Change-1 to Navigation and Inspection Circular 01-13, Inspection and Certification of Vessels Under the Maritime Security Program, 31909-31912 [2015-13668]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 107 / Thursday, June 4, 2015 / Notices
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention and the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Elaine L. Baker,
Director, Management Analysis and Services
Office, Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2015–13620 Filed 6–3–15; 8:45 am]
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. FDA–2015–N–0002]
Withdrawal of Approval of New Animal
Drug Application; Chlortetracycline
AGENCY:
BILLING CODE 4163–18–P
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
Notice of withdrawal of
approval.
ACTION:
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is withdrawing
approval of a new animal drug
application (NADA). This action is
being taken at the sponsors’ request
because this product is no longer
manufactured or marketed.
DATES: Withdrawal of approval is
effective June 15, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sujaya Dessai, Center for Veterinary
Medicine (HFV–212), Food and Drug
Administration, 7519 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855, 240–276–9075,
sujaya.dessai@fda.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Hartz
Mountain Corp., 400 Plaza Dr.,
Secaucus, NJ 07094 has requested that
FDA withdraw approval of NADA 065–
222 for KEET LIFE (chlortetracycline)
Bird Seed because this product is no
longer manufactured or marketed.
Therefore, under authority delegated
to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs
and redelegated to the Center for
Veterinary Medicine, and in accordance
with 21 CFR 514.116 Notice of
withdrawal of approval of application,
notice is given that approval of NADA
065–222, and all supplements and
amendments thereto, is hereby
withdrawn, effective June 15, 2015.
The animal drug regulations are not
being amended to reflect the voluntary
withdrawal of approval of this
application because it is not codified.
SUMMARY:
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention
Disease, Disability, and Injury
Prevention and Control Special
Emphasis Panel (SEP); Initial Review
In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of
the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(Pub. L. 92–463), the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC)
announces a meeting for the initial
review of applications in response to
Funding Opportunity Announcement,
RFA–TS–15–001, Analyze and Evaluate
Potential Risk Factors for Amyotrophic
Lateral Sclerosis (ALS).
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Times and Dates: 9:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m.,
EDT, June 30, 2015 (CLOSED).
Place: The Georgian Terrace, 659 Peachtree
Street NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30308. This
meeting will also be held by teleconference.
Status: The meeting will be closed to the
public in accordance with provisions set
forth in Section 552b(c)(4) and (6), Title 5
U.S.C., and the Determination of the Director,
Management Analysis and Services Office,
CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92–463.
Matters for Discussion: The meeting will
include the initial review, discussion, and
evaluation of applications received in
response to ‘‘Analyze and Evaluate Potential
Risk Factors for Amyotrophic Lateral
Sclerosis (ALS)’’, TS15–001.
Contact Person for More Information: Jane
Suen, Dr.P.H., M.S., Scientific Review
Officer, CDC, 4770 Buford Highway NE.,
Mailstop F63, Atlanta, Georgia 30341–3724,
Telephone (770) 488–4281.
The Director, Management Analysis
and Services Office, has been delegated
the authority to sign Federal Register
notices pertaining to announcements of
meetings and other committee
management activities, for both the
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention and the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry.
Elaine L. Baker,
Director, Management Analysis and Services
Office, Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2015–13622 Filed 6–3–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163–18–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:33 Jun 03, 2015
Jkt 235001
31909
The meeting will be closed to the
public in accordance with the
provisions set forth in sections
552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C.,
as amended. The grant applications and
the discussions could disclose
confidential trade secrets or commercial
property such as patentable material,
and personal information concerning
individuals associated with the grant
applications, the disclosure of which
would constitute a clearly unwarranted
invasion of personal privacy.
Name of Committee: Heart, Lung, and
Blood Initial Review Group, NHLBI
Mentored Clinical and Basic Science Review
Committee.
Date: June 25–26, 2015.
Time: 10:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
Agenda: To review and evaluate grant
applications.
Place: Crystal City Marriott, 1999 Jefferson
Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 22202.
Contact Person: Keith A. Mintzer, Ph.D.,
Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific
Review/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and
Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room
7186, Bethesda, MD 20892–7924, 301–594–
7947, mintzerk@nhlbi.nih.gov.
(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program Nos. 93.233, National Center for
Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and
Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung
Diseases Research; 93.839, Blood Diseases
and Resources Research, National Institutes
of Health, HHS)
Dated: May 29, 2015.
Michelle Trout,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory
Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015–13604 Filed 6–3–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
[Docket No. USCG–2011–1156]
Dated: June 1, 2015.
Bernadette Dunham,
Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine.
