Vessel Requirements for Notices of Arrival and Departure, and Automatic Identification System, 76295-76318 [E8-29698]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
11.9 miles east of the airport and within a
6.4-mile radius of Richard Lloyd Jones Jr.
Airport, and within a 7.2-mile radius of
William R. Pogue Municipal Airport and
within 4 miles each side of the 355° bearing
from William R. Pogue Municipal Airport
extending from the 7.2-mile radius to 10.9
miles north of the airport, and within 4 miles
each side of the 175° bearing from William
R. Pogue Municipal Airport extending from
the 7.2-mile radius to 10.9 miles south of the
airport and within 4.1 miles each side of the
330° radial of the Glenpool VOR/DME
extending from the 7.2-mile radius of
William R. Pogue Municipal Airport to 8.3
miles northwest of the airport.
*
*
*
*
*
Issued in Fort Worth, TX on December 9,
2008.
Walter L. Tweedy,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group,
ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. E8–29755 Filed 12–15–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Parts 160, 161, 164, and 165
[USCG–2005–21869]
RIN 1625–AA99
Vessel Requirements for Notices of
Arrival and Departure, and Automatic
Identification System
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing
to expand the applicability of notice of
arrival and departure (NOAD) and
automatic identification system (AIS)
requirements to more commercial
vessels. This proposed rule would
expand the applicability of notice of
arrival (NOA) requirements to
additional vessels, establish a separate
requirement for certain vessels to
submit notices of departure (NOD), set
forth a mandatory method for electronic
submission of NOA and NOD, and
modify related reporting content,
timeframes, and procedures. This
proposed rule would also expand the
applicability of AIS requirements,
beyond Vessel Traffic Service (VTS)
areas, to all U.S. navigable waters and
require AIS carriage for additional
commercial vessels. These proposed
changes would improve navigation
safety, enhance the Coast Guard’s ability
to identify and track vessels, heighten
our overall maritime domain awareness,
and thus help us address threats to
maritime transportation safety and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
security and mitigate the possible harm
from such threats.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Docket Management
Facility on or before April 15, 2009.
Comments sent to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) on
collection of information must reach
OMB on or before April 15, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by Coast Guard docket
number USCG–2005–21869 to the
Docket Management Facility at the U.S.
Department of Transportation. To avoid
duplication, please use only one of the
following methods:
Online: https://www.regulations.gov.
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.
Hand delivery: Same as mail address
above, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The telephone number is 202–
366–9329.
Fax: 202–493–2251.
You must also send comments on
collection of information discussed in
the Paperwork Reduction Act section of
this NPRM (VI. D.) 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 email oira_submission@omb.eop.gov (the
subject line of the e-mail must include
the docket number and Attention: Desk
Officer for Coast Guard, DHS) or by fax
at 202–395–6566. 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 1409, U.S. Coast Guard
Headquarters, 2100 Second Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20593–0001 between 9
a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The
telephone number is 202–372–1563.
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 the NOAD
portion of this proposed rule, contact
Lieutenant Sharmine Jones, Office of
Vessel Activities (CG–543), Coast Guard,
Sharmine.N.Jones@uscg.mil, telephone
202–372–1234. If you have questions on
the AIS portion of this proposed rule,
contact Mr. Jorge Arroyo, Office of
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
76295
Navigation Systems (CG–5413), Coast
Guard, Jorge.Arroyo@uscg.mil,
telephone 202–372–1563. If you have
questions on viewing material in the
docket, call Ms. Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone 202–366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents for Preamble
I. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
A. Submitting Comments
B. Viewing Comments and Documents
C. Privacy Act
D. Public Meeting
II. Background and Purpose
A. Threat to the Marine Transportation
System
B. Notice of Arrival and Departure
C. Automatic Identification System
D. AIS Displays and Integration
E. Maritime Domain Awareness
F. Nationwide AIS
III. Regulatory History
A. Notice of Arrival
B. Automatic Identification System
C. Expansion of AIS Carriage
IV. Discussion of Comments Received on
Expansion of AIS Carriage
A. Need for AIS and Scope of Availability
B. Reason AIS Requirement Was Not
Expanded to All Vessels
C. Use of AIS Class B Devices
D. Deviation From AIS Requirements
E. Relation of Coast Guard AIS Receiving
Infrastructure to Requirement for AIS in
All Waters
V. Discussion of Proposed Rule
A. NOAD Revisions
B. AIS Revisions
C. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Regulatory Analysis
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Small Entities
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
Table of Abbreviations and Acronyms
AC Alternating Current
AIS Automatic Identification System
AOR Area of Responsibility
API American Petroleum Institute
APIS Advance Passenger Information
System
ARPA Advanced Radar Plotting Aid
ASTM American Society for Testing and
Materials
CBP U.S. Customs and Border Protection
CDC Certain Dangerous Cargo
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COP Common Operating Picture
COTP Captain of the Port
CSTDMA Carrier-sense Time Division
Multiple Access
DGPS Differential Global Positioning
System
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
76296
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
DHS U.S. Department of Homeland
Security
ECDIS Electronic Chart Display and
Information System
ECS Electronic Chart System
eNOAD Electronic Notice of Arrival and
Departure
FCC Federal Communications Commission
GPS Global Positioning System
GT Gross Registered Tons
IEC International Electrotechnical
Commission
IMO International Maritime Organization
IRVMC Inland River Vessel Movement
Center
ISM International Safety Management
ISPS International Ship and Port Facility
Security
ISSC International Ship Security Certificate
ITU International Telecommunications
Union
MDA Maritime Domain Awareness
MISLE Marine Information for Safety and
Law Enforcement
MKD Minimal Keyboard Display
MMSI Maritime Mobile Service Identity
MTS Marine Transportation System
MTSA Maritime Transportation Security
Act of 2002
NAICS North American Industry
Classification System
NAIS Nationwide Automatic Identification
System
NARA National Archives and Records
Administration
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969
NOA Notice of Arrival
NOAD Notice of Arrival and Departure
NOD Notice of Departure
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
NVMC National Vessel Movement Center
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OSRV Oil Spill Response Vessel
PV Present Value
PWSA Ports and Waterways Safety Act
RA Regulatory Assessment
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RTCM Radio Technical Commission for
Maritime Services
SBA Small Business Administration
SCC Sector Command Center
SOLAS International Convention for the
Safety of Life at Sea
U.S.C. United States Code
USCS United States Customs Service
VSL Value of Statistical Life
VTC Vessel Traffic Center
VTS Vessel Traffic Service
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
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 to use
the Docket Management Facility.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
A. Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG–2005–21869),
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 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. 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,
click on ‘‘Search for Dockets,’’ and enter
the docket number for this rulemaking
(USCG–2005–21869) in the Docket ID
box, and click enter. If you do not have
access to the internet, you may view the
docket online by visiting the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12–140
on the ground floor of the Department
of Transportation 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 a Privacy
Act, system of records notice regarding
our public dockets in the January 17,
2008 issue of the Federal Register (73
FR 3316).
D. Public Meeting
We plan to hold one public meeting
in Washington, DC. The date, time, and
location will be announced by a later
notice in the Federal Register. You may
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
submit a request for additional public
meetings under ADDRESSES explaining
why one would be beneficial. If we
determine that additional public
meetings would aid this rulemaking, we
will hold one or more at a time and
place announced by a later notice in the
Federal Register.
II. Background and Purpose
This section discusses threats to the
maritime transportation system, and
provides background information on the
elements of notice of arrival and
departure (NOAD) and the automatic
identification system (AIS). This section
also discusses maritime domain
awareness, the Nationwide AIS project,
and the role NOAD and AIS will play
in increasing our understanding of the
maritime domain.
A. Threat to the Marine Transportation
System
A terrorist attack against the U.S.
marine transportation system (MTS) has
the potential to inflict a disastrous
impact on global shipping, international
trade, and the world economy.
Waterborne commerce enters the United
States through more than 360 ports,
transiting over 26,000 miles of
commercially navigable waterways,
carried by more than 8,000 foreign
vessels, making more than 50,000 port
calls a year. Over six million cruise ship
passengers travel annually from U.S.
ports, and domestic ferries transport
over 180 million passengers annually.
At any given time, we estimate that over
5,000 commercial vessels are within
2,000 nautical miles or 96 hours of our
shores.
Threats to our MTS can come from a
variety of scenarios. Use of explosiveladen small boats to attack larger vessels
to cause injury and loss of life has
already been demonstrated in the cases
of the USS COLE and the MT
LIMBURG. The use of an explosive
device on a commercial ferry was also
demonstrated when, in August 2005,
several persons were killed and dozens
of others were injured after a bomb
exploded on the M/V DONA RAMONA
in the Philippines. Other possible
terrorist scenarios include use of
maritime transportation routes to
smuggle weapons of mass destruction or
terrorists into the United States. In
December 1999, a person planning to
bomb the Los Angeles International
Airport was arrested at Port Angeles,
WA, after he got off a ferry arriving from
Canada and customs agents discovered
explosives in the trunk of his car. The
large geographic area that is occupied by
U.S. waterways, combined with the high
volume of commercial and recreational
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
vessel traffic on those waterways,
presents enormous challenges for
preventing terrorist incidents.
The terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001, along with maritime-related
terrorist events listed in the paragraph
above, call attention to the vulnerability
of the United States to potential terrorist
attacks. U.S. waterways and ports
present both vulnerable and attractive
targets, as well as a means of
transportation for terrorists. The Coast
Guard, working with other
international, national, State, and local
agencies, has acted to identify and
counter the threat to our MTS. In an
effort to ensure that we make the most
cost-effective use of our resources and
funding, we have identified the need for
a comprehensive knowledge and
understanding of all activities in our
maritime domain as key to preventing a
terrorist attack.
B. Notice of Arrival and Departure
Under 33 CFR part 160, owners,
agents, masters, operators, or persons in
charge of vessels must file notices of
arrival (NOA) before such vessels enter
a U.S. port. The Coast Guard’s NOA
requirements had been in effect for
decades before the terrorist attacks of
9/11. Vessels over 300 gross tons
submitted pre-arrival notices directly to
the applicable arriving port only 24
hours in advance. On October 4, 2001,
the Coast Guard published a temporary
final rule under the authority of the
Ports and Waterways Safety Act (PWSA)
(33 U.S.C. 1221–1232), increasing the
submission time for a notice of arrival
(NOA) from 24 to 96 hours prior to
arriving at a U.S. port or place; required
centralized submissions of this
information to the National Vessel
Movement Center (NVMC); temporarily
suspended exemptions from reporting
requirements for some groups of vessels;
and required submission of passenger,
crew, and cargo information. See 66 FR
50565 (Oct. 4, 2001).
The information in notices of arrival
provides the Coast Guard with valuable
data for screening vessels for safety and
security purposes. We have no current
regulation in place, however, to capture
vessel, crew, passenger, or specific cargo
information on vessels 300 gross tons or
less intending to arrive at or depart from
U.S. ports or places unless they are
arriving with certain dangerous cargo
(CDC) or are arriving at a port or place
in the Seventh Coast Guard District—
which includes South Carolina, most of
Georgia and Florida, and the island
possessions of the United States
pertaining to Puerto Rico and the Virgin
Islands. See 33 CFR 160.203(b)(1) and
160.210(c). This proposed rule would
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
expand the applicability for NOADs to
further enhance homeland security by
increasing our awareness of vessels and
people entering or departing U.S. ports
or places.
We propose to eliminate the current
300-gross-tons threshold exception and
to require NOADs from all foreign
commercial vessels departing to or
coming from a port or place in the
United States and all U.S. commercial
vessels coming to a U.S. port or place
from a foreign port. Requiring more
vessels to report a NOAD will allow the
Coast Guard to screen more vessels for
safety and security purposes well in
advance of an arrival, thereby enhancing
the safety and security of our ports and
waterways.
C. Automatic Identification System
Section 102 of the Maritime
Transportation Security Act of 2002
(MTSA), Public Law 107–295, 116 Stat.
2064, mandates that automatic
identification systems (AIS) be installed
and operating on most commercial
vessels on navigable waters of the
United States. See 46 U.S.C. 70114.
AIS automatically broadcasts
dynamic, static, and voyage-related
vessel information that is received by
other AIS-equipped stations. AIS has
achieved acceptance through worldwide
adoption of performance and technical
standards developed by diverse
international bodies, such as the
International Maritime Organization
(IMO), the International
Telecommunications Union (ITU), and
the International Electrotechnical
Commission (IEC), that ensure
commonality, universality, and
interoperability. Further, installation of
such equipment is required on vessels
subject to the International Convention
for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974,
(SOLAS), as amended. See specifically
SOLAS, Chapter V, regulation 19.2.4.
https://www.navcen.uscg.gov/enav/ais/
SOLAS.V.19.2.1-5.pdf.
In ship-to-ship mode, AIS provides
essential information to other vessels,
such as name, position, course, and
speed, that is not readily available on
board vessels. In the ship-to-shore
mode, AIS allows for the efficient
exchange of vessel traffic information
that previously was only available via
voice communications with a VTS. In
either mode, AIS enhances the mariner’s
situational awareness, makes possible
the accurate exchange of navigational
information, mitigates the risk of
collision through reliable passing
arrangements, facilitates vessel traffic
management while simultaneously
reducing voice radiotelephone
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
76297
transmissions, and enhances maritime
domain awareness (MDA).
For further information and
background on AIS, see 68 FR 39353,
39355 (July 1, 2003); 68 FR 60559,
60560 (Oct. 22, 2003); or visit https://
www.navcen.uscg.gov/enav.
D. AIS Displays and Integration
Shipboard AIS devices are divided
into two classes. AIS Class A devices
come with a minimal keyboard display
(MKD) that allows the user to input AIS
information (e.g., vessel identity,
dimensions, navigation status, and
antenna location) and to access all
information received from other
devices. AIS Class B devices require this
input to be pre-programmed into the
device. For further discussion of AIS
Class A and Class B, their differences
and similarities, see Section IV,
Discussion of Comments below. Both
types of shipboard AIS allow multiple
input-output and display (presentation)
options that facilitate using or
integrating AIS data on other
navigational systems, such as radar,
Advanced Radar Plotting Aid (ARPA),
Electronic Chart Display and
Information System (ECDIS), and
Electronic Chart System (ECS).
The greatest benefits of AIS will be
achieved by its widest use, both by the
number of vessels that use it and its
integration and synergy with other
shipboard systems. Although we
encourage full integration of AIS with
all navigation systems, this proposed
rule would not require such integration
because of the current limited
availability of type-approved equipment
that can readily and reliably integrate
AIS and these other systems (e.g.,
ECDIS, ARPA, radar, and chart plotters).
We caution mariners who seek to
integrate the equipment on their own,
particularly on non type-approved
equipment. This view is also set forth in
recommendations by the Transportation
Research Board’s ‘‘Special Report 272,
Shipboard Automatic Identification
System: Meeting the Needs of the
Mariners’’; see https://fermat.nap.edu/
catalog/10708.html.
The Conference Report accompanying
the Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation Act of 2004 (Public Law
108–293) states ‘‘[we] should require the
AIS system information to be integrated
with the electronic chart display.’’ See
H. Conf. Rep. No. 108–617, at 82 (July
20, 2004). Section 410 of this Act
mandates that electronic charts be
installed and operational on basically
the same vessel population mandated to
have AIS under the MTSA. The Coast
Guard expects to implement this
electronic chart mandate and address
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
76298
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
the display of AIS on electronic charts
through a separate rulemaking.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
E. Maritime Domain Awareness
In October 2005, the National Security
Council and Homeland Security Council
jointly published ‘‘The National Plan to
Achieve Maritime Domain Awareness,’’
(available at https://www.dhs.gov/
xlibrary/assets/HSPD_MDAPlan.pdf), a
collaborative inter-agency effort in
support of the National Strategy for
Maritime Security. This plan defines
MDA as the effective understanding of
anything associated with the global
maritime domain that could impact the
security, safety, economy, or
environment of the United States. The
Plan also identifies MDA as a key
component of an active, layered
maritime defense in depth—expanding
maritime boundaries.
MDA involves both the process of
receiving and analyzing data as well as
the system of technology that facilitates
this process. To maximize the
employment of our resources, MDA,
among other things, requires monitoring
and tracking vessels, cargo, and people.
Cold War legacy data collection
capabilities must be integrated with
current and emerging capabilities and
systems to provide near real-time
awareness of maritime threats.
Our primary method for collecting
AIS information will be the Nationwide
Automatic Identification System (NAIS)
network. These data will be used in
conjunction with the national maritime
common operating picture (COP). The
COP is a near real-time information grid
that will be shared by all U.S. Federal,
State, and local agencies with maritime
interests and responsibilities. COP data
will be accessible to all users, except
when limited by security restrictions,
policy, or regulations.
NOAD, NAIS, and AIS, when
employed together, provide a major
portion of the information needed for
MDA. AIS provides real-time
information on vessels that can be
correlated with NOAD data to enable us
to track vessel movements in or bound
for U.S. waters via NAIS COP.
Expanding NOAD and AIS
applicability broadens our sources of
information and enhances MDA. The
combined NOAD and AIS information is
one critical element in the overall MDA
process, along with data collected from
other various maritime and maritimerelated sources. These data streams will
form part of the COP and will also then
be reviewed by analysts to identify
vessels, persons, and activities that
might be suspect through a process
known as anomaly detection.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:35 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
Anomaly detection assists us in the
early identification of possible terrorist
or other suspicious activities, which in
turn allows us to take appropriate
preventive measures to protect public
safety and economic security. This
enhanced MDA would improve our
ability to prevent and respond to
terrorist attacks.
The greater synergy of NOAD and AIS
is realized when they are combined to
provide a comprehensive picture of the
maritime domain. The COP uses input
from various sources to provide both a
visual display of ship movements as
well as a display of each vessel’s
accompanying information.
The intent of the system is to allow
the Coast Guard to review the different
data elements against one another to
detect anomalies. For example, a Coast
Guard unit may identify a vessel
prepared to enter a U.S. harbor. The
Coast Guard unit could call up that
vessel’s information and review its
destination. At that time, the Coast
Guard would review the vessel’s notice
of arrival (NOA) and may observe that
the vessel has reported it is bound for
the container docks. Later, the AIS
broadcast may indicate that the vessel
did not maneuver to turn down the
channel to the container docks as
expected and is instead proceeding on
a collision course with a major marine
transportation infrastructure on the
other side of the harbor. In this example,
the comparison of different data sources
would have allowed the Coast Guard to
recognize this anomaly in reported data,
to deploy the necessary resources, and
to notify the surrounding infrastructure.
This is just one of many scenarios that
fuse NOAD and AIS data to ensure
maritime traffic is being monitored and
evaluated.
F. Nationwide AIS
In response to a Congressional
mandate in 46 U.S.C. 70113(a),
emerging homeland security
requirements, and the need to improve
navigational safety, the Coast Guard
initiated the Nationwide AIS (NAIS)
project: a major Federal acquisition
project to collect, aggregate, and share
information concerning AIS equipped
vessels operating on or bound for waters
subject to the jurisdiction of the United
States. NAIS will consist of an
integrated system of AIS equipment
(e.g., base station radios, antennas), data
storage, processing, and networking
infrastructure. NAIS will also be
integrated with other systems for the
purpose of sharing infrastructure and
improving NAIS’ overall performance.
NAIS will process (e.g., validate and
filter) and store AIS data and make these
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
data available for use by other existing
operational systems (e.g., COP, Sector
Command Center (SCC), Marine
Information for Safety and Law
Enforcement (MISLE), and VTS). It is
expected that these other systems will
provide data processing functions (e.g.,
vessel tracking correlation, information
processing, traffic analysis, and anomaly
detection) and user interfaces necessary
to take full advantage of AIS data
exchange functionality. NAIS
information will be displayed in the
Coast Guard’s national maritime COP
and shared—along with correlated data
and intelligence, as appropriate—with
other entities. Access to these NAIS data
by other authorized governmental
entities is intended to enhance maritime
safety and security and promote
interagency cooperation. Portions of the
COP will also be available to local port
partners in support of local security and
safety operations. Some users of NAIS
capabilities (e.g., U.S. Coast Guard
units, other governmental entities, and
strategic port partners) may indirectly
access AIS data via other systems.
Having such near real-time information
of vessels’ identity, location, and cargo
will be invaluable.
NAIS will be deployed regionally and
incrementally. As of the end of
September 2008, AIS-receive coverage
has been established in 58 major ports
and 16 critical coastal areas across the
nation under Increment One of the
NAIS project. All Coast Guard Sectors
have at least one AIS receiver site
within their Area of Responsibility
(AOR) and also have the capability to
view AIS vessel tracks outside their
AOR (e.g., for an adjacent CG Sector or
nationwide) via the maritime COP.
Increment Two will expand our
detection and surveillance nationwide
and add AIS transmit capability out to
24 nautical miles. Finally, Increment
Three will provide AIS detection and
surveillance capability out to 2,000
nautical miles. NAIS full operational
capability (i.e., AIS long range
detection, system integration, data
processing and sharing, etc.) is
anticipated to be achieved by 2014.
III. Regulatory History
Since the tragic events of September
11, 2001, the Coast Guard has modified
the NOA requirements for vessels
numerous times and implemented
SOLAS AIS regulations and carriage
requirements for AIS in VTS waters.
The summary below describes this
evolution of NOA and AIS regulations
since 2001 and provides background
intended to assist the reader as we later
describe existing regulations we are
seeking to revise through this proposed
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
76299
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
rule. The summary compiles Federal
Register citations in tables and presents
them in chronological order to assist
those who seek to review these past
rulemaking documents or notices.
A. Notice of Arrival
On October 4, 2001, we published a
temporary final rule entitled
‘‘Temporary Requirements for
Notification of Arrival in U.S. Ports’’ in
the Federal Register. See 66 FR 50565.
