Tank Level or Pressure Monitoring Devices on Single-Hull Tank Ships and Single-Hull Tank Barges Carrying Oil or Oil Residue as Cargo, 79314-79316 [E8-30803]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
79314
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 249 / Monday, December 29, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
SUMMARY: This document corrects a
recently published final rule entitled,
‘‘Washington, DC Metropolitan Area
Special Flight Rules Area.’’ The rule
codified special flight rules and airspace
and flight restrictions for certain aircraft
operations in the Washington, DC
Metropolitan Area. A word in the
codified text was incorrect. This
document corrects that word.
The final rule and this correction
will become effective on February 17,
2009.
DATES:
Ellen Crum, Airspace and Rules Group,
Office of System Operations Airspace
and AIM, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence
Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone (202) 267–8783.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On December 16, 2008, the FAA
published a final rule entitled,
‘‘Washington, DC Metropolitan Area
Special Flight Rules Area.’’ An error
appeared in § 93.335 Definitions, in the
definition of the term ‘‘Washington, DC
Metropolitan Area Special Flight Rules
Area (DC SFRA).’’
Correction
In final rule FR Doc. E8–29711,
published on December 16, 2008 (73 FR
76195), make the following correction.
[Corrected]
On page 76214, in the first column, in
the amendment for § 93.335, the
definition for ‘‘Washington, DC
Metropolitan Area Special Flight Rules
Area (DC SFRA),’’ in the 10th line,
remove the word ‘‘radial’’ and add in its
place the word ‘‘radius.’’
■
Issued in Washington, DC, on December
19, 2008.
Pamela Hamilton-Powell,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. E8–30730 Filed 12–24–08; 8:45 am]
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:28 Dec 24, 2008
Jkt 217001
Coast Guard
33 CFR Parts 155 and 156
[Docket No. USCG–2001–9046]
RIN 1625–AB12
Tank Level or Pressure Monitoring
Devices on Single-Hull Tank Ships and
Single-Hull Tank Barges Carrying Oil
or Oil Residue as Cargo
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
§ 93.335
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
ACTION:
The Coast Guard is removing
its regulations for tank level or pressure
monitoring (TLPM) devices because
devices that satisfy compliance
requirements remain unavailable.
DATES: This final rule is effective
January 28, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Comments and material
received from the public, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, are part
of docket USCG–2001–9046 and are
available for inspection or copying at
the 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, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. You may also
find this docket on the Internet at
https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this rule, call
Dolores Pyne-Mercier, Project Manager,
Office of Standards Evaluation and
Development, Project Development
Division (CG–5232), Coast Guard,
telephone 202–372–1093, or e-mail
address, Dolores.J.PyneMercier@uscg.mil. If you have questions
on viewing the docket, call Renee V.
Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone 202–366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents for Preamble
I. Abbreviations
II. Background
A. Regulatory History
B. Purpose
III. Discussion of Comments and Changes
IV. Regulatory Analyses
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
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
I. Abbreviations
FR Federal Register
NEPA National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969
NPRM Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
NTTAA National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act
TLPM Tank Level or Pressure
Monitoring
II. Background
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
J. Indian Tribal Governments
K. Energy Effects
L. Technical Standards
M. Environment
A. Regulatory History
In September 2002, the Coast Guard
promulgated tank level or pressure
monitoring (TLPM) device regulations
located in 33 CFR parts 155 and 156. (67
FR 58515). The Final Rule detailed
TLPM performance criteria and
described the vessels required to install
and use TLPM devices by 2007.
To date, we have identified no
devices meeting the performance
criteria established in the final rule, and
none have been submitted by industry
for our evaluation. As a result, in July
2005, we published a Final Rule (70 FR
41614) suspending the regulations for
TLPM devices for three years until July
21, 2008. In the final rule, we also
solicited public comment on the status
of TLPM technology development and
alternatives to TLPM devices. In
response, we received two comments
supporting our suspension of the
regulations for TLPM devices and no
new information on TLPM devices or
alternatives. We published another
Final Rule (73 FR 23397) on May 5,
2008, extending the suspension for three
additional years until May 5, 2011, to
allow time for the current rulemaking
process to be completed.
