Pollution Prevention Equipment, 52413-52418 [E9-24670]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
regulations that will have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The Department does not
believe that this rule will have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, as
the rule relieves the additional burden
imposed upon labor organizations
through the rescission of the regulations
published on January 21, 2009.
Therefore, a regulatory flexibility
analysis under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act is not required. The
Secretary has certified this conclusion
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration.
Unfunded Mandates Reform
This rule will not include any Federal
mandate that may result in increased
expenditures by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, of $100
million or more, or in increased
expenditures by the private sector of
$100 million or more.
List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 403
Labor unions, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
■ For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the Final Rule published
January 21, 2009 amending 29 CFR parts
403 and 408 (74 FR 3678), for which the
effective date was delayed on February
20, 2009 (74 FR 7814) and April 21,
2009 (74 FR 18132) is withdrawn.
Signed in Washington, DC, this 7th day of
October 2009.
Shelby Hallmark,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Employment
Standards.
John Lund,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for LaborManagement Programs.
[FR Doc. E9–24571 Filed 10–9–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–CP–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Paperwork Reduction Act
Coast Guard
This rule contains no new
information collection requirements for
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.). If the January 21 rule had gone
into effect, it would have increased the
burden of reporting under OMB No.
1215–0188. Under the January 21 rule,
the total burden hours per Form LM–2
respondent would have increased by
approximately 60.06 hours, and the total
burden hours would have increased by
274,539. The average cost per Form LM–
2 respondent would have been
increased by $1,939 and the total cost
would have increased by $8,863,038.
Since this rule rescinds the January 21
rule, the increases in reporting burden
under OMB No. 1215–0188 will not
occur. The Department will seek OMB
approval of any revisions of the existing
information collection requirements, in
accordance with the PRA.
33 CFR Parts 155 and 157; 46 CFR Part
162
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as
defined by section 804 of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, 5 U.S.C. 804. This
rule will not result in an annual effect
on the economy of $100,000,000 or
more; a major increase in costs or prices;
or significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or on the
ability of the United States-based
companies to compete with foreignbased companies in domestic and
export markets.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:30 Oct 09, 2009
Jkt 220001
[Docket No. USCG–2004–18939]
RIN 1625–AA90
Pollution Prevention Equipment
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is finalizing
its January 16, 2009, interim rule
establishing oil pollution prevention
equipment requirements with one minor
amendment to the rule’s effective date
for vessels with equipment installed on
or after January 1, 2005. The rule
harmonizes Coast Guard regulations
with new International Maritime
Organization (IMO) guidelines and
specifications issued under the
International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution from Ships
(MARPOL) Annex I. It implements these
MARPOL Annex I regulations and,
ultimately, is intended to reduce the
amount of oil discharged from vessels
and eliminate the use of ozonedepleting solvents in equipment tests.
All vessels replacing or installing oilywater separators and bilge alarms must
install equipment that meets these
revised standards. Newly constructed
vessels carrying oil in bulk must install
monitoring systems that meet the
revised standards.
DATES: This final rule is effective
November 12, 2009, except that
paragraphs 33 CFR 155.350(a)(3),
155.360(a)(2), and 155.370(a)(4) are
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
effective October 13, 2009. The
incorporation by reference of certain
publications listed in the rule is
approved by the Director of the Federal
Register on November 12, 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–2004–18939 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 by going
to https://www.regulations.gov, inserting
USCG–2004–18939 in the ‘‘Keyword’’
box, and then clicking ‘‘Search.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this rule, call or
email Mr. Wayne Lundy, Systems
Engineering Division (CG–5213), Office
of Design and Engineering Standards,
U.S. Coast Guard, telephone 202–372–
1379, e-mail Wayne.M.Lundy@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
Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
52413
I. Abbreviations
II. Regulatory History
III. Background and Purpose
IV. Discussion of Comments and Changes
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. 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
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
IMO International Maritime Organization
IOPP International Oil Pollution Prevention
ISO International Organization for
Standardization
MARPOL International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution from Ships
MEPC Marine Environment Protection
Committee
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
E:\FR\FM\13OCR1.SGM
13OCR1
52414
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OWS Oily-Water Separator
PPM Parts Per Million
§ Section symbol
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Regulatory History
On November 3, 2005, the Coast
Guard published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) entitled ‘‘Pollution
Prevention Equipment’’ in the Federal
Register (70 FR 67066).1 We received 17
letters containing 80 comments on the
proposed rule. The comments did not
request a public meeting and none was
held.
On January 16, 2009, the Coast Guard
published an interim rule (74 FR 3364)
that updated references for the
international standard for pollution
prevention equipment from the
International Maritime Organization’s
Marine Environment Protection
Committee resolution, MEPC.60(33) to
the new international standard in
MEPC.107(49) and addressed the 80
comments on the NPRM. With the
interim rule we also sought comment on
three paragraphs: 33 CFR 155.350(a)(3),
155.360(a)(2), and 155.370(a)(4), which
proposed requiring any pollution
prevention equipment installed on or
after January 1, 2005, that does not
comply with MEPC.107(49), which
became an international requirement on
January 1, 2005, to be replaced with
pollution prevention equipment that
does comply with the MEPC.107(49)
standard. These three paragraphs were
not included in the NPRM, and we
solicited public comment on them in
the interim rule. We received five
comments, which are discussed below
in IV. Discussion of Comments and
Changes.
The interim rule, with the exception
of the three paragraphs, became
effective on March 17, 2009. Under the
interim rule, the three paragraphs
regarding equipment installed on or
after January 1, 2005, were set to
become effective on October 13, 2009.
Under this final rule, however, the three
paragraphs as amended by the final rule
are effective October 13, 2009. The
Coast Guard is making these paragraphs
effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and
(3) because the three paragraphs relieve
a restriction otherwise imposed by the
interim rule that would take effect
1 On December 15, 2005, the Coast Guard
published a correction notice in the Federal
Register (70 FR 74259). The NPRM, as published,
contained the phrase ‘‘must be limited’’ at two
points, once in the preamble and once in the
regulatory text. We deleted that phrase because it
was inserted by error and could have confused
readers.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:30 Oct 09, 2009
Jkt 220001
within 30 days of publication of this
final rule. Specifically, the three
paragraphs relieve the burden on ship
owners with equipment installed on or
after January 1, 2005, from having to
comply with the rule’s requirements by
October 13, 2009, and instead add a
compliance date tied to the vessel’s
drydock or vessel survey schedule, as
applicable. Requiring ship owners to
comply with these requirements on
October 13, 2009, until an effective date
thirty days after the publication of this
final rule would cause unnecessary
burdens and confusion and, therefore,
would be impracticable and contrary to
the public interest. As such, the Coast
Guard has determined that it has good
cause for immediate implementation of
these three paragraphs. The remaining
provisions of this final rule become
effective 30 days after publication in the
Federal Register.