As noted previously, that temporary
rule increased the submission time for
a NOA from 24 to 96 hours prior to
arriving at a U.S. port or place; required
centralized submissions; temporarily
suspended exemptions from reporting
requirements for some groups of vessels;
and required submission of passenger,
crew, and cargo information. We
extended the effective period of that
temporary rule to allow us to complete
a rulemaking for permanent changes.
See 67 FR 37682 (May 30, 2002) and 67
FR 55115 (Aug. 28, 2002).
Following a notice of proposed
rulemaking published June 19, 2002, we
published a final rule on February 28,
2003, that replaced temporary
regulations and revised NOA
requirements in 33 CFR part 160 by
consolidating the notice of departure
(NOD) into the NOA, requiring
electronic submission of cargo manifest
information to the then United States
Customs Service (USCS), and requiring
additional crew and passenger
information. See 67 FR 41659 and 68 FR
9537.
On May 22, 2003, after consultation
with U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP), we suspended the
NOA requirement for electronic
submission of cargo manifest
information (Customs Form 1302)
pending further CBP regulatory action
under then-recent legislation, including
the Trade Act of 2002. See 68 FR 27907.
On August 18, 2004, we published a
temporary final rule with request for
comment that changed the definition of
CDC to include ammonium nitrate and
certain ammonium nitrate based
fertilizers, in bulk, as well as propylene
oxide, alone or mixed with ethylene
oxide, in bulk. That temporary final rule
also allowed vessels to submit notices of
arrival electronically; in this
rulemaking, we propose to make
electronic methods of submission
mandatory. See 69 FR 51176. On
December 16, 2005, we published an
interim rule with a request for
comments that adopted the temporary
final rule’s definition of ‘‘certain
dangerous cargo’’ to include (1)
ammonium nitrate, in bulk; (2)
ammonium nitrate based fertilizers, in
bulk; and (3) propylene oxide, alone or
mixed with ethylene oxide, in bulk, as
well as adding an option for vessels to
submit notices of arrival electronically.
See 70 FR 74663. That interim rule is
part of a separate rulemaking focused on
CDC.
Table 1 lists NOA rulemaking
documents discussed above and
associated corrections.
TABLE 1—NOA RULEMAKINGS
Date
Action
FR cite
Title of rule
[Docket No.]
10/04/2001 ..............
Temporary final rule ....................................
66 FR 50565 .........
11/19/2001 ..............
66 FR 57877 .........
67 FR 2571 ...........
Do.
05/30/2002 ..............
06/19/2002 ..............
Temporary final rule; request for comments; correction.
Temporary final rule; request for comments; correction.
Temporary rule; change of effective date ...
Notice of proposed rulemaking ...................
Temporary Requirements for Notification of Arrival in
U.S. Ports [USCG–2001–10689].
Do.
67 FR 37682 .........
67 FR 41659 .........
08/28/2002 ..............
Temporary rule; change of effective date ...
67 FR 55115 .........
02/28/2003 ..............
Final rule ......................................................
68 FR 9537 ...........
05/22/2003 ..............
08/18/2004 ..............
Final rule; partial suspension of regulation
Temporary final rule; request for comments
68 FR 27907 .........
69 FR 51176 .........
12/16/2005 ..............
Interim rule; request for comments .............
70 FR 74663 .........
Do.
Notification of Arrival in U.S. Ports [USCG–2001–
11865].
Temporary Requirements for Notification of Arrival in
U.S. Ports [USCG–2001–10689].
Notification of Arrival in U.S. Ports [USCG–2002–
11865].
Do.
Notification of Arrival in U.S. Ports; Certain Dangerous
Cargoes; Electronic Submission [USCG–2003–
16688].
Notification of Arrival in U.S. Ports; Certain Dangerous
Cargoes; Electronic Submission [USCG–2005–
19963].
01/18/2002 ..............
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
B. Automatic Identification System
On July 1, 2003, we published a
temporary interim rule with a request
for comments and notice of public
meeting titled ‘‘Automatic Identification
System; Vessel Carriage Requirement’’
in the Federal Register. See 68 FR
39353. That temporary interim rule was
one of six Coast Guard maritime
security rules published July 1, 2003, in
response to the MTSA. The interim rule
implemented AIS requirements under
MTSA and SOLAS, and required AIS on
all vessels subject to SOLAS AIS
provisions, Vessel Traffic Service Users
and certain other commercial vessels
identified in the MTSA.
On October 22, 2003, we published a
final rule which adopted, with changes,
the requirements of the AIS temporary
interim rule. The major changes were to
adopt a uniform U.S. implementation
date of December 31, 2004, and to not
require AIS on certain fishing and
passenger vessels. See 68 FR 60559 and
60562.
Table 2 lists the two AIS rulemaking
documents discussed above and a
correction document.
TABLE 2—AUTOMATIC IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM; VESSEL CARRIAGE REQUIREMENT [USCG–2003–14757]
Date
Action
07/01/2003 ................................................
Temporary interim rule with request for comments and notice of meeting ..............
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
FR cite
16DEP1
68 FR 39353.
76300
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 2—AUTOMATIC IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM; VESSEL CARRIAGE REQUIREMENT [USCG–2003–14757]—Continued
Date
Action
07/16/2003 ................................................
10/22/2003 ................................................
Correcting amendments ............................................................................................
Final rule ....................................................................................................................
C. Expansion of AIS Carriage
On the same date the AIS temporary
interim rule was published, we
published a notice in the Federal
Register posing eight questions and
requesting comments on how best to
address implementation beyond the
then-published AIS regulations. See 68
FR 39369 (July 1, 2003). We held public
meetings and extended the comment
period to January 5, 2004, to allow the
public and, specifically, the fishing and
small passenger vessel industry, the
opportunity to submit comments after
they had seen the final rule published
October 22, 2003. See 68 FR 55643
(Sept. 26, 2003) and 68 FR 61818 (Oct.
FR cite
68 FR 41913.
68 FR 6055.
30, 2003). In Section IV, below, we
discuss the many comments we
received and note proposed changes
from the 2003 final rule based on these
comments.
Table 3 lists the three documents we
published requesting comments on AIS
expansion discussed above.
TABLE 3—AUTOMATIC IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM; EXPANSION OF CARRIAGE REQUIREMENTS FOR U.S. WATERS [USCG–
2003–14878]
Date
Action
07/01/2003 ................................................
09/26/2003 ................................................
Notice; request for comments ...................................................................................
Notice; request for comments; extension of comment period; notice of public
meetings.
Notice; request for comments; notice of public meetings .........................................
10/30/2003 ................................................
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
IV. Discussion of Comments Received
on Expansion of AIS Carriage
We thank the more than 180 persons
or organizations who responded to our
request for comments and participated
in our public meetings on the expansion
of AIS requirements [see docket USCG–
2003–14878]. Their answers to our
original eight questions (68 FR 39369)
and subsequent two questions (68 FR
61818) posed in 2003 assisted us in
crafting or amending various provisions
of the AIS portion of this rule as stated
in the ‘‘AIS Revisions’’ section below.
We also received numerous comments
beyond the scope of our ten questions
that were similar or reiterated concerns
expressed during the previous
rulemaking [see USCG–2003–14757].
Our opinion and resolution of these
comments remains as stated in our final
rule (68 FR 60559), with the following
exceptions:
A. Need for AIS and Scope of
Availability
Numerous commenters, for various
reasons, do not believe that AIS
requirements are needed or that they
should apply to their type of vessel. In
general, we disagree. Congress has given
us an AIS mandate to implement. The
Coast Guard has been involved in the
development of AIS since the 1990s and
has done so in response to industry
demands [see USCG 2003–14757–8] for
‘‘silent VTSs’’ and the need to provide
mariners with pertinent, near real-time
navigation information in a seamless
manner which AIS does while reducing
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
the need for voice communication. We
recognize AIS is not a panacea. It will
not in itself prevent a collision or
terrorist attack; if AIS is coupled with
other information sources, however, it
does provide the mariner and the
government with situational awareness
to help thwart these events. It is not
intended to replace the radiotelephone,
radio, sound signals, security measures,
or other similar items; rather, it is there
to complement them.
The starting point or initial affected
population of AIS has been determined
for the most part by the MTSA. Congress
has stated that all self-propelled
commercial vessels of 65 feet or greater
or 26 feet or greater and over 600
horsepower when engaged in towing
and certain passenger vessels (which we
have determined to be those carrying 50
or more passengers) should have AIS; a
portion of the same population is also
required to have radiotelephones under
the Vessel Bridge-to-Bridge
Radiotelephone Act of 1971
(Radiotelephone Act), Public Law 92–
63, 85 Stat. 164. See 33 U.S.C. 1201 et
seq. A principal purpose of both the
MTSA and the Radiotelephone Act is to
improve navigation safety. AIS and the
radiotelephone, working together,
provide the necessary tools to
potentially prevent and mitigate
collisions and other mishaps.
The Radiotelephone Act requires
every power-driven vessel of 20 meters
(65 feet) or more in length; towing
vessels of 26 feet or more in length;
vessels of 100 gross tons and upward
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
FR cite
68 FR 39369.
68 FR 55643.
68 FR 61818.
carrying one or more passengers for
hire; and dredge and floating plants, in
or near a channel or fairway, engaged in
operations likely to restrict or affect
navigation to be equipped and monitor
the Bridge-to-Bridge Radiotelephone (33
U.S.C. 1203, 1204).
We also propose in this NPRM to
require AIS on dredges or floating plants
near commercial channels because these
vessels—given the nature of their
operation—pose a unique challenge to
navigation. As for passenger vessels, the
AIS provision of the MTSA grants the
Coast Guard discretion as to number of
passengers for hire a vessel less than 65
feet may carry. In our 2003 Temporary
Interim Rule, we established that
threshold at carrying 50 or more
passengers for hire. Subsequently, in
our Final Rule, we excepted these
vessels (and fishing vessels) and
established a 150-passengers-for-hire
threshold.
After we published the Final Rule, we
posed two additional questions via a
Request for Comments (68 FR 61818),
specific to these segments of industry—
fishing and small passenger operators—
and the burden that these regulations
placed on these predominantly small
entities. We reviewed all of these
comments and made Congress aware of
the various concerns expressed by
industry [see USCG–2003–14757–129];
nonetheless, this segment of industry is
not uniquely impacted by the
regulations and can greatly benefit from
AIS. We therefore propose in this
NPRM, AIS carriage requirements on
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
fishing vessels of 65 feet or more and on
vessels carrying 50 or more passengers.
We propose to omit the distinction of
‘‘for hire’’ because we believe all
passengers, whether paying or not, are
subject to a similar safety risk and thus
deserve the navigation safety and
maritime security benefit afforded to
them by AIS.
Finally, we propose that any vessel
moving CDC also be required to carry
AIS because of the unique risk the
movement of CDC poses to the marine
transportation system.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
B. Reason AIS Requirement Was Not
Expanded to All Vessels
Many commenters expressed the
desire that all vessels have AIS.
Ultimately, we believe all vessels
should avail themselves of AIS;
however, we propose to apply this rule
only to those vessels for which we have
current authority to mandate carriage of
AIS. We propose to add two classes of
vessels, not specifically addressed in the
Radiotelephone Act: high-speed
passenger vessels and vessels involved
in the movement of certain dangerous
cargo. High-speed passenger vessels and
vessels that transport dangerous cargo
pose unique challenges that AIS is wellsuited to address.
With the advent of AIS Class B
devices and the continual drop in prices
for Class A devices, these systems will
become more affordable. Consequently,
more vessels will use AIS and the
collective benefit AIS provides will
increase. Someday, we hope all vessels
will avail themselves of AIS, as many
have done so with charts,
radiotelephones, radars, and other
navigation equipment.
C. Use of AIS Class B Devices
Some commenters recommended that
the Coast Guard permit the use of AIS
Class B devices. We agree. Since
publication of the 2003 final rule (68 FR
60559) and through the diligent work of
various standards bodies, we now have
AIS Class B devices that are
interoperable with AIS Class A devices.
Class B devices differ slightly in features
and nature of design, which reduce their
cost (on average half the cost of Class A
devices); however, their performance is
somewhat limited. They report at a
fixed rate (30 seconds) vice the Class A’s
variable rate (2–10 seconds dependent
on speed and course change). They
consume less power, but also report at
lower power (2 watts versus 12 watts of
AIS Class A), thus impacting their
broadcast range. Despite these design
limitations, and after extensive testing
by the Coast Guard Research and
Development Center (see International
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
Telecommunication Union study group
report ‘‘Performance Assessment and
Interoperability of Proposed Class B AIS
With Existing Class A AIS System Using
Simulation Software’’ dated September
9, 2005), we deem AIS Class B devices
can operate properly and safely amongst
Class A devices and offer similar AIS
benefits. They broadcast and receive
virtually the same vessel identification
and other information. They have the
same ability to see targets that radar may
not always show (around the bend, in
sea clutter, or during foul weather). For
these reasons, we have concluded that
AIS Class B devices do enhance
navigation safety and assist in collision
avoidance comparable to AIS Class A
devices; however, given their design
limitations, we caution users that they
may not be the best alternative for
vessels that are highly maneuverable,
travel at high speed, or routinely transit
congested waters.
The Coast Guard seeks comment in
this NPRM on whether AIS Class B
devices should be permitted only on
certain vessels or waterways, or whether
this decision should be best left to the
master or owner’s discretion.
We welcome the advent of lower cost
AIS Class B devices and the continual
drop in price of AIS Class A devices—
currently averaging approximately
$3,000 vice $7,000 in 2003. Fishing
vessels and small passenger vessels,
previously included in the original AIS
carriage requirements of our temporary
interim rule (68 FR 39353), will be less
impacted by the current cost of AIS
Class A devices and the potential to use
even lower cost AIS Class B devices.
D. Deviation From AIS Requirements
There were a number of comments
stating that AIS should not be required
on vessels operating on certain
waterways. We recognize that the MTSA
provides us authority to waive AIS
requirements on waterways where we
determine AIS is not needed for safe
navigation; however, we have decided
not to create a patchwork of waterways
where AIS is or is not required. Rather
than waive requirements on specific
waterways we propose here to grant a
deviation based on where or how
vessels operate. To that end, we propose
to define what conditions under which
a deviation may be sought. Vessels that
operate—
(1) Solely within a very confined area
(e.g., less than a one nautical mile
radius, shipyard, fleeting area);
(2) On short and fixed scheduled
routes (e.g., a bank-to-bank river ferry
service); or
(3) In a manner that makes it unlikely
they will encounter other AIS users may
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
76301
request a yearly deviation from AIS
requirements as set forth in § 164.55.
E. Relation of Coast Guard AIS
Receiving Infrastructure to Requirement
for AIS in All Waters
Some commenters stated that we
should not require the carriage of AIS in
areas where the Coast Guard does not
have infrastructure in place to receive
these data. First, we note that the use of
AIS may prevent collisions wherever it
is used, regardless of the existence of
shore-side AIS infrastructure. Second,
we are working to establish nationwide
capability to fully utilize AIS data
wherever we require it to be
transmitted.
As discussed in the Nationwide AIS
section above, a NAIS project is being
conducted to provide the Coast Guard
with the capability to receive and
distribute information from shipboard
AIS equipment in order to enhance
MDA. That project will provide
detection and surveillance of vessels
carrying AIS equipment approaching or
operating in the maritime domain where
little or no shore-side vessel tracking
currently exists. Although the NAIS
project is not projected to be fully
operational until 2014, we have
achieved initial operational capability
for the receive-only increment of the
project, and we anticipate achieving
initial operational capability in three
Coast Guard sectors for the transmitand-receive increment by 2010. Our
existing AIS network of over 90 sites
and initial NAIS (Increment One)
capability, in conjunction with other
resources to benefit our overall MDA,
would be available before the
implementation date of the AIS
requirements proposed here. To
complement our existing AIS and future
NAIS infrastructure, all Coast Guard
cutters, many boats and some aircraft
are AIS capable.
For more details on that project,
please see the NAIS programmatic
environmental impact statement notice
published November 23, 2005 (70 FR
70862); the NAIS programmatic
environmental impact statement record
of decision published November 6, 2006
(71 FR 64977); or the NAIS Web site at
https://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-a/Ais/.
V. Discussion of Proposed Rule
In this section we discuss how we
propose to revise our NOAD and AIS
regulations.
A. NOAD Revisions
We propose numerous changes to our
NOAD regulations. We propose to
expand the applicability of the NOAD
regulations by changing the minimum
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
76302
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
size of vessels covered below the
current 300 gross tons, require that a
notice of departure be submitted for all
vessels required to submit a notice of
arrival, and mandate electronic
submission of NOAD notices to the
National Vessel Movement Center.
These changes are described in further
detail under the following 11 headings
in this section.
1. Applicability
We propose to amend the
applicability of our regulations in 33
CFR part 160, subpart C, to clarify that
unless a vessel is exempted, NOAD
regulations apply to U.S. vessels in
commercial service and all foreign
vessels departing to or coming from a
port or place in the United States. See
proposed § 160.203. We have revised
some exemptions in proposed § 160.204.
For example, foreign vessels 300 gross
tons or less not engaged in commercial
service and not carrying certain
dangerous cargo is one group of vessels
that will continue to be generally
exempted from submitting a NOA and
will no longer have a separate NOA
requirement for Coast Guard District
Seven.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
2. Definitions
We propose to add definitions for
commercial service, continental United
States (which includes Alaska),
disembark, embark, foreign vessel,
offshore supply vessel, oil spill response
vessel, passenger vessel, recreational
vessel, and towing vessel to the
definitions section in 33 CFR part 160,
subpart C, proposed § 160.202. These
additions would clarify the meaning of
these 10 terms used in our NOAD
regulations. Most of the new definitions
come directly from 46 U.S.C. 2101.
3. Exemptions
We also propose to change the
exemptions from reporting requirements
currently found in § 160.203. We would
revise the exemption for vessels 300
gross tons or less not carrying CDCs so
that all commercial vessels coming from
a foreign port or place would be
required to submit a NOA, regardless of
tonnage.
We propose to remove the exemption
for foreign commercial vessels 300 gross
tons or less whether or not they are
coming from a foreign port. Removing
this exemption entirely for foreign
commercial vessels would allow the
Coast Guard to align its vessel reporting
requirements with CBP electronic
arrival manifest requirements in 19 CFR
4.7b. We propose to maintain the
exemption for U.S. commercial vessels
300 gross tons or less, not carrying
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
CDCs, and transiting between ports or
places of the United States because most
are already screened through specific
Federal and State registration and/or
licensing programs as are the mariners
that operate and crew these vessels.
We currently require all foreign
commercial and recreational vessels 300
gross tons or less arriving at a port or
place in the Seventh Coast Guard
District to submit NOAs directly to the
cognizant Captains of the Port (COTPs).
We are proposing to remove that unique
NOA requirement for foreign
recreational vessels arriving in the
Seventh Coast Guard District. This will
ensure consistency between Coast
Guard districts and allow more efficient
use of Coast Guard District Seven
personnel and resources.
Vessels over 300 gross tons are
currently subject to NOA regulations.
We continue to require their compliance
so that we can maintain visibility of
these vessels because they carry a
greater number of passengers and crew
and a larger volume of cargo.
We also propose to revise an
exemption for vessels operating upon
the Mississippi River above mile 235
and its tributaries. That exemption
would be limited to vessels required to
report to the Inland River Vessel
Movement Center (IRVMC) under 33
CFR part 165.
We propose to clarify the exemption
for a vessel operating exclusively within
a COTP Zone when not carrying certain
dangerous cargo. Under both the current
33 CFR 160.203(b)(2) and proposed 33
CFR 160.204(a)(4)(ii), once a vessel has
arrived at a port or place within a single
COTP zone and has submitted the
required NOA, if it then transits to
another port or place within the same
COTP Zone it is considered to be
operating exclusively within that Zone
and, therefore, is not required to submit
a NOAD if it is not carrying CDC. If that
vessel, however, is carrying CDC or
leaves one COTP Zone and enters
another, it is not covered by the
exemption under current § 160.203(b)(2)
or proposed § 160.204(a)(4)(ii) and,
therefore, must submit the required
notices.
4. Submitter
We have inserted proposed § 160.205
to clarify who must submit notices of
arrival and notices of departure. This
section would direct the owner, agent,
master, operator, or person in charge of
a vessel to submit NOADs in
compliance with the subpart’s time,
method, and notice content
requirements.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
5. NOA Information
We propose to remove the optional
submission of INS (now CBP) Form I–
418 to satisfy crew and passenger
information reporting requirements
currently found in § 160.206(c) and to
remove the option of submitting
consolidated NOAs found in
§ 160.206(d). The Coast Guard found
that many vessels submitting
consolidated NOAs, or NOAs with
consecutive port submissions, were not
reporting changes in their crew, cargo,
or persons in addition to crew. The
eNOAD system we have developed to
support the submission of nonconsolidated NOADs meets the
requirements of both the Coast Guard
and CBP.
We would revise § 160.206, which
contains the information requirements
for NOA reports. The Coast Guard
proposes adding a requirement for the
Maritime Mobile Service Identity
(MMSI) number for vessels in NOA
reports because that number is
associated with AIS. For vessels with an
MMSI, this would allow the Coast
Guard to quickly link a vessel’s NOA
with its AIS broadcast in order to detect
security anomalies.
We also propose to require passport
country of issuance and passport date of
expiration information from everyone
onboard who presents a passport—
crewmembers and persons in addition
to crew. This additional passport
information will aid in the detection of
fraudulent passports that may be used
by individuals, both foreign and
domestic, attempting to enter or depart
the United States.
We propose to add a requirement to
indicate whether the vessel is 300 gross
tons or less and whether the vessel’s
voyage will be less than 24 hours in
NOA reports. This information will
allow the Coast Guard to prioritize
screening of vessels on brief voyages
with a shorter reporting requirement so
they are screened before entering their
port or place of destination.