On June 30, 2008, we published a
notice of proposed rulemaking entitled
‘‘Tank Level or Pressure Monitoring
Devices on Single-Hull Tank Ships and
Single-Hull Tank Barges Carrying Oil or
Oil Residue as Cargo’’ in the Federal
Register (73 FR 36825). We received 2
letters commenting on the proposed
rule. Both commenters supported the
Coast Guard’s decision to remove the
TLPM device regulations. No public
meeting was requested and none was
held.
B. Purpose
For a complete discussion of the
background for this final rule, see the
NPRM published on June 30, 2008 (73
FR 36825, 36826).
The Coast Guard is removing its
regulations for TLPM devices because
E:\FR\FM\29DER1.SGM
29DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 249 / Monday, December 29, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
devices that satisfy compliance
requirements remain unavailable. As
noted above in section II.A. ‘‘Regulatory
History,’’ we published a final rule
suspending Coast Guard regulations for
TLPM devices with a request for public
comments on the status of TLPM
technology development and other
means of detecting leaks from oil cargo
tanks into the water. We received two
comments supporting our suspension of
the regulations for TLPM devices. We
received no new information on TLPM
devices or alternatives for detecting
leaks into the water from single-hull
tank vessels carrying oil or oil residue
as cargo.
Based on the public response to the
suspension, the absence of new
information regarding TLPM devices or
alternatives, and the results of a
Congressionally-mandated study
(available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES), the Coast Guard
revisited the feasibility and practicality
of retaining regulations for TLPM
devices on single-hull tank vessels and
concluded that it is appropriate to
remove these regulations.
III. Discussion of Comments and
Changes
We received two comments on the
NPRM; both were in favor of the
removal of the TLPM device
requirement from the regulations. The
Coast Guard has made no changes from
the NPRM, save a minor edit to the
authority citation for part 156.
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
IV. Regulatory Evaluation
We developed this 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. Executive Order 12866
This rule is not a significant
regulatory action under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs
and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that
Order. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under that
Order.
Public comments on the NPRM are
summarized in Part IV of this preamble.
We received no public comments that
would alter our assessment of impacts
in the NPRM. We have adopted the
assessment in the NPRM as final. See
the ‘‘Regulatory Evaluation’’ section of
the NPRM for the complete analysis.
This final rule removes the
regulations for TLPM devices—a type of
shipboard equipment that does not
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:28 Dec 24, 2008
Jkt 217001
currently exist in the marketplace and
which has no practical alternative. We
conclude this rule will have no impact
on industry.
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.
We concluded that removing the
performance standards for TLPM
devices and the requirements for their
use will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities since industry did not adopt or
implement any TLPM provisions.
Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies
under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this final rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
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 the rule so that they
could better evaluate its effects on them
and participate in the rulemaking.
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 of the Coast
Guard, call 1–888–REG–FAIR (1–888–
734–3247). 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.
D. Collection of Information
This rule calls for no new collection
of information under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3520).
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
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
79315
impose a substantial direct cost of
compliance on them.
It is well settled that States may not
regulate in categories reserved for
regulation by the Coast 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), as well as the reporting of
casualties and any other category 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.
(See the decision of the Supreme Court
in the consolidated cases of United
States v. Locke and Intertanko v. Locke,
529 U.S. 89, 120 S.Ct. 1135 (March 6,
2000)). This rule removes previously
published rules on performance
standards, and the use of TLPM devices
falls into the category of vessel
equipment and operation. Because the
States may not regulate within these
categories, preemption under Executive
Order 13132 is not an issue.
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 rule will not result in such
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of
this rule elsewhere in the preamble.