III. Background and Purpose
The discussion of the background that
follows largely repeats the discussion of
the background and purpose set forth in
the interim rule.
This final rule will implement
international standards for oil pollution
prevention equipment designed for
ships and oil tankers. These standards
address the testing, certification, and
approval for oil pollution prevention
equipment, including discharge
monitors, which will help prevent oily
discharges from a ship into the water.
A. Types of Equipment
There are three types of equipment
involved in this rulemaking that deal
with oil, water, and other substances:
A bilge separator (also referred to as
oily-water separator), is designed to
produce an effluent from the bilge of
ships with oil content of 15 parts per
million (ppm) or less; and
A bilge alarm is designed to activate
an automatic stopping device when the
oil content concentration of an effluent
exceeds 15 ppm, and thus stop any
discharge overboard of oily mixtures
with an oil content exceeding 15 ppm.
An oil content meter (hereinafter
‘‘meter’’) is a piece of equipment in an
oil discharge monitoring and control
system (hereinafter ‘‘monitoring
system’’) on an oil tanker. The system
processes oil-tanker ballast and tankwashing water and monitors the
discharge into the sea of oily ballast or
other oil-contaminated water effluent
from the cargo tank areas. The meter
measures the oil content of the effluent
in ppm.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
B. Authority
Under the Act to Prevent Pollution
from Ships, Public Law 96–478, sections
2 and 4, 94 Stat. 2297, 2298 (Oct. 21,
1980), 33 U.S.C. 1901 and 1903, the
Secretary of the Department in which
the Coast Guard is operating is
authorized to prescribe any necessary or
desired regulations to carry out the
provisions of the Act and of Annex I
(Regulations for the prevention of
pollution by oil) of the International
Convention for the Prevention of
Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified
by the Protocol of 1978 relating to that
Convention (MARPOL 73/78). Under
the Act of August 26, 1983, Public Law
98–89, 97 Stat. 500, 504, 522, subtitle II
of title 46 of the U.S. Code (46 U.S.C.),
specifically 46 U.S.C. 3703, the
Secretary of the Department in which
the Coast Guard is operating is
authorized to issue equipment
regulations, and related maintenance
and training regulations for vessels
carrying liquid bulk dangerous cargo,
including oil. Authority under both of
these acts has been delegated to the
Coast Guard under Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1 II(77) and (92)(b).
C. International Standards Being
Implemented
This rulemaking implements
revisions to the international oil
pollution prevention standards for ships
in MARPOL Annex I, specifically
regulations 14, 18, and 31. Under
Article 38 of the Convention on the
International Maritime Organization
(IMO), the IMO Marine Environment
Protection Committee (Committee) is
designated to consider IMO matters
involving the prevention and control of
marine pollution from ships.
In 1992, during its 33rd session, the
Committee adopted a resolution,
MEPC.60(33), containing guidelines and
specifications for pollution prevention
equipment for machinery space bilges of
ships. In 2003, recognizing the
advancement of technology since 1992,
the Committee adopted resolution
MEPC.107(49), which contained new
guidelines and specifications that
superseded those adopted in 1992.
The MEPC.107(49) changed the fluids
used to test pollution prevention
equipment so they would more closely
represent the bilge wastes encountered
on vessels. Emulsified oil in water,
surfactants (for example, detergents),
and other contaminants are typically
found in bilge water. Under
MEPC.107(49), the bilge separator must
be capable of separating the oil from the
E:\FR\FM\13OCR1.SGM
13OCR1
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
emulsion to produce an effluent with an
oil content not exceeding 15 ppm.
The MEPC.107(49) also changed the
method by which oil content is
measured in effluent samples during the
approval process. Past methods
permitted the use of ozone-depleting
solvents, specifically carbon
tetrachloride and Freon 113 (CFC 113).
Both an international treaty and United
States laws call for phasing out the use
of these solvents. See the Montreal
Protocol on Substances that Deplete the
Ozone Layer, (‘‘Montreal Protocol’’),
Sept. 16, 1987, 26 I.L.M. 1550, and Title
VI of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7671–
7671q. Accordingly, MEPC.107(49)
specifies a different test method that
does not use ozone-depleting solvents.
The MEPC.107(49) guidelines and
specifications were incorporated into
Annex I after the 2004 adoption of
resolution MEPC.117(52), which led to
the revision of MARPOL Annex I. On
January 1, 2007, the revised Annex I
came into force. Resolution
MEPC.107(49) is incorporated into
Regulation 14 (Oil filtering equipment)
of the revised Annex I.
Additionally, in 2003, the Committee
also adopted resolution MEPC.108(49),
which revised guidelines and
specifications for oil discharge
monitoring and control systems for oil
tankers constructed after 2004. These
new guidelines and specifications were
incorporated into Regulations 18
(Segregated Ballast Tanks) and 31 (Oil
discharge monitoring and control
system) of the revised Annex I and
apply to oil content meters as part of oil
discharge monitoring and control
systems installed on tankers constructed
after 2004.
The new MEPC.108(49) guidelines
and specifications call for:
• Only one category of a monitoring
system to apply to all tankers of 150
gross tonnage and above;
• The monitoring system to be able to
record position (latitude and longitude)
from a vessel-position indicating device,
allowing more accurate input of speed
parameters;
• Greater control of oil mixture
discharges by tightening the accuracy
requirements for both the oil content
meter and the flow meter; and
• A more objective specification for
identifying crude oils: simply by
number and assigned characteristics and
parameters—such as density, viscosity,
and cloud point—rather than
geographical denominations used in
Resolution A.586(14). See IMO
Subcommittee on Ship Design and
Equipment Report to the Maritime
Safety Committee, DE 46/32 at 12 & 13
(April 4, 2003).
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:30 Oct 09, 2009
Jkt 220001
IV. Discussion of Comments and
Changes
In response to our request for
comments on the three paragraphs—33
CFR 155.350(a)(3), 155.360(a)(2), and
155.370(a)(4)—in the interim rule, we
received five comments from three
commenters. One comment was
submitted jointly by two commenters
who generally agree with the interim
rule, but suggest that the Coast Guard
adopt a pollution standard stricter than
the 15 ppm set forth in MARPOL Annex
I. While the Coast Guard appreciates the
support for the interim rule, the
commenters’ suggestion to adopt a
maximum oil discharge limit lower than
15 ppm is outside the jurisdiction of the
Coast Guard.
The four remaining comments came
from a manufacturer, and one of his
comments specifically addressed 33
CFR 155.350(a)(3), one of the three
delayed-effective date paragraphs on
which we sought public comment in the
interim rule. The three other comments
sought clarification to other aspects of
the interim rule. The Coast Guard
provided the below responses to these
four comments in direct
communications to the manufacturer,
unless noted otherwise. A summary and
the substance of those communications
are available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES.