Change-1 to Navigation and Inspection
Circular 01–13, Inspection and
Certification of Vessels Under the
Maritime Security Program
[FR Doc. 2015–13633 Filed 6–3–15; 8:45 am]
AGENCY:
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
ACTION:
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of availability.
The Coast Guard announces
the availability of Change-1 to
Navigation and Vessel Inspection
Circular (NVIC) 01–13, Inspection and
Certification of Vessels Under the
Maritime Security Program (MSP). The
MSP serves as a means for establishing
a fleet of commercially viable and
militarily useful vessels to meet national
defense as well as other security
requirements. NVIC 01–13 provides
guidance to assist vessel owners/
SUMMARY:
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
National Institutes of Health
National Heart, Lung, and Blood
Institute Notice of Closed Meeting
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, as
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is
hereby given of the following meeting.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\04JNN1.SGM
04JNN1
31910
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 107 / Thursday, June 4, 2015 / Notices
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
operators, Authorized Classification
Societies, and Coast Guard personnel
with the inspection and certification of
vessels under the MSP. This Change
clarifies the process for the issuance of
the Certificate of Documentation (COD)
to the vessel during the reflag process,
adds a note to the equivalency
provisions for inspection of MSP vessels
subsequent to initial certification,
clarifies the trial period requirements
for automated systems in machinery
spaces, includes interim provisions for
those vessels seeking to operate with
minimally attended or periodically
unattended machinery spaces, and
makes other technical changes to NVIC
01–13.
DATES: Change-1 to NVIC 01–13 is
effective as of June 4, 2015]. The owner/
operator may request an amended
Certificate of Inspection to align with
Change-1 to NVIC 01–13 at the next
scheduled Coast Guard attendance.
Documents discussed in this notice
should be available in the online docket
within three business days of today’s
publication.
ADDRESSES: To view the documents
mentioned in this notice go to https://
www.regulations.gov and use ‘‘USCG–
2011–1156’’ as your search term. Locate
this notice in the search results, and use
the filters on the left side of the page to
locate specific documents by type. If
you do not have access to the Internet,
you may view the docket online by
visiting the Docket Management Facility
in Room W12–140 on the ground floor
of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. We
have an agreement with the Department
of Transportation to use the Docket
Management Facility.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
information about this document, call or
email Lieutenant Corydon Heard, Office
of Commercial Vessel Compliance (CG–
CVC), U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 202–
372–1208, email Corydon.F.Heard@
uscg.mil. For information about viewing
or submitting material to the docket, call
Cheryl Collins, Program Manager,
Docket Operations, telephone 202–366–
9826, toll free 1–800–647–5527.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background and Purpose
NVIC 01–13 provides uniform process
guidance to assist vessel owners/
operators, authorized classification
societies, and Coast Guard personnel
regarding the MSP. Vessels that meet
MSP eligibility criteria may obtain a
Certificate of Inspection (COI) by
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:33 Jun 03, 2015
Jkt 235001
following the procedures and guidelines
detailed in NVIC 01–13. NVIC 01–13
was first published in February 2013. As
part of the first annual review, the Coast
Guard considered policy guidance
enhancements in order to better
facilitate the transition of vessels to U.S.
registry under the MSP. The Coast
Guard published a notice in the Federal
Register announcing the availability of
the draft changes to NVIC 01–13 and
requested public comments (79 FR
35177, June 19, 2014). Specifically,
these draft changes clarified the process
for the issuance of the Certificate of
Documentation (COD) to the vessel
during the reflag process, added a note
to the equivalency provisions for
inspection of MSP vessels subsequent to
initial certification, clarified the trial
period requirements for automated
systems in machinery spaces, and
included interim provisions for those
vessels seeking to operate with
minimally attended or periodically
unattended machinery spaces (MAMS/
PUMS), which do not otherwise meet
the requirements of 46 CFR 62.50–20
and/or 62.50–30 (as appropriate).
We received eight public comment
responses to the June 19, 2014, Federal
Register notice. In addition to several
general comments, these responses
contained numerous specific
recommendations, suggestions, and
other remarks. We have created a
comment matrix that provides a
summary of each specific comment and
the corresponding Coast Guard
response; the comment matrix also lists
and explains changes made by the Coast
Guard but not prompted by public
comments. A copy of this public
comment matrix is available for viewing
in the public docket for this notice. For
more detailed information, please
consult the actual public comment
letters in the docket. You may access the
docket going to https://
www.regulations.gov, using ‘‘USCG–
2011–1156’’ as your search term, and
following the instructions in the
ADDRESSES section above.
The basic framework of the draft
Change-1 to NVIC 01–13 described
above is retained in the final version.
