Alternate Compliance Program: Vessel Inspection Alternatives, 20416-20419 [E9-10113]
Download as PDF
20416
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 84 / Monday, May 4, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
through broadcast notices to mariners of
the enforcement period for the safety
zone as well as any changes in the
planned schedule.
(d) Regulations.
(1) In accordance with the general
regulations in § 165.23 of this part, entry
into this zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port
Pittsburgh.
(2) Persons or vessels requiring entry
into or passage through a safety zone
must request permission from the
Captain of the Port Pittsburgh or a
designated representative. They may be
contacted on VHF–FM Channel 13 or
16, or through Coast Guard Sector Ohio
Valley at 1–800–253–7465.
(3) All persons and vessels shall
comply with the instructions of the
Captain of the Port Pittsburgh and
designated on-scene U.S. Coast Guard
patrol personnel. On-scene U.S. Coast
Guard patrol personnel includes
Commissioned, Warrant, and Petty
Officers of the U.S. Coast Guard.
Dated: March 31, 2009.
S.T. Higman,
Lieutenant Commander, U.S. Coast Guard,
Acting Captain of the Port Pittsburgh.
[FR Doc. E9–10115 Filed 5–1–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
46 CFR Parts 2, 8, and 189
RIN 1625–AA92
Alternate Compliance Program: Vessel
Inspection Alternatives
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
tjames on PRODPC75 with RULES
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard amends the
vessel inspection regulations to expand
the Alternate Compliance Program
(ACP). Through these amendments, we
are updating the list of certificates the
Coast Guard issues, incorporating Coast
Guard policy regarding eligibility
requirements for classification societies
participating in the ACP, recognizing
classification societies other than the
American Bureau of Shipping, and
expanding the ACP to include
oceanographic research vessels.
DATES: This rule is effective June 3, 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–2004–19823 and are
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:04 May 01, 2009
Table of Contents for the Preamble
I. Abbreviations
II. Background and Purpose
III. Discussion of Comments
IV. Discussion of Final Rule
V. 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
[Docket No. USCG–2004–19823]
ACTION:
available for inspection at the Docket
Management Facility, U.S. Department
of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12–140, 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 Mr.
William Peters, U.S. Coast Guard Office
of Design and Engineering Standards, at
telephone 202–372–1371, or e-mail him
at William.S.Peters@uscg.mil. If you
have questions on viewing the docket,
call Ms. Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202–366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Jkt 217001
ACP Alternate Compliance Program
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
DMS Docket Management System
DOT Department of Transportation
FR Federal Register
IMO International Maritime Organization
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
NVIC Navigation and Vessel Inspection
Circular
PSSC Passenger Ship Safety Certificate
HSC High-speed Craft
RIN Regulation Identifier Number
SIP Streamlined Inspection Program
SOLAS International Convention for the
Safety of Life at Sea
US United States
USC United States Code
USCG United States Coast Guard
VAP Vessel Action Plan
II. Background and Purpose
The Alternate Compliance Program
(ACP) was launched as a pilot program
in 1995. A notice about the ACP was
published in the Federal Register on
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
February 3, 1995. 60 FR 6687. Under the
ACP, owners and operators of eligible
vessels may request inspection by an
authorized classification society, as
defined in 46 CFR 8.100, using an
equivalence to the requirements in the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
comprising classification society rules,
provisions of International Maritime
Organization (IMO) treaties, and a
supplementary list of requirements from
the CFR that were not in IMO provisions
or classification society rules. A
classification society gained eligibility
to participate in the ACP by meeting the
standards described in the regulations.
If it met these standards, a classification
society was recognized and delegated
authority to conduct plan reviews and
inspections, and issue, on the Coast
Guard’s behalf, certain IMO certificates
documenting compliance with IMO
treaty provisions.
An interim rule establishing new 46
CFR part 8, ‘‘Vessel Inspection
Alternatives’’ was published in the
Federal Register on December 27, 1996.
61 FR 68510. The pilot program was
concluded in 1997 and the ACP was
fully implemented by a final rule
published on December 24, 1997. 62 FR
67526.
Predictably, the program has evolved
since 1997 and the lessons learned have
been documented and typically
implemented through Coast Guard
policy decisions, where appropriate.
