Inspection of Towing Vessels, 40003-40147 [2016-12857]
Download as PDF
Vol. 81
Monday,
No. 118
June 20, 2016
Part II
Department of Homeland Security
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Coast Guard
46 CFR Parts 1, 2, 15, et al.
Inspection of Towing Vessels; Final Rule
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4717
Sfmt 4717
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40004
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
46 CFR Parts 1, 2, 15, 136, 137, 138,
139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, and 199
[Docket No. USCG–2006–24412]
RIN 1625–AB06
Inspection of Towing Vessels
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard is
establishing safety regulations governing
the inspection, standards, and safety
management systems of towing vessels.
We are taking this action because the
Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation Act of 2004 reclassified
towing vessels as vessels subject to
inspection and authorized the Secretary
of the Department of Homeland Security
to establish requirements for a safety
management system appropriate for the
characteristics, methods of operation,
and nature of service of towing vessels.
This rule, which includes provisions
covering specific electrical and
machinery requirements for new and
existing towing vessels, the use and
approval of third-party organizations,
and procedures for obtaining
Certificates of Inspection, will become
effective July 20, 2016. However, certain
existing towing vessels subject to this
rule will have an additional 2 years
before having to comply with most of its
requirements.
DATES: This final rule is effective July
20, 2016. The incorporation by reference
of certain publications listed in the final
rule is approved by the Director of the
Federal Register on July 20, 2016.
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–2006–24412 and are
available on the Internet by going to
https://www.regulations.gov, inserting
USCG–2006–24412 in the ‘‘Keyword’’
box, and then clicking ‘‘Search.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this rule, call
LCDR William Nabach, Project Manager,
CG–OES–2, Coast Guard, telephone
202–372–1386.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
Table of Contents for Preamble
I. Abbreviations
II. Executive Summary
A. Purpose and Authority
B. Overview of Rule
C. Costs and Benefits
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
III. Regulatory History
A. Statutory Background
B. Regulatory Background
IV. Discussion of Comments and Changes
A. General Feedback on the NPRM
B. Background and Need for Regulation
C. Organization, General Course, and
Methods Governing Marine Safety
Functions (Part 1)
D. User Fees and Inspection Table (Part 2)
E. Manning (Part 15)
F. Certification/Definitions/Applicability
(Part 136)
G. Vessel Compliance (Part 137)
H. Towing Safety Management System
(TSMS) (Part 138)
I. Third-Party Organizations (TPOs) (Part
139)
J. Operations (Part 140)
K. Lifesaving (Part 141)
L. Fire Protection (Part 142)
M. Machinery and Electrical (Part 143)
N. Construction and Arrangement (Part
144)
O. Miscellaneous Comments
P. Crew Endurance Management Systems
(CEMS)
Q. Economic Analysis Comments
V. Regulatory Analyses
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Small Entities
C. Assistance for Small Entities
D. Collection of Information
E. Federalism
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
G. Taking of Private Property
H. Civil Justice Reform
I. Protection of Children
J. Indian Tribal Governments
K. Energy Effects
L. Technical Standards and 1 CFR Part 51
M. Environment
I. Abbreviations
2004 Act Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation Act of 2004
2010 Act Coast Guard Authorization Act of
2010
2012 Act Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation Act of 2012
ABS American Bureau of Shipping
ABSG American Bureau of Shipping Group
ABYC American Boat and Yacht Council
AED Automatic External Defibrillator
ANSI American National Standards
Institute
AWO American Waterways Operators
BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics
CEMS Crew Endurance Management
System
COI Certificate of Inspection
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
EPIRB Emergency Position Indicating Radio
Beacon
FAST Fatigue Avoidance Scheduling Tool
FR Federal Register
FRFA Final regulatory flexibility
assessment
gpm gallons per minute
GRT Gross register tons
HIPAA Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act of 1996
HOS Hours of Service
IMO International Maritime Organization
IRFA Initial regulatory flexibility analysis
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
ISM International Safety Management
ISO International Organization for
Standardization
kPa Kilopascals
LBP Length Between Perpendiculars
LCG Longitudinal Center of Gravity
LORAN Long Range Aid to Navigation
lpm liters per minute
MISLE Marine Information for Safety and
Law Enforcement
MMC Merchant Mariner Credential
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
MTSA Maritime Transportation Security
Act of 2002
NAMS National Association of Marine
Surveyors
NARA National Archives and Records
Administration
NEC National Electrical Code
NICET National Institute for Certification in
Engineering Technologies
NFPA National Fire Protection Association
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NRTL Nationally Recognized Testing
Laboratory
NTSB National Transportation Safety Board
NVIC Navigation and Vessel Inspection
Circular
OCMI Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection
OIRA Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health
Administration
P.E. Professional Engineer
PFD Personal Flotation Device
PIC Person in charge
PPE Personal Protective Equipment
psi pounds per square inch
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
§ Section
SAE Society of Automotive Engineers
SAMS Society of Accredited Marine
Surveyors
SMS Safety Management System
SBA Small Business Administration
SOLAS International Convention for the
Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, as amended
STCW Implementation of the Amendments
to the International Convention on
Standards of Training, Certification and
Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, and
Changes to Domestic Endorsements
TPO Third-party organization
TSAC Towing Safety Advisory Committee
TSMS Towing Safety Management System
TVR Towing vessel record
U.S.C. United States Code
UWILD Underwater inspection in lieu of
drydocking
VCG Vertical Center of Gravity
VHF Very High Frequency
VSL Value of a statistical life
VTS Vessel Traffic Service
II. Executive Summary
A. Purpose and Authority
In 2004, Congress reclassified towing
vessels as vessels subject to inspection
under part B of subtitle II of title 46,
United States Code (U.S.C.), and
authorized the Secretary of Homeland
Security to establish requirements for
the inspection of towing vessels, their
possible use of safety management
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
systems (SMS) and hours of service
requirements for them. The legislative
history, which pointed to the need for
a ‘‘full safety inspection of towing
vessels,’’ references two towing vessel
incidents involving a total of 19 deaths.
In September 2001, a towing vessel
struck a bridge at South Padre Island,
TX. The bridge collapsed, and 5 people
died when their cars or trucks went into
the water. On May 26, 2002, a towing
vessel struck the I–40 highway bridge
over the Arkansas River at Webber Falls,
OK. The bridge collapsed, and 14
people died when their cars or trucks
went into the Arkansas River. 150 Cong.
Rec. H6469–01, 2004 WL 1630278; and
H.R. Conf. Rep. 108–617, 2004
U.S.C.C.A.N. 936, 951.
This final rule implements most
provisions of the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM)(76 FR 49976, Aug.
11, 2011) as proposed, but makes
changes to address concerns of the
public and industry expressed in
comments, as is explained below. This
rule is authorized and made necessary
by the Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation Act of 2004 (2004 Act),
Public Law 108–293, 118 Stat. 1028
(Aug. 9, 2004), which made towing
vessels subject to inspection. Six years
later, the Coast Guard Authorization Act
of 2010 (2010 Act), Public Law 111–281,
124 Stat. 2905 (Oct. 15, 2010), directed
the Secretary to issue a notice of
proposed rulemaking and a final rule.
B. Overview of Rule
This rule creates a comprehensive
safety system that includes company
compliance, vessel compliance, vessel
standards, and oversight in a new Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) subchapter
dedicated to towing vessels. This rule,
which (with exceptions) generally
applies to all U.S.-flag towing vessels 26
feet or more, and those less than 26 feet
moving a barge carrying oil or
hazardous material in bulk, lays out
both inspection mechanisms as well as
new equipment, construction, and
operational requirements for towing
vessels.
To provide flexibility, vessel
operators will have the choice of two
inspection regimes. Under the Towing
Safety Management System (TSMS)
option, routine inspections of towing
vessels will primarily be performed by
third-party organizations (TPOs),
including certain classification
societies, and this rule creates a
framework for oversight and audits of
such TPOs by the Coast Guard. The
TSMS will provide those operators with
the flexibility to tailor their safety
management system to their own needs,
while still ensuring an overall level of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
safety acceptable to the Coast Guard.
Alternatively, under the Coast Guard
inspection option, routine inspections
would be conducted by the Coast Guard,
providing an option for those operators
who choose not to develop and
implement their own TSMS.
The rule also creates many new
requirements for design, construction,
equipment, and operation of towing
vessels. Those requirements are
typically based on industry consensus
standards or existing Coast Guard
requirements for similar vessels. To
develop these requirements for towing
vessels, the Coast Guard started by
publishing a notice in 2004 (69 FR
78471) that asked questions and
announced public meetings to seek
guidance in implementing the 2004 Act
provisions. We also worked with the
Towing Safety Advisory Committee
(TSAC), industry groups, and a
contractor (ABSG Consulting—tasked
with providing an industry analysis) to
better gauge how to proceed with this
rulemaking. We evaluated existing
requirements for towing vessels
(contained primarily in 46 CFR part 27
and subchapter I) to determine whether
they were adequate for towing vessels
and meet the intent of the 2004 Act. As
discussed in greater detail below, the
safety requirements in this final rule
align with industry consensus
standards, and we consider it very likely
that most towing vessels already comply
with most of them.
We made several changes to our
proposal in the NPRM. We have
clarified the system for Coast Guard
oversight and inspection of towing
vessels that complements the TPO
system the Coast Guard proposed. To
address concerns about the cost impact
of the rule, we have added
‘‘grandfathering’’ provisions to several
requirements, so the requirements will
not apply to existing vessels or vessels
whose construction began before the
effective date of the rule. We also
reorganized several parts for greater
clarity or to better align with the
existing text of other parts of the CFR.
Finally, as we noted in the NPRM (76
FR 49985), we still plan to promulgate
a separate rulemaking for an annual
inspection fee for towing vessels that
will reflect the specific program costs
associated with the TSMS and Coast
Guard inspection options. Until then we
are establishing the existing fee of
$1,030 in 46 CFR 2.10–101 for any
inspected vessel not listed in Table
2.10–101 as the annual inspection fee
for towing vessels subject to subchapter
M. As reflected in 46 CFR 2.10–1(b), this
fee would not be charged for a vessel
being inspected for the initial issuance
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40005
of a COI, but the fee would be charged
annually starting a year later.
C. Costs and Benefits
This rule will affect approximately
5,509 U.S. flag towing vessels engaged
in pushing, pulling, or hauling
alongside, and the 1,096 companies that
own or operate them. Towing vessels
not covered by this rule include towing
vessels inspected under subchapter I,
work boats, and recreational vessel
towing vessels.
The estimate for total industry and net
government costs is $41.5 million
annualized at a 7 percent discount rate
over a 10-year period of analysis. The
estimate for monetized benefits is $46.4
million annualized at a 7 percent
discount rate, based on the mitigation of
risks from towing vessel accidents in
terms of lives lost, injuries, oil spilled,
and property damage.
Subtracting the annualized monetized
costs from the annualized monetized
benefits yields a net benefit of $4.9
million. We also identified, but did not
monetize, other benefits from reducing
the risk of accidents that have secondary
consequences of delays and congestions
on waterways, highways, and railroads.
III. Regulatory History
A. Statutory Background
The Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation Act of 2004 (2004 Act),
Public Law 108–293, 118 Stat. 1028
(Aug. 9, 2004), established new
authorities for towing vessels as follows:
The 2004 Act added ‘‘towing vessels’’
as a class of vessels that are subject to
safety inspections. See section 415 of
the 2004 Act, which amended section
3301 of title 46 of the U.S.C. (46 U.S.C.
3301). The term ‘‘towing vessel’’ was
already defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101, and
the scope and standards of safety
inspections are laid out in 46 U.S.C.
3305.
The 2004 Act also authorized the
Secretary of Homeland Security to
establish, by regulation, a safety
management system appropriate for the
characteristics, methods of operation,
and nature of service of towing vessels.
See Section 415 of the 2004 Act,
which amended 46 U.S.C. 3306(j).
B. Regulatory Background
On December 30, 2004, the Coast
Guard published a request for comments
and notice of public meetings titled
‘‘Inspection of Towing Vessels’’ in the
Federal Register (69 FR 78471). The
notice asked seven questions regarding
how the Coast Guard should move
forward with the rulemaking to
implement the statutory provisions from
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40006
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
the 2004 Act, listed above in section
III.A. ‘‘Statutory background.’’ The
Coast Guard then held four public
meetings, one each in Washington, DC;
Oakland, CA; New Orleans, LA; and St.
Louis, MO. In addition to the comments
the Coast Guard received at the public
meetings, there were 117 comments
submitted to the docket, which can be
found in docket USCG–2004–19977 at
https://www.regulations.gov. The Coast
Guard used the public input received to
inform its development of the NPRM.
On August 11, 2011, the Coast Guard
published an NPRM titled ‘‘Inspection
of Towing Vessels’’ in the Federal
Register (76 FR 49976). The Coast Guard
then held four public meetings, one
each in Newport News, VA; New
Orleans, LA; St. Louis, MO; and Seattle,
WA. The comment period was open
until December 9, 2011. We received
and considered a combined total of
more than 3,000 comments from more
than 265 written submissions and oral
statements from 105 persons at public
meetings.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
IV. Discussion of Comments and
Changes
A. General Feedback on the NPRM
For clarity, the following discussion
of comments is sorted by topic, which
primarily corresponds to parts of the
CFR as noted in the Table of Contents.
Parts 1 and 2 are in title 46 CFR
subchapter A, part 15 is in subchapter
B, part 199 is in subchapter W, and all
other parts are in the newly created
subchapter M. Where changes in
response to a comment led to changes
outside the designated section or part,
we have noted it in the text. Within
each topic of the rule, comments have
been addressed in order of the section
they applied to. When public
submissions addressed multiple
sections of the proposed rule or it
wasn’t clear what specific sections they
addressed, we responded to their
comments in the section that seemed
most appropriate. In addition, we have
made numerous changes through the
regulatory text that are entirely nonsubstantive and editorial in nature; for
example, changing ‘‘chapter’’ to
‘‘Chapter’’ or ‘‘onboard’’ to ‘‘on board’’
in certain contexts to better conform to
standard usage.
We received several comments in
general support of the proposed
inspection regime, design standards,
and SMS requirements for towing
vessels. Individuals and maritime
companies felt that the proposed
regulation would serve to improve the
safety, security, and environmental
protection of towing vessel operations.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
We also received several comments
from individuals and maritime
companies that generally opposed the
proposed regulation. Some commenters
expressed concern that the elements of
the proposed rule would impose added
cost burdens on business, which might
lead to termination of positions.
The Coast Guard acknowledges these
comments and concerns. However, we
do not expect towing companies and
businesses to eliminate positions or
downsize as a result of this rulemaking.
See the Regulatory Analysis for our
discussion of this issue.
One comment agreed with the
American Bureau of Shipping Group’s
(ABSG’s) recommendation that a
traditional, inspected vessel option be
offered as an alternative for those
companies that did not maintain
documentation of policies and
procedures, and for those smaller
companies who would not be able to
implement a SMS. As we noted in the
NPRM (76 FR 49978), we contracted
with ABSG Consulting in 2006 for
assistance with gathering data and
categorizing the vessels that make up
the towing industry; see their report,
which also contains recommendations,
in the docket, USCG–2006–24412–0017.
We concur with the commenter and
the cited ABSG recommendation. As an
alternative to a TSMS, the proposed rule
included the option of a Coast Guard
inspection regime. We have kept both of
these options in this final rule.
Citing an 80-page NPRM, more than
2,000 pages of supporting
documentation, and a short comment
period, one commenter requested an
extension of the comment period so
smaller operators can review how the
proposed requirements would impact
their businesses. The Coast Guard did
not grant this request; we provided a
120-day comment period, which is
longer than our standard 90-day
comment period, and also held four
public meetings in that time. We believe
there was sufficient opportunity to
comment on the NPRM.
B. Background and Need for Regulation
We received one comment noting that
the 2010 Act no longer exempted towing
vessels of less than 200 tons engaged in
exploiting offshore minerals or oil from
46 U.S.C. 8904 and regulations
promulgated under that authority, and
therefore § 15.535(b) should be revised.
See section 606 of that Act. We agree
with the commenter that the exemption
is no longer valid and so we adopted the
commenter’s requested amendment to
§ 15.535.
We received comments from several
commenters who supported the work
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
conducted by TSAC working groups.
For NPRM discussion of work by these
groups, see 76 FR 49978. Other
commenters commended the Coast
Guard’s efforts in incorporating
suggestions provided by TSAC. One
commenter explained that a quote in the
preamble, regarding the devastating
impact that a TSMS can have on smaller
companies, was incorrectly attributed to
the TSAC Economic Analysis Working
Group.
The commenter, a trade association,
went on to explain that according to the
experience of its members, TSMSs have
had a positive impact on the safety
performance and success of many small
companies.
As we have previously noted, we
greatly appreciate TSAC’s contributions
to the development of the NPRM. The
quote we attributed to the TSAC
Economic Working Group regarding the
devastating impact that a TSMS
requirement can have on smaller
companies was taken from an earlier
version of the working group’s report;
the quote should have read ‘‘To conduct
internal audits on a large fleet, this may
mean hiring a full-time staff, including
salary, training and travel costs. While
large companies will spend more to
implement and maintain a SMS,
however, the costs to a small company
may be more difficult to absorb.’’ See
page 4 of the TSAC Economic Analysis
Working Group Report, Dec. 16, 2008,
document USCG–2006–24412–0007 in
the docket. We are not surprised by the
statement that TSMSs have had a
positive impact on the safety
performance and success of safety
operators; we included TSMS as an
option because we believe TSMSs will
provide a positive impact on the safe
operation of towing vessels. For data
supporting this assessment, see the
Regulatory Analysis for this final rule in
the docket.
One commenter recommended that
rather than writing a costly new set of
regulations, the Coast Guard should give
consideration to consolidating the rules
already in place. The commenter
recalled a voluntary program from a
2009 ‘‘United States Coast Guard
Requirements for Uninspected Towing
Vessels’’ document that issued stickers
to vessels that had been reviewed for
compliance with current regulations.
The Coast Guard established the
voluntary Towing Vessel Bridging
Program in 2009 to ease the transition
of towing vessels going from a status of
uninspected to inspected, and to ensure
that both the Coast Guard and the
towing vessel industry are informed and
prepared to meet requirements coming
from this Inspection of Towing Vessels
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
rulemaking. As we noted in the NPRM,
the Coast Guard considered existing
regulations but decided the standards or
regulations found in other vessel
inspection subchapters were not
appropriate and did not fulfill the intent
of the 2004 Act. (76 FR 49987, Aug. 11,
2011.) The unique nature of the towing
industry and towing operations
warrants the development of new
standards and regulations that pertain
exclusively to towing vessels. In
addition to the TSMS, this final rule
contains other towing vessel-specific
provisions, including expansion of the
use of TPOs as part of the Coast Guard’s
TSMS-based, towing vessel inspection
for certification regime. The Towing
Vessel Bridging Program is a transition
program based on voluntary
compliance; it is not a substitute for a
comprehensive regulatory regime that
addresses and enforces safety
requirements for towing vessels that
Congress envisioned when it added
towing vessels to the list of vessels
subject to inspection.
We received comments from
individuals and maritime companies
who disagreed with the need for the
proposed regulations, either because
lack of vessel regulations were not the
cause of the problem or the proposed
regulations were not risk-based. Three
commenters noted that some casualties
occur because of human error, not from
a lack of regulation. One individual felt
that the Mississippi River accident in
2008 was not a good example in support
of additional regulation, because the
accident was caused by irresponsible
behavior of the pilot.
The Coast Guard recognizes that
human error is the cause of some
casualties and that no amount of
regulations will eliminate human error.
To the extent we are able, however, we
have attempted to adopt regulations that
help ensure the safe operation of towing
vessels, including some regulations
intended to address factors related to
human error. A fully functional safety
management system, such as a TSMS, is
continuously updated and evolving
based on the non-conformities observed
and the lessons learned as a result of
reviewing incidents—including those
related to human error. The TSMS
option should help ensure that towing
vessels are operated more safely and in
full compliance with the TSMS and
regulations in subchapter M. The Coast
Guard inspection option may provide
less frequent feedback to vessel
operators and crew, but it too is
intended to ensure compliance with
regulations in subchapter M.
Two commenters, an individual and a
towing company, felt that the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
regulations are not based on risk. A
company asserted that a risk-based
approach supported by towing vessel
casualty data should be the main
motivation behind the application and
development of towing vessel safety
regulation.
As reflected in discussions below
regarding specific requirements, the
Coast Guard has used a risk-based
approach in this rulemaking. We have
reviewed comments on cost and other
assumptions on which we based our
proposed rule and have made changes
when appropriate to ensure that this
final rule is risk-based. For data
supporting this assessment, see the
Regulatory Analysis for the final rule.
One commenter indicated that the
Coast Guard’s Marine Safety Directorate
has not sought to help working
mariners. The commenter praised
Congress for amending 46 U.S.C. 2114
to protect a seaman against
discrimination if he or she testifies in a
proceeding brought to enforce a
maritime safety law or regulation, or
engages in certain other actions
involving the seaman’s work, or
participates in a safety investigation by
the Department of Homeland Security or
National Transportation Safety Board
(NTSB). The commenter listed four
areas where mariners’ safety, health,
and welfare, in the commenter’s view,
were largely unprotected: Workplace
safety on uninspected dry cargo barges,
hearing protection and noise
prevention, asbestos, and personal
protective equipment. The same
commenter urged Congress to transfer
authority over workplace inspection,
drafting safety regulations, and
requiring proper maintenance of barges
from the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) to the
Coast Guard. This commenter also
recommended areas in which the NPRM
should be revised to promote workplace
safety and health regulations, including
training of Coast Guard inspectors in
OSHA-workplace-safety regulations and
the use of personal protective
equipment.
The Coast Guard notes the
commenter’s concern; the commenter’s
specific suggested revisions to the
regulations proposed in the NPRM are
addressed below where we discuss 46
CFR part 140, Operations, which
includes subparts on crew safety and
safety and health, and other parts
addressed by this commenter.
C. Organization, General Course, and
Methods Governing Marine Safety
Functions (Part 1)
In our NPRM, we did not propose to
amend part 1, but in this final rule we
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40007
added § 1.03–55 to address comments
on the appeals process for a company
whose certificate is rescinded. See
section IV.H below. Our proposed
§ 136.180 pointed to 46 CFR 1.03 for
those seeking to appeal, but we saw the
need to identify the Coast Guard official
or entity that appeals should be directed
to, including the appeal of matters
relating to action of a third party, such
as when a TPO rescinds a TSMS
certificate.
D. User Fees and Inspection Table
(Part 2)
Part 2 of 46 CFR is in subchapter A.
We received two comments regarding
user fees. An association asked the
Coast Guard to clarify whether those
choosing both the TSMS and the Coast
Guard inspection options will have to
pay whatever user fee is assessed in the
final rule to recover the costs of the
entire new towing vessel inspection
program. Another commenter asserted
that charging user fees to finance the
implementation of regulation that is not
risk-based will return little value to the
industry.
Under 46 U.S.C. 2110 and the Coast
Guard’s regulations in 46 CFR subpart
2.10, the Coast Guard is required to
charge a fee for services provided for
vessels required to have a Certificate of
Inspection (COI). Subpart 2.10 fees,
however, do not apply to the initial
issuance of a COI.
This fee for services must meet the
criteria of 31 U.S.C. 9701 (Fees and
charges for Government services and
things of value) to be fair and based on
the cost to the government, the value of
the service being provided, the public
policy served, and other relevant facts.
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) Revised Circular A–25 explains
that full program costs should be
recovered by fees charged.
In our NPRM, the Coast Guard stated
its intent to establish a user fee, as
required by law, for those vessels
required to comply with subchapter M,
and indicated that this user fee would
be established through a separate
rulemaking process that would
commence on or around publication of
this final rule. The Coast Guard also
committed to not inspecting towing
vessels or issuing COIs to towing vessels
until user fees were established. (76 FR
49985, August 11, 2011.)
We still plan to promulgate a separate
rulemaking for an annual inspection fee
specifically for towing vessels, under
the authority in 46 U.S.C. 2110 and 31
U.S.C. 9701, that will consider the
specific program costs associated with
the TSMS and Coast Guard inspection
options. However, until that time the
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40008
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Coast Guard is establishing the existing
fee of $1,030 stated in 46 CFR 2.10–101
as the annual inspection fee for towing
vessels subject to subchapter M, for any
inspected vessel not listed in Table
2.10–101. As reflected in 46 CFR 2.10–
1(b), this annual inspection fee will not
be charged for an initial COI inspection,
but the fee will be charged annually
starting a year later. Once this final rule
becomes effective, the Coast Guard will
apply the existing annual fee listed in
46 CFR 2.10–101, Table 2.10–101 as
‘‘Any inspected vessel not listed in this
table’’ to subchapter M vessels other
than those already separately listed in
the Table. Since all vessels subject to
subchapter M will be considered
inspected vessels and required to obtain
COIs, regardless of whether the TSMS
option is chosen, all subchapter M
vessels receiving COIs will be charged
an annual inspection fee as outlined
above.
User fees charged by the Coast Guard
under 46 U.S.C. 2110 do not directly
finance Coast Guard operations and thus
user fees do not finance the
implementation of the regulations.
OMB’s Revised Circular A–25 explains
that user fees are intended to offset the
cost of providing services to specific
beneficiaries.
Regarding the comment about the lack
of value of a user fee to finance the
implementation of a non-risk-based
regulation, we have used a risk-based
approach in developing this rulemaking
and have made changes from the
proposed rule taking into account
commenters concerns to ensure that this
final rule continues to rely on risk-based
analysis.
Other Certification Changes
In the NPRM we stated we would
amend the table in subchapter I—and in
other subchapters—that identified
inspection and certification regulations
applicable to vessels. Our intended
amendments to those tables were to
reflect changes for towing vessels
introduced by subchapter M (see
discussion in 76 FR 49979, August 11,
2011). Since the NPRM was published,
however, in a separate rulemaking (79
FR 58270, 58272, September 29, 2014)
the Coast Guard removed tables in 46
CFR 24.05–1, 70.05–1, 90.05–1, and
188.05–1. Those tables replicated a table
in 46 CFR part 2 dedicated to inspection
regulations and thus were not necessary.
Rather than add to the 7-column, 7page table in 46 CFR 2.01–7(a), we have
amended the text before and after the
table instead. These amendments direct
towing vessels to a new paragraph (b),
which directs those subject to this rule
to subchapter M for inspection and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
certification regulations, and other
towing vessels to Table 2.01–7(a).
E. Manning (Part 15)
We received approximately 40
comments that addressed the issue of
manning. Part 15 of 46 CFR is in
subchapter B.
We received several comments stating
that the Coast Guard should require
minimum crew manning levels. One
commenter said wheelhouse manning is
a concern due to the shortage of
qualified individuals holding the
appropriate merchant mariner
credential, especially with the
retirement age approaching for many
currently qualified individuals. A
maritime company said the minimum
manning level should be included in the
COI. Another commenter noted in
response to COI requirements proposed
in part 136 that this regulation should
clarify the number of required
crewmembers and allow the towing
vessel to be operated by a single
crewmember in certain circumstances.
In accordance with 46 CFR 15.501,
the Coast Guard will specify the
minimum manning for each towing
vessel in all of the vessel’s areas of
operation on the vessel’s COI, including
international and domestic operations.
We note that Officers in Charge, Marine
Inspection (OCMIs) will review
operational details of the vessel and
work with companies to make decisions
on vessel manning which could indicate
various levels of manning based on
specific routes and service of the towing
vessel when determining the number of
required crewmembers for a towing
vessel. We do not envision an
appreciable increase in the number of
qualified individuals needed to man
inspected towing vessels. The influence
of market forces on the number of
individuals seeking to become
credentialed operators is beyond the
scope of this rulemaking.
Several commenters opposed any
change to the current manning levels
required for towing vessels, and some
commenters recommended specific
changes to several sections currently in
the CFR, such as 33 CFR 155.710(e) and
46 CFR 15.810(b) and 15.820(a)(3), to
avoid inadvertent changes to the
manning or credentialing requirements
given the Coast Guard’s statement in the
NPRM that ‘‘we are not proposing to
change any of the current manning
levels required for towing vessels’’ (76
FR 49990, Aug. 11, 2011).
As previously stated, the Coast Guard
will make a vessel-specific assessment
of the manning required for a given
vessel’s operations. The minimum
manning required for safe operations
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
may differ from one operation to
another. As with other inspected
vessels, this is a vessel-specific
determination made by the cognizant
OCMI.
The Coast Guard believes the
requested change to § 15.820(a)(3) is
already addressed through existing
regulations. For inspected vessels 300
gross tons and above that operate on
inland waters, 46 CFR 15.820(a)(3)
requires the vessel to have an individual
with a license or the appropriate
merchant mariner credential (MMC)
officer endorsement if the OCMI
determines that such credentials are
necessary for the person responsible for
the vessel’s mechanical propulsion. For
purposes of towing vessels, however,
the applicable subchapter B definition
of ‘‘inland waters’’ excludes the Western
Rivers. See 46 CFR 10.107. Therefore,
§ 15.820(a)(3) does not apply to a towing
vessel when it is operating on Western
Rivers, a term also defined in § 10.107.
Based on a recent survey of the Coast
Guard’s Marine Information for Safety
and Law Enforcement (MISLE) database,
we have concluded that most inland
towing vessels 300 gross tons or above
operate on the Western Rivers. Those
towing vessels operating on inland
waters beyond the Western Rivers may
be required to have a credentialed
individual responsible for the vessel’s
mechanical propulsion based on a
vessel-specific assessment conducted by
the cognizant OCMI.
The Coast Guard believes changes to
33 CFR 155.710(e) that would allow the
use of a letter-of-designation for an
inspected towing vessel are not
warranted. The requirements of 33 CFR
155.710(e)(1) apply to all inspected
vessels required by 46 CFR chapter I to
have an officer aboard, including towing
vessels that become inspected vessels
under this rule. Congress made towing
vessels a class of vessels subject to
inspection, and we have no evidence
that towing vessels are less likely to
spill oil than the other inspected vessels
already subject to § 155.710(e)(1). We
also see value in uniform requirments
for inspected vessels conducting the
same activities. We note, however, that
existing § 155.130 provides for
exemptions from compliance with the
requirement if authorized by the COTP
or OCMI for reasons such as economic
or physical impracticality. We therefore
believe that adequate flexibility already
exists in Part 155 to accommodate any
unexpected consequences of towing
vessels becoming subject
§ 155.710(e)(1).
The Coast Guard believes changes to
46 CFR 15.810(b), in order to exempt
towing vessels subject to subchapter M
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
from the requirements for a minimum
number of mariners holding a license or
MMC officer endorsement as mate
required to be carried on certain
inspected vessels, are not warranted.
Towing vessels are one of the several
classes of vessels that are authorized to
use a two-watch system and, as a result,
additional mates are unnecessary to
comply with this level of manning.
Some commenters urged the Coast
Guard to adopt TSAC’s 2006
recommendations to amend proposed
46 CFR 15.535 to incorporate a baseline
requirement for a safe watch
complement. This was intended to
avoid confusion about the minimum
manning that will be required on towing
vessel COIs and the role of the TSMS in
crewing decisions.
Consistent with our NPRM preamble
statement that we were not proposing to
change any of the current manning
levels required for towing vessels, we
modeled our proposed § 15.535 after
§ 15.610, which addresses towing vessel
master and mate (pilot) requirements on
uninspected vessels. But as noted above
in section IV.B, we made a change in
§ 15.535 from what we proposed in the
NPRM. To reflect the 2010 Act’s
amendment to 46 U.S.C. 8905, we made
a conforming amendment to § 15.535(b)
to remove an non-applicability reference
to certain towing vessels of less than
200 gross register tons engaged in
exploiting offshore minerals or oil.
While reviewing proposed § 15.535 in
response to a comment discussed above,
we noted the need to remove a reference
to vessels engaged in assistance towing
because the applicability of § 15.535
does not include vessels engaged in
assistance towing. Further, we revised
paragraph (a) to more clearly state
which vessels are subject to § 15.535, to
specify the vessels not subject to
subchapter M that must meet
requirements § 15.535(b), and to note
that all towing vessels subject to
§ 15.535 must also meet requirements in
§ 15.535(c). Finally, we inserted
clarifying edits and paragraph headings
in § 15.535 to make it easier to read and
understand, and in both §§ 15.535 and
15.610 we clarified that the officer in
charge of the vessel must provide the
evidence to the Coast Guard.
Also, we made changes to § 15.535 to
ensure consistency in the nomenclature
introduced by the Consolidation of
Merchant Mariner Qualification
Credentials final rule (74 FR 11196,
Mar. 16, 2009), and to § 15.610 to ensure
that this section refers to the remaining
uninspected towing vessels. Our
changes also reflect the recent
amendments made by the final rule
entitled Implementation of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
Amendments to the International
Convention on Standards of Training,
Certification and Watchkeeping for
Seafarers, 1978, and Changes to
Domestic Endorsements (STCW) (78 FR
77796, Dec. 24, 2013).
As the authority issuing the vessel’s
COI, the cognizant OCMI is required by
law to stipulate the manning for an
inspected vessel. See 46 U.S.C. 3309
and 8101, 33 CFR 1.01–20, and 46 CFR
2.01–5 and 15.501. She or he can take
a variety of factors into consideration
when determining the safe manning for
a vessel, including recommendations
from the owner or managing operator. In
some cases, existing law or regulations
specify the minimum manning for a
particular voyage, area of operation, or
vessel service. See e.g., 46 U.S.C. 8301
and 46 CFR 15.610. In this final rule, 46
CFR 15.535 would set one such
minimum. An OCMI may specify a level
of manning above those minimums
specified by law if such a level is
warranted to safely operate the vessel.
See 46 U.S.C. 8301(d)(2) and 46 CFR
15.501. A vessel’s safety management
system can identify situations where
additional manning may be warranted
(such as high water conditions) but it
cannot specify a level of manning below
the minimum established by the OCMI
at any time.
We received some comments stating
that the language used in § 15.535(c)
concerning towing vessels in pilotage
waters on the Lower Mississippi River
is not clear. One commenter said it
would be useful to define the
geographical limits of the ‘‘pilotage
waters of the Lower Mississippi River’’
in § 15.535(c). Another commenter said
the language should be the same as that
used in § 15.610(b).
The Coast Guard agrees with these
comments and has changed the text in
§ 15.535(c) to match the current text of
§ 15.610(b), except for necessary
organizational changes and to specify
that the evidence should be provided to
the Coast Guard. The pilotage waters of
the Lower Mississippi River are
described in a notice of designated areas
published December 26, 1996 (61 FR
68090).
Some commenters said crew size
should be dictated by the size and needs
of the vessel. One commenter said the
vessel master must have the final say on
the crew requirements. A towing
company said it is important that the
minimum manning requirements
account for different vessel operations
(e.g., crew of three for ship assist work
in-harbor versus crew of six for offshore
trips).
While the master has a role in
ensuring the proper manning of a vessel,
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40009
the master must observe applicable law
and regulations, and the manning
specified by the Coast Guard on the
vessel’s COI when performing that role.
We note that under § 140.210, the
master must ensure that adequate
corrective action is taken when he or
she encounters unsafe conditions. The
COI issued by the Coast Guard will
specify the minimum manning for the
vessel under normal operating
conditions and the master must adhere
to the provisions of the COI. See
§ 140.210(a)(1). The towing vessel
master and the TSMS should identify
when, and if, additional personnel are
needed on board the towing vessel.
During flood or low water conditions,
for example, the master may specify that
additional crew members are needed.
We received some comments
requesting that the Coast Guard clarify
and resolve differences in language
between § 15.535 and language in the
STCW Supplemental NPRM that
proposed to amend § 15.610.
As noted above, the STCW final rule
has been published, and we have
amended the text in § 15.535(c) to match
the current § 15.610(b). There was a
slight variation in wording between
§ 15.535(c) as originally proposed and
§ 15.610(b).
Further, our proposed § 15.535(c)
specified that the towing vessel ‘‘be
under the control of an officer who
holds a first class pilot’s license or
endorsement for that route, or who
meets’’ requirements related to the type
of barge being towed. The current
§ 15.610(b) specifies that the towing
vessel be under the control of an officer
meeting that section’s requirements for
a towing vessel of 26 feet or more in
length and that that officer hold ‘‘a firstclass pilot’s endorsement for that route
or MMC officer endorsement for the
Western Rivers, or’’ that the officer
meets the requirements for a towing
vessel of 26 feet or more in length and
the requirements based on the type of
barge being towed. Consistent with the
commenters’ recommendations, we
have amended § 15.535 to conform to
the current version of § 15.610.
Also, because we added § 15.535 to
address vessels subject to subchapter M,
we inserted a paragraph at the beginning
of § 15.610 to limit that section to
towing vessels not subject to subchapter
M. Applicability exceptions in
subchapter M explain that some towing
vessels at least 8 meters in length will
still be subject to § 15.610. We made
necessary organizational changes to
§ 15.610 to reflect our insertion of this
new paragraph.
An individual recommended that in
addition to the towing vessel being
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40010
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
operated by a properly licensed master,
our rule should require at least one crew
member to be documented with
preferably an ‘‘Able Bodied’’ seaman’s
rating. The commenter noted his marine
work experience and seeing members of
a construction crew assigned to handle
the lines when a towing evolution was
needed. He stated that the skills and
knowledge of construction workers do
not always overlap with those required
of seamen.
We did not propose the change
suggested by this commenter and would
want to receive comments before
making the suggested change. But we
are confident that the manning
requirements in § 15.535 and
requirements in § 140.210 for reporting
and addressing unsafe conditions
provide assurances that lines will be
properly handled during towing
evolutions. We have not made a change
from the proposed rule based on this
comment.
We received one comment saying that
our rulemaking seeks to address issues
such as a ‘‘man overboard’’ situation,
but such situations are innately linked
to minimum safe manning of a vessel.
The commenter asked how a licensed
towing officer at the helm is expected to
safely and successfully recover a single
deckhand from the water should the
deckhand go overboard during routine
operations.
We have addressed requirements for
lifesaving equipment, arrangements,
systems, and procedures on towing
vessels in Section IV.K of this preamble,
‘‘Lifesaving,’’ and lifesaving regulations
are located in part 141 of subchapter M.
When specifying the minimum
complement of officers and crew
necessary for the safe operation of the
vessel, the OCMI is called on to
consider emergency situations such as a
person overboard. See 46 CFR 15.501.
One commenter pointed out that
language used in § 15.535 in the NPRM
regarding an exception for certain
towing vessels was eliminated by
section 606 of the 2010 Act.
As noted above in response to a
comment addressed in section IV.B,
section 606 of Public Law 111–281 did
strike the paragraph in 46 U.S.C. 8905
that exempted vessels of less than 200
gross tons ‘‘engaged in the offshore
mineral and oil industry if the vessel
has offshore mineral and oil industry
sites or equipment as its ultimate
destination or place of departure’’ from
46 U.S.C. 8904 requirements and
regulations promulgated under 46
U.S.C. 8904. This statutory change was
not reflected in our proposed rule.
Accordingly, we made a conforming
amendment to § 15.535(b), which
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
excludes certain vessels from the
licensed-master-or-mate requirement, by
deleting the reference to vessels engaged
in the offshore mineral and oil industry.
This amendment to § 15.535(b), which
now only exempts vessels engaged in
assistance towing from the licensedmaster-or-mate requirement, conforms
this final rule to Public Law 111–281’s
amendment to 46 U.S.C. 8905.
One commenter expressed concern
about the words ‘‘not to include over
time’’ in the definition of ‘‘day’’ in
existing 46 CFR 10.107 and that
section’s computation of service hours
on vessels less than 100 gross register
tons (GRT). The commenter stated that
work-hour abuses occur, especially on
vessels of less than 100 GRT, because a
day of work is considered 8 hours. Also,
overtime is not counted toward sea
service. The commenter recommends
that this loophole be removed.
In the proposed regulatory text of the
NPRM, we did touch on 46 CFR chapter
I, subchapter B, Merchant Marine
Officers and Seamen, but we did not
propose any changes to 46 CFR part 10,
Merchant Mariner Credential, where 46
CFR 10.107 is located. Related to this
comment, we note that Section 607 of
the 2010 Act, which amended 46 U.S.C.
by introducing additional logbook and
entry requirements in 46 U.S.C. 11304,
included entries for the ‘‘number of
hours in service to the vessels of each
seaman and each officer.’’ We would
need a separate rulemaking to fully
implement section 607 of the 2010 Act,
which involves hours of service; that
rulemaking could apply to more than
just towing vessels.
We amended a regulation, 46 CFR
15.815(c), that requires a radar observer
endorsement for masters or mates
onboard an uninspected towing vessel
26 feet or longer by removing the word
‘‘uninspected.’’ When that regulation
was issued, most towing vessels were
uninspected, and § 15.815(a) covered
towing vessels 300 GRT or more that
were inspected. Because most towing
vessels 26 feet or longer will become
inspected once this rule becomes
effective, we are making this conforming
amendment to 46 CFR 15.815(c). This
change is consistent with our § 15.815
towing-vessel specific enabling statute,
46 U.S.C. 8904(a), which distinguishes
towing vessels purely on length, not
whether they are inspected or
uninspected. Because § 15.815(c)
already requires this radar observers’
endorsement on uninspected towing
vessels, there is no anticipated cost
associated with this change.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
F. Certification/Definitions/
Applicability (Part 136)
Applicability
We received some comments
supporting the Coast Guard’s decision to
defer consideration to a subsequent
rulemaking of requirements for towing
vessels less than 26 feet in length,
towing vessels used solely for assistance
towing, and work boats operating
exclusively within a work site and
performing intermittent towing within a
work site. Several commenters
expressed support for the concept of
excepted vessels but felt that
clarification is needed with regard to the
range of fleet and harbor service
operations that fall under this term.
Others suggested that some aspects of
the equipment requirements, like
distress flares and additional lifebuoys,
could be removed from the rule.
In our definition of ‘‘excepted vessel’’
in § 136.110, we make reference to
harbor-assist, but we define that term in
addition to ‘‘limited geographic area’’
and we believe those definitions are
sufficiently clear to identify the range of
harbor service operations that fall under
these terms. We had included a
reference to a fleeting area as an
example of a limited geographic area in
our proposed definition of ‘‘excepted
vessel,’’ but, as discussed below in this
section (IV.F), we removed that and
other examples for the separately
defined term ‘‘limited geographic area.’’
Also, we amended the reference to
vessels that may be included by the
cognizant OCMI in this definition by
identifying the requirements and
reasons the OCMI must consider before
treating a vessel as an excepted vessel
for purposes of some or all of the
requirements listed.
The Coast Guard has not subjected
excepted vessels to certain requirements
in part 142 for fire protection
equipment, and certain requirements for
new vessels in part 143 for alarms and
monitoring, general alarms,
communication, fuel shutoff, additional
fuel system requirements for existing
vessels, and electrical power sources,
generators, and motors, and electrical
overcurrent protection. We have
considered a commenter’s request to
also not require excepted vessels to
comply with distress flare and
additional lifebuoy requirements but
decline to do so because the factors used
to except these vessels do not reduce the
need for flare and lifebuoy
requirements.
In § 141.375, we have a more precise
exception regarding distress flares and
do not require that they be carried on
vessels operating in a limited
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
geographic area on a short run limited
to approximately 30 minutes away from
the dock. Also, we have reviewed our
lifebuoy requirements in § 141.360
based on the request to not require
additional lifebuoys of excepted vessels,
but have not adopted this suggested
change because some excepted vessels,
for example, towing vessels used for
response to an emergency, need to have
on board the lifebuoys required under
§ 141.360. Also, we noted our use of the
term ‘‘excepted towing vessel,’’ instead
of ‘‘excepted vessel,’’ in part 143. We
have clarified part 143 by making all
proposed references to ‘‘excepted
towing vessel,’’ consistent with the term
we defined, ‘‘excepted vessel.’’
Some commenters did not agree with
our exception of towing vessels less
than 26 feet for several reasons,
including smaller vessels being given an
unfair competitive advantage, the fact
that such vessels may be engaging in
commercial work, and a concern about
regulatory avoidance.
Our exemption for towing vessels less
than 26 feet in length is intended to
provide for an incremental application
of inspection status to the towing vessel
fleet and is consistent with the
recommendations of TSAC. We note
here that we made edits in § 136.105 to
ensure that the exemptions in that
section are clearly stated. Specifically
regarding our meter approximation of 26
feet, we changed ‘‘(8 meters)’’ to the
more precise approximation of ‘‘(7.92
meters).’’ Also we corrected the
threshold for vessels subject to
subchapter I.
An individual noted that towing
vessels should be measured end-to-end
at actual length, and another commenter
suggested that the size of tow should be
used to determine exempt vessels.
Another individual recommended that
the exemption should be based on a
combination of length, displacement,
and shaft horsepower in order to remove
the incentive to use short, high-power
tugs to circumvent Coast Guard
inspections. A commenter suggested a
clarification that towing vessels less
than 26 feet in length are not exempt if
they move barges carrying oil.
For methods of measuring towing
vessels, the Coast Guard sees no reason
to deviate from the statutory standard in
46 U.S.C. 8904(a) which is reflected in
46 CFR 15.535 and 136.105: Length
measured from end to end over the deck
(excluding the sheer). We considered
the suggestion of using size of tow or a
combination of length, displacement,
and shaft horsepower as a way to
determine applicability, but we believe
using the length of the towing vessels is
a more manageable approach which—
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
while not as direct—provides a measure
of risk control.
We agree that a change from the
proposed rule is necessary to clarify that
vessels less than 26 feet are not exempt
from the requirements of this
rulemaking when towing a barge
carrying oil. In proposed § 136.105,
when identifying exceptions to
applicability, we made clear that towing
vessels less than 26 feet that push, pull,
or haul a ‘‘barge that is carrying
dangerous or hazardous material’’
would not be excluded from subchapter
M applicability. In the NPRM, we did
not define the term ‘‘dangerous or
hazardous material’’ but in the preamble
we did describe our limitation on the
less-than-26-feet exemption by stating
this rule does not apply to towing
vessels less than 26 feet in length
‘‘unless towing a barge carrying oil or
other dangerous or combustible cargo in
bulk.’’ To make this intent clear in the
regulatory text of the final rule, we have
adopted the defined term ‘‘oil or
hazardous material in bulk,’’ to replace
the term ‘‘dangerous or hazardous
material’’ in § 136.105(a).
Also, to clarify that only one form of
hazardous material needs be carried to
trigger applicability, we changed
‘‘materials’’ to the singular, ‘‘material,’’
throughout the final rule. Also, we
amended the definition of ‘‘oil or
hazardous material in bulk’’ by inserting
‘‘to carry cargoes’’ in its reference to
being certified under subchapters D or
O to better reflect the nature of the
certifications.
Other companies supported the lessthan-26-foot exception. One commenter
acknowledged that the Coast Guard
could address smaller towing vessels in
a future rulemaking. An individual
thought the exception should apply to
even longer vessels (up to 32 or 40 feet
in length) because such vessels are too
small to do any serious towing, and a
company agreed and stated that all its
shipyard and harbor service vessels
were 34 feet or longer.
As noted above, the Coast Guard
approach in transitioning the
uninspected towing vessel fleet into an
inspected status is to do so
incrementally over time. Based on our
analysis of risk and a specific
recommendation provided by TSAC,1
we proposed that subchapter M apply to
vessels 26 feet and above. This length
standard has been used in various
statutes to establish requirements for
radiotelephones, automatic
identification systems, electronic charts,
1 ‘‘Report of the Working Group on Towing Vessel
Inspection,’’ p. 6, submitted to TSAC on September
29, 2005.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40011
and manning for towing vessels. See 33
U.S.C. 1203 and 1223a, and 46 U.S.C.
8904 and 70114. We find no perfect
length for measuring risk, but we
believe 26 feet is the best breakpoint to
use at this time in our transitioning of
the uninspected towing vessel fleet into
an inspected fleet.
We received one comment supporting
the exception for workboats that do not
engage in commercial towing for hire
but perform intermittent towing within
a worksite. A contracting company
agreed that increased equipment
requirements are not needed for job site
boats. Two individuals suggested that
the exception should be simplified,
such as by including a mileage
limitation. A company recommended a
slight expansion of the exception to
cover workboats going to or from the
worksite.
The Coast Guard disagrees with the
recommendation to include a mileage
limitation or expand the exception, and
believes the terms ‘‘worksite’’ and
‘‘workboat’’ are adequately defined in
§ 136.110. The OCMI will make
determinations of the boundaries and
limitations of worksites within the
OCMI’s zone. The OCMI will evaluate
the unique operating conditions and
hazards of the area and determine the
risks and mitigating factors necessary to
support such operations.
A commenter requested that we treat
workboats engaged in oil spill response
activities as exempt, just as we exempt
workboats operating in a worksite.
