Alternate Tonnage Threshold for Oil Spill Response Vessels, 38729-38731 [2012-15976]
Download as PDF
38729
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
EPA-APPROVED INDIANA REGULATIONS—Continued
Indiana
effective date
Indiana citation
Subject
8–15–6 ..............
Alternative control plan ........
12/1/2010
8–15–7 ..............
Administrative requirements
12/1/2010
8–15–8 ..............
Record keeping and reporting requirements.
Test methods .......................
12/1/2010
8–15–9 ..............
*
*
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
46 CFR Part 126
[Docket No. USCG–2011–0966]
RIN 1625–AB82
Alternate Tonnage Threshold for Oil
Spill Response Vessels
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule; Interpretation.
AGENCY:
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
14:46 Jun 28, 2012
Jkt 226001
[Insert page number where the document be[Insert page number where the document be[Insert page number where the document be-
*
*
Table of Contents for Preamble
The Coast Guard is
establishing an alternate size threshold
based on the measurement system
established under the International
Convention on Tonnage Measurement of
Ships, 1969, for oil spill response
vessels, which are properly certificated
under 46 CFR chapter I, subchapter L.
The present size threshold of 500 gross
register tons is based on the U.S.
regulatory measurement system. This
final rule provides an alternative for
owners and operators of offshore supply
vessels that may result in an increase in
oil spill response capacity and
capability. This final rule adopts,
without change, the interim rule
amending 46 CFR part 126 published in
the Federal Register on Monday,
December 12, 2011.
DATES: This final rule is effective June
29, 2012.
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–2011–0966 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.
SUMMARY:
I. Abbreviations
II. Regulatory History
III. Basis and Purpose
IV. Background
V. Regulatory Analyses
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Small Entities
C. Assistance for Small Entities
D. Collection of Information
E. Federalism
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
G. Taking of Private Property
H. Civil Justice Reform
I. Protection of Children
J. Indian Tribal Governments
K. Energy Effects
L. Technical Standards
M. Environment
I. Abbreviations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
GT ITC Gross Tonnage International
Tonnage Convention, 1969
OSV Offshore Supply Vessel
OSRV Oil Spill Response Vessel
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Regulatory History
On Monday, December 12, 2011, the
Coast Guard published an interim rule
with request for comments entitled
Alternate Tonnage Threshold for Oil
Spill Response Vessels in the Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Notes
[Insert page number where the document be-
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–2011–0966 in the ‘‘Keyword’’
box, and then clicking ‘‘Search.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this final rule,
call or email Mr. Brian T. Ellis, Coast
Guard Marine Safety Center; telephone
202–475–5636, email
Brian.T.Ellis@uscg.mil. If you have
questions on viewing the docket, call
Renee V. Wright, Program Manager,
Docket Operations, telephone 202–366–
9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
6/29/2012,
gins].
6/29/2012,
gins].
6/29/2012,
gins].
6/29/2012,
gins].
*
[FR Doc. 2012–15688 Filed 6–28–12; 8:45 am]
ACTION:
12/1/2010
EPA approval date
Sfmt 4700
*
*
Register (76 FR 77128). We received no
comments on the interim rule. No
public meeting was requested and none
was held. This rule is considered to be
an interpretive rule under the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C.
551 et seq.) and, therefore, the 30-day
delay of the effective date is not
required under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(2).
III. Basis and Purpose
The interim final rule published in
the Federal Register on Monday,
December 12, 2011 (76 FR 77128)
provides a discussion of the basis and
purpose of this rulemaking, but a
summary of that discussion follows.
This final rule establishes an alternate
tonnage threshold at 6000 Gross
Tonnage International Tonnage
Convention (GT ITC) for oil spill
response vessels (OSRVs) that are also
certificated as offshore supply vessels
(OSVs). The selected alternate tonnage
threshold is consistent with a 6000 GT
ITC alternate threshold established for
OSVs in 1996.1 This final rule will
allow owners of OSVs regulated under
the alternate tonnage framework to also
have their vessels certificated as OSRVs,
without the need to meet significantly
higher standards applicable to tank
vessels.
Because this final rule provides for
optional use of an alternative approach
to meet an existing requirement, there is
no mandatory cost to the public. The
authority for this final rule is the 1996
Coast Guard Authorization Act (the Act)
(Pub. L. 104–324), as codified in 46
U.S.C. 3702(f)(2)(A) and 14104(b).
IV. Background
The interim final rule, published in
the Federal Register on Monday,
December 12, 2011 (76 FR 77128),
provides a discussion of the background
of this rulemaking. No comments were
received on the interim final rule and,
1 See Offshore Supply Vessels: Alternate
Tonnage, 61 FR 66613 (Dec. 18, 1996), amending 46
CFR 125.160.