The May 2007 notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) preceding this final
rule described the Coast Guard’s plans
to expand the ACP and incorporate the
lessons we have learned into the CFR.
72 FR 28650, May 22, 2007. For
example, when the ACP was initiated,
the Coast Guard chose to retain issuing
authority for the SOLAS Passenger Ship
Safety Certificate (PSSC). This decision
was based on our experience with the
complexities of the passenger vessel
plan review, inspection, and
certification process. Experience has
shown that retaining this issuing
authority has created confusion over the
roles of the Coast Guard versus the
authorized classification society under
the ACP. Experience with the ACP has
also allowed us to gain confidence with
the ACP process. Therefore, we decided
to grant PSSC issuing authority to
authorized classification societies.
For similar reasons, in the May 2007
NPRM, we proposed to delegate to
authorized classification societies
issuing authority for the High-Speed
Craft (HSC) Safety Certificate. This
follows our determination that the HSC
Code is equivalent to the 46 CFR
Subchapter H requirements for
passenger vessels. We published our
E:\FR\FM\04MYR1.SGM
04MYR1
tjames on PRODPC75 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 84 / Monday, May 4, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
decision in Navigation and Vessel
Inspection Circular (NVIC) 6–99 on
inspection of high-speed craft and in
Policy Letter 01–00, dated May 3, 2000.
NVIC 6–99 is available from the Coast
Guard National Maritime Center on the
World Wide Web at https://
www.uscg.mil/hq/gm/nvic/index90.htm.
Policy Letter number 01–00 is available
in the docket for this rulemaking. As the
Coast Guard and several classification
societies have now gained significant
experience with the HSC Code, it is now
appropriate to add the HSC Certificate
to the ACP.
Our experience with the success of
the ACP has also given us the flexibility
to explore applying the program to other
types of vessels that were originally
excluded under our measured
implementation approach. Positive
feedback and recommendations from
the U.S. maritime industry gathered
since we initiated ACP demonstrate
broad support for this idea. As a result,
in May 2007, we proposed that the ACP
be expanded to encompass
Oceanographic Research Vessels that
engage in international voyages.
Soon after the ACP rules went into
effect, we recognized that a
classification society needs
authorization to issue five basic IMO
certificates to fully leverage ACP
flexibility, namely:
• The Cargo Ship Safety Construction
Certificate from the International
Convention for Safety of Life at Sea,
1974;
• The Cargo Ship Safety Equipment
Certificate from the International
Convention for Safety of Life at Sea,
1974;
• The International Load Line
Certificate from the International
Convention on Load Lines;
• The International Tonnage
Certificate from the International
Convention on Tonnage Measurement;
and
• The International Oil Pollution
Prevention Certificate from the Protocol
of 1978 relating to the International
Convention for the Prevention of
Pollution from Ships, 1973.
While we have implemented this
concept as part of our operating
policies, it had not been incorporated
into 46 CFR part 8. Therefore, in our
May 2007 NPRM, we proposed to revise
46 CFR part 8 to require that a
classification society have authority to
issue the five basic IMO certificates to
be eligible to participate in the ACP.
The initial version of the ACP only
applied to the American Bureau of
Shipping with whom the Coast Guard
had collaborated to develop the first
U.S. Supplement—a list of differences
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:04 May 01, 2009
Jkt 217001
between the CFR and the combination
of IMO treaty provisions and
classification society rules. As the
program has expanded, we have
engaged in similar partnerships with
other classification societies that are
now approved to participate in the ACP.
Consequently, our specific references to
the American Bureau of Shipping in 46
CFR part 2 are outdated. Therefore, in
May 2007, we proposed to replace
specific references to the American
Bureau of Shipping with a more general
reference to authorized classification
societies. The term ‘‘authorized
classification society’’ is already defined
in 46 CFR 8.100.
III. Discussion of Comments
We received four letters commenting
on the notice of proposed rulemaking
published May 22, 2007. 72 FR 28650.
The commenters supported the
Alternate Compliance Program (ACP)
and recommended the Coast Guard
expand the program further to the U.S.
tank barge industry, the Great Lakes
shipping fleet, offshore supply vessels,
and other domestic vessels that receive
classification and loadline certificates.