The Coast Guard has already included
an exception for towing vessels engaged
in emergency or pollution response in
our definition of ‘‘excepted vessels’’ in
§ 136.110. We do not intend to provide
a general exemption to oil spill response
vessels from these rules. Instead, the
OCMI may designate a pollution
response area as a worksite which
would afford a towing vessel the
opportunity to be exempt from
subchapter M while it is operating
exclusively in the worksite if it qualifies
as a workboat under § 136.105(a)(3).
This is consistent with the Coast
Guard’s intent to provide inspection
standards to certain vessels based on
risk and consistent with the
recommendations of TSAC. This rule
exempts certain types of vessels from
subchapter M, and relieves other types
of vessels, excepted vessels, from
certain equipment requirements due to
the nature of their service. We have
made no changes from the proposed
rule based on this comment.
Two commenters suggested adding
language to our worksite exception in
§ 136.105(a)(3) to include ‘‘maneuvering
a tank barge on and off of a drydock or
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40012
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
cleaning dock’’ to the ‘‘intermittent
towing’’ covered in the worksite; and
others recommended that we amend our
‘‘excepted vessel’’ definition in
§ 136.110 to include moving vessels on
and off drydocks and to and from
cleaning docks, or shifting vessels
within a limited geographic area, or
including a full range of activities
commonly performed by towing vessels
in a limited geographic area.
The Coast Guard sees no need for
these recommended changes. Our
workboat exception in § 136.105(a)(3)
covers the activity the commenter
requests we add. Also, our definition of
‘‘excepted vessel’’ in § 136.110 includes
towing vessels operating ‘‘within a
limited geographic area.’’ Excepted
vessels could include towing vessels
moving vessels on and off drydocks and
to and from cleaning docks. But we have
left this determination to the discretion
of the cognizant OCMI, to be made on
a case-by-case basis.
We received a very large number of
comments, particularly from
commenters in the American Waterways
Operators (AWO) Responsible Carrier
Program (RCP), that expressed the belief
that the TSMS should be required for all
towing companies and should not be
optional. Proponents argued that the
TSMS is flexible and scalable, would
create consistency, and addresses
human error, the leading cause of
towing vessel accidents. Some of the
commenters favored having a thirdparty audit option and conservation of
Coast Guard resources. A maritime
company stated that the savings
accruing from a robust TSMS will far
outweigh any associated cost of
development and implementation. One
company observed that a TSMS gives a
company the ability to adjust its system
through lessons learned and continuous
improvement, rather than complying
with a set of standards once a year.
Commenters stated that the Coast Guard
should not make the TSMS optional
because of concern about costs; instead
the Coast Guard should eliminate
requirements that are not justified by
risk analysis. One commenter warned,
however, that a TSMS is not a substitute
for an inspection.
We received many other comments
that supported retaining the option of
inspection by the Coast Guard.
Proponents favored the flexibility
provided by having the option, the
reduced administrative burden of the
Coast Guard inspection, cost efficiency
for small businesses, and the fact that
the Coast Guard already has a successful
inspection program. An association has
favored a traditional Coast Guard
inspection program for the towing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
industry. An individual noted that small
companies cannot afford to create and
implement a TSMS and would depend
on the Coast Guard to provide yearly
inspections and guidance. Other
individuals and a State government
recommended that the Coast Guard
should develop a model TSMS that
would be easy for small companies to
adopt. Another individual opposed
having optional provisions in a
regulation. A commenter pointed out
that current form CG–3752, Application
for Inspection of U.S. Vessel, should be
revised to add a block for indicating
which option is being used for the
towing vessel.
As we noted in the NPRM (76 FR
49979), the NTSB and TSAC have
strongly supported a TSMS, and the
approach is supported by the
International Safety Management (ISM)
Code. The NTSB disagreed with our
applicability exception for seagoing
towing vessels of 300 gross tons or more
subject to the provisions of subchapter
I because currently under 33 CFR part
96 only vessels measuring more than
500 gross tons and operating on
international voyages are required to
have SMS and the subchapter M
regulation does not apply to the 22
seagoing towing vessels of 300 gross
tons or more already inspected in
accordance with regulations for cargo
and miscellaneous vessels in 46 CFR
subchapter I. The NTSB encouraged the
Coast Guard to extend the SMS
requirement to these seagoing vessels by
requiring SMS on all seagoing towing
vessels of 300 gross tons or more.
The Coast Guard believes the
traditional annual inspection regime we
offer as an option to all towing vessels
subject to subchapter M will provide
necessary measures to ensure
compliance with subchapter M
requirements and enable us to detect
non-compliance.
The Coast Guard notes the NTSB
concerns and acknowledges that not all
seagoing towing vessels subject to
subchapter I are required to comply
with SMS requirements in 33 CFR part
96, subpart B, for vessels on
international voyages. That applicability
threshold of the 500 gross tons reflects
an international standard from the
International Convention for the Safety
of Life at Sea, 1974, as amended
(SOLAS) for vessels subject to Chapter
IX of SOLAS, Management of the Safe
Operation of Ships. In general, the Coast
Guard supports all towing vessels being
subject to a robust and well-functioning
safety management system. Should the
Coast Guard decide to extend SMS
requirements to all vessels subject to
subchapter M, or to seagoing towing
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
vessels of 300 gross tons or more that
are subject to subchapter I, we would
proceed with a separate rulemaking. We
would look at accident data after this
rule becomes effective before proposing
such a rule.
We are considering the suggestion
that we amend form CG–3752,
Application for Inspection of U.S.
Vessel, to add a block to indicate which
option the towing vessel owner or
managing operator is using. For now, we
recommend using the ‘‘Other (Indicate)’’
box—e.g., ‘‘Towing Vessel (TSMS
option)’’ or ‘‘Towing Vessel (CG
Inspection option).’’
We received some comments from
towing or dredging companies
suggesting exemption from the entire
rule for certain vessels, such as all
existing vessels, vessels under 79 feet,
vessels under 200 gross tons, or vessels
operating on inland and harbor routes.
One company argued that construction/
dredge tugs on the Great Lakes should
be considered for exceptions. Another
company requested an exception for
vessels that work as towing vessels less
than 10 percent of the year. A small
company with an 18-foot tow vessel and
a 33-foot barge that carries less than
10,000 gallons of diesel requested an
exception. Some commenters suggested
that vessels used to move passenger
barges should be specifically excluded.
One company recommended that a
committee should be formed to examine
which regulatory provisions are
appropriate for particular vessels.
The Coast Guard does not believe that
broad exemptions from the requirement
of these rules would serve the intended
goal of improving safety in the towing
vessel industry. The Coast Guard seeks
a balance between a tiered
implementation of towing vessel safety
rules to vessels with the greatest risk
and a prudent exemption of
applicability to towing vessels with less
potential risk to life, property and the
environment.
One commenter suggested exemptions
for towing vessels operating on inland
and harbor routes not engaged in
transporting petroleum products. In
particular, they argued that the TSMS
and towing vessel record (TVR)
requirements should only apply to
vessels that tow oil and hazardous
material, or are over 79 feet and 2,000
HP.
The Coast Guard disagrees. As we
note in our earlier discussion of part 136
comments, the Coast Guard does not
intend to create exemptions for all types
of inland towing operations, or to
provide exemptions for particular areas
without cause. We note, however, that
under § 136.230 the OCMI may consider
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
route-specific requirements of
subchapter M when designating a
permitted route.
Regarding the TSMS requirement, it is
optional. In this final rule, the only
vessels required to maintain a TSMS are
those that choose the TSMS option. A
TSMS, however, may benefit every type
of towing vessel regardless of its service
routes, vessel length, or vessel
horsepower. For more details on this,
see the discussion in section IV.B and
the RA for the final rule (in the docket).
As for the TVR requirement, the vessel
owner or managing operator has the
option of maintaining it electronically
or on paper, and for towing vessels with
a TSMS, the required records may be
maintained in another record specified
by the TSMS. It is essential for maritime
safety that data we require in § 140.915
be recorded. We discuss the TVR
requirement, and the various forms it
may take, in more detail in our
discussion of part 140 comments.
We received one comment that
favored applying the rule to vessels
towing oil and providing harbor assist to
large ships, applying a less costly
system to other vessels, and clarifying
exemptions. Many commenters agreed
that rules designed for offshore or ocean
routes or large rivers were not
appropriate for vessels in canals,
harbors, or shallow rivers. The
commenters opposed a one size fits all
approach, and noted that Congress
intended different standards for various
types of towing vessels. One of the
commenters favored grandfathering
existing vessels into compliance for as
many of the requirements as practicable.
Another commenter, however, noted
that risks are similar for inland and
harbor towing as for coastwise or ocean
towing, and solutions, such as planning
and testing, should be similar. A towing
company opposed having more
stringent rules for tank barge operators
than for companies that haul dry cargo
barges.
The Coast Guard agrees that there are
different characteristics, methods of
operation, and nature of service of
towing vessels that require unique
application of requirements. The Coast
Guard believes that the utilization of a
TSMS allows the operator to tailor
safety processes to the unique
conditions in which the vessel and
company operate. A TSMS is scalable,
dynamic, and customized by the
operator for the unique risks,
challenges, and operating environments
anticipated. Some hazards are universal
to all vessels regardless of where they
operate. Therefore, the Coast Guard
believes that certain minimum
standards are necessary to mitigate these
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
risks and seeks to apply them to all
towing vessels subject to this rule. The
additional variations necessitated by the
type and area of operation can be
accommodated by a TSMS.
An association questioned whether
‘‘Lugger Tugs,’’ towing vessels that carry
cargo, would be inspected as towing
vessels or as offshore supply vessels.
One individual urged the Coast Guard to
ensure consistency in regulatory
enforcement and fairness for all vessels.
The Coast Guard notes that towing
vessels that carry cargo for hire, or
conduct other regulated activities—such
as carrying passengers for hire, would
likely be subject to regulations
contained in other subchapters. Vessels
engaged in two (or more) separate
regulated activities are referred to as
being in ‘‘dual (or multiple) service.’’
Towing vessels that want to conduct
activities other than just towing need to
seek approval from the OCMI issuing
the COI. The Coast Guard provides
guidance to all OCMIs to help ensure
consistency in regulatory enforcement
and fairness for all vessels. In the
example of a towing vessel carrying
cargo, that vessel meets the definition
for two vessel types and would have to
meet additional requirements to carry
cargo on the towing vessel. Numerous
parameters, including vessel
characteristics and the operations
conducted by the vessel, would
determine under which vessel type the
vessel would be inspected.
For clarification, we amended our
description of ‘‘public vessel’’ in
§ 136.105 to match the term defined in
46 U.S.C. 2101. We also point to the 46
U.S.C. 2101 definition for the meaning
of the term in §§ 2.01–7, 15.535, and
15.610 of this chapter.
Definitions
We received several hundred
comments suggesting edits, deletions, or
additions to our proposed definitions in
§ 136.110. The discussion of changes
made to the individual terms is as
follows:
‘‘Accepted Safety Management System’’
We deleted our proposed definition of
‘‘Accepted Safety Management System’’
because we did not propose to use the
term within the regulatory text of the
NPRM and do not use it in this final
rule.
’’Audit’’
We received a suggested amendment
of the first sentence in our definition of
‘‘audit’’ that would replace ‘‘planned
arrangements’’ and ‘‘arrangements’’ with
‘‘TSMS.’’ One commenter suggested
deleting the phrase ‘‘observing persons
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40013
performing required tasks’’ in paragraph
(1)(iii) of the proposed definition of
‘‘audit,’’ because there is no definition
for ‘‘required task.’’
The Coast Guard partially agrees with
the first comment. Not all towing
vessels will operate in accordance with
a TSMS. Under § 138.225, some vessels
may meet TSMS requirements by
complying with ISM Code requirements
of 33 CFR part 96 or some other SMS
that the Coast Guard has accepted and
deemed to meet subchapter M TSMS
requirements. Rather than adopting the
suggested edit, we deleted ‘‘planned
arrangements’’ in favor of
‘‘requirements’’ and have made clear
what requirements we intend to be
covered by our § 136.110 definition of
‘‘audit’’ by specifying ‘‘TSMS or other
applicable SMS planned arrangements.’’
In response to the ‘‘required task’’
comment, the Coast Guard has edited
the definition of ‘‘audit’’ in § 136.110 by
replacing the term ‘‘required tasks’’ with
‘‘specific tasks within their assigned
duties,’’ in paragraph (1)(iii) and
‘‘specific tasks’’ with ‘‘their assigned
duties’’ in paragraph (1)(ii). We used the
term ‘‘duties’’ which is used in
§ 138.220(b)(2) to describe training for
operational duties and duties associated
with the execution of the TSMS.
’’Authorized Classification Society’’
We received a comment from a
classification society requesting that the
Coast Guard delegate the inspection of
towing vessels to authorized
classification societies. In response, as
we discuss in more detail in our TPO
preamble section (IV.I), we have
amended § 139.110 to clarify the
distinction between audits and surveys.
For the purpose of audits, a recognized
classification society meets the
requirements of a TPO and may work as
a third-party auditor. For the purpose of
surveys, an authorized classification
society meets the requirements of a TPO
and may work as a third-party surveyor.
Further, we have amended § 144.140 to
include certain authorized classification
societies as being qualified to conduct a
verification of compliance with design
standards. Therefore, we have
incorporated the part 8 definition of
‘‘authorized classification society’’ into
this final rule.
‘‘Buoyant Apparatus’’ or ‘‘Inflatable
Buoyant Apparatus’’
We received five comments, primarily
from maritime companies and
professional associations, suggesting the
addition of a definition for the terms
‘‘buoyant apparatus’’ and ‘‘inflatable
buoyant apparatus’’ because the terms
are not defined in the proposed part
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40014
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
141. One maritime company suggested
the following text for the definition of
‘‘buoyant apparatus’’: ‘‘Buoyant
apparatus is flotation equipment (other
than lifeboats, life rafts, and personal
flotation devices) designed to support a
specified number of persons in the
water, and of such construction that it
retains its shape and properties and
requires no adjustment or preparation
for use.’’ The same commenter offered
the following text for the definition of
‘‘inflatable buoyant apparatus’’:
‘‘Inflatable buoyant apparatus is
flotation equipment that depends on
inflated compartments for buoyancy and
is designed to support a specified
number of persons completely out of the
water.’’
The Coast Guard does not agree that
it is necessary to include definitions for
commonly understood lifesaving
apparatus in subchapter M. These terms
are already defined in 46 CFR, part
160—Lifesaving Equipment, in
§ 160.010–2. We did not make any
changes from the proposed rule based
on these comments.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
‘‘Class II Piping Systems’’
We deleted this definition as this term
is no longer used within this
subchapter.
‘‘Cold Water’’
A maritime trade association had no
objection to the proposed definition of
‘‘cold water,’’ and understood its
application in Table 141.305 regarding
survival craft; however, the commenter
was unaware of any deficiency in the
survival craft currently in use and
requested that only a single standard
apply to the Great Lakes.
The Coast Guard notes that the
definition of cold water is consistent
with other regulations and existing
Coast Guard policy (NVIC 7–91) lists the
areas designated as cold water. While
the Great Lakes are generally considered
cold water, several lakes are not
designated as cold water during certain
months of the year. The Coast Guard
believes that specifying all of the Great
Lakes as all cold water, year round,
would impose an unnecessary burden
on those towing vessels which operate
seasonally when certain lakes are not
designated as cold water. However, this
does not prevent a vessel owner or
managing operator from voluntarily
carrying the equipment required on cold
water at all times.
‘‘Consideration’’
We deleted this term as the proposed
definition was identical to 46 U.S.C.
2101 and the term was only used once
in that context, so instead we added a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
reference to 46 U.S.C. 2101 directly to
our definition of ‘‘assistance towing’’ in
§ 136.110.
‘‘Crewmember’’
Two commenters felt that the term
‘‘crewmember’’ should be defined as an
individual who is listed on Form CG
735(T): Master’s Report of Seamen
Shipped or Discharged, so as to avoid
any misunderstanding related to
vendors who are onboard for
maintenance or repair.
The Coast Guard has revised the
definition in § 136.110 to match an
existing definition of ‘‘crewmember’’ in
46 CFR 16.105, paragraph (2)(iv) of
which would exclude vendors who are
onboard to conduct maintenance or
repair work. Also, please note that the
COI will list crewmembers required to
be onboard and persons in addition to
the crew that may be carried onboard
the vessel.
‘‘Disabled Vessel’’
One commenter noted that some dead
ships can range up to 900 feet in length
and suggested that we clarify our
definition of ‘‘disabled vessel’’ and set
some limit on a dead ship’s size for
purposes of assistance towing. We note
that a dead ship is a ship without the
benefit of mechanical or sail propulsion.
The commenter’s concern appears based
on § 136.105 excluding vessels used for
assistance towing from subchapter M
applicability. We defined ‘‘assistance
towing’’ to mean ‘‘towing a disabled
vessel for consideration.’’
The Coast Guard disagrees about the
need to amend our proposed definition
of ‘‘disabled vessel.’’ We note that a
dead ship would fit our definition if the
vessel regularly operated under its own
power but was temporarily disabled.
The Coast Guard does not see a need to
include a specific length criterion for
dead ships in its definition of ‘‘disabled
vessel’’ because not all assistance
towing vessels are the same length or
horsepower and the local COTP would
assess the size and number of towing
vessels needed to assist a dead ship.
‘‘Downstreaming’’
A maritime company suggested we
insert ‘‘attempting to land’’ in place of
‘‘landing’’ in our proposed definition of
‘‘downstreaming.’’ The Coast Guard
acknowledges that downstreaming
includes unsuccessful as well as
successful attempts to align with a barge
or other object, but has replaced the
word ‘‘landing’’ with the words ‘‘in
order to approach and land squarely on’’
instead of the commenter’s suggested
words. Also, we amended the definition
by replacing the limited reference to the
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
‘‘end of the barge’’ with ‘‘a fleet, a dock,
or another tow.’’ Finally, we inserted
the words ‘‘with the current’’ to describe
downstreaming and to reflect the nature
of our concern in § 140.610(e) where we
require all exterior openings at the main
deck level to be closed when a towing
vessel is downstreaming.
’’Engine Room’’
In reviewing the definition of ‘‘engine
room’’ in the NPRM, the Coast Guard
decided the word ‘‘area’’ was too broad;
accordingly, we have replaced ‘‘area’’
with ‘‘space,’’ which is commonly used
and understood in the maritime
industry to refer to a specific room (also
see the definition for ‘‘Accommodation
space’’ in § 136.110).
‘‘Element’’
After reviewing this definition, which
as proposed, only applied to safety
management systems, we decided to
delete it as the term ‘‘element’’ is also
used within the subchapter with regard
to surveys and audits. Additionally,
whenever the term is used, its meaning
is clear.
‘‘Essential System’’
A company requested that we replace
references to ‘‘vessel’’ with ‘‘towing
vessel’’ in our definition of ‘‘essential
system.’’ Another commenter noted that
the definition of ‘‘essential systems’’ is
similar to the term ‘‘critical systems’’ in
the ISM code, suggesting that the terms
be aligned or at least cross-referenced
for clarification. An association whose
members trade on all five of the Great
Lakes noted that the definition of
‘‘essential system’’ is very broad and
needs to be scaled back to systems that
are truly essential so as to help ensure
consistent application, and that as
written, it is difficult to identify a
shipboard system other than galley
equipment that is not essential.
Regarding the first comment, the
Coast Guard disagrees with the
suggestion because this entire
subchapter pertains to towing vessels,
and we believe references to ‘‘vessel’’ in
our definition of ‘‘essential system’’
clearly refer to towing vessel. We agree
it is important to distinguish ‘‘vessel’’
from ‘‘towing vessel’’ in the few
contexts in subchapter M where it is
necessary, but we do not view our
definition of ‘‘essential system’’ as one
of them. We made no change from the
proposed rule based on this first
comment. In response to the second
comment, to better align our definition
with critical systems in ISM code, we
added language to include critical
systems identified in a part 96compliant SMS. As for scaling back
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
systems included, the Coast Guard
disagrees. We believe that the definition
of ‘‘essential system’’ accurately covers
those systems that are required in
subchapter M to ensure a vessel’s
survivability, maintain safe operation,
control the vessel, or ensure safety of
onboard personnel.
‘‘Excepted Vessel’’
Many commenters, including an
association and various towing
companies, supported the concept of
‘‘excepted vessel,’’ under which towing
vessels operating solely in fleeting and
harbor services would not be required to
meet certain equipment requirements in
part 143. Several of the commenters
suggested that the definition of
‘‘excepted vessel’’ should be clarified or
expanded to specify activities such as
moving vessels on and off drydocks or
to and from cleaning docks. Also,
commenters stated the definitions
should encompass the full range of
activities commonly performed by
towing vessels in limited geographic
areas or harbor assist service and that
failure to do so will potentially
endanger the economic viability of
small to medium size harbor/fleeting
companies and consequently, the small
to medium size ports and industries
they service. One towing company
requested clarification of the meaning of
‘‘solely,’’ because towing vessels often
engage in different types of towing
operations throughout their life-spans.
An individual recommended that the
term ‘‘harbor assist’’ in the definition of
‘‘excepted vessel’’ should be replaced by
‘‘assistance towing’’ to be consistent
with the applicability exclusion
paragraph in § 136.105(a)(2)(i) or with
‘‘recreational assist.’’ Also a company
pointed to the need to improve our
definition of ‘‘excepted vessel’’ in
§ 136.110 specifically as it applies to
harbor assist vessels, a common term
that it noted was used for vessels that
conduct ship assist activities helping
larger vessels in and out of port. One
towing company opposed the concept of
excepted vessels and expressed the view
that all towing vessels should meet the
same requirements. Another company
also opposed exempting fleeting or
limited route vessels from the proposed
provisions, because such vessels may
operate in close proximity to chemical
plants and barge fleets. The commenter
warned that such vessels may have
minimal safety standards and operators
may modify their vessels to benefit from
the proposed provisions. An individual
provided examples of vessels that work
in fleeting areas but also travel many
miles away from their base of operations
without proper equipment. One
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
commenter pointed out that the
example of a limited geographic area (‘‘a
fleeting area for barges or a commercial
facility’’) in the definition of ‘‘excepted
vessel’’ conflicts with the proposed
definition of ‘‘limited geographic area.’’
The Coast Guard views the excepted
vessel category as a valuable tool to
more precisely tailor regulations. We
have amended the definition of
‘‘excepted vessel’’ by removing the
examples of limited geographic area
activities. The term ‘‘limited geographic
area’’ is defined in § 136.110 and allows
local COTP discretion to determine
limited geographic areas for her or his
zone. Further, we note that, in addition
to certain system and equipment
requirements in part 143, excepted
vessels are also not subject to fire
protection requirements in §§ 142.315
through 142.330. In terms of clarifying
the definition, we did change it to make
it clear that excepted vessels are subject
to subchapter M, but not to certain
requirements in the subchapter.
Accordingly, we changed ‘‘exempted’’
to ‘‘excepted’’ when describing action
by the OCMI that would make a towing
vessel excepted.
As for the recommendation that we
clarify or expand on the list of specific
activities within limited geographic area
and harbor assist service, the Coast
Guard disagrees. Instead, we have
removed the examples of activities
within a limited geographic area in
favor of leaving the discretion with the
local COTP, as stated in the definition
of limited geographic area, and not have
what some may read as an exclusive list
of examples in our definition of
‘‘excepted vessel’’ that references
limited geographic area. However,
additional guidance beyond this rule
may be developed to help the industry
and public understand how operating in
a limited geographic area may impact
the equipment requirements if they are
an ‘‘excepted vessel’’. The definition of
‘‘harbor-assist’’ remains identical to the
existing definition in 46 CFR 10.107.
Further, the definition of ‘‘excepted
vessel’’ also contains the provision for
the cognizant OCMI to except vessels
based on reasons submitted by the
vessel owner or managing operator as to
why the vessel does not need to meet
certain system and equipment
requirements in parts 142 and 143 for
the safe operation of the vessel. We
believe that the ability to except certain
vessels from specific equipment carriage
requirements provides relief from the
potential economic burden on these
vessel owners.
As for clarifying the meaning of
‘‘solely’’ in our definition of ‘‘excepted
vessel,’’ in § 136.110, the Coast Guard
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40015
sees no need to do so. The definition
says ‘‘[u]sed solely,’’ for any one or a
combination of the services listed.
Therefore, subchapter M provisions not
required of excepted vessels would be
required of a towing vessel subject to
subchapter M whenever it is conducting
towing operations not listed in the
definition of ‘‘excepted vessels,’’ unless
it has been excepted by the cognizant
OCMI. When a vessel is exclusively
used in one or more of the excepted
activities it is not subject to certain
provisions of Subchapter M. However, if
the vessel engages in activities that are
not excepted, then it may be subject to
those provisions even if this activity
only occurs intermittently.
In the NPRM, we proposed a
definition for harbor-assist that is
identical to the existing definition in 46
CFR 10.107. To be excepted, a vessel
would need to be subject to subchapter
M, and in the applicability section,
§ 136.105, we state that subchapter M is
not applicable to towing vessels ‘‘used
for assistance towing,’’ so we would not
include ‘‘assistance towing’’ in activities
for excepted vessels. We also exclude
towing vessels engaged in towing
recreational vessels for salvage, or
transporting or assisting the navigation
of recreational vessels within and
between marinas and marina facilities,
within a limited geographic area. Harbor
assist and assistance towing are two
separate and distinct operations, both of
which we have defined in § 136.110. We
have made no changes from the
proposed rule based on these comments.
We have amended the definition of
‘‘excepted vessel’’ to remove the
reference to ‘‘restricted service’’ and, as
noted above, to remove examples from
the limited geographic area sentence
that may have been too narrowly
focused and conflicting with the
definition of limited geographic area.
‘‘Excursion Party’’
One commenter suggested that the
term ‘‘excursion party’’ be defined as ‘‘a
group visiting the vessel for no specific
business purpose.’’
The Coast Guard added a definition
for ‘‘excursion party’’ in this final rule;
however we do not agree with the
commenter’s proposed definition. As
addressed in § 136.245, any personnel
(business, personal, etc.) not authorized
to be carried by the COI would be
considered by the OCMI when issuing
an excursion permit.
‘‘Flammable Liquid’’
One commenter suggested that we
define ‘‘flammable liquid’’ and
‘‘combustible liquid’’ as they are
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40016
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
defined in 46 CFR 30.10–15 and 30.10–
22.
The Coast Guard partially agrees. The
definitions in 46 CFR part 30 apply
specifically to equipment required on
tankers. The Coast Guard believes that
adding these definitions would not
provide any additional clarification for
these rather common terms used in our
fire protection and machinery and
electrical systems and equipment
regulations in 46 CFR parts 142 and 143.
However, we did modify part 143 to
reference part 30.
‘‘Fleeting Area’’
We received comments from two
maritime companies regarding our
proposed definition of ‘‘fleeting area’’ in
§ 136.110. One commenter suggested
inserting the words ‘‘or wait to load or
unload cargo’’ after ‘‘where individual
barges are moored or assembled to make
a tow,’’ and to insert ‘‘towing’’ before
‘‘vessel’’ when referencing another
vessel that will transport the barges in
the tow to various destinations.
The Coast Guard agrees with the
second recommendation, but not the
first. The inclusion of the term ‘‘towing’’
to the description of ‘‘vessels’’ makes
the definition clearer. We disagree with
the first recommendation to insert the
words ‘‘or wait to load or unload cargo’’
because here we are defining ‘‘fleeting
area’’ which is focused on making a tow,
as opposed to ‘‘limited geographic area’’
which may cover more activities.
Reflecting the definition of ‘‘limited
geographic area,’’ we also inserted, ‘‘as
determined by the local Captain of the
Port (COTP),’’ after a reference to a
limited geographic area in our ‘‘fleeting
area’’ definition.
definition should include inland harbor
and fleet vessels.
The Coast Guard disagrees. Regarding
the recommendation to delete ‘‘or’’ and
restrict both ‘‘dock, undock, moor, shift,
or unmoor,’’ and ‘‘escorting’’ to towing
vessel actions involving a vessel with
limited maneuverability, we do not see
a need for this change to this definition,
which we adopted word-for-word from
46 CFR 10.107. For a vessel to be
escorted, the vessel needs some
independent maneuvering capability,
which is not be true of all vessels a
towing vessel may dock, undock, moor,
or unmoor. We do not need to add
‘‘shift’’ to the definition because we
believe any shifting is already captured
by the words ‘‘maneuvers to dock,
undock, moor, or unmoor a vessel.’’
Also, there is no need to add shifting
barges in a limited geographic area nor
do we wish to add towing barges in a
limited geographic area to this
definition. While not self-propelled, a
barge would be included in the
definition’s reference of a vessel, and we
do not view harbor-assist as
encompassing the full range of activities
covered by ‘‘towing.’’ Finally, we do not
see a need to add responding to an
emergency situation or pollution event
involving towing vessels, vessels with
limited maneuverability, or barges to
our definition of ‘‘harbor-assist.’’ Both of
these activities are already included
within our ‘‘excepted vessel’’ definition.
We have made no changes from the
proposed rule based on these comments;
our subchapter M ‘‘harbor-assist’’
definition remains consistent with the
46 CFR 10.107 definition.
‘‘Harbor-Assist’’
‘‘Horsepower’’
A professional association and private
citizen expressed support for our
proposed definition of ‘‘horsepower’’
which is that stated on the COI which
reflects ‘‘the sum of the manufacturer’s
listed brake horsepower for all installed
propulsion engines.’’ We made no
changes from the proposed rule based
on these comments.
A maritime company suggested that
for our definition of ‘‘harbor-assist,’’ we
add ‘‘shift’’ to ‘‘dock, undock, moor, or
unmoor,’’ and tie the escort of a vessel
with limited maneuverability to these
actions by removing the disjunctive
‘‘or’’ we have placed between those
activities, and to add two more activities
at the end of the definition ‘‘to shift or
tow barges within a limited geographic
area; or to respond to an emergency
situation or pollution event involving
towing vessels, vessels with limited
maneuverability, or barges.’’ Another
commenter agreed and also felt that the
‘‘Independent’’
One commenter suggested revising or
deleting the definition of ‘‘independent’’
because it appears only in §§ 143.300
and 143.435.
Our proposed definition of
‘‘independent’’ in § 136.110 is and was
intended to be focused on equipment.
We agree that it is not the appropriate
definition for the use of ‘‘independent’’
outside of part 143, Machinery and
Electrical Systems and Equipment. In
response to this comment, we have
removed the definition from § 136.110
where it would have been applicable to
‘‘Fully Attended’’
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
We deleted the definition of ‘‘fully
attended’’ because we did not use the
term in this final rule, nor did we use
the term within the regulatory text of
the NPRM.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
all of subchapter M and have placed it
in part 143’s definition section,
§ 143.115, where it is only applicable to
that part. We believe the definition is
useful as limited to that part and
therefore, we have only restricted, and
not deleted, the definition.
We use the word ‘‘independent’’ in a
different context when we describe
TSMSs and TPOs, as in our definition
of ‘‘audit’’ and ‘‘TPO’’ in § 136.110, and
§§ 138.205(b)(4), 138.310(d)(4),
139.115(b)(1) and 139.120(p). In that
context we will use the common
definition of the term—to be free from
the influence, control, or determination
of another or others.
’’Inland Waters’’
One commenter suggested deleting
the proposed definition for ‘‘inland
waters’’ because it is not defined in
other 46 CFR and would be confusing
when considering classes of vessels. The
commenter felt that the terms ‘‘Inland
waters, excluding Western Rivers’’ can
be used instead.
The Coast Guard disagrees. ‘‘Inland
waters’’ is defined in 46 CFR 10.107 and
our subchapter M proposed definition
aligns with that existing definition. To
address the reach of this and other
§ 136.110 definitions, we have inserted
the introductory text of ‘‘As used in this
subchapter’’ in § 136.110, which reflects
our initial intent that definitions in that
section have limited applicability. Also,
in subchapter M we only use the term
‘‘inland waters’’ once, in the definition
of ‘‘Western Rivers,’’ and do not view it
as generating confusion regarding
classes of vessels. We have made no
changes from our proposed definition of
‘‘inland waters’’ based on this comment.
‘‘International Voyage’’
We received comments from two
commenters requesting that the
proposed definition of ‘‘international
voyage’’ not include Canadian waters
that are transit waters between Alaska
and other States. The commenters noted
that towing vessels do not always make
port calls in Canada during passage and
are not considered international voyages
and subject to SOLAS.
The Coast Guard does not see a need
to amend our definition of
‘‘international voyage.’’ Under our
definition, towing vessels transiting
directly from a U.S. port in the
contiguous 48 states to the state of
Alaska or the state of Hawaii would not
be considered on an international
voyage for purposes of subchapter M
because they would not be going to a
port outside the United States.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
’’Lakes, Bays, and Sounds’’
We received two comments
suggesting the proposed definition of
the term ‘‘lakes, bays, and sounds’’ be
clarified to state that the operations on
Kentucky Lake are not to be included in
the current definition of ‘‘lakes, bays,
and sounds.’’ Another commenter
suggested that the definition is too
broad to include lakes, bays, and sounds
in inland river systems, and should be
revised to exempt lakes, bays, and
sounds that are part of the inland or
Western River systems.
The Coast Guard uses the term ‘‘lakes,
bays, and sounds’’ in § 136.230 as one
of a number of major headings under
which each area of operation—referred
to as a route—is described on a towing
vessel’s COI. With the exception of
‘‘rivers,’’ ‘‘Lakes, bays, and sounds,’’ is
the least severe of the routes. Our
definition matches that used for small
passenger vessels in subchapter K (46
CFR 114.400) and small passenger
vessels in subchapter T (46 CFR
175.400). The Coast Guard does not
intend to create exemptions for all types
of inland towing operations, or to
provide exemptions for particular areas
without cause. We note, however, that
under § 136.230 the OCMI may consider
route-specific requirements of
subchapter M when designating a
permitted route. We have not made a
change from the proposed rule based on
these comments.
‘‘Limited Geographic Area’’
One commenter asked for further
definition of the term ‘‘limited
geographic area.’’
Our definition of ‘‘limited geographic
area’’—‘‘a local area of operation,
usually within a single harbor or
port’’—is intended to be flexible enough
to reflect the wide range of local
operations. The local COTP has the
discretion to determine limited
geographic areas for his or her COTP
zone. We do use the term ‘‘limited
geographic area’’ as a factor in our
definition of ‘‘excepted vessel,’’ but we
believe it is appropriate to not impose
certain requirements, such as for
additional fire-extinguishing equipment,
on vessels we identify as excepted
vessels, or impose less rigid lifesaving
equipment requirements on vessels that
operate in a limited geographic area. We
assess excepted vessels and certain
vessels operating in a limited
geographic area as presenting a reduced
risk with respect to certain subchapter
M requirements.
‘‘Major Conversion’’
One commenter requested that we
change our definition of ‘‘major
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
conversion.’’ First, the commenter
would establish a threshold up front
that all the factors discussed must
meet—that changes result in
‘‘essentially a new towing vessel’’—
while also leaving that same standard in
the last (‘‘otherwise’’) factor. Second,
the commenter would move our
reference to a determination by the
Coast Guard to the end of the definition.
And third, the commenter would limit
the ‘‘substantially prolonging the life of
the towing vessel’’ factor by expressly
excluding ‘‘the replacement of
propulsion engines’’ from that factor.
The Coast Guard agrees with the
recommendation that we move our
reference to a determination to the end
of our definition of ‘‘major conversion.’’
This change makes our definition more
consistent with the statutory definition
in 46 U.S.C. 2101 (14a) and our existing
46 CFR 28.50 definition in subchapter C
for uninspected vessels. We also
clarified that reference from vaguely
stating ‘‘as determined by the Coast
Guard’’ to ‘‘as determined by the
Commandant.’’ This change better
aligns the definition with the phrasing
used in existing text.
We received comments from
professional associations, maritime
companies, and other companies who
expressed concern over the phrase
‘‘substantially prolongs the life of the
vessel’’ in the proposed definition of
major conversion. Commenters felt that
the definition should be clarified to
explain that routine activities like
maintenance or part replacement are not
considered major conversions, but only
those activities that would result in the
converted vessel becoming a new vessel.
Two commenters, a private citizen and
maritime company, requested examples
of what is considered a major
conversion. Another maritime company
suggested that the term, as it is currently
proposed, would apply ‘‘new vessel’’
requirements to existing vessels, and
discourages the maintenance of or
investment in existing towing vessels.
We see no reason to adopt the
commenter’s two other suggested
changes that deviate from the statutory
definition. The first change would
introduce an unexplained redundancy
and the second would expressly exclude
the replacement of propulsion engines
from consideration of actions that
substantially prolongs the life of the
vessel. As reflected above, based on
these comments, we have revised our
definition to make it consistent with
existing definitions in 46 U.S.C.
2101(14a) and 46 CFR 28.50 of
subchapter C, and we did not adopt the
commenters’ two other suggested
changes. The Coast Guard believes a
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40017
replacement of propulsion engines is
normally undertaken to prolong the
service life of a vessel, and therefore fits
the definition of ‘‘major conversion.’’ To
match the wording in 46 CFR 28.50, we
changed ‘‘Coast Guard’’ to
‘‘Commandant’’ and added part 28’s
definition of ‘‘Commandant’’ to
§ 136.110. Major Conversion
determinations are made by the Coast
Guard Marine Safety Center on a caseby-case basis.
‘‘Major Non-Conformity’’
One commenter suggested the
following text for the definition of
‘‘major non-conformity’’ which
specifically identifies deviations as
being from the safety management
system and replaces our reference to the
lack of effective and systematic
implementation of the TSMS as being
included as a major non-conformity, to
references to items that would be
considered a more significant
breakdown or failure of the SMS:
‘‘Major Non-Conformity means an
identifiable deviation to the safety
management system which poses a
serious threat to personnel, vessel
safety, or a serious risk to the
environment; where a large number of
non-conformities exist in an area or
where similar non-conformities exist
throughout the company or vessel then
this demonstrates a more significant
breakdown or failure of the safety
management system.’’
The Coast Guard has simplified its
definition of ‘‘major non-conformity’’ to
include the term ‘‘non-conformity’’; by
referring to ‘‘non-conformity’’, we are
including a failure to conform to the
SMS. Even though the definition in 33
CFR part 96, our regulations
implementing SOLAS and ISM Code
provisions for safety management
systems, includes an example of a lack
of effective and systematic
implementation, we have deleted that
language from the definition in
§ 136.110. We did not agree with the
suggested definition, which could be
read as creating an additional standard
for a ‘‘more significant breakdown.’’
‘‘New Towing Vessel’’
One commenter suggested that we
remove the following factor in our
proposed definition of ‘‘new towing
vessel’’: Towing vessels that underwent
a major conversion initiated on or after
the effective date of our final rule.
The Coast Guard disagrees with this
recommended change to our definition
of ‘‘new towing vessel.’’ Standards for
new vessels are sometimes set higher
than for existing vessels as a means of
ensuring improved safety standards over
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40018
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
time without imposing undue costs on
existing vessels. If we left major
conversions out of the definition of new
vessels, then we would provide
incentive for existing vessels to undergo
major conversions to avoid having to
meet new vessel standards. Granting
existing vessels the status of being
‘‘grandfathered’’ is a valuable regulatory
approach, but factoring major
conversions into our definition of ‘‘new
vessels’’ provides a means of controlling
a potential abuse of ‘‘grandfathered’’
status and is consistent with other 46
CFR subchapters. We have not made
any changes from the proposed rule
based on this comment.
However, upon further review of the
definition, we determined that it should
be amended for other reasons. As
proposed, the definition was based on
the date the vessel was contracted for or
the date the keel was laid. More often
than not, these will be two separate
dates which could lead to confusion as
to whether or not a vessel is a ‘‘new
towing vessel.’’ We amended the
definition to base the determination on
the date the keel was laid or the vessel
is at a similar stage of construction in
order to account for those instances
where a vessel might be built in a
modular mode of construction. We also
removed paragraph (3) of the definition
regarding vessels built without a
contract because we viewed it as
unnecessary given our removal of a
reference to a contract in paragraph (a).
The second reason for amending the
definition is to ensure that owners,
designers, and builders have sufficient
time to adapt and incorporate the
requirements applicable to new vessels
into the design and construction of a
vessel. As proposed, the date for a new
vessel was 30 days after the regulation
publication date. In reviewing a
commenter’s request for more time to
comply with the final rule, we
concluded that 30 days is too short a
time period. It would be very difficult
and costly to make changes in line with
the ‘‘new vessel’’ requirements in those
instances where the design of a vessel
is almost complete. We have determined
that for smooth transition and
implementation, an additional year is
needed, and we amended the definition
accordingly.
‘‘Objective Evidence’’
One commenter recommended we
add records of an approved third-party
organization as another example in our
definition of ‘‘objective evidence’’ in
§ 136.110.
The Coast Guard agrees with this
suggested change and has amended the
definition accordingly. We already list
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
classification society reports as an
example, and would consider reports or
records from a TPO as a similarly
appropriate example reflecting an
independent assessment.
‘‘Pressure Vessel’’
One commenter suggested we amend
our definition of ‘‘pressure vessel’’ to
simply refer to closed containers
designed to hold gases, liquids or a
combination at a pressure substantially
different from ambient pressure—
instead of just ‘‘under pressure.’’
Another commenter suggested adding
the following text as a definition for
‘‘heating boiler’’: ‘‘An enclosed steel or
cast iron container that uses an energy
source to heat water (or make steam)
that is sent through heat radiating
devices in the machinery space to heat
a towing vessel.’’
The Coast Guard agrees with the
comment regarding pressure being
substantially different from ambient
pressure and in response inserted the
words ‘‘greater than atmospheric
pressure’’ at the end of the definition.
We also agreed with the need to
incorporate language to include boilers
so we broadened the definition of
‘‘pressure vessel’’ to include ‘‘unfired’’
and ‘‘fired’’ pressure vessels which
incorporate boilers.
‘‘Random Selection of a Representative
Sampling’’
One commenter suggested the need
for defining ‘‘random selection of a
representative sampling’’ for better
consistency in the auditing process.
We do not agree that a specific
definition is needed for ‘‘random
selection of a representative sampling.’’
We feel that ‘‘random selection of a
representative sampling’’ is a common
safety management system and auditing
term that should be recognized and
understood by any ISO–9001-trained
internal or external auditor. In a related
external audit provision in § 138.410(f),
we removed a vague reference to
samples having to be statistically valid.
‘‘Recognized Classification Society’’
We shortened the definition of
‘‘recognized classification society’’ by
focusing on the core of the definition: A
classification society recognized by the
Coast Guard in accordance with 46 CFR
part 8.
‘‘Recognized Hazardous Conditions’’
We deleted the definition of
‘‘recognized hazardous conditions’’
because we do not use the term in this
final rule, nor did we propose to use it
in the regulatory text of the NPRM.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
‘‘Rescue Boat’’
One commenter noted that ‘‘skiff’’ is
referenced in § 140.420(d)(4), which
contains a training requirement if the
skiff is ‘‘listed as an item of emergency
equipment to abandon ship or man
overboard recovery’’ and that ‘‘rescue
boat’’ also appears in § 140.420. The
commenter recommends that if a rescue
boat is a separate craft from a skiff, as
our use of the two terms in § 140.420
suggests, then we should define ‘‘rescue
boat’’ in § 136.110 in addition to having
defined ‘‘skiff’’ there.
The Coast Guard agrees with the
recommendation that we add a
definition of ‘‘rescue boat’’ to § 136.110.
We do consider a rescue boat as a
separate craft from a skiff. We have
added the same definition of ‘‘rescue
boat’’ in § 136.110 that appears in three
existing Coast Guard regulations. This
definition distinguishes the dedicated
purpose of a rescue boat—to rescue
persons in distress and to marshal
survival craft—from the general nature
of a skiff, a small auxiliary boat carried
onboard a towing vessel that might be
used in emergency situations.
‘‘Replacement in Kind’’
We have added a new definition to
§ 136.110 for the term ‘‘Replacement in
kind’’ which was undefined in the
NPRM but appeared several times in
part 143. ‘‘Replacement in kind’’
generally means replacing a failed
component with the same component,
or a part with the same technical
specifications as the original design.
Replacements in kind may normally be
accomplished by the crew, or a
shipyard, as part of routine maintenance
or repairs, and may not require
notification to the OCMI.
‘‘Safety Management System’’
Two commenters recommended
inserting the following 11 italicized
words in our proposed definition of
‘‘Safety Management System’’:
Safety Management System means a
systematically structured and documented
system enabling the owner or managing
operator and towing vessel personnel to
identify and manage interrelated process and
effectively implement the owner or managing
operator’s safety and environmental
protection policies and that is routinely
exercised and audited in a way that ensures
the policies and procedures are incorporated
into the daily operation of the vessel and
company.
In addition, one commenter
recommended replacing the word
‘‘audited’’ with ‘‘evaluated’’ in the
above definition.
The Coast Guard partially agrees with
the proposals to change this definition.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
We have amended the definition by
adopting a modified version of our 33
CFR part 96 definition that identifies
those enabled by the SMS and the
purpose of the SMS with respect to
subchapter M. We disagree with
changing the term from ‘‘audited’’ to
‘‘evaluated’’ as an audit is a clearly
defined and recognized activity with
respect to safety management systems.
‘‘Survey’’
One commenter suggested that the
difference between ‘‘audit’’ and
‘‘survey’’ needs to be clarified in
§ 136.110, as well as with respect to the
Coast Guard option under proposed
§ 136.150 and the TSMS option under
proposed § 136.205. Another commenter
noted that these two terms, in addition
to ‘‘inspection’’ are used
interchangeably in the NPRM, as are the
words ‘‘auditor, inspector, and
surveyor.’’ There were also comments
about the need to clarify the frequency
of audits, inspections, and surveys, and
which ones may be conducted by third
parties.
The Coast Guard believes that our
definitions of these two terms are
clearly distinguishable. Our definition
of ‘‘survey’’ in § 136.110 focuses on
compliance with subchapter M and
other authorities—‘‘an examination of
the vessel, its systems and equipment to
verify compliance with applicable
regulations, statutes, conventions, and
treaties.’’ Our definition of ‘‘audit’’ in
§ 136.110 is more focused on systems
set up to ensure that compliance.
Neither proposed § 136.150, Annual and
periodic inspections, nor proposed
§ 136.205, which describes the COI,
refer to audits or surveys.
Regarding the word ‘‘inspection,’’ we
did not define that term which applies
to all vessels subject to subchapter M
because they are all ‘‘subject to
inspection’’ under 46 U.S.C. 3301. In
this rule, we primarily use the word
‘‘inspection’’ to distinguish a towing
vessel that has selected the option of an
annual inspection by the Coast Guard
instead of a TSMS option under which
surveys and audits are conducted. But
regardless of the option selected, under
proposed §§ 136.140 and 136.145 the
Coast Guard would conduct inspections
for certification on all vessels seeking to
obtain or renew a COI. An inspection is
similar to a survey in that both involve
an examination of a vessel to determine
whether it is in compliance with
applicable regulations or other legal
authorities. In reviewing proposed
§§ 136.140 and 136.145, however, we
reorganized these requirements and
moved then into subpart B, Certificate of
Inspection, as §§ 136.210 and 136.212.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
We believe this response should
clarify what we mean by the use of these
terms but knowing the frequency of
these activities may also help. Section
137.200 identifies the frequency of
inspections associated with the Coast
Guard inspection option. For vessels
under the TSMS option, external and
internal surveys and audits are required.
Sections 137.205 and 137.210,
respectively, identify the frequency of
surveys under the external and internal
survey programs. Finally, §§ 138.310
and 138.315, respectively, identify the
frequency of external and internal
audits.
‘‘Third-Party Organization’’
We received comments suggesting the
need to clarify or remove our proposed
definition of ‘‘third-party organization.’’
The commenter suggested that the term
is inconsistent with our repeated use of
the proposed term ‘‘approved thirdparty organization’’ in part 139 and
would be redundant if we adopted his
recommendation to amend our
proposed definition of ‘‘approved third
party’’ to make it clear it only refers to
TPOs. One commenter suggested
converting our proposed definition of
‘‘approved third party’’ in § 136.110 to
a definition of ‘‘approved third party
organization’’ and to add ‘‘organization’’
to the definition so the term ‘‘means a
third party organization approved by the
Coast Guard in accordance with part
139 of this subchapter.’’
The Coast Guard agrees that our
proposed definitions of the terms
‘‘approved third party’’ (ATP) and
‘‘third-party organization’’ (TPO) may
cause confusion, so we deleted the term
ATP and modified any references to
approved third-party surveyors or
auditors to make clear that such
surveyors or auditors would be from a
third-party organization or TPO. Also,
we deleted the word ‘‘approved’’ used
in front of TPO because by definition,
TPOs are approved. Our definition of
third-party organization in this final
rule makes it clear that the organization
is approved by the Coast Guard to
conduct independent verifications to
assess whether TSMSs or towing vessels
comply with applicable requirements
contained in this subchapter. Also, we
have amended § 139.115(b) to make that
approval process clearer and replaced a
reference to an organization having to
meet subchapter M requirements with
one to expressly include the standard of
meeting part 139 requirements for TPOs.
