Notification of Arrival in U.S. Ports; Certain Dangerous Cargoes, 68208-68214 [E9-30347]
Download as PDF
68208
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 23, 2009 / Proposed Rules
(school night and weekend), Drinking of
alcoholic beverages, Driving, Smoking,
Computer/Internet/E-Mail)
References:
Dated: December 16, 2009.
Stanley S. Colvin,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Private Sector
Exchanges, Bureau of Educational and
Cultural Affairs, U.S. Department of State.
through 3, the language ‘‘Example 3.
Automated clearinghouse network. A
operates an automated clearinghouse
(‘‘ACH’’) network that merely’’ is
corrected to read ‘‘Example 3.
Automated clearing house network. A
operates an automated clearing house
(‘‘ACH’’) network that merely’’.
[FR Doc. E9–30274 Filed 12–22–09; 8:45 am]
§ 31.3406–0
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Parts 1 and 31
§ 31.3406(b)(3)–5
[REG–139255–08]
Information Reporting for Payments
Made in Settlement of Payment Card
and Third Party Network Transactions;
Correction
AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Correction to a notice of
proposed rulemaking.
SUMMARY: This document contains
corrections to a notice of proposed
rulemaking (REG–139255–08) that were
published in the Federal Register on
Tuesday, November 24, 2009 (74 FR
61294) relating to information reporting
requirements, information reporting
penalties, and backup withholding
requirements for payment card and
third party network transactions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Barbara Pettoni, (202) 622–4910 (not a
toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
A notice of proposed rulemaking
(REG–139255–08) that is the subject of
this document is under sections 3406,
6041, 6050W, and 6051 of the Internal
Revenue Code.
cprice-sewell on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Need for Correction
As published, a notice of proposed
rulemaking (REG–139255–08) contains
errors that may prove to be misleading
and are in need of clarification.
Correction of Publication
Accordingly, the publication of a
notice of proposed rulemaking (REG–
139255–08), which was the subject of
FR Doc. E9–28076, is corrected as
follows:
[Corrected]
1. On page 61302, column 3,
paragraph (e) Example 3., lines 1
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:31 Dec 22, 2009
[Corrected]
3. On page 61304, column 2, at the
bottom of the column, paragraph (c)
‘‘Effective/applicability date.’’ is added.
RIN 1545–BI51
§ 1.6050W–1
[Corrected]
2. On page 61304, column 2, in the
instructional paragraphs, first entry of
Paragraph 5, the language ‘‘1. Entries for
§ 31.3406(b)(3)–5(a) and (b) are added.’’
is corrected to read ‘‘1. Entries for
§ 31.3406(b)(3)–5(a), (b) and (c) are
added.’’.
BILLING CODE 4710–05–P
Jkt 220001
LaNita Van Dyke,
Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch,
Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief
Counsel (Procedure and Administration).
[FR Doc. E9–30551 Filed 12–22–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Parts 104, 105, 160
[USCG–2004–19963]
RIN 1625–AA93
Notification of Arrival in U.S. Ports;
Certain Dangerous Cargoes
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: On December 16, 2005, the
Coast Guard published an interim rule
that defined ‘‘certain dangerous cargo
residue’’ (CDC residue). After reviewing
comments on the interim rule, the Coast
Guard proposes to change that
definition to include certain bulk
liquids and liquefied gases in residue
quantities. Based on changes to the CDC
residue definition, the Coast Guard also
proposes to revise the definition of
‘‘certain dangerous cargo.’’
Additionally, the Coast Guard intends to
adopt changes made to 33 CFR part 104
and 105 by the 2005 interim rule.
DATES: Comments and related material
must either be submitted to our online
docket via https://www.regulations.gov
on or before February 22, 2010 or reach
the Docket Management Facility by that
date. Comments sent to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) on
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
collection of information must reach
OMB on or before February 22, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2004–19963 using any one of the
following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202–493–2251.
(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility
(M–30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590–
0001.
(4) Delivery: Same as mail address
above, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The telephone number is 202–
366–9329.
To avoid duplication, please use only
one of these methods. For instructions
on submitting comments, see the
‘‘Public Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below.
Collection of Information Comments:
If you have comments on the collection
of information discussed in section
VI.D. of this notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM), you must also send
comments to the Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Office of
Management and Budget. To ensure that
your comments to OIRA are received on
time, the preferred methods are by email to oira_submission@omb.eop.gov
(include the docket number and
‘‘Attention: Desk Officer for Coast
Guard, DHS’’ in the subject line of the
e-mail) or fax at 202–395–6566. An
alternate, though slower, method is by
U.S. mail to the Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, 725 17th
Street NW., Washington, DC 20503,
ATTN: Desk Officer, U.S. Coast Guard.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this proposed
rule, call Lieutenant Sharmine Jones,
Office of Vessel Activities, U.S. Coast
Guard Headquarters, telephone 202–
372–1234. If you have questions on
viewing or submitting material to the
docket, call Ms. Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone 202–366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents for Preamble
I. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
A. Submitting Comments
B. Viewing Comments and Documents
C. Privacy Act
D. Public Meeting
II. Abbreviations
E:\FR\FM\23DEP1.SGM
23DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 23, 2009 / Proposed Rules
III. Background and Purpose
A. History of This Rulemaking
B. Parallel Rulemaking Affecting This
Rulemaking
IV. Discussion of Comments on the Interim
Rule
A. CDC Residue
B. NOAs and Port Scheduling
C. Definition of Charterer
D. Foreign Recreational Vessels
V. Discussion of Proposed Rule
A. Proposed Changes to Definitions of CDC
and CDC Residue
B. Interim Rule Changes To Be Adopted
C. Interim Rule Changes Affected by
Parallel Rulemaking
VI. Regulatory Analysis
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Small Entities
C. Assistance for Small Entities
D. Collection of Information
E. Federalism
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
G. Taking of Private Property
H. Civil Justice Reform
I. Protection of Children
J. Indian Tribal Governments
K. Energy Effects
L. Technical Standards
M. Environment
please enclose a stamped, self-addressed
postcard or envelope.
We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment
period. We may change this proposed
rule based on your comments.
I. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
C. Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic
form of all comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on
behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review a Privacy
Act notice regarding our public dockets
in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All
comments received will be posted,
without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided.
cprice-sewell on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
A. Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG–2004–19963),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You
may submit your comments and
material online or by fax, mail, or hand
delivery, but please use only one of
these means. We recommend that you
include your name and a mailing
address, an e-mail address, or a phone
number in the body of your document
so that we can contact you if we have
questions regarding your submission.
To submit your comment online, go to
https://regulations.gov, insert ‘‘USCG–
2004–19963’’ in the ‘‘Keyword’’ box,
and click ‘‘Search’’; then click on the
balloon shape in the ‘‘Actions’’ column.
If you submit your comments by mail or
hand delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by
11 inches, suitable for copying and
electronic filing. If you submit
comments by mail and would like to
know they have reached the Facility,
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:33 Dec 22, 2009
Jkt 220001
B. Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, insert
‘‘USCG–2004–19963’’ in the ‘‘Keyword’’
box, and click ‘‘Search.’’ Click the
‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ in the ‘‘Actions’’
column. If you do not have access to the
internet, you may view the docket
online by visiting the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12–140
on the ground floor of the Department
of Transportation West Building, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. We have an agreement with
the Department of Transportation to use
the Docket Management Facility.
D. Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But, you may submit a request
for a public meeting to the docket using
one of the methods specified under
ADDRESSES. In your request, explain
why you believe a public meeting
would be beneficial. If we determine
that one would aid this rulemaking, we
will hold one at a time and place
announced by a later notice in the
Federal Register.
II. Abbreviations
AIS Automatic identification system
CDC Certain dangerous cargo
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COI Collection of information
CTAC Chemical Transportation
Advisory Committee
DHS Department of Homeland
Security
FR Federal Register
NOA Notice of arrival
NOAD AIS Vessel Requirements for
Notices of Arrival and Departure, and
Automatic Identification System
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
OMB Office of Management and
Budget
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
U.S.C.
68209
United States Code
III. Background and Purpose
A. History of This Rulemaking
The notice of arrival (NOA) is a
process by which a vessel submits
required information—including data
about the vessel, cargo and crew—before
the vessel arrives at a port or place in
the United States. The information
contained in the NOA allows the Coast
Guard to implement appropriate safety
and security measures, including
security screening and escort into port.