The Coast Guard appreciates these
comments. The ACP is one of many
ways the Coast Guard partners with our
industry stakeholders to make the best
use of our combined resources, achieve
a balance between industry and
government interests, and improve
opportunities for the U.S. maritime
community to be competitive in the
global marketplace. The Coast Guard
has opted not to delegate authority to
implement our regulations on domestic
vessels.
The owners of domestic vessels may
apply for enrollment in other, similar
programs, such as the Streamlined
Inspection Program (SIP) described in
46 CFR part 8, subpart E. In the SIP, the
vessel owner and the Coast Guard work
together to develop a Vessel Action Plan
(VAP) that prescribes the procedures for
maintenance, examination, and
inspection of a vessel enrolled in the
SIP. Under the SIP, owners of domestic
vessels earn, in a manner similar to the
ACP, more autonomy, flexibility, and
responsibility for their vessels and
operations under Coast Guard oversight.
We made no changes from the proposed
rule based on these comments.
IV. Discussion of Final Rule
This final rule amends 46 CFR 2.01–
25(a)(1) and (a)(2) to:
• List all SOLAS certificates required
to be maintained aboard ships,
including the High-Speed Craft Safety
Certificate; and
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
20417
• Update the lists of SOLAS
certificates that the Coast Guard issues
and that can be issued by an authorized
classification society on the Coast
Guard’s behalf.
In the proposed regulatory text of the
May 2007 NPRM, we omitted the HSC
Safety certificate from the list of IMO
certificates the Coast Guard would
issue, but we did reference such an
update in the preamble of the NPRM (72
FR 28651). Therefore, in this final rule
we added a paragraph (ix) to § 2.01–
25(a)(2) to include HSC Safety in the list
of certificates issued by the Coast Guard.
In § 2.01–25(a)(3), we changed the
phrase ‘‘American Bureau of Shipping’’
to ‘‘authorized classification society.’’
In § 8.320(b), we added the following
IMO certificates to the list of those that
can be issued by an authorized
classification society:
• Passenger Ship Safety Certificate,
and
• High-Speed Craft Safety Certificate.
Also, in § 8.420(c), we added to the
list of conditions for eligibility to
participate in the ACP, a requirement
that a classification society must have
been delegated issuing authority for the
Cargo Ship Safety Construction
Certificate, Cargo Ship Safety
Equipment Certificate, International
Load Line Certificate, International
Tonnage Certificate, and International
Oil Pollution Prevention Certificate.
Finally, in new § 189.15–5, we
expand the ACP to include Subchapter
U ‘‘Oceanographic Research Vessels.’’
V. Regulatory Analyses
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. Regulatory Planning and Review
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.
This rule will not impose mandatory
costs on the public because it enables
voluntary alternatives to inspections by
Coast Guard personnel. We anticipate
that vessel owners and operators will
realize potential cost savings due to the
expansion of the ACP. In this rule, we
add to the delegation of certain
inspections (and the resulting issuance
of certain certificates) to classification
societies that potentially leads to a
E:\FR\FM\04MYR1.SGM
04MYR1
20418
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 84 / Monday, May 4, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
reduction of time and resources for plan
review and the vessel inspection
process.
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.
In the NPRM, we certified under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that the proposed rule
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities and we requested public
comments on this certification. We
received no comments on this
certification and adopt it as final.
This rule does not change any
requirements in the regulations. It
simply updates and expands an existing
voluntary program for alternate
compliance with Coast Guard
regulations. Therefore, the Coast Guard
certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
rule would 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 this rule so they can
better evaluate its effects on them and
participate in the rulemaking. If the rule
affects your small business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please consult Mr. William
Peters, U.S. Coast Guard Office of
Design and Engineering Standards,
telephone 202–372–1731. 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.
tjames on PRODPC75 with RULES
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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:04 May 01, 2009
Jkt 217001
impose a substantial direct cost of
compliance on them. We have analyzed
this rule under that Order and have
determined that it does not have
implications for federalism.
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 discuss the effects of
this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
G. Taking of Private Property
This rule will not affect 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
will not create an environmental risk to
health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.
J. Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it will 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 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
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 lieu of
government-unique standards in their
regulatory activities unless the agency
determines use of these standards
would be inconsistent with law or are
otherwise impractical. Agencies not
using voluntary consensus standards in
lieu of government-unique standards
must provide 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
adopted by voluntary consensus
standard bodies.
This rule does not use voluntary
consensus standards as there are none
that meet the objectives of this
rulemaking, and, 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 023–01 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(b), (d),
and (e) of the Instruction and neither an
environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is
required. This rule involves the
delegation of authority, the inspection
and documentation of vessels, and
equipment approval and carriage
requirements. An environmental
analysis checklist and a categorical
exclusion determination are available in
the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.
E:\FR\FM\04MYR1.SGM
04MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 84 / Monday, May 4, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects
PART 8—VESSEL INSPECTION
ALTERNATIVES
46 CFR Part 2
3. The authority citation for part 8
continues to read as follows:
Marine safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Vessels.
■
46 CFR Part 8
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3306, 3316,
3703; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
Administrative practice and
procedure, Incorporation by reference,
Organization and functions
(Government agencies), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Vessels.
46 CFR Part 189
Marine safety, Oceanographic
research vessels, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
§ 8.320 Classification society authorization
to issue international certificates.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 46
CFR parts 2, 8, and 189 as follows:
■
*
PART 2—VESSEL INSPECTIONS
1. The authority citation for part 2
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1903; 43 U.S.C. 1333;
46 U.S.C. 2110, 3103, 3205, 3306, 3307, 3703;
46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; E.O. 12234, 45 FR
58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1. Subpart 2.45 also issued under
the Act Dec. 27, 1950, Ch. 1155, secs. 1, 2,
64 Stat. 1120 (see 46 U.S.C. App. Note prec.
1).
2. Amend § 2.01–25 as follows:
a. Add a new paragraph (a)(1)(ix) to
read as set forth below;
■ b. Add a new paragraph (a)(2)(ix) to
read as set forth below;
■ c. In paragraph (a)(3), remove the
words ‘‘the American Bureau of
Shipping may issue the Cargo Ship
Safety Construction Certificate to cargo
and tankships which it classes.’’ and
add, in their place, the words ‘‘an
authorized classification society may
issue international convention
certificates as permitted under part 8,
subpart C, of this title.’’ and;
■ d. In paragraph (b)(1), after the word
‘‘Cargoes),’’ remove the word ‘‘and’’,
and after the words ‘‘Passenger
Vessels)’’, add the words ‘‘and
Subchapter U (Oceanographic Research
Vessels),’’.
■
■
tjames on PRODPC75 with RULES
§ 2.01–25 International Convention for the
Safety of Life at Sea, 1974.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(ix) High-Speed Craft Safety
Certificate
(2) * * *
(ix) High-Speed Craft Safety
Certificate
*
*
*
*
*
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:04 May 01, 2009
Jkt 217001
4. Amend § 8.320 as follows:
a. In paragraph (b)(8), remove the
word ‘‘and’’;
■ b. In paragraph (b)(9), remove the
period and add, in its place, a
semicolon; and
■ c. Add new paragraphs (b)(10) and
(b)(11) to read as follows:
■
■
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(10) SOLAS Passenger Ship Safety
Certificate; and
(11) High-Speed Craft Safety
Certificate.
*
*
*
*
*
5. In § 8.420, revise paragraph (c) to
read as follows:
■
§ 8.420 Classification society authorization
to participate in the Alternate Compliance
Program.
*
*
*
*
(c) A recognized classification society:
(1) Will be eligible to receive
authorization to participate in the ACP
only after the Coast Guard has delegated
to it the authority to issue the following
certificates:
(i) International Load Line Certificate;
(ii) International Tonnage Certificate;
(iii) Cargo Ship Safety Construction
Certificate;
(iv) Cargo Ship Safety Equipment
Certificate; and
(v) International Oil Pollution
Prevention Certificate; and
(2) Must have performed a delegated
function related to general vessel safety
assessment, as defined in § 8.100 of this
part, for a two-year period.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 189.15–5
20419
Alternate compliance.
(a) In place of compliance with other
applicable provisions of this subchapter,
the owner or operator of a vessel subject
to plan review and inspection under
this subchapter for initial issuance or
renewal of a Certificate of Inspection
may comply with the Alternate
Compliance Program provisions of 46
CFR part 8.
