Passenger Weight and Inspected Vessel Stability Requirements, 49244-49275 [E8-18791]

Agencies

• Coast Guard
• DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 20, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 49244-49275]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18791]



[[Page 49243]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part II





Department of Homeland Security





-----------------------------------------------------------------------



Coast Guard



-----------------------------------------------------------------------



46 CFR Parts 71, 114, 115 et al.



Passenger Weight and Inspected Vessel Stability Requirements; Proposed 
Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 20, 2008 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 49244]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

46 CFR Parts 71, 114, 115, 122, 170, 171, 172, 174, 175, 176, 178, 
179, and 185

[Docket No. USCG-2007-0030]
RIN 1625-AB20


Passenger Weight and Inspected Vessel Stability Requirements

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to amend its regulations governing 
the stability of passenger vessels and the maximum number of passengers 
that may safely be permitted on board a vessel. The average American 
weighs significantly more than the assumed average weight per person 
utilized in current regulations, and the maximum number of persons 
permitted on a vessel is determined by several factors, including an 
assumed average weight for each passenger. Updating regulations to more 
accurately reflect today's average weight per person will maintain 
intended safety levels by taking this weight increase into account. The 
Coast Guard is also taking this opportunity to clarify and update 
intact stability and subdivision and damage stability regulations.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Docket Management 
Facility on or before November 18, 2008. Comments sent to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) on collection of information must reach OMB 
before November 18, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket 
number USCG-2007-0030 to the Docket Management Facility at the U.S. 
Department of Transportation. To avoid duplication, please use only one 
of the following methods:
    (1) Online: https://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of 
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (3) Hand delivery: Room W12-140 on the Ground Floor of the West 
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The 
telephone number is 202-366-9329.
    (4) Fax: 202-493-2251.
    You must also send comments on collection of information to the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and 
Budget. To ensure that the comments are received on time, the preferred 
method is by e-mail at oira_submission@omb.eop.gov or fax at 202-395-
6566. The subject line should include the docket number (USCG-2007-
0030) and say ATTN: Desk Officer, U.S. Coast Guard, DHS. An alternate, 
though slower, method is by U.S. mail to the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, 
NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attn: Desk Officer, U.S. Coast Guard.
    You may inspect the material proposed for incorporation by 
reference at room 1308, U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second 
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20593-0001 between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is 
202-372-1372. Copies of the material are available as indicated in the 
``Incorporation by Reference'' section of this preamble.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed 
rule, call Mr. William Peters, U.S. Coast Guard, Office of Design 
Engineering Standards, Naval Architecture Division (CG-5212), telephone 
202-372-1371. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material 
to the docket, call Ms. Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket 
Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents for the Preamble

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments
    A. Submitting Comments
    B. Viewing Comments and Documents
    C. Privacy Act
    D. Public Meeting
    E. Technical Review by Society of Naval Architects and Marine 
Engineers
II. List of Acronyms
III. List of Terms
IV. Background and Purpose
V. Discussion of Proposed Rule
    A. Vessel Stability
    Part One--Explanation
    Part Two--Analysis
    Part Three--Assessment Methodology
    B. Weight of Passengers and Crew
    C. Notes on Pontoon Vessels
    D. SOLAS and Resolution A.265
    E. Corrections, Clarifications, and Updates
    F. American Bureau of Shipping
    G. Discussion of Proposed Amendments by Section
VI. Incorporation by Reference
VII. Regulatory Analyses
    A. Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Small Entities
    Number of Small Entities Affected
    Types of Entities Affected
    Other Federal Rules
    Regulatory Alternatives
    C. Assistance for Small Entities
    D. Collection of Information
    E. Federalism
    F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    G. Taking of Private Property
    H. Civil Justice Reform
    I. Protection of Children
    J. Indian Tribal Governments
    K. Energy Effects
    L. Technical Standards
    M. Environment

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted, 
without change, to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided. We have an agreement with the 
Department of Transportation (DOT) to use the Docket Management 
Facility. Please see DOT's ``Privacy Act'' paragraph below.

A. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking (USCG-2007-0030), indicate the specific section of this 
document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each 
comment. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, 
an e-mail address, or a phone number in the body of your document so 
that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission. 
You may submit your comments and material by electronic means, mail, 
fax, or delivery to the Docket Management Facility at the address under 
ADDRESSES; but please submit your comments and material by only one 
means. If you submit them by mail or delivery, submit them in an 
unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ 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. We will consider all comments and 
material received during the comment period. We may change this 
proposed rule in view of them.

B. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble 
as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov at 
any time. Enter the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG-2007-0030) 
in the Search box and click ``Go >>.'' You may also visit the Docket 
Management

[[Page 49245]]

Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

C. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into 
any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment 
(or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, 
business, labor union, etc.). You may review the Department of 
Transportation's Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register 
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit https://
DocketsInfo.dot.gov.

D. Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a 
request for one to the Docket Management Facility at the address under 
ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that 
one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place 
announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

E. Technical Review by Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers

    An ad hoc panel of the Society of Naval Architects and Marine 
Engineers (SNAME) has reviewed reports delivered to the Coast Guard by 
BMT Designers and Planners and CSC Advanced Marine Center and provided 
technical advice concerning vessel stability and increased passenger 
weight. SNAME is a nonprofit, professional society, and the panel's 28 
experienced naval architects are able to provide technical peer review 
from a broad cross-section of the designers, builders and operators of 
passenger vessels. The Charter for Ad Hoc Panel 15 on Loading Criteria 
for People Aboard Passenger Vessels and a memorandum from the panel's 
chairman to the Coast Guard concerning the Phase 1 Impact Analysis 
Report from BMT Designers and Planners are available in the docket at 
https://www.regulations.gov. A list of the panel's members and 
information about their meetings is available at https://www.sname.org/
committees/tech_ops/O44/passenger/activity-15.html. The Coast Guard 
will make any additional reports from the ad hoc panel available to the 
public by posting them to the docket.