The Coast Guard has made some
changes from the draft version of
Change-1 to NVIC 01–13 to the final
version based on the public comments.
All changes are underlined in the final
version and each changed page is
annotated with CH–1 in the footer. We
note that several commenters
recommended the establishment of a
working group to address MSP
inspection issues. While the Coast
Guard welcomes public input and will
continue to champion a transparent and
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
pragmatic approach which factors
industry concerns, we believe that the
current process of issuing draft policy
documents and incorporating public
input is the best means of policy
development at this time. Some
commenters raised general concerns and
objections over several key aspects of
NVIC 01–13. A discussion of these
general concerns is included below,
while responses to specific technical
issues are contained in the
supplementary material available in the
docket.
The Coast Guard received several
comments asserting that NVIC 01–13 is
inconsistent with the purpose and plain
language of the MSP law. Specifically,
commenters suggested that pursuant to
46 U.S.C. 53102(e), a vessel is eligible to
receive a COI as long as the vessel
continues to comply with international
agreements and the associated
guidelines of the vessel’s prior flag
State. Commenters contested the
applicability of Title 46, Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) by arguing that
vessels in the MSP are solely regulated
under applicable international
agreements (e.g., SOLAS) and
Classification Society rules, specifically
with regard to the manning and
watchkeeping requirements for
periodically unattended machinery
space (PUMS). Commenters stated that
to the extent that the CFR requirements
differ from international conventions
and class society rules, they are contrary
to the statute.
While we concur that the
international agreements are applicable,
we disagree concerning the nonapplicability of domestic regulations to
vessels in the MSP. Sections
53102(e)(1)(A) and (B) of 46 U.S.C.
specifically address the basis for
accepting foreign construction and
equipment standards for the physical
ship as a condition for receiving a COI.
The MSP law establishes broad
equivalencies, rather than an
exemption, for equipment and
provisioning required by U.S.
regulations at reflag. The MSP law does
not require the vessel’s systems to be
modified in order to meet U.S.
equipment carriage requirements.
Compliance with classification society
rules and the previous flag’s laws serve
as evidence that the vessel is eligible for
reflagging and issuance of its initial COI.
The intent of the MSP COI endorsement
is to identify this equivalency for
equipment and provisioning.
Furthermore, the Coast Guard generally
will not require the installation of
additional equipment as a condition of
holding the COI once it was initially
issued. However, the statute is silent
E:\FR\FM\04JNN1.SGM
04JNN1
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 107 / Thursday, June 4, 2015 / Notices
with regard to operational matters such
as manning, watchstanding, record
keeping, periodic inspections and
casualty reporting.
Unlike the design and equipment
requirements needed to obtain a COI,
manning and watchstanding provisions,
as well as other operational
requirements (logbooks, cargo
authorities, inspection intervals and
certification rules), are described in the
various CFR subchapters depending on
the vessel type. These regulations apply
to MSP ships as they would to any U.S.
flag vessel depending on route and
service, and serve as the U.S.
interpretations of the IMO international
instruments since these international
regulations intentionally leave many
areas to ‘‘the satisfaction of the
administration.’’ These regulations
include provisions for an optional
reduction in manning and/or
discretionary authorization for a PUMS.
Considering the flexibility afforded by
the applicable IMO international
instruments, especially in the area of
manning, operations, and the scope of
flag administration inspections, the
Coast Guard recognized the need for
consistent MSP inspection procedures
for vessel owners, class societies, and
marine inspectors, and therefore
published NVIC 01–13. Accordingly, the
procedural guidance provided in NVIC
01–13 does not establish any original or
new requirements, but clarifies the
applicability of existing regulations,
while incorporating previous and long
standing policies.
Some commenters expressed concern
that NVIC 01–13 is inconsistent with
prior Coast Guard practice and assert
that any change in interpretation and
formal imposition of new substantive
requirements require a rulemaking
under the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA). The commenters argue that NVIC
01–13 imposes new substantive
requirements on MSP operators, and
that the Coast Guard has not followed
the informal rulemaking process of the
APA in enacting it. This, the
commenters argue, should invalidate
the NVIC, pursuant to Alaska
Professional Hunters Ass’n v. Federal
Aviation Administration, 177 F.3d 1030
(D.C. Cir. 1992). Specifically, the
commenters argue that previous policy
guidance stated that MSP vessels will be
inspected under special provisions,
except that ‘‘new installations or
modifications to existing systems shall
conform to the Coast Guard’s
interpretation of international
regulations,’’ without specifying the
meaning of ‘‘interpretation’’; while the
new policy guidance contained in NVIC
01–13 indicated that the Coast Guard’s
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:33 Jun 03, 2015
Jkt 235001
interpretation of international regulation
meant compliance with the
requirements in Title 46 of the CFR.