In 2003, the Coast Guard became
concerned about the potential security
hazards of bulk Ammonium nitrate and
propylene oxide cargoes transported on
U.S. waters. After consultation with the
Chemical Transportation Advisory
Committee (CTAC) and Towing Safety
Advisory Committee, the Coast Guard
determined that these substances should
be considered ‘‘certain dangerous
cargoes’’ (CDCs). Regulations at 33 CFR
160.204 specifically define CDCs, but, in
general terms, CDCs are substances or
materials that pose an unreasonable risk
to health, safety, and property if
improperly handled. Existing
regulations require most vessels
carrying CDCs to submit NOAs.
The Coast Guard published a
temporary final rule on August 18, 2004,
titled ‘‘Notification of Arrival in U.S.
Ports; Certain Dangerous Cargoes;
Electronic Submission’’ (69 FR 51176).
That temporary final rule changed the
definition of ‘‘certain dangerous cargo
(CDC)’’ to include: ammonium nitrate,
in bulk; ammonium nitrate based
fertilizers, in bulk; and propylene oxide,
alone or mixed with ethylene oxide, in
bulk. The temporary final rule also
updated 33 CFR parts 104 and 105 on
vessel and facility security to include
these new CDCs. In addition, the
temporary final rule implemented two
new optional formats for electronic
submittal of NOAs.
The Coast Guard published an interim
rule on December 16, 2005, titled
‘‘Notification of Arrival in U.S. Ports;
Certain Dangerous Cargoes; Electronic
Submission’’ (70 FR 74663). That
interim rule made permanent the
definition of CDC as implemented in the
2004 temporary final rule. The interim
rule also made permanent the
application of vessel security
requirements at 33 CFR part 104 to
barges carrying CDCs. However, the
interim rule removed the remainder of
the temporary changes made to 33 CFR
parts 104 and 105 because they were no
longer necessary.
The interim rule also added changes
that had not been included in the 2004
E:\FR\FM\23DEP1.SGM
23DEP1
68210
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 23, 2009 / Proposed Rules
temporary final rule. First, the interim
rule added another optional method for
electronic submittal of NOAs. Second,
the interim rule clarified that 33 CFR
part 160 on NOAs does not apply to
U.S. recreational vessels under 46
U.S.C. 4301. Third, the interim rule
added a definition of ‘‘CDC residue’’
that, in effect, exempted certain vessels
carrying CDC residue from the same
NOA requirements imposed on vessels
carrying CDCs. The 2005 definition of
CDC residue is limited to residue
quantities of bulk ammonium nitrate or
ammonium nitrate fertilizer remaining
onboard after the vessel discharges all
saleable cargo; no other cargo residues
fall within the current definition of
‘‘CDC residue.’’
In response to the 2005 interim rule,
the Coast Guard received comments
from the Chemical Transportation
Advisory Committee (CTAC) suggesting
the Coast Guard revise the definition of
CDC residue to include some bulk
liquids and liquefied gases. The Coast
Guard tasked CTAC’s Hazardous
Cargoes Transportation Security
Subcommittee with reviewing the
current requirement that a CDC vessel
remain a CDC vessel until the removal
of all bulk liquid and liquefied gas CDC
cargoes, including residue quantities of
such cargoes, from the vessel. The
Committee completed its
recommendation on August 24, 2006,
and submitted it to the Coast Guard for
review and consideration. The Coast
Guard concurs with CTAC and, with
this NPRM, proposes to amend the
definitions of CDC and CDC residue
consistent with CTAC’s
recommendation.
cprice-sewell on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
B. Parallel Rulemaking Affecting This
Rulemaking
Concurrent with this proposal to
amend the definition of CDC residue, a
parallel rulemaking effort has proposed
to renumber relevant paragraphs and
change some of the provisions
implemented by the 2005 interim rule.
That parallel rulemaking is ‘‘Vessel
Requirements for Notices of Arrival and
Departure, and Automatic Identification
System’’ (NOAD AIS). The Coast Guard
published an NPRM on December 16,
2008, and the comment period closed
on April 15, 2009 (73 FR 76295).
Section V.C., ‘‘Interim Rule Changes
Affected by Parallel Rulemaking,’’
discusses the impact of this NOAD AIS
proposal on specific provisions
implemented by the 2005 interim rule.
You may read the NOAD AIS proposal,
and public comments on it, at docket
USCG–2005–21869.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:33 Dec 22, 2009
Jkt 220001
IV. Discussion of Comments on the
Interim Rule
The Coast Guard received two letters
commenting on the 2005 interim rule:
one submitted by an advisory committee
and the other submitted by a trade
association. The letter from the advisory
committee addressed several issues
associated with CDC residue and NOAs.
The letter from the trade association
addressed the clarification made by the
interim rule with regard to applicability
of 33 CFR part 160. The Coast Guard
received no comments on the interim
rule as it affected 33 CFR parts 104 and
105 or the electronic submission of
NOAs.
A. CDC Residue
One commenter sought to provide
information on industry practices
relevant to vessel transport of CDCs. In
particular, the commenter described the
manner in which chemical cargo
residues are diluted by washing the
tanks with water or by loading another
cargo over the residue. The commenter
suggested that these practices, as well as
the practice of carrying multiple cargoes
on one vessel, reduce the risk of an
intentional incident involving CDC
residues. The commenter suggested the
Coast Guard undertake further study of
CDC residues in order to avoid
expending Coast Guard and industry
resources on unnecessary security
precautions. The Coast Guard agreed
with this recommendation and tasked
the Chemical Transportation Advisory
Committee (CTAC) with providing
recommendations on CDC residue. The
Committee’s recommendations form the
basis of the Coast Guard’s proposal in
this NPRM.
The same commenter suggested that
the definition of ‘‘CDC residue’’
implemented by the interim rule be
renamed ‘‘Ammonium Nitrate Residue’’
to avoid implying that all CDCs carried
in residue quantities satisfy the
definition. With this NPRM, the Coast
Guard proposes to broaden the
definition of ‘‘CDC residue’’ to include
cargo residue other than ammonium
nitrate, thereby removing the possibility
of confusion.
B. NOAs and Port Scheduling
One commenter described the
difficulty of complying with NOA
requirements when vessels plan to call
at multiple berths in the same port. The
commenter indicated that the minimum
notice required before transit to another
berth causes delays and unnecessary
ship movements, contributing to traffic
congestion in busy ports. This proposed
rule is likely to reduce the number of
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
intra-port transits requiring NOAs
because it broadens the definition of
CDC residue. However, the general
issues of port congestion and NOAs for
intra-port transit are outside the scope
of the interim rule and this NPRM,
neither of which addresses the time for
the submission of NOAs. We have
forwarded these comments to the
appropriate program staff for further
consideration and appropriate action.
The same commenter suggested that
the Coast Guard use Vessel Traffic
Service systems and/or Automatic
Identification System coverage to track
vessel movements in the port area,
instead of requiring NOAs. In this
proposed rule, the Coast Guard is
revising the definition of CDC and CDC
residue in its NOA regulations. Because
the Coast Guard escorts vessels carrying
CDC in ports, this proposed change
would allow the Coast Guard to focus
on vessels that are loaded with a CDC
cargo and free it from having to escort
vessels that are only transporting CDC
residue. This proposed rule would also
relieve some vessels that do not operate
in VTS areas from having to submit
NOAs. This commenter’s
recommendation goes beyond the scope
of this rulemaking so we are forwarding
it to the appropriate program staff for
consideration in the NOAD AIS
rulemaking.
C. Definition of Charterer
One commenter suggested that
requiring NOAs to include the identity
of the vessel charterer provides minimal
value to the Coast Guard. In addition,
this commenter indicated that
individual companies submitting NOAs
identify the vessel charterer differently
because the definition of ‘‘charterer’’ is
confusing. Regulations at 33 CFR
160.204 define the term charterer to
mean ‘‘the person or organization that
contracts for the majority of the carrying
capacity of a ship for the transportation
of cargo to a stated port for a specified
period. This includes ‘time charterers’
and ‘voyage charterers’.’’ However, the
use of the information collected in the
NOA is outside the narrow scope of the
interim rule and this NPRM. We have
forwarded these comments to the
appropriate program staff for further
consideration and appropriate action.
D. Foreign Recreational Vessels
One commenter expressed concern
that the term ‘‘foreign recreational
vessels’’ could create confusion between
foreign-made vessels and foreign-owned
vessels. Specifically, the commenter
recommended inserting a reference to
the definition of ‘‘vessel of the United
States’’ found in 46 App. U.S.C. 1903(b).