(b) For the purposes of this section, a
list of authorized classification societies,
including information for ordering
copies of approved classification society
rules and supplements, is available from
Commandant (CG–521), 2100 Second
St., SW., Washington, DC 20593–0001;
telephone (202) 372–1371; or fax (202)
372–1925. Approved classification
society rules and supplements are
incorporated by reference into 46 CFR
8.110(b).
Dated: April 27, 2009.
Howard L. Hime,
U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Director of
Commercial Regulations and Standards.
[FR Doc. E9–10113 Filed 5–1–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
*
Subchapter U—Oceanographic Research
Vessels
PART 189—INSPECTION AND
CERTIFICATION
6. The authority citation for part 189
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(j); 46 U.S.C.
2113, 3306, 3307; E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801,
3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277; E.O. 12777, 56
FR 54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
7. Add new § 189.15–5 to read as
follows:
■
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
47 CFR Part 73
[DA 09–837; MB Docket No. 07–175; RM–
11380]
Radio Broadcasting Service; Cuba, IL
AGENCY: Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Audio Division grants a
petition for rule making filed by KM
Communications, Inc. (‘‘Petitioner’’) to
substitute Channel 252A for vacant
Channel 292 at Cuba, Illinois. Petitioner
proposes the foregoing channel
substitution to accommodate its
construction permit application to
substitute Channel 291A for Channel
252A at Abington. Channel 292A can be
allotted at Cuba, Illinois, in compliance
with the Commission’s technical
engineering requirements, at 40–25–50
North Latitude and 90–14–05 West
Longitude with a site restriction of 7.9
kilometers (4.9 miles) southwest of
Cuba.
DATES: Effective June 1, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Secretary, Federal
Communications Commission, 445
Twelfth Street, SW., Washington, DC
20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard B. Gorman, Media Bureau, (202)
418–2187.
E:\FR\FM\04MYR1.SGM
04MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 84 (Monday, May 4, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20416-20419]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-10113]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
46 CFR Parts 2, 8, and 189
[Docket No. USCG-2004-19823]
RIN 1625-AA92
Alternate Compliance Program: Vessel Inspection Alternatives
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard amends the vessel inspection regulations to
expand the Alternate Compliance Program (ACP). Through these
amendments, we are updating the list of certificates the Coast Guard
issues, incorporating Coast Guard policy regarding eligibility
requirements for classification societies participating in the ACP,
recognizing classification societies other than the American Bureau of
Shipping, and expanding the ACP to include oceanographic research
vessels.
DATES: This rule is effective June 3, 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-2004-19823 and are available for inspection at
the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
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 Mr. William Peters, U.S. Coast Guard Office of Design and
Engineering Standards, at telephone 202-372-1371, or e-mail him at
William.S.Peters@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing the docket,
call Ms. Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202-366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents for the Preamble
I. Abbreviations
II. Background and Purpose
III. Discussion of Comments
IV. Discussion of Final Rule
V. 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
ACP Alternate Compliance Program
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
DMS Docket Management System
DOT Department of Transportation
FR Federal Register
IMO International Maritime Organization
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
NVIC Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular
PSSC Passenger Ship Safety Certificate
HSC High-speed Craft
RIN Regulation Identifier Number
SIP Streamlined Inspection Program
SOLAS International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea
US United States
USC United States Code
USCG United States Coast Guard
VAP Vessel Action Plan
II. Background and Purpose
The Alternate Compliance Program (ACP) was launched as a pilot
program in 1995. A notice about the ACP was published in the Federal
Register on February 3, 1995. 60 FR 6687. Under the ACP, owners and
operators of eligible vessels may request inspection by an authorized
classification society, as defined in 46 CFR 8.100, using an
equivalence to the requirements in the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) comprising classification society rules, provisions of
International Maritime Organization (IMO) treaties, and a supplementary
list of requirements from the CFR that were not in IMO provisions or
classification society rules. A classification society gained
eligibility to participate in the ACP by meeting the standards
described in the regulations. If it met these standards, a
classification society was recognized and delegated authority to
conduct plan reviews and inspections, and issue, on the Coast Guard's
behalf, certain IMO certificates documenting compliance with IMO treaty
provisions.