We also propose to add a data field for
vessels to submit their estimated time of
arrival to the entrance to the port (if
applicable). This would be used by
COTPs to facilitate vessel traffic
management and to coordinate
boardings and inspections.
Additionally, we propose to clarify
through item (2)(i) in the table for
proposed 33 CFR 160.206 that vessels
that have visited ports or places outside
the continental United States need to
submit the last five foreign ports or
places visited on their NOA. In a
separate item from the table, (2)(ix), all
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
vessels must report their last port of
call, whether domestic or foreign.
These two data fields, with
accompanying items requesting arrival
and departure dates from ports or places
listed, will better enable us to determine
which vessels are coming from foreign
ports, and whether they may have been
subject to inspection at another U.S.
port since entering U.S. navigable
waters. A vessel that has not visited a
foreign port would make the appropriate
entry, as specified by eNOAD, for the
(2)(i) and (2)(ii) fields to report they
have not visited a foreign port or place.
Finally, in regard to § 160.206, we
propose to revise the reporting
requirements on the operational
condition of equipment. For that item,
we have replaced the reference to 33
CFR 164.35 with 33 CFR part 164, so
that we would include all relevant
navigation equipment, including AIS.
6. NOD Information
We propose that all vessels required
to submit a NOA will also be required
to submit a NOD when departing from
a port or place of the United States. The
departure information required by
proposed § 160.207—regarding the
vessel, voyage, cargo, crewmembers,
and persons in addition to the crew—
would increase our awareness of vessel
movements and, by supplementing
NOA data, would allow us to maintain
a complete picture of movements in and
out of U.S. ports or places.
Commercial vessels departing U.S.
ports or places bound for foreign ports
or places are currently required by CBP
to submit an electronic passenger
departure manifest and an electronic
crewmember departure manifest. See 19
CFR 4.64. As noted in their final rule
entitled ‘‘Electronic Transmission of
Passenger and Crew Manifests for
Vessels and Aircrafts,’’ published in the
Federal Register April 7, 2005 (70 FR
17820, 17833), however, CBP has
adopted the use of the Coast Guard’s
eNOAD to eliminate duplicate reporting
requirements and provide a ‘‘single
window’’ for filing manifest
information. While, as indicated in the
paragraph above, we would not limit
our NOD requirements to vessels going
to foreign ports, our proposed rule will
not change what CBP stated in their
final rule: eNOAD will capture the
notice information we require and the
electronic manifest information CBP
requires. See 70 FR 17831 (Apr. 7,
2005).
We have worked with CBP to avoid
requiring a vessel to submit the same
information to our agencies separately,
but our agencies do have separate
missions. The information we need to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
better enable us to fulfill our mission
under 33 U.S.C. 1225—to prevent
damage to structures on, in, or adjacent
to the navigable waters of the United
States, as well as protecting those
navigable waters—may differ somewhat
from information CBP requires to
implement the laws defining its
missions. To the extent, however, that
we both require the same information of
vessels, we do not require separate
submissions of that information to
satisfy our respective regulations in 19
CFR and 33 CFR.
7. Electronic Submission
In proposed § 160.210, we would
require NOAs and NODs be submitted
via electronic formats found at the
National Vessel Movement Center’s
(NVMC) Web site: https://
www.nvmc.uscg.gov. Mandating
electronic submission of NOADs allows
the Coast Guard and CBP to quickly and
automatically process, validate, and
screen arrival and departure notices.
The CBP’s Advance Passenger
Information System (APIS) regulations,
19 CFR 4.7b and 4.64, mandated that
arrival and departure information be
submitted by the electronic system.
Coast Guard and CBP consolidated the
reporting requirements and provided
the public with a ‘‘single-window’’ for
transmitting NOA and NOD
information. Information received
through the eNOAD system is
automatically forwarded to both the
Coast Guard and CBP.
Currently, 87 percent of NOA
submissions are made via the eNOAD
method. The eNOAD offers a quick and
easy way to submit NOAs and NODs.
8. When To Submit NOA
We recognize that the current times
for submitting NOAs in § 160.212 might
encumber some small commercial
vessels transiting between U.S. and
foreign ports; therefore, we propose to
make the reporting time closer to the
departure time for smaller vessels that
make frequent, short voyages between
U.S. and foreign ports or places.
For U.S. commercial vessels 300 gross
tons or less, arriving from a foreign port,
and on a voyage of less than 24 hours,
we propose in this NPRM a submission
time of 60 minutes prior to departure
from the foreign port or place. This
population of vessels often engages in
multiple, unscheduled, short-term
voyages within a given 24-hour period.
Because of the emergent and
spontaneous nature of their business,
this portion of the vessel industry
would be disproportionately affected if
required to submit NOADs 24 hours
before arrival. Additionally, the Coast
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
76303
Guard or State authorities already
document commercial vessels of the
United States of 300 gross tons or less.
In contrast, we have much less
information on some foreign
commercial vessels of 300 gross tons or
less; nor do we have advance access to
foreign merchant mariner
documentation or licenses of
commercial vessel crews. As a result,
our personnel require more time to
review and verify the information
submitted by foreign commercial vessels
300 gross tons or less; therefore, we are
not proposing to reduce the reporting
time for this population of foreign
vessels.
This proposed rule would also
mandate that foreign commercial vessels
of 300 gross tons or less that had been
required by § 160.210(c) to contact
COTPs in the Seventh Coast Guard
District would instead submit their
NOAs and NODs to the NVMC.
In proposed 33 CFR 160.212(a)(4) and
(b)(4), we have sought to clarify that the
times for submitting a NOA or update
are based on a vessel’s arrival at a port
or place.
9. When To Submit NOD
We are proposing a new requirement
to mandate times for submitting NODs.
This requirement is similar to the time
frame for departure notices mandated by
CBP in its APIS requirements, 19 CFR
4.7b.
10. Force Majeure
In proposed 160.215, we specify
information to be conveyed by vessels
bound for a port or place in the United
States under force majeure. The Coast
Guard recognizes the special
circumstances of such vessels and limits
the requirements of 33 CFR part 160,
subpart C, to reporting information to
the nearest Captain of the Port regarding
the vessel operator’s intentions, any
hazardous conditions, and whether the
vessel is carrying or controlling a vessel
carrying CDC. COTP zones are defined
in 33 CFR part 3.
11. Customs Form 1302 Removed
Finally, we propose to remove some
NOA regulatory text that has been
suspended. Requirements for submittal
of Customs Form 1302, a cargo
declaration, were included in Coast
Guard NOA regulations published
February 28, 2003. See 68 FR 9537. The
paragraphs in 33 CFR part 160
referencing this cargo declaration were
suspended 3 months later pending
further CBP regulatory action under
then recently enacted legislation. See 68
FR 27907 (May 22, 2003). At the time,
we noted that we would remove these
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
76304
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
cargo-manifest submission requirements
from Coast Guard regulations when they
were no longer needed.
On December 5, 2003, CBP published
its ‘‘Required Advance Electronic
Presentation of Cargo Information’’ final
rule (68 FR 68140), which fully
addressed the requirement for
submission of this cargo declaration
(Customs Form 1302). 19 CFR 4.7. Our
proposed rule would reinstate the
suspended paragraphs (d) and (e)
regarding Customs Form 1302 in 33 CFR
part 160 so that we could then remove
them because they are no longer needed.
B. AIS Revisions
We are proposing numerous changes
to our automatic identification system
and related regulations. Those
regulations require the installation and
operation of a device that automatically
broadcasts information about the
vessel—its position, and current
voyage—that may be received by other
AIS-equipped stations.
The proposed rule would revise
current AIS operation requirements and
would expand AIS applicability to all
U.S. navigable waters; under our current
regulations, vessels not on an
international voyage are only required
to use AIS in Vessel Traffic Service
(VTS) areas. We would also expand AIS
applicability to all commercial vessels
65 feet or more in length and the
following commercial vessels,
regardless of length: Vessels carrying 50
or more passengers (whether for hire or
not); vessels carrying 12 or more
passengers for hire and capable of
speeds in excess of 30 knots; dredges
and floating platforms operating near or
in a commercial channel or shipping
fairway; and any vessels carrying or
engaged in the movement of CDC. These
proposed changes are described in
greater detail in the 12 headings below
in this section.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
1. Changes to VTS Terminology and
Definitions
In § 160.5, we replace the term
‘‘Commanding Officers, Vessel Traffic
Services’’ with ‘‘Vessel Traffic Services
Director’’ to better align with our
current sector organizational structure.
In part 161, we are making several
changes. Those include adding vessels
operating with a type-approved AIS to
the definition of ‘‘Vessel Traffic Service
(VTS) user’’ in § 161.2. Since all Coast
Guard VTSs are AIS-capable, this
revision will facilitate vessel traffic
management within a VTS and will
allow AIS-equipped vessels to avail
themselves of VTS services.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
2. Administrative Changes and Changes
in Definition
In part 161, we propose making two
revisions, in §§ 161.12 and 161.19, to
reflect the new location (§ 160.202) of
our certain dangerous cargo (CDC)
definition.
In part 164, we are making several
revisions including in § 164.02(a), in
which we are revising the section
reference to § 164.46 to reflect the new
location of AIS requirements for SOLAS
vessels in that section, paragraph (c),
which, unlike the rest of the part, apply
to vessels in innocent passage.
We are adding four items to the
incorporation by reference list in
§ 164.03 ((f)(2), (5), (6), and (8))
reflecting new guidance regarding AIS
installation, use of binary applications
and the AIS destination field, and
deleting the IEC and ITU portions.
We are revising § 164.46 to expand its
applicability and better define the
proper operation of AIS.
We are moving three terms—gross
tonnage, length, and properly
installed—previously discussed in the
note to § 164.46(a) and adding them to
a new proposed ‘‘Definitions’’ paragraph
at § 164.46(a). This paragraph (a) also
includes definitions for Automatic
Identification System (AIS) and
International Voyage. We have
combined the properly installed
definition with the broader properly
installed, operational definition.
We are making a revision to
§ 164.46(b) to denote only ‘‘Coast Guard
type-approved’’ equipment as meeting
our requirements. This would include
various newly, Coast Guard typeapproved AIS Class B devices, but these
devices currently await FCC
certification (FCC rules regarding AIS
Class B certification are pending; see 71
FR 60102, October 12, 2006). We have
done so in response to the many
commenters who asked about
alternative or less expensive ways to
meet the requirement with AIS Class B
devices.
3. Expansion of AIS Carriage
Requirements
We propose to revise AIS
requirements and extend applicability
beyond VTS areas to all U.S. navigable
waters. Further, we would expand
applicability to all commercial vessels
65 feet or more in length, including
fishing vessels and vessels carrying
passengers regardless of the number of
passengers. We would also require
commercial passenger vessels carrying
50 or more passengers (whether for hire
or not), reducing the previous passenger
threshold from 150 or more for hire.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Additionally, we propose that vessels
carrying 12 or more passengers for hire
and capable of speeds in excess of 30
knots; dredges and floating platforms
operating near or in a commercial
channel or shipping fairway; and any
vessels carrying or controlling vessels
carrying CDC be required to install and
use AIS.
4. Class A and Class B AIS Devices
We have also added a note that
addresses the use of AIS Class B
devices. AIS Class B devices differ
slightly in features and nature of design,
which reduces their cost (on average
half the cost of AIS Class A devices) but
also impacts their performance. They
report at a fixed rate (30 seconds) versus
the AIS Class A variable rate (2–10
seconds dependent on speed and course
change). They consume less power but
also report at lower power (2 watts
versus 12 watts of AIS Class A), thus
impacting their broadcast range. Despite
these design limitations, AIS Class B
devices offer similar AIS benefits. They
broadcast and receive virtually the same
vessel identification and information.
They have the same ability to see targets
that radar may not always show (around
the bend, in sea clutter, or during foul
weather). For these reasons, and after
conducting our own AIS Class B testing,
we have concluded that AIS Class B
devices would enhance navigation
safety and assist in collision avoidance
as do Class A devices; however, we
caution users that they may not be the
best alternative for vessels that are
highly maneuverable, travel at high
speed, or routinely transit congested
waters.
5. Changes Regarding SOLAS AIS
Requirements
As previously noted, we propose to
revise paragraph (b) of § 164.02 to reflect
the new location in § 164.46 for SOLAS
requirements. In our proposed
§ 164.46(c), we omit SOLAS
implementation dates because those
dates have lapsed. In the proposed
paragraph (c), we would also reflect
SOLAS applicability for self-propelled
vessels in three paragraphs rather than
four:
• 500 gross tonnage or more,
• 300 gross tonnage or more on
international voyage, or
• 150 gross tonnage or more carrying
more than 12 passengers.
The first two paragraphs,
§ 164.46(c)(1) and (2), would properly
reflect SOLAS applicability for tankers;
therefore, there is no need to list tanker
applicability separately.
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
6. Clarification of Operating
Requirements
In response to numerous comments
and suggestions, we have expanded
operating requirements in new
paragraph § 164.46(d) clarifying that the
use of AIS does not relieve the vessel of
existing requirements in the
International Regulations for Preventing
Collisions at Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS),
28 U.S.T. 3459, T.I.A.S. 8587, or Inland
Navigation Rules, 33 U.S.C. 2001
through 2073, the Vessel Bridge-toBridge Radiotelephone Act (33 U.S.C.
1201 through 1208), part 26 of this
chapter, nor requirements of the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC)
specified in 47 CFR part 80. AISequipped vessels are to sound whistle
signals and display lights or shapes to
denote a vessel’s navigation status.
Vessels should ensure that their AIS
‘‘navigation status’’ field accurately
reflects the vessel status as denoted by
its navigation lights or displayed
shapes. Vessels must also make
appropriate voice broadcasts and
passing arrangements on the designated
VHF bridge-to-bridge channel. We also
address the use of AIS messaging and
note that it should not be relied upon
for distress or urgent marine
communications.
We also propose a requirement for the
vessel to ascertain that its AIS and
associated equipment is properly
operating prior to navigating. We have
done so in response to the many
improperly operating AIS we have
encountered in enforcing the current
regulations. Many users are not aware
that proper operation of AIS on SOLAS
certificated vessels requires the use of
external devices (the vessel’s navigation
system, gyro, and their associated
converters) or that they broadcast the
pertinent information regarding the
vessel’s description, dimensions, and
navigation status. We reiterate here that
vessels not ascertaining that their
broadcast AIS information is correct
prior to navigation will now be in clear
violation of the rules. This also pertains
to the broadcasts of an unassigned or
improper Maritime Mobile Service
Identity (MMSI) number. Each vessel’s
properly assigned MMSI is what
distinguishes its reports from other
vessel’s reports. Duplicate or improper
MMSIs may cause a vessel’s reports not
to be heard or to interfere with the
reports of other vessels.
7. Location and Use of AIS
We further propose that the
functionality and the display of AIS
information be located at or near the
conning position of the vessel and be
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
used by the master or the person in
charge to pilot or direct the movement
of the vessel. The safety benefits of AIS
can only be accrued by those who avail
themselves of its information; thus, we
deem it should be located at the conning
position for use by the master and
conning officer and that a periodic
watch be kept of AIS information. Note,
we do not require that the unit itself be
installed there, only that access to AIS
information be available there. This can
be accomplished by the AIS MKD or
some other appropriate AIS presentation
device, such as an AIS-capable radar or
electronic chart system being installed
there.
8. Integration of External Sensors
We recognize the use of external
sensors or devices, such as transmitting
heading devices, gyros, rate of turn
indicators, ECDIS/ECS, or radar, and we
are aware that such devices may
improve AIS performance; however, as
of the date of this publication, we do not
require their installation or integration,
except for those vessels subject to
requirements in SOLAS Regulation V/19
as denoted in proposed § 164.46(c). We
are also mindful that the MKD is not the
most optimal interface to access and use
AIS information; it was never intended
to be so. Each AIS has, at minimum, two
high speed input/output ports for
connection of onboard control
equipment, ECDIS/ECS, radar, etc., and
a pilot/auxiliary port for connection of
an AIS pilot system. Use of these ports
for external display systems is certainly
envisioned and desirable; however, we
note that technical requirements to do
so are still in development.
Requirements regarding electronic chart
systems and the display and integration
of AIS information on them will be the
subject of a separate rulemaking.
9. Implementation Date
We also propose an implementation
date, for those vessels covered by this
rulemaking, but not currently required
to have AIS, of no later than 7 months
after publication of the final rule. We
consider this a reasonable length of time
for owners to plan to purchase and
install AIS.
10. Location of AIS Pilot Port
In proposed § 164.46(g), we clarify the
previous requirement that the AIS Pilot
Port be located ‘‘near’’ an alternating
current (AC) outlet to a maximum
length—no more than 3 feet from each
other.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
76305
11. Requests for Deviation
The following vessels may request a
yearly deviation from AIS requirements.
Vessels that operate—
Solely within a very confined area
(e.g., less than a one nautical mile
radius, shipyard, fleeting area);
On short and fixed scheduled routes
(e.g., a bank-to-bank river ferry service);
or
In a manner that makes it unlikely
they will encounter other AIS users.
12. Removal of Expired Requirements
We propose to remove § 164.43 and
its separate and expired Prince William
Sound AIS requirement. Also, in
§ 165.1704, we propose to remove
paragraph (c)(6) because it refers to
expired requirements for having
Automatic Identification System
Shipborne Equipment in the Prince
William Sound regulated navigation
area.
C. Incorporation by Reference
Material proposed for incorporation
by reference appears in 33 CFR 164.03.
You may inspect this material at U.S.
Coast Guard Headquarters where
indicated under ADDRESSES. Copies of
the material are available from the
sources listed in § 164.03.
Before publishing a binding rule, we
will submit this material to the Director
of the Federal Register for approval of
the incorporation by reference.
VI. Regulatory Analysis
We developed this proposed rule after
considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or
executive orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866,
Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993) requires a
determination whether a regulatory
action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) and
subject to the requirements of the
Executive Order. This rulemaking has
been identified as significant under
Executive Order 12866. A combined
Regulatory Analysis and an Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is
available in the docket as indicated
under the ‘‘Public Participation and
Request for Comments’’ section of this
preamble. A summary of the analysis
follows.
This proposed rule would expand the
applicability for NOAD and AIS
requirements.
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
76306
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
The regulatory analysis (RA) presents
the scope and magnitude of costs
incurred by industry (vessel owners)
and benefits derived from an anticipated
reduction in marine casualty cases, and
we include a cost-effectiveness analysis
for both segments of this rulemaking.
We also present the overarching
assumptions that provided the
foundation for both our cost and benefit
analyses and make this information
available to the public for comment.
The NOAD portion of this proposed
rule would significantly expand the
applicability to include all commercial
foreign-flag vessels regardless of tonnage
down to zero gross tons that make port
calls to the United States. The expanded
NOAD applicability also includes all
U.S. commercial vessels 300 gross tons
or less coming from a foreign port. It
would also require that a notice of
departure be submitted for all vessels
that are required to submit a notice of
arrival. The proposed rule would also
mandate electronic submission of
NOAD notices to NVMC.
Section 102 of the MTSA mandates
that AIS be installed on all—foreign or
domestic—commercial self-propelled
vessels equal to or greater than 65 feet
in length (including fishing vessels) in
U.S. navigable waters, including those
outside already-regulated VTS areas.
This includes towing vessels equal to or
greater than 26 feet in length and 600
horsepower and, as determined by the
Secretary under authority of the MTSA,
passenger vessels carrying at least 50
passengers, certain high-speed
passenger craft, certain dredges or
floating plants, and vessels carrying or
moving CDCs. These expanded
requirements would allow the Coast
Guard to better correlate vessel AIS data
with NOAD data, enhance our ability to
identify anomalies, and expand our
overall MDA.
We could not, with a great degree of
certainty, estimate how many vessels
transit outside of VTS coverage areas.
With this in mind, we estimated the
numbers of vessels affected by this
rulemaking by using the population
figures presented in the AIS final rule
(included in the MTSA suite of
rulemakings) under docket number,
USCG–2003–14757. The Coast Guard
published the final rule for AIS in the
Federal Register on October 22, 2003, at
68 FR 60559. We estimate that both
segments of the proposed rule would
affect approximately 42,607 vessels. The
total number of domestic vessels
affected is approximately 17,323 and the
total number of foreign vessels affected
is approximately 25,284.
We estimate that the NOAD portion of
the proposed rule would affect
approximately 5,566 domestic vessels
and approximately 25,284 foreign
vessels. Of the 5,566 domestic vessels,
approximately 4,566 would be required
to install AIS and submit NOADs and
about 1,000 of the remaining vessels
would be required to submit NOADs
only. The total number of vessels
affected by the NOAD portion of the
proposed rule is approximately 30,850.
We estimate that the AIS portion of
the proposed rule would affect
approximately 16,323 domestic vessels
and approximately 1,119 foreign
vessels. The total number of vessels
affected by the AIS portion of this
proposed rule is approximately 17,442.
Table 4 below summarizes the vessel
population affected by the proposed
rule.
TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF U.S. AND FOREIGN VESSEL POPULATIONS
Total vessels affected *
NOAD
AIS
U.S.
U.S. Vessels ................................................................................................................
Foreign Vessels ...........................................................................................................
** 5,566
25,284
16,323
*** 1,119
Total Vessels by Portion of Rule .........................................................................
30,850
17,323
Foreign
25,284
Total
42,607
17,442
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
* Totals do not add up to sum of portions of the proposed rule since some vessels required to install AIS would also be required to submit
NOADs. Consequently, adding both would double count most of the ‘‘AIS affected’’ vessels.
** Of the approximately 5,566 U.S. vessels required to submit NOADs, about 1,000 would submit NOADs only; the remainder of about 4,566
would be required to both install AIS and submit NOADs.