E:\FR\FM\23DEP1.SGM
23DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 23, 2009 / Proposed Rules
The Coast Guard agrees that the phrase
‘‘U.S. recreational vessels under 46
U.S.C. 4301 et seq.’’ could create some
confusion, as it does not directly refer
to definitions found in Title 46 of the
United States Code. As discussed below,
the provision that concerns this
commenter is addressed in the parallel
NOAD AIS rulemaking proceeding.
As part of the separate NOAD AIS
rulemaking mentioned earlier in this
preamble, the Coast Guard has proposed
to delete the provision that is the subject
of the comment, revise the remaining
language on applicability of 33 CFR part
160, and add a definition of ‘‘foreign
vessel’’ to Part 160. The proposed
revisions should clarify the issues
identified by the commenter concerned
about § 160.202(b). Interested parties
may review the NOAD AIS proposal at
docket USCG–2005–21869.
cprice-sewell on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
V. Discussion of Proposed Rule
A. Proposed Changes to Definitions of
CDC and CDC Residue
The Coast Guard proposes to amend
the definition of CDC residue to include
certain bulk liquids and liquefied gases
that remain onboard in a cargo system
after discharge and are not accessible
through normal transfer procedures. A
vessel carrying only CDC residue may
qualify for an NOA exemption for
vessels not carrying CDC, provided it
meets criteria in § 160.203(b). Changing
the definition of CDC residue will allow
the Coast Guard to better allocate
resources to vessels that are carrying
CDCs and not just CDC residue.
In formulating this proposal, the Coast
Guard considered aspects of the
transportation industry and chemical
properties to decide which chemicals to
include in the definition. These aspects
included: Real-life workings of vessels
in handling residues; methods of
pumping material; the quantity of cargo
remaining onboard after discharge,
including stripping, cleaning tanks, etc.;
the relative hazard of CDCs; physical
properties of the chemicals; vapor
pressures of the chemicals; toxicity of
the chemicals; and exposure guidelines
for the chemicals.
The Coast Guard believes that
expanding the definition of CDC residue
is appropriate for several reasons. First,
discharging a typical chemical cargo
leaves a minimal amount of cargo in the
tank that is not accessible using the
normal pumping system. Second,
preparing the tank for a new cargo
effectively removes the potential hazard
of the previous cargo due to dilution or
removal of the potential hazard. Third,
with specific respect to liquefied gases,
gas tankers carry residue at a pressure
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:33 Dec 22, 2009
Jkt 220001
well below its vapor pressure, which
mitigates the hazard.
The Coast Guard also proposes that a
few bulk liquid and liquefied gas
cargoes should remain CDCs even when
carried in residue quantities. We base
this proposal primarily on the relative
hazard created by the vapor pressure of
the cargo and its potential impact to
health and safety. Therefore, the Coast
Guard proposes to amend the definition
of CDC residue to specify that the
following cargoes remain CDCs at all
times, even when only residue
quantities remain onboard: anhydrous
ammonia, chlorine, ethane, ethylene
oxide, methane (LNG), methyl bromide,
sulfur dioxide, and vinyl chloride.
Under this proposal, vessels carrying
residue quantities of these cargoes will
remain CDC vessels.
B. Interim Rule Changes To Be Adopted
The 2005 interim rule made changes
to 33 CFR parts 104 and 105 dealing
with vessel security regulations for CDC
vessels. In particular, the interim rule
adopted the change, first made in the
2004 temporary final rule, specifying
that 33 CFR part 104 applies to barges
carrying CDCs in bulk and engaged on
international voyages. Additionally, the
2005 interim rule removed all other
changes made to parts 104 and 105 by
the 2004 temporary final rule, because
those paragraphs were no longer
necessary. The Coast Guard proposes to
adopt these part 104 and 105 changes
introduced by the interim rule as final.
C. Interim Rule Changes Affected by
Parallel Rulemaking
The 2005 interim rule also updated
electronic submission options by adding
the eNOAD system as an optional
method for electronically submitting
NOAs under 33 CFR part 160. However,
an NPRM published in the parallel
NOAD AIS rulemaking proposes to
revise § 160.210 to require that all NOAs
be submitted electronically.
Separately, the 2005 interim rule
added a new paragraph, § 160.202(b),
clarifying that the NOA provisions in
Part 160 do not apply to U.S.
recreational vessels. The NOAD AIS
rulemaking proposes to remove
§ 160.202(b), renumber § 160.202 as
§ 160.203, and revise the new
§ 160.203(a) to read: ‘‘This subpart
applies to U.S. vessels in commercial
service and all foreign vessels that are
bound for or departing from ports or
places of the United States.’’ Similarly,
the NOAD AIS proposal would
renumber § 160.204 as § 160.202, and
add definitions of ‘‘commercial service’’
and ‘‘foreign vessel.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
68211
In light of the NOAD AIS proposal to
remove or revise these two sections
affected by the 2005 interim rule, the
Coast Guard does not expect to address
either section in the final rule to follow
this NPRM. Interested parties may
review the relevant sections in the
NOAD AIS docket at USCG–2005–
21869.
VI. Regulatory Analysis
We developed this proposed rule after
considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we present our analysis based on
13 of these statutes or executive orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
This proposed rule is not a significant
regulatory action under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review. OMB has not
reviewed it under that Order.
As discussed in the ‘‘Background and
Purpose’’ section of this proposed rule,
the Coast Guard published an interim
rule in 2005 that changed the definition
of certain dangerous cargo (CDC) to
include ammonium nitrate, in bulk;
ammonium nitrate based fertilizers, in
bulk; and propylene oxide, alone or
mixed with ethylene oxide, in bulk. In
the regulatory analysis for the interim
rule, the Coast Guard presented the
costs and impacts associated with
changing the definition of CDC (70 FR
74663).
After publication of the interim rule,
the Coast Guard received comments and
recommendations from the Chemical
Transportation Advisory Committee
(CTAC). Based on these
recommendations, the Coast Guard
proposes to change the definition of
CDC so that residue quantities of some
chemicals are not CDC. CTAC defined
residue as the cargo that remains
onboard in a cargo system after
discharge that is not accessible through
normal transfer procedures. Currently,
vessel operators affected by the interim
rule are required to submit a notice of
arrival (NOA) when transporting CDC,
regardless of quantity (including residue
amounts). If the Coast Guard adopts this
change, some vessel operators would no
longer be required to submit NOAs
when transporting residue quantities of
CDCs. Some chemicals will continue to
be considered CDCs in residue amounts
(see the ‘‘Discussion of Proposed Rule’’
section for more details). Vessel owners
carrying these chemicals will continue
submitting NOAs when transporting
these chemicals in residue amounts,
which is the current practice under the
interim rule.
Due to the proposed change in the
definition of CDC, we expect there
E:\FR\FM\23DEP1.SGM
23DEP1
68212
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 23, 2009 / Proposed Rules
cprice-sewell on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
would be a reduction in the cost and
reporting burden for vessel owners who
transport CDCs in residue amounts. The
Coast Guard does not have precise
estimates of how many vessel trips or
vessel owners will no longer be subject
to the NOA requirement. Under current
requirements, there is no distinction
made for shipments of CDC in residue
status.
Based on data from the Coast Guard
Ship Arrival Notification System
(SANS), we estimate there are on
average 2,800 vessels currently carrying
CDC that make approximately 25,000
port arrivals a year. Under the current
interim rule baseline, each of these
vessel arrivals involving CDCs in any
amount would require an NOA. Under
the proposed rule, some of these vessel
arrivals would no longer require an
NOA if the vessel is carrying certain
CDCs in residue quantity. Based on
information from the Coast Guard Office
of Vessel Activities, we estimate that
there will be at least a five-percent
annual reduction in the number of NOA
submittals as a result of this proposed
rule. Changes in vessel operations and
the demand for marine transportation of
bulk CDC shipments may affect these
estimates.
Based on data in the existing
collection of information ‘‘Advance
Notice of Vessel Arrival,’’ OMB Control
Number 1625–0100, we estimate the
NOA preparation time to be about 30
minutes (0.5 hours). We estimate the
cost for an NOA submission to be about
$17.50 ((0.5 hours × $31 labor rate/hour)
+ $2 transmittal fee).1 Therefore, we
consider a five-percent annual reduction
in NOA submissions to be equivalent to
a $22,000 decrease in cost burden for
vessel operators that transport certain
CDCs in residue status.2 This would
also result in a reduction in the NOA
information the Coast Guard would
need to process.