II. List of Acronyms

2008 IS Code International Code on Intact Stability, 2008
ABS American Bureau of Shipping
CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COI Certificate of Inspection
DHS Department of Homeland Security
DOT Department of Transportation
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
EO Executive Order
FR Federal Register
GM Metacentric height
LBP Length Between Perpendiculars
LCG Longitudinal Center of Gravity
MARPOL International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from 
Ships
MSC Marine Safety Center
NHANES National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
MISLE Marine Information for Safety and Law Enforcement
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NTSB National Transportation Safety Board
OCMI Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PSSC Passenger Ship Safety Certificate
PSST Pontoon Simplified Stability Proof Test
SBA United States Small Business Administration
SNAME Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers
SOLAS International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea
SST Simplified Stability Proof Test
U.S.C. United States Code
VCG Vertical Center of Gravity

III. List of Terms

    Angle of heel means the angle of the vessel's centerline to the 
upright when the vessel is inclined.
    Deadweight survey: See lightweight survey.
    Draft means the vertical distance from the bottom of the hull 
(i.e., the keel) or another point that protrudes below the hull to the 
waterline.
    Exposed waters generally means more than 20 nautical miles from a 
harbor of safe refuge.
    Flush deck means any continuous, unbroken deck from stem to stern.
    Freeboard means the vertical distance from the deck edge to the 
waterline. A decrease in freeboard (i.e. reduced freeboard) corresponds 
to an increase in draft.
    Heel is the degree to which a ship leans transversely as a result 
of variable and dynamic external forces.
    Heeling moment is generally a force acting through a distance that 
causes a vessel to roll or heel to one side. A heeling moment that is 
larger than the vessel's righting ability can cause the vessel to 
overturn or capsize. Coast Guard requirements limit the amount of heel 
a vessel can have when wind or passenger movement causes the heeling 
moment.
    Inclining or stability test is a methodical process that involves 
moving a series of known weights on a vessel and measuring the 
resulting change in the equilibrium heel angle to determine the 
vessel's stability characteristics.
    Intact stability generally means the stability properties of a 
vessel without any damage to its watertight buoyancy volume.
    Length between perpendiculars (LBP) means the length of the summer 
load waterline from the vessel's stern post to the point where it 
crosses the vessel's stem.
    Lightship displacement or lightweight means the weight of a vessel 
that is complete in all respects, but without consumables, stores, 
cargo, passengers, crew, and their effects, and without any liquids on 
board except fixed ballast and machinery and piping fluids, such as 
lubricants and hydraulics, which are at operating levels.
    Lightweight survey is a part of the stability test that determines 
any changes in lightship displacement and longitudinal center of 
gravity (LCG). It involves taking an audit of all items that should be 
added, deducted, or relocated on a vessel so that the observed 
condition of the vessel can be adjusted to the lightship condition. 
Often referred to as a deadweight survey.
    Longitudinal center of gravity (LCG) means the location along the 
vessel's length at which the total weight of the vessel may be assumed 
to act.
    Master means a person holding a valid license that authorizes that 
person to serve as a master of a passenger vessel.
    Open boat means a vessel not protected from entry of water by means 
of a complete weathertight deck.
    Operator means the person or entity who provides operational 
instructions to and receives reports from the master of the vessel and 
is responsible for the vessel's maintenance and repair, schedule of 
operations, crewing, etc.
    Owner means the person or entity holding title to the vessel.
    Partially protected waters generally means not more than 20 
nautical miles from a harbor of safe refuge.
    Passenger heel refers to the heeling moment that occurs when 
passengers move to one side of the vessel's centerline, causing the 
vessel to roll, or heel.
    Pontoon vessel generally means any vessel having two or more sealed 
hulls, which are structurally independent and detachable from the 
vessel's deck or cross structure.

[[Page 49246]]

    Protected waters generally means sheltered waters that present no 
special hazards.
    Sailing vessel means a vessel that is propelled by wind, using 
sails.
    Subdivision and damage stability refers to the stability 
characteristics of a vessel when damaged, generally focusing on 
flooding of watertight compartments.
    Vertical center of gravity (VCG) means the height above the keel at 
which the total weight of the vessel may be assumed to act.
    Vessel stability refers to the tendency of a ship to remain upright 
or return to upright when inclined by forces that are caused by the 
action of waves, wind, passenger movement, etc.
    Waterplane means the horizontal area obtained from the intersection 
of the ship's hull with the water's surface at a particular draft. The 
waterplane area is used to calculate how much immersion will be caused 
by additional weight.
    Wind heel refers to the heeling moment caused when the wind acts on 
the lateral area of the vessel above the waterline and causes the 
vessel to roll, or heel.