We note that Alaska Hunters’
reasoning was overturned by the U.S.
Supreme Court recently in Perez v.
Mortgage Bankers Association (March 9,
2015). Beyond that, we disagree with
this argument on two counts. First, the
Coast Guard provided notice and an
opportunity to comment on this
guidance document, and carefully
considered the comments received. The
Coast Guard published a draft version of
NVIC 01–13 for public comment in the
Federal Register on January 19, 2012
(77 FR 2741) and the final version on
February 28, 2013 (78 FR 13691).
Similarly, the draft version of this
change to the NVIC was published in
the Federal Register on June 19, 2014
(79 FR 35177), and public comments are
being addressed in this notice.
Second, the commenter made this
argument in relation to a request for
reduced manning requirements for a
PUMS. With regard to the manning
requirements at issue, NVIC 01–13 does
not introduce new policies, but merely
clarifies existing policies and, in fact,
the changes provide additional
flexibility for operators in compliance
options.
Notwithstanding the commenter’s
arguments, the Coast Guard’s procedural
guidance and interpretations of MSP
law have been consistent with respect to
the installation or modification to
existing systems, since the publication
of MOC Policy Letter 1–97, Reflag
Inspection and Certification of Vessels
Under the Maritime Security Program
(MSP). Prior to the issuance of NVIC 01–
13, we stated that, with respect to the
installation or modification to existing
systems, such systems must be replaced
with equipment that meets Coast Guard
standards (that is, the standards in Title
46 of the CFR). This guidance is clearly
stated in the Marine Safety Manual,
where we stated that ‘‘[a] reduction in
manning due to engine automation must
be approved and tested as satisfactory in
accordance with U.S. regulations
[emphasis added].’’ 1 Furthermore, the
Coast Guard has applied this guidance
to other vessels prior to the
promulgation of NVIC 01–13. For
example, in 2010, the Coast Guard
denied an appeal regarding the MV
HONOR’s firefighting system for
unattended machinery spaces. In our
response, we stated that ‘‘The HONOR
is not required to change the hardware
of its accepted [by the classification
society] fire fighting system as a
condition of holding a COI. It is only a
1 Marine
PO 00000
Safety Manual, vol. II, p. B1–15.
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
31911
requirement if the plan is to maintain
the vessel’s periodically unattended
machinery space designation.’’ 2 NVIC
01–13 merely reiterates this existing
guidance. Accordingly, it is the view of
the Coast Guard that NVIC 01–13 does
not represent a substantive alteration or
supersede the previous policy
interpretations.
In NVIC 01–13, the Coast Guard has
sought to provide additional flexibility
in respect to the replacement of
equipment ‘‘in kind’’ as well as for the
proposed acceptance of certain design
and technical specifications meeting
existing classification society rules as
equivalent for the purposes of MSP.
This posture has been consistently
evident in legacy Coast Guard policies,
such as PCV Policy Letter 06–06
Guidance for Ships Reflagged under the
Maritime Security Program Participating
in the Underwater Survey in Lieu of
Drydocking (UWILD) Program. NVIC
01–13 has further provided flexibility
for vessels transitioning to U.S. registry
under the MSP to participate in elective
programs such as UWILD and PUMS
while coming into compliance with
Coast Guard measures designed to
enhance the safety of U.S. mariners.
Several commenters recommended
that for PUMS, the Coast Guard should
accept foreign non-Coast Guard
approved equipment and systems that
comply with the applicable
international conventions as determined
by the previous flag state’s guidelines
provided the vessel’s automation and
remote population system are in
accordance with SOLAS, the previous
flag state’s requirements, and the
vessel’s classification society’s rules.
As previously noted, the Coast Guard
generally will not require the
installation of additional equipment as
a condition of holding a COI once it was
initially issued. For example, under
MSP the Coast Guard accepts an
attestation from the classification
society stating that the automation
systems (i.e., power management
system, propulsion control system,
dynamic positioning system, centralized
machinery monitoring and control
system, etc.) are designed to meet the
failsafe requirements of SOLAS (see
NVIC 01–13, Enclosure (2) Section
1.1.3). By contrast, the requirements and
authorization to electively operate with
an unattended machinery space rests
with the flag administration. However,
the Coast Guard received a comment
recommending that particular
supplemental Alternate Compliance
Program (ACP) standards for MAMS/
2 Letter to C.R. Cushing and Company, January
25, 2010.