*** All of the approximately 1,119 foreign-flag vessels required to install AIS would also be required to submit NOADs.
Our NOAD vessel populations
include vessels greater than 300 gross
tons (approximately 3,099), although
these vessels are currently required to
submit NOAs for a distinct voyage or
port call to the U.S. The proposed rule
would mandate that all commercial
vessels would be required to submit
NODs as well as NOAs; therefore, we
based our analysis on this difference in
applicability. The proposed rule would
also mandate that all commercial
vessels must submit NOADs
electronically (eNOAD).
The eNOAD system would allow the
Coast Guard to meet its notification of
arrival requirements and provide
synergy with the CBP requirements that
would eliminate duplicative reporting.
We anticipate that submitting NOADs
by this format should reduce the burden
hours imposed on industry whereas
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
under a temporary final rule (69 FR
51176, Aug. 18, 2004) and a subsequent
interim rule (70 FR 74663, Dec. 16,
2005), two new methods of electronic
submission were added and made
optional. All vessels would be required
to submit NOADs by a computer, which
would require the purchase of this item.
We assess the costs and benefits of the
proposed rule over the 10-year period,
2008–2017, and present costs in 2006
dollars. We discount costs to their
present value (PV) at three and seven
percent discount rates over the period of
analysis. Cost estimates include capital
costs such as the purchase of a
computer, and transmission, annual
maintenance, and replacement costs for
the NOAD portion of this rulemaking.
Cost estimates for the AIS portion of this
rulemaking include the AIS unit itself
and installation, training, annual
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
maintenance, and replacement costs.
Quantified, monetized benefit estimates
for the AIS portion of this rulemaking
include avoided injuries, fatalities, and
pollution as a result of the proposed
rule. Non-quantified benefits for AIS
include enhanced MDA, improved
information sharing with NOAD, and
improved overall communications. We
expect that non-quantified benefits exist
for the NOAD portion of this rulemaking
such as an efficient and timesaving
method of notification thereby reducing
the hour burden on industry and Coast
Guard resources.
Considering domestic commercial
vessels less than or equal to 300 gross
tons coming from a foreign port, for
example, we propose a 60-minute notice
time for vessels on voyages of less than
24 hours. We believe that this
population of vessels would originate
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
mostly from Caribbean or Canadian
ports and many vessels in this
population potentially could be charter
vessels such as fishing vessels or
smaller ferries that would not have
passenger information until a few
minutes before departure. To the extent
that many vessels in this population are
charter vessels, a 60-minute notice time
would greatly benefit these small vessel
owners since they would not be idle in
port waiting for the charter to reach its
capacity. In contrast, if we expand the
notice time, for example, to 24 hours for
this vessel population, these vessel
owners potentially would lose
customers and revenues since they rely
on walk-up business as they wait in port
in order to satisfy a longer notice time.
It may be likely that a longer notice time
would force some of these small
business owners to leave the industry as
they realize lower revenues and reduced
economic profits as a result.
Our proposed 60-minute notice time
provides flexibility for the smaller
vessel owner since these businesses
would continue to be able to operate
efficiently as charter businesses due to
the spontaneous nature of their
business. This requirement also aligns
with the Customs and Border Patrol
(CBP) proposed requirement, which
would alleviate confusion within the
industry and provide consistency for the
public. The Coast Guard requests
comments from the public on how a
shorter notice time benefits your
business with increased flexibility as
opposed to a longer notice time. We
would also like comments on how much
this provision would save your business
annually.
We estimate the total initial cost of
the proposed rule to U.S. vessel owners
and operators to comply with the NOAD
portion of this rulemaking is between
$3.4 and $4.3 million (non-discounted,
with a 2008 implementation date),
which covers the preparation of NOADs,
the capital cost of purchasing a
computer [we used $500 for the cost of
a computer which is consistent with the
CBP’s APIS rulemaking (70 FR 17820,
Apr. 7, 2005)]. The total initial year cost
to U.S. vessel owners and operators to
comply with the AIS portion of this
rulemaking is approximately $69.0
million (non-discounted, with a 2008
implementation date), which includes
the capital cost of an AIS unit,
installation, and training costs. Due to
economies of scale, we estimate the cost
of an AIS unit to be approximately
$3,000. The annual recurring cost for
the NOAD portion of the proposed rule
would be approximately between $4.1
million (using median number of trips
made per vessel) and $6.7 million (using
mean number of trips made per vessel)
(non-discounted). The annual recurring
cost of the AIS portion of the proposed
rule would be approximately $4.4
million (non-discounted).
We estimate that the 10-year total
present discounted value or cost of the
proposed rule to U.S. vessel owners is
between $132.2 and $163.7 million
(seven and three percent discount rates,
respectively, 2006 dollars) over the
period of analysis, 2008–2017. We
estimate the 10-year present discounted
value or cost of the NOAD portion of the
proposed rule using both a high and a
low median number of trips to account
for the variability in the number of trips
made. The 10-year total present
discounted value or cost to U.S. vessel
owners for the NOAD portion of the
proposed rule is between $10.4 and
$20.1 million at seven and three percent
discount rates, respectively. Using the
median and mean number of trips made
by U.S.-flag vessels, we estimate the
annualized NOAD costs to U.S.-flag
vessel owners and operators to be
approximately $1.5 and $2.4 million,
respectively.
The 10-year total present discounted
value or cost to U.S. vessels owners for
76307
the AIS portion of the proposed rule is
between $121.8 and $143.5 million at
seven and three percent discount rates,
respectively. The AIS portion of the
proposed rule is the most costly element
representing about 87 percent of the 10year total present discounted value or
cost at both seven and three percent
discount rates. The initial cost (nondiscounted) for the AIS portion
represents nearly 94 percent of the total
initial cost (non-discounted) of the
proposed rule. We estimate annualized
AIS costs to U.S. vessel owners and
operators to be approximately between
$17.3 and $16.8 million at seven and
three percent discount rates,
respectively.
We estimate that the 10-year total
present discounted value or cost for
foreign-flag vessels to comply with the
NOAD portion of the proposed rule is
between $40.9 and $62.4 million at
seven and three percent discount rates,
respectively. Using the mean and
median number of trips made by
foreign-flag vessels, we estimate the
annualized NOAD costs to foreign-flag
vessel owners and operators to be
approximately $7.3 and $4.8 million,
respectively. We estimate the total
present discounted value or cost for
foreign-flag vessel owners to comply
with the AIS portion of the proposed
rule is between $8.3 and $9.8 million at
seven and three percent discount rates,
respectively. We estimate annualized
AIS costs to foreign-flag vessel owners
and operators to be approximately $1.2
million. We estimate that the total
present discounted value or cost of the
proposed rule for both U.S. and foreignflag vessel owners is between $181.4
and $235.9 million at seven and three
percent discount rates, respectively,
over the 10-year period of analysis.
Table 5 below summarizes the total
annualized costs of the proposed rule
for both U.S. and foreign-flag vessel
owners and operators.
TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF TOTAL ANNUALIZED COSTS OF PROPOSED RULE TO U.S. AND FOREIGN-FLAG VESSEL OWNERS
[$Millions]
NOAD *
(median trips
made)
U.S.-Flag Vessels ..................................................................................................................
Foreign-Flag Vessels .............................................................................................................
$2.4 ($1.5)
7.3 (4.8)
AIS
$16.8–$17.3
1.2
Totals *
(median trips
made)
$20.2 ($19.2)
8.5 (7.0)
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
* Mean number of trips made.
In the interest of national security and
maritime domain awareness, the Coast
Guard believes that this proposed rule,
through a combination of NOAD and
AIS, would strengthen and enhance not
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
only maritime security but also the
national security of this country. We
believe that expanding NOA
applicability, specifically to foreign
commercial vessels under 300 gross tons
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and to all U.S. commercial vessels
coming from foreign ports or places, and
requiring them to also submit NODs—in
conjunction with AIS—would
accomplish this goal. The combination
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
76308
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
of NOAD and AIS would create a
synergistic effect between the two
requirements and would include a
significant number of smaller vessels
not currently covered under the current
regulations. This is the primary benefit
of the proposed rule.
Ancillary or secondary benefits exist
in the form of avoided injuries,
fatalities, and barrels of oil not spilled
into the marine environment. We
estimate that the total discounted
benefit (injuries and fatalities) derived
from 68 marine casualty cases analyzed
over an 8-year data period from 1996–
2003 for the AIS portion of the proposed
rule is between $24.7 and $30.6 million
using $6.3 million for the value of
statistical life (VSL) at seven and three
percent discount rates, respectively. Just
based on barrels of oil not spilled, we
expect the AIS portion of the proposed
rule to prevent 22 barrels of oil from
being spilled annually.
The 68 casualty cases over the 8-year
data period yielded about $3.2 million
in property damage or about $400,000
per year.
Table 6 below summarizes our
findings.
TABLE 6—SUMMARY OF TOTAL DISCOUNTED COST AND BENEFIT OF PROPOSED RULE FOR U.S. AND FOREIGN-FLAG
VESSELS (2008–2017, 7 AND 3 PERCENT DISCOUNT RATES, 2006 DOLLARS)
[$Millions]
NOAD
7 Percent Discount Rates:
U.S. Vessels * .................................................................................................................
Foreign Vessels ** ..........................................................................................................
10-Year total
cost of proposed rule
AIS
$10.4–$16.9
40.9–52.6
$121.8
8.3
$132.2–$138.6
49.2–61.0
Total Cost ................................................................................................................
3 Percent Discount Rate:
U.S. Vessels * .................................................................................................................
Foreign Vessels ** ..........................................................................................................
51.3–69.5
130.1
181.4–199.6
12.3–20.1
48.1–62.4
143.5
9.8
155.8–163.7
58.0–72.2
Total Cost ................................................................................................................
AIS Benefits
Injuries and Fatalities Avoided:
7 Percent Discount Rate (6.3M VSL) .............................................................................
3 Percent Discount Rate (6.3M VSL) .............................................................................
Pollution Avoided (bbls): ***
7 Percent Discount Rate ................................................................................................
3 Percent Discount Rate ................................................................................................
60.4–82.5
153.4
213.8–235.9
24.7
30.6
136
169
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Totals may not sum due to independent rounding.
* Using three (and four for vessels ≤300 GT) and eight (and nine for vessels ≤300 GT) median and mean number of trips, respectively.
** Using two (and three for vessels ≤300 GT) and four (and five for vessels ≤300 GT) median and mean number of trips, respectively.
*** We did not find cases involving oil spills from foreign-flag vessels.
We do not expect quantifiable benefits
for the NOAD portion of this proposed
rule and benefits in this case are nonprobabilistic (i.e., not based on
historical probabilities). We believe,
however, that there are considerable
inherent qualitative benefits resulting
from the NOAD requirement.
The Coast Guard Intelligence
Coordination Center provided an
intelligence analysis to other internal
Coast Guard offices and to the
Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) indicating terrorist organizations
have the capability and the intention to
conduct attacks on the U.S. using
vessels as a delivery method for direct
attacks on waterborne primary targets
and as a delivery method for personnel
and weapons in support of attacks on
secondary targets. Vessels not currently
covered under the applicability of
NOAD and AIS regulations could pose
a security risk to the maritime
transportation system that terrorist
organizations could exploit. Expanding
the applicability of NOAD and AIS will
enhance maritime domain awareness by
lowering the potential security risks. We
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
believe that having this proposed rule in
place could prevent terrorist attacks in
the future that might otherwise have
occurred without the rule.
Since the security benefits noted
above are difficult to quantify, we
conducted a break-even analysis to
determine what change in the reduction
of risk would be necessary in order for
the benefits of the rule to exceed the
costs. Because the types of events that
would be prevented by this regulation
vary greatly, we calculate potential
break-even results using a range of
generic events that result in loss of life
or casualties. We do expect that most
events would also involve asset
destruction or other capital loss. Events
involving loss of capital in addition to
casualties would cause the change in
risk reduction to be smaller for costs to
equal benefits.
We use $6.3 million as an estimate of
a Value of a Statistical Life (VSL) to
represent an individual’s willingness to
pay to avoid a fatality involving
maritime transportation and calculate
annualized benefits. Our VSL estimate
is based on the 2008 report ‘‘Valuing
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Mortality Risk Reductions in Homeland
Security Regulatory Analyses’’ prepared
for the U.S. Customs and Border
Protection. This report is available on
the docket as detailed under ADDRESSES.
We subtract the annualized benefits of
the NOAD and AIS portions of the
proposed rule (7 percent discount rate
over 10 years) from the annualized costs
and divide these net costs by the value
of casualties avoided to calculate an
annual risk reduction range that would
be required for the benefits of both
portions of the rule to at least equal the
costs.
The annual risk reductions required
for the rule to breakeven are presented
below for a range of casualties. As
shown, depending on the casualties
avoided, risk would have to be reduced
0.1 (1,000 casualties avoided) to 1.2
percent (100 casualties avoided) in
order for the NOAD portion of the
proposed rule to breakeven. For the AIS
portion of the proposed rule, risk would
have to be reduced 0.3 (1,000 casualties
avoided) to 2.9 percent (100 casualties
avoided) in order for the AIS
requirements of the proposed rule to
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
76309
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
breakeven. These small changes in risk
reduction suggest the potential benefits
of the proposed rule justify the costs.
ANNUAL PERCENT RISK REDUCTION
REQUIRED FOR COSTS TO EQUAL
BENEFITS
[Annualized at 7 percent over 10 years]
Casualties avoided
NOAD
100 ....................................
250 ....................................
500 ....................................
750 ....................................
1,000 .................................
AIS
1.2
0.5
0.2
0.2
0.1
2.9
1.2
0.6
0.4
0.3
See the ‘‘Regulatory Analysis’’ in
Docket No. USCG–2005–21869 at
https://www.regulations.gov for details of
these calculations
B. Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this rule would 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
populations of less than 50,000. An
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is
available in the docket as indicated
under the ‘‘Public Participation and
Request for Comments’’ section of this
preamble.
We have reviewed this proposed rule
for potential economic impacts on small
entities. From our analysis, we conclude
that this proposed rule may affect a
substantial number of small entities, as
defined by the Small Business
Administration (SBA). Small entities
affected by this rulemaking are vessel
owners and operators.
Due to the large number of vessels
and vessel owners and operators
potentially affected, we took a random
sample of the total number of
companies that could be affected by this
rulemaking. We found that this
rulemaking may affect as many as
14,506 U.S. companies that own and
operate the 17,323 domestic vessels.
Using 95 percent as our confidence
level, we took a random sample of 375
small businesses. We researched
approximately 3,300 companies in order
to achieve our sample size of 375 small
businesses, or about a 9 to 1 ratio. We
found that some of the companies that
we researched lacked company data
such as revenues and employee size,
which precluded us from using those
companies in our analysis based on
SBAs criteria for small companies.
Based on the industry classification
codes from the North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS), we
found that about 12 percent of the small
businesses analyzed are classified under
the NAICS code for ‘‘navigational
services to shipping’’ companies. About
11 percent of the small businesses
analyzed are classified under the NAICS
code for ‘‘scenic and sightseeing
transportation’’ companies. The
remaining 77 percent of the small
businesses analyzed represent a variety
of different industry classification
codes, each representing a small portion
of the small businesses analyzed (for
more details, see the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Act analysis available in the
docket).
To estimate the impact on small
businesses in the initial year, we
multiplied the first year costs for
implementing NOAD (includes capital,
installation, and submission costs) and
installing AIS (includes capital,
installation, and training costs) by the
number of vessels that each small
business owns. We divided this cost by
the average annual revenues for each
small business to obtain a proportion of
the initial cost to annual revenues. This
allows us to determine the initial cost
impact of this proposed rule on small
businesses. We also estimated the
annual cost impact on small businesses
using the same methodology explained
above. Again, we multiplied the annual
costs that each small business would
incur for implementing NOAD (includes
operation and maintenance and
submission costs) and installing AIS
(includes operation and maintenance
costs) by the number of vessels that each
small business owns. We divided this
cost by the average annual revenues for
each small business to obtain a
proportion of the annual costs to annual
revenues.
Table 7 presents the initial and
annual revenue impacts for the sample
of 375 small companies that we
researched with known average annual
revenues.
TABLE 7—ESTIMATED REVENUE IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED RULE FOR SMALL BUSINESSES THAT OWN U.S.-FLAG SOLAS
AND NON-SOLAS VESSELS
Initial
Annual
Number of small
entities with
known revenue
data
Percent of small
entities with
known revenue
data
Number of small
entities with
known revenue
data
Percent of small
entities with
known revenue
data
0–3 ...................................................................................................
>3–5 .................................................................................................
>5–10 ...............................................................................................
>10–20 .............................................................................................
>20 ...................................................................................................
357
10
7
1
0
95
3
2
0
0
375
0
0
0
0
100
0
0
0
0
Total ..........................................................................................
375
100
375
100
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Percent impact on annual revenue
As shown, the proposed rule would
have a 3 percent or less impact on 95
percent of the small businesses that own
vessels that would have to comply with
both the NOAD and AIS portions of this
proposed rule during the first year the
rule is in effect. The proposed rule
would have a 3 percent or less impact
on 100 percent of the small businesses
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
annually that we sampled. The data
suggest this proposed rule would not
have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities and
we request comments from the public
on whether they believe this finding is
correct. For more information on small
entities, refer to the Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (RFA) portion of the
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
regulatory analysis in the docket under
docket number USCG–2005–21869.
The Coast Guard is interested in the
impact of this rulemaking on small
entities. If you are a small entity, we
specifically request comments regarding
the economic impact of this proposed
rule on you.
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
76310
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
C. Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
we want to assist small entities in
understanding this rulemaking so that
they can better evaluate its effects on
them and participate in the rulemaking.
If you think that this proposed rule
would affect your small business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning these provisions or options
for compliance, please consult with the
Coast Guard personnel listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this proposed rule. Note, the Coast
Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about
this rule or any policy or action of the
Coast Guard.
Small businesses may send comments
on the actions of Federal employees
who enforce, or otherwise determine
compliance with, Federal regulations to
the Small Business and Agriculture
Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman
and the Regional Small Business
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).
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
D. Collection of Information
This proposed rule calls for the
collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520).
As defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(c),
‘‘collection of information’’ comprises
reporting, recordkeeping, monitoring,
posting, labeling, and other, similar
actions. The title and description of the
information collections, a description of
those who must collect the information,
and an estimate of the total annual
burden follow. The estimate covers the
time for reviewing instructions,
searching existing sources of data,
gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing
the collection.
This proposed rule modifies two
existing OMB-approved collections,
1625–0100 (formerly 2115–0557), and
1625–0112. The request for approval of
these Collections of Information are
available in the docket where indicated
under the ‘‘Public Participation and
Request for Comments’’ section of this
preamble.
The summary of the revised 1625–
0100 collection follows:
Title: Advance Notice of Vessel
Arrival and Departure.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
OMB Control Number: 1625–0100.
Summary of the Collection of
Information: The Coast Guard requires
pre-arrival notices from certain vessels
entering a port or place in the United
States. This proposed rule would
increase the number of vessels required
to submit a NOA and establishes a NOD
requirement.
Need for Information: To ensure port
safety and security and to ensure the
uninterrupted flow of commerce. To
this end, the Coast Guard must modify
its NOA regulations.
Proposed Use of Information: This
information is required to control vessel
traffic, develop contingency plans, and
enforce regulations.
Description of the Respondents:
Respondents are the owner, agent,
master, operator, or person in charge of
a vessel that arrives at or departs from
a port or place in the United States.
Number of Respondents: The existing
OMB-approved number of respondents
is 9,206. This proposed rule would
increase that number by 21,644. The
total number of respondents would be
30,850.
Frequency of Response: The existing
OMB-approved number of responses is
78,538. This proposed rule would
increase that number by 78,584. The
total number of responses would be
157,122.
Burden of Response: The existing
OMB-approved burden of response is
approximately 2.5 hours. This proposed
rule would decrease that number by 60
percent, due to the mandated use of
electronic reporting. The estimated
burden of response is now 1 hour.
Estimate of Total Annual Burden: The
existing OMB-approved total annual
burden is 200,039 hours. This proposed
rule would decrease that number by
42,917, due to the mandated use of
electronic reporting. The estimated total
annual burden would be 157,122 hours.
The summary of the revised 1625–
0112 collection follows:
Title: Enhanced Maritime Domain
Awareness via Electronic Transmission
of Vessel Transit Data.
OMB Control Number: 1625–0112.
Summary of the Collection of
Information: The Coast Guard plans to
collect, store, and analyze data
transmitted by AIS to enhance maritime
domain awareness (MDA). Awareness
and threat knowledge are critical for
securing the maritime domain and the
key to preventing adverse events.
Domain awareness enables the early
identification of potential threats and
enhances appropriate responses,
including interdiction at an optimal
distance with capable prevention forces.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Need for Information: To ensure port
safety and security and to ensure the
uninterrupted flow of commerce. To
this end, the Coast Guard must establish
this new collection.
Proposed Use of Information: This
information collection, storage, and
analysis would greatly expand the
breadth and depth of the Coast Guard’s
MDA. This enhanced MDA would
enable quicker, more efficient responses
to marine casualties and improve the
Coast Guard’s ability to prevent and
respond to potential terrorist threats. It
would also contribute an essential
aspect to the Coast Guard’s COP. The
COP is the Coast Guard’s system for
sharing operational data among those
who need it to perform their missions.
Description of the Respondents:
Respondents are the operator or person
in charge of a vessel that must carry AIS
as mandated by the MTSA. The MTSA
requires the following vessels carry AIS:
• A self-propelled commercial vessel
of at least 65-feet in overall length.
• Vessels carrying more than a
number of passengers for hire
determined by the Secretary [herein, 50
or more passengers, or more than 12 for
hire at speeds in excess of 30 knots].
• A towing vessel of more than 26
feet overall in length and 600
horsepower.
• Any other vessel for which the
Secretary decides that an automatic
identification system is necessary for
the safe navigation of the vessel [herein,
certain dredges or floating plants or
engaged in moving certain dangerous
cargoes].
