Approval of Classification Societies, 47544-47552 [2012-19376]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
47544
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
April 23, 1997). This final rule does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require
any special considerations under
Executive Order 12898, entitled
‘‘Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under FFDCA section 408(d), such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates
growers, food processors, food handlers,
and food retailers, not States or tribes,
nor does this action alter the
relationships or distribution of power
and responsibilities established by
Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such,
the Agency has determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct
effect on States or tribal governments,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply
to this final rule. In addition, this final
rule does not impose any enforceable
duty or contain any unfunded mandate
as described under Title II of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (Pub. L. 104–4).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section
12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report to each House of
the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:53 Aug 08, 2012
Jkt 226001
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of this final rule in the
Federal Register. This final rule is not
a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
*
Pulasan .......................................
Rambutan ...................................
*
0.05
0.05
*
*
*
*
Sapodilla .....................................
Sapote, black ..............................
Sapote, mamey ..........................
Sapote, white ..............................
*
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
*
*
*
*
Soursop ......................................
*
0.05
*
*
*
*
Spanish lime ...............................
*
0.05
*
*
*
*
Star apple ...................................
Starfruit .......................................
*
0.05
0.05
PART 180—[AMENDED]
*
*
*
*
Sugar apple ................................
*
0.05
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
*
*
*
*
Wax jambu ..................................
*
0.05
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: July 27, 2012.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.205 is amended by
alphabetically adding the following new
entries to the table in paragraph (a) to
read as follows:
*
§ 180.205 Paraquat; tolerances for
residues.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
■
(a) * * *
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
*
Atemoya ......................................
*
0.05
*
*
*
*
Biriba ...........................................
*
0.05
*
*
*
*
Canistel .......................................
*
0.05
*
*
*
*
Cherimoya ..................................
*
0.05
*
*
*
*
Custard apple .............................
*
0.05
*
*
*
*
Feijoa ..........................................
*
0.05
*
*
*
*
Ilama ...........................................
Jaboticaba ..................................
*
0.05
0.05
*
*
*
*
Longan ........................................
Lychee ........................................
Mango .........................................
*
0.05
0.05
0.05
*
*
*
*
Pawpaw ......................................
*
0.05
*
*
*
*
Pomegranate ..............................
*
0.05
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2012–19320 Filed 8–8–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Coast Guard
46 CFR Part 2
[Docket No. USCG–2007–27668]
RIN 1625–AB35
Approval of Classification Societies
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ACTION:
Federal law requires that
classification societies conducting
certain work in the United States be
approved by the Coast Guard. In this
rule, we finalize application procedures
and performance standards that
classification societies must meet in
order to obtain approval by the Coast
Guard. Through this final rule, we seek
to improve marine safety and
environmental protection by assuring
the consistency and quality of work
conducted by classification societies
that review, examine, survey, or certify
the construction, repair, or alteration of
a vessel in the United States.
DATES: This final rule is effective
September 10, 2012.
The incorporation by reference of
certain publications listed in the rule is
approved by the Director of the Federal
Register on September 10, 2012.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM
09AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
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–2007–27668 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–2007–27668 in the ‘‘Keyword’’
box, and then clicking ‘‘Search.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this rule, call or
email LT Alfred Giordano, Office of
Design and Engineering Standards (CG–
ENG–1), Coast Guard; telephone 202–
372–1362, email
alfred.j.giordano@uscg.mil. If you have
questions on viewing the docket, call
Renee V. Wright, Program Manager,
Docket Operations, telephone 202–366–
9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
Table of Contents for Preamble
I. Abbreviations
II. Regulatory History
III. Basis and Purpose
IV. Background
V. Discussion of Comments and Changes
A. Comments Received After Reopening
the Comment Period
B. Changes Made to Address the 2010 Act
VI. Incorporation by Reference
VII. 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
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
I. Abbreviations
ABS American Bureau of Shipping
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
IACS International Association of
Classification Societies
ICLL International Convention on Load
Lines, 1966
IMO International Maritime Organization
ISO International Organization for
Standardization
MARPOL 73/78 International Convention
for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships,
1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978
relating thereto
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:53 Aug 08, 2012
Jkt 226001
NARA National Archives and Records
Administration
NAICS North American Industry
Classification System
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
OMB Office of Management and Budget
RO Recognized Organization
SBA Small Business Administration
SOLAS International Convention for the
Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, as amended
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Regulatory History
We published a notice of policy and
a request for comments that outlined the
procedures by which classification
societies could apply for approval with
the Coast Guard. See 69 FR 63548
(November 2, 2004). This notice of
policy was based on the August 9, 2004
enactment of Section 413 of the Coast
Guard and Maritime Transportation Act
of 2004 (‘‘the 2004 Act’’) (Pub. L. 108–
293). The 2004 Act amended 46 U.S.C.
3316 by adding paragraph (c), which
prohibits certain activities on a vessel in
the United States by classification
societies that have not been approved by
the Coast Guard. The 2004 Act
mandated that, after December 31, 2004,
a classification society, including an
employee or agent of that society, may
not review, examine, survey, or certify
the construction, repair, or alteration of
a vessel in the United States unless the
classification society is either approved
by the Coast Guard or is a full member
of the International Association of
Classification Societies (IACS).
After publication of the notice of
policy, we received two questions from
the public that were addressed in a
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
published in the Federal Register on
April 23, 2010. The NPRM, entitled
‘‘Approval of Classification Societies’’
(75 FR 21212), outlined the procedures
and criteria we would use to evaluate
classification societies. The comment
period closed on July 22, 2010, and we
received no comments on the proposed
rule. No public meeting was requested
and none was held.
On October 15, 2010, the enactment of
section 622 of the Coast Guard
Authorization Act of 2010 (the ‘‘2010
Act’’) (Pub. L. 111–281) amended 46
U.S.C. 3316(c). The 2010 Act changed
the provision’s applicability to require
all classification societies, including
IACS members, to be approved by the
Coast Guard prior to conducting any
work on a vessel in the United States.
Because of the 2010 Act’s applicability
changes, we reopened the comment
period to allow for any additional or
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
47545
updated comments from the public on
our plan to remove the proposed rule’s
exemption for IACS members, and
apply the proposed rule to all
classification societies seeking Coast
Guard approval, including IACS
members. See 76 FR 47531 (August 5,
2011). The comment period closed on
September 6, 2011, and 4 commenters
with 11 comments responded to the
revised proposal. No public meeting
was requested and none was held.
III. Basis and Purpose
This final rule codifies into Title 46
of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
the procedures and criteria to evaluate
classification societies in accordance
with 46 U.S.C. 3316(c) in order to have
a specific, consistent, and enforceable
basis for approval determinations.
IV. Background
To incorporate the requirements of 46
U.S.C. 3316(c) into regulations, we
deem the International Maritime
Organization (IMO) Resolution
A.739(18), ‘‘Guidelines for the
Authorization of Organizations Acting
on Behalf of the Administration,’’ to
provide a sound and internationally
recognized standard on which to base
our classification society review and
approval program.
The IMO acknowledges that a
classification society often acts as a
Recognized Organization (RO) under
authority delegated by a flag state
administration when it performs
technical and survey work on behalf of
that administration. Recognizing this
relationship, IMO Resolution A.739(18)
adopted guidelines for minimum
competency standards for ROs that act
on behalf of flag state administrations to
conduct vessel examinations, issue
international certificates, perform
surveys and certifications, and
determine vessel tonnage in accordance
with applicable international
requirements. In addition, the IMO
guidelines are consistent with our
minimum standards for a classification
society to qualify as a Coast Guardrecognized organization in accordance
with 46 CFR part 8, ‘‘Vessel Inspection
Alternatives.’’
To perform work on behalf of a flag
state administration that uses the IMO
guidelines, an RO must sufficiently
demonstrate that its business practices
meet or exceed the performance
standards described in IMO Resolution
A.739(18). For example, the RO must
show that it—
• Publishes and systematically
maintains rules for the design,
construction, and certification of
vessels;
E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM
09AUR1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
47546
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
• Is professionally staffed with
strategically placed resources for
geographic coverage;
• Maintains a high level of
professional ethics;
• Is competent;
• Provides timely and quality
services; and
• Maintains an internal quality
system no less effective than the
International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) 9000 series
certification. (For information on these
standards or on ISO, see www.iso.ch.)
When an RO demonstrates these
competencies to the satisfaction of the
flag state administration, its
authorization is documented by that
administration in a formal written
agreement under the recommendations
of IMO Resolution A.739(18).
Similarly, all classification societies
must meet the following requirements
for approval under the provisions of 46
U.S.C. 3316(c):
• Vessels surveyed by the
classification society must have an
adequate safety record.
• The classification society must have
an adequate program to—
Æ Develop and implement safety
standards for the vessels it surveys;
Æ Make its safety records available in
an electronic format;
Æ Make the safety records of a vessel
survey available to other classification
societies; and
Æ Request safety records from other
classification societies that previously
surveyed a vessel for the purpose of a
specific vessel survey.
To better assess classification
societies, we evaluate how these
societies implement safety standards for
vessels by examining worldwide port
state control statistics for each society
and the vessels it surveys. These data
normally appear in annual reports
published by the world’s regional port
state control organizations. Some of
these annual reports are not available
online. These organizations include, but
are not limited to, the following
organizations created under regional
memoranda of understanding (MOU):
• Paris Memorandum of
Understanding on Port State Control
(Paris MOU: www.parismou.org).