G. Taking of Private Property
This rule will not effect a taking of
private property or otherwise have
taking implications under Executive
Order 12630, Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights.
H. Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets applicable standards
in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive
Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to
minimize litigation, eliminate
ambiguity, and reduce burden.
I. Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not
an economically significant rule and
does not create an environmental risk to
health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
E:\FR\FM\29DER1.SGM
29DER1
79316
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 249 / Monday, December 29, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
environment. Therefore, this rule is
categorically excluded, under section
2.B.2. Figure 2–1, paragraph 34(d), of
the Instruction and neither an
environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is
required. This rule involves the
equipping of vessels. An environmental
analysis checklist and a categorical
exclusion determination are available in
the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.
K. Energy Effects
We analyzed this 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 because
it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under Executive Order 12866 and 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.
List of Subjects
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
the 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 adopted by voluntary
consensus standards bodies.
This rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with RULES
J. Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.
■
M. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 0023.1 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 concluded that this action is one
of a category of actions which do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:28 Dec 24, 2008
Jkt 217001
Dated: December 17, 2008.
Brian M. Salerno,
Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety,
Security and Stewardship, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. E8–30803 Filed 12–24–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
18 CFR Chapter I
33 CFR Part 155
[Docket No. RM07–9–00]
Alaska, Hazardous substances, Oil
pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Review of FERC Form Nos. 6 and
6–Q
33 CFR Part 156
Hazardous substances, Oil pollution,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Water pollution control.
■ For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR parts 155 and 156 as follows:
PART 155—OIL OR HAZARDOUS
MATERIAL POLLUTION PREVENTION
REGULATIONS FOR VESSELS
1. The authority citation for 33 CFR
Part 155 and the note following citation
continue to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231, 1321(j); E.O.
11735, 3 CFR, 1971–1975 Comp., p. 793.
Sections 155.100 through 155.130, 150.350
through 155.400, 155.430, 155.440, 155.470,
155.1030(j) and (k), and 155.1065(g) are also
issued under 33 U.S.C. 1903(b). Sections
155.480, 155.490, 155.750(e), and 155.775 are
also issued under 46 U.S.C. 3703. Section
155.490 also issued under section 4110(b) of
Pub. L. 101–380.
Note to Part 155: Additional requirements
for vessels carrying oil or hazardous
materials are contained in 46 CFR Parts 30
through 40, 150, 151, and 153.
§ 155.200
[Amended]
2. In § 155.200, remove the definition
for ‘‘Sea State 5.’’
■
§ 155.490
■
[Removed and Reserved]
3. Remove and reserve § 155.490.
PART 156—OIL AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIAL TRANSFER OPERATIONS
4. The authority citation for 33 CFR
Part 156 is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231, 1321(j); 46
U.S.C. 3703a, 3715; E.O. 11735, 3 CFR 1971–
1975 Comp., p. 793. Section 156.120(bb) is
also issued under 46 U.S.C. 3703.
§ 156.120
■
[Amended]
5. In § 156.120, remove paragraph (ee).
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
December 18, 2008.
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice Terminating Proceeding.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission is terminating
its notice of inquiry regarding the need
for changes or revisions to the
Commission’s reporting requirements.
This notice specifically addresses FERC
Form Nos. 6 (Annual Report of Oil
Pipeline Companies) and 6–Q
(Quarterly Report of Oil Pipeline
Companies).
DATES:
Effective Date: December 29,
2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jenifer Lucas (Legal Information), Office
of the General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426, (202) 502–8362. E-mail:
jenifer.lucas@ferc.gov.
