbound format, no larger

than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for

copying and electronic filing. If you

submit them by mail and would like to

know that they reached the Facility,

please enclose a stamped, self-addressed

postcard or envelope.

Regulatory Information

We are publishing a direct final rule

under 33 CFR 1.05–55, because we do

not expect an adverse comment. Unless

we receive an adverse comment or

notice of intent to submit one within the

comment period specified under DATES,

this rule will become effective as stated

in DATES. In that case, about 30 days

before the effective date, we will

publish a document in the Federal

Register stating that we received no

adverse comment and confirming that

this rule will become effective as

scheduled. However, if we receive an

adverse comment or notice of intent to

submit one, we will publish a document

in the Federal Register announcing the

withdrawal of all or part of this rule. If

an adverse comment applies only to part

of this rule (e.g., to an amendment, a

paragraph, or a section) and it is

possible to remove that part without

defeating the purpose of this rule, we

may adopt, as final, those parts of this

rule on which we received no adverse

comment. We will withdraw any part of

this rule that becomes the subject of an

adverse comment. If we decide to

proceed with a rulemaking following

receipt of an adverse comment, we will

publish a separate notice of proposed

rulemaking (NPRM) and provide a new

opportunity for comment.

A comment counts as ‘‘adverse’’ if it

explains why this rule or a part of this

rule would be inappropriate, including

a challenge to its underlying premise or

approach, or would be ineffective or

unacceptable without a change.

Background and Purpose

A review of our rules indicates that

our policy and practice of permitting a

party to appeal any decision or action of

the Director, Great Lakes Pilotage, in

accordance with the procedures 46 CFR

Part 1.03 is not one provided for,

explicitly, by those rules. Yet it also

indicates that the practice has met

universal acceptance by persons

affected. The purpose of this direct final

rule is to codify our established policy

and practice on appeals.

Discussion of Rule

To codify these entails (1) amending

46 CFR 1.03–15 to take account of 46

U.S.C. Chapter 93 and 46 CFR Chapter

III and identify the particular Coast

Guard office for appeals; and (2) adding

a new 46 CFR 1.03–50 to describe the

appellate process for decisions or

actions of the Director, Great Lakes

Pilotage.

Because of an oversight affecting 46

CFR Subpart 1.03—Rights of Appeal,

the appellate procedures of the Coast

Guard do not by their terms apply to

decisions or actions taken by the

Director, Great Lakes Pilotage, under 46

U.S.C. Chapter 93 or 46 CFR Chapter III.

Nonetheless, the Coast Guard has

consistently followed them whenever a

decision or action taken by the Director

has been appealed to higher authority

within the Coast Guard, Commandant

(G–MW). This practice has met

universal acceptance by persons

affected. At this point, the Coast Guard

is simply codifying its procedures to

reflect its own policy and practice and

meet the public’s expectation.

Regulatory Evaluation

This direct 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. The Office

of Management and Budget has not

reviewed it 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

this rule is administrative in nature and

simply codifies the policy and practice

already in use since the beginning of

Great Lakes Pilotage, we expect the

economic impact of this 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. 601–612], we considered

whether this direct final rule will have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises

small businesses, not-for-profit

organizations that are independently

owned and operated and are not

dominant in their fields, and

governmental jurisdictions with

31844 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

populations of less than 50,000. This

rule does not affect any small entities.

Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies

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

not have a significant economic impact

on a substantial number of small

entities. We will evaluate, under the

criteria in ‘‘Regulatory Information’’,

any comments submitted in response to

this finding.

Collection of Information

This direct final rule calls for no new

collection of information under the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 [44

U.S.C. 3501–3520].

Federalism

We have analyzed this direct final

rule under Executive Order 13132 and

have determined that it does not have

implications for federalism under that

Order.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

of 1995 [2 U.S.C. 1531–1538] requires

Federal agencies to assess the effects of

their regulatory actions not specifically

required by law. In particular, the Act

addresses actions that may result in the

expenditure by a State, local, or tribal

government, in the aggregate, or by the

private sector of $100,000,000 or more

in any one year. Though this direct final

rule will not result in such an

expenditure, we do discuss the effects of

this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

This direct final rule will not effect a

taking of private property or otherwise

have taking implications under

Executive Order 12630, Governmental

Actions and Interference with

Constitutionally Protected Property

Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

This direct final rule meets applicable

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice

Reform, to minimize litigation,

eliminate ambiguity, and reduce

burden.