Number of Respondents: The existing
OMB-approved number of respondents
is 450. This proposed rule would
increase that number by 17,442. The
total number of respondents would be
17,892.
Frequency of Response: The existing
OMB-approved number of responses is
450. This proposed rule would increase
that number by 169,944. The total
number of responses would be 170,394.
Burden of Response: The estimated
annual AIS-related burden of response
is 11⁄2 hour.
Estimate of Total Annual Burden: The
existing OMB-approved total annual
burden is 150 hours. This proposed rule
would increase that number by 18,522.
The estimated total annual burden
would be 18,672.
As required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3507(d)), we have submitted a copy of
this proposed rule to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for its
review of the collection of information.
We ask for public comment on the
collection of information to help us
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
determine how useful the information
is; whether it can help us perform our
functions better; whether it is readily
available elsewhere; how accurate our
estimate of the burden of collection is;
how valid our methods for determining
burden are; how we can improve the
quality, usefulness, and clarity of the
information; and how we can minimize
the burden of collection.
If you submit comments on the
collection of information, submit them
both to OMB and to the Docket
Management Facility where indicated
under ADDRESSES, by the date under
DATES.
You need not respond to a collection
of information unless it displays a
currently valid control number from
OMB.
E. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
effect on State or local governments and
would either preempt State law or
impose a substantial direct cost of
compliance on them. We have analyzed
this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined, that to the extent
States have a current requirement in
effect for notices of vessel arrivals or
departures to a State agency—for
example, notices to pilot authorities for
pilot services—we do not intend to
preempt those requirements with this
rule.
However, we reserve our position
with respect to preemption of any
prospective new State rule or legal
requirement for a notice of arrival or
submission of information requirements
that are similar to those set forth in this
rule. The U.S. Supreme Court in United
States v. Locke, 529 U.S. 89, 120 S.Ct.
1135 (2000), held that pursuant to title
I of the Ports and Waterways Safety Act
(PWSA) (33 U.S.C. 1221–1232), the
authority for the NOAD portion of this
proposed rule, the Coast Guard can
preempt conflicting or similar State
requirements on vessel operation. The
Court held also that Congress had
preempted the field of marine casualty
reporting. Accordingly, based on the
Supreme Court’s holding in the Locke
case, we believe that any prospective
State requirement for a NOA or
information gathering requirement
directed at vessel owners or operators
that is similar to that contained in this
rule is inconsistent with the Federalism
principles enunciated in that case and is
preempted.
Regarding the AIS portion of this
proposed rule, it is well settled that
States may not regulate in categories
reserved for regulation by the Coast
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
Guard. It is also well settled, now, that
all of the categories covered in 46 U.S.C.
3306, 3703, 7101, and 8101 (design,
construction, alteration, repair,
maintenance, operation, equipping,
personnel qualification, and manning of
vessels), in which Congress intended
the Coast Guard to be the sole source of
a vessel’s obligations, are within the
field foreclosed from regulation by the
States. In addition, under the authority
of Title I of the PWSA (specifically 33
U.S.C. 1223) and the MTSA, this
regulation will preempt any State action
on the subject of AIS carriage
requirements. (See Locke.) Our
proposed AIS carriage requirements fall
into the category of equipping of
vessels. Because the States may not
regulate within this category,
preemption under Executive Order
13132 is not an issue for the AIS portion
of this proposed rule.
F. 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 discretionary regulatory actions. 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 proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
G. Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not require
a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under
Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with
Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights. We note that on March 20, 2006,
a challenge to our existing AIS
regulations was dismissed by the United
States District Court for the District of
Columbia, MariTEL, Inc. v. Collins et al.,
422 F.Supp.2d 188 (D.D.C. 2006). In that
case, MariTEL, Inc., alleged, in part, that
our 2003 AIS final rule constituted a
taking of its property—radio frequencies
it purchased at a Federal
Communications Commission (FCC)
auction. The court concluded that our
AIS equipment requirements were
authorized by the FCC and that because
our existing AIS regulations did not
specify frequency requirements, our AIS
final rule did not constitute a taking.
H. Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable
standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform, to minimize litigation,
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
76311
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce
burden.
I. Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed 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 create an
environmental risk to health or risk to
safety that may disproportionately affect
children.
J. Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule would require
certain vessels to submit NOADs and to
install and operate AIS. Some of these
vessels may be owned by Indian tribes,
but the proposed rule does not have
tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would 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.
K. Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have
determined that it is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under that order.
Although it is a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866,
this rulemaking is not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. The
Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs has
not designated it as a significant energy
action; therefore, it does not require a
Statement of Energy Effects under
Executive Order 13211.
L. Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use
voluntary consensus standards in their
regulatory activities unless the agency
provides Congress, through the Office of
Management and Budget, with an
explanation of why using these
standards would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are
technical standards (e.g., specifications
of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling
procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
76312
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
The Coast Guard will use the
following new voluntary consensus
standard from the International
Electrotechnical Commission: IEC
62287–1, Maritime navigation and
radiocommunication equipment and
systems—Class B shipborne equipment
of the automatic identification system
(AIS)—Part 1: Carrier-sense time
division multiple access (CSTDMA)
techniques, dated February 9, 2006 in
our type-approval process.
In addition, this proposed rule uses
the following standards required to
implement the AIS requirements of an
international agreement, SOLAS:
1. IMO Resolution A.917(22),
Guidelines for the Onboard Operational
Use of Shipborne Automatic
Identification System (AIS), dated
January 25, 2002.
2. IMO SN/Circ.236, Guidance on the
Application of AIS Binary Applications,
dated May 20, 2004.
3. IMO SN/Circ.244, Guidance on the
Use of the UN/LOCODE in the
Destination Field in AIS Messages,
dated December 15, 2004.
4. IMO SN/Circ.245, Amendments to
the Guidelines for the Installation of a
Shipborne Automatic Identification
System (AIS)(SN/Circ.227), dated March
2, 2005.
M. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 5100.1
and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination
under the Instruction that this action is
not likely to have a significant effect on
the human environment. An
environmental analysis checklist
supporting this preliminary
determination is available in the docket
where indicated under the ‘‘Public
Participation and Request for
Comments’’ section of this preamble.
We seek any comments or information
that may lead to the discovery of a
significant environmental impact from
this proposed rule.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
List of Subjects
33 CFR Part 160
Administrative practice and
procedure, Harbors, Hazardous
materials transportation, Marine safety,
Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Vessels,
Waterways.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
33 CFR Part 161
Harbors, Navigation (water),
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Vessels, Waterways.
33 CFR Part 164
Marine safety, Navigation (water),
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Waterways.
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 proposes to
amend 33 CFR parts 160, 161, 164, and
165 to read as follows:
PART 160—PORTS AND WATERWAYS
SAFETY—GENERAL
Subpart C—Notification of Arrival and
Departure, Hazardous Conditions, and
Certain Dangerous Cargoes
1. The authority citation for part 160
is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1223, 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1. Subpart C is
also issued under the authority of 33 U.S.C.
1225 and 46 U.S.C. 3715.
2. Revise the heading to subpart C to
read as shown above.
§ 160.5
[Amended]
3. In § 160.5(d), remove the phrase
‘‘Commanding Officers, Vessel Traffic
Services’’ and add, in its place, the term
‘‘Vessel Traffic Services Director’’.
4. Revise § 160.201 to read as follows:
§ 160.201
General.
This subpart contains requirements
and procedures for submitting a notice
of arrival (NOA), a notice of departure
(NOD), and a notice of hazardous
condition. The sections in this subpart
describe:
(a) Applicability and exemptions from
requirements in this subpart;
(b) Required information in a NOA
and a NOD;
(c) Required updates to a NOA and a
NOD;
(d) Methods and times for submission
of a NOA and a NOD and updates to a
NOA and a NOD;
(e) How to obtain a waiver; and
(f) Requirements for submission of the
notice of hazardous condition.
§§ 160.202 through 160.204
[Redesignated]
5. Redesignate § 160.202 as § 160.203,
§ 160.203 as § 160.204, and § 160.204 as
§ 160.202, respectively.
6. In redesignated § 160.202, add
definitions, in alphabetical order, for
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
‘‘commercial service’’, ‘‘continental
United States’’, ‘‘disembark’’, ‘‘embark’’,
‘‘foreign vessel’’, ‘‘offshore supply
vessel’’, ‘‘oil spill response vessel’’,
‘‘passenger vessel’’, ‘‘recreational
vessel’’, and ‘‘towing vessels’’, and
revise the introductory text to read as
follows:
§ 160.202
Definitions.
Terms in this subpart that are not
defined in this section or in § 160.3 have
the same meaning as those terms in 46
U.S.C. 2101. As used in this subpart—
*
*
*
*
*
Commercial service means any type of
trade or business involving the
transportation of goods or individuals,
except service performed by a
combatant vessel.
Continental United States means the
contiguous 48 states, Alaska, and the
District of Columbia.
*
*
*
*
*
Disembark means when a
crewmember or a person in addition to
the crew is detached from the vessel.
Embark means when a crewmember
or a person in addition to the crew joins
the vessel.
Foreign vessel means a vessel of
foreign registry or operated under the
authority of a country except the United
States.
*
*
*
*
*
Offshore supply vessel means a motor
vessel of more than 15 gross tons but
less than 500 gross tons as measured
under 46 U.S.C. 14502, or an alternate
tonnage measured under 46 U.S.C.
14302 as prescribed by the Secretary
under 46 U.S.C. 14104 that regularly
carries goods, supplies, individuals in
addition to the crew, or equipment in
support of exploration, exploitation, or
production of offshore mineral or energy
resources.
Oil spill response vessel means a
vessel that is designated in its certificate
of inspection as such a vessel, or that is
adapted to respond to a discharge of oil
or a hazardous material.
*
*
*
*
*
Passenger vessel means a vessel of at
least 100 gross tons as measured under
46 U.S.C. 14502, or an alternate tonnage
measured under 46 U.S.C. 14302 as
prescribed by the Secretary under 46
U.S.C. 14104—
(1) Carrying more than 12 passengers,
including at least one passenger for hire;
(2) That is chartered and carrying
more than 12 passengers; or
(3) That is a submersible vessel
carrying at least one passenger for hire.
*
*
*
*
*
Recreational vessel means a vessel
being manufactured or operated
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
76313
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
primarily for pleasure; or leased, rented,
or chartered to another for the latter’s
pleasure.
*
*
*
*
*
Towing vessel means a commercial
vessel engaged in or intending to engage
in pulling, pushing, or hauling
alongside, or any combination of
pulling, pushing, or hauling alongside.
*
*
*
*
*
7. In redesignated § 160.203:
a. Revise paragraph (a);
b. Remove paragraph (b);
c. Redesignate paragraphs (c) and (d)
as paragraphs (b) and (c); and
d. In redesignated paragraph (c),
following the two places where the term
‘‘NOA’’ is used, add the phrase ‘‘or
NOD’’.
The revision reads as follows:
§ 160.203
Applicability.
(a) This subpart applies to U.S.
vessels in commercial service and all
foreign vessels that are bound for or
departing from ports or places of the
United States.
*
*
*
*
*
8. In redesignated § 160.204, lift the
suspension of paragraphs (d) and (e),
and revise § 160.204 to read as follows:
§ 160.204
Exemptions.
(a) Except for reporting notice of
hazardous conditions, the following
(vi) A U.S. vessel 300 gross tons or
less, engaged in commercial service not
coming from a foreign port or place.
(b) A vessel less than 500 gross tons
need not submit the International Safety
Management (ISM) Code Notice (Entry 7
in Table 160.206 of § 160.206).
(c) A U.S. vessel need not submit the
International Ship and Port Facility
Security (ISPS) Code Notice information
(Entry 8 in Table 160.206 of § 160.206).
9. Add § 160.205 to read as follows:
vessels are exempt from requirements in
this subpart:
(1) A passenger or offshore supply
vessel when employed in the
exploration for or in the removal of oil,
gas, or mineral resources on the
continental shelf.
(2) An oil spill response vessel
(OSRV) when engaged in actual spill
response operations or during spill
response exercises.
(3) A vessel required by 33 CFR
165.830 or 165.921 to report to the
Inland River Vessel Movement Center
(IRVMC).
(4) The following vessels neither
carrying certain dangerous cargo nor
controlling another vessel carrying
certain dangerous cargo:
(i) A foreign vessel 300 gross tons or
less not engaged in commercial service.
(ii) A vessel operating exclusively
within a single Captain of the Port Zone.
Captain of the Port zones are defined in
33 CFR part 3.
(iii) A U.S. towing vessel and a U.S.
barge operating solely between ports or
places of the continental United States.
(iv) A public vessel.
(v) Except for a tank vessel, a U.S.
vessel operating solely between ports or
places of the United States on the Great
Lakes.
§ 160.205
Notices of arrival and departure.
The owner, agent, master, operator, or
person in charge of a vessel must submit
notices of arrival and notices of
departure consistent with the
requirements in this subpart.
10. In § 160.206, lift the suspension of
item (8) in table in paragraph (a) and
revise § 160.206 to read as follows:
§ 160.206
Information required in a NOA.
(a) Information required. With the
exceptions noted in paragraph (b) of this
section, each NOA must contain all of
the information items specified in Table
160.206. Vessel owners and operators
should protect any personal information
they gather in preparing notices for
transmittal to the National Vessel
Movement Center (NVMC) so as to
prevent unauthorized disclosure of that
information.
TABLE 160.206—NOA INFORMATION ITEMS
Vessels neither carrying CDC
nor controlling another vessel
carrying CDC
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Required information
(1) Vessel Information:
(i) Name ............................................................................................................
(ii) Name of the registered owner ....................................................................
(iii) Country of registry ......................................................................................
(iv) Call sign ......................................................................................................
(v) International Maritime Organization (IMO) international number or, if vessel does not have an assigned IMO international number, substitute with
official number ...............................................................................................
(vi) Name of the operator .................................................................................
(vii) Name of charterer .....................................................................................
(viii) Name of classification society ..................................................................
(ix) Maritime Mobile Service Identity (MMSI) number, if applicable; and ........
(x) Whether the vessel is 300 gross tons or less (yes or no) .........................
(2) Voyage Information:
(i) Names of last five foreign ports or places visited .......................................
(ii) Dates of arrival and departure for last five foreign ports or places visited
(iii) For the port or place of the United States to be visited, list the name of
the receiving facility, the port or place, the city, and the state ....................
(iv) For the port or place of the United States to be visited, the estimated
date and time of arrival .................................................................................
(v) For the port or place in the United States to be visited, the estimated
date and time of departure ...........................................................................
(vi) The location (port or place and country) or position (latitude and longitude or waterway and mile marker) of the vessel at the time of reporting
(vii) The name and telephone number of a 24-hour point of contact ..............
(viii) Whether the vessel’s voyage time is less than 24 hours (yes or no) ......
(ix) Last Port of Call .........................................................................................
(x) Dates of arrival and departure for last port or place visited; and ...............
(xi) The estimated date and time of arrival to the entrance of the port, if applicable. List sea buoy, pilot station, or COLREGS demarcation line ..........
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Vessels carrying CDC or
controlling another vessel
carrying CDC
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
76314
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 160.206—NOA INFORMATION ITEMS—Continued
Vessels neither carrying CDC
nor controlling another vessel
carrying CDC
Note to Table 160.206. For items with
an asterisk (*), see paragraph (b) of this
section. Submitting a response for item
6 does not serve as notice to the District
Commander, Captain of the Port, or
Vessel Traffic Center, under 33 CFR
164.53 that navigation equipment is not
operating properly.
(b) Exceptions. If a crewmember or
person on board other than a
X
................................................
................................................
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
(3) Cargo Information:
(i) A general description of cargo, other than CDC, onboard the vessel (e.g.,
grain, container, oil, etc.) ..............................................................................
(ii) Name of each CDC carried, including cargo UN number, if applicable;
and ................................................................................................................
(iii) Amount of each CDC carried .....................................................................
(4) Information for each Crewmember Onboard:
(i) Full name .....................................................................................................
(ii) Date of birth .................................................................................................
(iii) Nationality ...................................................................................................
(iv) Passport* or mariner’s document number (type of identification and
number) .........................................................................................................
(v) Passport country of issuance*; and ............................................................
(vi) Passport date of expiration* .......................................................................
(vii) Position or duties on the vessel; and ........................................................
(viii) Where the crewmember embarked (list port or place and country) ........
(5) Information for each Person Onboard in Addition to Crew:
(i) Full name .....................................................................................................
(ii) Date of birth .................................................................................................
(iii) Nationality ...................................................................................................
(iv) Passport number* .......................................................................................
(v) Passport country of issuance* ....................................................................
(vi) Passport date of expiration;* and ...............................................................
(vii) Where the person embarked (list port or place and country) ...................
(6) Operational condition of equipment required by 33 CFR part 164 of this
chapter (see note to table):
(7) International Safety Management (ISM) Code Notice:
(i) The date of issuance for the company’s Document of Compliance certificate that covers the vessel ...........................................................................
(ii) The date of issuance for the vessel’s Safety Management Certificate;
and ................................................................................................................
(iii) The name of the Flag Administration, or the recognized organization(s)
representing the vessel Flag Administration, that issued those certificates
(8) International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (ISPS) Notice:
(i) The date of issuance for the vessel’s International Ship Security Certificate (ISSC), if any ........................................................................................
(ii) Whether the ISSC, if any, is an initial Interim ISSC, subsequent and consecutive Interim ISSC, or final ISSC ............................................................
(iii) Declaration that the approved ship security plan, if any, is being implemented ..........................................................................................................
(iv) If a subsequent and consecutive Interim ISSC, the reasons therefore .....
(v) The name and 24-hour contact information for the Company Security Officer; and .......................................................................................................
(vi) The name of the Flag Administration, or the recognized security organization(s) representing the vessel Flag Administration that issued the ISSC
Vessels carrying CDC or
controlling another vessel
carrying CDC
X
Required information
X
section, each NOD must contain all of
the information items specified in Table
160.207. Vessel owners and operators
should protect any personal information
they gather in preparing notices for
transmittal to the NVMC so as to
prevent unauthorized disclosure of that
information.
crewmember is not required to carry a
passport for travel, then passport
information required in Table 160.206
by items (4)(iv) through (vi), and (5) (iv)
through (vi), need not be provided for
that person.
11. Add § 160.207 to read as follows:
§ 160.207
Information required in a NOD.
(a) Information required. With the
exceptions noted in paragraph (b) of this
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
TABLE 160.207—NOD INFORMATION ITEMS
Required information
Vessels neither carrying CDC
nor controlling another vessel
carrying CDC
(1) Vessel Information:
(i) Name ..........................................................................................................
(ii) Name of the registered owner ..................................................................
X
X
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
Vessels either carrying CDC or
controlling another vessel
carrying CDC
X
X
16DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
76315
TABLE 160.207—NOD INFORMATION ITEMS—Continued
Vessels neither carrying CDC
nor controlling another vessel
carrying CDC
Required information
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(iii) Country of registry ....................................................................................
(iv) Call sign ....................................................................................................
(v) International Maritime Organization (IMO) international number or, if
vessel does not have an assigned IMO international number, substitute
with official number .....................................................................................
(vi) Name of the operator ...............................................................................
(vii) Name of charterer ...................................................................................
(viii) Name of classification society; and ........................................................
(ix) Maritime Mobile Service Identity (MMSI) number ....................................
Voyage Information:
(i) The name of departing port or place of the United States, the estimated
date and time of departure .........................................................................
(ii) Next port or place of call (including foreign), the estimated date and
time of arrival; and ......................................................................................
(iii) The name and telephone number of a 24-hour point of contact .............
Cargo Information:
(i) A general description of cargo, other than CDC, onboard the vessel
(e.g., grain, container, oil, etc.) ...................................................................
(ii) Name of each CDC carried, including cargo UN number, if applicable;
and ..............................................................................................................
(iii) Amount of each CDC carried ...................................................................
Information for each Crewmember Onboard:
(i) Full name ...................................................................................................
(ii) Date of birth ...............................................................................................
(iii) Nationality .................................................................................................
(iv) Passport* or mariner’s document number (type of identification and
number) .......................................................................................................
(v) Passport country of issuance* ..................................................................
(vi) Passport date of expiration* .....................................................................
(vii) Position or duties on the vessel; and ......................................................
(viii) Where the crewmember embarked (list port or place and country) ......
Information for each Person Onboard in Addition to Crew:
(i) Full name ...................................................................................................
(ii) Date of birth ...............................................................................................
(iii) Nationality .................................................................................................
(iv) Passport number* .....................................................................................
(v) Passport country of issuance* ..................................................................
(vi) Passport date of expiration* and ..............................................................
(vii) Where the person embarked (list port or place and country) .................
Note to Table 160.207. For items with
an asterisk (*), see paragraph (b) of this
section.
(b) Exceptions. If a crewmember or
person on board other than a
crewmember is not required to carry a
passport for travel, then passport
information required in Table 160.207
by items (4)(iv) through (vi), and (5) (iv)
through (vi), need not be provided for
that person.
12. In § 160.208, revise the section
heading and paragraphs (a) and (c) to
read as follows:
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
§ 160.208
NOD.
Updates to a submitted NOA or
(a) Unless otherwise specified in this
section, whenever events cause
submitted NOA and NOD information to
become inaccurate, vessels must submit
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
Vessels either carrying CDC or
controlling another vessel
carrying CDC
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
................................................
................................................
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
an update within the times required in
§§ 160.212 and 160.213.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) When reporting updates, revise
and resubmit the NOA or NOD.
13. In § 160.210, lift the suspensions
on the last sentence of paragraph (b), the
last sentence of paragraph (c), and
paragraph (d); and revise § 160.210 to
read as follows:
submission requirements of paragraph
(a) of this section by submitting the
required information to the Saint
Lawrence Seaway Development
Corporation and the Saint Lawrence
Seaway Management Corporation of
Canada via eNOAD using methods
specified at: https://www.nvmc.uscg.gov.