E:\FR\FM\04JNN1.SGM
04JNN1
31912
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 107 / Thursday, June 4, 2015 / Notices
PUMS be incorporated into the MSP
guidelines as an alternative to certain
requirements in 46 CFR part 62. The
Coast Guard agrees with this comment
and has incorporated a general
alternative provision into the NVIC
change. Additionally, the interim
provisions provide for continual
MAMS/PUMS operation until the next
credit dry dock (not including UWILD)
one year from the publication date of
Change-1 to NVIC 01–13.
The remainder of comments received
were technical in nature, and are
discussed in the comment matrix
available in the docket. Upon reviewing
these specific comments, the Coast
Guard has included additional guidance
that maximizes flexibility by promoting
alternative inspection programs.
Principally, revisions were made to
streamline the automation approval
process, provide a standardized
equivalency for design and technical
specifications under ACP supplements,
and clarify the provisions for servicing
certain firefighting equipment and
liferafts.
This notice is issued under authority
of 5 U.S.C. 552(a).
Dated: May 26, 2015.
Paul F. Thomas,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant
Commandant for Prevention Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015–13668 Filed 6–3–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
CBPL No.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
27–08 .......
27–48 .......
N/A ...........
1500N, Washington, DC 20229, tel. 202–
344–1060.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Accreditation and Approval of
Laboratory Service, Inc., as a
Commercial Gauger and Laboratory
U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, Department of Homeland
Security.
ACTION: Notice of accreditation and
approval of Laboratory Service, Inc., as
a commercial gauger and laboratory.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given,
pursuant to CBP regulations, that
Laboratory Service, Inc., has been
approved to gauge petroleum and
certain petroleum products and
accredited to test petroleum and certain
petroleum products for customs
purposes for the next three years as of
November 6, 2014.
DATES: The accreditation and approval
of Laboratory Service, Inc., as
commercial gauger and laboratory
became effective on November 6, 2014.
The next triennial inspection date will
be scheduled for November 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Approved Gauger and Accredited
Laboratories Manager, Laboratories and
Scientific Services Directorate, U.S.
Customs and Border Protection, 1300
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite
SUMMARY:
ASTM
D86
D4052
D1364
Notice is
hereby given pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12
and 19 CFR 151.13, that Laboratory
Service, Inc., 11731 Port Rd., Seabrook,
TX 77586, has been approved to gauge
petroleum and certain petroleum
products and accredited to test
petroleum and certain petroleum
products for customs purposes, in
accordance with the provisions of 19
CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13.
Laboratory Service, Inc., is approved for
the following gauging procedures for
petroleum and certain petroleum
products from the American Petroleum
Institute (API):
API
chapters
3 ...........
7 ...........
8 ...........
12 .........
17 .........
Title
Tank gauging.
Temperature determination.
Sampling.
Calculations.
Maritime measurement.
Laboratory Service, Inc., is accredited
for the following laboratory analysis
procedures and methods for petroleum
and certain petroleum products set forth
by the U.S. Customs and Border
Protection Laboratory Methods (CBPL)
and American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM):
Title
Standard Test Method for Distillation of Petroleum Products.
Standard Test Method for Density and Relative Density of Liquids by Digital Density Meter.
Standard Test Method for Water in Volatile Solvents (Karl Fischer Reagent Titration Method).
Anyone wishing to employ this entity
to conduct laboratory analyses and
gauger services should request and
receive written assurances from the
entity that it is accredited or approved
by the U.S. Customs and Border
Protection to conduct the specific test or
gauger service requested. Alternatively,
inquiries regarding the specific test or
gauger service this entity is accredited
or approved to perform may be directed
to the U.S. Customs and Border
Protection by calling (202) 344–1060.
The inquiry may also be sent to
CBPGaugersLabs@cbp.dhs.gov. Please
reference the Web site listed below for
a complete listing of CBP approved
gaugers and accredited laboratories.
https://www.cbp.gov/about/labsscientific/commercial-gaugers-andlaboratories.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
15:33 Jun 03, 2015
Jkt 235001
Dated: May 26, 2015.
Ira S. Reese,
Executive Director, Laboratories and
Scientific Services Directorate.
[FR Doc. 2015–13659 Filed 6–3–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Accreditation and Approval of Saybolt
LP as a Commercial Gauger and
Laboratory
U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, Department of Homeland
Security.
AGENCY:
Notice of accreditation and
approval of Saybolt LP as a commercial
gauger and laboratory.
ACTION:
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Notice is hereby given,
pursuant to CBP regulations, that
Saybolt LP has been approved to gauge
petroleum and certain petroleum
products and accredited to test
petroleum and certain petroleum
products for customs purposes for the
next three years as of July 23, 2014.