The Coast Guard carefully considered
chemical properties and aspects of the
transportation industry in determining
which chemicals to include or exclude
from the definition of CDC residue. The
Coast Guard excluded chemicals that
may pose an unreasonable risk in
residue quantities from the proposed
1 Sources for time, labor rate and transmittal fee
estimates: (1) Collection of Information, OMB
Control Number 1625–0100, ‘‘Advance Notice of
Vessel Arrival,’’ Supplementary Document ‘‘1625–
0100 eNOAD NPRM R1,’’ January 14, 2009; and (2)
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, ‘‘Vessel
Requirements for Notices of Arrival and Departure,
and Automatic Identification System’’ docket
number USCG–2005–21869.
2 The figure $22,000 is rounded from $21,875 =
$17.50 NOA cost × 25,000 arrivals × 0.05 [the 5%
reduction in NOA].
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:33 Dec 22, 2009
Jkt 220001
changes to the definition of CDC
residue.
employees of the Coast Guard, call
1–888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247).
B. Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this proposed 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
governmental jurisdictions with
populations fewer than 50,000 people.
This proposed rule would not
increase the NOA reporting costs to
vessel operators shipping CDC. This
rulemaking would reduce the burden to
vessel operators shipping residue
quantities of certain CDCs. Therefore,
the Coast Guard certifies that under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) this proposed rule would
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities. If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rulemaking would have a
significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment to the Docket
Management Facility at the address
under ADDRESSES. In your comment,
explain why you think it qualifies and
how and to what degree this rulemaking
would economically affect it.
D. Collection of Information
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 proposed rule so that
they can better evaluate its effects on
them and participate in the rulemaking.
If the proposed rule would affect your
small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please consult
Lieutenant Sharmine Jones, Office of
Vessel Activities (CG–5432), Coast
Guard, telephone 202–372–1234. The
Coast Guard will not retaliate against
small entities that question or complain
about this proposed rule or any policy
or action of the Coast Guard.
Small businesses may send comments
on the actions of Federal employees
who enforce, or otherwise determine
compliance with, Federal regulations to
the Small Business and Agriculture
Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman
and the Regional Small Business
Regulatory Fairness Boards. The
Ombudsman evaluates these actions
annually and rates each agency’s
responsiveness to small business. If you
wish to comment on actions by
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
This proposed rule does not require a
new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520). It would modify an
existing collection under OMB Control
Number 1625–0100, Advance Notice of
Vessel Arrival.
As defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(c),
‘‘collection of information’’ comprises
reporting, recordkeeping, monitoring,
posting, labeling, and other, similar
actions. The title and description of the
information collection, a description of
those who must collect the information,
and an estimate of the total annual
burden follow. The estimate covers the
time for reviewing instructions,
searching existing sources of data,
gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing
the collection.
Due to the proposed change in the
definition of CDC, we expect that this
rulemaking would reduce the annual
burden for vessel operators who
transport certain CDCs. Regulations
would no longer require vessel
operators to submit NOAs when
transporting residue quantities of
certain CDCs. This proposed rule would
result in a reduction of the total number
of annual respondents and responses in
the existing collection under OMB
Control Number 1625–0100. The
following is a summary of the changes
to the existing collection as a result of
this proposed rule and updated ship
arrival data. The Coast Guard based
most of the information on estimates
discussed in the ‘‘Regulatory Planning
and Review’’ section and data from the
Coast Guard Ship Arrival Notification
System (SANS).
Title: Advance Notice of Vessel
Arrival.
OMB Control Number: 1625–0100.
Summary of the Collection of
Information: The Coast Guard requires
pre-arrival notices from certain vessels
entering a port or place in the United
States. These vessels include those
carrying a CDC as defined in 33 CFR
160.204. This proposed rule would
change the definition of CDC so that
residue quantities of some chemicals
would no longer be considered CDC. As
a result, the Coast Guard would no
longer require vessel operators to submit
NOAs when transporting residue
quantities of certain CDCs.
Need for Information: To ensure port
safety and security and to ensure the
uninterrupted flow of commerce.
E:\FR\FM\23DEP1.SGM
23DEP1
cprice-sewell on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 23, 2009 / Proposed Rules
Proposed Use of Information: The
Coast Guard would use the information
to enhance maritime domain awareness.
Description of the Respondents:
Respondents are the owners, agents,
masters, operators, or persons in charge
of a vessel that carries a CDC and arrives
at a port or place in the United States.
Number of Respondents: The total
number of respondents for the
collection of information is 31,594 per
year. The number of these respondents
or vessels (the subset of the total
number of vessels) affected by this
rulemaking is 2,800 per year.
Frequency of Response: The
frequency or number of responses
associated with the collection of
information is 170,866 per year. The
number of these responses associated
with CDC transits affected by this
rulemaking is about 25,000 per year.
This rulemaking would decrease that
number of responses by about 5 percent
or 1,250 per year [25,000 X 0.05 (the 5%
reduction in NOA)].
Burden of Response: The burden of
response associated with the collection
of information is approximately 30
minutes or 0.5 hours per response. This
rulemaking would not change the
burden of response. It would reduce the
number of responses.
Estimate of Total Annual Burden: The
total annual burden for the collection of
information is 163,994 hours per year
for all NOA respondents. We estimate
this proposed rule would reduce the
total annual burden by 625 hours per
year.3
As required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3507(d)), we have submitted a copy of
this proposed rule to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for its
review of the collection of information.
We ask for public comment on the
collection of information to help us
determine how useful the information
is; whether it can help us perform our
functions better; whether it is readily
available elsewhere; how accurate our
estimate of the burden of collection is;
how valid our methods for determining
burden are; how we can improve the
quality, usefulness, and clarity of the
information; and how we can minimize
the burden of collection. If you submit
comments on the collection of
information, submit them both to OMB
and to the Docket Management Facility
where indicated under ADDRESSES, by
the date under DATES. You need not
respond to a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid
control number from OMB.
3 625 hours per year reduction = 1,250 less NOA
responses per year × 0.5 hours per NOA.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:33 Dec 22, 2009
Jkt 220001
68213
E. Federalism
K. Energy Effects
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
effect on State or local governments and
would either preempt State law or
impose a substantial direct cost of
compliance on them. We have analyzed
this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it does not have
implications for federalism.
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have
determined that it is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under that order 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.
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 (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Though this
proposed rule would not result in such
an expenditure, we do discuss the
effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
G. Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not 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 proposed 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 proposed rule
under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically
significant rule and would not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to
safety that might disproportionately
affect children.
J. Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have
tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have
a substantial direct effect on one or
more Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 proposed rule does not use
technical standards. Therefore, we did
not consider the use of voluntary
consensus standards.
M. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Department of Homeland
Security 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
made a preliminary determination that
this action is one of a category of actions
which does not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. A preliminary
environmental analysis checklist
supporting this determination is
available in the docket where indicated
under the ‘‘Public Participation and
Request for Comments’’ section of this
preamble. This rule involves editorial or
procedural regulations, such as those
updating addresses or establishing
applications procedures and regulations
concerning manning, documentation,
admeasurement, inspection, and
E:\FR\FM\23DEP1.SGM
23DEP1
68214
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 23, 2009 / Proposed Rules
equipping of vessels. We seek any
comments or information that may lead
to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this
proposed rule.
List of Subjects
33 CFR Part 104
Maritime security, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security
measures, and Vessels.
33 CFR Part 105
Maritime security, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, and
Security measures.
33 CFR Part 160
Administrative practice and
procedure, Harbors, Hazardous
materials transportation, Marine safety,
Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Vessels,
and Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
adopt the amendments to 33 CFR parts
104 and 105, introduced by the interim
rule published at 70 FR 74669 on
December 16, 2005, as final, and to
amend 33 CFR part 160 as follows:
PART 160—PORTS AND WATERWAYS
SAFETY–GENERAL
1. The authority citation for part 160
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1223, 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1. Subpart D is
also issued under the authority of 33 U.S.C.
1225 and 46 U.S.C. 3715.