14. In § 160.212, lift the suspension of
paragraph (c), and revise § 160.212 to
read as follows:
§ 160.210 Methods for submitting a NOA
or a NOD.
(a) National Vessel Movement Center
(NVMC). Vessels must submit NOA and
NOD information required by
§§ 160.206 and 160.207 to the NVMC,
by electronic Notice of Arrival and
Departure (eNOAD) using methods
specified at: https://www.nvmc.uscg.gov.
(b) Saint Lawrence Seaway. Those
vessels transiting the Saint Lawrence
Seaway inbound, bound for a port or
place in the United States, may meet the
§ 160.212
(a) Submission of a NOA. (1) Except
as set out in paragraph (a)(2) and (a)(3)
of this section, all vessels must submit
NOAs within the times required in
paragraph (a)(4) of this section.
(2) Towing vessels, when in control of
a vessel carrying CDC and operating
solely between ports or places of the
continental United States, must submit
a NOA before departure but at least 12
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
When to submit a NOA.
16DEP1
76316
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
hours before arriving at the port or place
of destination.
(3) U.S. vessels 300 gross tons or less,
arriving from a foreign port or place,
and whose voyage time is less than 24
hours must submit a NOA at least 60
minutes before departure from the
foreign port or place.
(4) If your voyage time is—
Then you must submit a NOA—
(i) 96-hours or more; or.... ..................................
(ii) Less than 96-hours...... ..................................
At least 96-hours before arriving at the port or place of destination; or
Before departure but at least 24-hours before arriving at the port or place of destination.
(b) Submission of updates to a NOA.
(1) Except as set out in paragraphs (b)(2)
and (b)(3) of this section, vessels must
submit updates in NOA information
within the times required in paragraph
(b)(4) of this section.
(2) Towing vessels, when in control of
a vessel carrying CDC and operating
solely between ports or places in the
continental United States, must submit
updates to a NOA as soon as practicable
but at least 6 hours before entering the
port or place of destination.
(3) U.S. vessels 300 gross tons or less,
arriving from a foreign port or place,
whose voyage time is—
(i) Less than 24 hours but greater than
6 hours, must submit updates to a NOA
as soon as practicable, but at least 6
hours before entering the port or place
of destination.
(ii) Less than or equal to 6 hours, must
submit updates to a NOA as soon as
practicable, but at least 60 minutes
before departure from the foreign port or
place.
(4) Times for submitting updates to
NOAs are as follows:
If your remaining voyage time is—
Then you must submit updates to a NOA—
(i) 96-hours or more......... ...................................
(ii) Less than 96-hours but not less than 24hours; or..........
(iii) Less than 24-hours...... .................................
As soon as practicable, but at least 24-hours before arriving at the port or place of destination.
As soon as practicable, but at least 24-hours before arriving at the port or place of destination;
or
As soon as practicable, but at least 12-hours before arriving at the port or place of destination.
15. Add § 160.213 to read as follows:
§ 160.213
When to submit a NOD.
(a) Submission of a NOD. All vessels
must submit a NOD no later than 60
minutes before departure.
(b) Submission of updates to a NOD.
Vessels must submit updates in NOD
information as soon as practicable but
no later than 12 hours after departure.
§ 160.215
[Redesignated as § 160.216]
16. Redesignate § 160.215 as
§ 160.216, and add a new § 160.215 to
read as follows:
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
§ 160.215
Force majeure.
When a vessel is bound for a port or
place of the United States under force
majeure, it must comply with the
requirements in this section, but not
other sections of this subpart. The vessel
must report the following information to
the nearest Captain of the Port as soon
as practicable:
(a) The vessel master’s intentions;
(b) Any hazardous conditions as
defined in § 160.202; and
(c) If the vessel is carrying certain
dangerous cargo or controlling a vessel
carrying certain dangerous cargo, the
amount and name of each CDC carried,
including cargo UN number if
applicable.
PART 161—VESSEL TRAFFIC
MANAGEMENT
17. The authority citation for part 161
continues to read as follows:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1223, 1231; 46 U.S.C.
70114, 70117; Public Law 107–295, 116 Stat.
2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
18. In § 161.2, revise the term ‘‘VTS
User’’ to read as follows:
that provided by the required measure
or is a maneuver considered necessary
for safe navigation under the
circumstances.
§ 161.12
§ 161.2
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
VTS User means a vessel, or an
owner, operator, charterer, master, or
person directing the movement of a
vessel within a VTS area, that is:
(1) Subject to the Vessel Bridge-toBridge Radiotelephone Act;
(2) Required to participate in a VMRS;
or
(3) Equipped with a Coast Guard typeapproved Automatic Identification
System (AIS).
*
*
*
*
*
19. In § 161.5, revise paragraph (b) to
read as follows:
§ 161.5
Deviations from the rules.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Requests to deviate from any
provision in this part due to
circumstances that develop during a
transit or immediately preceding a
transit may be made to the appropriate
Vessel Traffic Center (VTC). Requests to
deviate must be made as far in advance
as practicable. Upon receipt of the
request, the VTC may authorize a
deviation if it is determined that, based
on vessel handling characteristics,
traffic density, radar contacts,
environmental conditions and other
relevant information, such a deviation
provides a level of safety equivalent to
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
[Amended]
20. In § 161.12(d)(5), remove the
section reference ‘‘§ 160.204’’ and add,
in its place, the section reference
‘‘§ 160.202’’.
21. In § 161.19, revise paragraph (f) to
read as follows:
§ 161.19
Sailing Plan
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Dangerous cargo on board or in its
tow, as defined in § 160.202 of this
chapter.
PART 164—NAVIGATION SAFETY
REGULATIONS
22. The authority citation for part 164
is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1222(5), 1223, 1231;
46 U.S.C. 2103, 3703; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
Sec. 164.13 also issued under 46 U.S.C. 8502.
Sec. 164.46 also issued under 46 U.S.C.
70114 and sec. 102 of Public Law 107–295.
Sec. 164.61 also issued under 46 U.S.C. 6101.
23. In § 164.02, revise the
introductory text of paragraph (a) to
read as follows:
§ 164.02 Applicability exception for foreign
vessels.
(a) Except for § 164.46(c), none of the
requirements of this part apply to
vessels that:
*
*
*
*
*
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
24. Revise § 164.03 to read as follows:
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
§ 164.03
Incorporation by reference.
(a) Certain material is incorporated by
reference into this part with the
approval of the Director of the Federal
Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1
CFR part 51. To enforce any edition
other than that specified in this section,
the Coast Guard must publish notice of
change in the Federal Register and the
material must be available to the public.
All approved material is available for
inspection at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For
more information on the availability of
this material at NARA, call 202–741–
6030, or go to: https://www.archives.gov/
federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
Also, it is available for inspection at the
Coast Guard, Office of Navigation
Systems (CG–5413), 2100 Second Street
SW., Washington, DC 20593–0001, and
is available from the sources listed
below.
(b) American Petroleum Institute
(API), 1220 L Street, NW., Washington,
DC 20005.
(1) API Specification 9A,
Specification for Wire Rope, Section 3,
Properties and Tests for Wire and Wire
Rope, May 28, 1984, IBR approved for
§ 164.74.
(2) [Reserved].
(c) American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM), 100 Bar Harbor
Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428–
2959.
(1) ASTM D4268–93, Standard Test
Method for Testing Fiber Ropes, IBR
approved for § 164.74.
(2) [Reserved].
(d) Cordage Institute, 350 Lincoln
Street, Hingham, MA 02043.
(1) CIA–3, Standard Test Methods for
Fiber Roper Including Standard
Terminations, Revised, June 1980, IBR
approved for 164.74.
(2) [Reserved].
(e) International Maritime
Organization (IMO), 4 Albert
Embankment, London SE1 7SR, U.K.
(1) IMO Resolution A342(IX),
Recommendation on Performance
Standards for Automatic Pilots,
November 12, 1975, IBR approved for
§ 164.13.
(2) IMO Resolution A.917(22),
Guidelines for the Onboard Operational
Use of Shipborne Automatic
Identification System (AIS), January 25,
2002, IBR approved for § 164.46.
(3) Resolution MSC.74(69), Annex 3,
Recommendation on Performance
Standards for a Universal Shipborne
Automatic Identification System (AIS),
May 12, 1998, IBR approved for
§ 164.46.
(4) SN/Circ. 227, Guidelines for the
Installation of a Shipborne Automatic
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
Identification System (AIS), January 6,
2003, IBR approved for § 164.46.
(5) SN/Circ.244, Guidance on the Use
of the UN/LOCODE in the Destination
Field in AIS Messages, December 15,
2004, IBR approved for § 164.46.
(6) SN/Circ.245, Amendments to the
Guidelines for the Installation of a
Shipborne Automatic Identification
System (AIS)(SN/Circ.227), March 2,
2005, IBR approved for § 164.46.
(7) SOLAS, International Convention
for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, and
1988 Protocol relating thereto, 2000
Amendments, effective January and July
2002, (SOLAS 2000 Amendments), IBR
approved for § 164.46.
(8) Conference resolution 1, Adoption
of amendments to the Annex to the
International Convention for the Safety
of Life at Sea, 1974, and amendments to
Chapter V of SOLAS 1974, adopted on
December 12, 2002, IBR approved for
§ 164.46.
(9) SN/Circ.236, Guidance on the
Application of AIS Binary Applications,
May 20, 2004, IBR approved for
§ 164.46.
(f) Radio Technical Commission for
Maritime Services (RTCM), 655
Fifteenth Street, NW., Suite 300,
Washington, DC 20005.
(1) RTCM Paper 12–78/DO–100,
Minimum Performance Standards,
Loran C Receiving Equipment, 1977,
IBR approved for § 164.41.
(2) RTCM Paper 71–95/SC112–STD,
RTCM Recommended Standards for
Marine Radar Equipment Installed on
Ships of Less Than 300 Tons Gross
Tonnage, Version 1.1, October 10, 1995,
IBR approved for § 164.72.
(3) RTCM Paper 191–93/SC112–X,
RTCM Recommended Standards for
Maritime Radar Equipment Installed on
Ships of 300 Tons Gross Tonnage and
Upwards, Version 1.2, December 20,
1993, IBR approved for § 164.72.
§ 164.43
[Removed]
25. Remove § 164.43.
26. Revise § 164.46 to read as follows:
§ 164.46
Automatic Identification System.
(a) Definitions. As used in this
section—
Automatic Identification Systems or
AIS means a maritime navigation safety
communications system standardized
by the International Telecommunication
Union (ITU), adopted by the
International Maritime Organization
(IMO), that—
(1) Provides vessel information,
including the vessel’s identity, type,
position, course, speed, navigational
status and other safety-related
information automatically to
appropriately equipped shore stations,
other ships, and aircraft;
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
76317
(2) Receives automatically such
information from similarly fitted ships;
monitors and tracks ships; and
(3) Exchanges data with shore-based
facilities.
Gross tonnage means tonnage as
defined under the International
Convention on Tonnage Measurement of
Ships, 1969.
International voyage means a voyage
from a country to which the present
International Convention for the Safety
of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974 applies to
a port outside such country, or
conversely.
Properly installed, operational means
an Automatic Identification System
(AIS) that is installed and operated
using the guidelines set forth by the
International Maritime Organization
(IMO) Safety of Navigation Circulars
(SN/Circ.) 227, 236, 244, and 245, and
Resolution A.917(22)(Incorporated by
reference, see § 164.03).
(b) AIS carriage. The following vessels
must have onboard a properly installed,
operational, Coast Guard type-approved
Automatic Identification System (AIS):
(1) A self-propelled vessel of 65 feet
or more in length, engaged in
commercial service;
(2) A towing vessel of 26 feet or more
in length and more than 600
horsepower, engaged in commercial
towing;
(3) A self-propelled vessel carrying 50
or more passengers, engaged in
commercial service;
(4) A vessel carrying more than 12
passengers for hire and capable of
speeds in excess of 30 knots;
(5) A dredge or floating plant engaged
in or near a commercial channel or
shipping fairway in operations likely to
restrict or affect navigation of other
vessels except for an unmanned or
intermittently manned floating plant
under the control of a dredge; and
(6) A self-propelled vessel carrying or
engaged in the movement of certain
dangerous cargoes as defined in
§ 160.202 of this subchapter.
Note to paragraph (b): Except for those
vessels denoted in paragraph (c) of this
section, use of Coast Guard type-approved
AIS Class B is permissible, however, not
well-suited, on vessels that are highly
maneuverable, navigate at high speed, or
routinely operate on or near very congested
waterways or in close-quarter situations with
other AIS equipped vessels.
(c) SOLAS provisions. The following
self-propelled vessels must comply with
International Convention for Safety of
Life at Sea (SOLAS), as amended,
Chapter V, regulation 19.2.1.6, 19.2.4
(AIS Class A), and 19.2.3.5 or 19.2.5.1
as applicable (Incorporated by reference,
see § 164.03):
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
76318
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules
(1) A vessel of 500 gross tonnage or
more;
(2) A vessel of 300 gross tonnage or
more, on an international voyage; and
(3) A vessel of 150 gross tonnage or
more, when carrying more than 12
passengers on an international voyage.
(d) Operations. The requirements in
this paragraph are applicable to any
vessel equipped with AIS.
(1) Use of AIS does not relieve the
vessel of the requirements to sound
whistle signals or display lights or
shapes in accordance with the
International Regulations for Preventing
Collisions at Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS),
28 U.S.T. 3459, T.I.A.S. 8587, or Inland
Navigation Rules, 33 U.S.C. 2001
through 2073; nor of the radio
requirements of the Vessel Bridge-toBridge Radiotelephone Act, 33 U.S.C.
1201–1208, part 26 of this chapter, and
47 CFR part 80.
(2) AIS must be maintained in
effective operating conditions which
includes the:
(i) Ability to reinitialize the AIS
should the need arise (this could require
access and knowledge of the AIS power
source and password);
(ii) Ability to access AIS information
from the primary conning position of
the vessel;
(iii) Accurate broadcast of a properly
assigned Maritime Mobile Service
Identity (MMSI) number;
(iv) Accurate input and upkeep of all
AIS data and system updates; and
(v) Continual operation of AIS, and its
associated devices (e.g., GPS, gyro,
converters), at all times the vessel is
underway, at anchor, or moored in or
near a commercial channel or shipping
fairway in operations likely to restrict or
affect navigation of other vessels,
except—
(A) When use of AIS would
compromise the safety or security of the
vessel or a security incident is
imminent.
(B) The AIS should be returned to
continuous operation as soon as the
compromise has been mitigated or the
security incident has passed. At that
time, those vessels denoted in paragraph
(b), must report to the nearest U.S.
Captain of the Port or Vessel Traffic
Center, and record in the ship’s official
log, the AIS operational interruption
and the reason for the interruption.
(3) AIS messaging must be conducted
in English and solely to exchange or
communicate navigation safety
information (for example, SECURITE).
Although not prohibited, it should not
be relied upon as the primary means for
broadcasting distress or urgent
communications (for example,
MAYDAY or PAN PAN). (47 CFR
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
80.1109, Distress, urgency, and safety
communications).
Note to paragraph (d): AIS devices must be
able to broadcast vessel position, course, and
speed, and may require the input of an
external positioning device (e.g., DGPS) to do
so. Although of great benefit, the integration
of existing, or installation of, other external
devices or displays (e.g., transmitting
heading device, gyro, rate of turn indicator,
ECDIS/ECS, and radar) is highly
recommended but is not currently required
except as denoted in § 164.46(c).
(e) Watchkeeping. AIS is primarily
intended for use of the master or person
in charge of the vessel, or the person
designated by the master or person in
charge to pilot or direct the movement
of the vessel, who must maintain a
periodic watch for AIS information.
(f) Portable AIS. The use of a portable
AIS is permissible only to the extent
that electromagnetic interference does
not affect the proper function of existing
navigation and communication
equipment on board and such that only
one AIS unit may be in operation at any
one time.
(g) Pilot Port. The AIS Pilot Port, on
any vessel subject to pilotage, must be
readily available and easily accessible
from the primary conning position of
the vessel and within at least 3 feet of
a 120-volt 50/60 Hz AC power
receptacle.
(h) Exceptions. Only those vessels
that operate solely within a very
confined area (e.g., less than a one
nautical-mile radius, shipyard, fleeting
area), or on short and fixed schedules
(e.g., a bank-to-bank river ferry service),
or that otherwise are not likely to
encounter another AIS equipped vessel,
may request a yearly deviation from this
section as set forth in § 164.55.
(i) Implementation date. Those
vessels identified in paragraph (b) of
this section that were not previously
subject to AIS carriage must install AIS
no later than [date of the first day of the
seventh month after publication of the
final rule to be inserted].
§ 164.53
[Amended]
27. In § 164.53(b), following the word
‘‘vessel’s’’, add the phrase ‘‘automatic
identification system (AIS),’’.
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
28. The authority citation for part 165
is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 50 U.S.C.
191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6,
and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
§ 165.1704
[Amended]
29. In § 165.1704, in paragraph (c)(4),
following the punctuation mark ‘‘;’’, add
the word ‘‘and’’; in paragraph (c)(5),
following the term ‘‘6 knots’’, remove ‘‘;
and’’ and add, in their place, the
punctuation mark ‘‘.’’; and remove
paragraph (c)(6).
Dated: December 2, 2008.
Thad W. Allen,
Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commandant.
[FR Doc. E8–29698 Filed 12–11–08; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management
Agency
44 CFR Part 67
[Docket No. FEMA–B–1024]
Proposed Flood Elevation
Determinations
AGENCY: Federal Emergency
Management Agency, DHS.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: Comments are requested on
the proposed Base (1 percent annualchance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) and
proposed BFE modifications for the
communities listed in the table below.
The purpose of this notice is to seek
general information and comment
regarding the proposed regulatory flood
elevations for the reach described by the
downstream and upstream locations in
the table below. The BFEs and modified
BFEs are a part of the floodplain
management measures that the
community is required either to adopt
or show evidence of having in effect in
order to qualify or remain qualified for
participation in the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition,
these elevations, once finalized, will be
used by insurance agents, and others to
calculate appropriate flood insurance
premium rates for new buildings and
the contents in those buildings.
DATES: Comments are to be submitted
on or before March 16, 2009.
ADDRESSES: The corresponding
preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map
(FIRM) for the proposed BFEs for each
community are available for inspection
at the community’s map repository. The
respective addresses are listed in the
table below.
You may submit comments, identified
by Docket No. FEMA–B–1024, to
William R. Blanton, Jr., Chief,
Engineering Management Branch,
Mitigation Directorate, Federal
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 76295-76318]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-29698]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Parts 160, 161, 164, and 165
[USCG-2005-21869]
RIN 1625-AA99
Vessel Requirements for Notices of Arrival and Departure, and
Automatic Identification System
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to expand the applicability of
notice of arrival and departure (NOAD) and automatic identification
system (AIS) requirements to more commercial vessels. This proposed
rule would expand the applicability of notice of arrival (NOA)
requirements to additional vessels, establish a separate requirement
for certain vessels to submit notices of departure (NOD), set forth a
mandatory method for electronic submission of NOA and NOD, and modify
related reporting content, timeframes, and procedures. This proposed
rule would also expand the applicability of AIS requirements, beyond
Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) areas, to all U.S. navigable waters and
require AIS carriage for additional commercial vessels. These proposed
changes would improve navigation safety, enhance the Coast Guard's
ability to identify and track vessels, heighten our overall maritime
domain awareness, and thus help us address threats to maritime
transportation safety and security and mitigate the possible harm from
such threats.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Docket Management
Facility on or before April 15, 2009. Comments sent to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) on collection of information must reach OMB
on or before April 15, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number USCG-2005-21869 to the Docket Management Facility at the U.S.
Department of Transportation. To avoid duplication, please use only one
of the following methods:
Online: https://www.regulations.gov.
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.
Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is 202-366-9329.
Fax: 202-493-2251.
You must also send comments on collection of information discussed
in the Paperwork Reduction Act section of this NPRM (VI. D.) 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 oira_submission@omb.eop.gov (the subject line of
the e-mail must include the docket number and Attention: Desk Officer
for Coast Guard, DHS) or by fax at 202-395-6566. 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 1409, U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20593-0001 between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is
202-372-1563. 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 the NOAD
portion of this proposed rule, contact Lieutenant Sharmine Jones,
Office of Vessel Activities (CG-543), Coast Guard,
Sharmine.N.Jones@uscg.mil, telephone 202-372-1234. If you have
questions on the AIS portion of this proposed rule, contact Mr. Jorge
Arroyo, Office of Navigation Systems (CG-5413), Coast Guard,
Jorge.Arroyo@uscg.mil, telephone 202-372-1563. If you have questions on
viewing material in the docket, call Ms. Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents for Preamble
I. Public Participation and Request for Comments
A. Submitting Comments
B. Viewing Comments and Documents
C. Privacy Act
D. Public Meeting
II. Background and Purpose
A. Threat to the Marine Transportation System
B. Notice of Arrival and Departure
C. Automatic Identification System
D. AIS Displays and Integration
E. Maritime Domain Awareness
F. Nationwide AIS
III. Regulatory History
A. Notice of Arrival
B. Automatic Identification System
C. Expansion of AIS Carriage
IV. Discussion of Comments Received on Expansion of AIS Carriage
A. Need for AIS and Scope of Availability
B. Reason AIS Requirement Was Not Expanded to All Vessels
C. Use of AIS Class B Devices
D. Deviation From AIS Requirements
E. Relation of Coast Guard AIS Receiving Infrastructure to
Requirement for AIS in All Waters
V. Discussion of Proposed Rule
A. NOAD Revisions
B. AIS Revisions
C. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Regulatory Analysis
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Small Entities
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
Table of Abbreviations and Acronyms
AC Alternating Current
AIS Automatic Identification System
AOR Area of Responsibility
API American Petroleum Institute
APIS Advance Passenger Information System
ARPA Advanced Radar Plotting Aid
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
CBP U.S. Customs and Border Protection
CDC Certain Dangerous Cargo
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COP Common Operating Picture
COTP Captain of the Port
CSTDMA Carrier-sense Time Division Multiple Access
DGPS Differential Global Positioning System
[[Page 76296]]
DHS U.S. Department of Homeland Security
ECDIS Electronic Chart Display and Information System
ECS Electronic Chart System
eNOAD Electronic Notice of Arrival and Departure
FCC Federal Communications Commission
GPS Global Positioning System
GT Gross Registered Tons
IEC International Electrotechnical Commission
IMO International Maritime Organization
IRVMC Inland River Vessel Movement Center
ISM International Safety Management
ISPS International Ship and Port Facility Security
ISSC International Ship Security Certificate
ITU International Telecommunications Union
MDA Maritime Domain Awareness
MISLE Marine Information for Safety and Law Enforcement
MKD Minimal Keyboard Display
MMSI Maritime Mobile Service Identity
MTS Marine Transportation System
MTSA Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NAIS Nationwide Automatic Identification System
NARA National Archives and Records Administration
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
NOA Notice of Arrival
NOAD Notice of Arrival and Departure
NOD Notice of Departure
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
NVMC National Vessel Movement Center
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OSRV Oil Spill Response Vessel
PV Present Value
PWSA Ports and Waterways Safety Act
RA Regulatory Assessment
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RTCM Radio Technical Commission for Maritime Services
SBA Small Business Administration
SCC Sector Command Center
SOLAS International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea
U.S.C. United States Code
USCS United States Customs Service
VSL Value of Statistical Life
VTC Vessel Traffic Center
VTS Vessel Traffic Service
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 to use the Docket Management Facility.
A. Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2005-21869), 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, click on ``Search for Dockets,'' and enter the docket number
for this rulemaking (USCG-2005-21869) in the Docket ID box, and click
enter. If you do not have access to the internet, you may view the
docket online by visiting the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-
140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation 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 a Privacy Act, system of
records notice regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008
issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
D. Public Meeting
We plan to hold one public meeting in Washington, DC. The date,
time, and location will be announced by a later notice in the Federal
Register. You may submit a request for additional public meetings under
ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that
additional public meetings would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one
or more at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal
Register.
II. Background and Purpose
This section discusses threats to the maritime transportation
system, and provides background information on the elements of notice
of arrival and departure (NOAD) and the automatic identification system
(AIS). This section also discusses maritime domain awareness, the
Nationwide AIS project, and the role NOAD and AIS will play in
increasing our understanding of the maritime domain.
A. Threat to the Marine Transportation System
A terrorist attack against the U.S. marine transportation system
(MTS) has the potential to inflict a disastrous impact on global
shipping, international trade, and the world economy. Waterborne
commerce enters the United States through more than 360 ports,
transiting over 26,000 miles of commercially navigable waterways,
carried by more than 8,000 foreign vessels, making more than 50,000
port calls a year. Over six million cruise ship passengers travel
annually from U.S. ports, and domestic ferries transport over 180
million passengers annually. At any given time, we estimate that over
5,000 commercial vessels are within 2,000 nautical miles or 96 hours of
our shores.
Threats to our MTS can come from a variety of scenarios. Use of
explosive-laden small boats to attack larger vessels to cause injury
and loss of life has already been demonstrated in the cases of the USS
COLE and the MT LIMBURG. The use of an explosive device on a commercial
ferry was also demonstrated when, in August 2005, several persons were
killed and dozens of others were injured after a bomb exploded on the
M/V DONA RAMONA in the Philippines. Other possible terrorist scenarios
include use of maritime transportation routes to smuggle weapons of
mass destruction or terrorists into the United States. In December
1999, a person planning to bomb the Los Angeles International Airport
was arrested at Port Angeles, WA, after he got off a ferry arriving
from Canada and customs agents discovered explosives in the trunk of
his car. The large geographic area that is occupied by U.S. waterways,
combined with the high volume of commercial and recreational
[[Page 76297]]
vessel traffic on those waterways, presents enormous challenges for
preventing terrorist incidents.
The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, along with maritime-
related terrorist events listed in the paragraph above, call attention
to the vulnerability of the United States to potential terrorist
attacks. U.S. waterways and ports present both vulnerable and
attractive targets, as well as a means of transportation for
terrorists. The Coast Guard, working with other international,
national, State, and local agencies, has acted to identify and counter
the threat to our MTS. In an effort to ensure that we make the most
cost-effective use of our resources and funding, we have identified the
need for a comprehensive knowledge and understanding of all activities
in our maritime domain as key to preventing a terrorist attack.
B. Notice of Arrival and Departure
Under 33 CFR part 160, owners, agents, masters, operators, or
persons in charge of vessels must file notices of arrival (NOA) before
such vessels enter a U.S. port. The Coast Guard's NOA requirements had
been in effect for decades before the terrorist attacks of 9/11.
Vessels over 300 gross tons submitted pre-arrival notices directly to
the applicable arriving port only 24 hours in advance. On October 4,
2001, the Coast Guard published a temporary final rule under the
authority of the Ports and Waterways Safety Act (PWSA) (33 U.S.C. 1221-
1232), increasing the submission time for a notice of arrival (NOA)
from 24 to 96 hours prior to arriving at a U.S. port or place; required
centralized submissions of this information to the National Vessel
Movement Center (NVMC); temporarily suspended exemptions from reporting
requirements for some groups of vessels; and required submission of
passenger, crew, and cargo information. See 66 FR 50565 (Oct. 4, 2001).
The information in notices of arrival provides the Coast Guard with
valuable data for screening vessels for safety and security purposes.
We have no current regulation in place, however, to capture vessel,
crew, passenger, or specific cargo information on vessels 300 gross
tons or less intending to arrive at or depart from U.S. ports or places
unless they are arriving with certain dangerous cargo (CDC) or are
arriving at a port or place in the Seventh Coast Guard District--which
includes South Carolina, most of Georgia and Florida, and the island
possessions of the United States pertaining to Puerto Rico and the
Virgin Islands. See 33 CFR 160.203(b)(1) and 160.210(c). This proposed
rule would expand the applicability for NOADs to further enhance
homeland security by increasing our awareness of vessels and people
entering or departing U.S. ports or places.
We propose to eliminate the current 300-gross-tons threshold
exception and to require NOADs from all foreign commercial vessels
departing to or coming from a port or place in the United States and
all U.S. commercial vessels coming to a U.S. port or place from a
foreign port. Requiring more vessels to report a NOAD will allow the
Coast Guard to screen more vessels for safety and security purposes
well in advance of an arrival, thereby enhancing the safety and
security of our ports and waterways.
C. Automatic Identification System
Section 102 of the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002
(MTSA), Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064, mandates that automatic
identification systems (AIS) be installed and operating on most
commercial vessels on navigable waters of the United States. See 46
U.S.C. 70114.
AIS automatically broadcasts dynamic, static, and voyage-related
vessel information that is received by other AIS-equipped stations. AIS
has achieved acceptance through worldwide adoption of performance and
technical standards developed by diverse international bodies, such as
the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the International
Telecommunications Union (ITU), and the International Electrotechnical
Commission (IEC), that ensure commonality, universality, and
interoperability. Further, installation of such equipment is required
on vessels subject to the International Convention for the Safety of
Life at Sea, 1974, (SOLAS), as amended. See specifically SOLAS, Chapter
V, regulation 19.2.4. https://www.navcen.uscg.gov/enav/ais/
SOLAS.V.19.2.1-5.pdf.
In ship-to-ship mode, AIS provides essential information to other
vessels, such as name, position, course, and speed, that is not readily
available on board vessels. In the ship-to-shore mode, AIS allows for
the efficient exchange of vessel traffic information that previously
was only available via voice communications with a VTS. In either mode,
AIS enhances the mariner's situational awareness, makes possible the
accurate exchange of navigational information, mitigates the risk of
collision through reliable passing arrangements, facilitates vessel
traffic management while simultaneously reducing voice radiotelephone
transmissions, and enhances maritime domain awareness (MDA).
For further information and background on AIS, see 68 FR 39353,
39355 (July 1, 2003); 68 FR 60559, 60560 (Oct. 22, 2003); or visit
https://www.navcen.uscg.gov/enav.
D. AIS Displays and Integration
Shipboard AIS devices are divided into two classes. AIS Class A
devices come with a minimal keyboard display (MKD) that allows the user
to input AIS information (e.g., vessel identity, dimensions, navigation
status, and antenna location) and to access all information received
from other devices. AIS Class B devices require this input to be pre-
programmed into the device. For further discussion of AIS Class A and
Class B, their differences and similarities, see Section IV, Discussion
of Comments below. Both types of shipboard AIS allow multiple input-
output and display (presentation) options that facilitate using or
integrating AIS data on other navigational systems, such as radar,
Advanced Radar Plotting Aid (ARPA), Electronic Chart Display and
Information System (ECDIS), and Electronic Chart System (ECS).
The greatest benefits of AIS will be achieved by its widest use,
both by the number of vessels that use it and its integration and
synergy with other shipboard systems. Although we encourage full
integration of AIS with all navigation systems, this proposed rule
would not require such integration because of the current limited
availability of type-approved equipment that can readily and reliably
integrate AIS and these other systems (e.g., ECDIS, ARPA, radar, and
chart plotters). We caution mariners who seek to integrate the
equipment on their own, particularly on non type-approved equipment.
This view is also set forth in recommendations by the Transportation
Research Board's ``Special Report 272, Shipboard Automatic
Identification System: Meeting the Needs of the Mariners''; see https://
fermat.nap.edu/catalog/10708.html.
The Conference Report accompanying the Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-293) states ``[we] should
require the AIS system information to be integrated with the electronic
chart display.'' See H. Conf. Rep. No. 108-617, at 82 (July 20, 2004).
Section 410 of this Act mandates that electronic charts be installed
and operational on basically the same vessel population mandated to
have AIS under the MTSA. The Coast Guard expects to implement this
electronic chart mandate and address
[[Page 76298]]
the display of AIS on electronic charts through a separate rulemaking.
E. Maritime Domain Awareness
In October 2005, the National Security Council and Homeland
Security Council jointly published ``The National Plan to Achieve
Maritime Domain Awareness,'' (available at https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/
assets/HSPD_MDAPlan.pdf), a collaborative inter-agency effort in
support of the National Strategy for Maritime Security. This plan
defines MDA as the effective understanding of anything associated with
the global maritime domain that could impact the security, safety,
economy, or environment of the United States. The Plan also identifies
MDA as a key component of an active, layered maritime defense in
depth--expanding maritime boundaries.
MDA involves both the process of receiving and analyzing data as
well as the system of technology that facilitates this process. To
maximize the employment of our resources, MDA, among other things,
requires monitoring and tracking vessels, cargo, and people. Cold War
legacy data collection capabilities must be integrated with current and
emerging capabilities and systems to provide near real-time awareness
of maritime threats.
Our primary method for collecting AIS information will be the
Nationwide Automatic Identification System (NAIS) network. These data
will be used in conjunction with the national maritime common operating
picture (COP). The COP is a near real-time information grid that will
be shared by all U.S. Federal, State, and local agencies with maritime
interests and responsibilities. COP data will be accessible to all
users, except when limited by security restrictions, policy, or
regulations.
NOAD, NAIS, and AIS, when employed together, provide a major
portion of the information needed for MDA. AIS provides real-time
information on vessels that can be correlated with NOAD data to enable
us to track vessel movements in or bound for U.S. waters via NAIS COP.
Expanding NOAD and AIS applicability broadens our sources of
information and enhances MDA. The combined NOAD and AIS information is
one critical element in the overall MDA process, along with data
collected from other various maritime and maritime-related sources.
These data streams will form part of the COP and will also then be
reviewed by analysts to identify vessels, persons, and activities that
might be suspect through a process known as anomaly detection.
Anomaly detection assists us in the early identification of
possible terrorist or other suspicious activities, which in turn allows
us to take appropriate preventive measures to protect public safety and
economic security. This enhanced MDA would improve our ability to
prevent and respond to terrorist attacks.
The greater synergy of NOAD and AIS is realized when they are
combined to provide a comprehensive picture of the maritime domain. The
COP uses input from various sources to provide both a visual display of
ship movements as well as a display of each vessel's accompanying
information.
The intent of the system is to allow the Coast Guard to review the
different data elements against one another to detect anomalies. For
example, a Coast Guard unit may identify a vessel prepared to enter a
U.S. harbor. The Coast Guard unit could call up that vessel's
information and review its destination. At that time, the Coast Guard
would review the vessel's notice of arrival (NOA) and may observe that
the vessel has reported it is bound for the container docks. Later, the
AIS broadcast may indicate that the vessel did not maneuver to turn
down the channel to the container docks as expected and is instead
proceeding on a collision course with a major marine transportation
infrastructure on the other side of the harbor. In this example, the
comparison of different data sources would have allowed the Coast Guard
to recognize this anomaly in reported data, to deploy the necessary
resources, and to notify the surrounding infrastructure.
This is just one of many scenarios that fuse NOAD and AIS data to
ensure maritime traffic is being monitored and evaluated.
F. Nationwide AIS
In response to a Congressional mandate in 46 U.S.C. 70113(a),
emerging homeland security requirements, and the need to improve
navigational safety, the Coast Guard initiated the Nationwide AIS
(NAIS) project: a major Federal acquisition project to collect,
aggregate, and share information concerning AIS equipped vessels
operating on or bound for waters subject to the jurisdiction of the
United States. NAIS will consist of an integrated system of AIS
equipment (e.g., base station radios, antennas), data storage,
processing, and networking infrastructure. NAIS will also be integrated
with other systems for the purpose of sharing infrastructure and
improving NAIS' overall performance.
NAIS will process (e.g., validate and filter) and store AIS data
and make these data available for use by other existing operational
systems (e.g., COP, Sector Command Center (SCC), Marine Information for
Safety and Law Enforcement (MISLE), and VTS). It is expected that these
other systems will provide data processing functions (e.g., vessel
tracking correlation, information processing, traffic analysis, and
anomaly detection) and user interfaces necessary to take full advantage
of AIS data exchange functionality. NAIS information will be displayed
in the Coast Guard's national maritime COP and shared--along with
correlated data and intelligence, as appropriate--with other entities.
Access to these NAIS data by other authorized governmental entities is
intended to enhance maritime safety and security and promote
interagency cooperation. Portions of the COP will also be available to
local port partners in support of local security and safety operations.
Some users of NAIS capabilities (e.g., U.S. Coast Guard units, other
governmental entities, and strategic port partners) may indirectly
access AIS data via other systems. Having such near real-time
information of vessels' identity, location, and cargo will be
invaluable.
NAIS will be deployed regionally and incrementally. As of the end
of September 2008, AIS-receive coverage has been established in 58
major ports and 16 critical coastal areas across the nation under
Increment One of the NAIS project. All Coast Guard Sectors have at
least one AIS receiver site within their Area of Responsibility (AOR)
and also have the capability to view AIS vessel tracks outside their
AOR (e.g., for an adjacent CG Sector or nationwide) via the maritime
COP. Increment Two will expand our detection and surveillance
nationwide and add AIS transmit capability out to 24 nautical miles.
Finally, Increment Three will provide AIS detection and surveillance
capability out to 2,000 nautical miles. NAIS full operational
capability (i.e., AIS long range detection, system integration, data
processing and sharing, etc.) is anticipated to be achieved by 2014.
III. Regulatory History
Since the tragic events of September 11, 2001, the Coast Guard has
modified the NOA requirements for vessels numerous times and
implemented SOLAS AIS regulations and carriage requirements for AIS in
VTS waters. The summary below describes this evolution of NOA and AIS
regulations since 2001 and provides background intended to assist the
reader as we later describe existing regulations we are seeking to
revise through this proposed
[[Page 76299]]
rule. The summary compiles Federal Register citations in tables and
presents them in chronological order to assist those who seek to review
these past rulemaking documents or notices.
A. Notice of Arrival
On October 4, 2001, we published a temporary final rule entitled
``Temporary Requirements for Notification of Arrival in U.S. Ports'' in
the Federal Register. See 66 FR 50565. As noted previously, that
temporary rule increased the submission time for a NOA from 24 to 96
hours prior to arriving at a U.S. port or place; required centralized
submissions; temporarily suspended exemptions from reporting
requirements for some groups of vessels; and required submission of
passenger, crew, and cargo information. We extended the effective
period of that temporary rule to allow us to complete a rulemaking for
permanent changes. See 67 FR 37682 (May 30, 2002) and 67 FR 55115 (Aug.
28, 2002).
Following a notice of proposed rulemaking published June 19, 2002,
we published a final rule on February 28, 2003, that replaced temporary
regulations and revised NOA requirements in 33 CFR part 160 by
consolidating the notice of departure (NOD) into the NOA, requiring
electronic submission of cargo manifest information to the then United
States Customs Service (USCS), and requiring additional crew and
passenger information. See 67 FR 41659 and 68 FR 9537.
On May 22, 2003, after consultation with U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP), we suspended the NOA requirement for electronic
submission of cargo manifest information (Customs Form 1302) pending
further CBP regulatory action under then-recent legislation, including
the Trade Act of 2002. See 68 FR 27907.
On August 18, 2004, we published a temporary final rule with
request for comment that changed the definition of CDC to include
ammonium nitrate and certain ammonium nitrate based fertilizers, in
bulk, as well as propylene oxide, alone or mixed with ethylene oxide,
in bulk. That temporary final rule also allowed vessels to submit
notices of arrival electronically; in this rulemaking, we propose to
make electronic methods of submission mandatory. See 69 FR 51176. On
December 16, 2005, we published an interim rule with a request for
comments that adopted the temporary final rule's definition of
``certain dangerous cargo'' to include (1) ammonium nitrate, in bulk;
(2) ammonium nitrate based fertilizers, in bulk; and (3) propylene
oxide, alone or mixed with ethylene oxide, in bulk, as well as adding
an option for vessels to submit notices of arrival electronically. See
70 FR 74663. That interim rule is part of a separate rulemaking focused
on CDC.
Table 1 lists NOA rulemaking documents discussed above and
associated corrections.
Table 1--NOA Rulemakings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Action FR cite Title of rule [Docket No.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10/04/2001....................... Temporary final rule..... 66 FR 50565........ Temporary Requirements for
Notification of Arrival in
U.S. Ports [USCG-2001-
10689].
11/19/2001....................... Temporary final rule; 66 FR 57877........ Do.
request for comments;
correction.
01/18/2002....................... Temporary final rule; 67 FR 2571......... Do.
request for comments;
correction.
05/30/2002....................... Temporary rule; change of 67 FR 37682........ Do.
effective date.
06/19/2002....................... Notice of proposed 67 FR 41659........ Notification of Arrival in
rulemaking. U.S. Ports [USCG-2001-
11865].
08/28/2002....................... Temporary rule; change of 67 FR 55115........ Temporary Requirements for
effective date. Notification of Arrival in
U.S. Ports [USCG-2001-
10689].
02/28/2003....................... Final rule............... 68 FR 9537......... Notification of Arrival in
U.S. Ports [USCG-2002-
11865].
05/22/2003....................... Final rule; partial 68 FR 27907........ Do.
suspension of regulation.
08/18/2004....................... Temporary final rule; 69 FR 51176........ Notification of Arrival in
request for comments. U.S. Ports; Certain
Dangerous Cargoes;
Electronic Submission [USCG-
2003-16688].
12/16/2005....................... Interim rule; request for 70 FR 74663........ Notification of Arrival in
comments. U.S. Ports; Certain
Dangerous Cargoes;
Electronic Submission [USCG-
2005-19963].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Automatic Identification System
On July 1, 2003, we published a temporary interim rule with a
request for comments and notice of public meeting titled ``Automatic
Identification System; Vessel Carriage Requirement'' in the Federal
Register. See 68 FR 39353. That temporary interim rule was one of six
Coast Guard maritime security rules published July 1, 2003, in response
to the MTSA. The interim rule implemented AIS requirements under MTSA
and SOLAS, and required AIS on all vessels subject to SOLAS AIS
provisions, Vessel Traffic Service Users and certain other commercial
vessels identified in the MTSA.
On October 22, 2003, we published a final rule which adopted, with
changes, the requirements of the AIS temporary interim rule. The major
changes were to adopt a uniform U.S. implementation date of December
31, 2004, and to not require AIS on certain fishing and passenger
vessels. See 68 FR 60559 and 60562.
Table 2 lists the two AIS rulemaking documents discussed above and
a correction document.
Table 2--Automatic Identification System; Vessel Carriage Requirement
[USCG-2003-14757]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Action FR cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
07/01/2003.................. Temporary interim 68 FR 39353.
rule with request
for comments and
notice of meeting.
[[Page 76300]]
07/16/2003.................. Correcting 68 FR 41913.
amendments.
10/22/2003.................. Final rule.......... 68 FR 6055.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Expansion of AIS Carriage
On the same date the AIS temporary interim rule was published, we
published a notice in the Federal Register posing eight questions and
requesting comments on how best to address implementation beyond the
then-published AIS regulations. See 68 FR 39369 (July 1, 2003). We held
public meetings and extended the comment period to January 5, 2004, to
allow the public and, specifically, the fishing and small passenger
vessel industry, the opportunity to submit comments after they had seen
the final rule published October 22, 2003. See 68 FR 55643 (Sept. 26,
2003) and 68 FR 61818 (Oct. 30, 2003). In Section IV, below, we discuss
the many comments we received and note proposed changes from the 2003
final rule based on these comments.
Table 3 lists the three documents we published requesting comments
on AIS expansion discussed above.
Table 3--Automatic Identification System; Expansion of Carriage
Requirements for U.S. Waters [USCG-2003-14878]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Action FR cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
07/01/2003.................. Notice; request for 68 FR 39369.
comments.