IV. Background and Purpose

    The total number of persons permitted on a passenger vessel, 
inspected and certificated under 46 CFR Subchapters H, K or T, is 
limited by a number of different design factors, one of which is 
stability. Stability requirements include intact stability for almost 
all vessels, as well as subdivision and damage stability generally for 
any vessel carrying more than 49 passengers and all vessels over 65 
feet in length. This NPRM is intended to clarify and update both intact 
stability and subdivision and damage stability regulations, primarily 
related to the carriage of passengers for hire, and to update the 
weight per person used for all vessels. The intent of this rulemaking 
is to ensure that each vessel operates without being overloaded.
    The overall good safety record of the passenger vessel industry 
reflects safety factors inherent in the stability requirements applied 
to passenger vessels. Increasing the passenger weight to reflect 
current data will help ensure that the safety margins included in our 
regulations remain valid.
    These safety margins operate in two ways. The first is through 
intact stability, which generally relates to the stability of a vessel 
in normal operation. The second is through subdivision and damage 
stability, which generally relates to the stability of a vessel in an 
emergency involving a flooded condition.
    A vessel's stability information, including any restrictions on 
route and the number of passengers permitted, is provided to the vessel 
operator most often in the form of a stability letter issued by the 
Coast Guard's Marine Safety Center (MSC), and/or a Coast Guard 
Certificate of Inspection (COI) issued by the Officer in Charge, Marine 
Inspection (OCMI). When both are provided, restrictions on the COI 
govern. The COI is issued after the vessel's stability has been 
evaluated in one of two ways:
    For vessels greater than 65 feet in length, stability is evaluated 
through detailed design calculations--submitted to the MSC--that 
produce the vessel's stability requirements. This process, which takes 
into account the assumed total weight of persons on board, is described 
in 46 CFR, subchapter S, parts 170 and 171.
    Vessels not greater than 65 feet in length normally undergo a 
performance test conducted in the presence of the OCMI, instead of 
submitting design stability calculations to the MSC (46 CFR part 178). 
This performance test, which also takes into account the assumed total 
weight of persons on board, is either a simplified stability proof test 
(SST) or, if the vessel is a pontoon vessel, a pontoon simplified 
stability proof test (PSST). The SST is intended to evaluate monohull 
vessels, and the PSST is intended to evaluate pontoon vessels operating 
on protected waters. For ease of discussion, we will use the term SST 
in this preamble to describe any simplified stability proof test.
    Vessels to which these tests do not apply may need to be evaluated 
through design calculations to show that they meet intact stability 
requirements. Alternately, a vessel might satisfy stability 
requirements by complying with a standard acceptable to the Commanding 
Officer, Marine Safety Center. Finally, simplified subdivision 
calculations may be necessary for some vessels not greater than 65 feet 
in length.
    To arrive at a total assumed weight of persons on board for 
calculating stability, an assumed average weight per person is used. 
Section 178.330 of Title 46 of the CFR specifies that the assumed 
average weight per person is 160 pounds, except that vessels operating 
exclusively on protected waters and carrying a mix of men, women, and 
children may use an average weight of 140 pounds per person. These 
weights were established in the 1960s.
    In a report issued in October 2004, the Centers for Disease Control 
and Prevention (CDC) concluded that the average weight of an individual 
in the United States has increased dramatically in the last 40 years, 
with the greatest increase seen in adults. (The report, Advance Data 
From Vital Health Statistics Mean Body Weight, Height, and Body Mass 
Index, United States 1960-2002, No. 347, October 27, 2004, is available 
in the docket.) This increase in passenger and crew weight can have an 
adverse effect on the stability of passenger vessels due to several 
factors, including increased vertical center of gravity, reduced 
freeboard, and increased passenger heeling moment.
    On December 20, 2004, the National Transportation Safety Board 
(NTSB) issued Safety Recommendation M-04-04 (available in the docket), 
which included findings that the current 140 pound per person weight 
allowance for operations on protected waters does not reflect actual 
loading conditions. The NTSB recommended that the Coast Guard revise 
its guidance to OCMIs for determining the maximum passenger capacity of 
small passenger pontoon vessels either by: (1) Dividing the vessel's 
SST weight by 174 pounds per person; or (2) restricting the actual 
cumulative weight of passengers and crew to the vessel's SST weight. In 
correspondence to the NTSB dated April 7, 2005 (available in the 
docket), the Coast Guard concurred that the average weight per person 
used in SSTs needed to be updated, and noted that an internal Coast 
Guard study identified the same issue. That study, which is entitled 
Study of Effects on Commercial Passenger Vessels Due to Weight 
Standards, is available in the docket.
    This notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) follows notices to the 
public, published in the Federal Register on April 26, 2006 (71 FR 
24732) and November 2, 2006 (71 FR 64546), recommending voluntary 
interim measures for passenger vessels to follow while the Coast Guard 
studied the issue of increased passenger weight. In summary, those 
voluntary measures advised pontoon vessels and other small passenger 
vessels to (1) more stringently monitor wind and wave conditions prior 
to departure and (2) begin using 185 pounds as the new assumed average 
weight per person when calculating passenger capacity. A discussion of 
how 185 pounds was chosen is contained in the April 26, 2006 notice and 
in the discussion of Sec.  170.090 in this preamble.
    At last count, the Docket Management Facility received 108 comments 
from the public in response to those notices. They are posted for 
public view at https://www.regulations.gov under docket number USCG-
2007-0030, and

[[Page 49247]]

can be viewed by following the directions in the ``Viewing comments and 
documents'' section of this preamble. We will respond to those 
comments, together with comments received in response to this NPRM, 
when we publish an effective rule.
    Finally, this proposed rule is an opportunity to identify where 
corrections, clarifications, and updates need to be made to existing 
regulations. These proposed changes, which would include changes in 
international requirements, will be discussed in greater detail later 
in this preamble, under ``Corrections, Clarifications, and Updates.''

V. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    For easier reference, we have divided this discussion into the 
following topics: A. Vessel Stability; B. Weight of Passengers and 
Crew; C. Notes on Pontoon Vessels; D. SOLAS and Resolution A.265; E. 
Corrections, Clarifications, and Updates; F. American Bureau of 
Shipping; and G. Discussion of Proposed Amendments by Section.

A. Vessel Stability

    An increase in passenger and crew weight will typically have an 
adverse effect on vessel stability. Whether or not such additional 
weight would result in non-compliance of a vessel with applicable 
stability criteria depends upon the amount and location of the 
additional weight, the degree by which the vessel demonstrated 
compliance with the stability criteria previously, and which of the 
criteria was limiting, if any.
    Historically, a margin of safety has been built into the 
requirements for both intact stability and subdivision and damage 
stability. The standards for intact stability criteria are generally 
designed to provide vessels with adequate ability to resist overturning 
heeling moments, such as those caused by wind or passenger weight 
shifting to one side. Standards for subdivision and damage stability 
are designed to address the worst case loading conditions and certain 
flooding scenarios that could occur as a result of accidental damage. 
Although intact stability and subdivision and damage stability 
standards address different stability risks, we believe that these two 
stability standards together are responsible in part for the good 
safety record of the passenger vessel industry. Therefore, we are 
proposing that intact stability and subdivision and damage stability 
requirements utilize an updated assumed average weight per person.
    We also propose adding more specific requirements for a vessel 
owner or operator to show that the vessel meets intact stability and 
subdivision and damage stability standards, including provisions 
accounting for possible changes in vessel and weight per person. These 
requirements will improve a master's ability to meet stability criteria 
for the intended service and also avoid overloading the vessel.
    Additionally, to help ensure that vessels maintain the intended 
safety levels after initial certification, we would clarify the 
requirement that stability information be checked at each annual 
inspection or COI renewal to confirm that it is still valid for the 
loading and service intended.
    Finally, we propose requiring stability verification--including 
calculations--at least every ten years.
    We propose detailing these requirements in new sections that would 
be added to each of the three subchapters that address the inspection 
of passenger vessels. The new sections, entitled ``Stability 
Verification,'' would be added at Sec.  71.25-50 in subchapter H, Sec.  
115.505 in subchapter K, and Sec.  176.505 in subchapter T (all of 
which are contained in chapter I, Title 46 of the CFR). Each new 
section would be comprised of paragraphs (a), (b), (c) and (d).
    So that owners, operators, and OCMIs may clearly understand these 
requirements, how we intend to implement them, and the analyses upon 
which they are based, a discussion in three parts is given below:
    ``Part One--Explanation'' describes the purpose and intent behind 
each of the paragraphs--(a), (b), (c), and (d)--in the proposed new 
``Stability Verification'' sections.
    ``Part Two--Analysis'' describes the process whereby the Coast 
Guard developed an assessment methodology for prioritizing the vessels 
that would require stability verification.
    ``Part Three--Assessment Methodology'' describes the methodology to 
be used by owners, operators, and OCMIs to, first, determine whether a 
change in the permitted number or distribution of passengers might be 
necessary and, second, to assess whether a vessel would be likely to 
require new stability testing or evaluation.
Part One--Explanation
Paragraph (a) of Sec. Sec.  71.25-50, 115.505, and 176.505
    Paragraph (a) would add, as the owner or operator's responsibility, 
two checks regarding the vessel's stability information. First, at each 
annual inspection and Certificate of Inspection (COI) renewal, the 
owner or operator would demonstrate that the stability information is 
still appropriate for the vessel's intended loading and service. This 
requirement would augment the confirmation by a Coast Guard marine 
inspector that a valid stability letter is properly posted aboard a 
vessel.
    Second, the owner or operator would need to confirm that the total 
weight of gear and variable loads is still valid for the intended 
service. (The total weight of gear and variable loads, including the 
total weight of persons carried, is the basis for the stability letter 
and/or the COI.) The owner or operator would need to ensure that the 
master knows both the maximum total weight of persons and the average 
weight per person on which the total weight is based.
    Currently, all passenger vessels are required to comply with a 
section in the ``Operations'' part of each inspection subchapter 
(Sec. Sec.  78.17-22, 122.315, and 185.315 of this title) that requires 
a master to verify, prior to departure on every voyage, that the loaded 
vessel complies with all stability information, and that the stability 
information is being used properly to ensure that the vessel is not 
overloaded. Paragraph (a) would add a requirement that the owner or 
operator demonstrate the methods the master uses to do this. Such 
methods could include the competent reading of loading or draft marks, 
and must include the proper use of that information for complying with 
the draft and/or freeboard restrictions normally contained in the 
stability letters for these types of vessels.
    If the stability information is no longer valid, a new stability 
letter would be needed. The new stability letter would contain revised 
operating restrictions that the master should follow to avoid 
overloading the vessel and to maintain compliance with stability 
requirements.
    The following flowchart illustrates the stability confirmation 
process discussed above:
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P