DATES: The accreditation and approval
of Saybolt LP as commercial gauger and
laboratory became effective on July 23,
2014. The next triennial inspection date
will be scheduled for July 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Approved Gauger and Accredited
Laboratories Manager, Laboratories and
Scientific Services Directorate, U.S.
Customs and Border Protection, 1300
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite
1500N, Washington, DC 20229, tel. 202–
344–1060.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is
hereby given pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\04JNN1.SGM
04JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 107 (Thursday, June 4, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31909-31912]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-13668]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
[Docket No. USCG-2011-1156]
Change-1 to Navigation and Inspection Circular 01-13, Inspection
and Certification of Vessels Under the Maritime Security Program
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces the availability of Change-1 to
Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular (NVIC) 01-13, Inspection and
Certification of Vessels Under the Maritime Security Program (MSP). The
MSP serves as a means for establishing a fleet of commercially viable
and militarily useful vessels to meet national defense as well as other
security requirements. NVIC 01-13 provides guidance to assist vessel
owners/
[[Page 31910]]
operators, Authorized Classification Societies, and Coast Guard
personnel with the inspection and certification of vessels under the
MSP. This Change clarifies the process for the issuance of the
Certificate of Documentation (COD) to the vessel during the reflag
process, adds a note to the equivalency provisions for inspection of
MSP vessels subsequent to initial certification, clarifies the trial
period requirements for automated systems in machinery spaces, includes
interim provisions for those vessels seeking to operate with minimally
attended or periodically unattended machinery spaces, and makes other
technical changes to NVIC 01-13.
DATES: Change-1 to NVIC 01-13 is effective as of June 4, 2015]. The
owner/operator may request an amended Certificate of Inspection to
align with Change-1 to NVIC 01-13 at the next scheduled Coast Guard
attendance. Documents discussed in this notice should be available in
the online docket within three business days of today's publication.
ADDRESSES: To view the documents mentioned in this notice go to https://www.regulations.gov and use ``USCG-2011-1156'' as your search term.
Locate this notice in the search results, and use the filters on the
left side of the page to locate specific documents by type. If you do
not have access to the Internet, you may view the docket online by
visiting the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an agreement
with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket Management
Facility.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about this document,
call or email Lieutenant Corydon Heard, Office of Commercial Vessel
Compliance (CG-CVC), U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 202-372-1208, email
Corydon.F.Heard@uscg.mil. For information about viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone 202-366-9826, toll free 1-800-647-5527.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background and Purpose
NVIC 01-13 provides uniform process guidance to assist vessel
owners/operators, authorized classification societies, and Coast Guard
personnel regarding the MSP. Vessels that meet MSP eligibility criteria
may obtain a Certificate of Inspection (COI) by following the
procedures and guidelines detailed in NVIC 01-13. NVIC 01-13 was first
published in February 2013. As part of the first annual review, the
Coast Guard considered policy guidance enhancements in order to better
facilitate the transition of vessels to U.S. registry under the MSP.
The Coast Guard published a notice in the Federal Register announcing
the availability of the draft changes to NVIC 01-13 and requested
public comments (79 FR 35177, June 19, 2014). Specifically, these draft
changes clarified the process for the issuance of the Certificate of
Documentation (COD) to the vessel during the reflag process, added a
note to the equivalency provisions for inspection of MSP vessels
subsequent to initial certification, clarified the trial period
requirements for automated systems in machinery spaces, and included
interim provisions for those vessels seeking to operate with minimally
attended or periodically unattended machinery spaces (MAMS/PUMS), which
do not otherwise meet the requirements of 46 CFR 62.50-20 and/or 62.50-
30 (as appropriate).
We received eight public comment responses to the June 19, 2014,
Federal Register notice. In addition to several general comments, these
responses contained numerous specific recommendations, suggestions, and
other remarks. We have created a comment matrix that provides a summary
of each specific comment and the corresponding Coast Guard response;
the comment matrix also lists and explains changes made by the Coast
Guard but not prompted by public comments. A copy of this public
comment matrix is available for viewing in the public docket for this
notice. For more detailed information, please consult the actual public
comment letters in the docket. You may access the docket going to
https://www.regulations.gov, using ``USCG-2011-1156'' as your search
term, and following the instructions in the ADDRESSES section above.