• Memorandum of Understanding on
Port State Control in the Asian-Pacific
Region (Tokyo MOU: www.tokyo-mou.
org).
• Mediterranean Memorandum of
Understanding on Port State Control
(Med MOU: www.medmou.org).
• Black Sea Memorandum of
Understanding on Port State Control
(Black Sea MOU: www.bsmou.org).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:53 Aug 08, 2012
Jkt 226001
• The Latin American Agreement on
Port State Control of Vessels (Vina del
Mar MOU: www.acuerdolatino.int.ar).
• West and Central Africa
Memorandum of Understanding on Port
State Control (Abuja MOU: www.
abujamou.org).
• Riyadh Memorandum of
Understanding on Port State Control in
the Gulf Region (Riyadh MOU: www.
riyadhmou.org).
• Indian Ocean Memorandum on Port
State Control (Indian Ocean MOU: www.
iomou.org).
• Caribbean Memorandum of
Understanding on Port State Control
(Caribbean MOU: www.caribbeanmou.
org).
These MOU are regional agreements
among countries to share port state
control inspection results with the aim
of eliminating the operation of
substandard ships. Typically, MOU are
managed by secretariats that maintain
databases of inspection activities and
results and often compile the data into
annual reports. The annual reports
normally compiled by the MOU
secretariats are available to the public
and identify, among other things—
• Vessel names and particulars;
• Inspection dates and locations;
• Classification societies;
• Deficiencies noted;
• Detentions imposed;
• Detained vessels; and
• Banned and targeted vessels.
For information on U.S. port state
control results and the regional MOUs,
see www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/pscweb/
index.htm. A copy of the most recent
annual report from the United States
and the regional organizations can be
found in this docket.
We can evaluate the performance of a
particular classification society by
scrutinizing the port state control
history of the vessels it surveys. For
example, an annual report from a major
MOU secretariat typically includes 3
years of data showing the performance
of all ships listed by administration and
RO. The RO is usually a classification
society.
These shared port state control data
are indispensable in evaluating the
safety performance of flag state
administrations and classification
societies. Not only can we check
performance from the data in the annual
reports, we can also track trends from
year to year.
V. Discussion of Comments and
Changes
We received no comments from the
NPRM published on April 23, 2010.
Since the publication of the NPRM, the
2010 Act required all classification
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
societies, without exemption, to seek
Coast Guard approval prior to working
on a vessel located in the United States.
Accordingly, we reopened the comment
period (76 FR 47531).
A. Comments Received After Reopening
the Comment Period
We received 11 comments from 4
commenters in response to the NPRM
after the reopening of the comment
period.
Two commenters requested that a
classification society that has qualified
as a Coast Guard-recognized
organization under 46 CFR part 8 to
conduct work on behalf of the Coast
Guard on U.S. flagged vessels be
exempted from the proposed rule. We
have determined that we lack the
authority to grant wholesale exemptions
to the requirement in 46 U.S.C.
3316(c)(1) that every classification
society ‘‘appl[y] for approval under this
subsection,’’ and that section 3316(c)(2)
requires us to ‘‘review[] and approve[]
that society’’ under that subsection.
However, we will deem compliance
with the application procedures in 46
CFR part 8 to satisfy the new
application procedures under new 46
CFR subpart 2.45 promulgated by this
rule. Consistent with the statute, we are
requiring any Coast Guard-RO seeking
approval as a classification society
under this rule to explicitly request that
the Coast Guard evaluate their 46 CFR
part 8 application materials under this
rule as well. Upon receiving such
notice, we will treat the part 8
application materials as an application
under this subpart. If we need
additional information to perform our
review, we will take the appropriate
action to notify the classification society
and give them an opportunity to submit
the information to us.
One commenter requested that his or
her organization be automatically
approved under 46 U.S.C. 3316(c)(1)
and under the proposed rule. The
commenter argued that such approval
was justified because the organization is
identified in 46 U.S.C. 3316(a) by name
as an agent on behalf of the U.S.
Government in classifying vessels
owned by the Government. Also, the
organization is recognized by the Coast
Guard and authorized as a recognized
organization of the Coast Guard
pursuant to the requirements of Coast
Guard regulations in 46 CFR part 8
pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 3316(b)(1).
We agree with the commenter that the
organization is identified as the sole
classification society for U.S.
Government-owned vessels. However,
based on the reasoning previously
stated, we cannot automatically approve
E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM
09AUR1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
any organization as a classification
society. Section 3316(c)(1) of 46 U.S.C.
requires that every classification society
make application to the Coast Guard for
approval and that the Coast Guard
assess the conduct of the classification
society under 46 U.S.C. 3316(c)(2). An
automatic approval would violate both
the application requirement and the
assessment requirement. As stated
above, however, we will deem
compliance with the application
procedures in 46 CFR part 8 to satisfy
the new application procedures under
new 46 CFR subpart 2.45, provided each
applicant submits indication that they
all wish to be assessed under the new
regulations in 46 CFR subpart 2.45 to
become an approved classification
society.
Additionally, the same commenter
asked that we clarify in the final rule
whether the detention rate is based on
all vessel detentions or specifically ROrelated detentions. We agree that
clarification is necessary. An RO
detention occurs when a vessel is
detained due to a deficiency which is
the result of an activity by an RO.
Therefore, we will amend the regulatory
text to specify that the detention rate is
based specifically on RO-related
detentions.
One commenter felt that the final rule
does not list clear or specific criteria for
annually reevaluating the records of
classification societies to ensure they
continue to meet the conditions for
approval. The same commenter also
stated that if the re-evaluation criteria
include data from global port state
control regimes, then some previously
approved classification societies would
have poorer records than some
classification societies that are not
approved. The same commenter
expressed the hope that the requirement
in § 2.45–15 would not amount to
annual auditing of classification
societies performance processes.
We agree that the proposed rule did
not explicitly list the criteria for
annually reevaluating the performance
of a classification society. However, as
stated in the NPRM (see 75 FR page
21215), we will ‘‘annually reevaluate
the records of approved classification
societies to ensure they continue to
meet the conditions for approval.’’ It
was and remains our intention to use
the approval requirements listed in
§ 2.45–15 to annually reevaluate the
performance of approved classification
societies. We also agree that it is
possible for us to find during a reevaluation that an approved
classification society has a poor
performance record based on data
collected from global port state control
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:53 Aug 08, 2012
Jkt 226001
regimes. If we determine that a
previously approved classification
society no longer meets the
requirements in § 2.45–15, then we will
take corrective action per § 2.45–20.
While we appreciate the commenter’s
concern, annual review of a
classification society’s performance is
necessary to ensure that the
classification society is in compliance
with the requirements set forth in the
regulations.
One commenter had six comments,
discussed as follows.
The commenter asked that we clarify
the scope of ‘‘repair’’ in light of the fact
that repairs to the hull, equipment, and
machinery can be made at any time as
a result of an accident or survey work.
Repair includes, but is not limited to,
any work done to the hull, equipment,
or machinery that restores the item to its
original design or intended operating
condition.
The commenter requested that we
clarify whether a classification society
would be allowed to conduct surveys
‘‘whether they be periodical (annual,
intermediate and renewal) or occasional
and to issue certificates even if they are
not approved by the Coast Guard.’’ A
classification society that is not
approved by the Coast Guard would be
permitted to conduct surveys and issue
certificates to a vessel if that vessel is
not undergoing or has not completed
any construction, repair, or alteration in
the United States.
Next, the commenter took issue with
the requirement proposed in § 2.45–
15(a)(6)(i) that a classification society
must use a system to make its safety
records available to the Coast Guard.
The commenter believes the provision
does not define or sufficiently clarify
the scope of information to be provided
as part of a vessel’s safety records,
thereby risking the disclosure of
commercially sensitive and confidential
information of ship owners to parties
who should not be privy to that
information.
We appreciate the commenter’s
concern; however, to determine whether
the vessels surveyed by a classification
society have an adequate safety record,
the classification society would be
required to provide all records we
formally request. We would request
only those records that are necessary to
adequately determine the performance
of a classification society with respect to
safety and, except as required by law,
would not disclose those records to any
parties with competing interests.
The same commenter stated that
§ 2.45–15(a)(6)(ii), which requires a
classification society to have in place a
system to provide its safety records to
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
47547
other classification societies when
requested, is redundant because of
existing procedures for sharing data. We
appreciate the commenter’s concern;
however, 46 U.S.C. 3316(c)(2)(B)(iii)
mandates that the Coast Guard require
classification societies to make their
safety records available to all relevant
parties.
Next, the commenter was concerned
with the proposed requirement in
§ 2.45–15(5) that requires that a country
for which a classification society is an
RO must be a signatory to the
International Convention for the Safety
of Life at Sea, 1974, as amended,
(SOLAS); the International Convention
for the Prevention of Pollution from
Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol
of 1978 relating thereto (MARPOL); and
the International Convention on Load
Lines, 1966 (ICLL). The commenter felt
that this requirement may cause an
adverse situation because a flag state
would be compelled to ratify the
aforementioned international
conventions simply to have its RO meet
the Coast Guard’s requirement. We
disagree that this requirement would
create an adverse situation. By ratifying
the SOLAS, MARPOL, and ICLL
conventions, a flag state would join the
majority of flag states that have ratified
these conventions and help ensure that
their vessels improve their safety record.