2. In § 160.204, revise paragraphs (7)
through (9) of the definition for ‘‘Certain
dangerous cargo (CDC)’’ and the entire
definition of ‘‘Certain dangerous cargo
residue (CDC residue)’’ to read as
follows:
§ 160.204
cprice-sewell on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
*
*
*
*
Certain dangerous cargo (CDC)
includes any of the following:
*
*
*
*
*
(7) All bulk liquefied gas cargo carried
under 46 CFR 151.50–31 or listed in 46
CFR 154.7 that is flammable and/or
toxic and that is not carried as certain
dangerous cargo residue (CDC residue).
(8) The following bulk liquids except
when carried as CDC residue:
(i) Acetone cyanohydrin;
(ii) Allyl alcohol;
(iii) Chlorosulfonic acid;
(iv) Crotonaldehyde;
(v) Ethylene chlorohydrin;
(vi) Ethylene dibromide;
(vii) Methacrylonitrile;
(viii) Oleum (fuming sulfuric acid);
and
13:33 Dec 22, 2009
Dated: December 15, 2009.
Kevin S. Cook,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Director of
Prevention Policy.
[FR Doc. E9–30347 Filed 12–22–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Copyright Royalty Board
Definitions.
*
VerDate Nov<24>2008
(ix) Propylene oxide, alone or mixed
with ethylene oxide.
(9) The following bulk solids:
(i) Ammonium nitrate listed as a
Division 5.1 (oxidizing) material in 49
CFR 172.101 except when carried as
CDC residue; and
(ii) Ammonium nitrate based fertilizer
listed as a Division 5.1 (oxidizing)
material in 49 CFR 172.101 except when
carried as CDC residue.
Certain dangerous cargo residue (CDC
residue) includes any of the following:
(1) Ammonium nitrate in bulk or
ammonium nitrate based fertilizer in
bulk remaining after all saleable cargo is
discharged, not exceeding 1,000 pounds
in total and not individually
accumulated in quantities exceeding
two cubic feet.
(2) For bulk liquids and liquefied
gases, the cargo that remains onboard in
a cargo system after discharge that is not
accessible through normal transfer
procedures, with the exception of the
following bulk liquefied gas cargoes
carried under 46 CFR 151.50–31 or
listed in 46 CFR 154.7:
(i) Ammonia, anhydrous;
(ii) Chlorine;
(iii) Ethane;
(iv) Ethylene oxide;
(v) Methane (LNG);
(vi) Methyl bromide;
(vii) Sulfur dioxide; and
(viii) Vinyl chloride.
*
*
*
*
*
Jkt 220001
37 CFR Part 380
[Docket No. 2005–1 CRB DTRA]
Digital Performance Right in Sound
Recordings and Ephemeral
Recordings
AGENCY: Copyright Royalty Board,
Library of Congress.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
SUMMARY: The Copyright Royalty Judges
are publishing for comment proposed
regulations governing the statutory
minimum fees to be paid by Commercial
Webcasters under two statutory
licenses, permitting certain digital
performances of sound recordings and
the making of ephemeral recordings, for
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the period beginning January 1, 2006,
and ending on December 31, 2010.
DATES: Comments and objections, if any,
are due by no later than January 22,
2010.
ADDRESSES: Comments and objections
may be sent electronically to
crb@loc.gov. In the alternative, send an
original, five copies and an electronic
copy on a CD either by mail or hand
delivery. Please do not use multiple
means of transmission. Comments and
objections may not be delivered by an
overnight delivery service other than
U.S. Postal Service Express Mail. If by
mail (including overnight delivery),
comments and objections must be
addressed to: Copyright Royalty Board,
P.O. Box 70977, Washington, DC 20024–
0977. If hand delivered by a private
party, comments and objections must be
brought to the Copyright Office Public
Information Office, Library of Congress,
James Madison Memorial Building,
Room LM–401, 101 Independence
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20559–
6000, between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. If
delivered by a commercial courier,
comments and objections must be
delivered between 8:30 a.m. and 4 p.m.
to the Congressional Courier Acceptance
Site located at 2nd and D Street, NE.,
Washington, DC, and the envelope must
be addressed as follows: Copyright
Royalty Board, Library of Congress,
James Madison Memorial Building,
Room LM–403, 101 Independence
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20559–
0600.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard Strasser, Senior Attorney, or
Gina Giuffreda, Attorney Advisor, by
telephone at (202) 707–7658 or by
e-mail at crb@loc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On May 1, 2007, the Copyright
Royalty Judges published in the Federal
Register their determination of royalty
rates and terms under the statutory
licenses under Sections 112(e) and 114
of the Copyright Act for the period 2006
through 2010 for a digital public
performance of sound recordings by
means of an eligible nonsubscription
transmission or a transmission by a new
subscription service. 72 FR 24084. In
Intercollegiate Broadcast System, Inc.v.
Copyright Royalty Board, 574 F.3d 748
(D.C. Cir. 2009), the United States Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit affirmed the Judges’
determination in the main but
remanded to the Judges the matter of
setting the minimum fee to be paid by
both Commercial Webcasters and
Noncommercial Webcasters under
E:\FR\FM\23DEP1.SGM
23DEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 245 (Wednesday, December 23, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 68208-68214]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-30347]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Parts 104, 105, 160
[USCG-2004-19963]
RIN 1625-AA93
Notification of Arrival in U.S. Ports; Certain Dangerous Cargoes
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On December 16, 2005, the Coast Guard published an interim
rule that defined ``certain dangerous cargo residue'' (CDC residue).
After reviewing comments on the interim rule, the Coast Guard proposes
to change that definition to include certain bulk liquids and liquefied
gases in residue quantities. Based on changes to the CDC residue
definition, the Coast Guard also proposes to revise the definition of
``certain dangerous cargo.'' Additionally, the Coast Guard intends to
adopt changes made to 33 CFR part 104 and 105 by the 2005 interim rule.
DATES: Comments and related material must either be submitted to our
online docket via https://www.regulations.gov on or before February 22,
2010 or reach the Docket Management Facility by that date. Comments
sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on collection of
information must reach OMB on or before February 22, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2004-19963 using any one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202-493-2251.
(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
(4) Delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is 202-366-9329.
To avoid duplication, please use only one of these methods. For
instructions on submitting comments, see the ``Public Participation and
Request for Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below.
Collection of Information Comments: If you have comments on the
collection of information discussed in section VI.D. of this notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM), you must also send comments to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Office of Management and
Budget. To ensure that your comments to OIRA are received on time, the
preferred methods are by e-mail to oira_submission@omb.eop.gov
(include the docket number and ``Attention: Desk Officer for Coast
Guard, DHS'' in the subject line of the e-mail) or fax at 202-395-6566.
An alternate, though slower, method is by U.S. mail to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget,
725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, ATTN: Desk Officer, U.S.
Coast Guard.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call Lieutenant Sharmine Jones, Office of Vessel Activities, U.S.
Coast Guard Headquarters, telephone 202-372-1234. If you have questions
on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Ms. Renee V.
Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents for Preamble
I. Public Participation and Request for Comments
A. Submitting Comments
B. Viewing Comments and Documents
C. Privacy Act
D. Public Meeting
II. Abbreviations
[[Page 68209]]
III. Background and Purpose
A. History of This Rulemaking
B. Parallel Rulemaking Affecting This Rulemaking
IV. Discussion of Comments on the Interim Rule
A. CDC Residue
B. NOAs and Port Scheduling
C. Definition of Charterer
D. Foreign Recreational Vessels
V. Discussion of Proposed Rule
A. Proposed Changes to Definitions of CDC and CDC Residue
B. Interim Rule Changes To Be Adopted
C. Interim Rule Changes Affected by Parallel Rulemaking
VI. Regulatory Analysis
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Small Entities
C. Assistance for Small Entities
D. Collection of Information
E. Federalism
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
G. Taking of Private Property
H. Civil Justice Reform
I. Protection of Children
J. Indian Tribal Governments
K. Energy Effects
L. Technical Standards
M. Environment
I. Public Participation and Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted,
without change, to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.
A. Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2004-19963), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material
online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of
these means. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing
address, an e-mail address, or a phone number in the body of your
document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your
submission.
To submit your comment online, go to https://regulations.gov, insert
``USCG-2004-19963'' in the ``Keyword'' box, and click ``Search''; then
click on the balloon shape in the ``Actions'' column. If you submit
your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound
format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and
electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to
know they have reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-
addressed postcard or envelope.
We will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period. We may change this proposed rule based on your
comments.
B. Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov,
insert ``USCG-2004-19963'' in the ``Keyword'' box, and click
``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column.