The basic framework of the draft Change-1 to NVIC 01-13 described
above is retained in the final version. The Coast Guard has made some
changes from the draft version of Change-1 to NVIC 01-13 to the final
version based on the public comments. All changes are underlined in the
final version and each changed page is annotated with CH-1 in the
footer. We note that several commenters recommended the establishment
of a working group to address MSP inspection issues. While the Coast
Guard welcomes public input and will continue to champion a transparent
and pragmatic approach which factors industry concerns, we believe that
the current process of issuing draft policy documents and incorporating
public input is the best means of policy development at this time. Some
commenters raised general concerns and objections over several key
aspects of NVIC 01-13. A discussion of these general concerns is
included below, while responses to specific technical issues are
contained in the supplementary material available in the docket.
The Coast Guard received several comments asserting that NVIC 01-13
is inconsistent with the purpose and plain language of the MSP law.
Specifically, commenters suggested that pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 53102(e),
a vessel is eligible to receive a COI as long as the vessel continues
to comply with international agreements and the associated guidelines
of the vessel's prior flag State. Commenters contested the
applicability of Title 46, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) by arguing
that vessels in the MSP are solely regulated under applicable
international agreements (e.g., SOLAS) and Classification Society
rules, specifically with regard to the manning and watchkeeping
requirements for periodically unattended machinery space (PUMS).
Commenters stated that to the extent that the CFR requirements differ
from international conventions and class society rules, they are
contrary to the statute.
While we concur that the international agreements are applicable,
we disagree concerning the non-applicability of domestic regulations to
vessels in the MSP. Sections 53102(e)(1)(A) and (B) of 46 U.S.C.
specifically address the basis for accepting foreign construction and
equipment standards for the physical ship as a condition for receiving
a COI. The MSP law establishes broad equivalencies, rather than an
exemption, for equipment and provisioning required by U.S. regulations
at reflag. The MSP law does not require the vessel's systems to be
modified in order to meet U.S. equipment carriage requirements.
Compliance with classification society rules and the previous flag's
laws serve as evidence that the vessel is eligible for reflagging and
issuance of its initial COI. The intent of the MSP COI endorsement is
to identify this equivalency for equipment and provisioning.
Furthermore, the Coast Guard generally will not require the
installation of additional equipment as a condition of holding the COI
once it was initially issued. However, the statute is silent
[[Page 31911]]
with regard to operational matters such as manning, watchstanding,
record keeping, periodic inspections and casualty reporting.
Unlike the design and equipment requirements needed to obtain a
COI, manning and watchstanding provisions, as well as other operational
requirements (logbooks, cargo authorities, inspection intervals and
certification rules), are described in the various CFR subchapters
depending on the vessel type. These regulations apply to MSP ships as
they would to any U.S. flag vessel depending on route and service, and
serve as the U.S. interpretations of the IMO international instruments
since these international regulations intentionally leave many areas to
``the satisfaction of the administration.'' These regulations include
provisions for an optional reduction in manning and/or discretionary
authorization for a PUMS. Considering the flexibility afforded by the
applicable IMO international instruments, especially in the area of
manning, operations, and the scope of flag administration inspections,
the Coast Guard recognized the need for consistent MSP inspection
procedures for vessel owners, class societies, and marine inspectors,
and therefore published NVIC 01-13. Accordingly, the procedural
guidance provided in NVIC 01-13 does not establish any original or new
requirements, but clarifies the applicability of existing regulations,
while incorporating previous and long standing policies.
Some commenters expressed concern that NVIC 01-13 is inconsistent
with prior Coast Guard practice and assert that any change in
interpretation and formal imposition of new substantive requirements
require a rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The
commenters argue that NVIC 01-13 imposes new substantive requirements
on MSP operators, and that the Coast Guard has not followed the
informal rulemaking process of the APA in enacting it. This, the
commenters argue, should invalidate the NVIC, pursuant to Alaska
Professional Hunters Ass'n v. Federal Aviation Administration, 177 F.3d
1030 (D.C. Cir. 1992). Specifically, the commenters argue that previous
policy guidance stated that MSP vessels will be inspected under special
provisions, except that ``new installations or modifications to
existing systems shall conform to the Coast Guard's interpretation of
international regulations,'' without specifying the meaning of
``interpretation''; while the new policy guidance contained in NVIC 01-
13 indicated that the Coast Guard's interpretation of international
regulation meant compliance with the requirements in Title 46 of the
CFR.
We note that Alaska Hunters' reasoning was overturned by the U.S.
Supreme Court recently in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association (March
9, 2015). Beyond that, we disagree with this argument on two counts.
First, the Coast Guard provided notice and an opportunity to comment on
this guidance document, and carefully considered the comments received.
The Coast Guard published a draft version of NVIC 01-13 for public
comment in the Federal Register on January 19, 2012 (77 FR 2741) and
the final version on February 28, 2013 (78 FR 13691). Similarly, the
draft version of this change to the NVIC was published in the Federal
Register on June 19, 2014 (79 FR 35177), and public comments are being
addressed in this notice.
