12112 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 43 / Monday, March 6, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

FDC Date State City Airport FDC No. SIAP

01/24/95 WI Madison ................................. Dane County Regional-Truax Filed .. 5/0301 VOR OR TACAN OR GPS RWY

31 AMDT 24...

01/30/95 FL Melbourne ............................. Melbourne Intl ................................... 5/0402 LOC BC RWY 27L AMDT 8...

02/09/95 CA Los Angeles .......................... Los Angeles Intl ................................ 5/0633 ILS RWY 24L AMDT 21...

02/09/95 CA Los Angeles .......................... Los Angeles Intl ................................ 5/0634 ILS RWY 7L AMDT 3...

02/09/95 GA Waycross .............................. Waycross-Ware County .................... 5/0631 VOR–A AMDT 7...

02/09/95 GA Waycross .............................. Waycross-Ware County .................... 5/0632 RNAV RWY 18 AMDT 4...

02/10/95 CA Firebaugh .............................. Firebaugh .......................................... 5/0662 VOR/DME OR GPS–A, AMDT

2...

02/10/95 CA Los Banos ............................. Los Banos Muni ................................ 5/0658 VOR/DME OR GPS RWY 14,

AMDT 3...

02/10/95 CA Los Banos ............................. Los Banos Muni ................................ 5/0659 VOR/DME OR GPS RWY 32,

AMDT 4...

02/10/95 CA Modesto ................................ Modesto City-County-Harry Sham

Field.

5/0663 NDB RWY 28R, AMDT 7A...

02/10/95 CA Oakdale ................................. Oakdale ............................................. 5/0661 VOR OR GPS RWY 10, AMDT

5A...

02/10/95 FL Jacksonville ........................... Craig Muni ......................................... 5/0670 ILS RWY 32 AMDT 2C...

02/10/95 TN Tullahoma ............................. Tullahoma Regional Airport/WM

Northern Field.

5/0655 VOR OR GPS–A AMDT 3...

02/14/95 AK Juneau .................................. Juneau Intl ........................................ 5/0731 LDA–1, RWY 8, AMDT 10...

02/14/95 GA Moultrie ................................. Moultrie Muni .................................... 5/0722 VOR OR GPS RWY 22, AMDT

11A...

02/16/95 FL Melbourne ............................. Melbourne Intl ................................... 5/0782 VOR OR GPS RWY 27L, AMDT

11...

02/21/95 FL Fort Myers ............................. Page Field ......................................... 5/0821 VOR OR GPS RWY 13, ORIG...

02/21/95 FL Orlando ................................. Orlando Intl ....................................... 5/0822 ILS RWY 35, AMDT 2...

[FR Doc. 95–5426 Filed 3–3–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD13–95–002]

Safety Zone Regulation; Bremerton,

Washington, to Queets, Washington

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is

establishing a moving safety zone 300

yards around the tugs STACEY FOSS

and RICHARD FOSS, the towline, and

the barge NESTUCCA while they are in

transit from Puget Sound Naval

Shipyard, Bremerton, Washington,

through U.S. navigable waters until

south of latitude 47°32′N, Queets,

Washington. The zone is needed to

protect the tugs STACEY FOSS and

RICHARD FOSS, and the barge

NESTUCCA, and other persons,

facilities, and vessels from safety

hazards associated with onlookers and

others who may wish to view the barge

at close range. Entry into this zone is

prohibited unless authorized by the

Captain of the Port.

EFFECTIVE DATES: This regulation

becomes effective on March 22, 1995 at

5 a.m. (PDT). It terminates when the

tugs STACEY FOSS and RICHARD

FOSS and the barge NESTUCCA are

south of Latitude 47°32′N, Queets,

Washington, at 1 p.m. (PDT) on March

23, 1995, unless sooner terminated by

the Captain of the Port.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

LTJG K. Paquette, c/o Captain of the

Port Puget Sound, 1519 Alaskan Way

South, Seattle, Washington 98134, (206)

217–6232.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In

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

of proposed rule making was not

published for this regulation and good

cause exists for making it 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

immediate action is needed to prevent

potential hazards to the tugs STACEY

FOSS and RICHARD FOSS and the

barge NESTUCCA and other vessels that

may transit the area. Details were not

available 30 days prior to the event,

thus, there were not sufficient time to

publish proposed rules in advance of

the event or to provide a delayed

effective date. Following normal

rulemaking procedures would be

impracticable.

Drafting Information

The drafters of this regulation are

LTJG K. Paquette, project officer for the

Captain of the Port, and LCDR J. Odell,

project attorney, Thirteenth Coast Guard

District Legal Office.

Discussion of Regulation

The event requiring this regulation

will begin on March 22, 1995 at 5 a.m.

(PDT). In response to a request from the

U.S. Navy, the Coast Guard is

establishing a 300 yard moving safety

zone around the tugs STACEY FOSS

and RICHARD FOSS, the towline, and

the barge NESTUCCA while these

vessels are in transit from Puget Sound

Naval Shipyard, Bremerton,

Washington, through U.S. navigable

waters until south of Latitude 47°32′N,

Queets, Washington at 1 p.m. (PDT) on

March 23, 1995. This transit may result

in a large number of vessels

congregating near or in the path of the

tugs STACEY FOSS and RICHARD

FOSS and the barge NESTUCCA. This

safety zone is needed due to the limited

maneuverability of the tugs STACEY

FOSS and RICHARD FOSS and the

barge NESTUCCA and the need to

ensure the safety of the mariners who

may attempt to approach the tugs

STACEY FOSS and RICHARD FOSS

and the barge NESTUCCA during their

transit, as well as other vessels in the

immediate vicinity. This moving safety

zone will be enforced by representatives

of the Captain of the Port Puget Sound,

Seattle, Washington. The Captain of he

Port may be assisted by other federal

agencies.