Regarding 33 CFR 155.350(a)(3), the
commenter asked for clarification on
when ship owners would have to
comply with the requirement set forth
in paragraph (a)(3), which will become
effective on October 13, 2009. The
commenter noted that it appears this
paragraph requires all equipment
installed after 2004 to be supplied or
upgraded to satisfy these new
international standards in
MEPC.107(49), and asked if this needs
to be accomplished by October 13. The
Coast Guard’s initial response in a direct
communication to the manufacturer,
which is included in the docket,
deferred addressing this comment until
the close of the comment period.
The Coast Guard recognizes that it
may not be feasible for ship owners to
comply with the requirements in
§ 155.350(a)(3) by October 13, and in
response to this comment, we are
adding an implementation period to
allow ship owners to budget and plan
for the work required to comply. Under
revised paragraph (a)(3), a vessel owner
must install equipment meeting the new
requirements in MEPC.107(49) by one of
two dates, as set forth in new
paragraphs (a)(3)(i) and (a)(3)(ii): either
the date of the vessel’s first drydock
following October 13, 2009, or for those
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52415
vessels going into international service
for the first time since January 2005, the
date of its first survey prior to receiving
its International Oil Pollution
Prevention (IOPP) certificate. The Coast
Guard is making the same change to
paragraphs 155.360(a)(2) and
155.370(a)(4).
The manufacturer’s second comment
requested clarification on the interim
rule’s affect on his backlog of equipment
that complies with the older
international standard, MEPC.60(33),
and is ordered but not yet installed. The
commenter noted that the interim rule
may preclude the installation of any
MEPC.60(33) equipment after March 17,
2009.
The Coast Guard’s response to this
comment is that equipment that has not
been physically installed must comply
with the current regulations, i.e., the
MEPC.107(49) standard.
The commenter’s third comment
asked for clarification of whether, under
the interim rule, bilge alarms replaced
after March 17, 2009, on separators
installed prior to January 1, 2005, must
be replaced with bilge alarms complying
with the revised 46 CFR 162.050
specifications. The Coast Guard notes
this comment concerns what is meant
by the term ‘‘good working order.’’
After March 17, 2009, if a bilge alarm
approved to MEPC.60(33) needs to be
replaced, then it may be replaced by a
bilge alarm approved to MEPC.60(33),
but only for separators approved to
MEPC.60(33) that were installed on the
ship prior to January 1, 2005. This is
allowed in recognition of the need for
compatibility between the separator and
bilge alarm, as well the relative ease to
replace a bilge alarm. Separators
approved to MEPC.60(33) that were
installed on the ship prior to January 1,
2005, may continue to be used as long
as they are maintained in good working
order, which includes basic or routine
maintenance and repair of such
separators as well as replacement of
components and consumables. If,
however, a separator approved to
MEPC.60(33) needs to be replaced,
regardless of when it was installed on
the ship, then it must be replaced with
a separator approved to MEPC.107(49).
In this case, the separator approved to
MEPC.107(49) must also have a bilge
alarm approved to MEPC.107(49).
Finally, the commenter’s fourth
comment sought confirmation that the
definition of the term ‘‘expired’’ as used
in the preamble to the interim rule (74
FR 3375) has the same meaning as
‘‘expired’’ on the United States Coast
Guard Maritime Information Exchange
Web site, Approved Equipment
E:\FR\FM\13OCR1.SGM
13OCR1
52416
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Definitions. https://cgmix.uscg.mil/
Equipment/Definitions.aspx.2
The Coast Guard response to this
comment is that a bilge alarm or
separator installed on a ship on or after
January 1, 2005, but not having approval
under MEPC.107(49), is subject to the
requirements of 33 CFR 155.350,
155.360, and 155.370, (see 74 FR 3363
and 74 FR 6358), namely the
requirement to be replaced by
equipment approved under
MEPC.107(49) unless it is determined to
be unreasonable or impracticable. Bilge
alarms and separators installed prior to
January 1, 2005, having a Certificate of
Approval issued by the Coast Guard,
can remain installed on the ship as long
as they are maintained in good working
order. Please note: A Certificate of
Approval is issued by the Coast Guard
to a manufacturer usually for a period
of five years. This five-year period
primarily affects the manufacturer and
not the ship. Equipment of a type
approved by the Coast Guard that is
manufactured during this five year
period in accordance with the terms of
the certificate may be installed on a ship
in order to meet the applicable
requirements for approved equipment.
There is no requirement, however, that
equipment be removed when the
Certificate of Approval expires.
Discussion of Final Rule
This rule finalizes the amendments
set forth in the interim rule. A full
discussion of the provisions of this rule
may be found in the ‘‘Discussion of
Interim Rule’’ section of the interim
rule. 74 FR 3364, at 3375. We are
making only one minor change to the
interim rule in the final rule by adding
implementation periods in 33 CFR
155.350(a)(3), 155.360(a)(2), and
155.370(a)(4), as discussed above.
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
V. Incorporation by Reference
The Director of the Federal Register
has approved the material in 33 CFR
157.02 and 46 CFR 162.050–4 for
incorporation by reference under 5
U.S.C. 552 and 1 CFR part 51. Copies of
the material are available from the
sources listed in 33 CFR 157.02 and 46
CFR 162.050–4.
VI. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this final rule after
considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking.
2 ‘‘EXPIRED—Product’s approval has expired, and
the approval holder has not notified us whether it
should be extended or terminated. Pending
resolution of its status, the product is no longer
approved for production. Items manufactured prior
to expiration of the approval are considered
APPROVED.’’
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:30 Oct 09, 2009
Jkt 220001
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.
Public comments on the interim rule
are summarized in Part IV of this
preamble. The Coast Guard received no
public comments, and have made no
changes, that would alter our
assessment of impacts in the interim
rule. We have found no additional data
or information that would change our
findings in the interim rule. We have
adopted the assessment in the interim
rule as final. A summary follows.
We estimated 176 existing vessels and
46 new vessels annually will be affected
by this rule and incur additional costs
for installing OWS and bilge alarms.
We estimated the annual costs of the
OWS and bilge alarms combined range
from $9,000 to $19,000, depending on
vessel type and size for both existing
and new vessels: $9,000 for vessels
below 400 gross tons; $13,000 for
vessels 400 gross tons or more and less
than 10,000 gross tons; and, $19,000 for
vessels 10,000 gross tons and over.
We estimated non-discounted annual
costs for existing vessels at
approximately $2.3 million and
approximately $550,000 for new vessels,
or about $2.9 million combined. We
estimated the total 10-year present value
cost of the rule to be $21 million or $25
million based on a seven or three
percent discount rate (all values
rounded).
The benefits of this rule are improved
environmental conditions from the use
of PPE, which meets higher standards of
pollution prevention. The new OWS
equipment will better handle the
separation of emulsified oils,
surfactants, and contaminants from
water. These pollutants will no longer
be released into the environment
because of these standards. See the
assessments in the interim rule and the
NPRM for additional details.
B. Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this rule has a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The term
‘‘small entities’’ comprises small
businesses, not-for-profit organizations
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 interim rule, 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. We have found no additional
data or information that would change
our findings in the interim rule. We
have adopted the certification in the
interim rule for this final rule. See the
‘‘Small Entity’’ sections of the interim
rule and the NPRM for additional
details.
Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies,
under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), that this final
rule does 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 offered to assist small entities in
understanding the rule so that they
could 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. Wayne
Lundy, Office of Systems Engineering
(CG–5213), Office of Design and
Engineering Standards, U.S. Coast
Guard, telephone 202–372–1379, e-mail
Wayne.M.Lundy@uscg.mil. 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). The paperwork burden associated
with the manufacture, laboratory
testing, approval tests, and marking of
pollution prevention equipment is
addressed in the existing collection of
information, OMB #1625–0035, entitled
‘‘Title 46 CFR Subchapter Q: Lifesaving,
Electrical and Engineering Equipment;
Construction and Materials.’’ The Office
of Management and Budget renewed its
approval of this collection of
information on May 27, 2009. It will
expire after the 3-year approval period
ends on May 31, 2012, unless renewed
again.
E. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
E:\FR\FM\13OCR1.SGM
13OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
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).)
The pollution prevention equipment
regulations promulgated in this rule are
within the field foreclosed from
regulation by the States, and therefore
preemption under E.O. 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
an expenditure, we do discuss the
effects of this rule elsewhere in this
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.
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:30 Oct 09, 2009
Jkt 220001
health or risk to safety that may
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 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 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 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
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This final rule uses the following
consensus standards that are not
voluntary standards:
• IMO Assembly Resolution
A.393(X)—Recommendation on
International Performance and Test
Specifications for Oily-Water Separating
Equipment and Oil Content Meters;
• IMO Assembly Resolution
A.496(XII)—Guidelines and
Specifications for Oil Discharge
Monitoring and Control Systems for Oil
Tankers;
• IMO Assembly Resolution
A.586(14)—Revised Guidelines and
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52417
Specifications for Oil Discharge
Monitoring and Control Systems for Oil
Tankers;
• IMO Marine Environment
Protection Committee Resolution
MEPC.13(19)—Guidelines for Plan
Approval and Installation Survey of Oil
Discharge Monitoring and Control
Systems for Oil Tankers and
Environmental Testing of Control
Sections Thereof;
• IMO Marine Environment
Protection Committee Resolution
MEPC.108(49)—Revised Guidelines and
Specifications for Oil Discharge
Monitoring and Control Systems for Oil
Tankers;
• International Organization for
Standardization Standard ISO 8217
(2005) Petroleum products—Fuels (class
F)—Specification of marine fuels;
• International Organization for
Standardization Standard ISO 9377–2
(2000), Water Quality—Determination of
hydrocarbon oil index—Part 2: Method
Using solvent extraction and Gas
Chromatography.
They are used because the United
States is party to MARPOL Annex I and
we must use these standards to
effectively implement MARPOL Annex
I regulations. The sections that reference
these standards and the locations where
these standards are available are listed
in 33 CFR 157.02 and 46 CFR 162.050–
4.
M. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Department of Homeland Security
Management 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. This rule is categorically
excluded under section 2.B.2, figure
2–1, paragraph (34)(d) of the Instruction
and under section 6(b) of the ‘‘Appendix
to National Environmental Policy Act:
Coast Guard Procedures for Categorical
Exclusions, Notice of Final Agency
Policy,’’ (67 FR 48243, July 23, 2002),
from further environmental
documentation. This regulation fits
within these categorical exclusions
because it concerns equipment approval
and carriage requirements and
implements regulations designed to
protect the environment. An
environmental analysis checklist and a
categorical exclusion determination are
available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES.
E:\FR\FM\13OCR1.SGM
13OCR1
52418
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects
33 CFR Part 155
Alaska, Hazardous substances, Oil
pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
33 CFR Part 157
Cargo vessels, Incorporation by
reference, Oil pollution, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
46 CFR Part 162
Fire prevention, Incorporation by
reference, Marine safety, Oil pollution,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
■ Accordingly, the interim rule
amending 33 CFR parts 155 and 157 and
46 CFR part 162, which was published
at 74 FR 3377 on January 16, 2009, as
amended by the correction published at
74 FR 6358 on February 9, 2009, is
adopted as a final rule with the
following changes:
TITLE 33—NAVIGATION AND
NAVIGABLE WATERS
PART 155—OIL OR HAZARDOUS
MATERIAL POLLUTION PREVENTION
REGULATIONS FOR VESSELS
1. The authority citation for part 155
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231, 1321(j); 46
U.S.C. 3703; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR,
1991 Comp., p. 351; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
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). Section
155.490 also issued under section 4110(b) of
Public Law 101–380. Sections 155.1110
through 155.1150 also issued under 33 U.S.C.
2735.
Note: Additional requirements for vessels
carrying oil or hazardous materials are
contained in 46 CFR parts 30 through 40,
150, 151, and 153.
2. In § 155.350, revise paragraph (a)(3)
to read as follows:
■
(i) A ship entering international
service for the first time since 2004,
must comply with the requirements of
paragraph (a)(3) of this section by the
date of its initial survey prior to
receiving its International Oil Pollution
Prevention (IOPP) certificate.
(ii) Any ship, other than a ship
described in paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this
section, must comply with the
requirements of paragraph (a)(3) of this
section by the date of the ship’s first
drydock after October 13, 2009.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. In § 155.360, revise paragraph (a)(2)
to read as follows:
§ 155.360 Oily mixture (bilge slops)
discharges on oceangoing ships of 400
gross tons and above but less than 10,000
gross tons, excluding ships that carry
ballast water in their fuel oil tanks.
(a) * * *
(2) For equipment installed after 2004
to be approved under paragraph (a)(1) of
this section, it must meet current
standards in 46 CFR part 162, subpart
162.050 by the date set forth in
paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (a)(2)(ii) of this
section, unless the equipment is
installed on a ship constructed before
2005 and it would be unreasonable or
impracticable to meet those current
standards.
(i) A ship entering international
service for the first time since 2004,
must comply with the requirements of
paragraph (a)(2) of this section by the
date of its initial survey prior to
receiving its International Oil Pollution
Prevention (IOPP) certificate.
(ii) Any ship, other than a ship
described in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this
section, must comply with the
requirements of paragraph (a)(2) of this
section by the date of the ship’s first
drydock after October 13, 2009.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. In § 155.370, revise paragraph (a)(4)
to read as follows:
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
§ 155.350 Oily mixture (bilge slops)/fuel oil
tank ballast water discharges on
oceangoing ships of less than 400 gross
tons.