Dave Lengenfelder (Technical
Information), Office of Enforcement,
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First St., NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–
8351. E-mail:
david.lengenfelder@ferc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. On February 15, 2007, the
Commission issued a Notice of Inquiry
(NOI) in this proceeding, seeking
comments from filers and users of
various financial forms, including FERC
Form Nos. 6 (Annual Report of Oil
Pipeline Companies) and 6–Q
(Quarterly Report of Oil Pipeline
Companies), addressing whether the
forms should be modified.1 The FERC
Form No. 6 contains data such as a
balance sheet, cost-of-service
information, income statement, and
1 Assessment of Information Requirements for
FERC Financial Forms, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 35,554
(2007).
E:\FR\FM\29DER1.SGM
29DER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 249 (Monday, December 29, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 79314-79316]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-30803]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Parts 155 and 156
[Docket No. USCG-2001-9046]
RIN 1625-AB12
Tank Level or Pressure Monitoring Devices on Single-Hull Tank
Ships and Single-Hull Tank Barges Carrying Oil or Oil Residue as Cargo
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is removing its regulations for tank level or
pressure monitoring (TLPM) devices because devices that satisfy
compliance requirements remain unavailable.
DATES: This final rule is effective January 28, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket,
are part of docket USCG-2001-9046 and are available for inspection or
copying at the 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, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. You may also find this
docket on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call Dolores Pyne-Mercier, Project Manager, Office of Standards
Evaluation and Development, Project Development Division (CG-5232),
Coast Guard, telephone 202-372-1093, or e-mail address, Dolores.J.Pyne-
Mercier@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call
Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-
9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents for Preamble
I. Abbreviations
II. Background
A. Regulatory History
B. Purpose
III. Discussion of Comments and Changes
IV. Regulatory Analyses
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
I. Abbreviations
FR Federal Register
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
TLPM Tank Level or Pressure Monitoring
II. Background
A. Regulatory History
In September 2002, the Coast Guard promulgated tank level or
pressure monitoring (TLPM) device regulations located in 33 CFR parts
155 and 156. (67 FR 58515). The Final Rule detailed TLPM performance
criteria and described the vessels required to install and use TLPM
devices by 2007.
To date, we have identified no devices meeting the performance
criteria established in the final rule, and none have been submitted by
industry for our evaluation. As a result, in July 2005, we published a
Final Rule (70 FR 41614) suspending the regulations for TLPM devices
for three years until July 21, 2008. In the final rule, we also
solicited public comment on the status of TLPM technology development
and alternatives to TLPM devices. In response, we received two comments
supporting our suspension of the regulations for TLPM devices and no
new information on TLPM devices or alternatives. We published another
Final Rule (73 FR 23397) on May 5, 2008, extending the suspension for
three additional years until May 5, 2011, to allow time for the current
rulemaking process to be completed.
On June 30, 2008, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
entitled ``Tank Level or Pressure Monitoring Devices on Single-Hull
Tank Ships and Single-Hull Tank Barges Carrying Oil or Oil Residue as
Cargo'' in the Federal Register (73 FR 36825). We received 2 letters
commenting on the proposed rule. Both commenters supported the Coast
Guard's decision to remove the TLPM device regulations. No public
meeting was requested and none was held.
B. Purpose
For a complete discussion of the background for this final rule,
see the NPRM published on June 30, 2008 (73 FR 36825, 36826).
The Coast Guard is removing its regulations for TLPM devices
because
[[Page 79315]]
devices that satisfy compliance requirements remain unavailable. As
noted above in section II.A. ``Regulatory History,'' we published a
final rule suspending Coast Guard regulations for TLPM devices with a
request for public comments on the status of TLPM technology
development and other means of detecting leaks from oil cargo tanks
into the water. We received two comments supporting our suspension of
the regulations for TLPM devices. We received no new information on
TLPM devices or alternatives for detecting leaks into the water from
single-hull tank vessels carrying oil or oil residue as cargo.
Based on the public response to the suspension, the absence of new
information regarding TLPM devices or alternatives, and the results of
a Congressionally-mandated study (available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES), the Coast Guard revisited the feasibility
and practicality of retaining regulations for TLPM devices on single-
hull tank vessels and concluded that it is appropriate to remove these
regulations.