Finally, the commenter requested we
clarify whether all countries for which
a classification society is an RO must be
a signatory to each of the SOLAS,
MARPOL, and ICLL conventions. The
commenter was concerned because
classification societies usually are ROs
of many countries, including ones that
have not ratified some of the
international conventions. In response,
we point out that the regulatory text in
§ 2.45–15(a)(4) clearly states that the
classification society must have
received approval to act as an RO by at
least one country that is a signatory to
the SOLAS, MARPOL, and ICLL
conventions. Therefore, at least one
country would have to be a signatory to
these conventions.
B. Changes Made To Address the
2010 Act
In this final rule, we made changes to
several sections from the proposed rule
based on changes in applicability as
required by the enactment of the 2010
Act, which amended 46 U.S.C. 3316(c),
and to improve clarity and ensure
accuracy of the information presented in
this final rule.
We amended §§ 2.45–10(a), 2.45–
15(a), and 2.45–30 by deleting any
references to exemptions for IACS
members in accordance with the 2010
E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM
09AUR1
47548
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Act, which requires all classification
societies, without exemption, to seek
Coast Guard approval prior to working
on a vessel located in the United States.
We amended § 2.45–25 by adding new
paragraph (c), which states that an
application submitted to become a Coast
Guard-RO under 46 CFR part 8, subpart
B satisfies the application requirements
to become an approved classification
society as long as the RO’s status has not
been revoked, it submits a request to
become an approved classification
society, and it certifies that the
application information submitted
under 46 CFR part 8, subpart B remains
valid. This change, in response to
commenters seeking an exemption or
automatic approval based on RO status,
avoids requiring organizations to
resubmit information they have
previously provided as part of an
application under 46 CFR part 8,
subpart B. This change permits such
organizations to submit a minimal
application, as long as the Coast Guard
has the necessary information
evidenced by continuing RO status and
the certification that the previously
submitted information is still valid.
We amended § 2.45–15(a)(1) to clarify
we will review the detention records of
a classification society for vessels it
surveys during the past 3 years.
We also amended § 2.45–15(a)(5) to
clarify that the country for which the
classification society is an RO refers to
the same country referenced in § 2.45–
15(a)(4).
We amended § 2.45–15(a)(5)(ii) by
rewording the language of the proposed
text to clarify that the one country for
which the class society meets the
requirement of § 2.45–15(a)(4) cannot be
identified as a flag state targeted for
additional port state control action by
the Coast Guard.
We also made minor changes to the
regulatory text. First, the final rule
deletes the authority citation for 46 CFR
2.45, as this section was removed from
the CFR on September 30, 1997. See 62
FR 51195. Second, the final rule makes
minor formatting changes to improve
clarity, such as adding paragraph
designations within some sections.
Finally, throughout the rule we changed
the Coast Guard office designator ‘‘CG–
521’’ to CG–ENG’’ to reflect a recent
Coast Guard organizational change.
VI. Incorporation by Reference
The Director of the Federal Register
has approved the material in § 2.45–5
for incorporation by reference under 5
U.S.C. 552 and 1 CFR part 51. Copies of
the material are available from the
sources listed in that section.
VII. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this rule after
considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or
executive orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
This rule is not a significant
regulatory action under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, as amended by
Executive Order 13563, Regulatory
Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs
and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that
Order. Accordingly, the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has not
reviewed it under that Order.
As previously discussed in section
‘‘V. Discussion of Comments and
Changes,’’ the applicability provision
was changed to reflect an amendment to
the legal authority made by the Coast
Guard Reauthorization Act of 2010. In
summary, the total cost for this rule will
involve only one-time costs for
applications for the initial approval, and
we estimate the total will be $5,429.
Below, we present the basis for our
estimate of the costs for this final rule
that accounts for this amendment and
the current status of classification
societies active in the United States.
We previously approved six
classification societies under the policy
announced in 2004 based on the 2004
Act. Of the six, these two are IACS
members: Indian Register of Shipping
and Polish Register of Shipping. The
other four that are not IACS members
are: Bulgarian Register of Shipping,
China Corporation Register of Shipping,
Hellenic Register of Shipping, and
International Naval Surveys Bureau. In
the NPRM, we stated that approved
classification societies would not need
to take additional actions and would not
occur any additional costs. We are not
aware of any information, either from
the comments or other sources, to alter
that assessment. Thus, these six
organizations would not have any cost
burden associated with this rulemaking.
We identified the remaining members
of IACS as the population affected by
the 2010 Act amendments, which
changed the applicability of 46 U.S.C.
3316(c) to include IACS members in the
application and review procedures.
Table 2 lists these classification
societies and indicates whether they
currently have RO status with the Coast
Guard under 46 CFR part 8.
TABLE 1—IACS MEMBERS WITHOUT CLASSIFICATION SOCIETY APPROVAL
Abbreviation
American Bureau of Shipping .............................................................................................
Bureau Veritas .....................................................................................................................
China Classification Society ................................................................................................
Croatian Register of Shipping .............................................................................................
Det Norske Veritas ..............................................................................................................
Germanischer Lloyd ............................................................................................................
Korean Register of Shipping ...............................................................................................
Lloyd’s Register of Shipping ................................................................................................
Nippon Kaiji Kyokai .............................................................................................................
Registro Italiano Navale ......................................................................................................
Russian Maritime Register of Shipping ...............................................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Class society
ABS ..............................................................
BV ................................................................
CCS ..............................................................
CRS ..............................................................
DNV ..............................................................
GL ................................................................
KRS ..............................................................
LR .................................................................
NK ................................................................
RINA .............................................................
RS ................................................................
As the table shows, there are seven
class societies that are not approved but
currently have RO status (ABS, BV,
DNV, GL, LR, NK, and RINA). We
assume that they will take advantage of
§ 2.45–25(c) and will submit an
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:53 Aug 08, 2012
Jkt 226001
application to become approved
classification societies.
Coast Guard subject matter experts in
the Naval Architecture Division
provided estimates of time to process
one of these applications submitted in
accordance with new § 2.45–25(c). The
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
RO?
Yes.
Yes.
No.
No.
Yes.
Yes.
No.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
No.
classification society will require 1 hour
for a junior manager to draft the
application letter and 0.5 hour for a
senior manager to review it. Coast Guard
processing will require 2 hours for a
senior staff member or junior manager to
review the application, verify the data,
E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM
09AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
and draft the approval letter, and 0.25
hour for a senior manager to review it.
Table 2 presents the complete
calculations of the unit cost for this
application, with the same wage rates
47549
used in the NPRM, ‘‘Approval of
Classification Societies’’ (75 FR 21212).
TABLE 2—UNIT COST OF APPLICATION FOR CLASSIFICATION SOCIETY WITH RO STATUS
Wage
rate
Sector
cost
Position
Industry .............................................
Junior Manager ................................
Senior Manager ................................
1.00
0.50
$67
88
$67
44
........................
........................
Industry Total .............................
...........................................................
1.50
........................
........................
$111
Government ......................................
Junior Officer ....................................
Senior Officer ...................................
2.00
0.25
67
88
134
22
........................
........................
Government Total ......................
...........................................................
2.25
........................
........................
156
Total Unit Cost ....................
...........................................................
3.75
........................
........................
267
The total cost for these applications is
$1,869 and Table 3 displays the
calculations.
TABLE 3—APPLICATION COSTS FOR
CLASS SOCIETIES WITH RO STATUS
Sector
Count
Unit
cost
Total
cost
Industry ...................
Government ............
7
7
$111
156
$777
1,092
Total ....................
7
267
1,869
We anticipate that the other four
classification societies that currently are
not ROs (CCS, CRS, KRS, and RS) will
also apply to become approved
classification societies. They will need
to prepare a complete application per
the requirements of § 2.45–25(b). In the
Hours
Position
cost
Sector
NPRM, we estimated the total unit cost
for one of these applications at $890
($712 for industry and $178 for
government). We received no additional
information from either the comments
or other sources to cause us to modify
this estimate. The total cost for these
four applications is $3,560, and Table 4
presents the calculations.
TABLE 4—APPLICATION COSTS FOR
CLASS SOCIETIES WITHOUT RO
STATUS
Sector
Unit
cost
Count
Total
cost
Industry ...........
Government ....
4
4
$712
178
$2,848
712
Total ............
4
890
3,560
In the NPRM, we stated that based on
the historical record, we anticipate that
the approved classification societies
will remain in good standing in the
foreseeable future. We received no
contrary information since then. With
that assumption, we anticipate that
there will be no costs associated with
suspensions or reapprovals. As stated
earlier, we also anticipate that only
current IACS members will apply for
approval.
With these assumptions, the total
costs for this rule will involve only onetime costs for applications for the initial
approval, and we estimate the total will
be $5,429. Table 5 summarizes these
application costs, as previously
described.
TABLE 5—TOTAL APPLICATION COSTS
RO Status
Industry
costs
Count
Government
costs
Total
costs
7
4
$777
2,848
$1,092
712
$1,869
3,560
Total .............................................................................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Currently RO ....................................................................................................
Not RO .............................................................................................................
11
3,625
1,804
5,429
The benefits of this rule derive from
incorporating the amendments from the
Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2004
and the Coast Guard Authorization Act
of 2010 and incorporating the standards
from IMO Resolution A.739(18),
‘‘Guidelines for the Authorization of
Organizations Acting on Behalf of the
Administration,’’ to provide a sound
and internationally recognized standard
on which to base our review and
approval program.
B. Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:53 Aug 08, 2012
Jkt 226001
whether this rule would have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises
small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations that are independently
owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and
governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000.