§ 155.370 Oily mixture (bilge slops)/fuel oil
tank ballast water discharges on
oceangoing ships of 10,000 gross tons and
above and oceangoing ships of 400 gross
tons and above that carry ballast water in
their fuel oil tanks.
(a) * * *
(3) For equipment installed after 2004
to be approved under paragraph (a)(2) of
this section, it must meet current
standards in 46 CFR part 162, subpart
162.050 by the date set forth in
paragraphs (a)(3)(i) and (a)(3)(ii) of this
section, unless the equipment is
installed on a ship constructed before
2005 and it would be unreasonable or
impracticable to meet those current
standards.
(a) * * *
(4) For equipment installed after 2004
to be approved under paragraph (a) of
this section, it must meet current
standards in 46 CFR part 162, subpart
162.050 by the date set forth in
paragraphs (a)(4)(i) and (a)(4)(ii) of this
section, unless the equipment is
installed on a ship constructed before
2005 and it would be unreasonable or
impracticable to meet those current
standards.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:30 Oct 09, 2009
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(i) A ship entering international
service for the first time since 2004,
must comply with the requirements of
paragraph (a)(4) of this section by the
date of its initial survey prior to
receiving its International Oil Pollution
Prevention (IOPP) certificate.
(ii) Any ship, other than a ship
described in paragraph (a)(4)(i) of this
section, must comply with the
requirements of paragraph (4) of this
section by the date of the ship’s first
drydock after October 13, 2009.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: October 7, 2009.
J.G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations and
Standards, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. E9–24670 Filed 10–9–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Copyright Royalty Board
37 CFR Part 370
[Docket No. RM 2008–7]
Notice and Recordkeeping for Use of
Sound Recordings Under Statutory
License
AGENCY: Copyright Royalty Board,
Library of Congress.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Copyright Royalty Judges
are issuing final regulations for the
delivery and format of reports of use of
sound recordings for the statutory
licenses set forth in sections 112 and
114 of the Copyright Act.
DATES: Effective Date: November 12,
2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard Strasser, Senior Attorney, or
Gina Giuffreda, Attorney Advisor, by
telephone at (202) 707–7658 or e-mail at
crb@loc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On October 6, 2006, the Copyright
Royalty Judges (‘‘Judges’’) issued
interim regulations published in the
Federal Register for the delivery and
format of reports of use of sound
recordings for the statutory licenses set
forth in sections 112 and 114 of the
Copyright Act. 71 FR 59010. The goal of
those interim regulations was to
establish format and delivery
requirements for reports of use so that
royalty payments to copyright owners
pursuant to section 112 and 114 licenses
could be made from April 1, 2004,
E:\FR\FM\13OCR1.SGM
13OCR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 196 (Tuesday, October 13, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52413-52418]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-24670]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Parts 155 and 157; 46 CFR Part 162
[Docket No. USCG-2004-18939]
RIN 1625-AA90
Pollution Prevention Equipment
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is finalizing its January 16, 2009, interim
rule establishing oil pollution prevention equipment requirements with
one minor amendment to the rule's effective date for vessels with
equipment installed on or after January 1, 2005. The rule harmonizes
Coast Guard regulations with new International Maritime Organization
(IMO) guidelines and specifications issued under the International
Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) Annex I.
It implements these MARPOL Annex I regulations and, ultimately, is
intended to reduce the amount of oil discharged from vessels and
eliminate the use of ozone-depleting solvents in equipment tests. All
vessels replacing or installing oily-water separators and bilge alarms
must install equipment that meets these revised standards. Newly
constructed vessels carrying oil in bulk must install monitoring
systems that meet the revised standards.
DATES: This final rule is effective November 12, 2009, except that
paragraphs 33 CFR 155.350(a)(3), 155.360(a)(2), and 155.370(a)(4) are
effective October 13, 2009. The incorporation by reference of certain
publications listed in the rule is approved by the Director of the
Federal Register on November 12, 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-2004-18939 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 by going to https://www.regulations.gov,
inserting USCG-2004-18939 in the ``Keyword'' box, and then clicking
``Search.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Mr. Wayne Lundy, Systems Engineering Division (CG-5213),
Office of Design and Engineering Standards, U.S. Coast Guard, telephone
202-372-1379, e-mail Wayne.M.Lundy@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
I. Abbreviations
II. Regulatory History
III. Background and Purpose
IV. Discussion of Comments and Changes
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. 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
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
IMO International Maritime Organization
IOPP International Oil Pollution Prevention
ISO International Organization for Standardization
MARPOL International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from
Ships
MEPC Marine Environment Protection Committee
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
[[Page 52414]]
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OWS Oily-Water Separator
PPM Parts Per Million
Sec. Section symbol
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Regulatory History
On November 3, 2005, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) entitled ``Pollution Prevention Equipment'' in the
Federal Register (70 FR 67066).\1\ We received 17 letters containing 80
comments on the proposed rule. The comments did not request a public
meeting and none was held.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On December 15, 2005, the Coast Guard published a correction
notice in the Federal Register (70 FR 74259). The NPRM, as
published, contained the phrase ``must be limited'' at two points,
once in the preamble and once in the regulatory text. We deleted
that phrase because it was inserted by error and could have confused
readers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 16, 2009, the Coast Guard published an interim rule (74
FR 3364) that updated references for the international standard for
pollution prevention equipment from the International Maritime
Organization's Marine Environment Protection Committee resolution,
MEPC.60(33) to the new international standard in MEPC.107(49) and
addressed the 80 comments on the NPRM. With the interim rule we also
sought comment on three paragraphs: 33 CFR 155.350(a)(3),
155.360(a)(2), and 155.370(a)(4), which proposed requiring any
pollution prevention equipment installed on or after January 1, 2005,
that does not comply with MEPC.107(49), which became an international
requirement on January 1, 2005, to be replaced with pollution
prevention equipment that does comply with the MEPC.107(49) standard.
These three paragraphs were not included in the NPRM, and we solicited
public comment on them in the interim rule. We received five comments,
which are discussed below in IV. Discussion of Comments and Changes.
The interim rule, with the exception of the three paragraphs,
became effective on March 17, 2009. Under the interim rule, the three
paragraphs regarding equipment installed on or after January 1, 2005,
were set to become effective on October 13, 2009. Under this final
rule, however, the three paragraphs as amended by the final rule are
effective October 13, 2009. The Coast Guard is making these paragraphs
effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register
in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3) because the three
paragraphs relieve a restriction otherwise imposed by the interim rule
that would take effect within 30 days of publication of this final
rule. Specifically, the three paragraphs relieve the burden on ship
owners with equipment installed on or after January 1, 2005, from
having to comply with the rule's requirements by October 13, 2009, and
instead add a compliance date tied to the vessel's drydock or vessel
survey schedule, as applicable. Requiring ship owners to comply with
these requirements on October 13, 2009, until an effective date thirty
days after the publication of this final rule would cause unnecessary
burdens and confusion and, therefore, would be impracticable and
contrary to the public interest. As such, the Coast Guard has
determined that it has good cause for immediate implementation of these
three paragraphs. The remaining provisions of this final rule become
effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.