This comment also caused us to
notice that our TPO definition needs to
be amended to better reflect the work
being done by the TPO. We added the
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40019
words ‘‘assess whether’’ to the
definition of ‘‘TPO.’’
‘‘Tow’’
One company recommended that we
define ‘‘tow’’ as a vessel or vessels being
moved by a towing vessel in contrast to
our proposed definition that identifies
the towing vessel as being part of the
tow which would also include one or
more barges or a vessel not under its
own power.
The Coast Guard concurs with the
need to clarify that tow refers to what
the towing vessel is moving—be it
another vessel, barge, or some other
object. We have revised our definition to
read ‘‘Tow means the barge(s), vessel(s),
or object(s) being pulled, pushed or
hauled alongside a towing vessel.’’ This
is consistent with our use of the term as
a noun in our rule (e.g., in § 140.625,
‘‘the movement of a towing vessel and
its tow’’). Reflecting this definition, in
§ 140.805 we added ‘‘or objects’’ to
barges and vessels when describing
what may make up a tow.
’’Towing Safety Management System
(TSMS)’’
On reviewing the comments, the
Coast Guard decided to add a definition
of TSMS in § 136.110 rather than just
rely on the information contained in
part 138 on TSMS compliance.
’’Towing Safety Management System
(TSMS) Certificate’’
We received several comments
suggesting two separate definitions of
the TSMS certificates be added: One for
the owner or managing operator and one
for each of the towing vessels found to
be in compliance with the TSMS.
The Coast Guard has not defined
‘‘TSMS certificate’’ and does not agree
that two separate definitions should be
added or that a separate certificate for
the company and the towing vessel
needs to be issued. TSMS certificates
are issued to the owners or managing
operators and a list of vessels covered
by the TSMS must be maintained, as
described in § 138.305.
‘‘Travel Time’’
Four commenters, including maritime
companies and a professional
association, suggested deleting the
proposed term ‘‘travel time’’ because it
does not appear anywhere else in the
regulation. One commenter suggested
that the proposed term needs to be
amended to clarify the application to
daytime operators who commute back
and forth to work, not travel to a large
commercial tug/barge unit that operates
like a self-propelled vessel. Conversely,
other commenters suggested that the
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40020
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
definition should not include travel
back and forth. One company asserted
that if the travel time is not included,
crewmembers that do not live in close
proximity to work will use the majority
of their hours traveling.
The Coast Guard agrees that our
definition of ‘‘travel time’’ should be
deleted from the final rule because we
do not use that term in subchapter M.
’’Unsafe Condition’’
One commenter, citing § 137.325(d),
asked the Coast Guard to create a good
definition of an ‘‘unsafe condition’’ that
can be consistently applied by
companies, auditors, and surveyors, as
well as the Coast Guard.
The Coast Guard agrees with the
commenter’s request and has added a
definition of ‘‘unsafe condition’’ to
§ 136.110, which includes observation
of a major non-conformity on board a
vessel.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
‘‘Unsafe Practice’’
One commenter suggested that in the
definition of ‘‘unsafe practice’’ the list of
items that may be subject to significant
risk of harm be supplemented by adding
‘‘and the vessel’’ after ‘‘property.’’
The Coast Guard disagrees. A vessel
belongs to an organization or person
and, therefore, is included by the word
‘‘property.’’ We made no changes from
the proposed rule based on this
comment, but recognizing it can be bad
practice to do something even once, we
inserted reference to a single action, in
addition to a habitual or customary
action.
‘‘Western Rivers’’
We received several comments,
mostly from maritime companies,
regarding the proposed definition of
‘‘Western Rivers.’’ Several maritime
companies suggested that the definition
should be consistent with the one in 33
CFR 164.70, which is identical except
for it adds waters specified by 33 CFR
89.27 ‘‘and such other, similar waters as
are designated by the COTP.’’
Commenters also asked that waterways
mentioned in 33 CFR 89.27 be included.
It was suggested that the consistency in
definitions will help avoid new
regulations for those vessels operating
on the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. One
commenter noted that the proposed
definition of ‘‘Western Rivers’’ is
inconsistent with the definition in the
TSAC report and current regulations. A
trade association believed the change in
the definition for ‘‘Western Rivers’’
would increase the burden on mariners.
A maritime company noted that the
NPRM lacks a definition, or a route
description in § 136.230, that covers
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
vessels operating in the Inland areas of
the waterway system within the Sea
Buoy system, which includes the Gulf
Intracoastal Waterway. The commenter
suggested that Western Rivers be
defined to include those vessels
operating within the Sea Buoy system.
Based on these comments, the Coast
Guard has decided to adopt the existing
33 CFR 164.70 definition of ‘‘Western
Rivers’’ which applies to navigation
safety regulations for towing vessels.
This is similar to the definition TSAC
used in its September 7, 2006 report
(USCG–2006–24412–0004). Their
definition ended with ‘‘and waters
connecting or tributary thereto’’ instead
of referencing waters designated by the
COTP. Waters specified by 33 CFR 89.25
and 89.27, for inland navigation rule
purposes, include all of the connecting
and tributary waters specified in TSAC’s
definition, and our addition of the 33
CFR 89.27 reference includes the Gulf
Intracoastal Waterway in the definition.
Also, making our definition consistent
with the one in 33 CFR 164.70 allows
COTPs to designate similar waters.
Multiple factors in 33 CFR 62.27 are
considered in the positioning of safe
water marks, which are also called ‘‘sea
buoys.’’ These factors may cause them
to be placed seaward or shoreward of
demarcation lines. And, while each safe
water mark has a plotted position in the
Light List available via 33 CFR 72.05–
10, unlike demarcation lines in 46 CFR
part 7, there are no lines associated with
safe water marks. Therefore, we have
decided to use the term ‘‘navigational
demarcation lines’’ currently used in 33
CFR 164.70.
‘‘Workboat’’
One commenter suggested we amend
our definition of ‘‘workboat’’ to include
‘‘vessels undergoing cleaning or repair,’’
besides equipment, as things that the
workboat pushes, pulls, or hauls
alongside within a worksite.
The Coast Guard disagrees with the
proposed change. However, we have
amended the definition of ‘‘workboat’’
to remove the specific listing of things
being towed. We believe that the revised
definition of workboat and our
definition of worksite—which already
included a list of certain activities
which we amended to reflect the
movement of equipment but specifically
excluded the movement of barges
carrying oil or hazardous material—
provide sufficient flexibility to the
OCMI to cover operations not
specifically listed.
‘‘Worksite’’
One commenter suggested that we
amend the definition ‘‘worksite’’ so all
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
areas within which workboats are
operated over short distances for
dredging, construction, maintenance, or
repair work, including shipyards,
owner’s yards, and lay-down areas used
by marine construction projects, would
not require OCMI designation as
worksites. Other worksites may be
specified by the OCMI. Further, a
maritime company suggested adding the
terms ‘‘cleaning facilities, fleeting areas’’
to the definition of ‘‘worksite.’’
The Coast Guard disagrees with these
recommendations. We believe it is
appropriate for the cognizant OCMI to
designate worksites based on the factors
and activities listed and their possible
impacts on other waterway users.
Therefore, we have decided not to adopt
the expanded definitions being
suggested here. We have made no
changes from the proposed rule based
on these comments.
Options for Obtaining a Certificate of
Inspection
A commenter opposed the option of
obtaining certification by annual Coast
Guard inspections and recommended
deletions of provisions in proposed
§§ 136.130, 136.140, 136.145, 136.150,
136.165, and 136.170.
The Coast Guard recognizes that some
in the industry view the option for Coast
Guard traditional inspections as not
having a role in the future of the
regulation of towing vessels. We believe
that the development of and adherence
to a TSMS that is tailored to a
company’s unique operations and that
provides for an authoritative reference
for all members of the organization
improves safety for the company’s
vessels. As the TSAC Economic
Analysis Working Group Report (USCG–
2006–24412–0007) stated, the costs to a
small company to implement and
maintain an SMS may be more difficult
to absorb than it is for a large company.
These regulations do not preclude any
towing vessel company from adopting a
safety management system. However,
the structure of subchapter M provides
towing vessel companies with flexibility
in how to comply with this subchapter.
With respect to the various sections
mentioned by this commenter, we have
made changes in this final rule.
Proposed § 136.130 has been revised
and retitled to better depict the purpose
of the options it presents for
documenting compliance with the
requirements of this subchapter and to
specifically note that a Certificate of
Inspection is obtained following a Coast
Guard inspection. We have moved
proposed §§ 136.140 and 136.145 into
subpart B of part 136—Certificate of
Inspection—as amended § 136.210 and
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
new § 136.212. Also, we merged
proposed §§ 136.150 and 136.165 into a
new § 137.200 to delineate the processes
under the Coast Guard inspection
option from the TSMS option processes
in part 137. The proposed part 137 had
laid out the TSMS procedures but was
silent on the Coast Guard option.
Further, we redesignated and amended
proposed § 136.170 as new § 136.202.
A commenter requested an appeal
process to permit the immediate review
of an inspector’s determinations.
The Coast Guard notes that, as we
proposed, the appeals process is
described in § 136.180. Further, this
final rule contains amendments to 46
CFR part 1 that institutes a process for
appealing the decisions of TPOs acting
on behalf of the Coast Guard.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Requirements for Existing Vessels
During Delayed Implementation
In response to comments regarding
the cost of requirements in parts 140
through 144, and concern about being
able to meet those requirements soon
after the rule is make effective, we
delayed implementation of nearly all
requirements in parts 140 through 144
until July 20, 2018. We made the rule
effective July 20, 2016 so that the Coast
Guard can begin to apply other
subchapter M regulations to review
applications from those seeking to
become TPOs and to impose deadlines
for towing vessels to decide which
option to choose—TSMS or Coast Guard
annual inspections. We added § 136.172
to ensure that we do not leave a gap
after the rule becomes effective but
before most requirements in parts 140
through 144 are implemented.
Section 136.172 requires existing
towing vessels that will be subject to
subchapter M to remain subject to Coast
Guard regulations applicable to the
vessel on July 19, 2016 until the earlier
of two dates: July 20, 2018 or the date
the vessel obtains a COI.
Subpart B Certificate of Inspection
We received a comment on proposed
§ 136.200(d) urging that provisions from
Marine Safety Manual Volume II,
Section B, Chapter I, referencing 46
U.S.C. 3314 and completing a foreign
voyage, should be added to the rule.
As reflected in § 136.200(d), towing
vessels issued a COI under subchapter
M are fully afforded the foreign-voyagecompletion provisions of 46 U.S.C.
3314, Expiration of Certificate of
Inspection. We made no changes from
the proposed rule based on this
comment, but on reviewing § 136.200,
we decided to insert a reference to the
COI phase-in period in proposed
§ 136.170 (now § 136.202) in paragraph
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
(a). This insertion is intended to
incorporate the date by which the vessel
must obtain a COI and thereby limit the
statement that the vessel may not
operate without having a valid COI
onboard to the period after that date.
Based on this review, we deleted
proposed § 136.225, because it was
redundant with § 136.200(c).
A commenter observed that
companies choosing the Coast Guard
inspection option should not be given a
longer period of time to obtain a COI
than companies choosing the TSMS
option.
The Coast Guard agrees. We have
amended, redesignated, and retitled the
proposed § 136.170, Compliance for the
Coast Guard option, as § 136.202,
Certificate of Inspection phase-in
period. This section now specifies when
COIs are required for towing vessels
subject to subchapter M regardless of
the option selected. Also, we removed
§ 136.203 because it is no longer needed
given our amendment to what is now
§ 136.202.
We received several comments on the
phase-in process in proposed § 136.203,
Compliance for the TSMS option.
Several commenters suggested that the
requirements for a TSMS and inspection
requirement be phased in to allow for
the industry to understand the new
requirements and identify any specific
waivers that may be needed. One
commenter favored making sure there is
about the same amount of work to be
done in each of the 5 years that make
up an inspection cycle. Another
commenter recommended a provision to
extend the schedules in the event of a
shortage of approved auditors or
inspectors. A professional maritime
association suggested that a phase-in
approach will assist in the transition for
vessel operators and auditors and
reduce the strain on shipyards as they
manage extensive drydocking that will
occur while vessels await their
inspections.
The Coast Guard generally agrees with
these concerns. As discussed in
response to an earlier comment, the
Coast Guard has amended the
requirements in proposed § 136.170 to
set the same timetable for obtaining a
COI regardless of which option the
vessel owner or managing operator
selects, and we have removed § 136.203,
which had a separate timetable for those
selecting the TSMS option. The phased
approach in § 136.202 distributes the
work load over a 6-year period from the
effective date of this final rule. The
Coast Guard has crafted this rule to
phase in towing vessels over time for
numerous reasons including spreading
costs and workload over time. Section
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40021
136.202 provides a broad phase-in
period for companies that choose either
the Coast Guard or TSMS compliance
option. As we stated in the NPRM, it
will be up to six years before some
vessels subject to subchapter M will
need to obtain a COI. However, we do
not agree that we need to add a
provision to extend the schedules more
than we have done already in this final
rule. We believe that there will be
sufficient TPOs available within the
new prescribed timeframes to conduct
subchapter M audits and surveys.
Similarly, the Coast Guard is preparing
to have enough inspectors available to
meet the demand for Coast Guard
inspections within the new prescribed
time frames.
A maritime company offered a phasein timeline that depends on separate
certificates for a company and their
vessels. The commenter suggested that
within 2 years of the rule’s effective date
a third-party would conduct an external
management audit of a company and
issue a Towing Company Safety
Management System Certificate. Then
during the following year, a third party
would conduct external vessel audits of
25 percent of company’s fleet and issue
each vessel a Towing Vessel Safety
Management System Certificate. Similar
steps would be taken in subsequent
years until in the sixth year, when all
vessels would have to obtain COIs.
As we noted in response to another
comment, we disagree with the
suggestion that two certificates should
be issued instead of one TSMS
certificate. We therefore decline to
adopt a schedule based on the issuance
of separate certificates for a company
and the company’s vessels.
In a submission to the docket, the
National Transportation Safety Board
requested the prompt publication of the
final rule to avoid any further delay in
regulating the safety of this largely
unregulated sector of the commercial
maritime industry. The same
commenter felt that the proposed 6-year
implementation period should be
shortened.
We received a comment from a towing
company suggesting that a shorter
compliance period be applied to those
operators who have not previously
participated in the Uninspected Towing
Vessel Bridging Program. The same
commenter expressed the importance of
consistent application of the final rule
to all vessel operators. The commenter
explained that by allowing some
operators to bypass the requirements
market rates will be affected, which will
have a serious effect on small operators.
The Coast Guard concurs with the
desire to publish this rule promptly and,
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40022
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
in general, to apply it consistently to all
vessel operators subject to subchapter
M. We have explained why certain
requirements are only applicable to new
towing vessels and why excepted
vessels do not need to comply with
certain requirements. We disagree with
shortening the implementation period
across the board or, specifically, for
those companies that did not participate
in the Uninspected Towing Vessel
Bridging Program, because it was a
voluntary program. We believe our
implementation period is appropriate
for this rule, which establishes both a
safety management system option
involving TPOs and new requirements
for more than 5,000 towing vessels.
We received a few comments on
proposed § 136.205, which identifies
what the COI will describe. One
commenter noted that minimum
manning requirements in the COI, as
required under this provision, should be
allowed to be different for different
types of towing vessels. Another
commenter asked how ‘‘minimum
manning’’ is to be determined. Another
commenter requested allowing for
multiple minimum manning standards
depending on the route. A commenter
suggested that this rulemaking should
clarify the number of required
crewmembers and allow the towing
vessel to be operated by a single
crewmember in certain circumstances.
Existing laws and regulations specify
minimum levels of manning for towing
vessels. As stated in § 140.205, manning
regulations are contained in part 15 of
this chapter and vessels must be
manned in accordance with the case
specific requirements included in the
COI. As stated in 46 CFR 15.705, the
minimum safe manning levels specified
in a vessel’s COI take into consideration
routine maintenance requirements and
the ability of the crew to perform all
operational evolutions, including
emergencies, as well as those functions
which may be assigned to persons in
watches. The OCMI is empowered to
establish a level of manning for a vessel
above the minimum levels prescribed by
law and regulation, based on the
vessel’s nature of operations and other
parameters, including route.
One individual was unclear about
whether proposed § 136.140 applied to
those who have an approved TSMS, as
well as those who choose the Coast
Guard inspection option. One company
asked for clarification of the sequence of
events for COI issuance.
As noted above, our proposed
§ 136.140, Application for a Certificate
of Inspection (COI), is incorporated into
amended § 136.210 and applies to all
vessels subject to subchapter M.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
Regardless of the inspection option
chosen, the owner or managing operator
must submit an application for
inspection to the cognizant OCMI where
the inspection will take place. As
specified in § 136.130(d), the
application should indicate which
option the owner or managing operator
is selecting.
We amended § 136.210 to make it
clear how and when to apply for the
initial COI. In our proposed § 136.140,
we specified deadlines for renewing a
COI, but not those for obtaining the
initial COI. Our amended § 136.210
identifies the application and
scheduling deadlines for the initial COI
and reflects the same application and
scheduling lead times for renewing a
COI: Submit the application at least 30
days before the vessel will undergo the
initial inspection for certification, and
schedule an inspection for the initial
certification with the cognizant OCMI at
least 3 months before the vessel is to
undergo the inspection for certification.
Amended § 136.212 sets forth the
process of receiving a Coast Guard
inspection at least once every 5 years
and for receiving a new COI after being
inspected by the Coast Guard.
We received one comment
recommending that the last line of
proposed § 136.145(b), now
redesignated as § 136.212(b), which
describes the nature of inspections,
should specify that inspection of the
vessel’s pollution prevention systems
and procedures should be in accordance
with any Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) between the
Coast Guard and the Environmental
Protection Agency.
The Coast Guard disagrees with this
recommendation because we do not
view the proposed amendment as either
necessary or desirable. We believe that
the current language that the ‘‘inspector
will also examine the vessel’s pollution
prevention systems and procedures’’ is
appropriate. An inspection involves an
examination of a vessel to determine
whether it is in compliance with
applicable regulations or other legal
authorities. There are existing pollution
prevention regulations that would
pertain to inspected towing vessels that
are not covered by any Coast Guard
MOU with the EPA. We have not made
any changes in this final rule based on
this comment.
An individual and a company
requested clarification of the inspection
frequency in proposed § 136.145. Two
companies suggested that frequency and
level of inspection should be
accomplished on a risk basis.
In this final rule, § 136.145 was
renamed § 136.212 and states that
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
towing vessels subject to subchapter M
will be inspected at least once every 5
years. Towing vessels choosing the
TSMS option would be subject to
annual surveys between those
inspections, while towing vessels
choosing the Coast Guard Inspection
option would be inspected annually.
See §§ 137.200, 137.205, and 137.210.
A company expressed concern about
whether the Coast Guard would have
resources to hire a sufficient number of
competent vessel inspectors for
convenient scheduling for the company,
including drydock scheduling.
The Coast Guard is prepared for the
estimated demand for annual inspection
from owners and managing operators
selecting the Coast Guard annualinspection option. The Coast Guard will
closely monitor the demand for
inspections and make resource
adjustments as necessary. However,
based on our reassessment of Coast
Guard resources, we have removed the
option in proposed § 136.105(b) for
vessels not covered by subchapter M to
request application of this part.
Another company requested that the
Coast Guard do everything possible to
ensure that Coast Guard inspections and
third-party audits or load line surveys
are coordinated to prevent an undue
burden on industry.
The Coast Guard agrees there are
benefits to coordinating audits, surveys,
and inspections, and will attempt to do
so. However, there may be times when
coordination is not possible due to
scheduling and operational constraints.
An association asked that the
Streamlined Inspection Program be
added as an alternative inspection
process.
The Streamlined Inspection Program,
available under 46 CFR part 8, is an
available option to obtain a renewal of
a COI. If using that option, the owner or
managing operator must comply with
the procedures identified in part 8. We
do not need to add text to subchapter M
for this part 8 option to be available to
vessels subject to subchapter M.
An individual suggested we eliminate
the term ‘‘uninspected towing vessel,’’
because towing vessels might not be
inspected currently for structural
construction, but are regulated and are
subject to Coast Guard rules for daily
operation.
The Coast Guard agrees that all
towing vessels are regulated by the
Coast Guard to some extent but are not
necessarily inspected. We have chosen
to continue to identify those towing
vessels not subject to subchapter M, and
that are subject to subchapter C, as
uninspected towing vessels.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
We received several comments on
proposed § 136.210(b)(3)(i), which
would require that an application for
initial certification include objective
evidence that the towing vessel’s
structure and stability comply with
applicable requirements. Commenters
recommended that for existing towing
vessels without a stability letter, an
audit report noting that the towing
vessel is being maintained and operated
in a manner that does not compromise
its watertight integrity or stability
should be sufficient to satisfy this
requirement. Others contended that
stability is not an issue on inland
waterways, and that there should be no
stability requirements for Western
Rivers towing vessels.
The Coast Guard has amended
§ 136.210 to more clearly identify what
the owner or managing operator needs
to provide the Coast Guard for both the
Coast Guard and TSMS options with the
application for inspection. Note that for
the TSMS option the application must
now include objective evidence of
having a TSMS compliant with part 138
and that the vessel meets the
requirements of this subchapter.
Structural requirements for existing
vessels are addressed in § 144.200. To
satisfy that regulation, if a vessel is not
built, equipped, and maintained to
conform to the rules of a recognized
classification society appropriate for the
intended service and routes, the
applicant must provide evidence that
the vessel has been both in satisfactory
service insofar as structural adequacy is
concerned and that the vessel does not
cause its structure to be questioned by
either the OCMI or TPO. Stability
requirements for existing vessels are
addressed in § 144.300 and under this
provision, for those vessels without a
stability document, documentation of
operating history—for example through
audit reports—is one option to meet
§ 144.300 requirements.
The Coast Guard believes that
stability is a concern on any vessel,
regardless of service or operating area.
Towing vessels must be maintained and
operated so the stability of the vessel is
not compromised.
Proposed § 136.210(b)(5)
(redesignated as § 136.210(a)(2)(ii))
would require a description of any
modification to the vessel. Some
commenters suggested that the
provision should be limited to major or
substantial modifications to the design
and construction of the towing vessel.
The Coast Guard disagrees with these
suggestions. The Coast Guard needs to
be aware of changes and modifications
made to inspected vessels. We will use
this information to determine if a single
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
change or incremental changes made to
a vessel over time will affect a vessel’s
suitability for its route or service.
However, replacements in kind, as
defined in this subchapter, are not
considered modifications. We have
made no changes from the proposed
rule based on these comments, but we
did clarify that a description of any
modification is only necessary when
renewing the COI.
With respect to proposed § 136.215,
which describes the period of validity of
a COI, we received two comments
urging the Coast Guard to add language
to the rule so that noncompliance with
a TSMS would not immediately result
in the invalidation of the COI.
The Coast Guard acknowledges that
§ 136.215 states that if the TSMS
certificate expires or is revoked, then
the towing vessel’s COI becomes
invalid. Non-conformities or major nonconformities found during surveys or
audits do not automatically invalidate
the TSMS or the COI. However,
deficiencies or non-conformities that are
egregious could result in the OCMI
removing the COI from the vessel.
Ultimately, the status of the COI is
determined by the OCMI. Based on the
extent of the deficiencies or nonconformities found during an
inspection, survey, or audit, the OCMI
has various opportunities to work with
the company to bring the vessel into
compliance without suspending or
revoking the TSMS certificate as
specified in § 138.305.
Commenters noted that proposed
§ 136.220 would require the original
COI to be framed under glass and posted
onboard the towing vessel. We received
many comments noting that this
requirement is outdated in this
electronic age. These commenters
suggested that the provision should
simply state that a current copy of the
COI must be on the towing vessel and
available for inspection. Some of them
added that the original COIs should be
kept in a central location.
In paragraph (b) of § 136.220 we
provide the alternative of keeping the
COI readily available onboard in a
weathertight container. Our § 136.220
implements 46 U.S.C. 3312, which
requires that the COI be displayed on
the vessel but allows for alternatives as
we have provided in § 136.220(b). We
do consider an open boat as an example
of when it is impracticable to post a
COI, but we removed this example from
the text of § 136.220(b) to place more
focus on the statutory language. We
require the original COI to be on board,
rather than a copy, because there is only
one original and removal of the COI
from the vessel is one means the OCMI
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40023
uses to prevent the vessel from getting
underway if it is unsafe for it to do so.
We received one comment on
proposed § 136.230(a) noting that the
route endorsements on COIs issued to
towing vessels should be consistent
with the route designations on the COIs
of the tank barges being moved.
The Coast Guard notes that routes on
barges and towing vessels are not
interdependent. The towing vessel and
its tow is limited to the most restrictive
route of the towing vessel or any vessel
in the tow. The Coast Guard encourages
the company to match route-appropriate
barges and towing vessels. However, we
made no changes from the proposed
rule based on this comment.
In reviewing § 136.235, which covers
Certificate of Inspection amendments,
we saw the need to distinguish
procedures for a vessel seeking a COI
amendment based on which option the
vessel selected. We amended § 136.235
accordingly. We also added a provision
stating that the OCMI may need to
conduct an inspection before issuing an
amended COI.
We received a comment on proposed
§ 136.235, suggesting that the term
‘‘towing vessel’’ should replace ‘‘vessel’’
in paragraphs (b) and (c)(2) of that
section. This commenter also noted the
same edit and other editorial changes
for various sections throughout the
proposed rule language.
The Coast Guard disagrees that there
is a need to change every use of the
word ‘‘vessel’’ to ‘‘towing vessel’’ when
we mean towing vessel. As with
§ 136.235, where we initially use the
term ‘‘towing vessel,’’ and it is clear
from the context that our use of the
word ‘‘vessel’’ refers to towing vessel,
we do not see a need to repeat ‘‘towing
vessel.’’ We have been careful to always
use ‘‘towing vessel’’ when referring to a
towing vessel in sections where we also
use the term ‘‘vessel’’ to mean
something other than the towing
vessel—e.g., in our definition of
‘‘bollard pull’’ in § 136.110.
Proposed § 136.240 addresses
permission to proceed to another port
for repairs. We received two comments
expressing support for the provision.
Another commenter suggested that the
vessel should be able to proceed for
repairs even if there is noncompliance
with the COI.
The Coast Guard notes that under
§ 136.240, an owner or managing
operator must notify the cognizant
OCMI in whose zone the noncompliance occurs or is discovered
before the vessel proceeds and also must
notify any other OCMI zones through
which the vessel will transit, and that
the cognizant OCMI may require
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40024
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
inspection of the vessel by a Coast
Guard Marine Inspector or examination
by a surveyor from a TPO prior to the
vessel proceeding. We clarified
§ 136.240(a), which we intended to
apply only to vessels with a TSMS, as
the TSMS may address the necessary
conditions under which the vessel may
safely proceed to another port for repair.
Accordingly, we amended paragraph (a),
made corresponding amendments to
paragraph (b), and inserted headings for
all three paragraphs in § 136.240.
We received one comment that
recommended changing ‘‘another port’’
to ‘‘next port of call,’’ in § 136.240 and
confining the conditions requiring a
Permit to Proceed to situations that
affect safety or seaworthiness. Other
commenters noted that the master, not
the owner or managing operator, should
be the person deciding if the trip for
repairs can be completed safely.
The Coast Guard disagrees with these
recommendations. The term ‘‘next port
of call’’ may be too restrictive and may
undermine the authority of the OCMI or
the vessel’s master in determining
where the vessel may safely proceed to
be repaired. Regarding the last
comment, we do list ‘‘owner, managing
operator, or master’’ when specifying
who must make a judgment that the trip
can be completed safely. We believe
§ 140.210(b) addresses the commenter’s
concerns by specifying that if the master
believes it is unsafe for the vessel to
proceed, he or she must not proceed
until it is safe to do so. We have made
no changes from the proposed rule
based on these comments.
One commenter stated that in
§ 136.240 it appears that a company
must notify the OCMI any time a vessel
must be moved to accomplish a repair
not specifically addressed in the TSMS.
The commenter stated that to
completely comply it seems that all
possibilities must be addressed in the
TSMS or the OCMI will be inundated
with requests for a problem not
involving seaworthiness. We do not
believe the commenter’s
characterization is accurate.
Companies using the TSMS have the
opportunity to tailor their system to
address conditions the company
anticipates may occur that would cause
the vessel not to be in compliance and
the necessary conditions under which
the vessel may safely proceed to another
port for repair. Under § 136.240(b), if the
condition is not addressed in the TSMS,
the owner, managing operator, or master
can request permission to proceed from
the cognizant OCMI in whose zone the
non-compliance occurs or is discovered.
A Permit to Proceed would only be
needed when a repair is needed and the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
vessel is no longer in compliance with
its COI. Minor repairs that do not affect
the safety of the vessel (including
seaworthiness) or its machinery would
most likely not be considered issues that
would invalidate the COI, and therefore
would not necessitate a Permit to
Proceed. We have made no changes
from the proposed rule based on this
comment.
Proposed § 136.245 addresses permits
to engage in an excursion. We received
a comment pointing out that a permit to
carry an excursion party is required
when the towing vessel carries more
persons than allowed by the COI, but
under proposed § 136.205, a COI
indicates that minimum number of
persons, not the maximum.
The Coast Guard notes that § 136.205
does not reflect all the information
contained on the COI. The COI is a
document issued under 46 U.S.C. 3309
that is in a form prescribed by the
Commandant. Currently, it lists the
minimum number of crew, those in
addition to crew, and the total persons
allowed on board. We have amended
our description of the COI in § 136.205
to include ‘‘total persons allowed
onboard.’’ Separately, and upon
reviewing proposed § 136.205 and a
similar description in 46 CFR 2.01–5,
we amended § 136.205 to improve its
description of a COI’s listing of safety
equipment and appliances required to
be onboard. Also, in further reviewing
§ 136.245 we saw the need to amend it
to include the case where a vessel
chooses the Coast Guard option or the
TSMS does not address excursion
parties.
Several commenters expressed the
opinion that having guests such as
vessel owners, service technicians,
auditors, trainers, or crew changes for
other vessels should not require a
special permit. Other commenters
opposed the proposed requirement to
give 48 hours’ notice to the OCMI
because the need for an excursion party,
such as customers or vendors on a
towing vessel to see a particular
operation, will often arise
spontaneously. One commenter was
unclear where to obtain a permit. We
received a comment requesting the
addition of a provision to require the
COI to identify the number of
crewmembers and persons in addition
to crewmembers allowed onboard,
taking into account overnight
accommodations, lifesaving equipment,
etc.
The Coast Guard has added
definitions for ‘‘excursion party’’ and
‘‘persons in addition to the crew’’ in
§ 136.110. Vendors/customers carried
onboard would not constitute an
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
‘‘excursion party’’; these individuals
would be carried as ‘‘persons in
addition to crew’’ as permitted by the
COI. We also amended § 136.210 so that
it prompts owners and managing
operators applying for an initial COI to
include documentation on the number
of persons in addition to the crew they
would like the OCMI to include in the
COI.
We received one comment on the
proposed requirement in § 136.250 for
load lines for vessels operating outside
the boundary line. The commenter
questioned how the requirement
applied to the Great Lakes, in which
there are no boundary lines.
The Coast Guard notes that boundary
lines are identified in 46 CFR part 7 and
that load line requirements for the Great
Lakes are provided in 46 CFR part 45.
We edited § 136.250 to make it clearer
that it applies to all towing vessels on
the Great Lakes, and also reorganized
§ 136.250 into a table for greater clarity.
G. Vessel Compliance (Part 137)
We received numerous comments on
part 137, and we made several changes
to the overall structure and content of
this part. In subpart A we removed the
definitions section, as we have removed
similar definition sections in other
parts, because it simply noted that
subchapter M definitions in § 136.110
apply to the part. We also deleted
proposed § 137.115 because the
substance of this provision is contained
in § 136.210.
We received two comments on
proposed § 137.120, which describes
responsibilities for compliance. One
commenter supported the provision that
the owner and managing operator are
responsible for ensuring compliance
and suggested that when deficiencies
and non-conformities are identified
during vessel inspections and TSMS
audits and fines imposed against a
company, those action letters should be
addressed to the person described in
§ 137.120, thereby ensuring the person
at the top is fully aware of the vessel’s
conditional status.
The Coast Guard concurs that
§ 137.120 holds the owner and
managing operator responsible for
compliance with subchapter M and
other applicable laws and regulations. It
also specifies that non-conformities and
deficiencies must be corrected in a
timely manner; we have deleted the
stated purpose for this corrective action
requirement because it was unnecessary
regulatory text. We will consider the
commenter’s suggestion for where to
send notification of non-compliance but
see no need to change the regulations.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Under § 137.130(c), we leave
discretion with the owner and operator
to specify in the TSMS procedures for
reporting and correcting nonconformities and deficiencies. We have
reorganized § 137.130 to make it easier
to read and understand the
requirements of the two programs for
compliance under the TSMS option.
Another commenter requested that
standard forms be provided to assist
small companies with compliance, and
that the Coast Guard should provide
guidelines to OCMIs for simple
inspections of towing vessels operated
by companies too small to have staff
dedicated to regulatory compliance, and
that the Coast Guard should provide
standard forms similar to U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers usage reports which
can be submitted to the local sector
OCMI.
Regarding the second commenter, the
Coast Guard does not plan to prepare a
specific form, but we have prepared a
Small Entities Guide (available in the
docket) for this final rule and we do
plan to provide guidance to OCMIs on
implementing this rule. We will develop
where necessary and appropriate
inspection and compliance checklists,
job aids, and guides for our OCMIs and
make them available to the public. We
made no changes from the proposed
rule based on these comments.
We removed § 137.125 because it
simply states that if a TSMS is
applicable to the vessel it must have
provisions for compliance with part
137. Section 137.125 is unnecessary
because part 138 addresses what the
TSMS must cover regarding all
subchapter M requirements.
The new structure of this part,
specifically in subparts B and C,
presents together the discussion of
inspections and surveys conducted
under the both Coast Guard and TSMS
options. As mentioned in the previous
section of the preamble, we moved the
discussion of inspections under the
Coast Guard option from proposed
§§ 136.150 and 136.165 into subpart B
of this part. We also added a Coast
Guard option section in subpart C of
this part. In subpart C, we rearranged
the order to place the discussion of
drydock intervals first and then describe
the Coast Guard and TSMS options. In
response to comments we changed the
term ‘‘periodic survey’’ to ‘‘external
survey program’’ and the term ‘‘audit
program’’ to ‘‘internal survey program’’
throughout the rule, including in the
headings for §§ 137.205 and 137.210.
We also defined these terms in
§ 136.110 and added a reference to them
in § 137.130.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
An individual disagreed with the
Coast Guard’s proposed 5-year
inspection for vessels under TSMS. The
commenter suggested that like vessels
under SOLAS, an annual verification
examination should be conducted.
In the NPRM, we did state that at the
vessel level, towing vessels operating
under the TSMS option would receive
audits and surveys by a TPO, in
addition to the Coast Guard conducting
compliance examinations at least once
every 5 years, along with additional
random compliance checks based on
risk (76 FR 49978, Aug. 11, 2011). While
some vessels operating under a TSMS
may be inspected by the Coast Guard
once a year, we do not feel that annual
Coast Guard inspections are necessary
given the audit and survey requirements
for vessels with a TSMS, along with our
oversight of that system.
We received three comments
objecting to the term ‘‘seaworthiness’’
proposed in § 136.150(a)(4), which we
have reorganized into § 137.200. They
noted that the appropriate term,
especially for Western River towing
vessels that don’t go to sea, is ‘‘fit for the
service for which it was intended’’ or
‘‘suitable for its intended route.’’ A
commenter noted that proposed
§ 136.150(a)(2) (now § 137.200(b))
would require a more detailed
inspection if an inspector finds
deficiencies or determines a major
change has occurred, and recommended
we set up boundaries on the open-ended
term ‘‘deficiencies,’’ such as
‘‘deficiencies of sufficient number or
severity,’’ and that we delete the ‘‘major
change’’ provision.
The Coast Guard partially agrees with
these recommendations. We consider
‘‘seaworthiness’’ to be an appropriate
term for considering the condition of the
vessel and note that the term is used in
the Riverman’s Lexicon (Lehman), a
noted publication specific to the
Western Rivers. However, we have
added a reference to fitness for route
and/or service to further clarify the
intent in the paragraphs where we use
the term ‘‘seaworthiness’’:
§§ 137.200(d), 137.300(b), and
137.335(a)(1).
We define the term ‘‘deficiency’’ in
§ 136.110 to mean ‘‘a failure to meet
minimum requirements of the vessel
inspection laws or regulations,’’ and we
do consider it appropriate to call for a
more detailed inspection if deficiencies
or a major change to the vessel are
found. A major change would include a
major conversion but would also
capture other changes such as changes
that may affect the operational safety of
the vessel or fitness for route or service.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40025
A commenter asked us what
constitutes a ‘‘visit’’ as opposed to an
‘‘inspection’’ or an ‘‘audit.’’
The Coast Guard may engage in visits
to TPOs, as discussed in § 139.160, to
ensure compliance with this rule. The
Coast Guard notes that in the preamble
of the NPRM we stated that, as part of
our oversight of those organizations, we
would conduct random oversight visits
to the offices of TPOs that conduct
TSMS audits and surveys. The Coast
Guard also clarifies the procedures for
such visits. The Coast Guard will
provide notice to the employer 48 hours
in advance of any site visit, unless the
visit is in response to a complaint or
other evidence of regulatory noncompliance (see § 139.160). In response
to an earlier comment above, we have
discussed the distinction between
inspections and audits. We have made
no changes from the proposed rule
based on this comment.
One commenter expressed the
opinion that annual and periodic Coast
Guard inspections under proposed
§ 136.150 would overly tax the system
and not effectively utilize Coast Guard
inspection talent.
On page 32 of our Preliminary
Regulatory Analysis and Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (USCG–
2006–24412–0002) we assumed that
1,340 towing vessels from small
companies with fleets of five or fewer
vessels would select the Coast Guard
annual-inspection option. Based on the
many comments submitted about the
benefits of a TSMS, we still anticipate
that many owners and operators of
towing vessels, particularly those from
companies with large fleets, will select
the TSMS option. The Coast Guard will
closely monitor the demand for
inspections and will make resource
adjustments as necessary.
With respect to the periodic survey
provision in proposed § 137.205, we
received one comment favoring an audit
by a third party every 3 years rather
than every year.
The Coast Guard disagrees with this
recommendation. We believe that 3-year
intervals would allow unsafe conditions
and other problems to go undetected for
too long. The annual compliance
activities are consistent with other
classes of inspected vessels including
those that implement other safety
management systems. To clarify when
the annual survey under § 137.205 must
be conducted, we amended § 136.110 by
adding a definition of ‘‘anniversary
date’’ tied to the expiration date of the
COI or TSMS certificate and we
amended § 137.205(a)(3) by referring to
the COI’s anniversary date. We also
amended other sections that referenced
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40026
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
anniversary issuance date to read
‘‘anniversary date.’’
We received one comment asking
whether participation in an ISM
program and issuance of a vessel’s
Safety Management certificate would
meet the requirements in proposed
§ 137.210, which is now titled Internal
survey program. Section 138.225 clearly
states that ISM Code compliance meets
the safety management requirements in
this subchapter. To clarify our reference
in § 138.225 to such vessels being
deemed in compliance with ‘‘these’’
requirements, we amended § 138.225(a)
in this final rule to replace ‘‘these
requirements’’ with ‘‘TSMS-related
requirements in this subchapter.’’ This
clarifying edit is consistent with our
statement in the NPRM preamble that
the Coast Guard is proposing to accept
compliance with the ISM Code, an
internationally mandated safety
management system for vessels subject
to the SOLAS, as satisfying TSMSrelated requirements. We implemented
the ISM Code through regulations in 33
CFR part 96 and view the processes and
procedures in place for compliance with
the ISM Code as sufficient to ensure that
towing vessels comply with TSMSrelated requirements in subchapter M.
This commenter also stated that
proposed paragraph (e) of § 137.210
appeared to indicate the audit can be
conducted by the operating company
since the OCMI may require the
attendance of an approved third party.
He asks if our intent is to allow the
operator to conduct these audits in lieu
of periodic (annual) audits by a third
party.
Yes, it was our intent, which is
reflected in this final rule, to allow
operators to conduct some surveys and
audits. We believe the commenter
meant to reference paragraph (e) of
§ 137.215. Section 137.215 deals with
conducting surveys and its paragraph (e)
states that the OCMI may require the
attendance of an approved third party
‘‘to assist with verifying compliance
with this part.’’ We deleted § 137.210(c)
to remove the requirement that a towing
vessel must successfully complete an
initial audit by a TPO before it may be
placed into an internal survey program.
Section 137.210 contains the provisions
that allow for owners and managing
operators to conduct annual surveys
under the internal survey program. For
the purposes of auditing under the
TSMS option, there is also an internal
audit program described in part 138 that
allows the owner or managing operator
to conduct annual internal management
audits. We note that we have amended
§ 137.210 by adding paragraph (a)(8)
requiring that the TSMS contain
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
procedures for assigning personnel to
conduct surveys.
We received several additional
comments on the provisions in
proposed § 137.210. A few commenters
suggested that ‘‘audit program’’ should
be changed to ‘‘program of continuous
assessment’’ and that the requirement in
proposed paragraph (b) for timing of the
surveys should provide that surveys
may be conducted within 3 months of
the anniversary date of the previous
survey.
Section 137.210(b) specifies that the
interval between successive surveys of
any item must not exceed 1 year. The
words ‘‘unless otherwise prescribed’’ at
the end of that paragraph modify the
reference to not being required to survey
items as one event. The internal survey
program allows the owner or managing
operator to assess the required items
through a series of surveys, resulting in
maximum flexibility in conducting
vessel operations while fulfilling
regulatory requirements. We want to
preserve the flexibility afforded to the
owner or managing operator that was
intended by the continuous survey
aspect of the internal survey program,
and view the 1-year-from-successivesurvey requirement as the best means of
assuring that required surveys under
this flexible system are conducted.
Therefore, we did not adopt the
commenter’s suggestion to amend
§ 137.210 to require that surveys be
conducted within 3 months of the
anniversary date of the previous survey.
One commenter recommended that
proposed § 137.210(a)(3) on
identification of items that need repairs
should allow for the issuance of Form
CG–835 deficiency tickets.
The Coast Guard agrees that the list of
items for inspection and repair should
include any existing deficiencies listed
by the Coast Guard on Form CG–835,
Notice of Merchant Marine Inspection
Requirements. We have amended
§ 137.210(a)(3) accordingly, and also
added these related items: noted survey
deficiencies, non-conformities, and
other corrective action reports.
Noting actions listed in proposed
§ 137.210(d) (now § 137.212), which
explains the OCMI’s authority to require
audits, surveys, and removal from the
TSMS option, one commenter called for
the Coast Guard to establish and use an
industry advisory committee for each
OCMI to advise him or her based on
impartial industry knowledge. Another
commenter recommended peer review
to verify the quality of work performed
by auditors.
The Coast Guard disagrees with the
suggestion that we establish and use an
advisory committee for each OCMI. The
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Coast Guard has established
requirements for auditors to ensure the
competency of auditors in TPOs at 46
CFR 139.125 and 139.130. The Coast
Guard retains oversight and
administrative control of TPOs and
through them, their auditors. See 46
CFR 139.135, 139.145, 139.150, and
139.160. We do not see the need for an
additional level of review of their work.
We developed these rules in
coordination and consultation with
TSAC, a Federal Advisory Committee
whose members are appointed by the
Secretary of Homeland Security to
advise, consult with, and make
recommendations to the Secretary on
matters relating to shallow-draft inland
and coastal waterway navigation and
towing safety. Further, OCMIs work
with Harbor Operations Committees and
conduct regular meetings with port
stakeholders and other industry
representatives at the Sector level to
discuss maritime issues, including those
related to towing vessels. We made no
changes from the proposed rule based
on this comment, but we did clarify the
reference to a ‘‘change in ownership’’ in
proposed § 139.125(c)(4) (now
§ 139.125(d)(4)) that would cause an
approval for a TPO to expire by
inserting the words ‘‘as defined in
§ 136.110’’ after the term.
One commenter expressed concern
about a lack of qualification
requirements for the individual doing
the surveys under the § 137.210 internal
survey program, beyond those written
into the TSMS. He recommended that
the rule require the individual
conducting surveys under § 137.210 to
have comparable qualifications to the
third-party surveyor.
The Coast Guard has amended
§ 137.210 by adding paragraph (a)(8)
requiring that the TSMS contain
procedures for assigning personnel to
conduct surveys. As suggested by the
commenter, under § 138.220(c)(1)
survey requirements must be specified
in the TSMS. We have amended
§ 138.220(c)(1) to make it clear that the
TSMS must list the minimum
qualifications of a surveyor if the
surveyor is not from a TPO. We also
removed § 138.220(c)(3) and (e) because
their proposed requirements are covered
in elsewhere in § 138.220.
We received two comments on
proposed § 137.215, which describes the
general conduct of a survey. One
commenter noted that proposed
paragraph (b)(3) would require
observation of drills and training, but
periodic surveys are typically performed
while the towing vessel is in drydock or
on a railway, and crews are generally
not on board.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
The Coast Guard disagrees with the
commenter’s premise that periodic
surveys under this subchapter will take
place in a dry dock. At least portions of
surveys under § 137.215 will require
that the vessel is dockside or underway
to complete adequate operational
assessment of equipment contained in
the scope of § 137.220.
However, the Coast Guard agrees with
the commenter that a surveyor would
not traditionally be expected to observe
the performance of a drill by the crew.
We have amended § 137.215 to reflect
that the surveyor would focus on the
vessel’s structural, electrical, and
mechanical systems, and equipment,
including those used in drills—for
example, davits, cranes, pumps, and
lifesaving equipment. These functions
could be performed while in drydock or
without the crew present. It is the
auditor who will focus on the
operational performance of the crew to
assess the competency in the
performance of the assigned roles. For
such an audit, the crew must be present
and the vessel must be ready to
demonstrate the performance upon
request. The Coast Guard has amended
§§ 138.405(d) and 138.410(c), conduct of
internal and external audits, assigning
auditors the responsibility to witness
drills.
Another commenter requested a
change to proposed paragraph
§ 137.215(c) which he felt created an
unnecessary loophole. He recommended
deleting it or revising it to read: ‘‘While
all the items listed in § 137.200 must be
surveyed for all vessels regardless of
their condition, vessels and equipment
found to be in poor condition may be
required to undergo more stringent
examinations in order to satisfy the
attending surveyor.’’
The Coast Guard agrees that
§ 137.215(c) should be amended to
address this concern. We added
language to § 137.215(c) to ensure that
survey standards in § 137.215 are met
and to require an expanded examination
by the surveyor when he or she finds
multiple deficiencies indicative of
systematic failures. Regarding the items
to be surveyed, § 137.215(b) clearly
states that the survey must address all
items in § 137.220.
We received several comments on the
scope of surveys in proposed § 137.220.
Some of the commenters focused on
three requested changes: Clarification
that gas-freeing prior to entry into
confined spaces, such as fuel tanks, is
not required; allowing verification of
drills to be done using a review of
documentation; and limiting the
inspection of watertight doors to those
that were required to be installed.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
As discussed in § 137.330(b), fuel
tanks need not be cleaned out and
internally examined if the general
condition of the tanks is determined to
be satisfactory by external examinations.
While the Coast Guard does not agree
that crew competency can be verified by
just reviewing records of required
training and drills, we have removed the
requirement for witnessing drills from
the survey portion of the rule and have
moved it to the audit requirements in
§§ 138.405 and 138.410. Any watertight
fittings that crews rely on for watertight
integrity and vessel safety should be
operational and subject to survey.
One commenter noted that § 137.220
should be amended to clarify that a
topside exam can be conducted in
segments and need not be done as a
discrete event.
Section 137.220 describes the scope of
the survey which would apply under
either the § 137.205 or § 137.210
program. For those choosing the
§ 137.210 internal survey program to
demonstrate vessel compliance, the
Coast Guard makes it clear in
§ 137.210(b) that the owner or managing
operator is not required to survey the
items as described in § 137.220 as one
event, but may survey items on a
schedule over time, provided that the
interval between successive surveys of
any item does not exceed 1 year, unless
otherwise prescribed. The Coast Guard
believes that § 137.210(b) provides clear
guidance that an owner or managing
operator of a towing vessel may select
to have surveys done during multiple
events. In contrast, the § 137.205
external survey program calls for one
event, an annual survey, and not
successive surveys to survey the items
described in § 137.220. The Coast Guard
has not made any changes from the
proposed rule in response to this
comment.