[[Page 49248]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP20AU08.000

BILLING CODE 4910-15-C

[[Page 49249]]

Paragraph (b) of Sec. Sec.  71.25-50, 115.505, and 176.505.
    This paragraph would require a vessel's stability to be verified at 
10 year intervals or when modifications are made to the vessel that 
could affect the vessel's ability to meet stability requirements. The 
10 year ``clock'' would start whenever the last stability verification 
was conducted or stability letter was issued, or when a determination 
of sister vessel status was made (as permitted in part 170 of 
Subchapter S). The ``clock'' would be reset after each stability 
verification. For a vessel that would be issued a SOLAS Passenger Ship 
Safety Certificate (PSSC), the SOLAS requirement for a lightweight 
survey to be conducted at least once every 5 years would constitute a 
verification of the vessel's stability for the purposes of this 
paragraph.
    In other words, paragraph (a) requires the owner or operator to 
make sure that the vessel master knows what the vessels' stability 
limits are, based on the most recent stability calculations. Paragraph 
(b) requires new calculations of the per-person weight, and then 
requires the use of that weight to verify--usually with calculations--
that the vessel still meets applicable stability requirements.
Paragraph (c) of Sec. Sec.  71.25-50, 115.505, and 176.505.
    This paragraph would provide the minimum requirements for what the 
stability verification required by paragraph (b) would include. The 
requirements would vary depending on whether the vessel's stability 
compliance was governed by subchapter S or subchapter T of title 46 
CFR. Subchapter S requires that detailed design calculations be 
submitted to the Marine Safety Center (MSC), as described in parts 170 
and 171. This requirement also applies to all subchapter H and K 
vessels and some subchapter T vessels. However, a simplified test, 
either an SST or PSST, is performed for most subchapter T vessels, as 
described in part 178. In cases where a simplified test is neither 
feasible nor appropriate, a stability standard would be determined by 
the MSC.
    Unless the OCMI permits the use of another value, the assumed 
average weight per person would be determined according to proposed 
paragraph 170.090(d) or 178.330(a)(4)(ii), whichever is applicable. The 
OCMI may permit another value when the owner or operator can show that 
another value more accurately represents the average weight of persons 
carried in service; for example when the vessel carries primarily 
children.
    Using a total weight of persons based on this latest average weight 
per person (i.e., the new total test weight), the owner or operator 
would need to verify that the vessel meets applicable stability 
criteria. For subchapter S compliance, this would mean that 
calculations would need to be performed if the total weight of persons 
carried is greater than the total weight used in the previous stability 
verification. For vessels undergoing a simplified proof test, the owner 
or operator would need to either perform a new test using the new total 
test weight, or prove that the vessel could meet current applicable 
requirements using data from the most recently performed simplified 
test, if those data are valid.
    For vessels meeting subchapter S requirements, the verification 
would also include conducting a deadweight survey to verify that the 
vessel's stability characteristics have not changed significantly, and 
that it remains in compliance with applicable stability criteria. 
(Coast Guard policy for what constitutes a significant change is 
contained in Marine Safety Center Technical Note (MTN) 04-95, Lightship 
Change Determination; Weight-Moment Calculation vs. Deadweight Survey 
vs. Full Stability Test, available in the docket.) If sufficient 
accuracy can be obtained for the stability verification prior to the 
deadweight survey, some relaxation in the deadweight survey 
requirements could be accepted by the MSC. For example, a greater 
number of tanks containing operating liquids could be kept at normal 
levels.
    If the lightship characteristics have changed so that stability 
compliance is not assured under the existing stability information, a 
new stability analysis--together with associated loading calculations--
would be needed, and a new stability letter would be issued.
    When the passenger capacity of a vessel is limited by subdivision 
and/or damage stability considerations, the proposed increase in 
assumed average passenger weight may require a corresponding reduction 
in passenger capacity. For example, in a passenger vessel to which 46 
CFR 179.220 is applicable, an increase in the assumed average weight 
per person could cause either a change in freeboard, resulting in a 
reduction in the permissible distance between watertight bulkheads (see 
46 CFR 179.220(a)(2)), or a reduction in the permitted number of 
passengers in order to remain in compliance with existing subdivision 
and damage stability requirements. In a vessel to which subchapter S 
subdivision and damage stability requirements are applicable, increased 
passenger weight could cause the margin line to become submerged in the 
flooded condition, which regulations prohibit.
    Owners of such vessels as those discussed above may seek to modify 
their vessels to maintain their current passenger count. When 
significant, such modifications may be determined by the Coast Guard to 
be ``major conversions.'' When a modification constitutes a major 
conversion, it is appropriate to bring the vessel into compliance with 
the latest safety standards where it is both reasonable and practicable 
to do so. The cognizant OCMI makes a determination on which areas of a 
vessel undergoing major conversion must be brought into compliance.
    In all cases, for a passenger vessel that undergoes a major 
conversion or incurs changes that affect its stability, the required 
verification of both intact stability and subdivision and damage 
stability compliance would use the latest assumed average weight per 
person.
Paragraph (d) of Sec. Sec.  71.25-50, 115.505, and 176.505.
    This paragraph would permit the Coast Guard authority responsible 
for issuing the stability information to defer or dispense with 
stability verification based on the vessel's characteristics or the 
degree to which the vessel could be affected by increased weight per 
person or vessel weight. For vessels that are subject to subchapter S 
requirements, this authority is normally the Commanding Officer, Marine 
Safety Center; for vessels whose stability is based on a simplified 
stability test, this authority is normally the OCMI.
    Analyses described under the ensuing ``Part Two--Verification 
Process'' of this preamble showed that some vessel types experience a 
negligible effect from increased passenger weight. These vessel types 
include sailing vessels, vessels that carry substantial cargo amounts 
compared to the passenger weight, vessels that have an established 
process to avoid overloading, and/or vessels that follow the voluntary 
measures for prudent operation contained in the Federal Register notice 
published on April 26, 2006 (71 FR 24732). A more detailed description 
of those vessels relatively unaffected by an increase in weight per 
person can be found in ``Part Three--Assessment Methodology.''
Part Two--Analysis
    The Coast Guard sponsored an analysis of the impact of increased