III. Background and Purpose
The discussion of the background that follows largely repeats the
discussion of the background and purpose set forth in the interim rule.
This final rule will implement international standards for oil
pollution prevention equipment designed for ships and oil tankers.
These standards address the testing, certification, and approval for
oil pollution prevention equipment, including discharge monitors, which
will help prevent oily discharges from a ship into the water.
A. Types of Equipment
There are three types of equipment involved in this rulemaking that
deal with oil, water, and other substances:
A bilge separator (also referred to as oily-water separator), is
designed to produce an effluent from the bilge of ships with oil
content of 15 parts per million (ppm) or less; and
A bilge alarm is designed to activate an automatic stopping device
when the oil content concentration of an effluent exceeds 15 ppm, and
thus stop any discharge overboard of oily mixtures with an oil content
exceeding 15 ppm.
An oil content meter (hereinafter ``meter'') is a piece of
equipment in an oil discharge monitoring and control system
(hereinafter ``monitoring system'') on an oil tanker. The system
processes oil-tanker ballast and tank-washing water and monitors the
discharge into the sea of oily ballast or other oil-contaminated water
effluent from the cargo tank areas. The meter measures the oil content
of the effluent in ppm.
B. Authority
Under the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships, Public Law 96-478,
sections 2 and 4, 94 Stat. 2297, 2298 (Oct. 21, 1980), 33 U.S.C. 1901
and 1903, the Secretary of the Department in which the Coast Guard is
operating is authorized to prescribe any necessary or desired
regulations to carry out the provisions of the Act and of Annex I
(Regulations for the prevention of pollution by oil) of the
International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships,
1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating to that Convention
(MARPOL 73/78). Under the Act of August 26, 1983, Public Law 98-89, 97
Stat. 500, 504, 522, subtitle II of title 46 of the U.S. Code (46
U.S.C.), specifically 46 U.S.C. 3703, the Secretary of the Department
in which the Coast Guard is operating is authorized to issue equipment
regulations, and related maintenance and training regulations for
vessels carrying liquid bulk dangerous cargo, including oil. Authority
under both of these acts has been delegated to the Coast Guard under
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1 II(77) and
(92)(b).
C. International Standards Being Implemented
This rulemaking implements revisions to the international oil
pollution prevention standards for ships in MARPOL Annex I,
specifically regulations 14, 18, and 31. Under Article 38 of the
Convention on the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the IMO
Marine Environment Protection Committee (Committee) is designated to
consider IMO matters involving the prevention and control of marine
pollution from ships.
In 1992, during its 33rd session, the Committee adopted a
resolution, MEPC.60(33), containing guidelines and specifications for
pollution prevention equipment for machinery space bilges of ships. In
2003, recognizing the advancement of technology since 1992, the
Committee adopted resolution MEPC.107(49), which contained new
guidelines and specifications that superseded those adopted in 1992.
The MEPC.107(49) changed the fluids used to test pollution
prevention equipment so they would more closely represent the bilge
wastes encountered on vessels. Emulsified oil in water, surfactants
(for example, detergents), and other contaminants are typically found
in bilge water. Under MEPC.107(49), the bilge separator must be capable
of separating the oil from the
[[Page 52415]]
emulsion to produce an effluent with an oil content not exceeding 15
ppm.
The MEPC.107(49) also changed the method by which oil content is
measured in effluent samples during the approval process. Past methods
permitted the use of ozone-depleting solvents, specifically carbon
tetrachloride and Freon 113 (CFC 113). Both an international treaty and
United States laws call for phasing out the use of these solvents. See
the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer,
(``Montreal Protocol''), Sept. 16, 1987, 26 I.L.M. 1550, and Title VI
of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7671-7671q. Accordingly, MEPC.107(49)
specifies a different test method that does not use ozone-depleting
solvents.
The MEPC.107(49) guidelines and specifications were incorporated
into Annex I after the 2004 adoption of resolution MEPC.117(52), which
led to the revision of MARPOL Annex I. On January 1, 2007, the revised
Annex I came into force. Resolution MEPC.107(49) is incorporated into
Regulation 14 (Oil filtering equipment) of the revised Annex I.
Additionally, in 2003, the Committee also adopted resolution
MEPC.108(49), which revised guidelines and specifications for oil
discharge monitoring and control systems for oil tankers constructed
after 2004. These new guidelines and specifications were incorporated
into Regulations 18 (Segregated Ballast Tanks) and 31 (Oil discharge
monitoring and control system) of the revised Annex I and apply to oil
content meters as part of oil discharge monitoring and control systems
installed on tankers constructed after 2004.
The new MEPC.108(49) guidelines and specifications call for:
Only one category of a monitoring system to apply to all
tankers of 150 gross tonnage and above;
The monitoring system to be able to record position
(latitude and longitude) from a vessel-position indicating device,
allowing more accurate input of speed parameters;
Greater control of oil mixture discharges by tightening
the accuracy requirements for both the oil content meter and the flow
meter; and
A more objective specification for identifying crude oils:
simply by number and assigned characteristics and parameters--such as
density, viscosity, and cloud point--rather than geographical
denominations used in Resolution A.586(14). See IMO Subcommittee on
Ship Design and Equipment Report to the Maritime Safety Committee, DE
46/32 at 12 & 13 (April 4, 2003).
IV. Discussion of Comments and Changes
In response to our request for comments on the three paragraphs--33
CFR 155.350(a)(3), 155.360(a)(2), and 155.370(a)(4)--in the interim
rule, we received five comments from three commenters. One comment was
submitted jointly by two commenters who generally agree with the
interim rule, but suggest that the Coast Guard adopt a pollution
standard stricter than the 15 ppm set forth in MARPOL Annex I. While
the Coast Guard appreciates the support for the interim rule, the
commenters' suggestion to adopt a maximum oil discharge limit lower
than 15 ppm is outside the jurisdiction of the Coast Guard.
The four remaining comments came from a manufacturer, and one of
his comments specifically addressed 33 CFR 155.350(a)(3), one of the
three delayed-effective date paragraphs on which we sought public
comment in the interim rule. The three other comments sought
clarification to other aspects of the interim rule. The Coast Guard
provided the below responses to these four comments in direct
communications to the manufacturer, unless noted otherwise. A summary
and the substance of those communications are available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES.
Regarding 33 CFR 155.350(a)(3), the commenter asked for
clarification on when ship owners would have to comply with the
requirement set forth in paragraph (a)(3), which will become effective
on October 13, 2009. The commenter noted that it appears this paragraph
requires all equipment installed after 2004 to be supplied or upgraded
to satisfy these new international standards in MEPC.107(49), and asked
if this needs to be accomplished by October 13. The Coast Guard's
initial response in a direct communication to the manufacturer, which
is included in the docket, deferred addressing this comment until the
close of the comment period.