An interim rule establishing new 46 CFR part 8, ``Vessel Inspection
Alternatives'' was published in the Federal Register on December 27,
1996. 61 FR 68510. The pilot program was concluded in 1997 and the ACP
was fully implemented by a final rule published on December 24, 1997.
62 FR 67526.
Predictably, the program has evolved since 1997 and the lessons
learned have been documented and typically implemented through Coast
Guard policy decisions, where appropriate. The May 2007 notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) preceding this final rule described the
Coast Guard's plans to expand the ACP and incorporate the lessons we
have learned into the CFR. 72 FR 28650, May 22, 2007. For example, when
the ACP was initiated, the Coast Guard chose to retain issuing
authority for the SOLAS Passenger Ship Safety Certificate (PSSC). This
decision was based on our experience with the complexities of the
passenger vessel plan review, inspection, and certification process.
Experience has shown that retaining this issuing authority has created
confusion over the roles of the Coast Guard versus the authorized
classification society under the ACP. Experience with the ACP has also
allowed us to gain confidence with the ACP process. Therefore, we
decided to grant PSSC issuing authority to authorized classification
societies.
For similar reasons, in the May 2007 NPRM, we proposed to delegate
to authorized classification societies issuing authority for the High-
Speed Craft (HSC) Safety Certificate. This follows our determination
that the HSC Code is equivalent to the 46 CFR Subchapter H requirements
for passenger vessels. We published our
[[Page 20417]]
decision in Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular (NVIC) 6-99 on
inspection of high-speed craft and in Policy Letter 01-00, dated May 3,
2000. NVIC 6-99 is available from the Coast Guard National Maritime
Center on the World Wide Web at https://www.uscg.mil/hq/gm/nvic/index90.htm. Policy Letter number 01-00 is available in the docket for
this rulemaking. As the Coast Guard and several classification
societies have now gained significant experience with the HSC Code, it
is now appropriate to add the HSC Certificate to the ACP.
Our experience with the success of the ACP has also given us the
flexibility to explore applying the program to other types of vessels
that were originally excluded under our measured implementation
approach. Positive feedback and recommendations from the U.S. maritime
industry gathered since we initiated ACP demonstrate broad support for
this idea. As a result, in May 2007, we proposed that the ACP be
expanded to encompass Oceanographic Research Vessels that engage in
international voyages.
Soon after the ACP rules went into effect, we recognized that a
classification society needs authorization to issue five basic IMO
certificates to fully leverage ACP flexibility, namely:
The Cargo Ship Safety Construction Certificate from the
International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea, 1974;
The Cargo Ship Safety Equipment Certificate from the
International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea, 1974;
The International Load Line Certificate from the
International Convention on Load Lines;
The International Tonnage Certificate from the
International Convention on Tonnage Measurement; and
The International Oil Pollution Prevention Certificate
from the Protocol of 1978 relating to the International Convention for
the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973.
While we have implemented this concept as part of our operating
policies, it had not been incorporated into 46 CFR part 8. Therefore,
in our May 2007 NPRM, we proposed to revise 46 CFR part 8 to require
that a classification society have authority to issue the five basic
IMO certificates to be eligible to participate in the ACP.
The initial version of the ACP only applied to the American Bureau
of Shipping with whom the Coast Guard had collaborated to develop the
first U.S. Supplement--a list of differences between the CFR and the
combination of IMO treaty provisions and classification society rules.
As the program has expanded, we have engaged in similar partnerships
with other classification societies that are now approved to
participate in the ACP. Consequently, our specific references to the
American Bureau of Shipping in 46 CFR part 2 are outdated. Therefore,
in May 2007, we proposed to replace specific references to the American
Bureau of Shipping with a more general reference to authorized
classification societies. The term ``authorized classification
society'' is already defined in 46 CFR 8.100.
III. Discussion of Comments
We received four letters commenting on the notice of proposed
rulemaking published May 22, 2007. 72 FR 28650. The commenters
supported the Alternate Compliance Program (ACP) and recommended the
Coast Guard expand the program further to the U.S. tank barge industry,
the Great Lakes shipping fleet, offshore supply vessels, and other
domestic vessels that receive classification and loadline certificates.