Protection of Children

We have analyzed this direct final

rule under Executive Order 13045,

Protection of Children from

Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks. This rule is not an economically

significant rule and does not concern an

environmental risk to health or risk to

safety that may disproportionately affect

children.

Indian Tribal Governments

This direct final rule does not have

tribal implications under Executive

Order 13175, Consultation and

Coordination with Indian Tribal

Governments, because it does not have

a substantial direct effect on one or

more Indian tribes, on the relationship

between the Federal Government and

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities between the

Federal Government and Indian tribes.

Environment

The Coast Guard considered the

environmental impact of this direct final

rule and concluded that, under figure 2–

1, paragraph (34)(a) of Commandant

Instruction M16475.lC, this rule is

categorically excluded from further

environmental documentation. It is

‘‘procedural’’ within the meaning of that

paragraph. A Determination of

Categorical Exclusion is available in the

docket where indicated under

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 46 CFR Part 1

Organization, General Course and

Methods Governing Marine Safety

Functions.

For the reasons discussed in the

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 46

CFR part 1 as follows:

1. Revise the citation of authority for

part 1 to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552; 14 U.S.C. 633; 46

U.S.C. 7701; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 93; 49 CFR

1.45, 1.46; § 1.01–35 also issued under the

authority of 44 U.S.C. 3507.

2. Revise paragraph (a) of § 1.03–15

and add paragraph (h)(5) to read as

follows:

§ 1.03–15 General.

(a) Any person directly affected by a

decision or action taken under this

chapter or under chapter III of this title,

by or on behalf of the Coast Guard,

except for matters covered by subpart J

of part 5 of this chapterdealing with

suspension-and-revocation hearings,

shall follow the procedures contained in

this section when requesting that the

decision or action be reviewed, set

aside, or revised.

* * * * *

(h) * * *

(5) Commandant (G–MW) for appeals

involving decisions or actions of the

Director, Great Lakes Pilotage.

* * * * *

3. Add § 1.03–50 to read as follows:

§ 1.03–50 Appeals from decisions or

actions of the Director, Great Lakes

Pilotage.

Any person directly affected by a

decision or action of the Director, Great

Lakes Pilotage, may make a formal

appeal of that decision or action to

Commandant (G–MW), in accordance

with the procedures contained in

§ 1.03–15 of this subpart.

Dated: April 24, 2001.

R.C. North,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant

Commandant for Marine, Safety and

Environmental Protection.

[FR Doc. 01–14817 Filed 6–12–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 635

[I.D. 051701G]

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species;

Bluefin Tuna Recreational Fishery

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Retention limit adjustments.

SUMMARY: NMFS adjusts the daily

retention limit for the recreational

fisheries for Atlantic bluefin tuna (BFT)

for the fishing year that began June 1,

2001, and ends May 31, 2002. Vessels

permitted in the Atlantic Tunas Angling

and the Atlantic Highly Migratory

Species (HMS) Charter/Headboat

categories are eligible to land BFT under

the BFT Angling category quotas. The

seasonal adjustments to the daily

retention limit and the measurements

for each BFT size class are specified in

the DATES and SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section of this document.

This action is being taken to provide

increased fishing opportunities in all

areas without risking overharvest of this

category.

DATES: Effective June 15 through

October 31, 2001, the daily retention

limit in all areas for all vessels fishing

under the Angling category quota is

adjusted to four BFT per vessel, which

may be from the school, large school, or

small medium size class.

Effective November 1, 2001 through

May 31, 2002, the daily retention limit

in all areas is adjusted to one large

school or small medium BFT for all

vessels fishing under the Angling

category quota.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brad

McHale, (978) 281–9260.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulations implemented under the

authority of the Atlantic Tunas

Convention Act (16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.)

and the Magnuson-Stevens