The Coast Guard recognizes that it may not be feasible for ship
owners to comply with the requirements in Sec. 155.350(a)(3) by
October 13, and in response to this comment, we are adding an
implementation period to allow ship owners to budget and plan for the
work required to comply. Under revised paragraph (a)(3), a vessel owner
must install equipment meeting the new requirements in MEPC.107(49) by
one of two dates, as set forth in new paragraphs (a)(3)(i) and
(a)(3)(ii): either the date of the vessel's first drydock following
October 13, 2009, or for those vessels going into international service
for the first time since January 2005, the date of its first survey
prior to receiving its International Oil Pollution Prevention (IOPP)
certificate. The Coast Guard is making the same change to paragraphs
155.360(a)(2) and 155.370(a)(4).
The manufacturer's second comment requested clarification on the
interim rule's affect on his backlog of equipment that complies with
the older international standard, MEPC.60(33), and is ordered but not
yet installed. The commenter noted that the interim rule may preclude
the installation of any MEPC.60(33) equipment after March 17, 2009.
The Coast Guard's response to this comment is that equipment that
has not been physically installed must comply with the current
regulations, i.e., the MEPC.107(49) standard.
The commenter's third comment asked for clarification of whether,
under the interim rule, bilge alarms replaced after March 17, 2009, on
separators installed prior to January 1, 2005, must be replaced with
bilge alarms complying with the revised 46 CFR 162.050 specifications.
The Coast Guard notes this comment concerns what is meant by the term
``good working order.''
After March 17, 2009, if a bilge alarm approved to MEPC.60(33)
needs to be replaced, then it may be replaced by a bilge alarm approved
to MEPC.60(33), but only for separators approved to MEPC.60(33) that
were installed on the ship prior to January 1, 2005. This is allowed in
recognition of the need for compatibility between the separator and
bilge alarm, as well the relative ease to replace a bilge alarm.
Separators approved to MEPC.60(33) that were installed on the ship
prior to January 1, 2005, may continue to be used as long as they are
maintained in good working order, which includes basic or routine
maintenance and repair of such separators as well as replacement of
components and consumables. If, however, a separator approved to
MEPC.60(33) needs to be replaced, regardless of when it was installed
on the ship, then it must be replaced with a separator approved to
MEPC.107(49). In this case, the separator approved to MEPC.107(49) must
also have a bilge alarm approved to MEPC.107(49).
Finally, the commenter's fourth comment sought confirmation that
the definition of the term ``expired'' as used in the preamble to the
interim rule (74 FR 3375) has the same meaning as ``expired'' on the
United States Coast Guard Maritime Information Exchange Web site,
Approved Equipment
[[Page 52416]]
Definitions. https://cgmix.uscg.mil/Equipment/Definitions.aspx.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ``EXPIRED--Product's approval has expired, and the approval
holder has not notified us whether it should be extended or
terminated. Pending resolution of its status, the product is no
longer approved for production. Items manufactured prior to
expiration of the approval are considered APPROVED.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Coast Guard response to this comment is that a bilge alarm or
separator installed on a ship on or after January 1, 2005, but not
having approval under MEPC.107(49), is subject to the requirements of
33 CFR 155.350, 155.360, and 155.370, (see 74 FR 3363 and 74 FR 6358),
namely the requirement to be replaced by equipment approved under
MEPC.107(49) unless it is determined to be unreasonable or
impracticable. Bilge alarms and separators installed prior to January
1, 2005, having a Certificate of Approval issued by the Coast Guard,
can remain installed on the ship as long as they are maintained in good
working order. Please note: A Certificate of Approval is issued by the
Coast Guard to a manufacturer usually for a period of five years. This
five-year period primarily affects the manufacturer and not the ship.
Equipment of a type approved by the Coast Guard that is manufactured
during this five year period in accordance with the terms of the
certificate may be installed on a ship in order to meet the applicable
requirements for approved equipment. There is no requirement, however,
that equipment be removed when the Certificate of Approval expires.
Discussion of Final Rule
This rule finalizes the amendments set forth in the interim rule. A
full discussion of the provisions of this rule may be found in the
``Discussion of Interim Rule'' section of the interim rule. 74 FR 3364,
at 3375. We are making only one minor change to the interim rule in the
final rule by adding implementation periods in 33 CFR 155.350(a)(3),
155.360(a)(2), and 155.370(a)(4), as discussed above.
V. Incorporation by Reference
The Director of the Federal Register has approved the material in
33 CFR 157.02 and 46 CFR 162.050-4 for incorporation by reference under
5 U.S.C. 552 and 1 CFR part 51. Copies of the material are available
from the sources listed in 33 CFR 157.02 and 46 CFR 162.050-4.
VI. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this final 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.
Public comments on the interim rule are summarized in Part IV of
this preamble. The Coast Guard received no public comments, and have
made no changes, that would alter our assessment of impacts in the
interim rule. We have found no additional data or information that
would change our findings in the interim rule. We have adopted the
assessment in the interim rule as final. A summary follows.
We estimated 176 existing vessels and 46 new vessels annually will
be affected by this rule and incur additional costs for installing OWS
and bilge alarms.
We estimated the annual costs of the OWS and bilge alarms combined
range from $9,000 to $19,000, depending on vessel type and size for
both existing and new vessels: $9,000 for vessels below 400 gross tons;
$13,000 for vessels 400 gross tons or more and less than 10,000 gross
tons; and, $19,000 for vessels 10,000 gross tons and over.
We estimated non-discounted annual costs for existing vessels at
approximately $2.3 million and approximately $550,000 for new vessels,
or about $2.9 million combined. We estimated the total 10-year present
value cost of the rule to be $21 million or $25 million based on a
seven or three percent discount rate (all values rounded).
The benefits of this rule are improved environmental conditions
from the use of PPE, which meets higher standards of pollution
prevention. The new OWS equipment will better handle the separation of
emulsified oils, surfactants, and contaminants from water. These
pollutants will no longer be released into the environment because of
these standards. See the assessments in the interim rule and the NPRM
for additional details.
B. Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule has 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 interim rule, 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. We have found no additional data
or information that would change our findings in the interim rule. We
have adopted the certification in the interim rule for this final rule.
See the ``Small Entity'' sections of the interim rule and the NPRM for
additional details.
Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies, under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), that
this final rule does 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 offered to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they could 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. Wayne Lundy, Office of Systems
Engineering (CG-5213), Office of Design and Engineering Standards, U.S.