[[Page 49250]]

weight per person on the U.S. inspected passenger vessel fleet. From 
the Marine Information for Safety and Law Enforcement (MISLE) database, 
we found that nearly 75 percent of the inspected U.S. flag passenger 
vessels are 65 feet in length or less. The stability of most of these 
vessels was based on the performance of a simplified stability test 
(SST), either for a monohull or a pontoon passenger vessel.
    The analysis showed that the effect of increased passenger weight 
on vessels depended on factors not included in the MISLE database, such 
as the amount of freeboard and draft and whether the vessel is a flush 
deck or open boat type.
    To supplement that study, additional stability analyses were 
performed on a number of monohull vessels that had undergone SSTs. By 
analyzing the SST results, conservative estimates of key parameters--
such as the moment to heel 1 degree--can be made, that, in turn, can be 
used in an assessment methodology for intact stability verification.
    These analyses were peer-reviewed by the Society of Naval 
Architects and Marine Engineers (SNAME) Ad Hoc Panel No. 15, which 
provided both a technical appraisal of the analyses and recommendations 
on how they could be used. Two of the panel's recommendations are 
associated with the proposed prioritizing process:
    (1) The panel recommended the Coast Guard adopt a risk-based 
process that looks at relative changes to a vessel's stability 
characteristics and compares these relative changes to acceptable 
limits determined by the Coast Guard; and
    (2) The panel recommended the Coast Guard adopt a technical process 
in reviewing stability. That process would use the stability 
requirements the vessel is designed to meet to determine if the vessel 
has been adversely affected by an increase in passenger weight such 
that a new stability evaluation should be performed.
    We agree with these recommendations. In addition, based on the 
analyses of the impact of increased passenger weight on the passenger 
vessel fleet, we developed an assessment methodology, detailed in 
``Part Three--Assessment Methodology'' below, that reflects these 
recommendations.
    As stated above, this proposed rule would require that a stability 
verification be performed within ten years of the date the last 
stability letter was issued or a previous stability verification was 
performed. Regardless of when the stability information was issued, 
however, all vessels must meet stability requirements using the latest 
assumed average weight per person immediately upon the effective date 
of this rule. Additionally, in all cases, when a vessel or its loading 
is modified in any way that alters its stability, a stability 
verification is required as soon as is practicable, using the latest 
assumed average weight per person.
    Since a very large portion of inspected passenger vessels currently 
have stability letters that are more than 10 years old, we developed a 
process that allows owners, operators, and OCMIs to determine whether 
the stability verification should be conducted as soon as is 
practicable, deferred to a later date--most likely the next regular 
inspection--or perhaps dispensed with. This process would more evenly 
distribute demand for the Coast Guard resources that will be necessary 
to guide implementation of this proposed rule.
    The following flowchart illustrates the prioritizing process, 
discussed in detail below:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP20AU08.001


[[Page 49251]]


Part Three--Assessment Methodology
    The process by which an owner, operator, or OCMI would determine 
whether a vessel would need to reduce or redistribute passengers and 
whether it would need a new stability verification--and how soon--is 
laid out in detail below: First for vessels subject to the requirements 
of subchapter S, and second for vessels that undergo a simplified proof 
test.
    However, there are several vessel categories for which no further 
assessment of passenger weight needs to be considered, with the 
exception that a new stability letter might be required. No immediate 
stability verification or change to passenger capacity is necessary if 
the vessel:
    1. Is a sailing vessel;
    2. Has a Certificate of Inspection (COI) that permits 86 percent 
(approximately equal to 160 pounds divided by 185 pounds) or fewer of 
the passengers permitted by the stability letter, and the assumed 
weight per person was 160 or 165 pounds;
    3. Has a COI that permits 75 percent (approximately equal to 140 
pounds divided by 185 pounds) or fewer of the passengers permitted by 
the stability letter, if operating on protected waters with a mix of 
men, women, and children, and the assumed weight per person was 140 
pounds;
    4. Is permitted to carry an amount of cargo, not including 
passengers, that exceeds the total weight of passengers carried; or
    5. Ensures that the total weight of persons aboard the vessel does 
not exceed the assumed total weight of persons used to develop the 
stability information, which is equal to the total test weight.
    Assessment of vessels subject to the requirements of subchapter S.
    The SNAME Ad Hoc panel also proposed, and the Coast Guard, in turn, 
proposes a process for evaluating stability change in these vessels 
using the latest assumed average weight per person. By following the 
process below, the owner, operator, or OCMI could determine the urgency 
of each vessel's need for a re-evaluation of intact stability and 
prioritize the vessel accordingly. The data necessary for making the 
percent change and detailed loading calculations described below should 
be readily available, as Sec.  78.17-22(b) requires that vessel masters 
have the capability to determine the vessel's draft, trim, and 
stability as necessary.
    Evaluation process for a vessel subject to the requirements of 
subchapter S.
    The following three assumptions were applied:
    1. Wind heel requirements are more severe than passenger heel, and 
this doesn't change with an increase in weight per person. Experience 
has shown that passenger heel requirements in subchapter S rarely 
exceed wind heel requirements.
    2. Each vessel meets stability requirements in its current 
condition, prior to assessing the effect of a per-person weight 
increase. Our assessment cannot take into account unauthorized changes 
to the vessel or its service.
    3. A small amount of increase in weight or vertical center of 
gravity (VCG) will not adversely affect the stability of the vessel 
significantly.
    This approach is taken from MTN 4-95 (available in the docket), 
which uses weight-moment calculations to assess the absolute and 
relative changes in displacement and centers of gravity (LCG and VCG). 
Those changes, in turn, can be compared to previously determined limits 
to evaluate the relative risk of adverse changes to the vessel's 
stability. To do this, a calculation is needed that relates the change 
in vertical weight moment caused by an increase in assumed weight per 
person (VMOMchng) to the lightship vertical weight moment 
(VMOMlightship):