E:\FR\FM\29JNR1.SGM
29JNR1
38730
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
therefore, this final rule adopts, without
change, that interim rule amending 46
CFR part 126.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
V. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this final rule after
considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
based on 14 of these statutes or
executive orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 (‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’) and 13563
(‘‘Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review’’) direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). Executive Order 13563
emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of
reducing costs, of harmonizing rules,
and of promoting flexibility.
This final 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 reviewed it under that
Order.
This final rule establishes a tonnage
threshold of 6000 GT ITC for OSRVs
under the alternate tonnage framework,
which offers a mechanism for the Coast
Guard to regulate vessels under
tonnages assigned using the convention
measurement system, instead of the
regulatory measurement system.
Therefore, this final rule provides an
option to owners of vessels certificated
as OSVs (under 46 CFR subchapter L) to
seek OSRV certification based on this
alternate tonnage threshold. We believe
that a vessel owner will opt to use the
alternate tonnage framework described
in this final rule only if it will be
beneficial to the owner’s business.
We expect this final rule to be
beneficial to the public and to the
maritime industry because it provides
the opportunity to increase oil spill
response capacity and capability.
This final rule provides for optional
and voluntary use of an alternative
approach to meet an existing
requirement. Accordingly, there is no
mandatory cost to the public.
B. Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), this rule is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:46 Jun 28, 2012
Jkt 226001
considered an interpretive rule and is
not subject to the requirement under 5
U.S.C. 553(b) for publication of a
general notice of proposed rulemaking.
Therefore, under 5 U.S.C. 601, it is not
a rule that is subject to the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
The Coast Guard issued this rule as an
interpretive rule on December 12, 2011,
as authorized by section 702 of the Act
(Pub. L. 104–324; October 19, 1996).
The Conference Report on the Act (H.
Rept. 104–854) states that, because this
rule is considered to be an interpretive
rule under the Administrative
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.), the
notice of proposed rulemaking and
comment requirements and the 30-day
delay of effective date under 5 U.S.C.
553 would not be required in order to
expedite this rulemaking.
This final rule provides for optional
and voluntary use of an alternative
approach to owners of vessels
certificated as OSVs to seek an OSRV
certification based on an alternate
tonnage threshold. We believe that a
vessel owner will opt to use the
alternate tonnage framework described
in this final rule only if it will be
beneficial to the owner’s business. We
expect this final rule to be beneficial to
the public and to the maritime industry
because it provides the opportunity to
increase the availability and capacity of
OSRVs.
C. Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
we want to assist small entities in
understanding this rule so that they can
better evaluate its effects on them and
participate in the rulemaking. If the rule
will affect your small business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please consult Brian T.
Ellis, U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety
Center, Tonnage Division, 202–475–
5636, Brian.T.Ellis@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.
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 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
employees of the Coast Guard, call 1–
888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247).
D. Collection of Information
This rule calls for no new collection
of information under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3520).
E. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. We have
analyzed this rule under that Order and
have determined that it does not have
implications for federalism. It is well
settled that States may not establish
alternate tonnages for oil spill response
vessels pursuant to 46 U.S.C.
3702(f)(2)(A). Therefore, preemption is
not an issue under Executive Order
13132.
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 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 cause a taking of
private property or otherwise have
taking implications under Executive
Order 12630, Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights.
H. Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets applicable standards
in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive
Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to
minimize litigation, eliminate
ambiguity, and reduce burden.
I. Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not
an economically significant rule and
does not create an environmental risk to
health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
E:\FR\FM\29JNR1.SGM
29JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
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.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
L. Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act (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 rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
M. Environment
We have analyzed this final 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 (42
U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have concluded
that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. This final rule
is categorically excluded under section
2.B.2, figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(d) of
the Instruction. Exclusion under
paragraph (34)(d) applies because this
final rule pertains to regulations
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:46 Jun 28, 2012
Jkt 226001
concerning documentation and
admeasurement of vessels. An
environmental analysis checklist and a
categorical exclusion determination are
available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 46 CFR Part 126
Cargo vessels, Marine safety,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
PART 126–INSPECTION AND
CERTIFICATION
Accordingly, the interim rule
amending 46 CFR part 126, which was
published at 76 FR 77128 on December
12, 2011, is adopted as a final rule
without change.
Dated: May 24, 2012.
F. J. Sturm,
Acting Director of Commercial Regulations
and Standards, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2012–15976 Filed 6–28–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations
System
48 CFR Parts 218, 232 and 252
RIN Number 0750–AH40
Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement: Updates to
Wide Area WorkFlow (DFARS Case
2011–D027)
Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Department of
Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
DoD is issuing a final rule
amending the Defense Federal
Acquisition Regulation Supplement
(DFARS) to update policies on the
submission of payment requests and
receiving reports in electronic format.