Another commenter recommended
that we eliminate the term ‘‘rescue boat’’
from the rule, which we used in
proposed § 137.220(g)(6) when
identifying the scope of items to be
examined and also in crew safety
regulations in part 140 of the NPRM. He
notes this change would avoid
confusion between the terms ‘‘skiff,’’
‘‘survival craft,’’ and ‘‘rescue boat.’’
The Coast Guard agrees that the use
of the term ‘‘rescue boat’’ in this rule
could cause confusion. We did not
propose that subchapter M require
towing vessels to carry rescue boats, so
to avoid confusion, we have removed
the references to rescue boats in
§§ 137.220 and 140.405. We did,
however, leave instruction and drill
requirements in § 140.420(d)(4) for
launching and using a rescue boat if a
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40027
towing vessel has one installed, and
have defined rescue boat as described
earlier in this preamble.
One commenter objected to a
§ 137.220(g) requirement for towing
vessels to conduct a man-overboard
drill, simulated under emergency
conditions. The commenter noted that
towing vessels on the Great Lakes
should not have to comply with
standards not applied to ‘‘self-propelled
lakers’’, that is, other self-propelled
vessels, on the Great Lakes.
The Coast Guard disagrees and did
not make a change from the proposed
rule based on this comment. We seek to
promote safe vessel operations for all
towing vessels and we have casualty
data that indicates that falls overboard
is one of the main contributing factors
to crew member fatalities in this
industry. As detailed in § 136.105, the
Coast Guard has provided a number of
exceptions for towing vessels based on
the known risks involved in their
specific operation. The Coast Guard has
declined to provide blanket exemptions
for entire operating areas such as lakes,
bays and sounds, rivers, or as the
commenter suggests, the Great Lakes.
The Coast Guard has evaluated the
hazards of towing vessel operations in
each of these particular areas and
determined that the application of these
regulations to certain towing vessel
operations in each of these areas would
improve safety to life, property and the
environment.
In addition, noting the language
currently in 33 CFR 164.01(b) and the
‘‘33 CFR part 164, if applicable’’
language in proposed § 137.220(j)(5), a
commenter raised concerns about
determining when and whether a given
towing vessel is subject to 33 CFR part
164 navigation safety regulations.
We did not propose to amend 33 CFR
part 164, and neither § 164.01 nor other
sections in that part use ‘‘inspected’’ or
‘‘uninspected’’ as criteria for
applicability, so this rule does not alter
the applicability of 33 CFR part 164 for
towing vessels. To see what
requirements in 33 CFR part 164 may
apply to a given towing vessel, one
needs to review all of § 164.01, not just
paragraph (b) which is focused on
towing vessels. For example, § 164.01(d)
points to automatic identification
system requirements without reference
to type of vessel. We made no changes
from the proposed rule based on this
comment.
We received two comments on
proposed § 137.300, a section on
documenting compliance with drydock
and internal structural surveys
requirements. One of these commenters
referenced § 136.130(d) in combination
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40028
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
with § 137.300 when requesting
clarification about the scope and
frequency of such surveys. Both
§ 136.130(d) and redesignated
§ 137.300(a) make it clear that the
frequency does not change based on
which option is chosen to obtain a COI.
Further, we amended § 137.300(a) to
clearly indicate that the drydock and
internal structural intervals start after
the issuance of the initial COI.
Paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of § 137.300
clearly state the intervals for drydock
and internal structural surveys. Finally,
we established separate sections for
vessels using the TSMS option
(§ 137.305) and those using the Coast
Guard inspection option (§ 137.302) to
document compliance with drydock and
internal structural survey requirements.
Regarding the scope of drydock and
internal structural surveys, whether a
vessel provides objective evidence using
the external survey option under
§ 137.310 or the internal survey option
under § 137.315 requirements (see these
options referenced in redesignated
§ 137.305(a) and (b)), the scope of the
survey is clearly laid out in § 137.330.
Also, § 137.325 contains a
comprehensive inventory of items to be
reviewed during the examination. The
Coast Guard believes that the numerous
items identified in § 137.325, in
addition to the supporting § 137.330,
provide sufficient information to
address the commenter’s concerns. As
noted above, redesignated § 137.300
makes clear that regardless of the option
chosen to obtain a Certificate of
Inspection, each towing vessel must
undergo a drydock and internal
structural examination at the prescribed
intervals after the issuance of the initial
COI. Accordingly, we have amended the
§ 137.325 heading so that it no longer
references just surveys for the TSMS
option. Throughout amended subpart C
of part 137 we have changed the term
‘‘survey’’ to ‘‘examination’’ when
referring to the drydock and internal
structural examinations.
A person commenting on proposed
§ 137.300(c), which called for objective
evidence of compliance with certain
load line requirements in subchapter E,
noted that load lines are not applicable
to inland towing vessels. We agree that
load lines are not applicable for
situations where the inland towing
vessel never operates on the Great Lakes
or outside the Boundary Lines. But
under § 136.250, the load line
requirement in subchapter E would
apply to certain towing vessels 79 feet
or more in length that normally operate
on inland waters but that sometimes
operate on the Great Lakes or outside
the Boundary Lines. In this final rule,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
we moved requirements for
documenting compliance with load line
and other requirements in this subpart
to § 137.305 for vessels choosing the
TSMS option and to § 137.302 for
vessels choosing the Coast Guard
inspection option. We recognize that 46
CFR 42.03–5(b)(1)(v) in subchapter E
excepts vessels that operate exclusively
on inland waters and that do not engage
in coastwise or Great Lakes voyages
from load line requirements. However,
§ 137.305(c) and amended § 137.320
make clear that the load line provision
is only relevant for towing vessels
subject to subchapter E load line
requirements. Similarly, the provisions
in new § 137.322 for vessels currently
classed by a recognized classification
society whose applicable rules have
been accepted by the Coast Guard, are
only relevant to vessels so classed.
Redesignated § 137.305 clarifies that
objective evidence is needed to
demonstrate that a vessel utilizing the
TSMS option complies with the
drydock and internal structural
examination requirements of this
subpart. Paragraph (c) points to
§§ 137.320 and 137.322. We amended
§ 137.320 to make clear that an
examination performed to maintain a
valid load line certificate issued in
accordance with subchapter E would
count as an examination required under
§ 137.300. Also, new § 137.322 allows
for the same consideration in the case of
a drydock and internal structural
examination performed to maintain
class by a recognized classification
society whose applicable rules the Coast
Guard has accepted. In the case of those
vessels required to conduct two drydock
and internal structural examinations in
accordance with § 137.300(a)(1), the
allowance under either § 137.320 or
§ 137.322 only counts for one of the
required examinations.
We received several diverse
comments on proposed § 137.305,
which specifies intervals for drydock
and internal structural surveys. One
commenter observed that towing vessels
operate in an environment that requires
them to be in contact with barges and
vessels, and that this contact puts
unusual stresses to the hull. Based on
this observation the commenter
suggested that the survey intervals
called for in proposed § 137.305(a)(2),
redesignated § 137.300(a)(2), for vessels
not exposed to salt water often should
be the same as those with more
saltwater exposure—at least twice every
5 years and not more than 36 months
between drydockings—instead of just
once every 5 years.
The Coast Guard disagrees. The
drydock and internal structural
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
examination requirements in this final
rule are consistent with the
requirements for other vessels subject to
inspection, and we see no reason to
believe this frequency of drydocking
would need to be increased for towing
vessels. The Coast Guard will monitor
the inspected fleet to see if increased
frequency is called for in the future. As
discussed earlier, proposed § 137.305
has been redesignated as § 137.300 in
this final rule.
Some commenters thought the
provision of proposed § 137.305 should
be amended to ensure vessels operating
on the Great Lakes may receive a 1-year
extension on the required interval for
drydocking and interval structural
examinations as provided under load
line provisions in 46 CFR subpart 42.09
and current Coast Guard policy.
The Coast Guard disagrees that
modification to our applicable text, now
found in § 137.300, is needed. The
extension of a Great Lakes Load Line
certificate by the Ninth District
Commander is addressed in 46 CFR
42.07–45(d)(2). Existing Coast Guard
policy, found in the Marine Safety
Manual, Volume II, provides additional
guidance to the Coast Guard and
industry regarding extensions of
drydock and internal structural
examinations for Great Lakes vessels.
The Ninth District Commander is also
the approving authority for drydock
extensions for these vessels, including
towing vessels operating on the Great
Lakes. While the same entity can issue
both of these extensions, the load line
certificate and the vessel’s Certificate of
Inspection must both be annotated with
the new due date for the vessel’s
drydock and internal structural
examination. We made no changes from
the proposed rule based on this
comment.
Some commenters noted that a
definition for ‘‘saltwater’’ is needed if
the times of operation in ‘‘saltwater’’ is
a factor in determining intervals for
inspections.
The Coast Guard did not add a
definition for the term ‘‘saltwater’’ in
the rule. The Marine Safety Manual,
Volume II, places the responsibility of
determining salt water and fresh water
dry-docking and internal structural
inspection intervals on the OCMI. If
fresh water intervals are determined
appropriate for a specific vessel, the
OCMI will annotate the fresh water
service intervals on the vessel’s COI and
evaluate that determination
periodically. OCMIs maintain lists of
boundary lines where fresh water ends,
and salt water begins, within their
particular zones.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
A commenter expressed concern
about the cost of the requirements. He
wrote that proposed § 137.305 would
impose enormous cost on small
businesses, and that his company’s
vessels that operate in the Southeast in
a saltwater environment would have to
be drydocked twice every 5 years at an
estimated cost of about $40,000 for each
drydocking evolution for one vessel, or
$80,000 per vessel every 5 years.
Another commenter suggested that
§ 137.305, requiring drydocking of
saltwater vessels twice every 5 years,
would cost his company at least
$100,000 to $150,000 per vessel.
The drydock and internal structural
examination requirements in this final
rule are consistent with the
requirements for other vessels subject to
inspection and necessary to meet the
statutory requirements for vessel
inspections. We have made no changes
from the proposed rule based on this
comment.
With regard to the cost of drydocking,
after publication of the NPRM, the Coast
Guard sponsored a study of standard
marine engineering services for use in
regulatory analyses, titled ‘‘Study of
Marine Engineering and Naval
Architecture Costs for Use in Regulatory
Analyses’’ by ABS Consulting, available
on the docket. According to the
Engineering Cost Study, cost of
drydocking can vary based on a variety
of factors, including vessel size, vessel
weight, equipment, type of work,
operating environment and location of
the drydock.2 The Engineering Cost
Study summarizes the minimum,
average and maximum costs of
drydocking for various vessel types in
Table 6–9, page 32. The Engineering
Cost Study does not report a separate
cost category for towing vessels. The
Coast Guard uses the costs for smaller
Freight Ships and Industry Vessels as a
proxy for towing vessels based on
similar size and operating
characteristics. Based on the
Engineering Cost Study, the minimum
cost for a drydocking of a towing or
similar vessel is $2,000, the maximum
is $20,000 and the average is $9,250. We
consider the $9,250 as the best available
estimate for the average cost of
drydocking. We acknowledge that the
$40,000 estimate provided by the
commenter is feasible given the
variability of factors, such as size and
location. To account for the variability,
we assume that the $40,000 cost is at the
90th percentile of the distribution of
2 Source: ABS Consulting for the U.S. Coast
Guard, Study of Marine Engineering and Naval
Architecture Costs for Use in Regulatory Analyses,
March 29, 2013, Contract GS–23F–0207L2714803,
page 30.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
costs, that is, 10 percent of vessels will
incur this cost for drydocking. As a
result, we modify the average cost to
reflect the upper 10th percentile cost of
$40,000, for a weighted average cost of
$13,250. As per the regulatory
requirements, vessels that are not
currently covered by a safety
management system are assumed to
incur this cost once every 5 years for
freshwater vessels and twice every 5
years for saltwater vessels.3 For a more
detailed discussion of the costs, see
section 3.3 of the Regulatory Analysis
which is available in the docket.
We received a few comments on
proposed § 137.315. Some commenters
were unclear whether the requirement
of notification prior to commencing
work at the drydock refers to any
drydock work or only those drydock
visits that are required by the TSMS.
In response, we amended § 137.315(d)
to clarify when to notify the Coast
Guard under paragraph (d) and TPOs
under paragraph (b) of activities related
to credit drydocking or internal
structural examinations.
A few commenters asked that
§ 137.315 be modified to clarify that the
items described in § 137.330 need not be
examined as one event, but may be
examined on a schedule over time.
Section 137.315(c) states that ‘‘The
interval between examinations of each
item may not exceed the applicable
interval described in § 137.300.’’ The
Coast Guard believes the words
‘‘examinations of each item’’ provides
clear guidance that an owner or
managing operator of a towing vessel
may select to survey different items
described in § 137.330 during multiple
events, and the remainder of
§ 137.315(c) makes clear that the
interval for surveys of a given item must
not exceed the applicable interval
described in § 137.300.
Several commenters argued that
proposed paragraph (a) of § 137.325,
requiring a surveyor to determine that
the hull and related structure and
components are free of defects or
deterioration, would be too difficult to
meet. One commenter suggested
language we used in proposed
§ 137.335(c)(3) regarding underwater
inspections—‘‘free from appreciable
defects and deterioration’’—stating that
it does not make sense to require a
higher standard for a vessel on drydock
than one being inspected in the water.
The Coast Guard agrees with the
commenters with respect to the term
‘‘free of defects [and] deterioration.’’ We
have amended § 137.325(a), to remove
3 Vessels currently covered by an SMS already are
required to undergo drydocking at similar intervals.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40029
the term ‘‘free of’’ and have further
rearranged the paragraph so that the
standard for evaluating the listed items
detected in the hull and related
structure and components is whether
they ‘‘adversely affect the vessel’s
seaworthiness or fitness or suitability
for its route or service’’ instead of
‘‘reducing effectiveness.’’ Also, in
§ 137.325(a), we changed ‘‘determine
that’’ to ‘‘determine whether’’ to better
reflect the purpose of the survey: To
determine if standards are met. In
response to the second comment, the
Coast Guard amended § 137.335 by
removing the word ‘‘appreciable’’ to
provide a more consistent standard with
that of § 137.325(a), and by reorganizing
the section to better clarify its intent.
Two commenters expressed general
opposition to the proposed
requirements and scope for regular
mandatory drydock examinations. One
commenter stated that harbor service
boats are already being retired on a
regular basis when their structural
usefulness is at an end, and therefore
mandatory structural inspections are not
warranted. The commenter also noted
the cost of additional boats to fill the
service void when these boats are in
transit to a certified inspection drydock
and when undergoing a drydock
inspection. Another commenter was
specifically concerned that proposed
§ 137.330 was vague regarding pulling
the tail shafts for inspection.
Because of the nature of towing, the
hulls of towing vessels are exposed to
the unique hazards that result in
degradation and damage to the towing
vessel in the normal course of operation.
For this reason, regular drydocking of a
towing vessel to inspect its underwater
areas is a necessary component of
assessing and verifying fitness for
service. We note, however, that as
proposed in the NPRM, § 137.335 in this
final rule identifies situations where it
may be acceptable to conduct an
underwater survey in lieu of a
drydocking.
The Coast Guard notes that scope of
drydock examination required by
§ 137.330 is the same for both seagoing
and inland service. The Coast Guard
believes § 137.330 clearly lays out the
scope of the required drydock
examination for all towing vessels
subject to subchapter M. Our proposed
definition of ‘‘drydock’’ in § 136.110
actually defines a drydock examination
(as opposed to the physical dock) and
matches the definitions of that term in
subchapters K and T, so we amended
the term being defined to ‘‘drydock
examination.’’
Regarding examination of tail shafts,
the Coast Guard proposed
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40030
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
§ 137.330(a)(2) to permit the surveyor or
inspector to conduct the required
examinations using different means
than pulling the tail shaft, so long as the
method used allows the surveyor or
inspector to properly evaluate the tail
shaft for bends, cracks, and damage.
These methods may include
technologies such as non-destructive
testing and x-ray. The Coast Guard has
not made any changes from the
proposed rule based on these
drydocking and tail shaft comments.
Regarding the cost of additional boats
to fill the service void when these boats
are in transit to a certified inspection
drydock and when undergoing a
drydock inspection, the Coast Guard has
added an estimate of lost revenues
(rather than the cost of replacement) to
account for the potential impacts of
vessels being out of service due to
drydock inspections. Further
information is available in Section 2.5 of
the Regulatory Analysis.
We received a few comments on
§ 137.335, which sets out provisions for
an underwater survey in lieu of
drydocking. One commenter expressed
support for the provision. One
commenter suggested that for purposes
of determining whether an underwater
survey is appropriate, the age of the hull
should be used rather than the age of the
towing vessel.
The Coast Guard does not agree that
we should use the age of a given vessel’s
hull as opposed to the vessel’s age when
considering eligibility for enrollment in
an underwater inspection in lieu of
drydocking (UWILD) program. For an
existing vessel with no prior credit
drydock overseen by the Coast Guard,
we have no criteria to make an ‘‘age of
hull’’ determination. Once inspected, a
completely new hull will likely be
considered as a major modification and
reset the vessel’s age for purposes of
UWILD enrollment.
While we did not make a change from
the proposed § 137.335 based on these
comments, we did amend § 137.335 to
clarify the process for the UWILD
program by stating that it is the Coast
Guard that determines if the stated
criteria for eligibility has been met.
One commenter opposed several
vessel compliance provisions in part
137. He argued that requirements for
training and recordkeeping will be an
excessive burden on small companies, a
distraction to pilots, and cause undue
hardship for vessel owners; that vessel
managing operators should not have to
get permission to put visitors, company
representatives, or additional personnel
on the vessel; and that restrictions in
routes permitted on the COI would be
a deterrent to his ability to make a living
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
and provide employment for his
personnel. Other commenters noted that
the paperwork requirements would
distract pilots while they are steering
their towing vessels.
The Coast Guard views the TSMS,
and its requirements for records to
document compliance with regard to
training, as the foundational document
itemizing the standards, processes and
management systems necessary to
improve maritime safety aboard towing
vessels. Towing companies that lack the
resources to develop and implement a
TSMS may choose the Coast Guard
inspection option and will not have to
maintain the TSMS-required records
and documents. We note, however, that
personnel record requirements in
§ 140.400(a) and (b) apply to all vessels
subject to subchapter M; in response to
this comment we have made clarifying
amendments to those paragraphs. With
respect to associated paperwork, many
of the entries are short in duration and
the Coast Guard does not mandate when
the paperwork is filled out.
Regarding crews and visitors, the
Coast Guard will issue certificates of
inspection that establish the level of
manning and persons in addition to the
crew that will be allowed to be on board
the vessels. Companies should work
with OCMIs prior to issuance of the COI
to request any additional personnel
above what the required manning level
would normally be. The Coast Guard
does not agree with the commenter’s
assertion that the OCMI does not need
to be contacted to carry additional
personnel (visitors, company reps, etc.)
beyond what is stated on the COI. We
note that § 136.245 provides for the
issuance of an excursion permit by the
OCMI as needed.
The application for inspection allows
owners and managing operators to
request the routes necessary to
accomplish their business. OCMIs will
evaluate that request to determine if the
vessel meets the standard for the routes
being requested. Those standards are
found in parts 140 through 144. We
made no changes from the proposed
rule based on these comments.
One maritime company expressed
concerns regarding added operating
costs incurred that will stem from
drydock inspection fees paid to
surveyors or the Coast Guard, and from
audit exams and what the maritime
company considers unnecessary repairs
brought upon the industry by non-riskbased regulations.
The requirement to have a surveyor
from a TPO conduct a drydock and
internal examination is predicated on
the option chosen to obtain a COI. The
Coast Guard encourages the owner or
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
managing operator of a vessel using the
TSMS option to discuss such costs with
the company’s TPO, as appropriate.
One commenter predicted the cost of
surveys would likely increase for both
small and large companies, citing the
demand for Coast Guard-approved
surveyors from TPOs and the increased
scope of surveys. He noted many
common repairs that can now be
performed without requiring
independent surveys will require
independent surveys under this rule.
The Coast Guard does not accept the
premise that this rule imposes a
requirement that independent surveyors
must be involved before common
repairs are performed. Regarding
repairs, under § 137.305, the OCMI may
require additional examination of a
vessel whenever he or she discovers or
suspects damage or deterioration to hull
plating or structural members that may
affect the seaworthiness of a vessel. We
believe the OCMI should be able to
require additional examinations when
he or she discovers such conditions, and
we note that such examinations are
typically reserved for those dry-docking
and topside surveys required by part
137. We note also that under
§§ 137.135(a)(12) or 137.210(a)(3) there
is a requirement to identify items that
need to be repaired or replaced before
the vessel continues in service, but this
would not require a TPO survey before
common repairs could be made.
Regarding the need for surveyors from
TPOs, under the Coast Guard option,
annual inspections are performed by
Coast Guard personnel and do not
require participation of a surveyor from
a TPO. Similarly, if a company has a
TSMS and chooses an internal survey
program, the surveys can be conducted
by a qualified member of the company
and would not require a TPO. If a
company with a TSMS uses the external
survey program, they would incur
additional costs of using a surveyor
from a TPO.
H. Towing Safety Management System
(TSMS) (Part 138)
We received many comments on our
proposed part 138 TSMS requirements.
We received several comments with
regard to the schedule for the TSMS
option. An individual suggested that the
implementation of a TSMS should occur
immediately with the allowance of a 6month interim certificate. This
commenter stated using an interim basis
approach, as is done with the ISM Code,
will prevent reinventing the wheel and
align the system approach to existing
requirements.
We have made a number of changes,
as explained in this section to provide
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
for a smooth implementation of the
TSMS option while keeping in mind the
burden to owners and managing
operators. In the NPRM, we proposed
that owners and managing operators
who select the TSMS option would have
2 years from the effective date of a final
rule to create their TSMS, have a TPO
approve it and then issue a TSMS
certificate. The owners and managing
operators would then have 4 years from
the date of that TSMS certificate to bring
all vessels under their ownership or
management into the TSMS and obtain
COIs for them.
In this final rule, we changed
§ 138.115 so that owners or managing
operators of towing vessels need only to
obtain a TSMS certificate issued under
§ 138.305 at least six months before
being able to have any of their vessels
obtain a Certificate of Inspection under
the TSMS option. We made this change
to better account for the time needed for
third parties to obtain approval from the
Coast Guard and for owners and
managing operators to obtain approval
of their TSMS from these third parties
before being required to have their
vessels obtain a COI. We also believe
that six months of implementing a
TSMS is sufficient for obtaining a COI,
and as required, the vessel would need
to have on board a copy of the owner
or managing operator’s TSMS
certificate. We amended § 138.115 to
more closely align the deadline with the
deadlines for vessels to obtain a COI,
but this change does not prevent a
company from implementing a TSMS
sooner and we encourage owners and
managing operators to obtain the TSMS
certificate and implement their TSMS as
soon as possible. In making this change,
we do not believe there is a need for a
6-month temporary certificate.
Two commenters expressed their
view that utilizing internal and followup audits would mean that there would
be no need for a TSMS.
The Coast Guard does not agree that
merely conducting audits and surveys
would negate the need for TSMS. The
TSMS is the foundational document
itemizing the standards, processes, and
management systems that the auditor
would review, assess, and validate.
Without a TSMS, or some other form of
Safety Management System, there
would be no documentation to identify
the processes and management
system(s) put in place for a vessel
choosing the TSMS option. We made no
changes from the proposed rule based
on these comments.
We received comments from maritime
companies and a professional
association suggesting that proposed
§§ 138.205, 138.210, 138.215, and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
138.220 pertaining to the purpose,
functional requirements, and elements
of the TSMS be revised to be more
simplistic and to more clearly state the
primary goals of a TSMS.
We believe the purpose, objectives,
functional requirements, and elements
presented in these four sections in part
138, subpart B, succinctly establish
reasons for, and the requirements and
goals of, a safety management system.
The Coast Guard incorporates these core
elements to provide consistency with
the ISM Code and to identify the
elements that must be addressed when
developing a TSMS. In response to a
previous comment, we did revise our
definition of ‘‘safety management
system,’’ which identifies the nature of
an SMS and who it enables to
effectively implement the safety and
environmental protection requirements
of subchapter M. Additional guidance
will be developed to help the industry
and public understand the goals of a
TSMS and how to develop and
implement one.
Some commenters requested
clarification regarding the proposed
functional requirements in § 138.215(f)
and TSMS elements in § 138.220(e)
related to the phrase ‘‘procedures to
manage contracted (vendor safety)
services.’’ The commenters suggested
that the management of all hired
(contracted) towing vessels to ensure
they comply with subchapter M would
be a burden, and they suggested that
proof of the hired company’s TSMS and
vessel’s COI should be sufficient
evidence to meet the intent of the rule.
One of the commenters stated that it is
unclear what contracted services are
covered by § 138.220(e).
The Coast Guard agrees. When
contracting their vessels to others for
towing services, the owner and operator
remain responsible for for verifying that
their vessels are in compliance with the
regulations. We have removed the
requirements proposed in §§ 138.215(f)
and 138.220(e).
We received several comments from
maritime companies that conveyed
concern regarding the proposed
requirement in § 138.220(b)(1) for
employers to, ‘‘ensure personnel are
. . . mentally capable to perform
required tasks.’’ The commenter’s stated
that although employers conduct drug
testing, safety training, and physical
examinations, the employers cannot be
responsible for determining their mental
health status.
The Coast Guard agrees that it may be
unreasonable for the company to
determine the mental health of a
crewmember. It is reasonable, however,
for companies to identify if potential
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40031
crew members are able to perform
required tasks. For this reason, we have
edited the quoted language in
§ 138.220(b)(1) to require the TSMS to
contain employment procedures which
ensure ‘‘that personnel are able to
perform required tasks.’’
We received a comment requesting
more details regarding crew member
(master, mate, able seaman, pilot, etc.)
responsibilities in the operation,
managing, and implementation of the
TSMS and the vessel.
The Coast Guard does not agree that
the regulations should contain more
details on crew responsibilities and
believes that this should be left to the
discretion of the owner or managing
operator to set in the TSMS. Under
§ 138.220(b), policies must be in place
in the TSMS that cover the owner or
managing operator’s approach to
managing its personnel, including the
duties and responsibilities of the
crewmembers.
We received comments from
individuals and a maritime company
recommending that the rule ensures that
major non-conformities, nonconformities, accidents, and hazardous
situations are reported to the owners,
company, or managing operators; are
investigated and analyzed with the
objective of improving safety and
pollution prevention; and that auditors
notify the Coast Guard and the company
immediately of any serious, unsafe
situation that threatens the vessel, its
personnel, or the environment. One
commenter noted that TSMS requires a
designated person to whom
crewmembers can report safety
violations, but that towing vessels
opting for the Coast Guard inspection
option would not have this reporting
system that would likely prevent
accidents. Another commenter
recommended supplementing the text in
§ 138.220(a)(1)(ii) to ensure that the
designated person monitors the safety
and pollution prevention aspects of the
operation of each vessel and ensures
that adequate resources and shore-based
support are applied.
With respect to reporting accidents
and non-conformities, we note that
§ 138.215(c) requires TSMSs to include
procedures for reporting both. Section
138.220(a)(2)(ii) requires that the TSMS
include procedures to identify and
correct non-conformities. The TSMS
must include how an initial report
should be made and the actions taken to
follow up and ensure appropriate
resolution.
For vessels choosing the Coast Guard
option the corresponding ‘‘designated
person’’ is the vessel’s Master. In part
140 on operations, § 140.210(d)(6)
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40032
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
requires the crew to report unsafe
conditions to the Master and take the
most effective action to prevent
accidents.
The Coast Guard disagrees with
adding specific regulatory text to
§ 138.220(a)(1)(ii) regarding the
designated person. Section 138.220(c)
requires the TSMS to have an element
that addresses verification of vessel
compliance that covers the safety and
pollution prevention aspects that the
commenter alluded to. Ultimately the
designated person is responsible for
ensuring the TSMS is implemented and
continuously functions to address
concerns identified by the commenter.
On the issue of protecting the
responsibilities and authority of
masters, we received comments
suggesting that the TSMS specifically
states that the master has overriding
authority to make decisions regarding
the company’s safety and pollution
prevention.
The Coast Guard agrees that the
master of a towing vessel has overriding
responsibility and authority to ensure
the safety of his or her vessel. As stated
in § 138.220(a)(1)(iii), the Master’s
authority, as defined by the owner or
managing operator in the TSMS, must
provide for his or her ability to make
final determinations on safe operations
of the towing vessel including the
ability to cease operations if an unsafe
condition exists. This reflects provisions
in operational regulation § 140.210
which specify that safety of the towing
vessel is the responsibility of the master
and that if the master believes it is
unsafe for the vessel to proceed, he or
she must not proceed until it is safe to
do so.
We received many comments from
maritime companies that recommend
that the Coast Guard accept the AWO
RCP as an approved TSMS. Commenters
wrote about the wide use of the RCP and
attested to the success that their
company has experienced implementing
that program. Several commenters also
suggested that because AWO RCP has
been developed from the ISM code,
which we already noted as being
accepted in the NPRM, the AWO RCP
should qualify as an approved TSMS.
The provisions of § 138.225 state that
an SMS that is fully compliant with the
ISM Code requirements of 33 CFR part
96 will be deemed in compliance with
TSMS requirements in part 138. It also
states that the Coast Guard may consider
other existing safety management
systems as meeting part 138
requirements. The Coast Guard will
examine AWO’s RCP to determine
whether or not it meets the
requirements of 46 CFR part 138 in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
order to determine if it qualifies under
the provisions of this section. We have
not made a change from the proposed
rule based on these comments.
We received comments from several
maritime companies that recommended
the sequence of events for the issuance
of a COI for towing vessels be provided.
The Coast Guard notes the following
short sequence of events associated with
the various ways to obtain a COI:
Step 1: As specified in § 136.210,
Obtaining or renewing a Certificate of
Inspection (COI), the owner or operator
must submit a completed CG–3752,
Application for Inspection of U.S.
Vessel, to the cognizant OCMI. As noted
in § 136.130(d), the applicant must
specify the option—TSMS or Coast
Guard Inspections—when submitting
the Application for Inspection for a
vessel.
Step 2: Under § 136.212, the Coast
Guard will inspect the vessel at least
once every 5 years for certification.
Step 3: As specified in § 136.212(c) of
this final rule, the OCMI will issue a
vessel a new Certificate of Inspection
after the vessel successfully completes
the inspection for certification.
With respect to this process, and as
noted previously, we amended
§ 138.115 so that owners or managing
operators of towing vessels selecting the
TSMS option need to obtain a TSMS
certificate at least six months before
being able to have any of their vessels
certificated. We believe this is more
consistent with the required schedule of
when vessels must obtain a COI as
shown in § 136.202 when considering
the time needed for third parties to
obtain Coast Guard approval and for
owners and managing operators to
obtain approval of their TSMS from the
third parties.
Five maritime companies suggested
that additional language be provided in
§ 138.305 to clarify how a third-party is
to respond when a non-conformity is
discovered and what the appeals
process will be for a company whose
certificate is rescinded.
The Coast Guard agrees and has
added language to § 138.505(a) to
specify that the results of any external
audit of the owner or managing
operator’s compliance with § 138.315 of
this part must be submitted to the
Towing Vessel National Center of
Expertise within 30 days of audit
completion by the TPO conducting the
external audit. Further, we amended our
definition of ‘‘non-conformity’’ in
§ 136.110 to clarify that it is referring
the non-fulfillment of a safety
management system specified
requirement. On reviewing proposed
§ 138.215(j) procedures for evaluating
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
recommendations, which has been
redesignated as § 138.215(i), to be more
consistent with other quality control
and safety management systems, we
amended its reference to the source of
the recommendations to include more
company personnel, and made a similar
edit in § 138.220(a)(2)(ii) regarding
reporting non-conformities.
Regarding the appeal process, in
proposed § 136.180 we stated that any
person directly affected by a decision or
action taken under this subchapter by or
on behalf of the Coast Guard, may
appeal in accordance with subpart 1.03
in subchapter A of this chapter. In
response to comments, the Coast Guard
has added § 1.03–55 to identify the
Coast Guard official or entity appeals
should be directed to, including the
appeal of matters relating to action of a
third party, such as when a TPO
rescinds a TSMS certificate.
A professional association noted that,
as written, proposed § 138.305 would
require that all towing vessels in a fleet
that are in compliance with the TSMS
be included on the company’s TSMS
certificate. The commenter stated that
this provision would render an entire
fleet invalid if a TSMS is revoked under
proposed § 138.305(d), and therefore, a
paragraph needs to be added to this
section detailing the appeals process for
the rescinding of a TSMS, which
mirrors the current Coast Guard appeals
process for rescinded COI’s. One
commenter suggested that the proposed
requirement in paragraph (c) to list
vessels on a TSMS certificate is
cumbersome and unnecessary.
The Coast Guard understands the
commenter’s concern and has amended
§ 138.305, so that owners or managing
operators need only maintain, and
produce on request, a list of vessels
currently covered by each TSMS
certificate. This is a less burdensome
means of requiring this information.
Exceptional circumstances such as
failure to complete a required audit,
major non-conformities discovered
during an audit or survey, and failure to
fully implement their TSMS could
render the TSMS certificate invalid for
a company’s entire fleet. Based on the
Coast Guard’s experience with other
safety management systems, including
ISM, these circumstances have been
rarely observed. It is more likely that an
infraction of the regulations would
result in a less drastic response—for
example, in the form of nonconformities being reported for the one
or few vessels involved, or those vessels
being removed from the list of vessels
found to be in compliance with the
TSMS.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
If the situation warrants, the TPO that
issued the TSMS certificate is able to
rescind the certificate, which could
impact the entire fleet, or remove one or
more vessels from the list of vessels on
the TSMS for non-compliance with the
requirements of part 138. Such an action
that would render the certificate no
longer valid would indeed impact the
entire fleet of vessels listed in that
TSMS certificate. Also, we note that the
Coast Guard may suspend or revoke the
TSMS certificate at any time for noncompliance with the requirements of
part 138. As discussed above, we have
added 46 CFR 1.03–55 to clearly
identify the Coast Guard official or
entity appeals should be directed to for
those seeking to appeal a decision by a
TPO under § 138.305(e) to rescind, or a
Coast Guard official under § 138.305(d)
to suspend or revoke, a TSMS
certificate.
In commenting on § 138.305(f)
requirements, an individual suggested it
is unnecessary for a copy of the TSMS
certificate to remain onboard the vessel
because the certificate will be on file at
the Captain of the Port (COTP) and at
the company’s office.
The Coast Guard does not agree. Some
towing vessels will frequent a number of
COTP zones. The TSMS certificate
provides evidence that a vessel covered
by the TSMS was found to meet 46 CFR
part 138 requirements, and a copy on
board the vessel will be readily
available to Coast Guard officials
wherever the vessel is operating.
A transportation company suggested
that two certificates should be issued
instead of one: A Towing Company
Safety Management System Certificate
to the office and a Towing Vessel Safety
Management System Certificate to each
towing vessel. One commenter
recommended and provided text for a
new section that would provide
information on how to obtain such
certificates.
The Coast Guard does not agree. A
TSMS is intended to be the central
document that directly links the towing
vessel and the shore-based management
operation. The TSMS is not only for the
vessel or only for management. Rather,
it is the documentation of processes,
responsibilities and required action
defining the mutually supporting
actions between the vessel mariners and
management. A TSMS certificate should
be the only document issued attesting to
the acceptability of the system. This
should reduce the paperwork burden on
industry and TPOs.
We received comments suggesting the
removal of the proposed requirement for
an internal auditor to be a person
outside of the organization. Commenters
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
felt that this requirement could make it
difficult for small companies to comply.
Others suggested that a person who is
involved in the development of the
TSMS would be useful in identifying
areas where the system is not meeting
standards. Several comments from
maritime companies felt that the
requirements for internal auditors
should mirror ISM Code 12.4, which
states that ‘‘Personnel carrying out
audits should be independent of the
areas being audited, unless this is
impracticable due to the size and the
nature of the Company.’’
The Coast Guard believes that some of
these comments are based on a
misreading of § 138.310. The section
does not require an internal auditor to
be a person outside of the organization.
However, to come closer to the desired
objectivity of a third-party organization,
the internal auditor may not be a person
involved in the implementation of the
TSMS. In response to these comments
on § 138.310, the Coast Guard has
amended § 138.310(d)(4) to include
qualifying language from ISM code 12.4:
The auditor must be independent of the
procedures being audited, unless this is
impracticable due to the size and the
nature of the organization. Thus, very
small organizations may potentially use
someone from within their organization
to perform the audit.
Some commenters also recommended
that the proposed requirement, in
§ 138.310(d)(2), for internal auditors to
have completed ISO 9001–2000 courses
be deleted.
The Coast Guard does not agree. We
believe that a robust auditing system
that includes both internal and external
auditing processes serves to enhance the
effectiveness of a safety management
system and provides a venue for
identification of deficiencies and a
process for corrective action. Requiring
internal auditors to have completed an
ISO 9001–2000 internal auditor/assessor
training course, or a Coast Guardrecognized equivalent course, is
intended to ensure that the internal
auditor is familiar with basic auditing
standards and procedures. However, we
want to accept those who have been
trained under newer ISO 9001–2008, so
we amended §§ 138.310(d) and
139.130(b)(3) to include that standard.
In this final rule, both the ISO 9001–
2000-based training we referenced in
the NPRM and the ISO 9001–2008-based
training meet our qualification
requirement. The intended result of this
training is to ensure that the internal
audit meets minimum standards.
One commenter requested more
information regarding the accepted
course work for internal auditors. An
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40033
individual offered suggestions for the
minimum education for internal
auditors.
The Coast Guard disagrees. The Coast
Guard has incorporated ISO 9001
standards for internal auditor
competencies in § 138.310 to reflect the
best practices found in industry. The
Coast Guard does not agree that
standards either less than or in excess
of these minimum competencies
enhance the credibility of the internal
auditing process. We made no changes
from the proposed rule based on these
comments.
We received comments that requested
clarification of our requirements for
external audits in § 138.315. One
commenter opposed the provision in
§ 138.315(b)(2) that vessels must be
selected randomly for an external audit
during the 5-year period of validity of
the TSMS certificate, which the
commenter viewed as subjecting a
vessel to multiple external audits. He
suggested that satisfying § 136.203
requirements for vessels with TSMS
certificates should be sufficient.
Another was confused by
§ 138.315(b)(2)’s requirement for an
external audit prior to the issuance of
the TSMS certificate because he felt it
was the initial audit that leads to the
TSMS certificate. One commenter
questioned why we called for random
audits.
In response to these comments we
have changed § 138.315(b) to clarify the
requirements for external vessel audits.
We removed the requirement in
proposed paragraph (b)(1) regarding the
need for an external audit on all vessels
prior to an owner or managing operator
receiving the initial TSMS certificate.
Upon reconsidering this provision we
determined it is not necessary and
instead we considered the need for
vessel to undergo an external audit in
relation to the initial COI for the vessel.
And in doing so we considered the two
different categories of vessels for which
an owner or managing operator would
need to obtain an initial COI. First, there
are the vessels that have been owned or
operated for more than six months
which generally will include all existing
vessels that are now coming under this
subchapter. Secondly, there are newly
constructed vessels as well as existing
vessels that an owner or managing
operator may obtain, all of which will
need a COI to operate but which have
been owned or operated for less than 6
months. For the first category,
§ 138.315(b)(1) requires the vessel to
undergo an external audit prior to
obtaining the initial COI. For the second
category, § 138.315(b)(2) requires that
the vessel undergo an external audit no
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40034
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
later than 6 months after receiving the
initial COI. We note, that as required by
§ 138.505(b), the results of all external
vessel audits are required to be provided
to the cognizant OCMI. We believe that
6 months of operation is sufficient for
owners or managing operators to fully
implement their TSMS on their towing
vessels and is also consistent with other
SMS provisions including the duration
of interim ISM vessel certificates.
Proposed § 138.315(b)(2) has
remained the same but is now
§ 138.315(b)(3). The other change we
made was to add § 138.315(b)(4) to
clarify that not all information for an
external audit necessarily needs to come
from the vessel examination as some
may be obtained from the owner or
managing operator’s office but that
however, some of the information must
be obtained by visiting the vessel.
As noted, we made these changes to
clarify when vessels need to undergo an
external audit as well as the relationship
between the external audit and a
vessel’s initial COI.
As for the comment regarding
confusion caused by § 138.315(b)(2),
(now § 138.315(b)(3)), we note that, as
proposed, paragraph (b)(1)’s
requirement for an external audit of the
vessel before issuance of the initial
TSMS certificate is separate from
paragraph (b)(2)’s requirement that an
external audit of each vessel must be
conducted during the 5-year period of
validity of the TSMS certificate. We
didn’t view these requirements as
confusing or conflicting but as noted
above, we have removed the
requirement proposed in
§ 138.315(b)(1). Nor do we consider
§ 138.315’s sequencing of external
management audits and vessel audits as
confusing. As noted above, we removed
proposed § 138.315(b)(1) and replaced it
with provisions in (b)(1) and (b)(2) to
specify when an external vessel audit is
required relative to a vessel receiving
the initial COI. Note that § 138.315(a)(2)
and new § 138.315(b)(3) continue to
specify the external management and
vessel audits required during the
validity period of the TSMS certificate.
It is important that all vessels undergo
one external audit every five years along
with external management audits to
verify that an owner or managing
operator’s TSMS have been fully
implemented and the TSMS certificate
can be renewed. In proposed
§ 137.210(c), we did state that before it
could be placed in an audited program,
a towing vessel must successfully
complete an initial audit by a thirdparty organization, and then be audited
as required by part 138. In this final rule
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
we removed any reference to an initial
audit in part 137.
One commenter recommended
replacing the random selection with a
requirement for at least one
intermediate verification between the
second and third anniversary dates of
the TSMS certificate. Another
commenter stated that § 138.315’s
sequencing of external management
audits and vessel audits seems
confusing.
The commenter’s concern about
proposed § 138.315(b)(2)’s, now
§ 138.315(b)(3)’s, random-selection
provision is unwarranted because that
paragraph specifically calls for only one
(‘‘an’’) external audit of vessels during
the 5-year period. In addition, as noted
previously, we added § 138.315(b)(4) to
allow for the use of objective evidence
to verify compliance with some portions
of the audit; however, some portions
require visiting each vessel during the 5year period. We call for the vessels to
be selected randomly to provide a riskbased approach and maximum
flexibility for ensuring continual
compliance with this subchapter.
Therefore, we decline to amend
§ 138.315 to remove the randomselection provision.
We received comments from several
companies noting that the proposed
requirement in § 138.315(c), that audit
documents to be maintained for 5 years
and submitted to Coast Guard upon
request, appears to conflict with the
proposed § 138.505 requirement that the
owner or managing operator submit
each audit to the Coast Guard.
The Coast Guard agrees that these two
sections contain different record
requirements, but we do not view them
as conflicting requirements. Paragraph
(c) of § 138.315 calls for the
maintenance of external audit results so
that they are available when requested
by the Coast Guard inspectors or an
external auditor. Coast Guard inspectors
may not have access to those audit
reports submitted to the TVNCOE and
external auditors may not otherwise
have access to results from previous
TPOs’ management or vessel audits. The
Coast Guard has amended § 138.505 to
clarify who the submission is required
to go to and the submission timeframe
for the external audit results.
Three commenters suggested that a
provision be added to § 138.315 that
states the OCMI or COTP may be able
to extend the external audit time period
due to the unavailability of an TPO.
The Coast Guard declines. Paragraphs
(a) and (b) of § 138.315 establish a range
of time for companies and TPOs to
schedule external audits. A TPO that
has been contracted to oversee the
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
towing company’s TSMS program is
responsible for maintaining the audit
cycles required by the regulations. The
TPO has the ability to enter into
contractual agreements to conduct
required audits. However, in response to
these comments, we added a paragraph
(l) to § 139.120 to clarify the
responsibilities of the TPO in regards to
conducting required external audits and
surveys within the intervals established
in this subchapter.
Some commenters recommended that
text be added to § 138.410 to address the
process an auditor must follow when he
or she identifies a non-conformity.
These commenters recommended
adding a requirement that the TPO
notify the owner or managing operator
and the Coast Guard immediately of any
recognized hazardous condition that
poses an imminent hazard to personnel,
the towing vessel, or the environment.
For less serious non-conformities, these
commenters recommended that the
auditor only require the owner or
managing operator to develop and
implement a corrective action plan.
The Coast Guard agrees with the
commenters’ suggested edits. First of all,
we amended § 138.505 to make clear
where external audit result reports are
to be submitted. Under § 138.505, all
detected non-conformities would be
reported to the Coast Guard because
they would be part of the results of any
external audit. Section 138.505 contains
requirements on what is to be submitted
to the Coast Guard by the external
auditor and when it is to be submitted.
In addition, we also amended § 138.410
to require the auditor to notify the Coast
Guard within 24 hours of discovering a
major non-conformity which, as defined
in § 136.110, would cover hazardous
conditions that pose imminent hazards.
We also amended § 138.410 in response
to this comment to ensure the auditor
reports major non-conformities to the
owner or managing operator.
We received several comments,
particularly from maritime companies,
requesting that we add language to
proposed § 138.500 to specify which
Coast Guard office or official the owner
or managing operator should notify
prior to conducting a third-party audit
and to clarify that the Coast Guard’s
attendance at such audits—attendance
that § 138.500(b) allows the Coast Guard
to require—would not or should not
cause delays in the audit.
The Coast Guard has amended
§ 138.500(a) in response to these
comments to include a notification to
the cognizant OCMI at least 72 hours
prior to an external audit to mitigate
potential delays in the conduct of the
audit from Coast Guard scheduling, if
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
attendance is required. In a related
amendment, we deleted § 139.170 in its
entirety because those requirements are
already stated in parts 137 and 138.
A company suggested that § 138.505
clarify that audit records only be
provided to the Coast Guard upon
request. Also, a maritime company
requested to be able to submit
documents required by § 138.505
electronically.
The Coast Guard disagrees with the
suggested change to § 138.505 to only
provide records upon request. Final
reports from the external management
and vessel audits must be provided to
the Coast Guard within 30 days of an
audit. For the Coast Guard to properly
oversee vessels using subchapter M’s
TSMS option, it is important that it
receives final reports soon after they are
completed. As noted above, we set the
30-day submission deadline in response
to a previous comment. We note that in
addition to this submission
requirement, § 138.315(c) requires
records of external audits to be
maintained for 5 years and made
available on request. These reports are
valuable historical records that must be
available when needed by internal and
external auditors as well as by the Coast
Guard.
As for submitting external audits
records or results required by § 138.505
electronically, we noted earlier that we
amended § 140.915(b) to provide
safeguards against false or late
electronic entries in towing vessel and
TSMS records. If the submitter uses
equivalent safeguards for transmitting
records, the Coast Guard will accept
electronically transmitted external
audits records that § 138.505 directs be
submitted to the Towing Vessel
National Center of Expertise (managing
operator’s compliance audits) and the
cognizant OCMI (towing vessels
external audits) so long as the means
used allows the Coast Guard to reliably
verify the person making the submission
and the authenticity of the external
audit records. For those seeking to
submit external audits records or results
to the Coast Guard electronically, the
TSMS must address the means to be
used to make electronic submissions.
We have amended § 138.505 to reflect
this option.
We received comments from a
maritime company and an individual
requesting more information regarding
the address to which the results of an
external audit are to be submitted to the
Coast Guard.
The Coast Guard agrees with these
requests and has amended § 138.505 so
that it is clear to the TPO which Coast
Guard office or official external audit
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
records must be submitted to. Also, we
have inserted the address for the Coast
Guard Towing Vessel National Center of
Expertise.
We received six comments from
maritime companies requesting more
information be provided regarding
potential actions the Coast Guard may
take if an owner is found to be
noncompliant with the TSMS or
requirements in subchapter M. Also,
two commenters suggested that the
TSMS is ‘‘unenforceable’’ and that we
do not have a sufficient penalty process
in place for violations.
The company and its vessels are
subject to a broad range of actions by the
Coast Guard and the TPO depending on
the conditions found on the vessel.
Companies and vessels operating under
a TSMS that fail to meet minimum
requirements may be subject to
enforcement, including Captain of the
Port orders restricting operations,
suspension and withdrawal or
revocation of the COI, and suspension
or revocation of the TSMS certificate.
Also, as we state in § 140.1000,
violations of the provisions of this
subchapter will subject the violator to
the applicable penalty provisions of
Subtitle II of Title 46, and the penalty
provisions of Title 46, and Title 18,
U.S.C.
A company expressed concern about
whether the Coast Guard would have
resources to hire a sufficient number of
competent vessel inspectors for
convenient scheduling for the company,
including drydock scheduling.
Regarding having a sufficient number
of competent vessel inspectors, as we
indicated in response to comments
above, the Coast Guard is prepared for
what it has estimated will be the
demand for annual inspection from
owners and managing operators
selecting the Coast Guard inspection
option. The Coast Guard will closely
monitor the demand for inspections and
will make resource adjustments as
necessary.