This regulation is issued pursuant to

33 USC 1231 as set out in the authority

citation for all of part 165.

Regulatory Evaluation

This temporary final rule is not a

significant regulatory action under

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866

and does not require an assessment of
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 43 / Monday, March 6, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 12113

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). 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.

Federalism

This action has been analyzed in

accordance with the principles and

criteria contained in Executive Order

12612, and it has been determined that

the proposed rulemaking does not have

sufficient federalism implications to

warrant the preparation of a Federalism

Assessment.

Environmental Assessment

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.c. of Commandant

Instruction M16475.1B.

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, part

165 of title 33, Code of Federal

Regulations, is amended 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. A new § 165.T13–002 is added to

read as follows:

§ 165.T13–002 Safety Zone: Puget Sound,

Washington.

(a) Location. The following area is a

safety zone: All waters within 300 yards

of the tugs STACEY FOSS and

RICHARD FOSS, the towline, and the

barge NESTUCCA while in transit from

Puget Sound Naval Shipyard,

Bremerton, Washington, through U.S.

navigable waters until south of Latitude

47°32′ N., Queets, Washington, at 1 p.m.

(PDT) on March 23, 1995.

(b) Definitions. A designated

representative of the Captain of the Port

is any Coast Guard commissioned,

warrant, or petty officer who has been

authorized by the Captain of the Port,

Puget Sound, to act on his behalf. The

following officers have or will be

designated by the Captain of the Port:

the Coast Guard Patrol Commander and

the senior boarding officer on each

vessel enforcing the safety zone.

(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 or his designated

representatives.

(d) Effective dates. This regulation

becomes effective on March 22, 1995 at

5 a.m. (PDT). It terminates when the

tugs STACEY FOSS and RICHARD

FOSS and the barge NESTUCCA are

south of Latitude 47°32′ N., Queets,

Washington, at 1 p.m. (PDT) on March

23, 1995, unless sooner terminated by

the Captain of the Port.

Dated: February 10, 1995.

R.K. Softye,

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

Port, Puget Sound.

[FR Doc. 95–5385 Filed 3–3–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–14–M

POSTAL RATE COMMISSION

39 CFR Part 3001

[Docket No. RM91–1; Order No. 1043]

Rules of Practice and Procedure

AGENCY: Postal Rate Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission is

publishing final rules amending its rules

of practice adopted in Order No. 1043,

issued February 17, 1995. The rules are

based on revisions submitted as a

proposed settlement of issues in Docket

RM91–1, a rulemaking addressing

general improvements in the

Commission’s rules of practice. The

proposed revisions were published in

the Federal Register (59 FR 8576) and

comments have been received and

considered. The differences between the

rules as proposed and as adopted reflect

conforming changes, editorial

improvements, or clarification of intent.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 6, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Stephen L. Sharfman, Legal Advisor

(202) 789–6820.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Two

settlement agreements involving

proposed improvements to the

Commission’s rules of practice were

presented to the Commission in this

docket. In response to the settlement

coordinator’s motion transmitting these

agreements, the Commission

incorporated the text of both agreements

in a notice of proposed rulemaking, and

requested comments. See 59 FR 8576,

February 23, 1994. One involved a

number of traditional, or standard,

aspects of these rules, such as service

and production specifications. This

final rule adopts, with minor

adjustments, revisions to the rules of

practice contained in that proposal. The

other proposed that participants be

required to file certain documents in

electronic form. Opposition to this

settlement existed, and a new docket

will shortly be established to further

explore potential solutions to problems

in this area.

The Commission received five

comments. Four commenters expressed

general support for the proposed

revisions, but singled out one or more

specific changes for additional

discussion. One commenter expressed

no opinion on the rules as whole, but

sought clarification of one proposed

change.

The Commission’s evaluation of the

settlement agreements and participants’

comments leads to the publication of

final rules that differ in several respects

from the proposed rules. The main

differences entail: the deletion of a

proposed requirement related to filing

documents in electronic form; the

express exclusion of answers to

interrogatories (and compelled answers)

from the ‘‘special request’’ service

practice otherwise applicable to

discovery-related documents; removal

of language restricting transcript

corrections of Commission hearings to

oral material; and clarification of

minimum typeface size. Other

differences reflect conforming changes

and editorial improvements. A review of

the rules and related comments follows.

Production Requirements (Rule 10(a)):

Terminology and Formatting

Instructions

Existing rule 10(a) sets forth

specifications for production and

preparation of documents filed with the

Commission. The revision updates these

requirements to reflect modern office

technology and practice. For example,

the final rule replaces the term

‘‘typewritten,’’ which currently appears

as the title of the subsection and in the

first sentence, with the term

‘‘production’’ or ‘‘produced,’’ as

appropriate. In addition, the final rule

increases the amount of space available

for text by easing longstanding margin

and line-spacing restrictions. It also

replaces the existing requirement that

text be double spaced with language

allowing spacing of not less than one