DATES: Effective date: June 29, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Veronica Fallon, 571–372–6087.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
I. Background
DoD published a proposed rule at 76
FR 71928 on November 21, 2011, to
update DFARS policies and procedures
for electronic submission of payment
requests and receiving reports through
Wide Area WorkFlow (WAWF) and
TRICARE Encounter Data System
(TEDS). WAWF, which electronically
interfaces with the primary DoD
payment systems, is the accepted DoD
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
38731
system for generating invoices and
receiving reports. TEDS is an accepted
system for processing payment requests
for rendered TRICARE health care
services.
The capabilities of WAWF have
expanded to enable use in additional
environments by a wider variety of
users. As such, this rule expands the use
of WAWF for submission of payment
requests and receiving reports and
standardizes processes and instructions
on the use of WAWF. The public
comment period closed January 20,
2011. Six respondents submitted
comments on the proposed rule.
II. Discussion and Analysis
DoD reviewed the public comments in
the development of the final rule. A
discussion of the comments and the
changes made to the rule as a result of
those comments are provided as
follows:
A. Summary of Significant Changes
Changes to the proposed rule to
clarify language were made at 232.7002
Policy, 232.7004 Prescription, and the
Payment Clause at 252.232–7003,
Electronic Submission of Payment
Requests and Receiving Reports. The
new payment instruction clause at
252.232–7006, Wide Area WorkFlow
Payment Instructions, was changed to
more clearly identify WAWF as DoD’s
method to receive payment requests and
receiving reports and clarify language
and to clarify instructions for
completion of clause fill-ins.
B. Analysis of Public Comments
1. Policies and Procedures
Comment: Several respondents
identified an apparent inconsistency
with use of the term ‘‘Senior
Procurement Executive’’ in the
Supplementary and Background
information and the use of the term
‘‘Service Procurement Executive’’ in the
proposed change to 232.7002(a)(6).
Response: The correct term is ‘‘Senior
Procurement Executive,’’ which is
incorporated into the final rule.
Comment: A respondent observed that
language is confusing to the reader, in
both the proposed change to policy at
232.7002(a)(1) and the existing clause at
252.232–7003, Electronic Submission of
Payment Requests and Receiving
Reports, paragraph (c)(4). Specifically,
according to the respondent, the
language is unclear that describes what
is and is not required to be submitted
in electronic form for payment requests
and receiving reports when purchases
are paid for using a Governmentwide
purchase card.
E:\FR\FM\29JNR1.SGM
29JNR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 126 (Friday, June 29, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38729-38731]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15976]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
46 CFR Part 126
[Docket No. USCG-2011-0966]
RIN 1625-AB82
Alternate Tonnage Threshold for Oil Spill Response Vessels
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule; Interpretation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing an alternate size threshold
based on the measurement system established under the International
Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969, for oil spill
response vessels, which are properly certificated under 46 CFR chapter
I, subchapter L. The present size threshold of 500 gross register tons
is based on the U.S. regulatory measurement system. This final rule
provides an alternative for owners and operators of offshore supply
vessels that may result in an increase in oil spill response capacity
and capability. This final rule adopts, without change, the interim
rule amending 46 CFR part 126 published in the Federal Register on
Monday, December 12, 2011.
DATES: This final rule is effective June 29, 2012.
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-2011-0966 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-2011-0966 in the ``Keyword'' box, and then clicking
``Search.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this final
rule, call or email Mr. Brian T. Ellis, Coast Guard Marine Safety
Center; telephone 202-475-5636, email Brian.T.Ellis@uscg.mil. If you
have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents for Preamble
I. Abbreviations
II. Regulatory History
III. Basis and Purpose
IV. Background
V. Regulatory Analyses
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Small Entities
C. Assistance for Small Entities
D. Collection of Information
E. Federalism
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
G. Taking of Private Property
H. Civil Justice Reform
I. Protection of Children
J. Indian Tribal Governments
K. Energy Effects
L. Technical Standards
M. Environment
I. Abbreviations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
GT ITC Gross Tonnage International Tonnage Convention, 1969
OSV Offshore Supply Vessel
OSRV Oil Spill Response Vessel
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Regulatory History
On Monday, December 12, 2011, the Coast Guard published an interim
rule with request for comments entitled Alternate Tonnage Threshold for
Oil Spill Response Vessels in the Federal Register (76 FR 77128). We
received no comments on the interim rule. No public meeting was
requested and none was held. This rule is considered to be an
interpretive rule under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551
et seq.) and, therefore, the 30-day delay of the effective date is not
required under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(2).
III. Basis and Purpose
The interim final rule published in the Federal Register on Monday,
December 12, 2011 (76 FR 77128) provides a discussion of the basis and
purpose of this rulemaking, but a summary of that discussion follows.