Coast Guard, telephone 202-372-1379, e-mail Wayne.M.Lundy@uscg.mil. 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). The paperwork
burden associated with the manufacture, laboratory testing, approval
tests, and marking of pollution prevention equipment is addressed in
the existing collection of information, OMB 1625-0035,
entitled ``Title 46 CFR Subchapter Q: Lifesaving, Electrical and
Engineering Equipment; Construction and Materials.'' The Office of
Management and Budget renewed its approval of this collection of
information on May 27, 2009. It will expire after the 3-year approval
period ends on May 31, 2012, unless renewed again.
E. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
[[Page 52417]]
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).)
The pollution prevention equipment regulations promulgated in this
rule are within the field foreclosed from regulation by the States, and
therefore preemption under E.O. 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 an expenditure, we
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this 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.
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 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 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 adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This final rule uses the following consensus standards that are not
voluntary standards:
IMO Assembly Resolution A.393(X)--Recommendation on
International Performance and Test Specifications for Oily-Water
Separating Equipment and Oil Content Meters;
IMO Assembly Resolution A.496(XII)--Guidelines and
Specifications for Oil Discharge Monitoring and Control Systems for Oil
Tankers;
IMO Assembly Resolution A.586(14)--Revised Guidelines and
Specifications for Oil Discharge Monitoring and Control Systems for Oil
Tankers;
IMO Marine Environment Protection Committee Resolution
MEPC.13(19)--Guidelines for Plan Approval and Installation Survey of
Oil Discharge Monitoring and Control Systems for Oil Tankers and
Environmental Testing of Control Sections Thereof;
IMO Marine Environment Protection Committee Resolution
MEPC.108(49)--Revised Guidelines and Specifications for Oil Discharge
Monitoring and Control Systems for Oil Tankers;
International Organization for Standardization Standard
ISO 8217 (2005) Petroleum products--Fuels (class F)--Specification of
marine fuels;
International Organization for Standardization Standard
ISO 9377-2 (2000), Water Quality--Determination of hydrocarbon oil
index--Part 2: Method Using solvent extraction and Gas Chromatography.
They are used because the United States is party to MARPOL Annex I
and we must use these standards to effectively implement MARPOL Annex I
regulations. The sections that reference these standards and the
locations where these standards are available are listed in 33 CFR
157.02 and 46 CFR 162.050-4.
M. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management 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. This rule is categorically excluded under section 2.B.2,
figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(d) of the Instruction and under section 6(b)
of the ``Appendix to National Environmental Policy Act: Coast Guard
Procedures for Categorical Exclusions, Notice of Final Agency Policy,''
(67 FR 48243, July 23, 2002), from further environmental documentation.
This regulation fits within these categorical exclusions because it
concerns equipment approval and carriage requirements and implements
regulations designed to protect the environment. An environmental
analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion determination are
available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.
[[Page 52418]]
List of Subjects
33 CFR Part 155
Alaska, Hazardous substances, Oil pollution, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
33 CFR Part 157
Cargo vessels, Incorporation by reference, Oil pollution, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
46 CFR Part 162
Fire prevention, Incorporation by reference, Marine safety, Oil
pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
0
Accordingly, the interim rule amending 33 CFR parts 155 and 157 and 46
CFR part 162, which was published at 74 FR 3377 on January 16, 2009, as
amended by the correction published at 74 FR 6358 on February 9, 2009,
is adopted as a final rule with the following changes:
TITLE 33--NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS
PART 155--OIL OR HAZARDOUS MATERIAL POLLUTION PREVENTION
REGULATIONS FOR VESSELS
0
1. The authority citation for part 155 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231, 1321(j); 46 U.S.C. 3703; E.O. 12777,
56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 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).
Section 155.490 also issued under section 4110(b) of Public Law 101-
380. Sections 155.1110 through 155.1150 also issued under 33 U.S.C.
2735.
Note: Additional requirements for vessels carrying oil or
hazardous materials are contained in 46 CFR parts 30 through 40,
150, 151, and 153.
0
2. In Sec. 155.350, revise paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 155.350 Oily mixture (bilge slops)/fuel oil tank ballast water
discharges on oceangoing ships of less than 400 gross tons.
(a) * * *
(3) For equipment installed after 2004 to be approved under
paragraph (a)(2) of this section, it must meet current standards in 46
CFR part 162, subpart 162.050 by the date set forth in paragraphs
(a)(3)(i) and (a)(3)(ii) of this section, unless the equipment is
installed on a ship constructed before 2005 and it would be
unreasonable or impracticable to meet those current standards.
(i) A ship entering international service for the first time since
2004, must comply with the requirements of paragraph (a)(3) of this
section by the date of its initial survey prior to receiving its
International Oil Pollution Prevention (IOPP) certificate.
(ii) Any ship, other than a ship described in paragraph (a)(3)(i)
of this section, must comply with the requirements of paragraph (a)(3)
of this section by the date of the ship's first drydock after October
13, 2009.
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec. 155.360, revise paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 155.360 Oily mixture (bilge slops) discharges on oceangoing
ships of 400 gross tons and above but less than 10,000 gross tons,
excluding ships that carry ballast water in their fuel oil tanks.
(a) * * *
(2) For equipment installed after 2004 to be approved under
paragraph (a)(1) of this section, it must meet current standards in 46
CFR part 162, subpart 162.050 by the date set forth in paragraphs
(a)(2)(i) and (a)(2)(ii) of this section, unless the equipment is
installed on a ship constructed before 2005 and it would be
unreasonable or impracticable to meet those current standards.
(i) A ship entering international service for the first time since
2004, must comply with the requirements of paragraph (a)(2) of this
section by the date of its initial survey prior to receiving its
International Oil Pollution Prevention (IOPP) certificate.
(ii) Any ship, other than a ship described in paragraph (a)(2)(i)
of this section, must comply with the requirements of paragraph (a)(2)
of this section by the date of the ship's first drydock after October
13, 2009.
* * * * *
0
4. In Sec. 155.370, revise paragraph (a)(4) to read as follows:
Sec. 155.370 Oily mixture (bilge slops)/fuel oil tank ballast water
discharges on oceangoing ships of 10,000 gross tons and above and
oceangoing ships of 400 gross tons and above that carry ballast water
in their fuel oil tanks.
(a) * * *
(4) For equipment installed after 2004 to be approved under
paragraph (a) of this section, it must meet current standards in 46 CFR
part 162, subpart 162.050 by the date set forth in paragraphs (a)(4)(i)
and (a)(4)(ii) of this section, unless the equipment is installed on a
ship constructed before 2005 and it would be unreasonable or
impracticable to meet those current standards.
(i) A ship entering international service for the first time since
2004, must comply with the requirements of paragraph (a)(4) of this
section by the date of its initial survey prior to receiving its
International Oil Pollution Prevention (IOPP) certificate.
(ii) Any ship, other than a ship described in paragraph (a)(4)(i)
of this section, must comply with the requirements of paragraph (4) of
this section by the date of the ship's first drydock after October 13,
2009.
* * * * *
Dated: October 7, 2009.
J.G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. E9-24670 Filed 10-9-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P