Percent Change = VMOMchng/VMOMlightship x 100

Where:
VMOMchng = (Wpaxnew - Wpaxold) x (VCGpax)
VMOMlightship = lightship weight x lightship VCG
VCG = vertical center of gravity above baseline
Wpaxnew = the number of passengers multiplied by the latest assumed 
average weight per person
Wpaxold = the number of passengers multiplied by the old assumed 
average weight per person (generally, either 160 or 165 pounds)
VCGpax = the overall VCG of the passengers carried above the 
baseline

    In making the calculations, consistent units must be used. In other 
words, if the lightship weight is given in long tons, Wpaxnew and 
Wpaxold must be computed in long tons; if the lightship VCG is in feet, 
VCGpax must be in feet; if in meters, use meters.
    MTN 4-95 allows up to a 2 percent change in lightship weight 
without verifying weight-moment calculations. Additionally, an OCMI may 
consider the difference in VCG of the vessel and the passengers. It 
should be noted that a percent change of the vertical moment of less 
than 3 provides a value of safety corresponding to the 2 percent 
displacement allowed in MTN 4-95. For these reasons, if the percent 
change in vertical moment computed by the methodology given above is 
less than 3, an OCMI could defer the stability verification to a later 
date, most likely the next regularly scheduled inspection. If the 
percent change is 3 or greater, and the vessel's most recent stability 
letter is more than 10 years old, detailed stability calculations 
should be performed to determine the degree to which, if any, an 
increase in total assumed passenger weight would affect the vessel's 
compliance with the applicable stability criteria.
    Evaluation process for a vessel undergoing a monohull simplified 
stability proof test.
    This process uses data obtained from the SST data form and the 
standards given in 46 CFR 178.330. If the data for the SST is not 
available, vessel measurements will be necessary to obtain the SST data 
or the moment to heel 1 degree (MH1SST) must be estimated as described 
in the steps below:
    1. Using the following equation, calculate the additional sinkage 
in inches (centimeters) due to the increased passenger weight:

Sinkage = (Wpaxnew - Wpaxold)/Wimmersion

Where:

Wimmersion = (Waterplane Area x Water Density/K) in pounds per inch 
(kilograms per centimeter) (this is the weight per unit immersion); 
K = 12 inches per foot (100 centimeters per meter)
Wpaxnew = the number of passengers multiplied by the latest assumed 
average weight per person in pounds (kilograms)
Wpaxold = the number of passengers multiplied by the old assumed 
average weight per person used in the SST (generally, either 140 or 
160 pounds) in pounds (kilograms)
Waterplane Area = Length x Beam x Waterplane Coefficient in square 
feet (square meters)
Waterplane Coefficient = 0.7 for monohulls or 0.4 for multihulls, 
unless a more accurate value is known
Water Density = 64 pounds per cubic foot (1,025 kilograms per cubic 
meter) for salt water; 62.4 pounds per cubic foot (1,000 kilograms 
per cubic meter) for fresh water

    2. Calculate the location of the new maximum allowable immersion 
mark (iupright-new) above the upright load waterline by subtracting the 
sinkage calculated in step 1 above from the SST measured freeboard and 
applying the appropriate formula from 46 CFR 178.330(d). If the data 
for an SST is not available, the freeboard should be measured with the 
vessel in the condition specified in 46 CFR 178.330(a). (In summary, 
this is with the vessel complete in all respects, in a fully

[[Page 49252]]

loaded condition, and with all anticipated loads properly distributed.)
    3. Calculate the existing SST moment to heel 1 degree (MH1SST) as 
follows:

MH1SST = HMSST/ThetaSST

Where:

ThetaSST = angle between upright SST waterline and actual SST 
immersion point (after weight movement), in degrees = inverse 
tangent (2 x (iheeled - iupright/beam at the reference station)) 
(This is the actual heel angle caused by the heel moment applied in 
the SST.)
HMSST = heeling moment applied during the SST in foot-pounds (meter-
kilograms)
iupright = maximum allowable immersion determined from the upright 
freeboard before weight movement
iheeled = actual remaining distance measured after the weight 
movement from the water surface to the position of iupright on the 
vessel

    If the data for an SST is not available, the MH1SST can be 
estimated using the following equations:
    For a vessel operating on exposed waters:
MH1SST = 3 x ((L x B\3\)\2\)/10\8\ + (L x B\3\)/60 + 50

    For a vessel operating on partially protected waters:

MH1SST = 4 x ((L x B\3\)\2\)/10\8\ + (L x B\3\)/125 + 200

    For a vessel operating on protected waters:

MH1SST = 4.5 x ((L x B\3\)\2\)/10\8\ + (L x B\3\)/250 + 250

Where,

L = Length in feet, and
B = Beam, in feet

    4. Determine the new moment to heel 1 degree (MH1new) in foot-
pounds (meter-kilograms) with the increased passenger weight as 
follows:

MH1new = MH1SST x (TSST/Tnew) - VMnew/57.3

Where:

TSST = Estimated draft during SST in feet (meters), which may be 
calculated as the difference between the depth to the keel and the 
freeboard used in step 2
Tnew = TSST + sinkage (calculated in step 1 above, and converted to 
feet (meters))
VMnew = (Wpaxnew - Wpaxold) x VCGpax in foot-pounds (meter-
kilograms)
VCGpax = Overall vertical center of gravity (VCG) of the passengers 
carried

    5. Calculate new passenger heeling moment (MPnew) in accordance 
with 46 CFR 178.330 using the latest assumed average weight per person. 
If the existing wind heeling moment (MW) exceeds MPnew, the new draft 
(Tnew) should be used to calculate the new wind heeling moment (MWnew) 
in accordance with 46 CFR 178.330. The greatest of the new passenger or 
wind heeling moments (MPnew or MWnew) is divided by MH1new to determine 
the heel angle produced by the new heeling moment (Thetanew):

Thetanew = (Max (MPnew or MWnew))/MH1new

    6. Using the heel angle (Thetanew) calculated in step 5, the height 
of the heeled waterline above the upright waterline (iheeled-new) with 
the new heeling moment is determined:
iheeled-new = tangent (Thetanew) x 2 x beam at the reference station

    If iheeled-new is less than or equal to the height of the new 
maximum allowable immersion mark calculated in step 2 (iupright-new), 
the vessel would not be affected by an increase in assumed weight per 
person. If the value exceeds (iupright-new), the number of passengers 
should be reduced, or the passengers redistributed if the vessel has an 
upper deck, and steps 1 through 6 repeated until the immersion mark 
height (iheeled-new) is equal to or below the maximum allowable 
(iupright-new).