09/26/2003.................. Notice; request for 68 FR 55643.
comments; extension
of comment period;
notice of public
meetings.
10/30/2003.................. Notice; request for 68 FR 61818.
comments; notice of
public meetings.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Discussion of Comments Received on Expansion of AIS Carriage
We thank the more than 180 persons or organizations who responded
to our request for comments and participated in our public meetings on
the expansion of AIS requirements [see docket USCG-2003-14878]. Their
answers to our original eight questions (68 FR 39369) and subsequent
two questions (68 FR 61818) posed in 2003 assisted us in crafting or
amending various provisions of the AIS portion of this rule as stated
in the ``AIS Revisions'' section below. We also received numerous
comments beyond the scope of our ten questions that were similar or
reiterated concerns expressed during the previous rulemaking [see USCG-
2003-14757]. Our opinion and resolution of these comments remains as
stated in our final rule (68 FR 60559), with the following exceptions:
A. Need for AIS and Scope of Availability
Numerous commenters, for various reasons, do not believe that AIS
requirements are needed or that they should apply to their type of
vessel. In general, we disagree. Congress has given us an AIS mandate
to implement. The Coast Guard has been involved in the development of
AIS since the 1990s and has done so in response to industry demands
[see USCG 2003-14757-8] for ``silent VTSs'' and the need to provide
mariners with pertinent, near real-time navigation information in a
seamless manner which AIS does while reducing the need for voice
communication. We recognize AIS is not a panacea. It will not in itself
prevent a collision or terrorist attack; if AIS is coupled with other
information sources, however, it does provide the mariner and the
government with situational awareness to help thwart these events. It
is not intended to replace the radiotelephone, radio, sound signals,
security measures, or other similar items; rather, it is there to
complement them.
The starting point or initial affected population of AIS has been
determined for the most part by the MTSA. Congress has stated that all
self-propelled commercial vessels of 65 feet or greater or 26 feet or
greater and over 600 horsepower when engaged in towing and certain
passenger vessels (which we have determined to be those carrying 50 or
more passengers) should have AIS; a portion of the same population is
also required to have radiotelephones under the Vessel Bridge-to-Bridge
Radiotelephone Act of 1971 (Radiotelephone Act), Public Law 92-63, 85
Stat. 164. See 33 U.S.C. 1201 et seq. A principal purpose of both the
MTSA and the Radiotelephone Act is to improve navigation safety. AIS
and the radiotelephone, working together, provide the necessary tools
to potentially prevent and mitigate collisions and other mishaps.
The Radiotelephone Act requires every power-driven vessel of 20
meters (65 feet) or more in length; towing vessels of 26 feet or more
in length; vessels of 100 gross tons and upward carrying one or more
passengers for hire; and dredge and floating plants, in or near a
channel or fairway, engaged in operations likely to restrict or affect
navigation to be equipped and monitor the Bridge-to-Bridge
Radiotelephone (33 U.S.C. 1203, 1204).
We also propose in this NPRM to require AIS on dredges or floating
plants near commercial channels because these vessels--given the nature
of their operation--pose a unique challenge to navigation. As for
passenger vessels, the AIS provision of the MTSA grants the Coast Guard
discretion as to number of passengers for hire a vessel less than 65
feet may carry. In our 2003 Temporary Interim Rule, we established that
threshold at carrying 50 or more passengers for hire. Subsequently, in
our Final Rule, we excepted these vessels (and fishing vessels) and
established a 150-passengers-for-hire threshold.
After we published the Final Rule, we posed two additional
questions via a Request for Comments (68 FR 61818), specific to these
segments of industry--fishing and small passenger operators--and the
burden that these regulations placed on these predominantly small
entities. We reviewed all of these comments and made Congress aware of
the various concerns expressed by industry [see USCG-2003-14757-129];
nonetheless, this segment of industry is not uniquely impacted by the
regulations and can greatly benefit from AIS. We therefore propose in
this NPRM, AIS carriage requirements on
[[Page 76301]]
fishing vessels of 65 feet or more and on vessels carrying 50 or more
passengers. We propose to omit the distinction of ``for hire'' because
we believe all passengers, whether paying or not, are subject to a
similar safety risk and thus deserve the navigation safety and maritime
security benefit afforded to them by AIS.
Finally, we propose that any vessel moving CDC also be required to
carry AIS because of the unique risk the movement of CDC poses to the
marine transportation system.
B. Reason AIS Requirement Was Not Expanded to All Vessels
Many commenters expressed the desire that all vessels have AIS.
Ultimately, we believe all vessels should avail themselves of AIS;
however, we propose to apply this rule only to those vessels for which
we have current authority to mandate carriage of AIS. We propose to add
two classes of vessels, not specifically addressed in the
Radiotelephone Act: high-speed passenger vessels and vessels involved
in the movement of certain dangerous cargo. High-speed passenger
vessels and vessels that transport dangerous cargo pose unique
challenges that AIS is well-suited to address.
With the advent of AIS Class B devices and the continual drop in
prices for Class A devices, these systems will become more affordable.
Consequently, more vessels will use AIS and the collective benefit AIS
provides will increase. Someday, we hope all vessels will avail
themselves of AIS, as many have done so with charts, radiotelephones,
radars, and other navigation equipment.
C. Use of AIS Class B Devices
Some commenters recommended that the Coast Guard permit the use of
AIS Class B devices. We agree. Since publication of the 2003 final rule
(68 FR 60559) and through the diligent work of various standards
bodies, we now have AIS Class B devices that are interoperable with AIS
Class A devices. Class B devices differ slightly in features and nature
of design, which reduce their cost (on average half the cost of Class A
devices); however, their performance is somewhat limited. They report
at a fixed rate (30 seconds) vice the Class A's variable rate (2-10
seconds dependent on speed and course change). They consume less power,
but also report at lower power (2 watts versus 12 watts of AIS Class
A), thus impacting their broadcast range. Despite these design
limitations, and after extensive testing by the Coast Guard Research
and Development Center (see International Telecommunication Union study
group report ``Performance Assessment and Interoperability of Proposed
Class B AIS With Existing Class A AIS System Using Simulation
Software'' dated September 9, 2005), we deem AIS Class B devices can
operate properly and safely amongst Class A devices and offer similar
AIS benefits. They broadcast and receive virtually the same vessel
identification and other information. They have the same ability to see
targets that radar may not always show (around the bend, in sea
clutter, or during foul weather). For these reasons, we have concluded
that AIS Class B devices do enhance navigation safety and assist in
collision avoidance comparable to AIS Class A devices; however, given
their design limitations, we caution users that they may not be the
best alternative for vessels that are highly maneuverable, travel at
high speed, or routinely transit congested waters.
The Coast Guard seeks comment in this NPRM on whether AIS Class B
devices should be permitted only on certain vessels or waterways, or
whether this decision should be best left to the master or owner's
discretion.
We welcome the advent of lower cost AIS Class B devices and the
continual drop in price of AIS Class A devices--currently averaging
approximately $3,000 vice $7,000 in 2003. Fishing vessels and small
passenger vessels, previously included in the original AIS carriage
requirements of our temporary interim rule (68 FR 39353), will be less
impacted by the current cost of AIS Class A devices and the potential
to use even lower cost AIS Class B devices.
D. Deviation From AIS Requirements
There were a number of comments stating that AIS should not be
required on vessels operating on certain waterways. We recognize that
the MTSA provides us authority to waive AIS requirements on waterways
where we determine AIS is not needed for safe navigation; however, we
have decided not to create a patchwork of waterways where AIS is or is
not required. Rather than waive requirements on specific waterways we
propose here to grant a deviation based on where or how vessels
operate. To that end, we propose to define what conditions under which
a deviation may be sought. Vessels that operate--
(1) Solely within a very confined area (e.g., less than a one
nautical mile radius, shipyard, fleeting area);
(2) On short and fixed scheduled routes (e.g., a bank-to-bank river
ferry service); or
(3) In a manner that makes it unlikely they will encounter other
AIS users may request a yearly deviation from AIS requirements as set
forth in Sec. 164.55.
E. Relation of Coast Guard AIS Receiving Infrastructure to Requirement
for AIS in All Waters
Some commenters stated that we should not require the carriage of
AIS in areas where the Coast Guard does not have infrastructure in
place to receive these data. First, we note that the use of AIS may
prevent collisions wherever it is used, regardless of the existence of
shore-side AIS infrastructure. Second, we are working to establish
nationwide capability to fully utilize AIS data wherever we require it
to be transmitted.
As discussed in the Nationwide AIS section above, a NAIS project is
being conducted to provide the Coast Guard with the capability to
receive and distribute information from shipboard AIS equipment in
order to enhance MDA. That project will provide detection and
surveillance of vessels carrying AIS equipment approaching or operating
in the maritime domain where little or no shore-side vessel tracking
currently exists. Although the NAIS project is not projected to be
fully operational until 2014, we have achieved initial operational
capability for the receive-only increment of the project, and we
anticipate achieving initial operational capability in three Coast
Guard sectors for the transmit-and-receive increment by 2010. Our
existing AIS network of over 90 sites and initial NAIS (Increment One)
capability, in conjunction with other resources to benefit our overall
MDA, would be available before the implementation date of the AIS
requirements proposed here. To complement our existing AIS and future
NAIS infrastructure, all Coast Guard cutters, many boats and some
aircraft are AIS capable.
For more details on that project, please see the NAIS programmatic
environmental impact statement notice published November 23, 2005 (70
FR 70862); the NAIS programmatic environmental impact statement record
of decision published November 6, 2006 (71 FR 64977); or the NAIS Web
site at https://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-a/Ais/.
V. Discussion of Proposed Rule
In this section we discuss how we propose to revise our NOAD and
AIS regulations.
A. NOAD Revisions
We propose numerous changes to our NOAD regulations. We propose to
expand the applicability of the NOAD regulations by changing the
minimum
[[Page 76302]]
size of vessels covered below the current 300 gross tons, require that
a notice of departure be submitted for all vessels required to submit a
notice of arrival, and mandate electronic submission of NOAD notices to
the National Vessel Movement Center. These changes are described in
further detail under the following 11 headings in this section.
1. Applicability
We propose to amend the applicability of our regulations in 33 CFR
part 160, subpart C, to clarify that unless a vessel is exempted, NOAD
regulations apply to U.S. vessels in commercial service and all foreign
vessels departing to or coming from a port or place in the United
States. See proposed Sec. 160.203. We have revised some exemptions in
proposed Sec. 160.204. For example, foreign vessels 300 gross tons or
less not engaged in commercial service and not carrying certain
dangerous cargo is one group of vessels that will continue to be
generally exempted from submitting a NOA and will no longer have a
separate NOA requirement for Coast Guard District Seven.
2. Definitions
We propose to add definitions for commercial service, continental
United States (which includes Alaska), disembark, embark, foreign
vessel, offshore supply vessel, oil spill response vessel, passenger
vessel, recreational vessel, and towing vessel to the definitions
section in 33 CFR part 160, subpart C, proposed Sec. 160.202. These
additions would clarify the meaning of these 10 terms used in our NOAD
regulations. Most of the new definitions come directly from 46 U.S.C.
2101.
3. Exemptions
We also propose to change the exemptions from reporting
requirements currently found in Sec. 160.203. We would revise the
exemption for vessels 300 gross tons or less not carrying CDCs so that
all commercial vessels coming from a foreign port or place would be
required to submit a NOA, regardless of tonnage.
We propose to remove the exemption for foreign commercial vessels
300 gross tons or less whether or not they are coming from a foreign
port. Removing this exemption entirely for foreign commercial vessels
would allow the Coast Guard to align its vessel reporting requirements
with CBP electronic arrival manifest requirements in 19 CFR 4.7b. We
propose to maintain the exemption for U.S. commercial vessels 300 gross
tons or less, not carrying CDCs, and transiting between ports or places
of the United States because most are already screened through specific
Federal and State registration and/or licensing programs as are the
mariners that operate and crew these vessels.
We currently require all foreign commercial and recreational
vessels 300 gross tons or less arriving at a port or place in the
Seventh Coast Guard District to submit NOAs directly to the cognizant
Captains of the Port (COTPs). We are proposing to remove that unique
NOA requirement for foreign recreational vessels arriving in the
Seventh Coast Guard District. This will ensure consistency between
Coast Guard districts and allow more efficient use of Coast Guard
District Seven personnel and resources.
Vessels over 300 gross tons are currently subject to NOA
regulations. We continue to require their compliance so that we can
maintain visibility of these vessels because they carry a greater
number of passengers and crew and a larger volume of cargo.
We also propose to revise an exemption for vessels operating upon
the Mississippi River above mile 235 and its tributaries. That
exemption would be limited to vessels required to report to the Inland
River Vessel Movement Center (IRVMC) under 33 CFR part 165.
We propose to clarify the exemption for a vessel operating
exclusively within a COTP Zone when not carrying certain dangerous
cargo. Under both the current 33 CFR 160.203(b)(2) and proposed 33 CFR
160.204(a)(4)(ii), once a vessel has arrived at a port or place within
a single COTP zone and has submitted the required NOA, if it then
transits to another port or place within the same COTP Zone it is
considered to be operating exclusively within that Zone and, therefore,
is not required to submit a NOAD if it is not carrying CDC. If that
vessel, however, is carrying CDC or leaves one COTP Zone and enters
another, it is not covered by the exemption under current Sec.
160.203(b)(2) or proposed Sec. 160.204(a)(4)(ii) and, therefore, must
submit the required notices.
4. Submitter
We have inserted proposed Sec. 160.205 to clarify who must submit
notices of arrival and notices of departure. This section would direct
the owner, agent, master, operator, or person in charge of a vessel to
submit NOADs in compliance with the subpart's time, method, and notice
content requirements.
5. NOA Information
We propose to remove the optional submission of INS (now CBP) Form
I-418 to satisfy crew and passenger information reporting requirements
currently found in Sec. 160.206(c) and to remove the option of
submitting consolidated NOAs found in Sec. 160.206(d). The Coast Guard
found that many vessels submitting consolidated NOAs, or NOAs with
consecutive port submissions, were not reporting changes in their crew,
cargo, or persons in addition to crew. The eNOAD system we have
developed to support the submission of non-consolidated NOADs meets the
requirements of both the Coast Guard and CBP.
We would revise Sec. 160.206, which contains the information
requirements for NOA reports. The Coast Guard proposes adding a
requirement for the Maritime Mobile Service Identity (MMSI) number for
vessels in NOA reports because that number is associated with AIS. For
vessels with an MMSI, this would allow the Coast Guard to quickly link
a vessel's NOA with its AIS broadcast in order to detect security
anomalies.
We also propose to require passport country of issuance and
passport date of expiration information from everyone onboard who
presents a passport--crewmembers and persons in addition to crew. This
additional passport information will aid in the detection of fraudulent
passports that may be used by individuals, both foreign and domestic,
attempting to enter or depart the United States.
We propose to add a requirement to indicate whether the vessel is
300 gross tons or less and whether the vessel's voyage will be less
than 24 hours in NOA reports. This information will allow the Coast
Guard to prioritize screening of vessels on brief voyages with a
shorter reporting requirement so they are screened before entering
their port or place of destination.
We also propose to add a data field for vessels to submit their
estimated time of arrival to the entrance to the port (if applicable).
This would be used by COTPs to facilitate vessel traffic management and
to coordinate boardings and inspections. Additionally, we propose to
clarify through item (2)(i) in the table for proposed 33 CFR 160.206
that vessels that have visited ports or places outside the continental
United States need to submit the last five foreign ports or places
visited on their NOA. In a separate item from the table, (2)(ix), all
[[Page 76303]]
vessels must report their last port of call, whether domestic or
foreign.
These two data fields, with accompanying items requesting arrival
and departure dates from ports or places listed, will better enable us
to determine which vessels are coming from foreign ports, and whether
they may have been subject to inspection at another U.S. port since
entering U.S. navigable waters. A vessel that has not visited a foreign
port would make the appropriate entry, as specified by eNOAD, for the
(2)(i) and (2)(ii) fields to report they have not visited a foreign
port or place.
Finally, in regard to Sec. 160.206, we propose to revise the
reporting requirements on the operational condition of equipment. For
that item, we have replaced the reference to 33 CFR 164.35 with 33 CFR
part 164, so that we would include all relevant navigation equipment,
including AIS.
6. NOD Information
We propose that all vessels required to submit a NOA will also be
required to submit a NOD when departing from a port or place of the
United States. The departure information required by proposed Sec.
160.207--regarding the vessel, voyage, cargo, crewmembers, and persons
in addition to the crew--would increase our awareness of vessel
movements and, by supplementing NOA data, would allow us to maintain a
complete picture of movements in and out of U.S. ports or places.
Commercial vessels departing U.S. ports or places bound for foreign
ports or places are currently required by CBP to submit an electronic
passenger departure manifest and an electronic crewmember departure
manifest. See 19 CFR 4.64. As noted in their final rule entitled
``Electronic Transmission of Passenger and Crew Manifests for Vessels
and Aircrafts,'' published in the Federal Register April 7, 2005 (70 FR
17820, 17833), however, CBP has adopted the use of the Coast Guard's
eNOAD to eliminate duplicate reporting requirements and provide a
``single window'' for filing manifest information. While, as indicated
in the paragraph above, we would not limit our NOD requirements to
vessels going to foreign ports, our proposed rule will not change what
CBP stated in their final rule: eNOAD will capture the notice
information we require and the electronic manifest information CBP
requires. See 70 FR 17831 (Apr. 7, 2005).
We have worked with CBP to avoid requiring a vessel to submit the
same information to our agencies separately, but our agencies do have
separate missions. The information we need to better enable us to
fulfill our mission under 33 U.S.C. 1225--to prevent damage to
structures on, in, or adjacent to the navigable waters of the United
States, as well as protecting those navigable waters--may differ
somewhat from information CBP requires to implement the laws defining
its missions. To the extent, however, that we both require the same
information of vessels, we do not require separate submissions of that
information to satisfy our respective regulations in 19 CFR and 33 CFR.
7. Electronic Submission
In proposed Sec. 160.210, we would require NOAs and NODs be
submitted via electronic formats found at the National Vessel Movement
Center's (NVMC) Web site: https://www.nvmc.uscg.gov. Mandating
electronic submission of NOADs allows the Coast Guard and CBP to
quickly and automatically process, validate, and screen arrival and
departure notices. The CBP's Advance Passenger Information System
(APIS) regulations, 19 CFR 4.7b and 4.64, mandated that arrival and
departure information be submitted by the electronic system. Coast
Guard and CBP consolidated the reporting requirements and provided the
public with a ``single-window'' for transmitting NOA and NOD
information. Information received through the eNOAD system is
automatically forwarded to both the Coast Guard and CBP.
Currently, 87 percent of NOA submissions are made via the eNOAD
method. The eNOAD offers a quick and easy way to submit NOAs and NODs.
8. When To Submit NOA
We recognize that the current times for submitting NOAs in Sec.
160.212 might encumber some small commercial vessels transiting between
U.S. and foreign ports; therefore, we propose to make the reporting
time closer to the departure time for smaller vessels that make
frequent, short voyages between U.S. and foreign ports or places.
For U.S. commercial vessels 300 gross tons or less, arriving from a
foreign port, and on a voyage of less than 24 hours, we propose in this
NPRM a submission time of 60 minutes prior to departure from the
foreign port or place. This population of vessels often engages in
multiple, unscheduled, short-term voyages within a given 24-hour
period. Because of the emergent and spontaneous nature of their
business, this portion of the vessel industry would be
disproportionately affected if required to submit NOADs 24 hours before
arrival. Additionally, the Coast Guard or State authorities already
document commercial vessels of the United States of 300 gross tons or
less.
In contrast, we have much less information on some foreign
commercial vessels of 300 gross tons or less; nor do we have advance
access to foreign merchant mariner documentation or licenses of
commercial vessel crews. As a result, our personnel require more time
to review and verify the information submitted by foreign commercial
vessels 300 gross tons or less; therefore, we are not proposing to
reduce the reporting time for this population of foreign vessels.
This proposed rule would also mandate that foreign commercial
vessels of 300 gross tons or less that had been required by Sec.
160.210(c) to contact COTPs in the Seventh Coast Guard District would
instead submit their NOAs and NODs to the NVMC.
In proposed 33 CFR 160.212(a)(4) and (b)(4), we have sought to
clarify that the times for submitting a NOA or update are based on a
vessel's arrival at a port or place.
9. When To Submit NOD
We are proposing a new requirement to mandate times for submitting
NODs. This requirement is similar to the time frame for departure
notices mandated by CBP in its APIS requirements, 19 CFR 4.7b.
10. Force Majeure
In proposed 160.215, we specify information to be conveyed by
vessels bound for a port or place in the United States under force
majeure. The Coast Guard recognizes the special circumstances of such
vessels and limits the requirements of 33 CFR part 160, subpart C, to
reporting information to the nearest Captain of the Port regarding the
vessel operator's intentions, any hazardous conditions, and whether the
vessel is carrying or controlling a vessel carrying CDC. COTP zones are
defined in 33 CFR part 3.
11. Customs Form 1302 Removed
Finally, we propose to remove some NOA regulatory text that has
been suspended. Requirements for submittal of Customs Form 1302, a
cargo declaration, were included in Coast Guard NOA regulations
published February 28, 2003. See 68 FR 9537. The paragraphs in 33 CFR
part 160 referencing this cargo declaration were suspended 3 months
later pending further CBP regulatory action under then recently enacted
legislation. See 68 FR 27907 (May 22, 2003). At the time, we noted that
we would remove these
[[Page 76304]]
cargo-manifest submission requirements from Coast Guard regulations
when they were no longer needed.
On December 5, 2003, CBP published its ``Required Advance
Electronic Presentation of Cargo Information'' final rule (68 FR
68140), which fully addressed the requirement for su