If you do not have access to the internet, you may view the docket
online by visiting the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on
the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an
agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket
Management Facility.
C. Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into
any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment
(or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
D. Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But, you may submit a
request for a public meeting to the docket using one of the methods
specified under ADDRESSES. In your request, explain why you believe a
public meeting would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid
this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a
later notice in the Federal Register.
II. Abbreviations
AIS Automatic identification system
CDC Certain dangerous cargo
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COI Collection of information
CTAC Chemical Transportation Advisory Committee
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NOA Notice of arrival
NOAD AIS Vessel Requirements for Notices of Arrival and Departure, and
Automatic Identification System
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
OMB Office of Management and Budget
U.S.C. United States Code
III. Background and Purpose
A. History of This Rulemaking
The notice of arrival (NOA) is a process by which a vessel submits
required information--including data about the vessel, cargo and crew--
before the vessel arrives at a port or place in the United States. The
information contained in the NOA allows the Coast Guard to implement
appropriate safety and security measures, including security screening
and escort into port.
In 2003, the Coast Guard became concerned about the potential
security hazards of bulk Ammonium nitrate and propylene oxide cargoes
transported on U.S. waters. After consultation with the Chemical
Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC) and Towing Safety Advisory
Committee, the Coast Guard determined that these substances should be
considered ``certain dangerous cargoes'' (CDCs). Regulations at 33 CFR
160.204 specifically define CDCs, but, in general terms, CDCs are
substances or materials that pose an unreasonable risk to health,
safety, and property if improperly handled. Existing regulations
require most vessels carrying CDCs to submit NOAs.
The Coast Guard published a temporary final rule on August 18,
2004, titled ``Notification of Arrival in U.S. Ports; Certain Dangerous
Cargoes; Electronic Submission'' (69 FR 51176). That temporary final
rule changed the definition of ``certain dangerous cargo (CDC)'' to
include: ammonium nitrate, in bulk; ammonium nitrate based fertilizers,
in bulk; and propylene oxide, alone or mixed with ethylene oxide, in
bulk. The temporary final rule also updated 33 CFR parts 104 and 105 on
vessel and facility security to include these new CDCs. In addition,
the temporary final rule implemented two new optional formats for
electronic submittal of NOAs.
The Coast Guard published an interim rule on December 16, 2005,
titled ``Notification of Arrival in U.S. Ports; Certain Dangerous
Cargoes; Electronic Submission'' (70 FR 74663). That interim rule made
permanent the definition of CDC as implemented in the 2004 temporary
final rule. The interim rule also made permanent the application of
vessel security requirements at 33 CFR part 104 to barges carrying
CDCs. However, the interim rule removed the remainder of the temporary
changes made to 33 CFR parts 104 and 105 because they were no longer
necessary.
The interim rule also added changes that had not been included in
the 2004
[[Page 68210]]
temporary final rule. First, the interim rule added another optional
method for electronic submittal of NOAs. Second, the interim rule
clarified that 33 CFR part 160 on NOAs does not apply to U.S.
recreational vessels under 46 U.S.C. 4301. Third, the interim rule
added a definition of ``CDC residue'' that, in effect, exempted certain
vessels carrying CDC residue from the same NOA requirements imposed on
vessels carrying CDCs. The 2005 definition of CDC residue is limited to
residue quantities of bulk ammonium nitrate or ammonium nitrate
fertilizer remaining onboard after the vessel discharges all saleable
cargo; no other cargo residues fall within the current definition of
``CDC residue.''
In response to the 2005 interim rule, the Coast Guard received
comments from the Chemical Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC)
suggesting the Coast Guard revise the definition of CDC residue to
include some bulk liquids and liquefied gases. The Coast Guard tasked
CTAC's Hazardous Cargoes Transportation Security Subcommittee with
reviewing the current requirement that a CDC vessel remain a CDC vessel
until the removal of all bulk liquid and liquefied gas CDC cargoes,
including residue quantities of such cargoes, from the vessel. The
Committee completed its recommendation on August 24, 2006, and
submitted it to the Coast Guard for review and consideration. The Coast
Guard concurs with CTAC and, with this NPRM, proposes to amend the
definitions of CDC and CDC residue consistent with CTAC's
recommendation.
B. Parallel Rulemaking Affecting This Rulemaking
Concurrent with this proposal to amend the definition of CDC
residue, a parallel rulemaking effort has proposed to renumber relevant
paragraphs and change some of the provisions implemented by the 2005
interim rule. That parallel rulemaking is ``Vessel Requirements for
Notices of Arrival and Departure, and Automatic Identification System''
(NOAD AIS). The Coast Guard published an NPRM on December 16, 2008, and
the comment period closed on April 15, 2009 (73 FR 76295). Section
V.C., ``Interim Rule Changes Affected by Parallel Rulemaking,''
discusses the impact of this NOAD AIS proposal on specific provisions
implemented by the 2005 interim rule. You may read the NOAD AIS
proposal, and public comments on it, at docket USCG-2005-21869.
IV. Discussion of Comments on the Interim Rule
The Coast Guard received two letters commenting on the 2005 interim
rule: one submitted by an advisory committee and the other submitted by
a trade association. The letter from the advisory committee addressed
several issues associated with CDC residue and NOAs. The letter from
the trade association addressed the clarification made by the interim
rule with regard to applicability of 33 CFR part 160. The Coast Guard
received no comments on the interim rule as it affected 33 CFR parts
104 and 105 or the electronic submission of NOAs.
A. CDC Residue
One commenter sought to provide information on industry practices
relevant to vessel transport of CDCs. In particular, the commenter
described the manner in which chemical cargo residues are diluted by
washing the tanks with water or by loading another cargo over the
residue. The commenter suggested that these practices, as well as the
practice of carrying multiple cargoes on one vessel, reduce the risk of
an intentional incident involving CDC residues. The commenter suggested
the Coast Guard undertake further study of CDC residues in order to
avoid expending Coast Guard and industry resources on unnecessary
security precautions. The Coast Guard agreed with this recommendation
and tasked the Chemical Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC) with
providing recommendations on CDC residue. The Committee's
recommendations form the basis of the Coast Guard's proposal in this
NPRM.
The same commenter suggested that the definition of ``CDC residue''
implemented by the interim rule be renamed ``Ammonium Nitrate Residue''
to avoid implying that all CDCs carried in residue quantities satisfy
the definition. With this NPRM, the Coast Guard proposes to broaden the
definition of ``CDC residue'' to include cargo residue other than
ammonium nitrate, thereby removing the possibility of confusion.
B. NOAs and Port Scheduling
One commenter described the difficulty of complying with NOA
requirements when vessels plan to call at multiple berths in the same
port. The commenter indicated that the minimum notice required before
transit to another berth causes delays and unnecessary ship movements,
contributing to traffic congestion in busy ports. This proposed rule is
likely to reduce the number of intra-port transits requiring NOAs
because it broadens the definition of CDC residue. However, the general
issues of port congestion and NOAs for intra-port transit are outside
the scope of the interim rule and this NPRM, neither of which addresses
the time for the submission of NOAs. We have forwarded these comments
to the appropriate program staff for further consideration and
appropriate action.
The same commenter suggested that the Coast Guard use Vessel
Traffic Service systems and/or Automatic Identification System coverage
to track vessel movements in the port area, instead of requiring NOAs.
In this proposed rule, the Coast Guard is revising the definition of
CDC and CDC residue in its NOA regulations. Because the Coast Guard
escorts vessels carrying CDC in ports, this proposed change would allow
the Coast Guard to focus on vessels that are loaded with a CDC cargo
and free it from having to escort vessels that are only transporting
CDC residue. This proposed rule would also relieve some vessels that do
not operate in VTS areas from having to submit NOAs. This commenter's
recommendation goes beyond the scope of this rulemaking so we are
forwarding it to the appropriate program staff for consideration in the
NOAD AIS rulemaking.
C. Definition of Charterer
One commenter suggested that requiring NOAs to include the identity
of the vessel charterer provides minimal value to the Coast Guard. In
addition, this commenter indicated that individual companies submitting
NOAs identify the vessel charterer differently because the definition
of ``charterer'' is confusing. Regulations at 33 CFR 160.204 define the
term charterer to mean ``the person or organization that contracts for
the majority of the carrying capacity of a ship for the transportation
of cargo to a stated port for a specified period. This includes `time
charterers' and `voyage charterers'.'' However, the use of the
information collected in the NOA is outside the narrow scope of the
interim rule and this NPRM. We have forwarded these comments to the
appropriate program staff for further consideration and appropriate
action.