B. Weight of Passengers and Crew

    New provisions on the assumed average weight per person would be 
added at Sec. Sec.  170.090 and 178.330 and are discussed in detail at 
those sections of this preamble.
    A new section, 171.045, would require each passenger vessel to 
which subchapter S intact stability requirements now apply to use the 
latest assumed average weight per person appropriate for the intended 
service. This requirement would apply immediately on the effective date 
of this rule, although stability verification would not be required 
until ten years after the most recent stability information was issued, 
as discussed under ``Vessel Stability'' above.
    A new section, 178.215, would be added for vessels whose stability 
letter is based on the results of an SST or PSST. This section would 
require the owner or operator to provide the master with the total test 
weight, the latest assumed average weight per person, and the maximum 
number of persons permitted on board based on that weight.

C. Notes on Pontoon Vessels

    The passenger capacity of pontoon vessels may not be affected if a 
process is followed on every voyage to ensure that the total weight of 
persons carried does not exceed the total test weight that was used to 
determine stability compliance. One example of such a process would be 
to weigh all the passengers as they board the vessel. The passenger 
capacity will be affected if such a process is not followed and the 
passenger weight used on the vessel's SST was based on either 140 or 
160 pounds per person. If an SST was performed on the vessel using the 
procedures contained in the Small Passenger Vessels Simplified 
Stability Test Procedure for Pontoon Vessels on Protected Waters, the 
results of that test, if valid, may be used to determine the new 
capacity based on an assumed average weight that is appropriate for the 
intended service. In many cases, however, a new SST will need to be 
performed on pontoon passenger vessels. We propose adding the 
requirement in Sec.  178.210(d) that a vessel that undergoes a PSST in 
accordance with Sec.  178.340 must have a stability letter issued by 
the Marine Safety Center.

D. SOLAS and Resolution A.265

    Sections 170.248 and 171.001 would be revised by adding 
requirements concerning new vessels, which will become effective when 
certain amendments to the International Convention for the Safety of 
Life at Sea (SOLAS) come into effect on January 1, 2009. Each new 
vessel issued a SOLAS Passenger Ship Safety Certificate (PSSC) or a 
SOLAS Cargo Ship Safety Construction Certificate would have to meet the 
requirements of SOLAS chapter II-1, in addition to meeting the 
requirements concerning watertight bulkhead doors in subpart H of part 
170, and subdivision and damage stability requirements. For more 
information on these revisions, see the discussion of Sec.  170.015 in 
this preamble.
    The amendments to SOLAS chapter II-1 primarily involve the 
harmonization of subdivision and damage stability requirements for 
passenger and cargo vessels. IMO Resolution A.265(VIII) (hereafter 
A.265) was promulgated in 1973, and contains a probabilistic damage 
stability method that is an alternative set of requirements for 
passenger vessels instead of the traditional requirements contained in 
existing SOLAS regulations. This optional use of A.265 has been 
incorporated into U.S. regulations as ``Type III subdivision'', as an 
alternative to Type I subdivision. However, we are not aware of any 
U.S. flag vessel that has used Type III subdivision (A.265).
    Since the SOLAS chapter II-1 amendments are effectively an update 
of A.265, there is no need to keep A.265 as an option. Accordingly, we 
propose removing Sec. Sec.  170.135, 171.075, and 171.082, which 
address A.265 and Type III subdivision. While not replacing A.265, the 
SOLAS chapter II-1 amendments would be accepted as an equivalent to 
Type I subdivision.

[[Page 49253]]

Operating information associated with SOLAS chapter II-1 would be added 
in new Sec.  170.140.

E. Corrections, Clarifications, and Updates

    In the course of this rulemaking, we identified several regulations 
that need to be updated or corrected, and others that could benefit 
from clarification. While each of these proposed rule changes will be 
addressed more fully in the ensuing section-by-section discussion, a 
summary list of the affected sections--other than those discussed in 
``SOLAS and Resolution A.265'' above, and ``American Bureau of 
Shipping'' below--is as follows: Subpart 71.75 (heading); 71.75-1; 
71.75-5; 115.900; 115.910; 115.920; 115.930; 170.001; 170.015; 170.070; 
170.100; 170.105; 170.135; 170.160; 170.165; Part 170, subpart E 
(heading); 170.170; 170.248; 170.270; 171.001; Part 171, subpart B 
(heading); 171.050; Part 171, subpart C (heading); 171.060; 171.065; 
171.070; 172.020; 172.070; 174.007; 174.100; 174.360; 176.900; 176.910; 
176.920; 176.930; 178.115; 178.230; 178.310; 178.320; 178.325; 179.212 
and 179.220.

F. American Bureau of Shipping

    As one of the updates of regulations cited above, we propose 
removing references to the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) from 
Sec. Sec.  170.075, 170.080, 170.085, 170.093, 170.100, 170.110, 
170.120, 170.170, 170.173, 170.175, 170.180, 170.185, 170.190, and 
170.235. Procedures that the ABS uses to perform reviews of certain 
documents on behalf of the Coast Guard are contained in Navigation and 
Vessel Inspection Circulars 10-82 and 3-97. Title 46 U.S.C. 3316 
authorizes the Coast Guard to accept plan review, inspections, and 
examinations performed by ABS for compliance with Coast Guard rules and 
regulations. Delegation to a recognized classification society, 
including ABS, of authority to perform certain functions on behalf of 
Coast Guard is addressed in part 8 of 46 CFR.