Two maritime companies felt that use
of any Coast Guard inspection resources
should be based on risk and that those
companies that have had satisfactory
safety records, and successful TSMS
audits, should not have the same level
of Coast Guard oversight as companies
with a history of poor performance.
The Coast Guard agrees with the
comment about its allocation of
resources and intends to use a riskbased approach based on safety, survey,
inspection and audit histories.
One commenter requested
information regarding how the Coast
Guard will manage conflict of interest
potentially created by future
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40035
employment opportunities in the towing
vessel industry offered to those
conducting inspections. All Coast Guard
personnel are bound by ethics laws and
regulations which govern their ability to
seek and accept non-federal positions
following their government service.
One commenter urged the Coast
Guard to obtain full jurisdiction over
regulated towing vessels, including
areas that OSHA is currently regulating.
This request is beyond the scope of
this rulemaking. OSHA will continue to
enforce its requirements on shipyard
employers that perform shipyard
employment subject to 29 CFR 1915 on
inspected and uninspected vessels.
OSHA will also continue its current
enforcement on uninspected vessels.
A towing company suggested that a
more ‘‘streamlined’’ TSMS be offered to
smaller companies so as to avoid
burdensome administrative
requirements.
A safety management system in
general, and the TSMS in particular, is
a flexible tool for management in that it
is user-defined to address the unique
operations, equipment and hazards
present in the vessel operator’s market.
For the small business operator with a
fleet of one or two vessels the TSMS
may not need to be an expansive
document. The requirements to identify
the range of operations for a small
towing vessel serving a limited area and
market is likely to be much less than
that of a larger towing vessel company
consisting of dozens of vessels and
serving a large, diverse market over a
large area.
The TSMS for small operators is
scalable to their operation. Thus, it can
be ‘‘streamlined’’ to address a limited
set of assets, process, and personnel. As
a towing vessel operation grows, so too
would the TSMS need to scale up to
identify the growing inventory of
operations and accompanying safety
concerns. We have not made any
changes from the proposed rule based
on these comments.
One commenter suggested that the
safety culture in the towing vessel
industry could be further developed by
addressing the communication barrier
between managers and operation
personnel.
We believe the safety culture the
commenter refers to will be greatly
enhanced in companies with a TSMS in
place. A TSMS is the central document
that directly links the towing vessel and
the shore-based management operation.
For a TSMS to be effective, management
and operational personnel must
continuously communicate. The TSMS
documents processes, responsibilities
and required action that define the
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40036
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
mutually supporting actions between
managers and operation personnel. The
Coast Guard believes that the integration
of the TSMS will result in enhanced
safety as it promotes greater
communication and also defines
corrective actions required when
communications fail to produce the
intended result of improving safety.
One commenter suggested that for
small companies that choose to elect the
Coast Guard inspection option, language
should be added to indicate that
‘‘alternative compliance methodologies’’
are acceptable.
As we noted above, the Streamlined
Inspection Program in part 8, subpart E,
of this chapter, is an option that vessels
subject to subchapter M may seek to use
to renew a COI. Also, in § 136.115, we
proposed accepting certain alternative
approaches to satisfying subchapter M
requirements. We did not propose,
however, to allow vessels subject to
subchapter M to take advantage of part
8, subpart D’s, Alternative Compliance
Program to obtain a COI. We have made
no changes from the proposed rule
based on this comment.
Another commenter suggested
updating the Streamlined Inspection
Program to include electronic,
downloadable forms, and user-friendly
templates.
This suggestion is outside of the scope
of this rulemaking. We made no changes
from the proposed rule based on this
comment.
In the NPRM we discussed comments
submitted in response to seven
questions we posed in a December 30,
2004, Inspection of Towing Vessels
notice. In response to that portion of the
NPRM, one of these commenters
recommended that all vessels should
comply with the proposed SMS rules
within 1 year. The same commenter
suggested that using the ISM Code from
2002 as a guideline in developing the
SMS requirements will allow for a
number of operators using the AWO
RCP to be compliant.
Neither our proposed rule nor this
final rule would require towing
companies selecting the Coast Guard
compliance option to establish a safety
management system. This rule provides
an option for towing companies to use
the ISM systems currently published in
33 CFR part 96 or other safety
management systems acceptable to the
Coast Guard under § 138.225. The Coast
Guard believes that we are providing
sufficient flexibility for towing
companies that want to adopt the safety
management system option under
subchapter M.
We also received two comments on
the proposed rule that opposed the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
TSMS. One stated that TSMS should not
be the basis of any inspection regime
and that any governmental inspection
program should be staffed appropriately
to provide for Coast Guard inspections,
and asserted that having third party or
other industry inspectors opens the door
to profiteering or altered inspection
requirements not originally intended by
the regulations.
The Coast Guard views subchapter M
external and internal survey programs,
combined with Coast Guard oversight of
vessels and organizations choosing the
TSMS option, as an effective means of
helping to ensure compliance with
subchapter M requirements. In addition,
all vessels subject to subchapter M will
be inspected by the Coast Guard before
obtaining a COI and at least once every
5 years. See §§ 136.210 and 136.212.
Another commenter stated that TSMS
is not necessary as an option because
the Coast Guard can do the inspections
as outlined in subchapter T (Small
Passenger Vessels) which incorporates
everything that is required in
subchapter M. We disagree that
subchapter T is appropriate for the
unique nature of towing vessel
operations, which is reflected in our
authorization in 46 U.S.C. 3306(j) to
establish an SMS ‘‘appropriate for the
characteristics, methods of operation,
and nature of service of towing vessels.’’
We believe that a towing-vessel-specific
subchapter is appropriate, rather than
imposing existing inspected vessel
regulations on towing vessels. Towing
companies that may lack the resources
to develop and implement a TSMS, or
choose not to, must follow the Coast
Guard inspection option.
I. Third-Party Organizations (TPOs)
(Part 139)
We received several comments,
mostly from maritime companies,
requesting that the list of approved
TPOs be made available online.
The Coast Guard concurs with this
recommendation and plans to publish a
list of TPOs for the towing vessel
industry to refer to when considering
the selection of a TPO. The Towing
Vessel National Center of Expertise
(TVNCOE) will update and maintain the
list and make it available at:
www.uscg.mil/tvncoe.
Other commenters requested that
§ 139.120 be changed to include the
name of the Coast Guard program office
to which an organization seeking to
become a TPO should submit its
request.
The Coast Guard agrees. We have
amended § 139.120 to identify the office
and address of the TVNCOE, where
such requests should be sent.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
One commenter expressed concern
regarding the option offered by the
wording of §§ 139.115 and 139.120 for
TPOs to create customized audit
guidelines and tools. The commenter
pointed out that the variety of audit
reports could present inconsistencies
during compliance checks.
As proposed, part 138, subpart D, of
this final rule requires that audits must
be of sufficient depth and breadth to
ensure the owner or managing operator
meets the requirements outlined in
§ 138.220. In our NPRM, we noted that
an elaborate TSMS designed for large
operations may be impractical for
owners or managing operators with
small operations, and that a small
company may seek to use a significantly
scaled down TSMS tailored to its
operation. We acknowledge there will
be variations in TSMSs. Similarly, we
acknowledge that §§ 139.115 and
139.120 allows TPOs to develop
customized audit guidelines and tools.
The Coast Guard intends to issue
guidance that may include sample
checklists, job aids, and guides, but we
have not changed §§ 139.115 and
139.120 based on this comment because
the requirements in part 138, subpart D,
must still be met and we do not favor
more prescriptive, one-size-fits-all
standards in part 139.
One commenter expressed confidence
in the Coast Guard’s ability to oversee
the inspection of towing vessels
conducted by classification societies.
We received other comments expressing
support for the use of qualified or
trained third-party auditors and
surveyors. Also, several maritime
companies and a professional
association supported Coast Guard’s
proposal to allow smaller entities, other
than recognized classification societies,
to apply for Coast Guard approval.
Under proposed § 139.110 a
recognized classification society
automatically would have met the
requirements of a TPO for the purposes
of part 139. However, as noted above,
we have amended § 139.110 to clarify
the distinction between audits and
surveys. A recognized classification
society meets the requirements of a TPO
for the purpose of performing audits. An
authorized classification society meets
the requirements of a TPO for the
purpose of performing surveys. We did
this to ensure the Coast Guard has
evaluated the classification society’s
ability to carry out vessel surveys. We
added a definition in § 136.110 of
‘‘authorized classification society’’ for
clarity. Paragraph (c) of § 139.110 has
been amended to specify that
organizations qualifying as TPOs under
paragraphs (a) or (b) of that section must
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
ensure that employees providing
services under part 139 hold proper
qualifications for the particular type of
service being performed. We also note
that the criteria stated in our TPO
application section, § 139.120, allow
small entities to become TPOs. As we
defined it, the term ‘‘third-party
organization’’ is used to describe an
organization approved by the Coast
Guard to conduct independent
verifications to assess whether TSMSs
and towing vessels comply with
applicable requirements contained in
this subchapter.
All auditors and surveyors approved
to conduct subchapter M external
surveys and audits would be part of a
TPO. We set standards for auditors and
surveyors in § 139.130, but these are
used in conjunction with § 139.120
where we require TPO applicants to list
the organization’s auditors and
surveyors who meet the requirements of
§ 139.130. On further review of
§ 139.130(a), the Coast Guard realized it
makes sense to include ‘‘surveyor’’ in
this lead paragraph. The specific
qualifications for an auditor and a
surveyor remain in paragraphs (b) and
(c), respectively. We have edited this
section accordingly.
One commenter expressed concern
that the requirements for TPOs would
result in only classification societies
qualifying to become auditors. The
commenter was concerned that class
society personnel are experienced in
blue water shipping but not towing
vessel operations.
The Coast Guard developed this rule
to ensure that organizations, including
small entities, with the requisite
knowledge, experience, and
qualifications would be eligible to
become a TPO. The standards in part
139 allow organizations other than
recognized classification societies to
become TPOs, and meeting these
standards should be within the
capabilities of small entities seeking to
provide such services to the towing
industry.
As qualified in our discussion above,
§ 139.110 does not subject recognized or
authorized classification societies to
additional requirements for application
as a TPO; however, as stated in
§ 139.110(c), their employees providing
services under this part must have the
proper qualifications in accordance with
§ 139.130. The Coast Guard established
this requirement to ensure that
employees of recognized classification
societies have the proper experience in
towing vessel operations in order for
them to carry out TPO audits under
subchapter M.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
To help readers better understand that
relationship, in the regulatory text of
this final rule we have converted
references to ‘‘approved third-party
auditor’’ or ‘‘approved third-party
surveyor’’ to show this relationship—
e.g., ‘‘surveyor or auditor from a thirdparty organization.’’ Also, although we
have left some difficult-to-change
instances in place, we avoid using the
word ‘‘approved’’ with TPO because, as
noted above, by definition a TPO is
approved.
We received several comments,
particularly from maritime companies,
supporting Coast Guard’s oversight of
third-party auditors and urging the
Coast Guard to implement the approval
process for third parties prior to the
finalization of the rule. Commenters felt
that the Coast Guard would need to
ensure that a sufficient pool of thirdparty approvers is available prior to the
increased demand created by
subchapter M compliance.
The Coast Guard is aware of the
concern regarding the availability of
third-party organizations. Subchapter M
regulations governing third-party
organizations need to become effective
before the Coast Guard will be able to
evaluate requests from organizations
seeking to become a TPO under part
139. That effective date is July 20, 2016.
Also, on that date, in accordance with
§ 139.110, recognized classification
societies and authorized classification
societies may begin acting as TPOs for
the purpose of conducting subchapter M
audits and surveys. As we noted above,
we used a phased approach in our
§ 136.202 deadlines for obtaining a COI
so as to distribute the work load over a
6-year period from the effective date of
this final rule.
A commenter suggested that the Coast
Guard publish a Navigation and Vessel
Inspection Circular (NVIC) that provides
the qualification process for TPOs.
The Coast Guard plans to issue a
guide to assist small entities, including
those interested in becoming a thirdparty organization under subchapter M.
However, we believe that part 139 is
sufficiently specific. Section 139.120
identifies the information an
organization would need to submit to
become a TPO for purposes of
subchapter M. We have amended
§ 139.120 so it more precisely identifies
where such requests should be sent.
Section 139.130 includes a list of the
qualifications of auditors and surveyors
that those applying to become a TPO
need to use to identify that
organization’s auditors and surveyors
who meet these requirements. The Coast
Guard will consider issuing guidance if
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40037
it identifies wide-spread confusion after
this rule is published.
Some commenters, including
maritime companies and trade
associations, viewed the qualifications
required for surveyors in § 139.130 as
inadequate and recommended that the
qualifications include sufficient
background, training, and experience to
qualify as a TPO. One of these
commenters suggested that training for
both auditors and surveyors should be
provided by an independent
accreditation organization. A
commenter provided text edits to the
language in proposed § 139.130(b)(2)
and recommended several minimum
education requirements for auditors and
surveyors.
Section 139.130(c) already specifies a
minimum level of education, skills, and
experience needed for surveyors from
TPOs. The ISO standard training
requirement for auditors and the marine
surveyor’s accreditation requirement, as
stated in § 139.130, incorporate a role of
independent accreditation organizations
in the required training for both
surveyors and auditors from TPOs. The
Coast Guard feels that the criteria in
§ 139.130, which lists qualifications of
auditors and surveyors, provides a
sufficient minimum level of education,
skills and experience needed for thirdparty surveyors and auditors, and that
we cannot point to evidence that higherlevel-education requirements would be
justified. Owners, managing operators,
and TPOs can establish additional
requirements at their discretion.
Some commenters suggested that the
Coast Guard require surveyors to receive
ISO 9000 series training.
In § 139.130 we include successful
completion of an ISO 9001–2000 or
9001–2008 lead auditor/assessor course
or Coast Guard recognized equivalent
qualification for auditors, but not
surveyors. The Coast Guard does not
believe that we should add training in
ISO 9001 standards as a required
qualification for surveyors because
surveyors conduct direct inspections of
vessel equipment and systems as
opposed to auditing SMS processes. In
addition, the ISO does not have a 9001
equivalent for surveying at this time.
We received a comment requesting
that existing qualified and certified
inspectors that participate in an
auditing program be ‘‘grandfathered’’ as
approved third-party inspectors.
The Coast Guard does not intend to
allow grandfathering of existing
inspectors who may be participating in
some form of an existing program. The
Coast Guard has no oversight of these
personnel and has no specified
minimum qualifications for them to
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40038
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
conduct such work. If a person with
qualifications required in § 139.130
wishes to conduct subchapter M TSMS
audits or survey, he or she would need
to start or become part of a TPO.
We received requests for more
information regarding the monitoring
and removal process of auditors or
third-party companies.
In § 139.145, we describe the process
for a suspension of approval when the
Coast Guard has determined that a TPO
is not complying with the provisions of
part 139. Under that process the Coast
Guard will provide details to the TPO of
the organization’s failure to comply and
provide a time period for the
organization to correct its failure(s). In
this final rule, we shorten § 139.145 by
replacing a repeated list of procedures
the Coast Guard must follow for a
partial suspension with a reference
pointing back to the same procedures
listed in paragraph (a) for a suspension.
In § 139.150, we make clear that the
Coast Guard may revoke the approval of
a TPO if the organization has
demonstrated a pattern or history of
failing to comply with part 139,
substantially deviates from the terms of
the approval granted under part 139, or
has failures that indicate to the Coast
Guard that the organization is no longer
capable of carrying out its duties as a
TPO. We amended § 139.150, to provide
provisions for Coast Guard notification
to TPOs of actions taken under
§ 139.150. In terms of monitoring, we
note that § 139.160 lays out means for
the Coast Guard to oversee TPOs.
Two commenters requested more
information regarding the reference to
‘‘Required training courses for the
auditing of a Towing Safety
Management System’’ in § 139.130(b)(4).
Paragraph (b)(4) of § 139.130 in the
proposed rule listed ‘‘[s]uccessful
completion of a required training course
for the auditing of a Towing Safety
Management System’’ as one of the
qualifications in paragraph (b) an
auditor must meet. Because auditors
must meet all the qualifications listed in
paragraph (b), we have deleted the
redundant word ‘‘required’’ from
paragraph (b)(4). Also, for added clarity
and consistency we removed ‘‘required’’
from paragraph (b)(5)(ii) for the
previously stated reason.
Given the nature of the towing
industry, the Coast Guard believes that
auditors should complete a TSMSspecific auditing course. At the time of
this writing, the Coast Guard is aware of
at least one TSMS Auditor course and
the Coast Guard believes that additional
courses will be developed once this rule
becomes effective, similar to the way
courses developed for auditors of ISM-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
based safety management systems. We
anticipate that market forces will meet
the demand for TSMS-specific auditing
courses.
One commenter requested that the
regulation be modified to only accept
auditors that are U.S. citizens.
The Coast Guard disagrees with this
recommendation. This commenter did
not provide reasons why we should
make the requested change and we find
no reason to base the eligibility for
becoming an auditor in a TPO on
citizenship. There are towing vessels
operating overseas or in U.S.
jurisdictions outside of the continental
U.S. Requiring that an auditor be a U.S.
citizen might unnecessarily limit the
availability of auditors to these vessels.
Also, a recognized classification society
may operate around the world and is
not required to employ only U.S.
citizens.
A commenter suggested that both
auditors and surveyors must be
accredited by an independent
accreditation organization that is
accepted by the Coast Guard and is
organized especially for the purpose of
accrediting auditors and surveyors to
perform work in documenting
compliance with subchapter M
requirements for towing vessels. The
commenter did not believe that the
National Association of Marine
Surveyors (NAMS), the Society of
Accredited Marine Surveyors (SAMS),
or another other organization should be
allowed to accredit individual surveyors
for purposes of subchapter M until the
Coast Guard has approved the
organization’s accreditation processes.
This commenter suggested the
possibility that this accreditation
process could also be done by an
independent third-party auditor/
surveyor accreditation organization that
is accepted by the Coast Guard.
We note that, that as with other
organizations, NAMS and SAMS are not
required to apply for approval to the
Coast Guard to accredit individual
surveyors. In § 139.130, where we list
qualifications for auditors and
surveyors, we have removed paragraph
(c)(4), which references accredited
marine surveyors and NAMS and
SAMS. Instead, we added ‘‘accredited
marine surveyor’’ to a list of other
relevant marine experience in paragraph
(c)(2)(ii).
These edits eliminate names of
specific accrediting organizations, but
still include work experience as an
accredited marine surveyor as a factor to
be considered and identified in
applications. The Coast Guard believes
that accreditation is a valuable factor to
consider, but not an essential one—as
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
reflected in the proposed rule which
only required that qualifications from
paragraph (c)(1) (education) and one of
the two remaining paragraphs, (c)(2)(i)
or (ii), be met. At this time, the Coast
Guard does not see the need for it to
accept an independent accreditation
organization for the purpose of
accrediting subchapter M auditors and
surveyors.
Some commenters recommended that
the Coast Guard require that all TPOs
provide and maintain a list of current
and former auditors and surveyors.
As we proposed in the NPRM,
§ 139.135(a) of the final rule specifically
requires TPOs to ‘‘maintain a list of
current and former auditors and
surveyors.’’ In § 139.135(b), we remove
the word ‘‘for approval,’’ but retained
the requirement that to add an auditor
or surveyor, the TPO must submit that
person’s experience, background and
qualifications to the Coast Guard. We
note that it is the responsibility of the
TPO to ensure that auditors and
surveyors conducting work for their
organization satisfy the qualifications
requirements in § 139.130. The
submissions required by § 139.135(b)
will assist the Coast Guard in its
continual oversight of TPOs.
A State government and a task force
suggested that the Coast Guard consider
developing a TPO-rating criterion that is
based on the percentage of towing vessel
companies (for which the TPO has
issued a TSMS certificate) that the Coast
Guard independently finds to have
major non-conformities. If the number
of companies in a given period having
major non-conformities exceeds that
percentage, the TPO should be
automatically placed on the a ‘‘grey
list,’’ and be required to demonstrate to
the Coast Guard that it is taking actions
to improve its oversight/auditing
program. The commenters felt that this
criterion would help vessel owners and
operators assess the qualification of its
oversight program.
The Coast Guard will consider this
recommendation after it gains
experience with the implementation of
these rules when developing metrics for
evaluating and overseeing TPOs.
Two commenters expressed concern
that a company may switch TPOs to
find one that enforces compliance with
subchapter M less rigorously. These
commenters suggested that the Coast
Guard develop a criterion to prevent
towing vessel companies from ‘‘thirdparty organization hopping,’’ such as a
provision that if a towing vessel
company changes TPOs more than once
in a 5-year period, an external Coast
Guard inspection of the company’s
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
TSMS documents and vessels is
automatically triggered.
The Coast Guard acknowledges that a
company may seek to switch its TPO for
the reason suggested, but a company
may also change its TPO for reasons
beyond its control or for reasons other
than seeking to avoid full compliance
with subchapter M. Because switching
TPOs is not necessarily a reason to focus
more attention on a given company, the
Coast Guard would be reluctant to adopt
the more-than-once-in-5-years metric
suggested by the commenters, but it
does acknowledge that changing TPOs
could be a signal that more scrutiny
should be focused on a company. We
note that the monetary costs and the
loss of time associated with such
changes will be factors a company
would consider before switching to a
different TPO, and therefore we do not
expect TPO switching to be a common
occurrence.
Referencing §§ 139.120 and 139.155, a
commenter noted that the NPRM does
not specify a process for a company to
follow if it needs to appeal a decision
of its TPO to deny or revoke issuance of
a TSMS certificate. The commenter also
noted that the Coast Guard must create
a specific appeals process because
towing vessel companies with a TSMS
are dependent on third-party
documentation to obtain a COI. The
commenter wrote that the proposed rule
required third parties to develop
procedures for appeals, and allows a
company to follow existing, general
appeals procedures, but that more detail
is needed.
The Coast Guard has provided a
specific appeal process in this final rule.
As reflected in above, in § 136.180 we
stated that any person directly affected
by a decision or action taken under this
subchapter by or on behalf of the Coast
Guard, may appeal in accordance with
subpart 1.03 in subchapter A of this
chapter. We have added § 1.03–55 to
identify the Coast Guard official or
office appeals should be directed to,
including the appeal of matters relating
to action of a third party, such as when
a third party rescinds a TSMS
certificate.
A commenter expressed concern
regarding a potential conflict of interest
for companies that develop TSMSs or
provide TSMS-related training sessions.
The commenter said that such a
company would not be able to
objectively inspect systems that they
developed because finding fault with
the towing company would be a
reflection on their own work. Moreover,
this commenter saw a related potential
conflict of interest resulting if the only
companies that could be hired to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
conduct surveys and audits were those
that didn’t develop the TSMS. In that
situation, the commenter noted, it may
be the developer’s direct competitor
who is hired as the TPO and that
competitor would have a natural
tendency to be biased against programs
that look different from the ones it
produces.
Section 139.120(o) requires TPO
applicants to disclose any potential
conflicts of interest. Section 139.120(p)
requires applicants to submit a
statement to the Coast Guard stating that
their employees who are engaged in
audits and surveys will not engage in
any activities that could result in a
conflict of interest, which we define in
§ 136.110, or that could otherwise limit
the independent judgment of the
auditor, surveyor, or organization. And
under § 139.150(a)(3), conflicts of
interest are a factor the Coast Guard may
consider when deciding whether to
revoke the approval of a TPO. An
organization does not have to be a TPO
to develop or help implement a TSMS,
but a TPO is the only entity that can
verify compliance with a TSMS or issue
a TSMS certificate.
One company stated that an
organization should be assigned to
oversee the third-party process in order
to ensure consistency in the use of
resource materials and tools. Another
commenter asked what process would
be in place to oversee TPO training and
approvals.
As reflected in the NPRM and this
final rule, the Coast Guard will provide
direct oversight of TPOs. A list of Coast
Guard oversight activities appears in
§ 139.160. This oversight is intended to
ensure that TPOs that conduct audits
and surveys for towing vessels subject to
this subchapter comply with part 139
requirements. To the extent consistency
in the use of resource materials and
tools by TPOs is required by part 139,
the Coast Guard will provide the
oversight requested. To the extent it is
not, we view the requested oversight as
an area best left to market forces. In
reviewing proposed § 139.160(g), which
discussed the Coast Guard being able to
require a replacement for
noncompliance or poor performance, we
deleted that paragraph because it is
covered by suspension provisions in
§ 139.145(b).
We received a comment from a towing
company that felt that because of
limited Coast Guard resources, relying
on third-party auditors would be a
solution to the increase in demand for
inspections after implementation of
subchapter M.
We concur that the use of TPOs under
the TSMS option may reduce the
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40039
number of Coast Guard inspections
required to implement subchapter M.
We received comments from towing
companies and professional associations
that suggested that TPO requirements in
proposed § 139.160(f) and (g) be moved
to § 138.510 because of the discussion of
owner and managing operator
compliance oversight of TSMS. One
commenter suggested that § 139.160(f)
be moved under § 138.400.
The Coast Guard disagrees with these
recommendations. Section 139.160 lists
discretionary oversight activities the
Coast Guard employs in its oversight of
TPOs. These oversight activities should
not be moved under § 138.510, which
describes the Coast Guard’s authority to
direct owners, managing operators, and
third parties to explain or demonstrate
portions of the TSMS when there is
evidence that the TSMS is not in
compliance with part 138 requirements,
nor under § 138.400, which addresses
audits of safety management systems.
We did remove § 139.160(g), however,
because it is covered by suspension
provisions in § 139.145(b), and we also
removed proposed paragraph (c)
because there was no need for us to refer
to assigning personnel to observe or
participate in audits or surveys.
A commenter suggested that the Coast
Guard open communications with
stakeholders to become better informed
of options to ensure consistency in the
auditing process.
The Coast Guard established the
TVNCOE in 2010 to help promote
consistency in the regulation of towing
vessels and to promote communications
between the Coast Guard and industry
as we moved towards certification of
towing vessels. The TVNCOE
communicates routinely through their
national customer service
representatives, list server, and Web site
(https://www.uscg.mil/tvncoe) with those
who will be subject to subchapter M
requirements. As the Coast Guard
approving authority for TPOs, TVNCOE
will have oversight responsibilities to
assure consistency with the auditing
process.
One commenter said that the Coast
Guard needs to ‘‘assure the integrity’’ of
the third-party approval system.
The Coast Guard expects that by using
a single entity, the TVNCOE, to review
and approve TPOs, the Coast Guard will
ensure consistency and integrity in the
subchapter M TPO system.
A commenter felt that in the context
of part 139, it is not clear if a third-party
auditor needs to be associated with a
TPO or if an auditor can be approved as
an independent operation.
The Coast Guard notes that to perform
external audits under subchapter M, the
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40040
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
auditor must be listed by a TPO as one
of its auditors who meets the
requirements of § 139.130. This
individual need not be exclusively
employed by a single TPO. It would be
possible for a single auditor—who
worked in a remote location, for
example—to work for more than one
TPO. As previously mentioned, the
Coast Guard has revised language in this
final rule to make it clear that under
subchapter M, external surveys and
audits must be conducted by auditors
and surveyors who are part of—and
subject to oversight by—a TPO.
An individual noted that part 139
does not contain procedures on how to
conduct a damage survey of a vessel.
Part 139 deals with TPOs and would
not contain requirements relating to a
damage survey. Surveys are generally
discussed in part 137. Section
137.300(b) discusses an OCMI’s ability
to require further examination of the
vessel in the event of damage. In
addition, if the vessel is damaged,
§ 136.240 addresses how to obtain
permission to proceed for repairs. The
extent of a given vessel’s damage and
other circumstances may warrant
specific survey requirements.
One towing company suggested the
need for a peer auditing program to
assess consistency and competency
among TPO auditors and surveyors.
TPOs will be required to adhere to
ISO 9001 standards for operating in
accordance with a Quality Management
System, and their auditors must have
completed training in ISO 9001 Quality
Management Systems Auditing. We list
‘‘accredited marine surveyor’’ in
§ 139.130, along with other-relevantmarine-experience, as a non-mandatory
qualification for surveyors.
We do not agree with the commenter
that supplemental peer-review of TPO
auditors and surveyors is warranted or
necessary. We note that the work of
surveyors will be subject to audits, and
as noted above in our discussion of
§ 139.160, the Coast Guard will be
overseeing the work of TPOs.
An individual argued that the intent
of the term ‘‘third party’’ is to explain
that the Coast Guard is a third party to
towing vessels and the term should not
apply to the organizations to which the
Coast Guard is delegating authority.
The Coast Guard does not use the
term ‘‘third party’’ in the way suggested
by this commenter. We use the term to
refer to a TPO, which we define as ‘‘an
organization approved by the Coast
Guard to conduct independent
verifications to assess whether towing
vessels or their TSMSs comply with
applicable requirements contained in
this subchapter.’’ As previously noted,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
we have made changes to clarify our
third-party references in this rule, but
we have made no changes from the
proposed rule based on this comment.
As noted above in our discussion of
comments related to part 138, we
removed § 139.170 because those
attendance provisions are already stated
in parts 137 and 138.
J. Operations (Part 140)
We received many general comments
from individuals, companies, and
associations concerning our operational
requirements in part 140.
Two commenters noted that the
purpose section of part 140 does not
explain how the Coast Guard will
ensure that non-TSMS operating
companies comply with the regulations
because these companies do not have
documented written procedures and are
not subject to audits. One commenter
expressed concern that non-TSMS
companies would have lower operation
costs and their services would be less
safe.
In the NPRM, the Coast Guard offered
the TSMS or Coast Guard annual
inspection option. For vessels that do
not choose the TSMS option, we will
use Coast Guard inspections to verify
compliance with the requirements of
this subchapter. We are confident that
the Coast Guard annual inspection
option will help to ensure that towing
vessels are operated at an appropriate
level of safety. The casualty reviews
presented in the benefits chapter of the
Regulatory Analysis found many
instances in which the Coast Guard
inspection and TSMS options were
rated the same in risk reduction benefits
and other cases where the TSMS
options scored higher. If a company
believes the Coast Guard inspection
option is more cost-effective than a
TSMS, this rule provides the flexibility
for that choice. We have made no
changes from the proposed rule based
on this comment.
In reviewing § 140.200, and similar
sections in parts 141 through 144 which
state that if a TSMS is applicable to the
vessel it must have provisions for
compliance with that part, we decided
to delete those sections. They are
unnecessary because part 138 addresses
what the TSMS must cover regarding all
subchapter M requirements.
A company noted that the list of
mariners required to have a
Transportation Worker Identification
Credential (TWIC) by § 140.205(e)’s
reference to 33 CFR 101.105 is too broad
and should instead be the same
requirement as under 33 CFR 101.515.
Further, an individual noted that the
rule did not have language explaining
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
the requirement for TWIC cards for
individual employees on vessels moving
certain dangerous cargo.
In part 140, subpart B, which includes
§ 140.205, we do require that the vessel
be operated in accordance with
applicable laws and regulations, but
there is no explicitly stated requirement
for personnel to hold a TWIC. The Coast
Guard understands the problem with
§ 140.205(e)’s reference to 33 CFR
101.105, and in the final rule we
removed that reference and replaced it
with the personal identification
requirements of 33 CFR 101.515—which
do not require personnel to have a
TWIC.
One commenter suggested that
complete background checks for
employees should not be required for
those crewmembers who are required to
obtain a TWIC.
The Coast Guard notes that in general
a background check is included as part
of receiving a TWIC, and we also note
that we are not requiring background
checks in these regulations.
Regarding a Master’s authority on
board, an individual suggested that
proposed § 140.210 ensure that the
TSMS contains a clear statement
emphasizing the master’s authority.
The Coast Guard proposed in
§ 140.210(b) that the master must take
adequate corrective action or cease
operations when he or she believes that
an unsafe condition exists. Moreover,
§ 140.210(c) further states that the
master has the authority to take steps
deemed necessary and prudent to assist
vessels in distress or for other
emergency conditions. The Coast Guard
believes that these requirements are
sufficient to provide the master of the
vessel the appropriate latitude and
discretion to exercise his or her duties
to ensure the safety of the vessel. In
reviewing § 140.210, we have added the
officer in charge of a navigational watch
as also having the responsibility to cease
operation or take adequate corrective
action if he or she believes it is unsafe
for the vessel to proceed. Also, we
amended § 140.210(d) to indicate that
the crew must ensure that either the
master or the officer in charge of a
navigational watch is made aware of the
vessel’s condition. And in § 140.605 we
moved a requirement into paragraph (a)
that was covered by proposed paragraph
(c) and added ‘‘or officer in charge of a
navigational watch’’ in the discussion of
determining if the vessel meets all
stability requirements before getting
underway. We made similar revisions to
the requirements for master or officer in
charge of a navigational watch in
§§ 140.610(c) (hatches and openings)
and 140.615(b) (tests and examinations).
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
One commenter felt that if the
language in § 140.210(d) is intended for
crew members who are responsible for
maintaining a vessel’s COI, then the
Coast Guard should require that the
vessel’s TSMS contain a provision
requiring that crew members receive
training on how to complete the tasks
assigned to them by the TSMS and how
to comply with the COI.
The Coast Guard proposed in
§ 138.220(b)(2)(ii) that the TSMS
contain a policy relating to training
personnel in ‘‘duties associated with the
execution of the TSMS.’’ The Coast
Guard believes that this requirement is
sufficient to ensure that crew members
are aware of their duties under the
TSMS. We have made no changes from
the proposed rule based on this
comment.
A company suggested that the term
‘‘pilot’’ would be more appropriate
instead of ‘‘mate’’ in § 140.210(c).
Another commenter suggested that
‘‘mate (pilot)’’ be deleted from
§ 140.210(c) because its current use
suggested that the mate and master were
equal, rather than the master having the
ultimate authority on the ship.
Alternatively, the commenter suggested
that language be added to § 140.210(c)
stating that the mate must inform the
master before deviating from the COI if
time and circumstances permit.
The Coast Guard recognizes that
throughout the diverse towing industry
there are differences in terminology,
including in the use of ‘‘pilot’’ or
‘‘mate.’’ For purposes of consistency
with other sections, the Coast Guard has
chosen to use the terms ‘‘master or mate
(pilot)’’ in this rule, or ‘‘officer in charge
of a (or the) navigational watch’’ as
appropriate, as they are the most
common currently applied terms in
related regulations and policy,
including manning regulations in 46
CFR part 15. The Coast Guard does not
agree with the comment about ‘‘mate
(pilot)’’ because we are simply referring
to the responsibility of the person in
charge of the navigational watch. The
Master retains overall responsibility for
the safety of the towing vessel as
prescribed in § 140.210(a). We have
made no changes from the proposed
rule based on this comment.
We received two comments
suggesting the development of a policy
to restrict the use of cell phones and
other non-essential electronic devices
by pilothouse watchstanders.
The Coast Guard has added language
in § 140.210(d) requiring the crew to
minimize distractions when performing
duties. This amendment is intended to
prevent the non-essential use of cell
phones and other distractions that take
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
away from a crewmember’s situational
awareness. Given the commenters’ focus
on pilothouse watchstanders, we have
amended § 140.640 to expressly require
the officer in charge of a navigational
watch to maintain situational awareness
and minimize distractions.
We received two comments
suggesting that either the word
‘‘lookout’’ be deleted from § 140.400(c),
or that the word be changed to the
phrase ‘‘supplemental lookout.’’ They
argued that the term ‘‘lookout’’ was
superfluous because the master or mate
serves as his or her own lookout.
The Coast Guard is requiring in
§ 140.400 that a record be maintained
for all watchstanders going on and off
watch. Lookouts are added by the
master or mate (pilot) under the
provisions of § 140.630. This does not
preclude the Master or Mate (Pilot) from
acting as a lookout, when appropriate.
Section 140.400 requires that lookouts
and all other members of the navigation
watchstanding team must have times of
service entered and recorded. Our
addition of ‘‘officer in charge of a
navigational watch’’ to the list of
watchstanders does not change our need
to include lookouts.
We received comments from an
individual and an association who
recommended that the Coast Guard
should require that any mariner,
engineer, or watchstander that works in
the engine room, or near machinery, be
provided with initial safety training and
additional training on the operation and
maintenance of installed machinery
prior to beginning work in these areas.
In §§ 140.410(b)(10) and 140.515, the
Coast Guard specifically requires safety
orientation training on the awareness of
and expected response to any hazards
inherent to the operation of the towing
vessel which may pose a threat to life,
property, or the environment. Section
15.405 of 46 CFR requires that
crewmembers be familiar with the
relevant characteristics of the vessel
prior to assuming their duties and
responsibilities, including the main
propulsion and auxiliary machinery,
such as steering gear systems and
controls. We have amended §§ 140.405
and 140.410 to note that personnel must
meet the requirements in §§ 15.405 and
15.1105 as appropriate. In § 140.405, we
also added threats to the environment
during an emergency as situations when
the duties and duty stations of each
person onboard must be identified; this
amendment is consistent with general
vessel operation objectives stated in
§ 140.205(a).
Under §§ 140.510 and 140.515, it is
the responsibility of the owner or
managing operator to identify the
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40041
unique training required to mitigate the
risk to the specific machinery and
operating equipment aboard each
particular towing vessel.
Several commenters suggested that
proposed § 140.415 include the
following text in the ‘‘reserved’’
paragraph: ‘‘A safety orientation need
not be provided to an individual that is
not a crewmember if that individual is
accompanied while on board the towing
vessel by a crewmember who is familiar
with the items specified in
§ 140.415(a).’’
The Coast Guard does not agree. The
Coast Guard believes it is unreasonable
to assume that during an emergency the
escorting crewman would have no other
responsibilities or duties other than
escorting the individual at all times
while aboard the vessel. The Coast
Guard believes that a safety orientation
for individuals visiting the vessel would
not place an undue burden in terms of
time or distraction. The Coast Guard has
made no changes from the proposed
rule based on these comments.
However, note that for simplicity we
have removed the ‘‘reserved’’ paragraph,
made the previous paragraph (a) into
introductory text, and made the
previous subparagraphs of (a) into
paragraphs (a) through (d), as
appropriate.
One commenter asked for clarity
regarding specific drills and training
that would be required in § 140.420(a),
and thought that the requirement of
drills to respond to ‘‘other threats to life,
property, or the environment’’ was too
ambiguous. Another noted that
additional requirements for first-aid
trainings should be included in the
regulation.
The Coast Guard in § 140.420(a)
provided specific emergency drills that
must be performed. This includes
abandoning the vessel, recovering
persons from the water, responding to
onboard fires and flooding, or
responding to other threats to life,
property, or the environment. The
owner or managing operator is
responsible for identifying any other
additional training and drills required
in addition to the above identified
requirements based on the specific
intended service of their vessels. This
may be covered by the required risk
assessment for TSMS vessels.
The Coast Guard has made no changes
from the proposed rule based on these
comments.
We received a recommendation for
text additions to proposed § 140.420
that included the option for ‘‘elearning’’ for emergency drills and
trainings. The commenters suggested
that the Coast Guard not require follow-
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40042
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
on discussions with a subject matter
expert if the ‘‘e-learning’’ provides
scoring at the completion of training
and the individual receives a score
higher than the minimum required by
the TSMS.
The Coast Guard in § 140.420(e)
specifically provides for alternative
forms of instruction for the training
aspect of § 140.420; however, the
participation in emergency drills must
take place on board the vessel so far as
practicable. This section permits
training required by this rule to be
conducted by viewing electronically or
digitally formatted training materials
followed by a live discussion led by
someone familiar with the subject
matter. The Coast Guard believes that
follow-on discussions with members of
the crew and interactive discussions
provide insights into the specific
functions of emergency procedures
aboard a particular ship and allow crew
members to individually and
collectively discuss specific actions and
expectations of each other during drills
or actual emergencies. Further, to
ensure that the alternative form of
instruction is sufficient, we amended
§ 140.420(e) by adding requirements
that a competent individual provide a
demonstration using equipment that is
the subject of the training.
We received several comments on
§ 140.420(d). An individual noted that
‘‘rescue boat’’ was not defined in
§ 136.110. The commenter questioned
whether the Coast Guard was using the
terms ‘‘skiff’’ and ‘‘rescue boat’’
synonymously in § 140.420(d) and
requested that the Coast Guard define
‘‘rescue boat’’ if ‘‘rescue boat’’ and
‘‘skiff’’ were intended to be different
vessels. Another commenter felt that
requiring a safety orientation for
crewmembers to be conducted annually
as proposed in § 140.420(d)(1) was
unnecessary and burdensome.
The Coast Guard recognizes ‘‘skiffs’’
and ‘‘rescue boats’’ as different types of
vessels and did not use them
interchangeably in § 140.420(d). The
Coast Guard agrees that ‘‘rescue boat’’
should be defined and has amended
§ 136.110 to provide a definition.
As for the second comment, the Coast
Guard agrees and has removed proposed
§ 140.420(d)(1), which contains the
requirement for an annual safety
orientation. The requirements for when
a safety orientation should be conducted
can be found in § 140.410(b). The Coast
Guard has amended that paragraph to
clarify that a safety orientation is
required for a crewmember prior to that
crewmember getting underway for the
first time on a particular towing vessel.
Also, in § 140.410(c) we corrected a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
reference to ‘‘new vessel,’’ by switching
it to ‘‘other vessel’’ regarding
requirements for safety orientation
provided to crewmembers who received
a safety orientation on another vessel.
Furthermore in § 140.410(d) we
amended paragraph (d)(3) to require the
signature in addition to name of those
providing training.
In reviewing § 140.420(d), we added
paragraph (d)(5) which states that
credentialed mariners holding an officer
endorsement do not require the
instruction listed in paragraph (d) with
the exception of launching a skiff, if one
is listed as an item of emergency
equipment to abandon ship or recover
persons overboard. We added a similar
provision in § 140.645(c) for
credentialed mariners holding Able
Seaman or officer endorsements
regarding navigation safety training
requirements in § 140.645. These
changes allow credentialed mariners to
use their previous training to meet
specified subchapter M training
requirements.
One commenter suggested that the
term ‘‘work vests and anti-exposure
work suits’’ be used instead of ‘‘work
vest’’ in § 140.430 because anti-exposure
work suits are also approved under 46
CFR 160.053.
The Coast Guard does not agree with
this suggestion. Vessel personnel are
afforded three choices of approved
equipment that they may use. In
§ 140.430 the Coast Guard addresses the
wearing of work vests and states that life
jackets, immersion suits, and work vests
must all meet applicable regulations.
The term ‘‘anti-exposure work suit’’
does not appear within 46 CFR subpart
160.053. The Coast Guard has made no
changes from the proposed rule based
on these comments.
We received several comments
requesting that § 140.430 permit type III
Personal Flotation Devices (PFD) as an
alternate to work vests. One commenter
requested that work vests worn at night
not require a light.
Section 140.430 provides the standard
requirements for the wearing of work
vests; however, companies can require
the use of approved flotation devices
that are of a higher type rating. The
Coast Guard does not agree with the
comment requesting the removal of the
lighting requirement for work vests
worn at night as this is an important
safety feature for night time operations.
We note that we did amend a reference
in § 140.430 to a paragraph in § 141.340
based on amendments we made in
§ 141.340; we changed the paragraph
reference from ‘‘(c)’’ to ‘‘(g)(1).’’
We received several comments
opposing the requirement in
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
§ 140.435(b) and (c) for small crews and
low-risk environments to maintain
automatic external defibrillators (AEDs)
on board towing vessels. Commenters,
including maritime companies, felt the
proposed requirement should be
removed because subchapter T, which
applies to vessels in higher risk
environments, does not require AEDs.
Others felt that the cost of the
equipment and training would be a
burden on small companies. A maritime
company requested that harbor boats be
exempted from the requirement because
of the emergency response personnel
and land-based assistance available.
Also, we received several comments
that supported the requirement and
need for AEDs on towing vessels. An
individual suggested clarifying that the
intent of the requirement is for vessels
that are ‘‘double crewed’’ and not those
containing ‘‘overnight
accommodations.’’ Two commenters
suggested that the training for AED use
should be left to the manufacturer’s
recommendations.
Due to the comparatively high cost of
the carriage (estimated by the Coast
Guard at $2,500 per unit for each
vessel), maintenance, and training of
AEDs on board towing vessels, the Coast
Guard has decided to remove the AED
requirements proposed in § 140.435(b)
and (c). However, companies can elect
to carry, maintain, and train crews on
equipment above and beyond the scope
of subchapter M requirements. Owners
and managing operators can address
AED carriage using a risk-based
approach through the requirement to
implement procedures to identify and
mitigate health and safety hazards in
§ 140.510.
We received some comments on
safety concerns that were not included
in the NPRM. Two commenters noted
that the NPRM does not include the safe
remediation of asbestos and suggested
either referencing OSHA regulations or
other related code in the rulemaking or
drafting our own regulations and adding
them to the rulemaking. A commenter
also expressed concerns regarding
carbon monoxide exposure from
exhaust leaks in the towing vessels and
suggested that the Coast Guard include
guidance on protection against carbon
monoxide exposure.
Another commenter suggested that
the Coast Guard implement a ‘‘No
Smoking’’ policy for mariners. The same
commenter and an individual requested
that Coast Guard institute hearing
protection programs as well. Similarly,
a commenter suggested that the Coast
Guard implement additional
occupational safety and health
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
regulations to protect mariners from
accidental injury or death.
Another commenter said that the
regulations should incorporate effective
means of ‘‘severing or releasing’’ a chain
or wire rope tow connection in the case
of emergencies, noting that a fire axe
cannot effectively cut such towline.
Lastly, two commenters provided
several suggestions for additional
workplace safety regulations such as
preventive maintenance programs, the
incorporation of the OSHA personal
injury reporting system instead of CGform 2632 for personal injury reporting,
and a hearing protection program for
mariners comparable to OSHA
standards for shoreside workers.
With regard to mariner safety, the
Coast Guard is committed to the safe
operation of vessels and the protection
of mariners. Section 140.510 establishes
the requirements for owners or
managing operators to implement
procedures to identify and mitigate
health and safety hazards aboard towing
vessels subject to inspection, which can
include exposure to asbestos, smoking,
noise, carbon monoxide, and the ability
to sever or release wire or chain
towlines. Regarding the comment on the
use of the CG–2692, this rule
implements a casualty reporting regime
consistent with the requirements for
other classes of inspected vessels.
Further, this final rule requires that the
owners and operators of these vessels
develop and implement their own
health and safety processes and
procedures—see subpart E of part 140.
The OSHA standards for shoreside
workers could be used as a template for
this purpose. The Coast Guard has made
no change from the proposed rule based
on these comments.
Finally, the Coast Guard disagrees
with the comments regarding the
incorporation of OSHA standards. As
we noted in the NPRM, OSHA’s
jurisdiction on the workspace safety
aspects for seamen on towing vessels
subject to subchapter M will cease.
However, we have endeavored to
incorporate some of the OSHA
requirements into the Health and Safety
Plan requirements in the final rule. A
commenter’s recommendation that
Congress transfer certain authority from
OSHA to the Coast Guard is beyond the
scope of this rulemaking.
We received numerous comments that
objected to proposed § 140.520, which
would require the owner or managing
operator to maintain and provide access
to medical records. Several commenters
suggested that this section be deleted
because medical recordkeeping is not
required in subchapter T. Other
commenters also felt that § 140.520
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
conflicted with the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act of
1996 (HIPAA), Public Law 104–191, and
should be deleted in its entirety,
because under HIPAA employers do not
retain medical records on employees
containing diagnoses that those
employees have not already seen. One
commenter suggested that § 140.520(b)
be deleted because it conflicted with the
patient’s right to know and violated
HIPAA. Another commenter suggested
that the section be revised to emphasize
medical records confidentiality
requirements that currently exist in
Federal law. One commenter felt that
the section should clarify what
information an employer can give out
under HIPAA. One commenter
questioned which medical records need
to be retained under § 140.520(a).
Finally, another commenter suggested
we amend § 140.520(a)(1) so as to
require that only medical records
related to pre-employment physicals,
injuries occurring in the course or scope
of employment, or medical procedures
required by the employer be
maintained.
The Coast Guard agrees in principle
with the comments and deleted
proposed § 140.520 from the final rule.
The intent of the requirement was to
ensure that owners or managing
operators retain records of injuries
occurring in the course or scope of
employment as a result of a health and
safety incident on board the vessel.
However, we believe the health and
safety plan required under § 140.500
already includes recordkeeping
procedures addressing this issue. Also,
we have amended § 140.505(a) to make
clear that the owner or managing
operator must maintain records of
health and safety incidents that occur
on board the vessel, including any
medical records associated with the
incidents, and that upon request, he or
she must provide crewmembers with
incident reports and the crewmember’s
own associated medical records.