Second, the commenter made this argument in relation to a request
for reduced manning requirements for a PUMS. With regard to the manning
requirements at issue, NVIC 01-13 does not introduce new policies, but
merely clarifies existing policies and, in fact, the changes provide
additional flexibility for operators in compliance options.
Notwithstanding the commenter's arguments, the Coast Guard's
procedural guidance and interpretations of MSP law have been consistent
with respect to the installation or modification to existing systems,
since the publication of MOC Policy Letter 1-97, Reflag Inspection and
Certification of Vessels Under the Maritime Security Program (MSP).
Prior to the issuance of NVIC 01-13, we stated that, with respect to
the installation or modification to existing systems, such systems must
be replaced with equipment that meets Coast Guard standards (that is,
the standards in Title 46 of the CFR). This guidance is clearly stated
in the Marine Safety Manual, where we stated that ``[a] reduction in
manning due to engine automation must be approved and tested as
satisfactory in accordance with U.S. regulations [emphasis added].''
\1\ Furthermore, the Coast Guard has applied this guidance to other
vessels prior to the promulgation of NVIC 01-13. For example, in 2010,
the Coast Guard denied an appeal regarding the MV HONOR's firefighting
system for unattended machinery spaces. In our response, we stated that
``The HONOR is not required to change the hardware of its accepted [by
the classification society] fire fighting system as a condition of
holding a COI. It is only a requirement if the plan is to maintain the
vessel's periodically unattended machinery space designation.'' \2\
NVIC 01-13 merely reiterates this existing guidance. Accordingly, it is
the view of the Coast Guard that NVIC 01-13 does not represent a
substantive alteration or supersede the previous policy
interpretations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Marine Safety Manual, vol. II, p. B1-15.
\2\ Letter to C.R. Cushing and Company, January 25, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In NVIC 01-13, the Coast Guard has sought to provide additional
flexibility in respect to the replacement of equipment ``in kind'' as
well as for the proposed acceptance of certain design and technical
specifications meeting existing classification society rules as
equivalent for the purposes of MSP. This posture has been consistently
evident in legacy Coast Guard policies, such as PCV Policy Letter 06-06
Guidance for Ships Reflagged under the Maritime Security Program
Participating in the Underwater Survey in Lieu of Drydocking (UWILD)
Program. NVIC 01-13 has further provided flexibility for vessels
transitioning to U.S. registry under the MSP to participate in elective
programs such as UWILD and PUMS while coming into compliance with Coast
Guard measures designed to enhance the safety of U.S. mariners.
Several commenters recommended that for PUMS, the Coast Guard
should accept foreign non-Coast Guard approved equipment and systems
that comply with the applicable international conventions as determined
by the previous flag state's guidelines provided the vessel's
automation and remote population system are in accordance with SOLAS,
the previous flag state's requirements, and the vessel's classification
society's rules.
As previously noted, the Coast Guard generally will not require the
installation of additional equipment as a condition of holding a COI
once it was initially issued. For example, under MSP the Coast Guard
accepts an attestation from the classification society stating that the
automation systems (i.e., power management system, propulsion control
system, dynamic positioning system, centralized machinery monitoring
and control system, etc.) are designed to meet the failsafe
requirements of SOLAS (see NVIC 01-13, Enclosure (2) Section 1.1.3). By
contrast, the requirements and authorization to electively operate with
an unattended machinery space rests with the flag administration.
However, the Coast Guard received a comment recommending that
particular supplemental Alternate Compliance Program (ACP) standards
for MAMS/
[[Page 31912]]
PUMS be incorporated into the MSP guidelines as an alternative to
certain requirements in 46 CFR part 62. The Coast Guard agrees with
this comment and has incorporated a general alternative provision into
the NVIC change. Additionally, the interim provisions provide for
continual MAMS/PUMS operation until the next credit dry dock (not
including UWILD) one year from the publication date of Change-1 to NVIC
01-13.
The remainder of comments received were technical in nature, and
are discussed in the comment matrix available in the docket. Upon
reviewing these specific comments, the Coast Guard has included
additional guidance that maximizes flexibility by promoting alternative
inspection programs. Principally, revisions were made to streamline the
automation approval process, provide a standardized equivalency for
design and technical specifications under ACP supplements, and clarify
the provisions for servicing certain firefighting equipment and
liferafts.
This notice is issued under authority of 5 U.S.C. 552(a).
Dated: May 26, 2015.
Paul F. Thomas,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Prevention
Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-13668 Filed 6-3-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P