The Coast Guard appreciates these comments. The ACP is one of many
ways the Coast Guard partners with our industry stakeholders to make
the best use of our combined resources, achieve a balance between
industry and government interests, and improve opportunities for the
U.S. maritime community to be competitive in the global marketplace.
The Coast Guard has opted not to delegate authority to implement our
regulations on domestic vessels.
The owners of domestic vessels may apply for enrollment in other,
similar programs, such as the Streamlined Inspection Program (SIP)
described in 46 CFR part 8, subpart E. In the SIP, the vessel owner and
the Coast Guard work together to develop a Vessel Action Plan (VAP)
that prescribes the procedures for maintenance, examination, and
inspection of a vessel enrolled in the SIP. Under the SIP, owners of
domestic vessels earn, in a manner similar to the ACP, more autonomy,
flexibility, and responsibility for their vessels and operations under
Coast Guard oversight. We made no changes from the proposed rule based
on these comments.
IV. Discussion of Final Rule
This final rule amends 46 CFR 2.01-25(a)(1) and (a)(2) to:
List all SOLAS certificates required to be maintained
aboard ships, including the High-Speed Craft Safety Certificate; and
Update the lists of SOLAS certificates that the Coast
Guard issues and that can be issued by an authorized classification
society on the Coast Guard's behalf.
In the proposed regulatory text of the May 2007 NPRM, we omitted
the HSC Safety certificate from the list of IMO certificates the Coast
Guard would issue, but we did reference such an update in the preamble
of the NPRM (72 FR 28651). Therefore, in this final rule we added a
paragraph (ix) to Sec. 2.01-25(a)(2) to include HSC Safety in the list
of certificates issued by the Coast Guard.
In Sec. 2.01-25(a)(3), we changed the phrase ``American Bureau of
Shipping'' to ``authorized classification society.''
In Sec. 8.320(b), we added the following IMO certificates to the
list of those that can be issued by an authorized classification
society:
Passenger Ship Safety Certificate, and
High-Speed Craft Safety Certificate.
Also, in Sec. 8.420(c), we added to the list of conditions for
eligibility to participate in the ACP, a requirement that a
classification society must have been delegated issuing authority for
the Cargo Ship Safety Construction Certificate, Cargo Ship Safety
Equipment Certificate, International Load Line Certificate,
International Tonnage Certificate, and International Oil Pollution
Prevention Certificate.
Finally, in new Sec. 189.15-5, we expand the ACP to include
Subchapter U ``Oceanographic Research Vessels.''
V. Regulatory Analyses
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. Regulatory Planning and Review
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.
This rule will not impose mandatory costs on the public because it
enables voluntary alternatives to inspections by Coast Guard personnel.
We anticipate that vessel owners and operators will realize potential
cost savings due to the expansion of the ACP. In this rule, we add to
the delegation of certain inspections (and the resulting issuance of
certain certificates) to classification societies that potentially
leads to a
[[Page 20418]]
reduction of time and resources for plan review and the vessel
inspection process.
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.
In the NPRM, we certified under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that the proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities and we requested public comments on this
certification. We received no comments on this certification and adopt
it as final.
This rule does not change any requirements in the regulations. It
simply updates and expands an existing voluntary program for alternate
compliance with Coast Guard regulations. Therefore, the Coast Guard
certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule would 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 this rule so they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the rule affects
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please consult Mr. William Peters, U.S. Coast Guard Office of Design
and Engineering Standards, telephone 202-372-1731. 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. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.
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
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
G. Taking of Private Property
This rule will not affect 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 will not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.
J. Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it will 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 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 lieu of government-unique standards in their regulatory activities
unless the agency determines use of these standards would be
inconsistent with law or are otherwise impractical. Agencies not using
voluntary consensus standards in lieu of government-unique standards
must provide 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 adopted
by voluntary consensus standard bodies.
This rule does not use voluntary consensus standards as there are
none that meet the objectives of this rulemaking, and, 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 023-01 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(b), (d), and (e) of the
Instruction and neither an environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is required. This rule involves the
delegation of authority, the inspection and documentation of vessels,
and equipment approval and carriage requirements. An environmental
analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion determination are
available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.