For-profit classification societies
affected by this rule may be classified
under one of the following North
American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) 6-digit codes for water
transportation: 488330—Navigation
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Services to Shipping or 488390—Other
Support Activities for Water
Transportation. According to the Small
Business Administration’s (SBA) size
standards, a U.S. company classified
under these NAICS codes with annual
revenues of less than $7 million is
considered a small entity.
The only predominant U.S.
classification society is the American
Bureau of Shipping (ABS), which is a
non-profit organization. We do not
consider the ABS to be a small entity
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. In
addition, the costs that we described in
the previous section are so minimal, we
E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM
09AUR1
47550
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
do not believe they rise to the level of
being a significant economic impact.
Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies
under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
we offered to assist small entities in
understanding the rule so that they
could better evaluate its effects on them
and participate in the rulemaking. 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 (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501–3520).
This rule comprises application
procedures classification societies must
meet for approval. As stated in Section
VII.A, we expect four new approvals in
the first year after the rule becomes
effective. In the NPRM, we forecasted
that there would be no or very few
applications in the near future. We
received no comments or additional
information to indicate that there would
be 10 or more approvals after the first
year. Thus, we expect to receive less
than 10 approval requests per year. This
figure is less than the threshold of 10
per 12-month period for collection of
information reporting purposes under
the PRA.
This rule specifies a separate approval
process for classification societies that
are currently ROs. These ROs will only
need to send the Coast Guard a letter
requesting that we use previously
collected data as the basis for their
approval.
As stated in Section VII.A, we expect
the seven current ROs to use this
method to apply for approval the first
year the rule becomes effective. This
process does not require any new
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:53 Aug 08, 2012
Jkt 226001
information and the affected population
is less than the threshold of 10 per 12month period for collection of
information reporting purposes under
the PRA.
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.
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. Although 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.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.
K. Energy Effects
We have analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have
determined that it is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under that order because
it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under Executive Order 12866 and is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy. The Administrator of the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs
has not designated it as a significant
energy action. Therefore, it does not
require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
L. Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use
voluntary consensus standards in their
regulatory activities unless the agency
provides Congress, through the Office of
Management and Budget, with an
explanation of why using these
standards would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are
technical standards (e.g., specifications
of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling
procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This rule uses the following voluntary
consensus standards: IMO Resolution
A.739(18), ‘‘Guidelines for the
Authorization of Organizations Acting
on Behalf of the Administration.’’ The
section that references this standard and
the location where this standard is
available is listed in 46 CFR 2.45–5.
M. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023–01 and
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
which guide the Coast Guard in
complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have concluded that this action is one
of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment. This rule is categorically
excluded under section 2.B.2, figure 2–
1, paragraphs (34)(b) and (d) of the
Instruction. This rule involves
regulations concerning internal agency
functions and regulations concerning
E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM
09AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
manning, documentation,
admeasurement, inspection, and
equipping 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 2
Incorporation by reference, Marine
safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Vessels.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 46
CFR part 2 as follows:
PART 2—VESSEL INSPECTIONS
1. The authority citation for part 2 is
revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: Sec. 622, Pub. L. 111–281; 33
U.S.C. 1903; 43 U.S.C. 1333; 46 U.S.C. 2110,
3103, 3205, 3306, 3307, 3703; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701; E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR,
1980 Comp., p. 277; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
■
2. Add subpart 2.45 to read as follows:
Subpart 2.45—Classification Society
Activities
Sec.
2.45–1 Definitions.
2.45–5 Incorporation by reference.
2.45–10 General.
2.45–15 Approval requirements.
2.45–20 Probation, suspension, and
revocation.
2.45–25 Application for approval.
2.45–30 Penalties.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Definitions.
The following definitions apply to
this subpart:
Administration means the
Government of the State whose flag the
ship is entitled to fly.
Classification society means an
organization that, at a minimum,
verifies that a vessel meets requirements
embodying the technical rules,
regulations, standards, guidelines and
associated surveys, and inspections
covering the design, construction, and/
or through life compliance of a ship’s
structure and essential engineering and
electrical systems.
Recognized Organization (RO) means
an organization authorized to act on
behalf of an Administration.
Regional port state control secretariat
means an organization established to
collect and maintain port state control
inspection data in addition to other
functions under a regional agreement
among countries.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:53 Aug 08, 2012
Jkt 226001
Incorporation by reference.
(a) Certain material is incorporated by
reference into this part with the
approval of the Director of the Federal
Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1
CFR part 51. To enforce any edition
other than that specified in this section,
the Coast Guard must publish notice of
change in the Federal Register and the
material must be available to the public.
All approved material is available for
inspection at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call 202–741–6030 or
go to https://www.archives.gov/
federal_register/
code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html. Also, it is available
for inspection at the Coast Guard’s
Office of Design and Engineering
Systems (CG–ENG), 2100 Second Street
SW., Washington, DC 20593–0001, and
is available from the sources indicated
in this section.
(b) International Maritime
Organization, 4 Albert Embankment,
London SE1 7SR, U.K. +44 (0)20 7735
7611, https://www.imo.org/.
(1) IMO Resolution A.739(18),
Guidelines for the Authorization of
Organizations Acting on Behalf of the
Administration, adopted 4 November
1993, incorporation by reference
approved for § 2.45–15.
(2) [Reserved]
§ 2.45–10
Subpart 2.45—Classification Society
Activities
§ 2.45–1
§ 2.45–5
General.
(a) A classification society (including
an employee or agent of that society)
must not review, examine, survey, or
certify the construction, repair, or
alteration of a vessel in the United
States unless it is approved under the
provisions of this subpart.
(b) This subpart applies to a
recognized organization that meets the
definition of a classification society
provided in § 2.45–1 of this subpart.
§ 2.45–15
Approval requirements.
(a) A classification society may be
approved for purpose of § 2.45–10 if the
following conditions are met:
(1) Vessels surveyed by the
classification society must have a
worldwide port state control detention
rate of less than 2 percent based on the
number of Recognized Organization
(RO)-related detentions divided by the
number of vessel inspections for at least
40 port state control inspections for the
past 3 years;
(2) The classification society must not
be identified in the most recent
publication of ‘‘Port State Control in the
United States’’ as a Priority I and as
having more than one RO-related
detention for the past 3 years;
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
47551
(3) The classification society must
comply with the minimum standards for
an RO recommended in IMO Resolution
A.739(18), Appendix 1 (incorporated by
reference, see § 2.45–5.);
(4) The classification society must be
an RO for at least one country under a
formal written agreement that includes
all of the elements described in IMO
Resolution A.739(18), Appendix 2
(incorporated by reference, see § 2.45–
5.);
(5) The referenced country that is
cited for satisfaction of the requirement
of paragraph (a)(4) of this section for
which the classification society is an
RO—
(i) Must be signatory to each of the
following: The International Safety of
Life at Sea Convention (SOLAS), the
International Convention on the
Prevention of Pollution from Ships
(MARPOL 73/78), the International
Convention on Load Lines (ICLL), 1966,
and the Protocol of 1988 relating to the
ICLL, 1966; and
(ii) Must not be identified as a flag
state targeted for additional port state
control action by the Coast Guard or any
regional port state control secretariat.
(6) The classification society must use
a system to—
(i) Make its safety records and those
of persons acting on behalf of the
classification society available to the
Coast Guard in electronic format;
(ii) Provide its safety records and
those of persons acting on behalf of the
classification society to another
classification society that requests those
records for the purpose of conducting
surveys of vessels; and
(iii) Request the safety records of a
vessel to be surveyed from any other
classification society that previously
surveyed that vessel.
(b) Where sufficient performance
records are not available from a regional
port state control secretariat, the Coast
Guard may consider an equivalent
safety performance indicator proposed
by the classification society seeking
approval.
§ 2.45–20 Probation, suspension, and
revocation.
(a) A classification society approved
for the purpose of this subpart must
maintain the minimum requirements for
approval set forth in § 2.45–15.
(b) If an approved classification
society fails to maintain compliance
with paragraph (a) of this section, the
Coast Guard may place the classification
society approval on probation, or
suspend or revoke the classification
society’s approval, as appropriate.
(c) Probation. A classification society
on probation is approved for the
E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM
09AUR1
47552
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
purpose of this subpart. The probation
continues until the next review of the
classification society’s compliance with
paragraph (a) of this section.
(1) If the review shows that
compliance with paragraph (a) of this
section is achieved, the probation may
end.
(2) If the review shows significant
improvement but compliance with
paragraph (a) of this section is not
achieved, the probation may be
extended.
(3) If the review does not show
significant improvement, and
compliance with paragraph (a) of this
section is not achieved, the approval
may be suspended.
(d) Suspension. A classification
society whose approval is suspended is
not approved for the purpose of this
subpart. Suspension will continue until
the next review of the classification
society’s compliance with paragraph (a)
of this section.
(1) If the review shows compliance
with paragraph (a) of this section, the
classification society’s approval may be
restored.
(2) If the review shows significant
improvement toward compliance with
paragraph (a) of this section, the
suspension may be extended.
(3) If the review does not show
significant improvement and
compliance with paragraph (a) of this
section, the classification society’s
approval may be revoked.
(e) Revocation. A classification
society whose approval is revoked is not
approved for the purpose of this
subpart. The classification society may
reapply for approval when the
requirements of § 2.45–15 are met.