This final rule establishes an alternate tonnage threshold at 6000
Gross Tonnage International Tonnage Convention (GT ITC) for oil spill
response vessels (OSRVs) that are also certificated as offshore supply
vessels (OSVs). The selected alternate tonnage threshold is consistent
with a 6000 GT ITC alternate threshold established for OSVs in 1996.\1\
This final rule will allow owners of OSVs regulated under the alternate
tonnage framework to also have their vessels certificated as OSRVs,
without the need to meet significantly higher standards applicable to
tank vessels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Offshore Supply Vessels: Alternate Tonnage, 61 FR 66613
(Dec. 18, 1996), amending 46 CFR 125.160.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because this final rule provides for optional use of an alternative
approach to meet an existing requirement, there is no mandatory cost to
the public. The authority for this final rule is the 1996 Coast Guard
Authorization Act (the Act) (Pub. L. 104-324), as codified in 46 U.S.C.
3702(f)(2)(A) and 14104(b).
IV. Background
The interim final rule, published in the Federal Register on
Monday, December 12, 2011 (76 FR 77128), provides a discussion of the
background of this rulemaking. No comments were received on the interim
final rule and,
[[Page 38730]]
therefore, this final rule adopts, without change, that interim rule
amending 46 CFR part 126.
V. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this final rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on 14 of these statutes or executive orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review'') and
13563 (``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'') direct agencies
to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives
and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that
maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental,
public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity).
Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both
costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of
promoting flexibility.
This final 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 reviewed it under that Order.
This final rule establishes a tonnage threshold of 6000 GT ITC for
OSRVs under the alternate tonnage framework, which offers a mechanism
for the Coast Guard to regulate vessels under tonnages assigned using
the convention measurement system, instead of the regulatory
measurement system. Therefore, this final rule provides an option to
owners of vessels certificated as OSVs (under 46 CFR subchapter L) to
seek OSRV certification based on this alternate tonnage threshold. We
believe that a vessel owner will opt to use the alternate tonnage
framework described in this final rule only if it will be beneficial to
the owner's business.
We expect this final rule to be beneficial to the public and to the
maritime industry because it provides the opportunity to increase oil
spill response capacity and capability.
This final rule provides for optional and voluntary use of an
alternative approach to meet an existing requirement. Accordingly,
there is no mandatory cost to the public.
B. Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), this rule
is considered an interpretive rule and is not subject to the
requirement under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) for publication of a general notice
of proposed rulemaking. Therefore, under 5 U.S.C. 601, it is not a rule
that is subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.).
The Coast Guard issued this rule as an interpretive rule on
December 12, 2011, as authorized by section 702 of the Act (Pub. L.
104-324; October 19, 1996). The Conference Report on the Act (H. Rept.
104-854) states that, because this rule is considered to be an
interpretive rule under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551
et seq.), the notice of proposed rulemaking and comment requirements
and the 30-day delay of effective date under 5 U.S.C. 553 would not be
required in order to expedite this rulemaking.
This final rule provides for optional and voluntary use of an
alternative approach to owners of vessels certificated as OSVs to seek
an OSRV certification based on an alternate tonnage threshold. We
believe that a vessel owner will opt to use the alternate tonnage
framework described in this final rule only if it will be beneficial to
the owner's business. We expect this final rule to be beneficial to the
public and to the maritime industry because it provides the opportunity
to increase the availability and capacity of OSRVs.
C. Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule so that they can better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the rule will
affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction
and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please consult Brian T. Ellis, U.S. Coast Guard Marine
Safety Center, Tonnage Division, 202-475-5636, Brian.T.Ellis@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.
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 rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
E. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it does not have implications for federalism. It is
well settled that States may not establish alternate tonnages for oil
spill response vessels pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 3702(f)(2)(A). Therefore,
preemption is not an issue under Executive Order 13132.
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 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 cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
H. Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
I. Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
[[Page 38731]]
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.
L. Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
M. Environment
We have analyzed this final 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 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have
concluded that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This final rule is categorically excluded under section
2.B.2, figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(d) of the Instruction. Exclusion
under paragraph (34)(d) applies because this final rule pertains to
regulations concerning documentation and admeasurement of vessels. An
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 46 CFR Part 126
Cargo vessels, Marine safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
PART 126-INSPECTION AND CERTIFICATION
Accordingly, the interim rule amending 46 CFR part 126, which was
published at 76 FR 77128 on December 12, 2011, is adopted as a final
rule without change.
Dated: May 24, 2012.
F. J. Sturm,
Acting Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards, U.S. Coast
Guard.
[FR Doc. 2012-15976 Filed 6-28-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P