[[Page 20419]]
List of Subjects
46 CFR Part 2
Marine safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels.
46 CFR Part 8
Administrative practice and procedure, Incorporation by reference,
Organization and functions (Government agencies), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Vessels.
46 CFR Part 189
Marine safety, Oceanographic research vessels, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 46
CFR parts 2, 8, and 189 as follows:
PART 2--VESSEL INSPECTIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1903; 43 U.S.C. 1333; 46 U.S.C. 2110,
3103, 3205, 3306, 3307, 3703; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; E.O. 12234, 45
FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1. Subpart 2.45 also issued under the Act Dec.
27, 1950, Ch. 1155, secs. 1, 2, 64 Stat. 1120 (see 46 U.S.C. App.
Note prec. 1).
0
2. Amend Sec. 2.01-25 as follows:
0
a. Add a new paragraph (a)(1)(ix) to read as set forth below;
0
b. Add a new paragraph (a)(2)(ix) to read as set forth below;
0
c. In paragraph (a)(3), remove the words ``the American Bureau of
Shipping may issue the Cargo Ship Safety Construction Certificate to
cargo and tankships which it classes.'' and add, in their place, the
words ``an authorized classification society may issue international
convention certificates as permitted under part 8, subpart C, of this
title.'' and;
0
d. In paragraph (b)(1), after the word ``Cargoes),'' remove the word
``and'', and after the words ``Passenger Vessels)'', add the words
``and Subchapter U (Oceanographic Research Vessels),''.
Sec. 2.01-25 International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea,
1974.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(ix) High-Speed Craft Safety Certificate
(2) * * *
(ix) High-Speed Craft Safety Certificate
* * * * *
PART 8--VESSEL INSPECTION ALTERNATIVES
0
3. The authority citation for part 8 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3306, 3316, 3703; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
0
4. Amend Sec. 8.320 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (b)(8), remove the word ``and'';
0
b. In paragraph (b)(9), remove the period and add, in its place, a
semicolon; and
0
c. Add new paragraphs (b)(10) and (b)(11) to read as follows:
Sec. 8.320 Classification society authorization to issue
international certificates.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(10) SOLAS Passenger Ship Safety Certificate; and
(11) High-Speed Craft Safety Certificate.
* * * * *
0
5. In Sec. 8.420, revise paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 8.420 Classification society authorization to participate in the
Alternate Compliance Program.
* * * * *
(c) A recognized classification society:
(1) Will be eligible to receive authorization to participate in the
ACP only after the Coast Guard has delegated to it the authority to
issue the following certificates:
(i) International Load Line Certificate;
(ii) International Tonnage Certificate;
(iii) Cargo Ship Safety Construction Certificate;
(iv) Cargo Ship Safety Equipment Certificate; and
(v) International Oil Pollution Prevention Certificate; and
(2) Must have performed a delegated function related to general
vessel safety assessment, as defined in Sec. 8.100 of this part, for a
two-year period.
* * * * *
Subchapter U--Oceanographic Research Vessels
PART 189--INSPECTION AND CERTIFICATION
0
6. The authority citation for part 189 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(j); 46 U.S.C. 2113, 3306, 3307; E.O.
12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277; E.O. 12777, 56 FR
54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.
0
7. Add new Sec. 189.15-5 to read as follows:
Sec. 189.15-5 Alternate compliance.
(a) In place of compliance with other applicable provisions of this
subchapter, the owner or operator of a vessel subject to plan review
and inspection under this subchapter for initial issuance or renewal of
a Certificate of Inspection may comply with the Alternate Compliance
Program provisions of 46 CFR part 8.
(b) For the purposes of this section, a list of authorized
classification societies, including information for ordering copies of
approved classification society rules and supplements, is available
from Commandant (CG-521), 2100 Second St., SW., Washington, DC 20593-
0001; telephone (202) 372-1371; or fax (202) 372-1925. Approved
classification society rules and supplements are incorporated by
reference into 46 CFR 8.110(b).
Dated: April 27, 2009.
Howard L. Hime,
U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Director of Commercial Regulations and
Standards.
[FR Doc. E9-10113 Filed 5-1-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P