D. Foreign Recreational Vessels
One commenter expressed concern that the term ``foreign
recreational vessels'' could create confusion between foreign-made
vessels and foreign-owned vessels. Specifically, the commenter
recommended inserting a reference to the definition of ``vessel of the
United States'' found in 46 App. U.S.C. 1903(b).
[[Page 68211]]
The Coast Guard agrees that the phrase ``U.S. recreational vessels
under 46 U.S.C. 4301 et seq.'' could create some confusion, as it does
not directly refer to definitions found in Title 46 of the United
States Code. As discussed below, the provision that concerns this
commenter is addressed in the parallel NOAD AIS rulemaking proceeding.
As part of the separate NOAD AIS rulemaking mentioned earlier in
this preamble, the Coast Guard has proposed to delete the provision
that is the subject of the comment, revise the remaining language on
applicability of 33 CFR part 160, and add a definition of ``foreign
vessel'' to Part 160. The proposed revisions should clarify the issues
identified by the commenter concerned about Sec. 160.202(b).
Interested parties may review the NOAD AIS proposal at docket USCG-
2005-21869.
V. Discussion of Proposed Rule
A. Proposed Changes to Definitions of CDC and CDC Residue
The Coast Guard proposes to amend the definition of CDC residue to
include certain bulk liquids and liquefied gases that remain onboard in
a cargo system after discharge and are not accessible through normal
transfer procedures. A vessel carrying only CDC residue may qualify for
an NOA exemption for vessels not carrying CDC, provided it meets
criteria in Sec. 160.203(b). Changing the definition of CDC residue
will allow the Coast Guard to better allocate resources to vessels that
are carrying CDCs and not just CDC residue.
In formulating this proposal, the Coast Guard considered aspects of
the transportation industry and chemical properties to decide which
chemicals to include in the definition. These aspects included: Real-
life workings of vessels in handling residues; methods of pumping
material; the quantity of cargo remaining onboard after discharge,
including stripping, cleaning tanks, etc.; the relative hazard of CDCs;
physical properties of the chemicals; vapor pressures of the chemicals;
toxicity of the chemicals; and exposure guidelines for the chemicals.
The Coast Guard believes that expanding the definition of CDC
residue is appropriate for several reasons. First, discharging a
typical chemical cargo leaves a minimal amount of cargo in the tank
that is not accessible using the normal pumping system. Second,
preparing the tank for a new cargo effectively removes the potential
hazard of the previous cargo due to dilution or removal of the
potential hazard. Third, with specific respect to liquefied gases, gas
tankers carry residue at a pressure well below its vapor pressure,
which mitigates the hazard.
The Coast Guard also proposes that a few bulk liquid and liquefied
gas cargoes should remain CDCs even when carried in residue quantities.
We base this proposal primarily on the relative hazard created by the
vapor pressure of the cargo and its potential impact to health and
safety. Therefore, the Coast Guard proposes to amend the definition of
CDC residue to specify that the following cargoes remain CDCs at all
times, even when only residue quantities remain onboard: anhydrous
ammonia, chlorine, ethane, ethylene oxide, methane (LNG), methyl
bromide, sulfur dioxide, and vinyl chloride. Under this proposal,
vessels carrying residue quantities of these cargoes will remain CDC
vessels.
B. Interim Rule Changes To Be Adopted
The 2005 interim rule made changes to 33 CFR parts 104 and 105
dealing with vessel security regulations for CDC vessels. In
particular, the interim rule adopted the change, first made in the 2004
temporary final rule, specifying that 33 CFR part 104 applies to barges
carrying CDCs in bulk and engaged on international voyages.
Additionally, the 2005 interim rule removed all other changes made to
parts 104 and 105 by the 2004 temporary final rule, because those
paragraphs were no longer necessary. The Coast Guard proposes to adopt
these part 104 and 105 changes introduced by the interim rule as final.
C. Interim Rule Changes Affected by Parallel Rulemaking
The 2005 interim rule also updated electronic submission options by
adding the eNOAD system as an optional method for electronically
submitting NOAs under 33 CFR part 160. However, an NPRM published in
the parallel NOAD AIS rulemaking proposes to revise Sec. 160.210 to
require that all NOAs be submitted electronically.
Separately, the 2005 interim rule added a new paragraph, Sec.
160.202(b), clarifying that the NOA provisions in Part 160 do not apply
to U.S. recreational vessels. The NOAD AIS rulemaking proposes to
remove Sec. 160.202(b), renumber Sec. 160.202 as Sec. 160.203, and
revise the new Sec. 160.203(a) to read: ``This subpart applies to U.S.
vessels in commercial service and all foreign vessels that are bound
for or departing from ports or places of the United States.''
Similarly, the NOAD AIS proposal would renumber Sec. 160.204 as Sec.
160.202, and add definitions of ``commercial service'' and ``foreign
vessel.''
In light of the NOAD AIS proposal to remove or revise these two
sections affected by the 2005 interim rule, the Coast Guard does not
expect to address either section in the final rule to follow this NPRM.
Interested parties may review the relevant sections in the NOAD AIS
docket at USCG-2005-21869.
VI. Regulatory Analysis
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we present our
analysis based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review.
OMB has not reviewed it under that Order.
As discussed in the ``Background and Purpose'' section of this
proposed rule, the Coast Guard published an interim rule in 2005 that
changed the definition of certain dangerous cargo (CDC) to include
ammonium nitrate, in bulk; ammonium nitrate based fertilizers, in bulk;
and propylene oxide, alone or mixed with ethylene oxide, in bulk. In
the regulatory analysis for the interim rule, the Coast Guard presented
the costs and impacts associated with changing the definition of CDC
(70 FR 74663).
After publication of the interim rule, the Coast Guard received
comments and recommendations from the Chemical Transportation Advisory
Committee (CTAC). Based on these recommendations, the Coast Guard
proposes to change the definition of CDC so that residue quantities of
some chemicals are not CDC. CTAC defined residue as the cargo that
remains onboard in a cargo system after discharge that is not
accessible through normal transfer procedures. Currently, vessel
operators affected by the interim rule are required to submit a notice
of arrival (NOA) when transporting CDC, regardless of quantity
(including residue amounts). If the Coast Guard adopts this change,
some vessel operators would no longer be required to submit NOAs when
transporting residue quantities of CDCs. Some chemicals will continue
to be considered CDCs in residue amounts (see the ``Discussion of
Proposed Rule'' section for more details). Vessel owners carrying these
chemicals will continue submitting NOAs when transporting these
chemicals in residue amounts, which is the current practice under the
interim rule.
Due to the proposed change in the definition of CDC, we expect
there
[[Page 68212]]
would be a reduction in the cost and reporting burden for vessel owners
who transport CDCs in residue amounts. The Coast Guard does not have
precise estimates of how many vessel trips or vessel owners will no
longer be subject to the NOA requirement. Under current requirements,
there is no distinction made for shipments of CDC in residue status.
Based on data from the Coast Guard Ship Arrival Notification System
(SANS), we estimate there are on average 2,800 vessels currently
carrying CDC that make approximately 25,000 port arrivals a year. Under
the current interim rule baseline, each of these vessel arrivals
involving CDCs in any amount would require an NOA. Under the proposed
rule, some of these vessel arrivals would no longer require an NOA if
the vessel is carrying certain CDCs in residue quantity. Based on
information from the Coast Guard Office of Vessel Activities, we
estimate that there will be at least a five-percent annual reduction in
the number of NOA submittals as a result of this proposed rule. Changes
in vessel operations and the demand for marine transportation of bulk
CDC shipments may affect these estimates.
Based on data in the existing collection of information ``Advance
Notice of Vessel Arrival,'' OMB Control Number 1625-0100, we estimate
the NOA preparation time to be about 30 minutes (0.5 hours). We
estimate the cost for an NOA submission to be about $17.50 ((0.5 hours
x $31 labor rate/hour) + $2 transmittal fee).\1\ Therefore, we consider
a five-percent annual reduction in NOA submissions to be equivalent to
a $22,000 decrease in cost burden for vessel operators that transport
certain CDCs in residue status.\2\ This would also result in a
reduction in the NOA information the Coast Guard would need to process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Sources for time, labor rate and transmittal fee estimates:
(1) Collection of Information, OMB Control Number 1625-0100,
``Advance Notice of Vessel Arrival,'' Supplementary Document ``1625-
0100 eNOAD NPRM R1,'' January 14, 2009; and (2) Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, ``Vessel Requirements for Notices of Arrival and
Departure, and Automatic Identification System'' docket number USCG-
2005-21869.