One commenter suggested that the
Coast Guard establish food sanitation
regulations in the final rule and felt that
sanitation regulations, including food
sanitation, should be enforced with
recognized standards using an
inspection checklist. The Canada
Shipping Act was cited as an example.
The Coast Guard does not agree that
additional regulations are required in
the final rule to address the issues of
food sanitation aboard towing vessels.
As we proposed, this rule requires that
the owner or managing operator of the
towing vessel to establish policies
regarding sanitation and safe food
handling. These requirements may be
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40043
found in § 140.510(a)(13). Additionally,
the Coast Guard has the authority
during normal inspection activities to
issue corrective action orders to a
towing vessel to improve any unsafe
condition, including unsanitary food
conditions, and under § 137.220, the
owner or managing operator of a towing
vessel that has selected the TSMS
option must examine or have examined
systems, equipment, and procedures to
ensure that the vessel and its equipment
are suitable for the service for which the
vessel is certificated, including being in
compliance with part 140 of this
subchapter. The Coast Guard has made
no change from the proposed rule based
on this comment.
A professional association noted that
the potable water supply for vessels
should be maintained at the same
quality as for the Coast Guard’s military
and civilian employees. The commenter
suggested that the Coast Guard issue
regulations in this rulemaking that are
reasonable and attainable by towing
vessels. Two commenters suggested that
if the water supply aboard a vessel does
not satisfy tests for quality and purity
the vessel owners must provide bottled
water for the crew members.
The Coast Guard agrees that the
condition of water supply aboard
towing vessels should be of a sufficient
quality that the members of the crew are
not endangered. Under 46 U.S.C.
3305(a)(1)(D), the inspection process
ensures that vessels subject to
inspection have an adequate supply of
potable water for drinking and washing.
In the NPRM, the Coast Guard proposed
a requirement in § 140.510(a)(13) for the
owner or managing operator to
implement procedures to identify and
mitigate health and safety hazards
regarding sanitation and safe food
handling. Having an inadequate supply
of safe water for sanitation purposes and
for food handling is to be addressed by
the owner or managing operator. To
ensure that potable water is expressly
addressed in § 140.510, and that there is
an adequate supply of potable water for
drinking, we have added a potable water
supply requirement as § 140.510(a)(14).
One commenter felt that the proposed
requirements in § 140.515(b) for training
for individuals, other than crew
members, should include more specifics
on the information or training required,
such as fire training and abandon-ship
training. Another commenter suggested
that the refresher training in
§ 140.515(d) be repeated every 5 years,
rather than annually, because annually
was excessive.
The Coast Guard does not agree that
additional information on the
information and training required for
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40044
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
persons aboard towing vessels other
than crew members is required in this
rule to address the commenter’s
concerns. In § 140.415, the Coast Guard
requires that individuals who are not
crewmembers on board towing vessels
must receive additional safety
orientation prior to getting underway or
as soon as practical thereafter to include
issues of use of life-saving equipment,
emergency procedures, emergency
communications with crewmembers in
case of an emergency, and prevention of
falls overboard. Under § 140.515(b), the
Coast Guard requires owners or
managing operators to identify, specific
to their towing vessel’s operations, what
other information or training is needed
to limit the exposure of individuals to
hazards onboard the vessel.
The Coast Guard believes that annual
refresher training is necessary but, as
reflected in § 140.515(d), the refresher
training does not need to be as in-depth
as the initial training. These annual
training requirements parallel or mirror
comparable OSHA requirements which
currently apply to uninspected towing
vessels. Companies have the ability to
tailor this training to be less
comprehensive based on the risk. We
made no changes from the proposed
rule based on these comments.
We received comments from
individuals and companies who felt that
the proposed requirement in § 140.610
to close all exterior openings on the
main deck is not feasible when vessels
require ventilation during hot weather,
and not necessary in low water where
there is no current.
Others contended that stability is not
an issue on inland waterways, and that
there should be no stability
requirements for Western Rivers towing
vessels.
The Coast Guard believes that
watertight integrity and stability is a
concern on any vessel, regardless of
service or operating area. Towing
vessels must be maintained and
operated so the watertight integrity and
stability of the vessel is not
compromised. There is a sufficient body
of historical evidence regarding towing
vessel casualties in which the cause of
the casualty was the lack of watertight
integrity of the towing vessel.
Specifically, open hatches have
permitted the uncontrolled ingress of
water into the towing vessel, resulting
in the vessel sinking.
Within their final report on
‘‘Recommendations for the
Enhancement of Towing Vessel
Stability’’ dated September 9, 2013,
TSAC provided a safety
recommendation to the Coast Guard,
that towing vessel operators should
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
‘‘close and dog watertight hatches
during towing operations’’ to minimize
the risk of down-flooding and
progressive flooding of the towing
vessel.
We have provided appropriate
exceptions to the requirements in
§ 140.610(c)(1)–(3) to give sufficient
flexibility to the vessel’s master for crew
comfort and convenience. The Coast
Guard has made no changes from the
proposed rule based on these comments.
However, in reviewing § 140.610 on
hatches and other openings, we added
an express requirement, previously
implied in that section, that decks and
bulkheads designed to be watertight or
weathertight must be maintained in that
condition.
Some commenters suggested that
proposed § 140.610(b) be revised as
follows, ‘‘The master must ensure that
all hatches, doors, and other openings
that were installed to be watertight and
weathertight are functioning properly.’’
With one amendment, the Coast
Guard agrees with the suggested
revision. The intent of proposed
§ 140.610(b) was that any fittings that
crews rely on for watertight integrity
and vessel safety should be operational
and subject to survey. Our revision of
§ 140.610(b) is intended to make two
things clearer. First, this paragraph
covers hatches, doors, and other
openings designed to be watertight or
weathertight, whether or not they are
currently watertight or weathertight.
Second, the reference to ‘‘other
openings’’ in this section is also
intended to be limited to those designed
to be watertight or weathertight.
One commenter recommended that
proposed § 140.615(a) apply to all
towing vessels. Another company
suggested that this section only apply to
vessels that are not subject to 33 CFR
164.80 regulations.
Because it would be redundant to
apply § 140.615 to towing vessels
subject to 33 CFR 164.480, the Coast
Guard agrees with the second
commenter and has not made any
changes to the applicability of § 140.615
except that we replaced the term
‘‘inspection’’ with ‘‘examination’’ to
avoid using different terms to describe
the same action.
An individual suggested that repairs,
such as repairs to navigation lights or
whistles, need not be recorded as
required in proposed § 140.620(d).
The Coast Guard disagrees with the
commenter’s suggestion that the repairs
to navigational safety equipment need
not be recorded. The Coast Guard
believes that a record of repairs made to
navigational safety equipment is a vital
component of good management and
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
recordkeeping. Documentation of
repairs made to such equipment is vital
to identifying systemic issues affecting
the navigational safety equipment.
Additionally, if the vessel is operating
in accordance with the safety
management system, documentation of
repairs made would serve to provide an
account of materials needed and
requested as well as corrective actions
taken in order to address the observed
deficiencies. The Coast Guard has made
no changes from the proposed rule
based on this comment.
We received comments from a State
government and a task force asserting
that the Coast Guard should add
language to § 140.620 requiring that
vessels carrying oil or hazardous
material in bulk immediately notify the
COTP or OCMI when navigational safety
equipment fails and cannot be
immediately repaired.
The Coast Guard does not agree with
the commenters’ suggestion that
additional requirements for reporting
are necessary in this rulemaking. In
accordance with 33 CFR 164.53(a), a
towing vessel may continue to the next
port of call should navigation safety
equipment fail, subject to the direction
of the District Commander or the
Captain of the Port as provided by 33
CFR part 160. A towing vessel is
required by 33 CFR 164.53(b) to report
to the Coast Guard the loss of critical
navigation safety equipment to include
radar, radio navigation receivers, Gyro
compass, echo-depth sounding devices,
or primary steering gear. The Coast
Guard believes that these existing
requirements are sufficient to ensure
safety for towing vessel operations, and
we have made no changes from the
proposed rule based on these comments.
We inserted examples of navigation
safety equipment in § 140.620(c), but
left the repair-promptly requirements in
that section clearly applicable to all
navigation safety equipment.
Similarly, after further review of
§ 140.625, the Coast Guard decided not
to repeat the list (of topics for special
attention) already contained in 33 CFR
164.78; instead we refer to that CFR
section in a note, and point to the
TSMS, where such a list is more
appropriately maintained.
We received several comments, from
maritime companies and individuals
who felt that proposed § 140.630 should
be deleted from the NPRM. Several
companies felt that because lookouts are
included in Rule 5 of the Inland and
International Navigation Rules (33 CFR
83.05), the section is redundant for
subchapter M. Two commenters
suggested that because lookouts for
inspected crew boats are not required in
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
subchapter T, they should not be
required in subchapter M. An
individual asserted that the words
‘‘dedicated’’ or ‘‘designated’’ should be
included before the word ‘‘lookout’’ to
make it clear that a lookout position
would be in addition to a watchstanding officer. A State government
and task force member supported a
second person for bridge watch for all
towing vessel tank barges carrying oil or
hazardous material in bulk.
The Coast Guard does not agree that
the requirements of proposed § 140.630
should be altered or removed from the
rule. The Coast Guard agrees that Rule
5 of the Navigation Rules clearly
identifies the need to maintain a lookout
at all times while underway. The Coast
Guard believes that the additional
language provided in § 140.630 ensures
that owners and managing operators of
towing vessels have greater clarity on
expectations and thresholds of
performance for the placement of
additional lookouts to maintain a state
of vigilance whenever significant
change in the operational environment
occurs. This section makes clear that
responsibility for navigational safety
rests with the master and mate (pilot) of
the towing vessel. Subchapter M
establishes requirements for a class of
vessels that have different operational
risks than those covered by subchapter
T. As for the requirement for a second
person for bridge watch for all towing
vessel tank barges carrying oil or
hazardous material in bulk, the Coast
Guard believes that § 140.630 gives the
Master the proper authority to establish
an appropriate number of lookouts
based on the conditions and other
factors. To clarify the interaction of Rule
5 and 46 CFR 140.630, the Coast Guard
has made changes from the proposed
rule based on these comments.
We received a comment suggesting
that because navigation assessment is
covered in other regulations, it should
be eliminated from § 140.635. The
commenter felt that because navigation
watches are included in Navigation
Rules 6, 7(a) and 8(a), it would be
redundant to include them in
subchapter M. Companies also stated
that a navigation assessment should not
be required in subchapter M because it
is not required in subchapter T.
The Coast Guard does not agree with
the commenter’s suggestion to remove
§ 140.635. The requirements of
§ 140.635 provide additional guidance
and requirements for the vessel’s master
or mate (pilot) to ensure that the proper
planning is conducted and that
sufficient resources, personnel and
equipment are available to mitigate the
identified risks. In addition, subchapter
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
M establishes requirements for a class of
vessels that have different operational
risks than those covered by subchapter
T. The size of a towing vessel’s tow may
be large and continually changing, and
more challenging to navigate than a
small passenger vessel which has a
consistent size. Also, varying heights of
the tow—the tow’s air draft—must be
considered to determine if a tow is low
enough to clear bridges along the towing
vessels intended route. In contrast, the
height of small passenger vessels
normally remains constant. The Coast
Guard has made no changes from the
proposed rule based on this comment.
Two commenters felt that a navigation
assessment should be included in a
company’s TSMS and not included in
the final rule. We received some
comments that were in support of this
provision. Three commenters suggested
that navigation watch assessment
language should be revised in
accordance with the 2006 4 or 2008 5
TSAC recommendations on navigation
watch assessments. An individual
suggested that only vessels that transit
in large areas should be required to have
a navigation watch assessment. Two
commenters felt that it was too
burdensome to conduct and document a
navigation assessment for each voyage
the vessel makes in a watch.
The Coast Guard disagrees with the
commenters’ suggestion that the
requirement for a navigation assessment
should not be included as part of this
rule but rather, be required in the
company’s TSMS. Not all companies or
vessels are required to have a TSMS.
Therefore, we have included these
requirements here in part 140.
The Coast Guard disagrees that the
navigation assessment requirements will
be overly burdensome. As noted by
another commenter, the activities in the
navigation assessment are required by
Navigation Rules 6, 7(a) and 8(a), and
the best practice of prudent seamanship.
In the cases where the navigation
assessment is not being fully
implemented as current practice, we
estimate that an additional 0.2 hours per
operating day of effort would be needed
to meet the requirements in the final
rule. We believe that subchapter M
requirements for conducting navigation
assessments prior to getting underway
or while underway will ensure that
4 Report of the Towing Safety Advisory
Committee Working Group on Towing Vessel
Inspection, Task #04–03, Inspection of Towing
Vessels, Sept. 7, 2006, docket ID no. USCG–2006–
24412–0004.
5 Memorandum from the Towing Safety Advisory
Committee Economic Analysis Working Group,
Dec. 16, 2008, docket ID. No. USCG–2006–24412–
0007.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40045
officers in charge of the navigation
watch have the most up-to-date
information in order to assess
operational risks as well as to anticipate
and manage workload demands during
the voyage.
The Coast Guard believes that the
requirements for the navigation
assessment have taken into account the
safety recommendations and other
guidance received from TSAC. The
TSAC recommendations were based on
the premise that the details of the
navigational assessment requirements
would be contained in the TSMS.
However, not all vessels will be under
the TSMS scheme. Therefore we are
separately including the navigation
assesmment requirements here. The
core elements of the recommendations,
to identify risk and to take into account
the unique characteristics of the tow, are
included in this rule.
Finally, the Coast Guard does not
agree with the commenter’s suggestion
that only vessels that transit in ‘‘large
areas’’ should be required to meet this
requirement for navigational
assessment. The term ‘‘large areas’’ does
not provide sufficient information to
determine the boundaries envisioned by
the commenter. Furthermore, navigation
assessments have value not only for
transits of large areas or of prolonged
duration but also for transits in smaller
areas or of short duration; shorter
transits may also contain risks such as
bridges, high winds, or swift currents.
This requirement reflects good
seamanship and best practices, and does
not pose an undue burden to the
mariner. The Coast Guard has made no
changes from the proposed rule based
on this comment.
A State government and task force
suggested that the Coast Guard require
vessels towing tank barges that carry oil
or hazardous material in bulk to develop
a coastal and inland checklist to
determine if weather conditions make it
safe to proceed, and require personnel
to complete the checklist before
departure and retain it for Coast Guard
inspection. These commenters also
suggested we add language to proposed
§ 140.625 to require a qualified licensed
officer to be in charge of the navigation
of the vessel, as stated in 33 CFR 164.11.
The Coast Guard does not agree that
additional language is required to
address the commenters’ concerns.
Required tests, examinations, and
assessments for personnel operating
towing vessels are provided in
§§ 140.615 and 140.635. Section
140.635(a)(3) specifically requires that
the person in charge of the navigation
watch assess the ‘‘weather conditions
and changes anticipated along the
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40046
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
intended route’’ prior to getting
underway. The Coast Guard believes
that § 140.635(a)(3) and other required
considerations of the navigation
assessment are sufficient to reduce
operational risks and enhance the safety
of the towing vessel and its tows.
The Coast Guard notes that § 140.625
clearly states that at all times, the
movement of a towing vessel must be
under the command of a credentialed
mariner. The commenter correctly notes
that existing regulations require a
credentialed master or mate (pilot) to be
in control of the vessel at all times while
underway. The inclusion of additional
language would not enhance the safety
of towing vessel operations. The Coast
Guard has made no changes from the
proposed rule based on these comments.
We received several comments from
maritime companies that suggested that
because other rules address the
pilothouse requirements in proposed
§ 140.640, it should be eliminated.
Maritime companies and a trade
association felt that the section should
be deleted because sufficient coverage of
this issue exists in §§ 140.635 and
140.645. Three commenters stated that
because § 140.640 is not required in
subchapter T, it should not be required
in subchapter M. However, three
commenters supported this provision.
Two commenters felt that § 140.640
should incorporate the requirements in
33 CFR 164.80 instead of the listed
requirements.
The Coast Guard does not agree with
the commenters’ suggestion that the
requirements of § 140.640 should be
removed from this rule, or that
navigation assessment requirements in
§ 140.635, and § 140.645 navigation
safety training requirements, satisfy the
objective of requirements in § 140.640
which are specific to pilothouse
resource management. Towing vessels
have significantly different performance
capabilities from vessels regulated
under subchapter T. As such, these
vessels require greater levels of
coordinated action and information
transmission between members of the
navigational watch team. The TSAC
reports and AWO Bridge Allision study
as well as casualty data all identify
human factors as a causal factor in a
large percentage of casualties. The Coast
Guard believes that pilothouse resource
management requirements will help
reduce navigational risks. While we
amended § 140.640 for clarity, and as
noted above in this discussion of part
140 comments to address distractions in
§ 140.210(d), the Coast Guard has made
no changes from the proposed rule
based on these comments.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
We intend this rule to provide—as
much as practicable—the requirements
for towing vessels in a single
subchapter. Not all towing vessels are
subject to 33 CFR part 164. For those
that are, §§ 140.625 and 140.635 note
the need for some vessels to comply
with requirements in 33 CFR 164.78 or
164.80.
We do view it as appropriate to tailor
requirements in § 140.640 for those
vessels subject to subchapter M rather
than rely on existing requirements in 33
CFR 164.80. Also, we noted a tension
between our statement in § 140.600 that
subpart F, Vessel Operational Safety,
applies to all towing vessels unless
otherwise specified, and our selective
repeating of this statement in certain
sections. To eliminate that tension, we
deleted those unnecessary and
somewhat confusing references to
applicability in §§ 140.625, 140.635, and
140.640. Also, § 140.600 noted that
some vessels subject to subpart F remain
subject to the navigation safety
regulations in 33 CFR part 164. Sections
140.625, 140.635, and 140.640, as well
as § 140.725, contained statements about
33 CFR part 164 applicability that we
removed or moved to a note for the
section because this was more
informational than regulatory in nature.
As discussed later in this preamble,
however, we did delete §§ 140.810 and
140.815 and amended § 140.800 to
retain and clarify the statement about
applicability.
We received several comments from
maritime companies who stated that
because subchapter T does not require
navigation training for deckhands, this
training should not be required in
§ 140.645. A professional association
felt that obtaining a license is enough to
qualify for navigation.
The Coast Guard agrees in part with
these comments. The Coast Guard
recognizes that the training
requirements in 46 CFR parts 11 and 12,
for certain rating endorsements and all
deck officer endorsements include the
knowledge requirements listed in
§ 140.645. We included a new paragraph
(c) of this section to facilitate a link with
the training requirements in 46 CFR
parts 11 and 12.
The Coast Guard, however, is also
cognizant that not all mariners
performing lookout functions are
credentialed mariners therefore, we did
not change the rest of § 140.645.
Lookout duties may be assigned to crew
members aboard towing vessels who do
not have a credential as master or mate.
Additionally, a crew member may be
assigned temporary duties to assist the
navigational watch team in the
pilothouse during underway operations.
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
It is important that those crew members
serving in such capacity have a basic
understanding and elementary
education in the skills necessary to
perform any safety duties assigned to
them aboard towing vessel.
One commenter suggested that ‘‘fuel’’
also be included in the list of materials
in § 140.655(c) that should not be
intentionally drained into bilges.
The Coast Guard agrees that the
drainage of fuel into the bilge poses a
danger to the safety of towing vessel
operations and the environment.
Section 140.655(c) prohibits a person
from intentionally draining oil or other
hazardous material into the bilge of a
towing vessel from any source. The
Coast Guard intended the reference to
‘‘oil or hazardous material’’ in
§ 140.655(c) to encompass ‘‘fuel,’’ but to
make this clear we have added a
sentence adopting 33 U.S.C. 1321’s
definition of ‘‘oil’’ which includes ‘‘oil
of any kind or in any form, including,
but not limited to, petroleum, fuel oil,
sludge, oil refuse, and oil mixed with
wastes other than dredged spoil.’’ With
the adoption of this definition for
purposes of § 140.655, we deleted ‘‘and
fuel’’ from § 140.655(b) when
referencing spills during transfers. To
avoid any conflicting requirements, we
amended § 140.655(b)(2) regarding oil
spill containment capacity to limit it to
situations when the requirements in 33
CFR 155.320 do not apply.
We received several comments about
§ 140.655(c) from companies suggesting
that because the prevention of oil and
garbage pollution is already a
requirement under other rules, such as
33 CFR 155.770, the Oil Pollution Act
of 1990, and the International
Convention for the Prevention of
Pollution from Ships, this section
should be deleted.
The Coast Guard disagrees. By
expressly stating the requirement in
§ 140.655(c), we make clear that all
vessels subject to subchapter M must
comply with this requirement and the
requirements stated in 33 CFR 155.770.
As previously mentioned, to the extent
practicable, the Coast Guard is seeking
to present in one subchapter nearly all
the regulations with which a towing
vessel subject to this rule must comply.
This regulation prohibiting the
intentional draining of oil or hazardous
material into the bilge is one in
particular that we want to ensure those
subject to subchapter M are aware of.
The Coast Guard has made no changes
from the proposed rule based on these
comments.
A commenter stated that tests and
inspections under provisions of
National Fire Protection Association
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(NFPA) 306, Control of Gas Hazards on
Vessels, during repairs including
welding, burning, or other hot work
were easy to avoid on towing vessels
because these vessels were not subject
to Coast Guard inspection. Noting that
the absence of prescriptive regulations
restricts legitimate Coast Guard safety
investigations to uncover the cause of
accidents, the commenter recommended
that the latest edition of NFPA 306,
Control of Gas Hazards on Vessels, be
incorporated by reference in this rule.
Consistent with this recommendation,
other commenters urged the Coast
Guard to include a requirement for hot
work operations and safety that is
consistent with requirements for cargo
vessels (46 CFR 91.50–1). This
commenter also requested that the Coast
Guard draft regulations for this
rulemaking that govern the proper use
of any autopilot installed on a towing
vessel similar to those that apply to
other classes of inspected vessels.
The Coast Guard agrees that towing
vessels should have requirements for
hot work operations and safety, similar
to cargo vessels, and that the standard
recommended is appropriate and known
within the maritime industry. In
response to these comments, we added
§ 140.665 which incorporates by
reference portions of NFPA 306 in order
to address Marine Chemist inspections
required prior to making alterations,
repairs, or other such operations
involving riveting, welding, burning or
like fire-producing actions.
We also added § 140.670 to address
the use of auto pilot on towing vessels
adopting regulations, as suggested. This
regulation is similar to auto pilot
regulations that apply to other classes of
inspected vessels. We view these
additions as needed to ensure the safe
operation of towing vessels and as
consistent with our proposal for a
comprehensive subchapter M.
We received several comments
regarding proposed § 140.725. Three
maritime companies and a professional
association felt that the requirement for
a fathometer on vessels along the Gulf
Intracoastal Waterway is not needed
because the channel is ‘‘static and
marked,’’ and because the depth of the
water only changes by a couple feet. An
individual stated that magnetic
compasses should be allowed on the
Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. Another
commenter thought that ‘‘electronic
position fixing device’’ was a vague
term, and suggested either that it should
be defined in § 136.110 or that the
definition in 33 CFR 164.41 should be
incorporated in § 140.725(b)(3). This
commenter also recommended that any
devices installed 1 year after the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
effective date of the rule be required to
be approved under series 165.130.
The Coast Guard does not agree with
the commenters’ suggestion that a
fathometer is an unnecessary piece of
equipment aboard towing vessels
operating in the Gulf Intracoastal
Waterway. The Coast Guard agrees that
towing vessels operating almost solely
in marked channels regularly
maintained and commonly traversed
have a high degree of reliability with
regard to water depth. However, these
towing vessels sometimes deviate from
marked channels. A fathometer is a very
useful tool in order to ensure that a
towing vessel does not run aground and
is not damaged.
The Coast Guard notes the
commenter’s suggestion that a magnetic
compass should be allowed on the Gulf
Intracoastal Waterway. There is nothing
in this rule that prohibits the use of the
magnetic compass on board a towing
vessel when operating on the Gulf
Intracoastal Waterway. In reviewing this
comment, we amended § 140.725 by
inserting ‘‘illuminated’’ before
‘‘magnetic compass’’ to match the
illuminated requirement in that section
for that alternative swing-meter, and to
ensure the existing requirement that
both must be readable is met.
While there is no specific definition
of ‘‘electronic position fixing device’’
found in 33 CFR 164.41, the term is
generally now understood to mean a
satellite navigation receiver, since that
was allowed as a stand-alone means of
satisfying the requirement in 1983 (47
FR 58243, December 30, 1982) and the
requirement was subsequently amended
in 2011 once LORAN-based options
were eliminated (76 FR 31831, June 2,
2011).
The Coast Guard does not agree that
33 CFR 164.41 needs to be incorporated
in the requirements of proposed
§ 140.725(b)(3), but we have added a
definition of ‘‘electronic position fixing
device’’ in § 136.110 that defines the
term to mean a navigation receiver that
meets the requirements of 33 CFR
164.41. Also, we view the
recommendation for approval under
series 165.130 as being overly
prescriptive to include in this final rule
without first seeking comments on that
specific proposal.
Note that we reorganized § 140.725 for
greater clarity. We decided that
paragraph (a) was unnecessary so we
removed it, and we made proposed
paragraph (b) into introductory text, and
paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) became
paragraphs (a) through (d).
One commenter suggested that the
guidance in CG–543 Policy Letter 10–05
regarding carrying electronic navigation
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40047
publications on U.S. vessels should be
adopted in subchapter M.
The Coast Guard declines to
specifically add this language into the
final rule; however, on February 3,
2016, CG–NAV published NVIC 01–16,
which esblishes guidance on the use of
electronic charting systems and the
carriage of electronic navigation pubs.
NVIC 01–16 applies to towing vessels
and their requirement for the carriage of
navigation publications listed in
§ 140.705. In examining our reference to
‘‘information and equipment’’ in
§ 140.705(b), we replaced these words
with ‘‘charts, maps, and nautical
publications,’’ to better reflect the
section heading and the existing
references in the section.
Another commenter suggested that a
note should be included in
§ 140.705(b)(1) that in the event that
only electronic charts are used, the
system must be approved by the Coast
Guard.
The Coast Guard does not agree.
Section 140.705 already requires that if
electronic charts are used, that they
must be acceptable to the Coast Guard.
This allows the Coast Guard to consider
the system on which the charts will be
displayed when determining if the
charts will make safe navigation
possible. The broader issue of electronic
chart systems would be addressed in a
separate rulemaking. The Coast Guard
has made no changes from the proposed
rule based on this comment.
One commenter suggested that the
final rule should require that officers on
watch listen to the Coast Guard
Broadcast Notices to Mariners (BNM)
and National Weather Service regularly
to avoid hazards. The commenter also
suggested that ‘‘talk-back’’ capabilities
be available for crew members that are
out of sight of the watch officer.
The Coast Guard does not agree with
the commenter’s suggestion to require
navigational officers on watch to
maintain the suggested radio watch
aboard the towing vessel. Existing 33
CFR part 26 regulations address radio
watch standing requirements. Moreover,
whenever a vessel is operating in a
Vessel Traffic Service Area, 33 CFR part
161 provides additional requirements
for a towing vessel to maintain a radio
watch.
Also, the Coast Guard does not agree
with the commenter’s suggestion that a
‘‘talk-back’’ requirement be made
applicable for crew members that are
out of sight of the watch officer. The
requirements contained in § 140.640 on
pilothouse resource management
address information sharing procedures.
Further, if the condition of the vessel or
the construction of the vessel prohibits
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40048
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
direct communication between the
members of the navigation watch team,
then it is the responsibility of the vessel
owner or managing operator to provide
the necessary equipment to ensure that
communication is conducted in a
manner that provides for safer operation
of the vessel. The Coast Guard has made
no change from the proposed rule based
on these comments.
With respect to § 140.715, one
commenter suggested that at least two
Very High Frequency (VHF) radios
capable of Digital Selective Calling be
maintained on board and also that
towing vessels operating outside of the
VHF range have long-band medium
frequency or high frequency radio
equipment or a satellite system. Further,
the commenter recommended that all
towing vessels should be capable of
receiving Maritime Safety Information
Broadcasts. The commenter warned
against provisions allowing cellular
radios as an alternative means of
required communication function. The
commenter also suggested that changes
to equipment be required immediately
following a first inspection or no later
than 5 years from the effective date of
the regulations.
The Coast Guard does not agree with
the commenter’s suggestion. Section
140.715 reflects a performance standard
from current regulations. As required by
33 CFR 164.72, as long as a continuous
listening watch is maintained, the vessel
is in compliance. It is the responsibility
of the master to meet this performance
standard. These requirements are
identical to those contained 33 CFR
164.72 and 33 CFR part 26. The Coast
Guard has made no change from the
proposed rule based on this comment.
We received several comments from
companies and individuals regarding
towing safety in subpart H of part 140.
One commenter suggested deleting the
responsibilities listed in paragraphs (a)
through (c) in proposed § 140.801 and
replacing them with language from 33
CFR 164.74.
The Coast Guard does not agree with
the commenter’s suggestion because 33
CFR 164.74 only addresses towing
astern. The Coast Guard has made no
changes from the proposed rule based
on this comment. However, we have
added ‘‘or officer in charge of a
navigational watch’’ to the list of parties
who may be responsible for meeting the
requirements of this section, for greater
consistency with similar requirements
elsewhere. See discussion of § 140.210
above for more.
With regard to towing vessel
horsepower two commenters expressed
concern that the determination of
horsepower or bollard pull of the vessel
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
in §§ 140.801 and 140.805 needed to
safely maneuver the tow would be
subjectively determined by the owner or
managing operator of the vessel. One
commenter felt that companies were not
determining horsepower or bollard pull
accurately, and suggested that the Coast
Guard require that companies provide a
document from the engine manufacturer
and certified naval architect that rates
the vessel’s horsepower using data
provided by the maker, the vessel’s gear
reductions ratio, and the diameter and
pitch of the vessel’s propeller.
The Coast Guard does not concur. We
included a definition of ‘‘horsepower’’
in the definitions section of part 136,
and we see no compelling reason to
require additional testing that would not
be appropriate for all towing vessels.
The definition of horsepower requires
that the determination of a vessel’s
horsepower is made by the Coast Guard
or a third-party organization during the
issuance of the COI, and is made using
objective information issued by the
manufacturer. The Coast Guard feels
that the concerns regarding the
determination of adequate horsepower
are addressed in other sections of part
140 and are appropriately left to the
master’s assessment to the specific
aspects of the tow, towing vessel’s
capability, and the prevailing
conditions.
The Coast Guard has made no changes
from the proposed rule based on these
comments.
One commenter suggested that a
reference to guidelines from the AWO
RCP be included in § 140.801 because
the current language of the section left
too much discretion to the owners and
managing operators of towing vessels.
One company suggested edits to
§ 140.801 that would have rendered it
inapplicable to excepted vessels, harbor
assist vessels, vessels operating in a
limited geographic area, or vessels
operating on short hauls.
The Coast Guard does not agree with
the commenter’s suggestion concerning
the inclusion of a reference to the AWO
RCP. Section 140.801 requires that the
owner, managing operator, or master of
a towing vessel ensures compliance
with the performance standards in
§ 140.801. Those with this responsibility
may rely on a TSMS, guidance
documents, or other sources in deciding
how best to meet these requirements.
Also, the Coast Guard does not agree
with the commenter’s suggestion of
altering the applicability of § 140.801.
The towing gear in § 140.801 is just as
important for those vessels the
commenter listed as for other vessels
subject to subchapter M. The Coast
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Guard has made no changes from the
proposed rule based on these comments.
We received several comments from
companies and a trade association that
suggested the deletion of proposed
§§ 140.815 and 140.820 concerning the
inspection of towing gear and related
recordkeeping. The comments suggested
replacing these sections with
requirements from 33 CFR 164.74 and
towline and terminal gear requirements
from 33 CFR 164.76. Commenters felt
that this change will help reduce
confusion between the towing safety
regulations and these subparts. Another
commenter suggested that we add text
to proposed § 140.820 to augment the
recordkeeping requirements.
The Coast Guard agrees with the first
commenter’s recommendations. We
have deleted § 140.810 because
§ 140.615 will require that towing gear
be examined before getting underway
for all towing vessels not subject to 33
CFR 164.80 already, and we deleted
§ 140.815 because it was merely
informational. We also amended
§ 140.820 to apply the recordkeeping to
the inspections in 33 CFR 164.76
instead of § 140.815 as previously
proposed.
The Coast Guard also agrees with the
second comment, and we have adopted
an amended version of the commenter’s
proposed change to § 140.820(b). We
edited § 140.820 to remove ‘‘bridle’’
from the recordkeeping requirements for
examination, because bridles are
normally either attached to or are part
of the barge and it would be too onerous
for industry to complete this
recordkeeping requirement on towing
gear not under the continuous control of
the towing vessel.
One commenter suggested that the
description of TSMS recordkeeping
should include the acceptance of
electronic recordkeeping as an
alternative. Also, a commenter
discussing the official log book
mentioned the possibility of making
false or late entries. A third commenter
supported the TSMS and requested that
a towing vessel record as defined in
§ 136.110 be the exclusive form of
recordkeeping for all records cited in
§§ 137.135, 137.210, and 138.215.
As stated in 46 CFR 140.910(c), TVRs
may be maintained electronically or on
paper. For towing vessels with a TSMS,
however, § 140.910(b) states that
another record—other than the TVR, as
provided by the TSMS, must be
maintained. We agree that this TSMS
record may also be in electronic or
paper form. But to discourage false
electronic entries, we have amended
§ 140.915(b) to add specific entry
requirements for electronic records to
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
include the date and time of entry and
name of the person making the entry. If
an error is discovered in an entry, any
entries to correct the error must include
the date and time of entry and name of
the person making the correction and
must preserve a record of the original
entry being corrected.
With regard to making false or late
entries, we note that under 18 U.S.C.
1001, whoever knowingly and willfully
makes a materially false, fictitious, or
fraudulent statement or representation
with respect to reports, records, or
verifications required by subchapter M
regulations, may be subject to criminal
penalties.
Regarding the third comment, the
Coast Guard recognizes that a towing
vessel owner or managing operator is
required to compile records and reports
in multiple formats and in separate logs
and ledgers. Each of these records have
relevance to the TSMS aboard a vessel
and are a resource for the auditor and
the surveyor to review in order to
determine proof of adherence to the
requirements of the Safety Management
System. The Coast Guard does not wish
to impose a regulatory requirement that
would result in unnecessary
recordkeeping requirements upon
industry. Requiring all of these records
to be kept in one central record system
for the purposes of this rulemaking
would be impractical. The owner or
managing operator of the towing vessel
has the latitude to tailor their Safety
Management System to define the
method and location of those records
central to the safe operation, repair and
maintenance of the towing vessel. We
have not made changes from the
proposed rule based on these comments.
Two commenters felt that the
proposed recordkeeping requirements in
§§ 140.905 and 140.910 are not
consistent with the 46 U.S.C. 11304.
The Coast Guard acknowledges that
while the 2010 Act was enacted in
October 2010, its requirement for an
official logbook in 46 U.S.C. 11304 was
not addressed in our proposed rule. We
are not, however, amending § 140.905 or
§ 140.910 in this final rule. We will
consider addressing 46 U.S.C. 11304
requirements in a separate rulemaking
that would apply to all vessels subject
to inspection, and not just those subject
to subchapter M. Further, because 46
U.S.C. 11304 makes reference to hours
of service, we would again need to
consider a separate rulemaking as we
would want to seek comments on a
specific proposal before implementing
those requirements for towing vessels.
We have made no changes from
proposed § 140.905 or § 140.910 based
on these comments.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
One commenter expressed concern
regarding potential inconsistencies
between the unofficial and official Coast
Guard logbook forms. The commenter
suggested that vessels operating on the
Great Lakes should be exempt from the
requirement to maintain an official
logbook under § 140.905.
The Coast Guard disagrees with
changing § 140.905 to exempt vessels
operating on the Great Lakes. The
requirement to maintain an official log
comes from 46 U.S.C. 11301, and
§ 140.905(a) reflects the language of the
statute, including the exception for
vessels on a voyage from a port in the
United States to a port in Canada. We
did make minor changes to this subpart:
In § 140.910(d), we corrected a logbook
reference that should have pointed to
§ 140.905, and in § 140.915 we added a
note observing that for towing vessels
subject to 46 U.S.C. 11301, there are
additional logbook requirements in
statute, and that § 140.915 does not alter
requirements outside subchapter M to
make entries in specific log books.
One commenter suggested that
language from SOLAS V, regulation 28,
Records of navigational activities, be
considered in place of the first sentence
of TVR requirements in proposed
§ 140.910(c). The revision would have
replaced proposed language about a
chronological record of events with
language about activities and incidents
of importance to safety of navigation of
the vessel, sufficient to restore a
complete record of the voyage.
The Coast Guard disagrees. The
requirements of SOLAS V are designed
to meet the needs of an international
seagoing community and provide for
much greater depth and comprehensive
guidance than that of § 140.910(c).
Additionally, the requirements of
§ 140.910(c) have been tailored for use
by the domestic towing fleet and
provide a reduced burden upon vessel
owners and operators. In proposed
§ 140.915, however, we have added a
reference to tests and examinations that
are required by § 140.615. We believe
the commenter’s concern is addressed
by reading § 140.910(c) in combination
with the specific reporting requirements
of § 140.915, as amended.
We received two comments from
towing companies who felt that
compliance with subpart I of part 140
would be time consuming and a burden
on companies and the Coast Guard.
The Coast Guard acknowledges the
documentation requirements of this
portion of the rule do require some time
and familiarity on the part of the crew.
However, we believe the documentation
will result in a higher level of
operational safety and effectiveness,
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40049
which improves operational
performance. The time invested in
complying with the recordkeeping
requirements of this portion of the rule
is intended to provide sufficient benefits
to offset the time invested. The Coast
Guard has made no changes from the
proposed rule based on these comments.
Two companies requested that the
definition of ‘‘towing vessel record or
TVR’’ as stated in § 136.110 be a
substitute for the official logbook, CG–
706B or CG–706C, required in § 140.905.
The Coast Guard disagrees. Our
definition of ‘‘towing vessel record or
TVR’’ allows that record to take a
variety of forms, ‘‘a book, notebook, or
electronic record.’’ In § 140.905 of this
rule we identify vessels that are
required under 46 U.S.C. 11301 to use
the official logbook, and in § 140.905(b)
we specify the form of the official
logbook. We did not propose to alter the
form of the official logbook in the
NPRM, nor do we wish to do so in this
final rule. The official logbook is
standardized for all vessels required by
statute to have it. The Coast Guard has
made no changes from the proposed
rule based on these comments.
We received several comments from
maritime companies, an individual, and
a professional association suggesting
that the language in § 140.915 be
clarified to state that the items must be
recorded in accordance with the TSMS
associated with the vessel and not
recorded in the TSMS itself. The Coast
Guard agrees, and amended § 140.915 to
reflect this suggested change.
One commenter asserted that the
language in proposed § 140.1005,
Suspension and revocation, is too broad
and potentially could lead to ‘‘outright
abuse,’’ in the commenter’s words, of
mariners for mistakes made without
criminal intent. A towing company
suggested the deletion of § 140.1005
because it is addressed in 46 U.S.C.
7703.
The Coast Guard disagrees. We
believe it is appropriate and helpful to
identify penalties that those holding a
license, certificate of register, or
merchant mariner credential may be
subject to. Our language in § 140.1005 is
similar, for example, to language in 46
CFR 185.910 in subchapter T. In
reviewing § 140.1005(b) in response to
this comment, we added a source
reference of 46 U.S.C. 7704 in the
introductory text of § 140.1005, and
paragraph (d) to include a security risk
element listed in 46 U.S.C. 7703.
One commenter argued that the
marine industry must understand that
the Coast Guard will take equal action
against both mariners and companies for
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40050
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
violations of regulations in subchapter
M.
The Coast Guard has a broad range of
options to enforce regulations against
mariners, companies, or both. The
OCMI will conduct an investigation and
make determinations as to appropriate
course of action, which may include
civil penalties or criminal actions. The
Coast Guard has made no changes from
the proposed rule based on this
comment.
Lastly, a towing company pointed out
that the regulations are currently written
to assume a male captain and suggested
that revisions should be made
throughout the regulations to replace
gender-specific text with him or her, or
his or her.
The Coast Guard agrees. We have
amended the text in the final rule to
ensure we consistently use genderneutral language throughout the rule.
K. Lifesaving (Part 141)
We received several comments from
maritime companies, individuals, and
an association regarding lifesaving
requirements in part 141. Several
comments revealed misinterpretations
of the proposed rule, so we have made
editorial revisions throughout this part,
including some rearranging,
restructuring, and renumbering of the
text, to improve clarity and readability.
Three maritime companies
recommended deleting or revising part
141 because of lack of demonstrable risk
justifying additional costs to regulated
entities.
The Coast Guard analyzed the
casualty data balanced against the costs
associated with implementing this rule.
The details of this analysis can be found
below in the Regulatory Analysis
section of this final rule. As is discussed
in more detail there, we found that the
benefit of risk reduction was
commensurate to the cost or, in some
cases, we revised the rule to avoid costs
that exceeded the benefit. For the
lifesaving requirements in part 141, the
Coast Guard estimates the annualized
cost to be $3.2 million, with annualized
benefits of $4.4 million, resulting in a
net benefit of $1.2 million per year. The
positive net benefits estimate indicates
that the potential risk reduction justifies
the additional cost of the part.
The carriage, operation, and
maintenance of certain approved
lifesaving equipment is a fundamental
aspect of being an inspected vessel. The
Coast Guard analyzed the costs
associated with implementing lifesaving
provisions of this rule and concluded
that the largest costs associated with the
proposed rule arise from the carriage of
survival craft, particularly for inland
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
towing vessels. Noting that the
operating conditions may mitigate the
need for survival craft, the Coast Guard
has modified the proposed requirements
for survival craft as described below to
reduce the impact on the towing vessel
industry. The Coast Guard believes that
provisions of this final rule represent
the minimum requirement for safe
operation of an inspected towing vessel
and notes that nothing in this rule
would preclude a towing vessel operator
from optionally carrying survival craft
as excess equipment.
In a comment on part 141, a
commenter suggested that all our
references to limited geographical areas
should be expanded to include vessels
operating in harbor services.
In part 141 we proposed that, unless
required by the OCMI under
§ 141.305(c)(5), a towing vessel in a
limited geographic area need not carry
a survival craft. In this final rule, that
provision is reflected in the first area-ofoperation column in Table 141.305 of
§ 141.305 and in footnote 1 of that table.
Our definition of ‘‘limited geographic
areas’’ in § 136.110 gives the COTP the
discretion to determine limited
geographic areas in her or his COTP
zone. We don’t see a need to change that
definition based on this comment,
which seems more focused on ensuring
that vessels engaged in harbor services
share the same exceptions as those
operating in a limited geographic area.
A vessel that engages in harbor services
may do so in multiple locations and
may not always be operating in a
limited geographic area, and is not
necessarily exempted from carrying
survival craft. A vessel that engages in
harbor services within a limited
geographic area as determined by the
COTP, however, need not carry survival
craft unless required to do so by the
OCMI.
In response to general comments
about having time to comply with
equipment-related requirements in
subchapter M, we amended § 141.105 to
give existing towing vessels until the
earlier of either 2 years from the
effective date of this rule or the date the
vessel obtains a subchapter M COI to
comply with part 141 requirements. We
added § 141.105(a)(2) to clarify that the
delayed implementation provisions for
existing vessels do not apply to new
towing vessels. We also revised
§ 141.105(c) to include a reference to
SOLAS Chapter III as this is where
specific lifesaving requirements are
contained in SOLAS.
Because the reference to functional
requirements in proposed § 141.110
only applies to survival craft, we
relocated that text to § 141.305. An
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
individual suggested we edit proposed
§ 141.110 (now § 141.305) by adding
‘‘company’’ to those we identified
(‘‘owner or managing operator’’) who
may choose to meet the functional
requirements in this part instead of the
part’s prescriptive standards.
We do not agree. We do not see a need
to do so because our § 136.110
definition of ‘‘managing operator’’
includes organizations and if a company
owns the vessel, it would be covered by
our definition of ‘‘owner.’’
The same commenter also suggested
that the designated approved third party
provide written recommendations to the
cognizant OCMI regarding the OCMI’s
acceptance of functional requirements,
instead of the third party directly
accepting them.
We do not agree. A TPO may consult
with the OCMI, but under proposed
§ 141.110(c) (now § 141.305(c)(2)) the
TPO is free to accept a managing
operator or owner’s chosen means to
meet the survival craft requirements of
§ 141.305, so long as the means are
documented in the TSMS applicable to
the vessel. We believe these
documentation procedures are sufficient
and do not see a need for the TPO to
provide written recommendations to the
cognizant OCMI regarding acceptance of
arrangements that satisfy the functional
requirements.
We did not receive comments on
§ 141.115, Definitions, but noted that no
new definitions were proposed for this
part, and removed this section.
Additionally, as discussed elsewhere in
this preamble, in response to requests
for clarification on the appropriate
approvals for lifesaving equipment, we
imported the definition of ‘‘approval
series’’ from 46 CFR 199.30 to the
definition section for subchapter M and
used that term in part 141 to identify the
applicable approval series for each piece
of equipment
We did not receive comments on the
incorporation by reference section,
§ 141.120, but we did move the contents
of that section into § 136.112 and made
§ 136.112 the centralized incorporation
by reference section for all of subchapter
M. In addition, to better organize the
various technical standards used
throughout subchapter M, we also
consolidate central incorporation by
reference sections for other parts into
§ 136.112.
An individual recommended that in
§ 141.205(a) we add ‘‘guidelines,
instructions, and define level of
authority’’ to what the TSMS must
include in addition to policies and
procedures. The same commenter also
recommended that in paragraph (b) of
that section we require the TSMS to
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
‘‘include procedures ensuring that nonconformities, accidents and hazardous
situations are reported to the company,
owner, or managing operator,
investigated and analyzed with the
objective of improving safety and
pollution prevention,’’ instead of simply
ensuring objective evidence of
compliance with the TSMS.
The Coast Guard disagrees. We have
deleted § 141.205 entirely because we
felt that it was redundant with part 138
in general. As for the commenter’s
concern, § 138.220, Towing Safety
Management System (TSMS) Elements,
requires that the TSMS include
documentation of the management
organization in detail, personnel
management policies, and compliance
with other requirements of this
subchapter.
We did not receive comments on the
general provisions section for part 141,
proposed § 141.220 (now § 141.200), but
the Coast Guard standardized our
approval phraseology both here and
throughout this subchapter and also
clarified the specific approval required
for each equipment type. These edits are
consistent with requests discussed
below regarding § 141.305 to clarify the
appropriate approvals for lifesaving
equipment. At the time of their
inspection, every towing vessel must be
properly outfitted in accordance with
the route for which they are certificated.
However, we further clarified in new
§ 141.200(c) that requirements in part
141 are based solely on the areas where
a vessel operates.
We did not receive comments on
§ 141.225, but we found that the
provisions of § 136.115 were more
applicable to this part and cited this
section in new § 141.225(a) to reflect
§ 136.115’s provision that all towing
vessels, not just those with a TSMS,
may seek equivalencies. Similarly, we
redesignated § 136.115(c) as § 141.225(c)
to better align the provisions concerning
equivalencies of novel lifesaving
appliances or arrangements within part
141. In addition, we restructured
141.225 by replacing proposed
paragraph (a) with new paragraphs (a)
and (b) to clarify the intent allowing
towing vessels to use alternate
arrangements or equipment to meet this
part. We also amended the heading of
§ 141.225 to better reflect this section’s
paragraph (d), which specifies that the
cognizant OCMI may require a towing
vessel to carry specialized or additional
lifesaving equipment.
An individual recommended text
edits to § 141.230 that would require the
master to ensure that lifesaving
equipment is correctly installed in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
addition to being properly maintained
and ready for use at all times.
The Coast Guard does not agree. To
the extent improperly installed
lifesaving equipment would not be
ready for use, the wording of § 141.230
addresses the commenter’s concern. We
made no changes in response to this
comment.
Regarding § 141.235 and the
inspection, testing, and maintenance of
lifesaving equipment, we received a
comment from an association suggesting
that the content of 46 CFR 199.190,
which we reference in § 141.235, be
added as a stand-alone section in
subchapter M with modifications to
apply to towing vessel lifesaving
equipment and to clearly specify when
any necessary factory maintenance is
required.
The Coast Guard does not agree. The
full text of § 199.190 contains
maintenance requirements for various
types of lifesaving equipment, including
weekly, monthly, and annual
inspections and tests for lifeboats,
rescue boats, and launching appliances.
The majority of towing vessels will not
carry this equipment. Therefore, the
inclusion of the complete text of
§ 199.190 in subchapter M would add
little value. However, § 141.235 points
the operator to § 199.190 where he or
she can search for the relevant testing
and maintenance requirements for
vessels that carry this equipment. In
§ 141.235, we replaced the word
‘‘examination’’ with ‘‘inspection’’ to be
consistent with other related Coast
Guard regulations. Also, seeking
consistency with a similar provision in
§ 142.240, we set the records retention
period to at least 1 year after the
expiration of the Certificate of
Inspection.