III. Discussion of Comments and Changes
We received two comments on the NPRM; both were in favor of the
removal of the TLPM device requirement from the regulations. The Coast
Guard has made no changes from the NPRM, save a minor edit to the
authority citation for part 156.
IV. Regulatory Evaluation
We developed this 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. Executive Order 12866
This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order.
Public comments on the NPRM are summarized in Part IV of this
preamble. We received no public comments that would alter our
assessment of impacts in the NPRM. We have adopted the assessment in
the NPRM as final. See the ``Regulatory Evaluation'' section of the
NPRM for the complete analysis.
This final rule removes the regulations for TLPM devices--a type of
shipboard equipment that does not currently exist in the marketplace
and which has no practical alternative. We conclude this rule will have
no impact on industry.
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.
We concluded that removing the performance standards for TLPM
devices and the requirements for their use will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities since
industry did not adopt or implement any TLPM provisions. Therefore, the
Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this final rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
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 the rule so that they could better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking.
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 of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-
3247). 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.
D. Collection of Information
This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
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.
It is well settled that States may not regulate in categories
reserved for regulation by the Coast 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),
as well as the reporting of casualties and any other category 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. (See the decision of the Supreme Court in the consolidated
cases of United States v. Locke and Intertanko v. Locke, 529 U.S. 89,
120 S.Ct. 1135 (March 6, 2000)). This rule removes previously published
rules on performance standards, and the use of TLPM devices falls into
the category of vessel equipment and operation. Because the States may
not regulate within these categories, preemption under Executive Order
13132 is not an issue.
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 rule will not result in such expenditure, we do
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in the preamble.
G. Taking of Private Property
This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
H. Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
I. Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
[[Page 79316]]
J. Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
K. Energy Effects
We analyzed this 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 because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and 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 the 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 adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
M. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 0023.1 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 concluded
that this action is one of a category of actions which do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under
section 2.B.2. Figure 2-1, paragraph 34(d), of the Instruction and
neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact
statement is required. This rule involves the equipping of vessels. An
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects
33 CFR Part 155
Alaska, Hazardous substances, Oil pollution, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
33 CFR Part 156
Hazardous substances, Oil pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Water pollution control.
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR parts 155 and 156 as follows:
PART 155--OIL OR HAZARDOUS MATERIAL POLLUTION PREVENTION
REGULATIONS FOR VESSELS
0
1. The authority citation for 33 CFR Part 155 and the note following
citation continue to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231, 1321(j); E.O. 11735, 3 CFR, 1971-1975
Comp., p. 793. Sections 155.100 through 155.130, 150.350 through
155.400, 155.430, 155.440, 155.470, 155.1030(j) and (k), and
155.1065(g) are also issued under 33 U.S.C. 1903(b). Sections
155.480, 155.490, 155.750(e), and 155.775 are also issued under 46
U.S.C. 3703. Section 155.490 also issued under section 4110(b) of
Pub. L. 101-380.
Note to Part 155: Additional requirements for vessels carrying
oil or hazardous materials are contained in 46 CFR Parts 30 through
40, 150, 151, and 153.
Sec. 155.200 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 155.200, remove the definition for ``Sea State 5.''
Sec. 155.490 [Removed and Reserved]
0
3. Remove and reserve Sec. 155.490.
PART 156--OIL AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL TRANSFER OPERATIONS
0
4. The authority citation for 33 CFR Part 156 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231, 1321(j); 46 U.S.C. 3703a, 3715; E.O.
11735, 3 CFR 1971-1975 Comp., p. 793. Section 156.120(bb) is also
issued under 46 U.S.C. 3703.
Sec. 156.120 [Amended]
0
5. In Sec. 156.120, remove paragraph (ee).
Dated: December 17, 2008.
Brian M. Salerno,
Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety, Security and Stewardship, U.S.
Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. E8-30803 Filed 12-24-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