(f) The Coast Guard’s Office of Design
and Engineering Standards (CG–ENG)
administers probations, suspensions,
and revocations and makes all related
notifications to affected classification
societies.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 2.45–25
(a) An application for approval must
be made in writing and in the English
language to U.S. Coast Guard,
Commandant (CG–ENG), Office of
Design and Engineering Standards, 2100
Second Street SW. Stop 7126,
Washington DC 20593–7126.
(b) The application must—
(1) Indicate the type of work the
classification society intends to perform
on vessels in the United States;
(2) Include documentation
demonstrating that the classification
society complies with § 2.45–15;
(3) Contain a list of the vessels
surveyed by the classification society
over the previous 3 calendar years. The
15:53 Aug 08, 2012
Jkt 226001
§ 2.45–30
Penalties.
The owner, charterer, managing
operator, agent, master, or individual in
charge of a vessel that employs a
classification society to review,
examine, survey, or certify the
construction, repair, or alteration of a
vessel in the United States is subject to
civil penalties in accordance with Title
46 U.S.C. 3318 if the classification
society is not approved by the Coast
Guard under this subpart.
Final rule; response to petitions
for reconsideration.
ACTION:
On August 5, 2011, the
agency published a final rule amending
the requirements for voluntarily
installed event data recorders (EDRs)
established in August 2006. In response
to the August 2011 final rule, the agency
received three petitions for
reconsideration from the Alliance of
Automobile Manufacturers, the
Automotive Safety Council, and Honda
Motor Co., LTD. The Association of
Global Automakers, Inc. Technical
Affairs Committee, and Nissan North
America, Inc. both submitted comments
in support of the petitioners’ requests.
After careful consideration, the agency
is granting some aspects of the petitions,
and denying others. This document
amends the final rule accordingly.
SUMMARY:
Effective Date: The amendments
in this rule are effective October 9, 2012.
Compliance Dates: Except as provided
below, light vehicles manufactured on
or after September 1, 2012 that are
equipped with an EDR and
manufacturers of those vehicles must
comply with this rule. However,
vehicles that are manufactured in two or
more stages or that are altered are not
required to comply with the rule until
September 1, 2013. Voluntary
compliance is permitted before that
date.
Petitions: If you wish to submit a
petition for reconsideration of this rule,
your petition must be received by
September 24, 2012.
DATES:
Dated: July 26, 2012.
J.G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations and
Standards, U. S. Coast Guard.
Petitions for reconsideration
should refer to the docket number and
be submitted to: Administrator, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building, 4th Floor, Washington, DC
20590. Please see the Privacy Act
heading under Rulemaking Analyses
and Notices.
[FR Doc. 2012–19376 Filed 8–8–12; 8:45 am]
Application for approval.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
list must include vessel names, flags,
and IMO numbers, as well as initial
vessel inspections and detentions; and
(4) Provide a summary of the safety
records of vessels the classification
society surveys for each of the previous
3 calendar years, including initial vessel
inspections and detentions for all data
contained in regional port state control
Memoranda of Understanding (MOU)
and other port state control data
sources, including the U.S. Coast Guard.
(c) An application submitted in
accordance with 46 CFR part 8, subpart
B satisfies the application requirements
of paragraph (a) of this section, provided
the applicant:
(1) Has been notified in writing by the
Commandant that it met the criteria to
be a recognized classification society,
and its recognized status has not been
revoked, under 46 CFR part 8, subpart
B;
(2) Submits in writing and in the
English language to the address in
paragraph (a) of this section a statement
that the applicant is applying for
approval under this subpart; and
(3) Certifies in the submission under
paragraph (c)(2) of this section that the
information in the application
submitted under 46 CFR part 8, subpart
B remains valid.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 563
[Docket No. NHTSA–2012–0099]
RIN 2127–AL14
Event Data Recorders
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ADDRESSES:
For
technical and policy issues, contact:
David Sutula, Office of
Crashworthiness Standards, NVS–112.
Telephone: (202) 366–3273. Facsimile:
(202) 366–7002.
For legal issues, contact: David
Jasinski, Office of the Chief Counsel,
NCC–112. Telephone: (202) 366–2992.
Facsimile: (202) 366–3820.
Both persons may be reached by mail at
the following address: National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building, 4th Floor, Washington, DC
20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM
09AUR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 154 (Thursday, August 9, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47544-47552]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-19376]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
46 CFR Part 2
[Docket No. USCG-2007-27668]
RIN 1625-AB35
Approval of Classification Societies
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Federal law requires that classification societies conducting
certain work in the United States be approved by the Coast Guard. In
this rule, we finalize application procedures and performance standards
that classification societies must meet in order to obtain approval by
the Coast Guard. Through this final rule, we seek to improve marine
safety and environmental protection by assuring the consistency and
quality of work conducted by classification societies that review,
examine, survey, or certify the construction, repair, or alteration of
a vessel in the United States.
DATES: This final rule is effective September 10, 2012.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register on
September 10, 2012.
[[Page 47545]]
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-2007-27668 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-2007-27668 in the ``Keyword'' box, and then clicking
``Search.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email LT Alfred Giordano, Office of Design and Engineering
Standards (CG-ENG-1), Coast Guard; telephone 202-372-1362, email
alfred.j.giordano@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. Discussion of Comments and Changes
A. Comments Received After Reopening the Comment Period
B. Changes Made to Address the 2010 Act
VI. Incorporation by Reference
VII. 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
ABS American Bureau of Shipping
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
IACS International Association of Classification Societies
ICLL International Convention on Load Lines, 1966
IMO International Maritime Organization
ISO International Organization for Standardization
MARPOL 73/78 International Convention for the Prevention of
Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978
relating thereto
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
NARA National Archives and Records Administration
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
OMB Office of Management and Budget
RO Recognized Organization
SBA Small Business Administration
SOLAS International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974,
as amended
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Regulatory History
We published a notice of policy and a request for comments that
outlined the procedures by which classification societies could apply
for approval with the Coast Guard. See 69 FR 63548 (November 2, 2004).
This notice of policy was based on the August 9, 2004 enactment of
Section 413 of the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2004
(``the 2004 Act'') (Pub. L. 108-293). The 2004 Act amended 46 U.S.C.
3316 by adding paragraph (c), which prohibits certain activities on a
vessel in the United States by classification societies that have not
been approved by the Coast Guard. The 2004 Act mandated that, after
December 31, 2004, a classification society, including an employee or
agent of that society, may not review, examine, survey, or certify the
construction, repair, or alteration of a vessel in the United States
unless the classification society is either approved by the Coast Guard
or is a full member of the International Association of Classification
Societies (IACS).
After publication of the notice of policy, we received two
questions from the public that were addressed in a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) published in the Federal Register on April 23, 2010.
The NPRM, entitled ``Approval of Classification Societies'' (75 FR
21212), outlined the procedures and criteria we would use to evaluate
classification societies. The comment period closed on July 22, 2010,
and we received no comments on the proposed rule. No public meeting was
requested and none was held.
On October 15, 2010, the enactment of section 622 of the Coast
Guard Authorization Act of 2010 (the ``2010 Act'') (Pub. L. 111-281)
amended 46 U.S.C. 3316(c). The 2010 Act changed the provision's
applicability to require all classification societies, including IACS
members, to be approved by the Coast Guard prior to conducting any work
on a vessel in the United States. Because of the 2010 Act's
applicability changes, we reopened the comment period to allow for any
additional or updated comments from the public on our plan to remove
the proposed rule's exemption for IACS members, and apply the proposed
rule to all classification societies seeking Coast Guard approval,
including IACS members. See 76 FR 47531 (August 5, 2011). The comment
period closed on September 6, 2011, and 4 commenters with 11 comments
responded to the revised proposal. No public meeting was requested and
none was held.
III. Basis and Purpose
This final rule codifies into Title 46 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) the procedures and criteria to evaluate
classification societies in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 3316(c) in order
to have a specific, consistent, and enforceable basis for approval
determinations.
IV. Background
To incorporate the requirements of 46 U.S.C. 3316(c) into
regulations, we deem the International Maritime Organization (IMO)
Resolution A.739(18), ``Guidelines for the Authorization of
Organizations Acting on Behalf of the Administration,'' to provide a
sound and internationally recognized standard on which to base our
classification society review and approval program.
The IMO acknowledges that a classification society often acts as a
Recognized Organization (RO) under authority delegated by a flag state
administration when it performs technical and survey work on behalf of
that administration. Recognizing this relationship, IMO Resolution
A.739(18) adopted guidelines for minimum competency standards for ROs
that act on behalf of flag state administrations to conduct vessel
examinations, issue international certificates, perform surveys and
certifications, and determine vessel tonnage in accordance with
applicable international requirements. In addition, the IMO guidelines
are consistent with our minimum standards for a classification society
to qualify as a Coast Guard-recognized organization in accordance with
46 CFR part 8, ``Vessel Inspection Alternatives.''
To perform work on behalf of a flag state administration that uses
the IMO guidelines, an RO must sufficiently demonstrate that its
business practices meet or exceed the performance standards described
in IMO Resolution A.739(18). For example, the RO must show that it--
Publishes and systematically maintains rules for the
design, construction, and certification of vessels;
[[Page 47546]]
Is professionally staffed with strategically placed
resources for geographic coverage;
Maintains a high level of professional ethics;
Is competent;
Provides timely and quality services; and
Maintains an internal quality system no less effective
than the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 9000
series certification. (For information on these standards or on ISO,
see www.iso.ch.)