We received several comments
regarding Table 141.305—Survival
Craft. One commenter requested that all
towing vessels be equipped with an outof-water survival craft, like an inflatable
buoyant apparatus. An individual felt
that life floats and buoyant apparatus
references should be deleted from the
table, with the exception of references
in footnotes. A trade association and
individual noted two terms that should
be changed; ‘‘life floats’’ because it was
ordered removed by Congress by
January 1, 2015, and the term ‘‘buoyant
apparatus,’’ which was suggested to be
replaced with ‘‘approved buoyant
apparatus’’ in order to comply with
proposed § 141.305(c)(6). Another
commenter suggested that we edit
proposed § 141.305(b)(6) and (c)(6) by
replacing ‘‘By 2015,’’ with ‘‘After
December 31, 2014,’’ when specifying
when survival craft may no longer be
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40051
carried on board unless the craft ensures
that no part of the individual is
immersed in water.
On February 8, 2016, section 301 of
the Coast Guard Authorization Act of
2015 (2015 Act), Public Law 114–120,
130 Stat. 27, revised 46 U.S.C. 3104. The
deadline in our proposed § 141.305(b)(6)
and (c)(6), and § 141.330(g), for a new
standard for survival craft to meet to be
eligible for approval—‘‘must ensure that
no part of an individual is immersed in
water’’—was based on provisions
previously specified in 46 U.S.C. 3104.
The 2015 Act limited those standards
for survival craft to passenger vessels.
We have therefore removed references
to the deadline and those standards in
§ 141.305(b) and (c), and § 141.330, and
made edits to align the language with
the remaining functional requirements
for survival craft.
We developed the cost estimates for
part 141 under the requirements of 46
U.S.C. 3104 before it was amended by
the 2015 Act. Specifically, we posited
that owners and operators of the
affected vessel population would only
use inflatable buoyant apparatuses to
comply with the out-of-water mandate.
To the extent that affected owners and
operators take advantage of the
relaxation of equipment requirements
provided by the 2015 Act, this will
result in an over-estimate of the cost of
survival craft in this rule’s regulatory
analysis.
As recommended, we deleted the
terms ‘‘buoyant apparatus’’ and ‘‘life
float’’ from the Cold Water Operation
portion of Table 141.305 because
neither of these items satisfied the
minimum requirements for a vessel
operating in cold water. In the Warm
Water Operation portion of the table we
removed the rows for life float and
inflatable buoyant apparatus because
they are not specifically called out to
meet the minimum carriage
requirements although they can be used
as a substitute for a lower safety
precedence survival craft as described
in § 141.305(d). To avoid possible
confusion with ‘‘inflatable buoyant
apparatus,’’ we changed ‘‘buoyant
apparatus’’ to ‘‘rigid buoyant apparatus’’
throughout the final rule. Also, to
accurately reflect the safety precedence
hierarchy of survival craft, we moved
Inflatable Liferaft with SOLAS A pack to
the bottom of each list.
Also, we have revised the
requirements for carriage of survival
craft to exclude vessels operating in
protected waters, which we have
defined in § 136.110, unless survival
craft are deemed necessary by the
OCMI, and we have revised § 141.305(d)
to allow for non-approved survival craft
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40052
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
to be carried as excess equipment where
no survival craft are required by this
part, provided that the equipment is in
good condition and maintained
according to manufacturer’s
instructions.
In order to further clarify the options
for complying with the functional
requirements for survival craft, we have
added a new paragraph to § 141.305,
which includes text relocated from
proposed § 141.110. Under the new
§ 141.305(c), the two options for
complying with the functional
requirements for survival craft are
meeting the prescriptive requirements
in § 141.305(d) or employing alternative
means, acceptable to the OCMI or TPO,
and documented in the TSMS, if
applicable.
A towing company suggested that the
table include ‘‘Rivers and Canals’’ as an
area of operation.
The Coast Guard does not see a need
for this suggested change. Table 141.305
currently lists ‘‘Rivers’’ as an area of
operation and the definition of ‘‘rivers’’
in § 136.110 includes canals.
Another commenter suggested
removing all rows from the table where
equipment is not required. The same
commenter suggested that operations
that are exempt from specific equipment
requirements be indicated by the word
‘‘none’’ in the appropriate field in the
table. The Coast Guard agrees, and has
revised Table 141.305 accordingly.
We received several comments
regarding the footnotes in Table
141.305. Several commenters, including
towing companies and associations,
suggested deleting proposed footnote 1
that referenced survival craft
determinations by the cognizant OCMI
or as a requirement deemed necessary in
the applicable TSMS. Alternatively, an
individual suggested that a towing
vessel operating in ‘‘limited geographic
areas’’ be permitted to operate without
survival craft.
According to footnote 1 of Table
141.305 in the final rule, survival craft
are not required on towing vessels
operating in limited geographical areas,
‘‘unless survival craft requirements are
determined to be necessary by the
cognizant OCMI or TSMS applicable to
the towing vessel.’’ Though the Coast
Guard does not support requiring
survival craft on towing vessels
operating in limited geographic areas,
unless the OCMI or TSMS deems them
necessary under § 141.225, operators of
these vessels are welcome to carry
properly maintained survival craft as
excess equipment. A towing company
recommended that towing vessels
operating within 1 mile of the shore
should not be required to have survival
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
craft, unless determined necessary or if
it is required in the TSMS for that
particular towing vessel. A maritime
company suggested deleting the text,
‘‘unless determined to be necessary by
the cognizant OCMI or a TSMS
applicable to the towing vessel,’’ from
proposed footnote 6, but didn’t provide
any reasoning for this suggestion.
The Coast Guard does not agree with
the proposed amendment to footnote 6.
We believe this provision in proposed
footnote 6 is appropriate because the
OCMI (or author of the TSMS) should be
able to evaluate any extenuating
circumstances associated with the
towing vessel’s operation that would
require a survival craft when in general
they are not needed when the towing
vessel is operating within 1 mile of
shore. As noted below, however, based
on another comment we did move the
text of this footnote to
§ 141.305(d)(3)(iii).
Several commenters suggested that
footnotes 5 and 6 in the table be moved
into the regulatory text, and one
commenter recommended deleting the
reference to OCMI approval when
moving the text of footnote 6.
We agree that the content of proposed
footnotes 5 and 6, as well as footnote 4,
should be moved into paragraph form in
the regulatory text to aid the reader.
Therefore, we have inserted the
provisions of these footnotes into
paragraphs (d)(3)(i)–(iii) of § 141.305.
We disagree, however, with deleting the
reference to an OCMI determination.
When moving the content of proposed
footnote 6, we did insert the source of
the OCMI’s authority to make such a
determination.
One company suggested that because
of fast currents in some waterways, life
floats should be permitted to be retained
as supplemental approved survival craft
for limited applications as approved by
the Coast Guard. Because of downriver
flow, the time that the crew is in the
water, and the time for life raft
deployment, the commenter states it
would be difficult for crew to swim
against the Lower Mississippi River’s
current to catch the life raft that released
and inflated a period of time after the
crew member went into the water as
would happen with an automatic
deployment. This commenter notes that
crew members in the water would have
a much better chance of reaching a life
float as they and it are swept downriver
with the current at the same relative
speed.
The Coast Guard acknowledges the
commenter’s concerns, and in
§ 141.305(d)(2)(iv) we have permitted a
life float approved under approval series
160.027 to be substituted for a rigid
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
buoyant apparatus. Also, proposed
§ 141.220 would have required
lifesaving equipment to be of an
approved type, unless otherwise
specified. We amended that section,
now § 141.200, to specify that lifesaving
equipment for personal use need not be
approved by the Commandant if it is not
required by part 141. We also amended
§ 141.305(d) to allow the carriage of
non-approved survival craft as excess
equipment, provided that the equipment
is maintained in good working
condition according to the
manufacturer’s instructions.
We edited §§ 141.310 and 141.315 to
make it clear that they are applicable to
vessels that do not have an applicable
TSMS.
As noted in our discussion of
comments on § 141.305, the Coast Guard
does not agree with the assumption that
the vessel and its tow operating more
than 1 mile from shore could make it to
shore in the event of an accident.
Section 141.330 does not impose a
separate requirement that ‘‘other
survival craft’’ be carried: Instead it
simply sets out the requirements for a
skiff if the skiff is intended to be used
as a substitute for approved survival
craft required by Table 141.305. Table
141.305 prescribes the operating areas
where an approved inflatable liferaft is
required. As noted above, the Coast
Guard has included additional text in
§ 141.305 prescribing the hierarchy of
approved survival craft, and giving
owners and operators the right to
substitute a survival craft of higher
precedence. For example,
§ 141.305(d)(3)(ii) allows an inflatable
liferaft approved under approval series
160.051 or 160.151 to be substituted for
an inflatable buoyant apparatus or rigid
buoyant apparatus. Similarly, an
inflatable buoyant apparatus approved
under approval series 160.010 or life
float under approval series 160.027 may
be substituted for a rigid buoyant
apparatus (§ 141.305(d)(3)(iii) and (iv),
respectively). If the operator would
prefer to use a non-approved raft as a
survival craft, the functional
requirements listed in § 141.305(b)
would apply to the raft.
We received several comments
concerning the use of skiffs. One
individual noted that the proposed rule
contained no requirement that a skiff
comply with any requirements for safe
loading or buoyancy. The commenter
recommended that we amend
§ 141.330(a) to require compliance with
33 CFR part 183.
The Coast Guard acknowledges that,
for practical purposes, recreational boats
complying with 33 CFR part 183 will
commonly be used as skiffs, but we
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
share the commenters’ concern
regarding the potential for confusion
regarding the requirements for skiffs
that are used as survival craft. The Coast
Guard has revised § 141.330 to—
• Clarify that skiffs may only be used
as survival craft by towing vessels that
do not operate more than 3 miles from
shore,
• Include the source of the
requirements for safe loading and
capacity information (33 CFR 183.23),
and
• Correct a source reference for
marking requirements in paragraph (f) to
match the same source we listed in
§ 141.315 for survival craft.
The same commenter noted that
equipment referred to in proposed
§ 141.330(g) would be approved under
46 CFR part 159, not part 141, suggested
that we edit proposed § 141.330(g) to
prohibit the carriage of skiffs after
December 31, 2014, unless the craft
ensures that no part of the individual is
immersed in water.
The Coast Guard agrees that reference
to the approval of survival craft is
inappropriate in part 141, and has
removed proposed paragraph (g).
Additionally, we have revised the title
of § 141.330 from ‘‘Other survival craft’’
to ‘‘Skiffs as survival craft.’’
A commenter also suggested that we
not impose size requirements on a skiff
because the entire tow or the towing
vessel could usually make it to shore for
evacuation purposes in any type of
catastrophic event, or alternatively we
should include an inflatable raft as an
‘‘other survival craft.’’
As already discussed in the context of
§ 141.305, towing vessels operating in
limited geographical areas or on rivers
within 1 mile of shore are only required
to carry survival craft if the cognizant
OCMI determines that they are
necessary. However, in other operating
areas where we cannot assume that the
vessel can make it to shore, a skiff used
as a substitute for a survival craft must
be capable of carrying all personnel
onboard. As reflected in both § 141.330
and footnote 2 of table 141.305, vessels
that operate more than 3 miles from
shore may not use a skiff as a substitute
for a survival craft except for those
operating in warm water on the Great
Lakes or Lakes, Bays and Sounds.
One commenter listed several factors
that should be considered when
approving existing and new ‘‘skiffs.’’
However, the Coast Guard does not
intend to ‘‘approve’’ skiffs. Provided
that the skiff meets the requirements of
§ 141.330, it may be used as a substitute
for approved survival craft, as reflected
in Table 141.305.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
The same commenter cautioned
against using the terms ‘‘skiff’’ and
‘‘rescue boat’’ interchangeably for fear of
confusion between the functions of
these boats.
As discussed earlier in this preamble,
the Coast Guard acknowledges the
commenter’s concerns and has added a
definition for rescue boat in § 136.110.
To further reduce confusion, we have
removed the proposed references to
rescue boat in §§ 137.220 and 140.405,
but retained them in § 140.420 to leave
training or drill requirements in place
for towing vessels that use a rescue boat.
Regarding the sections for lifejackets,
immersion suits, and lifebuoys
(§§ 141.340, 141.350, and 141.360,
respectively), an individual noted that
these sections do not contain provisions
for vessels electing the Coast Guard
inspection option.
We disagree. Sections 141.340,
141.350, and 141.360 do contain the
requirements for all towing vessels,
whether they elect the Coast Guard
inspection option or the TSMS option.
We received several comments
concerning lifejackets. Four commenters
requested clarification of the
requirements for lifejackets at watch
stations. Three maritime companies and
an association suggested that one
lifejacket per watchstander be required
and made accessible. Commenters felt
that the requirement to store lifejackets
at ‘‘watch stations’’ is difficult to define
for deckhands because they are mobile;
one commenter stated that the term
‘‘watch station’’ needs to be defined.
The Coast Guard does not believe that
we need to define ‘‘watch station,’’ but
we make clear that lifejackets must be
immediately available to those standing
watch as well as to other crew. The
bridge and the engine control room are
examples of watch stations. As specified
in § 141.340(b), for towing vessels with
berthing aboard, lifejackets would need
to be immediately available for
watchstanders there as well as at other
manned watch stations.
Two commenters asserted that the
COI should list the total number of
persons allowed on a vessel and state
the same number of lifejackets and
space in a survival craft be available.
An inspected vessel’s COI will state
the total number of persons allowed on
the vessel as well as applicable
lifesaving equipment that is required
onboard the vessel. These numbers are
based on determinations made by the
OCMI issuing the COI.
One commenter suggested that crew
on manned barges in the Great Lakes,
over 3,000 GRT, should not be required
to have work vests because the
personnel mostly remain on the barge,
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40053
which is more stable than a tug. One
commenter suggested that the
requirement to provide both life jackets
and work vests is redundant.
The Coast Guard agrees that the
proposed Table 141.335 may have been
misinterpreted to mean that work vests
were required to be carried as personal
lifesaving equipment. Under § 140.430,
work vests are not required, but are one
of three options for use by personnel
dispatched from the vessel or working
in an area without rails or guards. We
clarified § 140.430 and removed Table
141.335, as discussed above, and we
have clarified § 140.430 to indicate the
appropriate use of work vests.
Another towing company
recommended that proposed § 141.335
should clarify that immersion suits are
not required on towing vessels that
travel along inland or Western Rivers.
The commenter noted that proposed
Table 141.335 indicated that immersion
suits are not required on vessels
travelling on limited geographic areas or
rivers, but it does require immersion
suits on vessels travelling on lakes,
bays, and sounds and that there are
many lakes that fit subchapter M’s
definition of lakes, bays, and sounds
along the inland and Western Rivers
that are simply part of a vessel’s route,
or an area to drop off barges.
The Coast Guard disagrees with this
recommendation. In our immersion suit
requirements in § 141.350, the
allowance for towing vessels operating
on rivers or in limited geographical
areas to not carry immersion suits
assumes that rescue or emergency
assistance would be close at hand, thus
limiting the duration that a person
would be immersed in cold water. We
cannot make this same assumption on
lakes, bays, and sounds. We have not
made changes from the proposed rule
based on this comment.
The Coast Guard removed proposed
§ 141.335 and Table 141.335 because
they contained the same information as
§ 141.340 and § 141.350.
We revised proposed § 141.340(d),
now § 141.340(c), to clarify that the
option to use alternative means to
comply with the lifejacket requirements
also applies to non-TSMS vessels, and
to cross reference back to § 141.225.
Several commenters, including
maritime companies, suggested that a
paragraph be added to note that
lifejackets that are stored on open racks,
where the jackets are clearly seen, do
not need labels.
The Coast Guard agrees that
clarification was necessary, so we have
revised and consolidated proposed
§ 141.340(e) and (f) into new
§ 141.340(h) to make clear that the
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40054
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
stowage location marking requirements
only apply to lifejackets stowed in a
berthing space, stateroom, or lifejacket
container, including those stored in
racks in these types of interior spaces.
The Coast Guard has made additional
editorial revisions to this section to
remove redundancies and to locate all
lifejacket requirements in this section,
rather than cross-referencing 46 CFR
subchapter W, and we have made
amendments to §§ 199.01 and 199.10 of
subchapter W, to clarify that subchapter
W does not apply to towing vessels. We
also numbered the rows of Table
199.10(a), to aid any possible future
edits.
A towing company suggested
amending proposed § 141.340(d) to be
consistent with TSAC recommendations
for stowing lifejackets. This particular
TSAC recommendation refers to the
TSMS option which allows alternative
means to meet the requirements of this
section, and also outlines language
requiring the approved TSMS to specify
the number and location of lifejackets to
facilitate immediate accessibility at
normally occupied spaces.
The Coast Guard has reviewed the
TSAC recommendations and its
proposed edits to draft regulatory text
related to lifesaving requirements in
their entirety and confirm that our
revisions to proposed § 141.340(d) (now
§ 141.340(c)) are consistent with those
recommendations.
We received comments from maritime
companies and an association that
recommended that the requirement for
posting of placards with information
regarding use of lifejackets be deleted,
and that information in another format
be provided on the vessel instead.
While the Coast Guard believes that
proper donning and use of the PFD
plays a large part in survival, we note
that this information is covered by the
safety orientation required by
§ 140.410(b). Accordingly, § 141.345 has
been removed from this rulemaking.
One commenter recommended that, at
a minimum, each towing vessel should
be required to furnish a throwable
flotation lifesaving device on the end of
each barge or tow available and ready
for use at all times to rapidly retrieve a
person who falls overboard. The
commenter noted that without a
‘‘lifebuoy’’ or equivalent, if a person
falls overboard from a single barge tow,
the nearest throwable lifesaving device
may be on the towboat itself and may
be 100 to more than 1,000 feet and
minutes away.
The Coast Guard recognizes the
commenter’s concern, but the comment
is outside the scope of this rulemaking.
We note that on September 10, 2014, the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
Coast Guard published a final rule
entitled, ‘‘Lifesaving Devices—
Uninspected Commercial Barges and
Sailing Vessels’’ (79 FR 53621). In the
course of that rulemaking, we discussed
and evaluated the feasibility of requiring
lifebuoys on barges, and found the costs
to outweigh the benefits. However,
vessel owners or managing operators
may opt to carry additional approved
lifebuoys for this purpose.
A mariner’s association and an
individual believed that efforts towards
the protection of personnel from cold
weather should include the requirement
of anti-exposure work suits for water
temperatures below 59 degrees
Fahrenheit, as cited in the NVIC 7–91.
One commenter suggested that NVIC 7–
91 be rewritten to include ‘‘cold water’’
areas found on navigable rivers in
addition to its present coastwise
coverage.
Consistent with recommendations in
NVIC 7–91, we proposed in § 141.350 to
require immersion suits for towing
vessels that operate north of latitude 32°
N. or south of latitude 32° S. if the
vessel does not operate exclusively on
rivers or in a limited geographic area. At
these latitudes water temperatures drop
below 59 degrees Fahrenheit during a
typical year. While the Coast Guard
agrees that anti-exposure work suits of
the type approved by the Coast Guard
under approval series 160.053 or
160.153 provide valuable thermal
protection to workers on deck, they are
not intended to get wet. Immersion suits
are specially tested and approved for
thermal protection during prolonged
immersion in cold water. As in
§ 141.340(c) above, we revised the text
in paragraph (a)(3) to clarify that the
option to use alternative means to
comply with the immersion suit
requirements also applies to non-TSMS
vessels and to cross reference back to
§ 141.225.
We received several comments, from
maritime companies and others,
requesting proposed § 141.360(a)(1) be
deleted because subchapter M does not
apply to vessels less than 26-feet long.
The Coast Guard does not agree.
Section 136.105 makes subchapter M
applicable to towing vessels of less than
26 feet if the towing vessel is pushing,
pulling, or hauling a barge that is
carrying oil or hazardous material in
bulk, and the requirement in
§ 141.360(a)(1)—to carry a minimum of
one lifebuoy of not less than 510
millimeters (20 inches) in diameter—
applies to those towing vessels.
We received several comments from
maritime companies and associations
suggesting that the required number of
lifebuoys on towing vessels be
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
consistent with industry practice. On
towing vessels of less than 79 feet, they
suggested reducing the required number
of lifebuoys to two from the proposed
number of three. On towing vessels of
more than 79 feet, they suggested
requiring four, in lieu of what we had
proposed, which was four, plus one on
each side of the primary operating
station and one at each alternative
operating station if the vessel is so
equipped.
The Coast Guard agrees that two
lifebuoys are appropriate for a towing
vessel between 26 and 79 feet in length,
and has reduced the required number
accordingly in amended § 141.360(a)(2),
consistent with lifesaving regulations
for inspected vessels of similar size.
Similarly, the Coast Guard agrees that
the proposed text appears to require
more lifebuoys than is practical on a
towing vessel of more than 79 feet in
length, and has amended § 141.360(a)(3)
to clarify the requirement by stating the
minimum number of lifebuoys and their
placement independently. Also, we
removed reference to primary and
alternative operating stations. Vessels
with more than one operating station
will now be required to carry lifebuoys
on each side of any operating station, as
practicable. We are aware that some of
the operating stations may have limited
space available or may not have a way
to access the sides. In these cases,
owners and operators need to work with
the local OCMI to determine an
acceptable equivalent for the operating
station concerned.
As above in §§ 141.340(c) and
141.350(a)(3), we revised the text in
§ 141.360(a)(4) to clarify that the option
to use alternative means to comply with
the lifebuoy requirements also applies
to non-TSMS vessels and to cross
reference back to § 141.225.
Other commenters, including an
association and an individual,
recommended that § 141.360 require a
specific commercially available
throwable PFD, instead of the
traditional ‘‘lifebuoy’’ because lifebuoys
can only be thrown a relatively short
distance.
The Coast Guard has revised
§ 141.360 to allow for throwable devices
approved under approval series 160.050
or 160.150 to satisfy the prescriptive
requirements of this section, provided
that the vessel is not subject to SOLAS.
An approved lifebuoy, or another
throwable PFD approved under
approval series 160.050 or 160.150 as
equivalent to a lifebuoy, would satisfy
this requirement. Consistent with
specifying performance objectives when
possible, rather than specifying the
behavior or manner of compliance that
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
regulated entities must adopt, we did
not adopt the commenter’s suggestion
that we require a specific commercially
available throwable PFD.
Regarding proposed § 141.360(b), a
company suggested that the reference to
release of lifebuoys in § 199.70(a)(1)(v)
would not be necessary for most towing
vessels, particularly those operating on
inland waters. Some commenters also
felt that the wording for § 141.360(b)(2)
should be rewritten but did not provide
suggestions.
The Coast Guard agrees that the
requirements of § 199.70(a)(1)(v) is not
the most appropriate for towing vessels,
and further notes that the cross
reference to § 199.70 in § 141.360(b)
creates unnecessary confusion as to
which requirements apply. The Coast
Guard has revised § 141.360 to remove
the reference to § 199.70(a) and to
include only those requirements that are
intended to apply to lifebuoys on
towing vessels.
Three commenters felt that
§ 141.360(b)(2) should be amended to
clarify that floating electric water lights
are not required for towing vessels
operating solely on Western Rivers.
The Coast Guard does not agree. The
fitting of lights to lifebuoys increases the
likelihood that the person in the water
will be located and retrieved,
irrespective of the operating area.
However, under revised § 141.360(c)(2)
and (3), the floating electric water light
is not required for towing vessels
limited to daytime operations.
An individual indicated that the
proposed rule did not clearly state the
floating electronic water light should
not be attached to the lifeline.
As noted in § 141.360(c)(4), the
floating electric water light is to be
secured around the body of the lifebuoy,
which is consistent with language
applicable to other inspected vessels.
The Coast Guard feels that this language
in § 141.360(c)(4) is clear.
One commenter felt that using
millimeters in proposed § 141.360(b)(3)
was unnecessary and could result in an
inspector rejecting a lifeline if he or she
determined it is only 908 mm in length
instead of the required 910 mm. The
commenter suggested that we use
meters instead of millimeters.
The Coast Guard does not agree. The
millimeter equivalents to the 3 and 6
foot standards in the corresponding
paragraph of this final rule,
§ 141.360(c)(3), are consistent with
similar regulations for other inspected
vessels. See, for example, 46 CFR 117.70
and 180.70. The more precise metric
equivalent leaves less of a gap between
it and the English units. The Coast
Guard does not see a compelling reason
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
to use a different standard for similar
requirements on other types of
inspected vessels.
One commenter suggested that the
number of alternative lifebuoys be left to
the OCMI to decide.
As noted above, we have reduced the
number of lifebuoys below what we
proposed in the NPRM. We do not
believe an appropriate level of safety is
met by further reducing that number.
Under § 141.225, however, the OCMI
may require additional lifebuoys as
deemed necessary based on the
operating area.
Lastly, an individual asserted that in
order to quickly identify lifebuoys as
safety equipment, all lifebuoys should
be colored orange.
The Coast Guard believes that
lifebuoys are readily recognized as
lifesaving equipment, regardless of
color. However, in § 141.360(b)(5) we
require that lifebuoys must be orange on
vessels on an oceans or coastwise route,
where visibility could be obscured by
white caps.
One commenter pointed out that
proposed § 141.365 includes procedures
in the TSMS for the prompt recovery of
a person from the water, and for the
training of crewmembers responsible for
recovery in effectively implementing
such procedures, applies only to towing
vessels under a TSMS and not to vessels
that elect Coast Guard inspection. This
commenter recommends that the rule
also address this issue for towing vessel
choosing the Coast Guard inspection
option.
The Coast Guard does not agree with
requiring these written procedures for
those vessels choosing the Coast Guard
option. Vessels choosing the Coast
Guard option will be required to get
underway to conduct drills for a Coast
Guard inspector and the retrieval of a
man-overboard may be required as part
of these drills. Therefore, the procedures
and training will be examined through
practice rather than through audit of the
SMS. However, we did find that
proposed § 141.365 was redundant with
§ 138.215 and removed it from the final
rule.
We received two submissions from
commenters requesting we add a
requirement for specific commercially
available person-overboard recovering
equipment. One commenter said that
recovery equipment to receive
unconscious personnel from water
should be required.
The Coast Guard is not in the position
to require carriage of a specific
commercial product. Based on these
comments, however, we have added text
to § 141.200 to allow a towing vessel to
carry additional lifesaving equipment in
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40055
addition to that required under
subchapter M and that this excess
equipment need not be Coast Guard
approved. We do not see a need to
require the person-overboard recovering
equipment, in addition to the lifesaving
equipment required in this rule.
One commenter recommended a
public hearing to discuss the lifesaving
equipment approval process within the
Marine Safety Directorate, and to agree
on what changes can encourage
innovative lifesaving devices for
commercial vessels.
This recommendation is outside of
the scope of this rulemaking, as this rule
applies only to the carriage of approved
lifesaving appliances on towing vessels,
and does not address the process by
which that equipment is approved. We
have made no changes from the
proposed rule based on this comment.
We received several comments
suggesting edits to the Miscellaneous
Lifesaving Requirements table, Table
141.370. We received two comments
from maritime companies, suggesting
amendments to the table clarifying
which vessels require six flares and
which require 12. One association
suggested that in order to be consistent
with other table styles, instead of the
three columns for Emergency Position
Indicating Radio Beacon (EPIRB) stating
‘‘Yes’’, the columns should just indicate
‘‘1’’.
The Coast Guard agrees that our
proposed Table 141.370 is confusing.
We have made appropriate revisions to
the table and the regulatory text of the
first section it references, § 141.375.
One commenter recommended that
the table in this section include ‘‘Rivers
and Canals’’ as an area of operation.
As we said in response to the same
comment regarding Table 141.305, the
definition of ‘‘rivers’’ in § 136.110,
which applies to the term used
throughout subchapter M, includes
canals. We have made no changes from
the proposed rule based on this
comment.
Several commenters suggested that
‘‘excepted towing vessels’’ operating
solely on Rivers or Western Rivers be
exempt from carrying distress signals.
We received several comments, mainly
from individuals and maritime
companies, who felt that the visual
distress signals should not apply to
Western Rivers or inland river systems.
Another commenter felt that flares and
smoke signals required in proposed
§ 141.375(b) were not needed for vessels
operating on rivers one mile wide. A
maritime company disagreed with the
requirement for single flares on harbor
and fleeting tugs.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40056
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
The Coast Guard does not agree. The
carriage, proper stowage, training, and
use of visual distress signals influence
survivability of the crew in the event of
an emergency that would require
evacuation. As we noted above, time to
rescue is influenced by the ability to
detect persons in distress. If there is
insufficient evidence that crewmembers
are in trouble, it is less likely they will
receive the assistance they need.
One commenter felt that phrases such
as, ‘‘approved under 46 CFR subpart
160.021 or other standard specified by
the Coast Guard’’ is vague and should
instead reference approval series found
in 46 CFR 199.30.
The Coast Guard agrees and has
revised the regulatory text in part 141 to
specify the approval series applicable to
all lifesaving equipment required to be
approved. The Coast Guard believes that
specifying the appropriate approval
series assists the vessel owners and
managing operators in determining
whether specific equipment is approved
for a particular application.
We received several comments,
particularly from maritime companies,
suggesting the deletion of § 141.380(c),
which requires identification markings
on each EPIRB.
The Coast Guard does not agree.
When we find an unattended EPIRB, it
is important that we know what vessel
it came from, so that we can mount a
more focused and effective rescue
response.
One company requested an exception
from the EPIRB requirement for vessels
operating within coastal bays or sounds
that may occasionally operate at greater
than 3 miles from shore.
In § 141.380, we did propose to
require EPIRBs on vessels operating
upon the Great Lakes beyond 3 nautical
miles from shore but not on vessels
operating on lakes, bays, and sounds.
The Coast Guard acknowledges the
conflict between § 141.380 and Table
141.370, and has made the appropriate
revisions to the table to exclude vessels
on lakes, bays, and sounds from the
EPIRB requirement.
One commenter stated that the
requirement for EPIRBs does not
mention requirements for hydrostatic
release.
We note that § 141.380(b) requires
that the EPIRB be mounted such that it
will float free if the vessel sinks.
Hydrostatic release is one of several
methods for meeting this requirement.
We made no changes from the proposed
rule based on this comment.
One commenter suggested that
§ 141.380(a) be consistent with NTSB
Recommendations M–10–1 and
suggested that each EPIRB installed after
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
the effective date of these rules should
be a type which includes a satellite
position in its distress alert.
The Coast Guard recognizes the merit
of enhanced locating devices, but the
benefit of adding enhanced GPS locating
functionality to an EPIRB does not
outweigh the costs associated with
making it mandatory for all towing
vessels, particularly before it is
mandatory for other types of inspected
vessels. Though the Coast Guard may
consider this matter holistically in the
future, we have not made changes to the
proposed rule based on this comment.
However, this does not preclude a
vessel operator from optionally carrying
such equipment.
We received comments from three
maritime companies that felt that
because a tug is able to retrieve a barge
without boarding, and because boarding
a drifting barge is dangerous, the line
throwing requirement in § 141.385 is
not needed.
The Coast Guard notes that the linethrowing appliance was only proposed
to be carried on towing vessels
operating on ocean routes, and is not
necessarily intended for boarding a
drifting barge. The line-throwing
appliance can be used to pass a line to
another vessel if the towing vessel is
incapacitated and needs to be towed.
One association suggested broadening
the line throwing apparatus requirement
to include towing vessels in coastwise
service that operate beyond the
boundary line.
The Coast Guard agrees that vessels in
coastwise service will be subject to
similar conditions, and have expanded
this requirement to include them,
consistent with other inspected vessels
(see 46 CFR 199.170 and 199.610). We
have amended § 141.385 accordingly.
L. Fire Protection (Part 142)
The fire protection standards
proposed in Part 142 retained most of
the fire protection regulations that
currently apply to towing vessels and
are contained in 46 CFR parts 25 and 27.
The public comments received in
response to proposed part 142 provided
a number of suggestions aimed at
improving the clarity of the
requirements based on several years of
operating experience with the current
regulations. We have incorporated many
of these suggestions in an effort to make
part 142 more user-friendly, and made
additional editorial revisions to improve
clarity and readability. We also received
some comments critical of specific
provisions in the NPRM. Most notable
are objections to the requirements for
flammable liquid storage cabinets on
inland towing vessels, the use of
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
portable fire pumps, the requirements
for a professional engineer (P.E.) to
certify fire detection systems, and any
requirements relating to onboard firefighting. Each of these comments is
discussed in greater detail in the
following item-by-item responses.
In general, the nature of the public
comments made it clear to us that the
organization of part 142 was confusing
and could be greatly improved by
placing in subpart B all of the general
requirements that are applicable to all
towing vessels—such as equipment
approvals, fire hazards to be minimized,
storage of flammable liquids, portable
fire extinguishers, firefighter’s outfits,
fire axes, and maintenance and
training—and placing in subpart C the
specific requirements for fireextinguishing and fire detection systems
applicable only to certain vessels.
Accordingly, we reorganized part 142 by
deleting redundant requirements for
fixed fire-extinguishing systems in
proposed § 142.235, and moving the
requirements for portable fire
extinguishers from proposed § 142.305
to § 142.230(d), the requirements for
firefighter’s outfits from proposed
§ 142.350 to a new § 142.226, and the
requirements for fire axes from
proposed § 142.350 to a new § 142.227,
but we did not change any
requirements, except in response to
public comments as discussed in the
following paragraphs. Section 142.235
in this final rule now contains
requirements for vessels contracted for
prior to November 19, 1952.
With respect to proposed § 142.105 on
applicability, one commenter requested
that we add text to indicate that vessels
exempted from 46 CFR part 27—which
currently applies to most towing vessels
that will become subject to subchapter
M requirements—need not comply with
part 142. We partially agree with this
commenter. In § 142.300, we have
established that excepted vessels need
not comply with the provisions of
subpart C regarding fixed fireextinguishing equipment; our definition
of ‘‘excepted vessels’’ in § 136.110
includes many of the vessels excluded
from part 27 applicability by
§ 27.100(b).
But, we do not agree that these vessels
should be exempt from the general fire
safety provisions in subparts A and B.
These requirements implement
minimum standards for portable fire
extinguishers and control of
combustible materials, which we
believe are essential on board all
vessels. Accordingly, we did not adopt
the broad exemption recommended by
the commenter.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
We revised § 141.205(a) to include a
reference to SOLAS Chapter II–2 as this
is where specific fire protection
requirements are contained.
With respect to § 142.215, one
commenter suggested that the
installation of excess fire-fighting and
fire detection equipment on a vessel
must be designed, constructed, installed
and maintained in accordance with
recognized industry standards
acceptable to the Coast Guard. We agree
with this comment and have added a
paragraph (c) to this section to address
equipment that is installed but not
required by this subpart. Because there
may be existing vessels affected by this,
we have included provisions that allow
the local OCMI to accept existing
equipment of any design as long as it is
determined to be in serviceable
condition. Additionally, we have
clarified the wording regarding
approved equipment in order to
standardize this language throughout
the subchapter.
Several commenters expressed
concern that the proposed requirements
in § 142.220 appeared to prohibit the
presence of any combustible and
flammable liquids in the bilges at any
time. They noted that the accumulation
of some amounts of combustible and
flammable liquids in the bilges is
unavoidable during normal operations,
and requested changes to this section.
We agree that small amounts of such
liquids are likely to be present;
however, we also want to clearly
express our concerns over the
accumulation of considerable quantities
of liquids that could be a fire hazard.
We therefore modified the text of
§ 142.220(a) to indicate that the bilges
should be kept as clear as practical.
Another commenter felt that the
proposed requirements in proposed
§ 142.220(c) (now § 144.415) for the
insulation of exhaust pipes and galley
cooking equipment exhaust ducts
should apply only to new vessels
because it would be difficult to retrofit
existing vessels, and the risk does not
warrant added protection. We do not
agree with this commenter, and have
not changed the requirement. There
have been recent exhaust system fires
(discussed in our Safety Alert 05–08,
dated September 17, 2008) in which the
cause was attributed to the installation
of new diesel engines that run at hotter
temperatures than previous models. We
believe that the potential fire risk is the
same on both new and existing vessels.
However, to alleviate concerns about
installing insulation on the exhaust
systems of existing vessels, we have
added to § 144.415 two alternate
methods of demonstrating compliance.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
The revised requirement would accept
exhaust systems designed to either
Standard P–1 of the American Boat and
Yacht Council (ABYC) or Standard 302
of the National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA) as equivalent forms
of protection. These additional means of
protection will provide operators of
existing vessels a wider range of choices
to comply with the rule. As noted
above, proposed § 142.220(c) was
moved to § 144.415 as this requirement
is more closely related to part 144.
We received several comments
objecting to requirements in § 142.225
for approved flammable liquids storage
cabinets on boats operating on the
Western rivers. These commenters
appear to have misinterpreted the
proposed rule. We proposed that
combustible and flammable liquids be
stored in a controlled area, either a
specific room or a dedicated storage
cabinet. An approved storage cabinet is
an option and not a required piece of
equipment. Related to this, one
commenter recommended that we also
accept flammable liquid storage cabinets
that are Factory Mutual approved. We
agree with the commenter that Factory
Mutual cabinets provide an equivalent
level of safety as those approved to UL
1275, a voluntary consensus standard
used in the NPRM and this final rule,
and have added a new § 142.225(c)(2) to
accept their use. Another commenter
felt that securing the cabinets to the
vessel should not be required on the
Western Rivers, but offered no
justification for the comment. We
acknowledge that vessels operating on
the river system are subject to less
significant wind and wave motions than
are experienced by ocean-going vessels,
but do not agree with the commenter
that flammable liquid storage cabinets
should be unsecured. Any sudden
acceleration or movement of the vessel
could dislodge the cabinet, causing a
flammable liquid spill potentially
leading to a fire. We have not made any
changes as a result of this comment.
Finally, we received one comment
suggesting that § 142.225 should contain
information on the storage of hazardous
material in ships’ stores. We believe
these materials are adequately covered
by regulations in 46 CFR part 147,
which apply to towing and other vessels
subject to inspection under 46 U.S.C.
3301, and need not be repeated here.
In § 142.226 (proposed § 142.345), and
throughout this part, we changed all
references from fireman to firefighter.
We also removed the reference to the
Mine Safety and Health Administration
because this agency no longer approves
self-contained breathing apparatus for
normal use. A variety of comments were
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40057
submitted regarding the proposed
requirements for the carriage of
firefighter’s outfits covered by proposed
§ 142.345 (now § 142.226 as noted
above). One commenter recommended
that the proposed standards should be
enhanced by listing the specific
equipment required for each firefighter’s
outfit. Others recommended that the
requirements for the carriage of
firefighter’s outfits should be deleted in
their entirety, since in their opinion it
is too dangerous for crewmembers to
enter a burning engine room, and would
be better advised to abandon ship in the
event of a serious fire.
We have not removed the
requirements for firefighter’s outfits. We
proposed firefighter’s outfits for a
limited class of vessels. Only vessels of
79 feet or more, operating on ocean or
coastwise routes, that do not have a
fixed fire suppression system in the
engine room are required to carry
firefighter’s outfits. These vessels are
primarily existing vessels that were
contracted for prior to August 27, 2003.
The Coast Guard believes that these
vessels, which operate on the open
ocean should have enhanced firefighting equipment because timely
outside assistance is unlikely, and in the
event of an engine room fire the crew
must be able to provide onboard
response. Vessel operators that believe
that fire-fighting poses an unacceptable
risk to the crew have the option of
installing a fixed fire-extinguishing
system in the engine room.
One commenter requested changes to
§ 142.230 that would allow two size B–
III semi-portable fire extinguishers on
smaller vessels to substitute for the
required B–V extinguisher, which in
their opinion, is difficult to handle due
to its size. We do not agree with this
comment. As noted in the 2004 FireSuppression Systems and Voyage
Planning for Towing Vessels final rule
(69 FR 34064, June 18, 2004), the
severity of an engine-room fire is not
related to the length of the vessel, but
to the fire hazard present in the engine
room. The use of marine diesel fuel oil
poses a sufficient hazard to warrant the
higher fire-suppression capability of a
size B–V extinguisher. However, we are
concerned that some operators may be
installing semi-portable extinguishers
that are fitted with wheels. These types
of extinguishers are intended for use in
shore-side applications and, if used on
board vessels, they need to be secured
to prevent possible injury to the crew.
We have consequently added a
supplemental provision to § 142.230(e)
that requires that any extinguishers
fitted with wheels must be welded or
otherwise secured to the vessel.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40058
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Another commenter noted that
because the NPRM splits discussion of
the fire extinguisher requirements
between § 142.230 and proposed
§ 142.305, it was difficult to determine
what is actually required; the
commenter requested a single chart with
all of the fire extinguisher requirements
in one location. We agree with this
commenter and have relocated all of the
portable hand-held fire extinguisher
requirements to § 142.230(d) and
deleted proposed § 142.305. The
proposed text in § 142.230(d) relating to
extinguisher labeling and nameplates
has also been deleted, since this is an
approval requirement covered by 46
CFR 162.028–3(f) and 162.028–4, and is
not appropriate for inclusion here.
Requirements for semi-portable B–V fire
extinguishers remain in § 142.315.
As previously noted in the general
discussion of Part 142, we have deleted
the content of proposed § 142.235
because it contained a superfluous
requirement that fixed fireextinguishing systems must be approved
by the Commandant, which is already
required by § 142.215(a). We also
deleted the requirement that carbon
dioxide systems must be designed in
accordance with 46 CFR part 76, subpart
76.15, because this is covered in the
definition of ‘‘fixed fire-extinguishing
system’’ in § 136.110.
One commenter suggested that all
new installations of fixed fireextinguishing systems should be
required to undergo plan approval by
the Coast Guard prior to installation. We
do not agree with this comment and
have not changed the proposed rule to
require plan approval by the Coast
Guard. We believe requirements in
§ 144.135 are sufficient. That section
requires verification of compliance with
construction and design standards
before a new installation that is not a
replacement in kind may be installed.
We changed the inspection and testing
criteria in Table 142.240 to harmonize
this regulation with the Carbon Dioxide
Fire Suppression Systems on
Commercial Vessels final rule (77 FR
33860, June 7, 2012), a separate rule
related to fire suppression systems on
commercial vessels that was published
after we published our NPRM. We made
reference to that ongoing rulemaking
and its potential impact on this rule in
our NPRM. See 76 FR 49985, Aug. 11,
2011. The Carbon Dioxide Fire
Suppression rule revised the vessel
regulations to require lock-out valves
and odorizing units on all new carbon
dioxide extinguishing systems installed
or materially altered after July 9, 2013.
That rulemaking also changed each of
the vessel subchapters to allow the use
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
of clean agent fire-extinguishing systems
as an alternative to carbon dioxide
systems. Because of this, it was
necessary to change the inspection and
testing requirements for fireextinguishing systems in Table 142.240
to include criteria for the inspection and
testing of the new clean agents. We have
also slightly modified the definition of
‘‘fixed fire-extinguishing system’’ in
§ 136.110 to comport with the revised
definition in new 46 CFR 27.101.
Additionally, we changed ‘‘maintain’’
to ‘‘test and inspect’’ in the water mist
‘‘test’’ field in Table 142.240, to more
accurately reflect the intent of this
requirement.
Several comments related to the
proposed regulatory text in § 142.240
revealed that this section was confusing
and did not clearly convey our intended
requirements. During our further review
of proposed § 142.240 we noted that the
NPRM used inconsistent wording and
tended to use the terms ‘‘examination,’’
‘‘test,’’ and ‘‘maintenance’’
interchangeably, which contributed to
the confusion. We have, therefore,
revised the text and format of this
section to improve its clarity and
consistency. All testing and inspection
requirements are stated in paragraph (a),
all maintenance requirements are in
paragraph (b), and requirements for
recordkeeping are in paragraph (c). We
have also replaced the word
‘‘examination’’ with ‘‘inspection’’ to be
consistent with other Coast Guard
regulations.
We received numerous comments
requesting that the proposed text of this
section be modified to require fire
suppression and fire detection systems
be inspected or tested annually or in
accordance with the TSMS applicable to
the vessel. We agree with this view and
have changed § 142.240(a) to require
inspection or testing at least every 12
months—as we proposed in
§ 142.240(c)—or more frequently, if
required by the vessel’s TSMS.
Several comments also proposed that
the TSMS should be the exclusive form
of recordkeeping for test and inspection
results. We do not agree with this
comment. For flexibility, we have
proposed that the records may be kept
in accordance with an applicable TSMS,
the TVR, or the vessel’s logbook,
whichever applies. We have also added
new provisions in § 142.240(c)(2) to
accept service tags attached to portable
and semi-portable extinguishers by a
qualified servicing organization as an
acceptable record that demonstrates the
required tests and inspections have been
completed.
One commenter requested that we
replace the phrase ‘‘dampers’’ in
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
proposed § 142.240(c), now § 142.240(a),
with ‘‘fire dampers.’’ It was not our
intent to require the testing of fusiblelink fire dampers. The proposed
requirement was directed at pressureoperated dampers installed in engine
room ventilation ducts. These dampers
are automatically operated by the engine
room fire-extinguishing system, and
must close prior to system discharge to
prevent the leakage and dilution of the
fire-extinguishing agent. To clarify what
dampers we intended to be tested, we
have changed ‘‘dampers’’ to ‘‘fixed fireextinguishing system pressure-operated
dampers.’’ We have also added this
phrase to § 142.240(a)(5) to clarify that
these dampers must be tested as part of
the fire-extinguishing system inspection
procedures.
One commenter requested a
modification to the carbon dioxide
cylinder tests required by Table 142.240
that would remove the requirement to
weigh the cylinders, and in its place
permit the use of liquid level indicators.
We do not agree with this requested
modification. The Coast Guard has
historically required that carbon dioxide
cylinders must be weighed to determine
the amount of extinguishing agent (see,
e.g., 46 CFR 91.25–20(a)(2) and related
table), because weighing is the only
reliable method to check the quantity of
carbon dioxide in the cylinders that the
Coast Guard recognizes. Liquid level
measuring systems use various types of
sensing elements that show the location
of the liquid/gas interface within the
cylinder. With that knowledge, a
technician is able to calculate the
quantity of agent. We have no objection
to the use of liquid level indicators for
checking the quantity of halocarbon
clean agents, because a liquid/gas
interface can be easily determined. This
is not the case with carbon dioxide,
however, which has a critical
temperature of 87.8 degrees Fahrenheit.
Below the critical temperature, carbon
dioxide in a closed container may be
part liquid and part gas. Above the
critical temperature it is entirely gas,
making the use of such measuring
devices impractical.
One commenter requested that we
change § 142.245 to require all records
of training and drills to be kept in the
TVR. We do not agree and have made
no changes from the proposed rule
based on this comment. For flexibility,
we have permitted several acceptable
recordkeeping methods, in accordance
with part 140 of this subchapter.
One commenter questioned the
intended extent of the fire detection and
alarm system testing during drills
required by proposed § 142.245(c)(3). As
proposed, the commenter noted, each
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
drill could be understood to require a
complete test of the system. This is not
our intent. We anticipate that during
drills, only the test switch or a single
detector needs to be activated to
familiarize the crew with the system’s
operation, and have changed the text of
§ 142.245(c)(3) to require that only one
device needs to be tested.
One commenter requested that the
proposed requirements in this section
for training crews to respond to fires
should be removed from the rule, as the
limited scope of the training would not
afford crew members with the necessary
skills and knowledge to safely engage in
fire-fighting activities. The commenter
anticipated that this may result in a
false sense of security, leading to
injuries for crewmembers attempting to
fight engine room fires. Further
supporting this argument, it was
suggested that the typical practice on
inland towing vessels in response to a
fire is to attempt ‘‘first-aid’’ firefighting
using portable extinguishers or fire
hoses. If this fails to contain the fire, the
crew would abandon ship to the tow or
the riverbank.
Another commenter requested that we
strengthen the training requirements by
mandating that all licensed officers,
apprentice mates, steersmen, and
engineers complete formal fire-fighting
training courses.
We considered comments on these
same issues in a previous rulemaking,
the Fire-Suppression Systems and
Voyage Planning for Towing Vessels
interim rule (68 FR 22607, April 29,
2003), and believed at that time that the
level of training proposed in our
Inspection of Towing Vessels NPRM
would provide crew members with
adequate knowledge of the procedures
and equipment on board their vessels
needed to respond to fires; we have not
changed our opinion on this issue based
on these comments on § 142.245. In
support of our previous rulemaking,
TSAC had performed an independent
analysis of our casualty data, which
showed that over 80 percent of the
reported fires on inland vessels had
been extinguished by the crewmembers
with only seven reported injuries. (See
USCG–2000–6931–0046, available on
www.regulations.gov). Further review of
the Coast Guard casualty reports on the
vessels where injuries were reported
revealed that most of the seven injuries
were the result of conditions in the
engine room (e.g., burns from the fire
outbreak) and were not attributable to
fire-fighting efforts.