G. Discussion of Proposed Amendments by Section

    Sec.  71.25-50. Existing Sec.  71.25-50 would be redesignated as 
Sec.  71.25-95, and a new section on stability verification would be 
added as discussed in detail earlier in this preamble under ``Stability 
Verification.''
    Sec.  71.50-1. The definition of ``drydock examination'' would be 
clarified to include the verification of the draft marks.
Subpart 71.75 (Heading) and Sec. Sec.  71.75-1 and 71.75-5
    The heading of this subpart and two of its sections would be 
revised to reflect that the SOLAS Passenger Ship Safety Certificate 
(PSSC) is issued under SOLAS 1974 provisions, that a vessel receiving a 
PSSC must comply with applicable SOLAS requirements, and that a vessel 
does not need to actually be engaged in international service but be 
certificated for international service to receive a PSSC.
    Sec.  114.400. A definition of ``variable load'' would be added to 
this section. The term is used in Sec.  115.112 for consideration of 
the number of persons and weight permitted on a vessel regulated by 
subchapter K.
    The third subparagraph of the definition of ``length'' would be 
deleted because it refers only to use with the requirements of part 
179, which are not applicable to vessels inspected under subchapter K.
    Sec.  115.110. Existing provisions of paragraph (d) of this section 
list the factors OCMIs may consider when designating a permitted route. 
This list would be modified by removing a part of subparagraph (d)(3) 
and adding it as new subparagraph (d)(4) to explicitly call attention 
to the OCMI's prerogative to consider a vessel's use in weather 
conditions. This approach would emphasize the OCMI's authority to 
include operational limits on a COI.
    It is not possible to accurately enumerate all combinations of safe 
environmental conditions on a given passenger vessel's COI. Instead, 
the Coast Guard has traditionally restricted small passenger vessels to 
operation in ``reasonable operating conditions.'' Defining reasonable 
operating conditions involves the judgment of a professional mariner 
having a certain degree of experience in the operation of a given size 
and type of vessel, and direct knowledge of the conditions to which the 
vessel is subject at any particular moment.
    Limiting winds, speeds, and wave heights alone, however, cannot 
adequately define a safe operating envelope for any vessel. Many other 
conditions involving the vessel, its changing environment, and its 
response to that environment, must be constantly observed, monitored, 
interpreted, and responded to by the master in order to evaluate the 
advisability of embarking on a voyage, or continuing on a voyage when 
conditions progressively deteriorate. The master has the responsibility 
to make this determination and is bound to do so using his or her best 
skill and judgment.
    This section, then, would emphasize the need for due diligence on 
the part of the master with respect to the weather, along with the 
other factors stipulated in this section, and would avoid unnecessary 
limits on the discretion of masters.
    Sec.  115.112. This section would be revised to explicitly list the 
total weight of passengers, crew, and variable loads as factors an OCMI 
may consider when determining the total number of persons and total 
weight a vessel would be permitted to carry.
    Sec.  115.505. This new section on stability verification would be 
added as discussed in detail earlier in this preamble, under 
``Stability Verification.''
    Sec.  115.610. Two sentences would be added to paragraph (a) that 
would add the verification of draft marks to the actions performed at a 
drydock examination, as well as to ensure that the stability 
information provided corresponds to the draft marks. A stability letter 
often includes an operating restriction that limits the maximum draft 
amidships. The vessel's draft marks (required by Sec.  122.602), 
however, might refer to a point on the vessel that differs from that 
used in the stability letter (for example, the bottom of the rudder or 
propeller). So that the master can effectively verify that the loaded 
vessel complies with the stability letter's maximum draft restriction, 
draft or loading marks must be provided that allow the master to 
compare the actual vessel draft with the maximum draft restriction. If 
the maximum draft restriction in the stability letter does not 
correspond to the information obtained from draft mark readings, a new 
stability letter with a revised restriction and/or draft marks would be 
needed.
    Sec. Sec.  115.900, 115.910, 115.920, and 115.930. These sections 
would be revised to reflect current practice and policy: (1) a 
passenger vessel need not actually be on an international voyage to be 
issued a SOLAS Passenger Ship Safety Certificate (PSSC) but simply be 
certificated for international service; (2) the Commandant no longer 
issues the PSSC or a SOLAS Exemption Certificate but authorizes the 
local OCMI to do so.
    Sec.  122.304. Forecasted visibility and weather conditions would 
be added as factors to which vessel masters should give special 
attention.
    Sec.  122.315. This section would be augmented to emphasize the 
master's duty to avoid overloading the vessel by taking into account 
the weight of passengers, crew, and variable loads.
    If appropriate for the vessel's operation, draft-sensing devices, 
loading

[[Page 49254]]

marks, or draft marks would satisfy this requirement. Other means might 
include: (1) Weighing passengers and crew individually, in groups, or 
in total; or (2) estimating the total weight of each passenger and 
including an appropriate margin.
    Of course, if the number of passengers permitted by the COI is 
significantly less than the number permitted by the stability letter, a 
simple passenger count would be satisfactory.
    Sec.  122.602. This section would be revised to require each vessel 
that complies with subchapter S requirements to have loading marks or 
draft marks. A stability letter or the stability information on a COI 
or load line certificate normally includes freeboard and draft 
restrictions on operation. While most vessels are already required to 
have markings of some kind, this section would be revised to require 
each vessel that complies with the requirements of subchapter S to have 
loading marks or draft marks to permit the master to verify compliance 
with the freeboard and draft restrictions.
    Part 170, Subpart E. As one of the corrections cited above, this 
subpart heading would be revised from ``Subpart E--Weather Criteria'' 
to ``Subpart E--Intact Stability Criteria'' to more accurately describe 
the contents of the subpart.
    Sec.  170.001. Paragraph (a) would be revised to clarify that the 
exception provision is intended to apply only to a vessel's contracted 
date. This exception was and is intended to allow retroactive 
application of new damage stability standards in Sec.  171.080 and is 
not intended to be applied to vessels other than those that are 
``inspected'' or that are required to meet a standard contained in 
subchapter S. A new subparagraph would also be added to paragraph (a) 
to clarify that certain uninspected vessels may need to comply with 
stability standards contained in subchapter S because they are issued a 
load line certificate or are required to meet a stability standard 
under subpart E of part 28 of this title.
    Sec.  170.015. In December 2006, the International Maritime 
Organization (IMO) adopted Resolution MSC.216(82), which is contained 
in SOLAS chapter II-1, to harmonize subdivision and damage stability 
regulations for passenger and cargo ships. Accordingly, SOLAS chapter 
II-1 would be added to this central incorporation by reference section 
and referenced in Sec. Sec.  170.140, and 170.248. The International 
Code on Intact Stability, 2008 (2008 IS Code), which would be 
referenced in Sec.  170.165, would also be added to Sec.  170.015.
    Sec.  170.055. A definition of ``constructed'' similar to that used 
in SOLAS for ``ships constructed'' would be added to this section for 
clarification.
    A definition of ``passenger fraction'' would also be added to this 
section. Passenger fraction is the ratio of total passenger weight to 
total displacement. This term would be used in revised Sec.  171.050, 
which addresses intact stability requirements for a mechanically 
propelled or a nonself-propelled vessel. It would also be used in 
proposed Sec.  171.052 concerning stability criteria for vessels of 
unusual proportion and form, specifically with regard to passenger 
distribution c