When an RO demonstrates these competencies to the satisfaction of
the flag state administration, its authorization is documented by that
administration in a formal written agreement under the recommendations
of IMO Resolution A.739(18).
Similarly, all classification societies must meet the following
requirements for approval under the provisions of 46 U.S.C. 3316(c):
Vessels surveyed by the classification society must have
an adequate safety record.
The classification society must have an adequate program
to--
[cir] Develop and implement safety standards for the vessels it
surveys;
[cir] Make its safety records available in an electronic format;
[cir] Make the safety records of a vessel survey available to other
classification societies; and
[cir] Request safety records from other classification societies
that previously surveyed a vessel for the purpose of a specific vessel
survey.
To better assess classification societies, we evaluate how these
societies implement safety standards for vessels by examining worldwide
port state control statistics for each society and the vessels it
surveys. These data normally appear in annual reports published by the
world's regional port state control organizations. Some of these annual
reports are not available online. These organizations include, but are
not limited to, the following organizations created under regional
memoranda of understanding (MOU):
Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control
(Paris MOU: www.parismou.org).
Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control in the
Asian-Pacific Region (Tokyo MOU: www.tokyo-mou.org).
Mediterranean Memorandum of Understanding on Port State
Control (Med MOU: www.medmou.org).
Black Sea Memorandum of Understanding on Port State
Control (Black Sea MOU: www.bsmou.org).
The Latin American Agreement on Port State Control of
Vessels (Vina del Mar MOU: www.acuerdolatino.int.ar).
West and Central Africa Memorandum of Understanding on
Port State Control (Abuja MOU: www.abujamou.org).
Riyadh Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control
in the Gulf Region (Riyadh MOU: www.riyadhmou.org).
Indian Ocean Memorandum on Port State Control (Indian
Ocean MOU: www.iomou.org).
Caribbean Memorandum of Understanding on Port State
Control (Caribbean MOU: www.caribbeanmou.org).
These MOU are regional agreements among countries to share port
state control inspection results with the aim of eliminating the
operation of substandard ships. Typically, MOU are managed by
secretariats that maintain databases of inspection activities and
results and often compile the data into annual reports. The annual
reports normally compiled by the MOU secretariats are available to the
public and identify, among other things--
Vessel names and particulars;
Inspection dates and locations;
Classification societies;
Deficiencies noted;
Detentions imposed;
Detained vessels; and
Banned and targeted vessels.
For information on U.S. port state control results and the regional
MOUs, see www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/pscweb/index.htm. A copy of the most
recent annual report from the United States and the regional
organizations can be found in this docket.
We can evaluate the performance of a particular classification
society by scrutinizing the port state control history of the vessels
it surveys. For example, an annual report from a major MOU secretariat
typically includes 3 years of data showing the performance of all ships
listed by administration and RO. The RO is usually a classification
society.
These shared port state control data are indispensable in
evaluating the safety performance of flag state administrations and
classification societies. Not only can we check performance from the
data in the annual reports, we can also track trends from year to year.
V. Discussion of Comments and Changes
We received no comments from the NPRM published on April 23, 2010.
Since the publication of the NPRM, the 2010 Act required all
classification societies, without exemption, to seek Coast Guard
approval prior to working on a vessel located in the United States.
Accordingly, we reopened the comment period (76 FR 47531).
A. Comments Received After Reopening the Comment Period
We received 11 comments from 4 commenters in response to the NPRM
after the reopening of the comment period.
Two commenters requested that a classification society that has
qualified as a Coast Guard-recognized organization under 46 CFR part 8
to conduct work on behalf of the Coast Guard on U.S. flagged vessels be
exempted from the proposed rule. We have determined that we lack the
authority to grant wholesale exemptions to the requirement in 46 U.S.C.
3316(c)(1) that every classification society ``appl[y] for approval
under this subsection,'' and that section 3316(c)(2) requires us to
``review[] and approve[] that society'' under that subsection.
However, we will deem compliance with the application procedures in
46 CFR part 8 to satisfy the new application procedures under new 46
CFR subpart 2.45 promulgated by this rule. Consistent with the statute,
we are requiring any Coast Guard-RO seeking approval as a
classification society under this rule to explicitly request that the
Coast Guard evaluate their 46 CFR part 8 application materials under
this rule as well. Upon receiving such notice, we will treat the part 8
application materials as an application under this subpart. If we need
additional information to perform our review, we will take the
appropriate action to notify the classification society and give them
an opportunity to submit the information to us.
One commenter requested that his or her organization be
automatically approved under 46 U.S.C. 3316(c)(1) and under the
proposed rule. The commenter argued that such approval was justified
because the organization is identified in 46 U.S.C. 3316(a) by name as
an agent on behalf of the U.S. Government in classifying vessels owned
by the Government. Also, the organization is recognized by the Coast
Guard and authorized as a recognized organization of the Coast Guard
pursuant to the requirements of Coast Guard regulations in 46 CFR part
8 pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 3316(b)(1).
We agree with the commenter that the organization is identified as
the sole classification society for U.S. Government-owned vessels.
However, based on the reasoning previously stated, we cannot
automatically approve
[[Page 47547]]
any organization as a classification society. Section 3316(c)(1) of 46
U.S.C. requires that every classification society make application to
the Coast Guard for approval and that the Coast Guard assess the
conduct of the classification society under 46 U.S.C. 3316(c)(2). An
automatic approval would violate both the application requirement and
the assessment requirement. As stated above, however, we will deem
compliance with the application procedures in 46 CFR part 8 to satisfy
the new application procedures under new 46 CFR subpart 2.45, provided
each applicant submits indication that they all wish to be assessed
under the new regulations in 46 CFR subpart 2.45 to become an approved
classification society.
Additionally, the same commenter asked that we clarify in the final
rule whether the detention rate is based on all vessel detentions or
specifically RO-related detentions. We agree that clarification is
necessary. An RO detention occurs when a vessel is detained due to a
deficiency which is the result of an activity by an RO. Therefore, we
will amend the regulatory text to specify that the detention rate is
based specifically on RO-related detentions.
One commenter felt that the final rule does not list clear or
specific criteria for annually reevaluating the records of
classification societies to ensure they continue to meet the conditions
for approval. The same commenter also stated that if the re-evaluation
criteria include data from global port state control regimes, then some
previously approved classification societies would have poorer records
than some classification societies that are not approved. The same
commenter expressed the hope that the requirement in Sec. 2.45-15
would not amount to annual auditing of classification societies
performance processes.
We agree that the proposed rule did not explicitly list the
criteria for annually reevaluating the performance of a classification
society. However, as stated in the NPRM (see 75 FR page 21215), we will
``annually reevaluate the records of approved classification societies
to ensure they continue to meet the conditions for approval.'' It was
and remains our intention to use the approval requirements listed in
Sec. 2.45-15 to annually reevaluate the performance of approved
classification societies. We also agree that it is possible for us to
find during a re-evaluation that an approved classification society has
a poor performance record based on data collected from global port
state control regimes. If we determine that a previously approved
classification society no longer meets the requirements in Sec. 2.45-
15, then we will take corrective action per Sec. 2.45-20.
While we appreciate the commenter's concern, annual review of a
classification society's performance is necessary to ensure that the
classification society is in compliance with the requirements set forth
in the regulations.
One commenter had six comments, discussed as follows.
The commenter asked that we clarify the scope of ``repair'' in
light of the fact that repairs to the hull, equipment, and machinery
can be made at any time as a result of an accident or survey work.
Repair includes, but is not limited to, any work done to the hull,
equipment, or machinery that restores the item to its original design
or intended operating condition.
The commenter requested that we clarify whether a classification
society would be allowed to conduct surveys ``whether they be
periodical (annual, intermediate and renewal) or occasional and to
issue certificates even if they are not approved by the Coast Guard.''
A classification society that is not approved by the Coast Guard would
be permitted to conduct surveys and issue certificates to a vessel if
that vessel is not undergoing or has not completed any construction,
repair, or alteration in the United States.
Next, the commenter took issue with the requirement proposed in
Sec. 2.45-15(a)(6)(i) that a classification society must use a system
to make its safety records available to the Coast Guard. The commenter
believes the provision does not define or sufficiently clarify the
scope of information to be provided as part of a vessel's safety
records, thereby risking the disclosure of commercially sensitive and
confidential information of ship owners to parties who should not be
privy to that information.
We appreciate the commenter's concern; however, to determine
whether the vessels surveyed by a classification society have an
adequate safety record, the classification society would be required to
provide all records we formally request. We would request only those
records that are necessary to adequately determine the performance of a
classification society with respect to safety and, except as required
by law, would not disclose those records to any parties with competing
interests.
The same commenter stated that Sec. 2.45-15(a)(6)(ii), which
requires a classification society to have in place a system to provide
its safety records to other classification societies when requested, is
redundant because of existing procedures for sharing data. We
appreciate the commenter's concern; however, 46 U.S.C.
3316(c)(2)(B)(iii) mandates that the Coast Guard require classification
societies to make their safety records available to all relevant
parties.
Next, the commenter was concerned with the proposed requirement in
Sec. 2.45-15(5) that requires that a country for which a
classification society is an RO must be a signatory to the
International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, as
amended, (SOLAS); the International Convention for the Prevention of
Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978
relating thereto (MARPOL); and the International Convention on Load
Lines, 1966 (ICLL). The commenter felt that this requirement may cause
an adverse situation because a flag state would be compelled to ratify
the aforementioned international conventions simply to have its RO meet
the Coast Guard's requirement. We disagree that this requirement would
create an adverse situation. By ratifying the SOLAS, MARPOL, and ICLL
conventions, a flag state would join the majority of flag states that
have ratified these conventions and help ensure that their vessels
improve their safety record.