\2\ The figure $22,000 is rounded from $21,875 = $17.50 NOA cost
x 25,000 arrivals x 0.05 [the 5% reduction in NOA].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Coast Guard carefully considered chemical properties and
aspects of the transportation industry in determining which chemicals
to include or exclude from the definition of CDC residue. The Coast
Guard excluded chemicals that may pose an unreasonable risk in residue
quantities from the proposed changes to the definition of CDC residue.
B. Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed 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 governmental
jurisdictions with populations fewer than 50,000 people.
This proposed rule would not increase the NOA reporting costs to
vessel operators shipping CDC. This rulemaking would reduce the burden
to vessel operators shipping residue quantities of certain CDCs.
Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies that under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rulemaking would have a significant economic impact on
it, please submit a comment to the Docket Management Facility at the
address under ADDRESSES. In your comment, explain why you think it
qualifies and how and to what degree this rulemaking would economically
affect it.
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 proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its
provisions or options for compliance, please consult Lieutenant
Sharmine Jones, Office of Vessel Activities (CG-5432), Coast Guard,
telephone 202-372-1234. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against
small entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or
any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247).
D. Collection of Information
This proposed rule does not require a new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). It
would modify an existing collection under OMB Control Number 1625-0100,
Advance Notice of Vessel Arrival.
As defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(c), ``collection of information''
comprises reporting, recordkeeping, monitoring, posting, labeling, and
other, similar actions. The title and description of the information
collection, a description of those who must collect the information,
and an estimate of the total annual burden follow. The estimate covers
the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing sources of
data, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection.
Due to the proposed change in the definition of CDC, we expect that
this rulemaking would reduce the annual burden for vessel operators who
transport certain CDCs. Regulations would no longer require vessel
operators to submit NOAs when transporting residue quantities of
certain CDCs. This proposed rule would result in a reduction of the
total number of annual respondents and responses in the existing
collection under OMB Control Number 1625-0100. The following is a
summary of the changes to the existing collection as a result of this
proposed rule and updated ship arrival data. The Coast Guard based most
of the information on estimates discussed in the ``Regulatory Planning
and Review'' section and data from the Coast Guard Ship Arrival
Notification System (SANS).
Title: Advance Notice of Vessel Arrival.
OMB Control Number: 1625-0100.
Summary of the Collection of Information: The Coast Guard requires
pre-arrival notices from certain vessels entering a port or place in
the United States. These vessels include those carrying a CDC as
defined in 33 CFR 160.204. This proposed rule would change the
definition of CDC so that residue quantities of some chemicals would no
longer be considered CDC. As a result, the Coast Guard would no longer
require vessel operators to submit NOAs when transporting residue
quantities of certain CDCs.
Need for Information: To ensure port safety and security and to
ensure the uninterrupted flow of commerce.
[[Page 68213]]
Proposed Use of Information: The Coast Guard would use the
information to enhance maritime domain awareness.
Description of the Respondents: Respondents are the owners, agents,
masters, operators, or persons in charge of a vessel that carries a CDC
and arrives at a port or place in the United States.
Number of Respondents: The total number of respondents for the
collection of information is 31,594 per year. The number of these
respondents or vessels (the subset of the total number of vessels)
affected by this rulemaking is 2,800 per year.
Frequency of Response: The frequency or number of responses
associated with the collection of information is 170,866 per year. The
number of these responses associated with CDC transits affected by this
rulemaking is about 25,000 per year. This rulemaking would decrease
that number of responses by about 5 percent or 1,250 per year [25,000 X
0.05 (the 5% reduction in NOA)].
Burden of Response: The burden of response associated with the
collection of information is approximately 30 minutes or 0.5 hours per
response. This rulemaking would not change the burden of response. It
would reduce the number of responses.
Estimate of Total Annual Burden: The total annual burden for the
collection of information is 163,994 hours per year for all NOA
respondents. We estimate this proposed rule would reduce the total
annual burden by 625 hours per year.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 625 hours per year reduction = 1,250 less NOA responses per
year x 0.5 hours per NOA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3507(d)), we have submitted a copy of this proposed rule to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for its review of the collection of
information. We ask for public comment on the collection of information
to help us determine how useful the information is; whether it can help
us perform our functions better; whether it is readily available
elsewhere; how accurate our estimate of the burden of collection is;
how valid our methods for determining burden are; how we can improve
the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information; and how we can
minimize the burden of collection. If you submit comments on the
collection of information, submit them both to OMB and to the Docket
Management Facility where indicated under ADDRESSES, by the date under
DATES. You need not respond to a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid control number from OMB.
E. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule
under that Order and have determined that 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 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
G. Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not 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 proposed 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 proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.
J. Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
K. Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order 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 proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
M. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security 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
made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category
of actions which does not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. A preliminary
environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination is
available in the docket where indicated under the ``Public
Participation and Request for Comments'' section of this preamble. This
rule involves editorial or procedural regulations, such as those
updating addresses or establishing applications procedures and
regulations concerning manning, documentation, admeasurement,
inspection, and
[[Page 68214]]
equipping of vessels. We seek any comments or information that may lead
to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this
proposed rule.
List of Subjects
33 CFR Part 104
Maritime security, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Security measures, and Vessels.
33 CFR Part 105
Maritime security, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, and
Security measures.
33 CFR Part 160
Administrative practice and procedure, Harbors, Hazardous materials
transportation, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Vessels, and Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to adopt the amendments to 33 CFR parts 104 and 105, introduced by the
interim rule published at 70 FR 74669 on December 16, 2005, as final,
and to amend 33 CFR part 160 as follows:
PART 160--PORTS AND WATERWAYS SAFETY-GENERAL
1. The authority citation for part 160 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1223, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. Subpart D is
also issued under the authority of 33 U.S.C. 1225 and 46 U.S.C.
3715.
2. In Sec. 160.204, revise paragraphs (7) through (9) of the
definition for ``Certain dangerous cargo (CDC)'' and the entire
definition of ``Certain dangerous cargo residue (CDC residue)'' to read
as follows:
Sec. 160.204 Definitions.
* * * * *
Certain dangerous cargo (CDC) includes any of the following:
* * * * *
(7) All bulk liquefied gas cargo carried under 46 CFR 151.50-31 or
listed in 46 CFR 154.7 that is flammable and/or toxic and that is not
carried as certain dangerous cargo residue (CDC residue).
(8) The following bulk liquids except when carried as CDC residue:
(i) Acetone cyanohydrin;
(ii) Allyl alcohol;
(iii) Chlorosulfonic acid;
(iv) Crotonaldehyde;
(v) Ethylene chlorohydrin;
(vi) Ethylene dibromide;
(vii) Methacrylonitrile;
(viii) Oleum (fuming sulfuric acid); and
(ix) Propylene oxide, alone or mixed with ethylene oxide.
(9) The following bulk solids:
(i) Ammonium nitrate listed as a Division 5.1 (oxidizing) material
in 49 CFR 172.101 except when carried as CDC residue; and
(ii) Ammonium nitrate based fertilizer listed as a Division 5.1
(oxidizing) material in 49 CFR 172.101 except when carried as CDC
residue.
Certain dangerous cargo residue (CDC residue) includes any of the
following:
(1) Ammonium nitrate in bulk or ammonium nitrate based fertilizer
in bulk remaining after all saleable cargo is discharged, not exceeding
1,000 pounds in total and not individually accumulated in quantities
exceeding two cubic feet.
(2) For bulk liquids and liquefied gases, the cargo that remains
onboard in a cargo system after discharge that is not accessible
through normal transfer procedures, with the exception of the following
bulk liquefied gas cargoes carried under 46 CFR 151.50-31 or listed in
46 CFR 154.7:
(i) Ammonia, anhydrous;
(ii) Chlorine;
(iii) Ethane;
(iv) Ethylene oxide;
(v) Methane (LNG);
(vi) Methyl bromide;
(vii) Sulfur dioxide; and
(viii) Vinyl chloride.
* * * * *
Dated: December 15, 2009.
Kevin S. Cook,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Director of Prevention Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-30347 Filed 12-22-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P