Finally, the commenter requested we clarify whether all countries
for which a classification society is an RO must be a signatory to each
of the SOLAS, MARPOL, and ICLL conventions. The commenter was concerned
because classification societies usually are ROs of many countries,
including ones that have not ratified some of the international
conventions. In response, we point out that the regulatory text in
Sec. 2.45-15(a)(4) clearly states that the classification society must
have received approval to act as an RO by at least one country that is
a signatory to the SOLAS, MARPOL, and ICLL conventions. Therefore, at
least one country would have to be a signatory to these conventions.
B. Changes Made To Address the 2010 Act
In this final rule, we made changes to several sections from the
proposed rule based on changes in applicability as required by the
enactment of the 2010 Act, which amended 46 U.S.C. 3316(c), and to
improve clarity and ensure accuracy of the information presented in
this final rule.
We amended Sec. Sec. 2.45-10(a), 2.45-15(a), and 2.45-30 by
deleting any references to exemptions for IACS members in accordance
with the 2010
[[Page 47548]]
Act, which requires all classification societies, without exemption, to
seek Coast Guard approval prior to working on a vessel located in the
United States.
We amended Sec. 2.45-25 by adding new paragraph (c), which states
that an application submitted to become a Coast Guard-RO under 46 CFR
part 8, subpart B satisfies the application requirements to become an
approved classification society as long as the RO's status has not been
revoked, it submits a request to become an approved classification
society, and it certifies that the application information submitted
under 46 CFR part 8, subpart B remains valid. This change, in response
to commenters seeking an exemption or automatic approval based on RO
status, avoids requiring organizations to resubmit information they
have previously provided as part of an application under 46 CFR part 8,
subpart B. This change permits such organizations to submit a minimal
application, as long as the Coast Guard has the necessary information
evidenced by continuing RO status and the certification that the
previously submitted information is still valid.
We amended Sec. 2.45-15(a)(1) to clarify we will review the
detention records of a classification society for vessels it surveys
during the past 3 years.
We also amended Sec. 2.45-15(a)(5) to clarify that the country for
which the classification society is an RO refers to the same country
referenced in Sec. 2.45-15(a)(4).
We amended Sec. 2.45-15(a)(5)(ii) by rewording the language of the
proposed text to clarify that the one country for which the class
society meets the requirement of Sec. 2.45-15(a)(4) cannot be
identified as a flag state targeted for additional port state control
action by the Coast Guard.
We also made minor changes to the regulatory text. First, the final
rule deletes the authority citation for 46 CFR 2.45, as this section
was removed from the CFR on September 30, 1997. See 62 FR 51195.
Second, the final rule makes minor formatting changes to improve
clarity, such as adding paragraph designations within some sections.
Finally, throughout the rule we changed the Coast Guard office
designator ``CG-521'' to CG-ENG'' to reflect a recent Coast Guard
organizational change.
VI. Incorporation by Reference
The Director of the Federal Register has approved the material in
Sec. 2.45-5 for incorporation by reference under 5 U.S.C. 552 and 1
CFR part 51. Copies of the material are available from the sources
listed in that section.
VII. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 13563,
Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of
potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order.
Accordingly, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not reviewed
it under that Order.
As previously discussed in section ``V. Discussion of Comments and
Changes,'' the applicability provision was changed to reflect an
amendment to the legal authority made by the Coast Guard
Reauthorization Act of 2010. In summary, the total cost for this rule
will involve only one-time costs for applications for the initial
approval, and we estimate the total will be $5,429. Below, we present
the basis for our estimate of the costs for this final rule that
accounts for this amendment and the current status of classification
societies active in the United States.
We previously approved six classification societies under the
policy announced in 2004 based on the 2004 Act. Of the six, these two
are IACS members: Indian Register of Shipping and Polish Register of
Shipping. The other four that are not IACS members are: Bulgarian
Register of Shipping, China Corporation Register of Shipping, Hellenic
Register of Shipping, and International Naval Surveys Bureau. In the
NPRM, we stated that approved classification societies would not need
to take additional actions and would not occur any additional costs. We
are not aware of any information, either from the comments or other
sources, to alter that assessment. Thus, these six organizations would
not have any cost burden associated with this rulemaking.
We identified the remaining members of IACS as the population
affected by the 2010 Act amendments, which changed the applicability of
46 U.S.C. 3316(c) to include IACS members in the application and review
procedures. Table 2 lists these classification societies and indicates
whether they currently have RO status with the Coast Guard under 46 CFR
part 8.
Table 1--IACS Members Without Classification Society Approval
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class society Abbreviation RO?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Bureau of Shipping...... ABS................. Yes.
Bureau Veritas................... BV.................. Yes.
China Classification Society..... CCS................. No.
Croatian Register of Shipping.... CRS................. No.
Det Norske Veritas............... DNV................. Yes.
Germanischer Lloyd............... GL.................. Yes.
Korean Register of Shipping...... KRS................. No.
Lloyd's Register of Shipping..... LR.................. Yes.
Nippon Kaiji Kyokai.............. NK.................. Yes.
Registro Italiano Navale......... RINA................ Yes.
Russian Maritime Register of RS.................. No.
Shipping.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As the table shows, there are seven class societies that are not
approved but currently have RO status (ABS, BV, DNV, GL, LR, NK, and
RINA). We assume that they will take advantage of Sec. 2.45-25(c) and
will submit an application to become approved classification societies.
Coast Guard subject matter experts in the Naval Architecture
Division provided estimates of time to process one of these
applications submitted in accordance with new Sec. 2.45-25(c). The
classification society will require 1 hour for a junior manager to
draft the application letter and 0.5 hour for a senior manager to
review it. Coast Guard processing will require 2 hours for a senior
staff member or junior manager to review the application, verify the
data,
[[Page 47549]]
and draft the approval letter, and 0.25 hour for a senior manager to
review it. Table 2 presents the complete calculations of the unit cost
for this application, with the same wage rates used in the NPRM,
``Approval of Classification Societies'' (75 FR 21212).
Table 2--Unit Cost of Application for Classification Society With RO Status
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sector Position Hours Wage rate Position cost Sector cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry...................... Junior Manager.. 1.00 $67 $67 ..............
Senior Manager.. 0.50 88 44 ..............
---------------------------------------------------------------
Industry Total............ ................ 1.50 .............. .............. $111
---------------------------------------------------------------
Government.................... Junior Officer.. 2.00 67 134 ..............
Senior Officer.. 0.25 88 22 ..............
---------------------------------------------------------------
Government Total.......... ................ 2.25 .............. .............. 156
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total Unit Cost....... ................ 3.75 .............. .............. 267
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The total cost for these applications is $1,869 and Table 3
displays the calculations.
Table 3--Application Costs for Class Societies With RO Status
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit Total
Sector Count cost cost
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry........................................ 7 $111 $777
Government...................................... 7 156 1,092
-----------------------
Total......................................... 7 267 1,869
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We anticipate that the other four classification societies that
currently are not ROs (CCS, CRS, KRS, and RS) will also apply to become
approved classification societies. They will need to prepare a complete
application per the requirements of Sec. 2.45-25(b). In the NPRM, we
estimated the total unit cost for one of these applications at $890
($712 for industry and $178 for government). We received no additional
information from either the comments or other sources to cause us to
modify this estimate. The total cost for these four applications is
$3,560, and Table 4 presents the calculations.
Table 4--Application Costs for Class Societies Without RO Status
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit Total
Sector Count cost cost
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry.................................... 4 $712 $2,848
Government.................................. 4 178 712
---------------------------
Total..................................... 4 890 3,560
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the NPRM, we stated that based on the historical record, we
anticipate that the approved classification societies will remain in
good standing in the foreseeable future. We received no contrary
information since then. With that assumption, we anticipate that there
will be no costs associated with suspensions or reapprovals. As stated
earlier, we also anticipate that only current IACS members will apply
for approval.
With these assumptions, the total costs for this rule will involve
only one-time costs for applications for the initial approval, and we
estimate the total will be $5,429. Table 5 summarizes these application
costs, as previously described.
Table 5--Total Application Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry Government
RO Status Count costs costs Total costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently RO.................................... 7 $777 $1,092 $1,869
Not RO.......................................... 4 2,848 712 3,560
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................................... 11 3,625 1,804 5,429
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The benefits of this rule derive from incorporating the amendments
from the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2004 and the Coast Guard
Authorization Act of 2010 and incorporating the standards from IMO
Resolution A.739(18), ``Guidelines for the Authorization of
Organizations Acting on Behalf of the Administration,'' to provide a
sound and internationally recognized standard on which to base our
review and approval program.
B. Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
For-profit classification societies affected by this rule may be
classified under one of the following North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) 6-digit codes for water transportation:
488330--Navigation Services to Shipping or 488390--Other Support
Activities for Water Transportation. According to the Small Business
Administration's (SBA) size standards, a U.S. company classified under
these NAICS codes with annual revenues of less than $7 million is
considered a small entity.
The only predominant U.S. classification society is the American
Bureau of Shipping (ABS), which is a non-profit organization. We do not
consider the ABS to be a small entity under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act. In addition, the costs that we described in the previous section
are so minimal, we
[[Page 47550]]
do not believe they rise to the level of being a significant economic
impact. Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that
this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
C. Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. 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 (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
This rule comprises application procedures classification societies
must meet for approval. As stated in Section VII.A, we expect four new
approvals in the first year after the rule becomes effective. In the
NPRM, we forecasted that there would be no or very few applications in
the near future. We received no comments or additional information to
indicate that there would be 10 or more approvals after the first year.
Thus, we expect to receive less than 10 approval requests per year.
This figure is less than the threshold of 10 per 12-month period for
collection of information reporting purposes under the PRA.
This rule specifies a separate approval process for classification
societies that are currently ROs. These ROs will only need to send the
Coast Guard a letter requesting that we use previously collected data
as the basis for their approval.
As stated in Section VII.A, we expect the seven current ROs to use
this method to apply for approval the first year the rule becomes
effective. This process does not require any new information and the
affected population is less than the threshold of 10 per 12-month
period for collection of information reporting purposes under the PRA.
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.
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. Although 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.
J. Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
K. Energy Effects
We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
L. Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This rule uses the following voluntary consensus standards: IMO
Resolution A.739(18), ``Guidelines for the Authorization of
Organizations Acting on Behalf of the Administration.'' The section
that references this standard and the location where this standard is
available is listed in 46 CFR 2.45-5.
M. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule is categorically excluded under section 2.B.2,
figure 2-1, paragraphs (34)(b) and (d) of the Instruction. This rule
involves regulations concerning internal agency functions and
regulations concerning
[[Page 47551]]
manning, documentation, admeasurement, inspection, and equipping 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 2
Incorporation by reference, Marine safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Vessels.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
46 CFR part 2 as follows:
PART 2--VESSEL INSPECTIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 2 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 622, Pub. L. 111-281; 33 U.S.C. 1903; 43 U.S.C.
1333; 46 U.S.C. 2110, 3103, 3205, 3306, 3307, 3703; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701; E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
0
2. Add subpart 2.45 to read as follows:
Subpart 2.45--Classification Society Activities
Sec.
2.45-1 Definitions.
2.45-5 Incorporation by reference.
2.45-10 General.
2.45-15 Approval requirements.
2.45-20 Probation, suspension, and revocation.
2.45-25 Application for approval.
2.45-30 Penalties.
Subpart 2.45--Classification Society Activities
Sec. 2.45-1 Definitions.
The following definitions apply to this subpart:
Administration means the Government of the State whose flag the
ship is entitled to fly.
Classification society means an organization that, at a minimum,
verifies that a vessel meets requirements embodying the technical
rules, regulations, standards, guidelines and associated surveys, and
inspections covering the design, construction, and/or through life
compliance of a ship's structure and essential engineering and
electrical systems.
Recognized Organization (RO) means an organization authorized to
act on behalf of an Administration.
Regional port state control secretariat means an organization
established to collect and maintain port state control inspection data
in addition to other functions under a regional agreement among
countries.
Sec. 2.45-5 Incorporation by reference.
(a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this part
with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any edition other than that
specified in this section, the Coast Guard must publish notice of
change in the Federal Register and the material must be available to
the public. All approved material is available for inspection at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030 or go to
https://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html. Also, it is available for inspection
at the Coast Guard's Office of Design and Engineering Systems (CG-ENG),
2100 Second Street SW., Washington, DC 20593-0001, and is available
from the sources indicated in this section.
(b) International Maritime Organization, 4 Albert Embankment,
London SE1 7SR, U.K. +44 (0)20 7735 7611, https://www.imo.org/.
(1) IMO Resolution A.739(18), Guidelines for the Authorization of
Organizations Acting on Behalf of the Administration, adopted 4
November 1993, incorporation by reference approved for Sec. 2.45-15.
(2) [Reserved]
Sec. 2.45-10 General.
(a) A classification society (including an employee or agent of
that society) must not review, examine, survey, or certify the
construction, repair, or alteration of a vessel in the United States
unless it is approved under the provisions of this subpart.
(b) This subpart applies to a recognized organization that meets
the definition of a classification society provided in Sec. 2.45-1 of
this subpart.
Sec. 2.45-15 Approval requirements.
(a) A classification society may be approved for purpose of Sec.
2.45-10 if the following conditions are met:
(1) Vessels surveyed by the classification society must have a
worldwide port state control detention rate of less than 2 percent
based on the number of Recognized Organization (RO)-related detentions
divided by the number of vessel inspections for at least 40 port state
control inspections for the past 3 years;
(2) The classification society must not be identified in the most
recent publication of ``Port State Control in the United States'' as a
Priority I and as having more than one RO-related detention for the
past 3 years;
(3) The classification society must comply with the minimum
standards for an RO recommended in IMO Resolution A.739(18), Appendix 1
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 2.45-5.);
(4) The classification society must be an RO for at least one
country under a formal written agreement that includes all of the
elements described in IMO Resolution A.739(18), Appendix 2
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 2.45-5.);
(5) The referenced country that is cited for satisfaction of the
requirement of paragraph (a)(4) of this section for which the
classification society is an RO--
(i) Must be signatory to each of the following: The International
Safety of Life at Sea Convention (SOLAS), the International Convention
on the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL 73/78), the
International Convention on Load Lines (ICLL), 1966, and the Protocol
of 1988 relating to the ICLL, 1966; and
(ii) Must not be identified as a flag state targeted for additional
port state control action by the Coast Guard or any regional port state
control secretariat.
(6) The classification society must use a system to--
(i) Make its safety records and those of persons acting on behalf
of the classification society available to the Coast Guard in
electronic format;
(ii) Provide its safety records and those of persons acting on
behalf of the classification society to another classification society
that requests those records for the purpose of conducting surveys of
vessels; and
(iii) Request the safety records of a vessel to be surveyed from
any other classification society that previously surveyed that vessel.
(b) Where sufficient performance records are not available from a
regional port state control secretariat, the Coast Guard may consider
an equivalent safety performance indicator proposed by the
classification society seeking approval.
Sec. 2.45-20 Probation, suspension, and revocation.
(a) A classification society approved for the purpose of this
subpart must maintain the minimum requirements for approval set forth
in Sec. 2.45-15.
(b) If an approved classification society fails to maintain
compliance with paragraph (a) of this section, the Coast Guard may
place the classification society approval on probation, or suspend or
revoke the classification society's approval, as appropriate.
(c) Probation. A classification society on probation is approved
for the
[[Page 47552]]
purpose of this subpart. The probation continues until the next review
of the classification society's compliance with paragraph (a) of this
section.
(1) If the review shows that compliance with paragraph (a) of this
section is achieved, the probation may end.
(2) If the review shows significant improvement but compliance with
paragraph (a) of this section is not achieved, the probation may be
extended.
(3) If the review does not show significant improvement, and
compliance with paragraph (a) of this section is not achieved, the
approval may be suspended.
(d) Suspension. A classification society whose approval is
suspended is not approved for the purpose of this subpart. Suspension
will continue until the next review of the classification society's
compliance with paragraph (a) of this section.
(1) If the review shows compliance with paragraph (a) of this
section, the classification society's approval may be restored.
(2) If the review shows significant improvement toward compliance
with paragraph (a) of this section, the suspension may be extended.
(3) If the review does not show significant improvement and
compliance with paragraph (a) of this section, the classification
society's approval may be revoked.
(e) Revocation. A classification society whose approval is revoked
is not approved for the purpose of this subpart. The classification
society may reapply for approval when the requirements of Sec. 2.45-15
are met.
(f) The Coast Guard's Office of Design and Engineering Standards
(CG-ENG) administers probations, suspensions, and revocations and makes
all related notifications to affected classification societies.
Sec. 2.45-25 Application for approval.
(a) An application for approval must be made in writing and in the
English language to U.S. Coast Guard, Commandant (CG-ENG), Office of
Design and Engineering Standards, 2100 Second Street SW. Stop 7126,
Washington DC 20593-7126.
(b) The application must--
(1) Indicate the type of work the classification society intends to
perform on vessels in the United States;
(2) Include documentation demonstrating that the classification
society complies with Sec. 2.45-15;
(3) Contain a list of the vessels surveyed by the classification
society over the previous 3 calendar years. The list must include
vessel names, flags, and IMO numbers, as well as initial vessel
inspections and detentions; and
(4) Provide a summary of the safety records of vessels the
classification society surveys for each of the previous 3 calendar
years, including initial vessel inspections and detentions for all data
contained in regional port state control Memoranda of Understanding
(MOU) and other port state control data sources, including the U.S.
Coast Guard.
(c) An application submitted in accordance with 46 CFR part 8,
subpart B satisfies the application requirements of paragraph (a) of
this section, provided the applicant:
(1) Has been notified in writing by the Commandant that it met the
criteria to be a recognized classification society, and its recognized
status has not been revoked, under 46 CFR part 8, subpart B;
(2) Submits in writing and in the English language to the address
in paragraph (a) of this section a statement that the applicant is
applying for approval under this subpart; and
(3) Certifies in the submission under paragraph (c)(2) of this
section that the information in the application submitted under 46 CFR
part 8, subpart B remains valid.
Sec. 2.45-30 Penalties.
The owner, charterer, managing operator, agent, master, or
individual in charge of a vessel that employs a classification society
to review, examine, survey, or certify the construction, repair, or
alteration of a vessel in the United States is subject to civil
penalties in accordance with Title 46 U.S.C. 3318 if the classification
society is not approved by the Coast Guard under this subpart.
Dated: July 26, 2012.
J.G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards, U. S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2012-19376 Filed 8-8-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