As previously discussed, in order to
make this regulation more user-friendly,
we have made various editorial changes
here such as moving the portable fire
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
extinguisher requirements previously
proposed in § 142.305 to § 142.230(d).
We also revised the section heading of
§ 142.315 to ‘‘Additional fireextinguishing equipment requirements,’’
and amended that entire section to make
clear which provisions did not apply to
certain towing vessels. In order to
account for those vessels operating
within 3 nautical miles from shore on
the Great Lakes, we revised paragraph
(a)(1) of § 142.315. These revisions did
not change any substantive
requirements proposed in the NPRM.
We received numerous comments
requesting that we modify proposed
§ 142.325(c) to clarify that sufficient
hydrants and hoses must be provided to
allow ‘‘a stream of water from’’ a single
length of hose to reach any part of the
machinery space. We concur with these
comments and have changed the text
accordingly. Associated with this were
several comments that the requirement
for a single length of hose should be
deleted. We do not concur with this,
because the single, 15-meter-length-ofhose requirement ensures that a
sufficient number of fire hydrants with
attached hoses are installed in or close
to the engine room. If the fire-fighting
water could be provided by multiple
sections of hose linked together, (i.e., a
segmented hose of unlimited length) a
single remote hydrant might satisfy the
rule, but the length of hose required
would either be too cumbersome to
handle in an emergency, not provide the
necessary amount of firefighting water
due to friction loss, or both.
One commenter urged us to add a
new § 142.325(g) requiring a minimum
fuel supply stowed onboard to enable 4
hours of operation of the portable fire
pump. We do not agree with this
suggestion. Paragraph (b) of 46 CFR
27.211 prohibits the carriage of portable
fuel tanks and related hardware except
when used for outboard engines or
when permanently attached to portable
equipment such as fire pumps. Most
commercially available portable fire
pumps have a fuel tank capable of
operating the pump for at least 1 hour.
The carriage of supplemental fuel
supplies to allow 4 hours of operation
would conflict with the provisions of 46
CFR 27.211(b).
Another commenter requested that we
remove the requirement for a ‘‘selfpriming’’ portable fire pump and
require, as an alternative, that a
minimum time period be specified
during which the crew must be able to
demonstrate that their portable pump
can be deployed. We do not agree with
this comment and have not removed the
requirement for self-priming pumps, as
non-self-priming pumps are extremely
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40059
difficult to successfully operate under
emergency conditions.
A third commenter noted that in his
experience, many crews have
difficulties getting the self-priming
feature of portable fire pumps to
function. We believe this commenter
raises a valid point, and have added a
new paragraph (c)(5) to § 142.245 to
require regular training on the selfpriming feature during fire drills to
ensure crew familiarity its operation, on
vessels equipped with portable pumps.
Another commenter requested that we
not accept the use of portable pumps at
all, as they are not comparable to fixed
fire main systems, and the amount of
time it takes to assemble and deploy the
pump in darkness or rough weather
could compromise mariner safety. We
do not concur with this comment
because portable pumps were
previously allowed for uninspected
towing vessels and we do not have data
supporting the removal of the option of
using cost-effective portable fire pumps.
Operators with vessels on routes or in
services where the ability to deploy and
operate portable pumps could be
difficult may choose to install a fixed
fire main system as an option.
One commenter recommended that
we specify the type of fire hoses
required by this section, and urged that
we adopt UL 19 as the required
standard. We believe that the existing
requirement for lined commercial fire
hose provides suitable fire-fighting
equipment for this purpose. Firehose
meeting UL 19 is constructed to a higher
standard that would impose
unnecessary costs on the industry.
One commenter suggested that
§ 142.325 require a dedicated sea-chest
for the installed fire main. We do not
agree with this comment, because a
dedicated sea-chest would likely be
used only during drills and in
emergencies. If the fire main system is
connected to a sea-chest that is regularly
used for shipboard services, there is a
greater chance that it will be clear of
debris or fouling when needed.
During our review of the public
comments on § 142.330, we noted that
the proposed introductory paragraph of
this section was confusing in regard to
the fire detection system requirements
for towing vessels constructed on or
after January 18, 2000. We have clarified
and improved the structure of this
section by addressing vessels whose
construction was contracted for prior to
January 18, 2000, separately in
paragraph § 142.330(a)(8).
One commenter requested
clarification as to whether the audible
and visual alarms at the operating
station required by proposed
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40060
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
§ 142.330(c) must be integral to the fire
alarm control panel. The Coast Guard’s
response is that the operating station
must have a fire detection control panel
installed within the space. However, in
the years since the Fire-Suppression
Systems and Voyage Planning for
Towing Vessels final rule was published
(69 FR 34064, June 18, 2004) and
incorporated into existing 46 CFR
subchapter C regulations, we have
become aware that there may be cases
where this is a problem on towing
vessels with more than one operating
station because the fire detection system
control panel is not installed at each
operating station. We did not intend to
impose an undue economic burden on
vessels of this design type by requiring
fire detection control panels at each
operating station. Rather, one operating
station must be outfitted with the fire
detection control panel while any others
could be outfitted with either fire
detection control panels or a remote
indicator with audible and visual
alarms. We amended the regulatory text
of this section to reflect this intent (see
new § 142.330(a)(3)).
Another commenter requested that we
remove reference to a circuit-fault
detector test-switch in § 142.330(a)(4)(v)
because currently available fire alarm
control panels use internal supervision
instead of a test switch to verify circuit
integrity. We agree with this comment
and have changed this paragraph to
accept control panels with internal
circuit supervision as equivalent to
those having a test switch. We have
elected to retain a reference to panels
with a test switch to allow flexibility in
meeting this provision.
Various commenters suggested that
proposed § 142.330(g), which we
redesignated as § 142.330(a)(7) in the
final rule, should be amended to allow
certification of fire detection systems by
the National Institute for Certification in
Engineering Technologies (NICET) Level
IV technicians in addition to registered
P.E.s. We concur with this view and
have changed the text of § 142.330(a)(7)
accordingly. Level IV technicians are
required to have at least 10 years’
experience in fire alarm installation and
testing and must pass a comprehensive
written exam to demonstrate their
knowledge. Other commenters
requested that we add a qualifying
statement to the requirement for a P.E.,
to ensure that the engineer is qualified
to review and certify fire detection
systems. We agree and have changed
§ 142.330(a)(7) to require that any P.E.s
or authorized classification society
reviewing the system have experience in
fire detection system design. It is
important to note that all required fire
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
detection systems must be certified and
inspected by a P.E., a NICET Level IV
Technician, or an authorized
classification society including those on
vessels that elect or are subject to the
Coast Guard traditional inspection
scheme under § 137.200. When the
Coast Guard inspects the vessel, it will
look for evidence that the vessel owner
or managing operator has had all
required fire detection systems on the
vessel certified and inspected by a P.E.,
a NICET Level IV Technician, or an
authorized classification society. We
also edited § 142.330(a)(7) to clearly
require the system and its installation to
be both certified and inspected.
One commenter requested
clarification of proposed § 142.330(g),
specifically, whether the certifying
engineer or technician must review only
the detection system equipment and
layout drawings, or whether it is
necessary to inspect the installation of
the fire detection system on board the
vessel. We clarified the language in
§ 142.330, and specify that the fire
detection system must be both: Certified
by a P.E., NICET technician, or an
authorized classification society
surveyor to comply with paragraphs
(a)(1) through (7) of § 142.330; and
inspected by a Coast Guard marine
inspector or a TPO surveyor, depending
upon which inspection regime applies
to the vessel, to comply with
§ 142.330(a)(2). This last reference
requires the system to be installed,
tested and maintained in accordance
with the manufacturer’s design manual.
We have substituted the term
independent testing laboratory in
§ 142.330(a)(1) and (8) with Nationally
Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL)
as defined in 29 CFR 1910.7. The
proposed term independent testing
laboratory is ambiguous and will be
replaced with NRTL throughout title 46
CFR upon the finalization of a
concurrent regulatory project (see the
Harmonization of Standards for Fire
Protection, Detection, and Extinguishing
Equipment notice of proposed
rulemaking (79 FR 2254, January 13,
2014)).
Please note that we have redesignated
§ 142.335, Smoke alarms in berthing
spaces, and § 142.340, Heat detector in
galley as § 142.330(b) and (c),
respectively, in the final rule. Multiple
commenters urged us to remove from
proposed § 142.335 (now § 142.330(b))
any requirements for battery operated
smoke detectors in berthing spaces, and
instead require smoke detectors that are
part of an installed fixed fire-detection
system. We do not concur with this
suggestion. Battery-operated smoke
detectors are not required, but detectors
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
that meet UL 217 may be used as an
alternative to satisfy the requirements in
new § 142.330(b). We have retained this
option in the final rule because it offers
a low cost alternative to installing a
fixed detection system in these areas.
A commenter requested changing
proposed § 142.340 regarding a heat
detector in the galley to require only
heat detectors that comply with UL 521.
We have not specified a specific
performance standard for the required
heat detectors; however, we agree with
the commenter that only restorable heat
sensing type detectors may be used (i.e.,
detectors that automatically reset to
operating condition when the heat
source is removed), and have changed
the requirements in redesignated
§ 142.330(c) accordingly.
In the NPRM we discussed comments
submitted in response to seven
questions we posed in a December 30,
2004, Inspection of Towing Vessels
notice. In response to that portion of the
NPRM, one of these commenters
recommended applying grandfathering
to structural fire-protection
requirements. The commenter also felt
that existing vessels should be treated
differently from newly constructed
vessels because of the likelihood that
fire standards will make it difficult to
retrofit existing vessels. We have made
no changes to the final rule in response
to this comment. The fire protection
standards proposed in this part retain
most of the fire protection regulations
that currently apply to existing towing
vessels and are contained in Title 46
CFR parts 25 and 27. Only three new
requirements have been added. Section
142.227 requires all vessels to have a
fire axe, § 142.330(b) (proposed
§ 142.335) requires smoke detectors in
berthing areas, and § 142.226 (proposed
§ 142.345) requires firefighter’s outfits
on certain ocean-going vessels. Batteryoperated smoke detectors will be
permitted, and the addition of fire axes
and firefighter’s outfits does not require
any modifications to the vessel;
therefore, we do not agree that either
requirement would be difficult to
implement onboard existing vessels.
M. Machinery and Electrical (Part 143)
In this final rule, we made substantive
changes in response to specific
comments on the NPRM, and we also
made significant organizational changes.
Because of the organizational changes,
subpart headings and section numbers
in this part no longer correspond to
those used in the NPRM. Much of the
content of proposed part 143 has been
removed or reordered, and several
provisions have been changed to apply
to new vessels only. The requirements
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
of proposed subpart C, deferred
requirements for existing vessels, and
proposed subpart D, for oil and
hazardous material in bulk, have been
divided among the other subparts. This
derivation table lists part 143 section
numbers in this final rule and the
corresponding part 143 section from the
NPRM:
TABLE 1—DERIVATION OF SECTIONS
OF PART 143 FROM THE NPRM
Final rule
section No.
..........
..........
..........
..........
143.205
143.210
143.215
143.220
143.225
143.230
143.235
143.240
143.245
143.250
143.255
143.260
143.265
143.270
143.275
143.300
143.400
143.410
143.415
143.450
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
143.460
143.500
143.505
143.510
143.515
143.520
143.540
143.545
143.550
143.555
143.560
143.565
143.570
143.575
143.580
143.585
143.590
143.595
143.600
143.605
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
143.100
143.105
143.115
143.200
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
NPRM section No.(s)
143.110.
143.105.
143.115.
143.200, 143.325, 143.330,
143.335.
143.220.
143.110, 143.215.
143.210.
143.235.
143.240.
143.245.
143.250.
143.330.
143.260.
143.270.
143.275.
143.280.
143.285.
143.290.
143.295.
143.320, 143.520, 143.525.
143.300.
143.310.
143.315.
143.210, 143.325, 143.515,
143.520.
143.330.
143.500, 143.505.
143.505.
143.510.
143.515.
143.520.
143.535.
143.540.
143.545.
143.340.
143.345.
143.350.
143.355.
143.360.
143.550.
143.405.
143.410.
143.420.
143.430.
143.435.
In several provisions in the NPRM, we
offered two different options for
complying with design or operational
standards in certain areas. These
sections were divided up into
‘‘functional requirements’’ and
‘‘prescriptive options’’ for complying
with the functional requirements. The
prescriptive options represented one
way to comply with the functional
requirements, but an owner or managing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
operator could choose another way to
comply so long as the alternative
method was approved by the OCMI or
an approved third party. On further
consideration, we have consolidated the
functional requirements with other
language about when and how
exceptions from the baseline standard
may be granted (see § 143.210).
Changes to Subpart A, ‘‘General’’
The applicability of the subparts
within this part has changed. The
specific changes are discussed
elsewhere in this preamble, but we have
revised the discussion of applicability
in subpart A to provide an overview of
the entire part for readers. Most notably,
subpart A now specifies that existing
vessels (which includes those vessels
already under construction that do not
meet our definition of ‘‘new towing
vessel’’), have 2 years to comply with
the rule; for certain listed provisions,
the delay is longer. Additionally,
because the structure of part 143 has
changed, new vessels must comply with
subparts B and C of part 143 except as
noted in specific sections in subpart C
instead of the proposed subpart E.
Under our ‘‘new towing vessel’’
definition, no vessel would be subject to
new vessel requirements until at least
July 20, 2017.
Because of the additional discussion
of the applicability of each subpart and
the changes to the discussion of
functional requirements with
prescriptive options for compliance, we
removed proposed § 143.110. The
content specific to OCMI or third-party
acceptance of alternative methods is
relocated to § 143.210 and consolidated.
However, we will address here the
comments received on proposed
§ 143.110. One commenter suggested
adding the word ‘‘company’’ to the
entities named in § 143.110(c) on
alternatives to the prescriptive option.
The Coast Guard declines to make this
change, because an ‘‘owner or managing
operator’’ may be a company. Another
commenter suggested replacing OCMI or
third-party acceptance with a TSMS
accepted by the third party. This change
would remove the option of OCMI
acceptance and would not be
appropriate for vessels not covered by a
TSMS, so the Coast Guard declines to
make the change.
As previously discussed in this
preamble, we relocated the definition of
‘‘independent’’ to part 143 in response
to a comment pointing out that the
definition was specific to vessel
arrangements described in this part.
Several commenters noted that that
the phrase ‘‘replacement in kind’’
should not be construed too narrowly,
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40061
so as to avoid subjecting existing towing
vessels to unnecessary additional
requirements. One commenter suggested
that where a piece of equipment such as
a generator is replaced with another that
has the same function and similar
characteristics but is not the exact same
model, such replacement should be
considered ‘‘replacement in kind.’’
Another commenter suggested that
proposed § 143.220 (now incorporated
into § 143.205) would prevent vessels
from upgrading to more efficient
equipment.
We added a definition of
‘‘replacement in kind’’ to § 136.110 in
response to numerous comments
requesting clarification of this term,
which is used in parts 143 and 144.
When equipment needs to be replaced,
it may be replaced by the same or
similar equipment, or it may be
upgraded. It is certainly acceptable to
upgrade, but an upgrade is not
considered a replacement in kind
because the maintenance and operation
of the new equipment may require
operator training, new maintenance
schedules, OCMI approval of equipment
arrangement, and an update to the
vessel’s TSMS.
Finally, the Coast Guard removed the
list of material incorporated by
reference specifically for part 143
(proposed § 143.120) and moved that
content to a consolidated list for the
entire subchapter at § 136.112. The
Coast Guard received one comment on
the incorporation of standards by
reference in part 143; the comment
appeared to indicate that new
incorporations are not necessary
because there are existing, currently
applicable standards elsewhere in title
46. The standards incorporated in part
143 are necessary because towing
vessels represent a unique class of
vessel design, and other standards
incorporated in various CFR sections are
not currently applicable to towing
vessels. The engineering standards
incorporated in subchapters F, J, and Q,
for instance, are generally applicable to
much larger ships with different risk
profiles, such as passenger ships or large
tank vessels.
Changes to Subpart B, ‘‘Requirements
for All Towing Vessels’’
The organization of subpart B remains
largely the same as in the NPRM,
although the section numbers have
changed. We removed proposed
§ 143.230, ‘‘Guards for exposed
hazards,’’ as it was duplicative of
proposed § 144.345. For more on this,
see discussion of changes to part 144
below. We also added two sections from
proposed subpart C—pilothouse alerter
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40062
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
systems and towing machinery—which
have delayed application dates for
existing vessels. An existing vessel must
comply not later than 5 years after the
issuance of the first COI for the vessel.
This delayed compliance date is
reflected in § 143.200(c) and is the same
length of time as was proposed in the
NPRM at proposed § 143.320. The
details of these requirements, and other
changes to proposed subpart C, are
discussed later in this preamble.
General
We redesignated proposed § 143.220
as § 143.205. The Coast Guard received
a suggestion that we insert the phrase
‘‘in accordance with their
responsibilities’’ in proposed
§ 143.220(b). The Coast Guard agrees
with the general approach and has
revised the paragraph to clarify that
crewmembers must demonstrate ability
to operate the machinery and electrical
systems for which they are responsible.
Another commenter suggested
changing the requirements in proposed
§ 143.220(c)(3) to apply to all control
stations (operating stations) instead of
just the primary one. The Coast Guard
agrees and has removed the word
‘‘primary’’ from this requirement. The
Coast Guard understands that certain
vessels have more than one operating
station; in such cases, each operating
station would need to comply with
revised and redesignated
§ 143.205(c)(3).
One commenter suggested that the
Coast Guard insert the phrase ‘‘with
respect to the installation in question’’
in the sentence in proposed § 143.220(d)
that requires installations to comply
with subpart C for new vessels if the
installation is made after this rule
becomes effective and is not a
replacement in kind on an existing
towing vessel. The Coast Guard declines
to make that change because the original
language was unambiguous and the
addition unnecessary.
Another commenter asked the Coast
Guard to change proposed § 143.220 to
‘‘clarify that replacements mandated by
regulation will not trigger the referenced
follow-on regulations . . . .’’ The Coast
Guard disagrees. If equipment requires
replacement and the owner or managing
operator chooses not to make a
replacement in kind, it is considered an
upgrade and subpart C may apply.
Depending on the significance of the
replacement (whole system versus one
particular piece), newer standards may
be applicable. Applying subpart C to
replacement equipment will not result
in the same cost as applying subpart C
to existing equipment, and is
appropriate because the maintenance
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
and operation of the new equipment
may differ.
Alternate Design
We combined proposed § 143.215 on
alternate design considerations with the
functional requirements provisions of
proposed § 143.110 that called for OCMI
or third-party acceptance; these are now
located in § 143.210, and have been
further condensed to refer to similar
provisions in § 136.115. As noted earlier
in this preamble, these changes do not
alter the availability of approval for
alternate designs.
The Coast Guard received several
comments requesting that we add
‘‘company’’ after ‘‘owner’’ in proposed
§ 143.215. The Coast Guard partially
agrees. In § 143.210(a), we inserted ‘‘or
managing operator’’ after ‘‘owner’’ to be
consistent with other sections where we
list both. The definition of ‘‘managing
operator’’ in § 136.110 includes
organizations, and if a company owns
the vessel, it would be covered by the
definition of ‘‘owner.’’
TSMS
We removed proposed § 143.205, as it
was duplicative of part 138. With
respect to the content of that proposed
section, one commenter had suggested
the Coast Guard include ‘‘guidelines’’ in
paragraph (a), along with policies and
procedures to ensure compliance. The
Coast Guard declines to make such a
change in the provisions discussing
TSMSs, because the purpose of the
TSMS is to help ensure compliance
with all parts of this subchapter, and the
inclusion of guidelines is not necessary
to that minimum standard. Nothing
prohibits the inclusion of guidelines in
individual TSMSs, however.
Existing Vessels Built to Class
We redesignated proposed § 143.210
as § 143.215. Proposed § 143.210 had
provided that vessels classed by the
American Bureau of Shipping (ABS), or
built to ABS rules, would be considered
in compliance with part 143 if they met
certain additional requirements.
However, we determined that the
requirements for existing and new
vessels need to be further distinguished.
This final rule creates flexibility for
existing vessels: Existing towing vessels
currently classed by any recognized
classification society, or determined
compliant with any recognized
classification society’s appropriate
rules, are equivalent to nearly all of the
requirements of subpart B. We have
reduced the list of additional
requirements originally proposed in
§ 143.210(b), so that existing vessels that
are classed or built to class rules only
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
need to meet the pilothouse alerter
requirement (by the delayed effective
date, 5 years after the issuance of the
first COI for the vessel) and readiness
and testing requirements. These
fundamental safety provisions replace
the longer list that we had proposed. In
particular, proposed paragraph (b)(2) on
potable water was removed because, as
a number of commenters noted,
proposed § 143.225 was ‘‘reserved’’ and
listed no requirements. The Coast Guard
agrees with the suggestion to remove
this reference to potable water
requirements; we note that Food and
Drug Administration requirements in 21
CFR 1250.82 already apply to potable
water systems for most towing vessels
engaged in interstate commerce. In
addition, in § 140.510(a)(14) an owner
or managing operator must identify and
mitigate health and safety hazards
related to the towing vessel’s potable
water supply.
Also, with regard to proposed
§ 143.210(a), the Coast Guard received
several comments suggesting we change
the phrase ‘‘mechanical standards’’ to
‘‘machinery standards.’’ The Coast
Guard agrees that ‘‘machinery
standards’’ is the industry accepted
term, and amended the section
accordingly. In what is now paragraph
(b), the Coast Guard clarified that the
OCMI or a third party would deem the
vessel to be in compliance.
As is discussed later in this preamble,
new towing vessels meeting ABS rules
in accordance with § 143.515, or classed
by ABS, are considered to be in
compliance with part 143 except for the
pilothouse alerter and readiness and
testing sections that are described
below. New towing vessels classed by
other recognized classification societies
may also be compliant with part 143 if
approved by the Coast Guard. This final
rule offers more flexibility than the
proposed rule, in that it provides for
Coast Guard approval of other class
standards, but does not automatically
accept all classed vessels as compliant
with part 143. In light of the wide range
of possible class standards in the future,
we believe this is the correct balance
between safety and feasibility.
Machinery Space Fire Prevention
We redesignated proposed § 143.235
as § 143.220. One commenter suggested
the Coast Guard change ‘‘flammable
liquid’’ to ‘‘flammable or combustible
liquid’’ in proposed paragraphs (a) and
(c), to cover diesel fuel. The Coast Guard
agrees that most grades of diesel fuel are
considered ‘‘combustible liquids’’ as
opposed to more volatile ‘‘flammable
liquids’’ such as gasoline, and amended
the section accordingly to indicate the
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
intent of preventing fires. We also refer
to 46 CFR subpart 30.10 for definitions
of those terms. Similarly, one
commenter suggested we add ‘‘and
other flammable liquids’’ to the
restriction on oil in proposed paragraph
(b). The Coast Guard agrees with the
underlying concern, but has removed
proposed paragraph (b) because it was
duplicative of the fire hazards provision
in part 142.
With respect to proposed § 143.235(c),
several commenters said that the
temperature threshold required, 65.5 °C
(150 °F), is too low to be practical. The
Coast Guard agrees that the temperature
specified in the NPRM was impractical,
and amended what is now § 143.220(b)
to adopt the SOLAS requirements for
insulation of hot surfaces: 220 °C
(428 °F) as was suggested by several
commenters. SOLAS is an established,
internationally recognized set of rules
developed and ratified by maritime
nations worldwide, and the Coast Guard
determined that this was the most
appropriate reference.
With respect to proposed
§ 143.235(d), one commenter suggested
the Coast Guard change ‘‘materials’’ to
‘‘products.’’ The Coast Guard agrees that
the suggested change is necessary to
achieve uniformity between parts 142
and 143, and amended § 143.220(c)
accordingly. In the same section, one
commenter suggested that the Coast
Guard include the amounts of
flammable and combustible materials
that can be safely stored in machinery
spaces under this section. The Coast
Guard declines to do so because, under
the original proposed language, the
limits would be determined by the size
of the designated areas defined in
§ 142.225 or the size of the flammable
storage cabinet that satisfies UL 1275. In
addition, because available storage areas
will be limited by prohibitions on
ignition sources in those areas, we
believe that operators will carry only the
amounts of products necessary for the
vessel mission.
The Coast Guard received several
comments recommending adding the
language from proposed § 144.360(c) to
proposed § 143.235, because it pertains
to machinery space fire prevention. The
Coast Guard declines to add the
language to part 143 because the
provisions of § 144.605 address this
topic for all towing vessels.
Control and Monitoring Requirements
We redesignated proposed § 143.240
as § 143.225. The Coast Guard received
several comments requesting that we
change ‘‘thrust’’ to ‘‘RPMs’’ in proposed
paragraph (a).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
The Coast Guard does not agree with
these comments because the use of the
word ‘‘thrust’’ is intended to cover other
propulsion systems in use today,
including varying propulsion and
steering control designs, as well as
indicators. An example would be a shaft
tachometer as an acceptable means of
monitoring the vessel’s propulsion
thrust.
The Coast Guard received several
comments asking if the position of the
rudder joystick is sufficient to meet the
requirements of proposed paragraph (b).
The position of the rudder joystick does
not provide a positive position of the
rudder and is not acceptable. The
rudder joystick simply provides an
indication of the commanded position
of the rudder.
Alarms and Monitoring
We redesignated proposed § 143.245
as § 143.230. The Coast Guard received
several comments suggesting that the
panel in the wheelhouse needs only to
alarm and should not be required to
identify the piece of equipment that has
tripped the alarm. The Coast Guard
agrees that specifying the exact piece of
equipment that is in an alarm condition
is not necessary in the wheelhouse.
Rather, a summary alarm in the
wheelhouse is considered sufficient. We
amended § 143.230 accordingly. The
Coast Guard also received comments
concerning the intent of requiring
alarms to function when primary power
is lost. We agree that it is impractical
that alarms on existing vessels have a
backup source of power in addition to
the primary power supply, because the
primary concern on a loss of main
electrical power is restoring the main
power source.
The Coast Guard received several
comments requesting whether certain
alarms should signal high or low levels;
the Coast Guard agrees that clarification
is needed, and amended the section to
specify which alarm settings are based
on high or low conditions. Several
commenters suggested that the
requirement for a ‘‘main engine fuel oil
pressure’’ alarm should be removed.
One commenter indicated that requiring
fuel oil pressure alarms was
unnecessarily rigorous and would have
a disproportionate effect on small
businesses. We agree that a wide range
of diesel engine fuel pressures may be
acceptable depending on the
manufacturer, and that fuel oil pressure
is not normally considered a mandatory
parameter to be monitored; these levels
may be checked each watch. We
therefore removed proposed
§ 143.245(a)(3) and (6) when drafting the
final version of § 143.230.
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40063
One commenter requested a high level
alarm requirement on day tanks, stating
that a number of spills have occurred as
the result of day tanks being overfilled.
The Coast Guard agrees that a high level
alarm could be beneficial. However, we
do not have spill data to justify such a
requirement and there are other
acceptable means to ensure the day tank
is not overfilled (for example, routing
the overfill line to a storage tank,
physically observing the level of the
tank during filling operations,
monitoring quantity of fuel transferred
so it does not exceed available capacity).
In the future, we may propose requiring
this alarm if spill data suggests
overfilling of the day tank could have
been avoided by such an alarm.
The Coast Guard also received several
comments stating that proposed
§ 143.245(a)(9) (now designated
§ 143.230(a)(6)) addressing low fuel
level alarms repeats proposed
§ 143.275(d) and that one of the two
sections should be removed. The Coast
Guard agrees, and removed proposed
§ 143.275(d).
One commenter suggested removing
the requirement for hydraulic level
alarms.
The Coast Guard disagrees. There is a
need to monitor the hydraulic fluid in
the steering hydraulic tank in the event
of leaks or pipe/hose rupture, because it
is essential for maneuvering.
With respect to proposed
§ 143.245(b)(3), the Coast Guard
received several comments in favor of a
self-monitoring alarm system.
The Coast Guard agrees that a selfmonitoring alarm system is a practical
alternative to manual testing of the
alarm system, and amended
§ 143.230(b)(2) accordingly.
The Coast Guard received several
comments suggesting deletion of the
requirement at proposed § 143.245(c)
that gauges be visible at the operating
station. The Coast Guard agrees that
gauges are not required at the operating
station, provided that there are alarms
or a summary of alarms at each
operating station. We amended this
section for clarification.
One commenter suggested that several
provisions of the NPRM, including
gauges for engines at proposed
§ 143.245(c), should not be required
because they are not required of
passenger vessels in subchapter T.
The Coast Guard disagrees with the
suggestion that that no gauges should be
provided, although we agree that
subchapter T vessels and subchapter M
vessels could have similar systems. The
gauges required by proposed
§ 143.245(c) are considered minimum
requirements for monitoring engine
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40064
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
performance. However, in the final rule,
the number of gauges required has been
reduced to only those considered
essential to engine monitoring, and
which normally are provided by the
manufacturer with all engine
installations regardless of the vessel
type.
With respect to paragraphs (c)(1) and
(3) one commenter suggested that the
Coast Guard add the engine RPMs to
these sections. The Coast Guard agrees
that the main engine(s) and auxiliary
generator engines should be equipped
with RPM indicators, and amended the
sections accordingly.
We deleted proposed paragraph (d)
because summary alarms are already
allowed under revised § 143.230(b)(1),
so there is no need for a separate section
allowing this on excepted vessels. With
respect to proposed paragraph (d) one
commenter suggested that the Coast
Guard add ‘‘crewmembers responding to
the alarm(s).’’ The Coast Guard agrees
with the comment in that the proposed
text could have been more specific
regarding communications between
crewmembers. However, proposed
paragraph (d) was applicable only to
excepted vessels, and given the
traditional size and service of excepted
vessels, we ultimately determined that a
separate paragraph was not necessary.
General Alarms
We redesignated proposed § 143.250
as § 143.235. One commenter suggested
that the Coast Guard clarify the
applicability of this section. That
commenter also recommended requiring
the public address system on towing
vessels be equipped with ‘‘talk-back’’
capability.
The Coast Guard has modified the
applicability section to be clearer, and
has made similar clarifying changes to
§ 143.240(a). As for adding a
requirement for ‘‘talk-back’’ capability,
we disagree. This capability is not
required on any commercial vessel and
would be unnecessary for the usual
purposes of a public address system.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Readiness and Testing
We redesignated proposed § 143.260
as § 143.245 and, as described earlier in
this preamble, removed the functional
and prescriptive designators in favor of
a unified section on alternatives at the
beginning of the part. One commenter
suggested that the Coast Guard remove
‘‘(if available)’’ from proposed
§ 143.260(a).
The Coast Guard agrees that
manufacturer’s instructions are
normally available, and removed the
phrase ‘‘if available.’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
With respect to proposed § 143.260(b),
the Coast Guard received several
comments to amend parts of the table to
clarify that the intent is for a crew
change and not a watch or shift change.
The Coast Guard agrees that testing the
propulsion and steering controls is not
necessary with every shift change, and
amended the section to clarify that the
test is only necessary prior to getting
underway, but not more often than once
every 24 hours. In the same section, one
commenter suggested changing the
required testing frequency of alarm
setpoints and pressure safety valves
from annually to every 2 years or longer.
The Coast Guard agrees and has
amended Table 143.245(b) to make
these requirements more consistent with
similar requirements in subchapter F.
Finally, one commenter suggested the
Coast Guard change ‘‘pressure vessel
safety valves’’ to ‘‘pressure vessel relief
valves.’’ The Coast Guard agrees that
relief valve is the more common
terminology and amended the section
accordingly.
System Isolation and Markings
We have redesignated proposed
§ 143.270 as § 143.250. The Coast Guard
received a number of comments
suggesting that ‘‘graywater lines need
not be fitted with isolation valves or
marked if all piping is contained inside
a fuel tank or void.’’ The Coast Guard
disagrees. It is not possible for ‘‘all
piping’’ to be contained in a tank, and
it is important for the piping system to
be identified. However, the intent of the
requirement is for crew members to be
able to identify piping systems used in
normal, everyday operations, and
therefore it is not essential that systems
in normally inaccessible spaces be
identified.
One commenter suggested that the
Coast Guard add a new paragraph (e) to
proposed § 143.270 to cover sanitary
discharges, and add ‘‘Except as
provided in paragraph (e) of this
section’’ to the beginning of this section.
The Coast Guard declines to do so
because the requirements in this section
would apply to any system piping
penetrating the hull beneath the
waterline. However, variations could be
accommodated through the provision
for alternate design approvals that has
already been discussed in this preamble.
With regard to proposed § 143.270(e),
one commenter stated that the use of
‘‘either’’ ISO Standard 14276 or marking
in accordance with the TSMS applicable
to the vessel would lead to a lack of
uniformity between towing vessels and
is counterproductive. The Coast Guard
agrees that one standard for industry
color-coding of piping is preferred, but
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
lacks the casualty data to support a
mandate for one particular standard.
Another commenter suggested that the
Coast Guard identify the basic colors
used to mark piping.
The Coast Guard declines to do so
because the international standard
referenced in this section already
identifies basic piping colors.
Fuel System Requirements
We redesignated proposed § 143.275
as § 143.255. The Coast Guard received
several comments suggesting that the
requirement at proposed § 143.275(c) to
replace fuel filters be based more on
‘‘performance requirements’’ as opposed
to manufacturer recommendations. The
Coast Guard partially agrees and
amended the section, but considers
manufacturer recommendations to be
based already in part on performance
requirements, such as differential
pressure and time in service. We also
amended proposed § 143.275(a) to
clarify that the term ‘‘be maintained’’
used in the proposed rule means a
documented maintenance plan. We also
made nonsubstantive changes to
proposed § 143.275(b) for brevity and
clarity.
As previously discussed, we removed
proposed § 143.275(d) in response to
comments stating it was duplicative of
proposed § 143.240(a)(9). We then
added a new paragraph (d) that requires
the use of diesel fuel unless approval for
another fuel is obtained pursuant to
§ 143.210 or § 143.520. We did this
because diesel fuel is considered the
standard for marine fuels, and the use
of more volatile fuels such as liquefied
natural gas or propane requires approval
by the MSC.
Fuel Shutoff Requirements
We redesignated proposed § 143.280
as § 143.260. The Coast Guard received
a comment suggesting that we define
‘‘near the source of supply’’ as used in
proposed § 143.280(c). The Coast Guard
agrees with this commenter. To clarify
the section, we drafted § 143.260(c) to
require that the valve be installed in the
fuel piping directly outside of the fuel
oil supply tank. We also received a
comment suggesting that the use of extra
heavy piping should be explicitly
allowed as an alternative to situating the
valve near the source.
The Coast Guard disagrees. While
such arrangements may be acceptable
with proper piping materials or other
design choices, locating the valve
directly after the fuel supply source is
the most effective way to stop a leak.
The Coast Guard received one
comment suggesting that we remove the
words ‘‘outside the space where the
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
valve is installed’’ from proposed
§ 143.280(d) and instead specifically
require that the valve be located on the
weather deck.
The Coast Guard disagrees because a
safe place outside the machinery may
not always be located on the weather
deck.
The Coast Guard also received one
comment stating, in part, that the
‘‘requirement for remote shutdown of
each engine outside the machinery
space is unworkable’’ and suggesting the
requirement should be removed.
The Coast Guard does not agree: The
remote shutdown outside the machinery
space is necessary in the event that the
engine space is not accessible due to
fire.
Additional Fuel System Requirements
for Towing Vessels Built After January
18, 2000
We redesignated proposed § 143.285
as § 143.265. With respect to proposed
§ 143.285(b), the Coast Guard received
several comments requesting
clarification on the proposed regulations
regarding ‘‘portable bilge pumps.’’ A
‘‘portable bilge pump’’ as specified in
paragraph (b) is a dewatering pump. We
received a comment suggesting that the
proposed rule would limit an operator’s
ability to dewater a damaged tow. We
disagree. The regulation allows for
proper stowage and use of portable
tanks or cans for portable bilge pumps.
The rules for the barge itself are beyond
the scope of this rulemaking, but
‘‘portability’’ of fuel is allowed in the
circumstances specified by this section.
If an operator is safely able to reach a
towed unit, there is no prohibition on
using portable equipment to dewater or
fight a fire on that unit.
The Coast Guard received a comment
suggesting that the proposed regulations
did not consider a ‘‘closed loop’’
ventilation system option for venting.
The Coast Guard does not agree with
this characterization of the proposed
rule, because proposed § 142.285(c)(1),
now designated § 143.265(c), allows
tank vents to be combined, as long as
there is ultimately a vent to the outside.
We received a comment suggesting
revisions to the required size of the vent
piping. We partially agree, and the
paragraph (c) has been amended for
clarity on this issue.
One commenter expressed concern
with the use of flexible fuel lines, noting
that the use of flexible hose in the
industry was ‘‘rampant,’’ and also
suggested requiring containment
systems beneath oil purification
equipment. This rule allows for flexible
hose that meets certain incorporated
standards, meaning the hose has passed
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
pressure and fire testing. The rule also
addresses the containment concern by
requiring that gaskets and seals be
maintained, and bilges kept free of
accumulated oil.
Bilge Pumps or Other Dewatering
Capability
We redesignated proposed § 143.295
as § 143.275. The Coast Guard received
several comments suggesting
‘‘prescriptive’’ regulations, such as those
for larger ships in 46 CFR 56.50, be
applied to proposed § 143.295. The
Coast Guard decided not to impose a
prescriptive requirement for bilge
pumping systems in this regulation
because of the extremely large number
of different configurations possible for
towing vessels. A commenter said that
proposed § 143.295 was not specific
enough with regard to dewatering
capability, noting that potentially
ineffective dewatering methods such as
‘‘buckets’’ could be acceptable under the
proposed text. We agree and have
amended the section to emphasize that
an installed or portable bilge pump
must be available.
One commenter suggested that only
‘‘installed’’ (not portable) bilge piping
should be required to have a check/foot
valve to prevent unintended flooding.
The Coast Guard agrees because a
permanently installed, power-operated
bilge pump is not the equivalent of a
portable pump. We amended the text
accordingly, as the use of a portable
pump implies constant operator
monitoring, which would normally
prevent improper flow (backflooding).
Pressure Vessels on Existing Vessels
With respect to proposed § 143.300,
the Coast Guard received several
comments suggesting the application of
existing pressure vessel requirements in
46 CFR subchapter F and the ASME
Code. Although these are certainly
acceptable for pressure vessel
installations on all vessels, the Coast
Guard does not have casualty data to
support the mandatory use of the
rigorous requirements of subchapter F
by existing towing vessels. Similarly,
one commenter suggested the
incorporation of the ASME Code
Section IV for heating boilers. The Coast
Guard agrees that the ASME Code is a
preferable design standard for heating
boilers, and considers it acceptable for
power or heating boilers on any vessel.
However, the Coast Guard has no
significant reportable casualty data with
a root cause of boiler or pressure vessel
design that justifies the increased cost of
requiring all towing vessels to use the
ASME Code for towing vessel boilers.
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40065
The Coast Guard received several
comments suggesting that proposed
§ 143.300(b) be clarified with regard to
examination requirements. The Coast
Guard agrees and amended paragraph
(b) so that pressure vessels are
externally examined annually, along
with relief valve testing twice every 5
years. These changes make inspection
requirements for pressure vessels and
relief valves more consistent with the
inspection requirements in subchapter F
for pressure vessels on larger ships.
Because of these changes we added a
new paragraph (c) to require the
maximum allowable working pressure
be indicated on all pressure vessels.
The Coast Guard received a question
concerning the pressure vessel
requirements of proposed §§ 143.300
and 143.540: ‘‘Could a towing vessel
also meet the requirements of 46 CFR
61.10 in lieu of the ABS Rules as
prescribed in 143.540?’’ The Coast
Guard agrees that compliance with 46
CFR 61.10 is acceptable and equivalent
to (or exceeds) the requirements in this
rule. However, § 61.10 generally is
applicable to large ships and the Coast
Guard does not require towing vessels to
meet subchapter F engineering
requirements.
Electrical Systems
We redesignated proposed § 143.305
as § 143.400. The Coast Guard received
several comments suggesting the Coast
Guard remove the requirement at
proposed § 143.305(d) that switchboards
and distribution panels be labeled with
a description of the loads they serve.
The Coast Guard partially disagrees. For
proper circuit identification during
operations and maintenance, labels
must be provided for the equipment
served. However, the Coast Guard has
removed the requirement that
equipment be marked with the location
of the isolating switch of circuit breaker,
because the panel should indicate that
information.
The Coast Guard received several
comments on proposed § 143.305(i)
expressing confusion on the use of male
receptacle outlets when transmitting
power between two receptacles. The
requested changes were in line with the
Coast Guard’s original intent, but we
decided the clearest revision would be
to remove the provision about male
outlets. As long as the plugs, cables, and
receptacles are compatible and designed
for the power to be transmitted,
specifying a particular configuration is
not necessary.
Shipboard Lighting
We redesignated proposed § 143.310
as § 143.410. One commenter argued
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40066
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
that the requirement for emergency
lighting in proposed § 143.310 would be
prohibitively expensive for small
businesses and is neither necessary nor
of any value on smaller towing vessels
where the crew typically knows the
vessel intimately.
The Coast Guard disagrees. With
respect to the cost, there are three
different options for compliance, some
as inexpensive as phosphorescent
lighting strips. With respect to the
utility this requirement in § 143.410 for
internal crew working and living areas,
we consider this lighting essential—
even on smaller vessels—to facilitate
egress in emergency situations when
normal lighting is not working and
dense smoke may be present.
The Coast Guard received several
comments asking whether berthing
spaces were required to have emergency
lighting under proposed § 143.310(a).
Specific berthing spaces are not
required to have emergency lights.
However, in the event of power loss
there must be sufficient illumination in
living areas to enable personnel egress
from the living space. One commenter
suggested adding a requirement for one
flashlight per bunk. The suggestion is a
good practice for mariners but the Coast
Guard declines to make it mandatory.
With respect to proposed
§ 143.310(b)(2), the Coast Guard
received several comments suggesting
we lower the required automatic
battery-operated emergency lighting
capability from 3 hours to 30 minutes.
The Coast Guard partially agrees with
these comments, and has modified the
requirement in § 143.410(b)(1) to 2
hours, consistent with subchapter T.
The requirement of 2 hours will ensure
the availability of battery-powered lights
when needed, along with ample battery
capacity. Emergencies that require
egress from a space, such as a living
space, do not necessarily mean
abandoning the vessel: The crew may
need to assemble on deck to fight a fire
or flooding, or restart the main electrical
plant. We confirmed that, for the second
option, phosphorescent strips are
available that provide illumination for
more than 2 hours.
In addition, the Coast Guard removed
proposed § 143.310(b)(1) because it was
redundant with a related subparagraph
in proposed § 143.340(b)(9).
Pilothouse Alerter System
The pilothouse alerter requirements
are now located in § 143.450. In the
NPRM, we proposed a pilothouse alerter
system requirement for all vessels (see
proposed § 143.210, as well as
§§ 143.325, 143.515, and 143.520), with
a deferred compliance date for existing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
vessels. We proposed this requirement
in response to the NTSB report on the
Robert Y Love allision with the I–40
Bridge, as well as eight incidents where
the operator died while navigating the
vessel and other cases that indicated
probable incapacitation of the operator.
The Coast Guard received comments
supporting and opposing the inclusion
of the deferred requirements proposed
in § 143.325.
After considering public comments,
as well as the traditional service and
limited manning of towing vessels 65
feet or less in length, we determined
that a pilothouse alerter system is not
necessary for towing vessels 65 feet or
less and have eliminated the alerter
requirement for this category of vessels.
This is accomplished in § 143.450(e).
We received a comment suggesting
the alerter could become a distraction
for harbor assist vessels. We disagree,
because a compliant system could be set
up to reset, for instance, each time the
throttle or steering was changed. We
also received comments that the alerter
should not be required when a vessel
had overnight accommodations but
those accommodations were not in use.
We decline to make a regulatory
exception for this scenario, but this
subchapter allows the OCMI the
discretion to waive certain requirements
on a case-by-case basis when
appropriate.
We received a comment suggesting
that requirements for systems such as
pilothouse alerters should be
performance-based, and flexible with
regard to rapid developments in
technology. The Coast Guard agrees. We
have not specified a particular design
for an alerter system, only that such
system must meet certain performance
requirements with regard to time limits
and adjustability of the alarm time to
suit the vessel mission.
With respect to proposed
§ 143.325(a)(3), imposing a 10-minute
maximum acknowledgment time for the
alerter, the Coast Guard received several
comments suggesting that the
acknowledgment time for the pilothouse
alerted should be less than 10 minutes.
The Coast Guard partially agrees. New
paragraph (b) of § 143.450 provides that
the time may be reduced by the owner
or managing operator in the TSMS but
must not be in excess of 10 minutes. We
received a comment suggesting that the
Robert Y Love incident would not have
been prevented by an alerter set at 10
minutes. We acknowledge that it is
possible that an alerter set at 10 minutes
may not have prevented the incident. It
is also possible that an operator could
become incapacitated at any time within
a 10-minute alerter reset period. In the
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Robert Y Love incident, had the pilot
become incapacitated 1 minute before
the alarm was scheduled to sound, it is
possible another crew member could
have made it to the pilothouse and
averted the allision. As a reference
point, we note that SOLAS requirements
for larger vessels (MSC.128(75)) require
a bridge watchstander alarm with an
elapsed time between resets of 3–12
minutes.
We received a comment stating that
‘‘fans with paper streamers effectively
fool motion detector systems.’’ The
Coast Guard notes that a motion
detector-type system is but one of many
options to comply with the alerter
requirement. An attempt to interfere
with any system installed to meet the
requirements of § 143.450 would be
investigated. And as stated in
§ 140.1000, there are statutory penalties
for violating the provisions of this
subchapter.
The Coast Guard received several
comments suggesting that a second,
adequately rested crewmember should
be required in the pilothouse at all
times, as well as comments suggesting a
second crewmember is an unnecessary
expense. The Coast Guard partially
agrees with both comments. A second
adequately rested crewmember in the
pilothouse of a towing vessel, while not
required by this section, is an acceptable
alternative to the pilothouse alerter
system as stated in § 143.450(d). We
chose not to require that a second
crewmember be in the pilothouse
because, in light of the thousands of
vessels of all sizes that safely operate
with a single crew member on the
bridge or operating station, depending
on maneuvering circumstances, we
could not justify the significant cost of
requiring an additional watchstander on
all towing vessels. However, under 46
U.S.C. 8104 and 46 CFR 15.705, it
remains the master’s responsibility to
provide an adequate watch.
The Coast Guard received a comment
requesting clarification of the pilothouse
alerter requirements for vessels with
more than one operating station.
Because the alerter is required to detect
incapacitation of the vessel pilot, the
system must be arranged to alarm at
each operating station. There may be
various system configurations that meet
the intent of this requirement.
Towing Machinery
The towing machinery requirements
are now located at § 143.460 and apply
to all vessels, with a deferred
compliance date for existing vessels. In
connection with proposed § 143.330(b)
the Coast Guard received several
comments requesting an example of an
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
acceptable safeguard against the towing
machinery becoming disabled if the tow
gets out of line. The Coast Guard agrees,
and added an example of a common
safeguard to this section. We also
received a comment suggesting that the
‘‘winch slippage alarm’’ sound in the
pilothouse. The Coast Guard agrees such
an alarm would be beneficial to
operations, but we do not have the
casualty data to support the mandate of
such a system.
Deferred Requirements for Existing
Vessels (Proposed Subpart C)
As discussed earlier in this preamble,
we removed proposed subpart C. We
relocated to subpart B the requirements
for pilothouse alerter systems and
towing machinery, and retained the
deferred compliance date for existing
vessels: These requirements are
discussed earlier in this preamble. We
removed proposed § 143.335 on remote
shutdowns because a similar effect is
accomplished through proposed
§ 143.280 (now § 143.260) on fuel oil
shutoff, and because remote fuel shutoff
is already required by 46 CFR
subchapter C.
The remaining deferred provisions of
proposed subpart C—§§ 143.340
through 143.360 on specific electrical
arrangements for existing towing
vessels—have been moved to subpart C
for new vessels. They do not apply to
existing vessels. We made this change in
response to comments indicating these
provisions were not appropriate for
existing vessels. Specifically, the Coast
Guard received many comments
recommending the deletion of the
prescriptive requirements in proposed
§§ 143.340 through 143.360.
Commenters characterized the proposed
requirements as burdensome, costly,
requiring extensive modifications, and
not justified by risk.
The Coast Guard does not agree that
the proposed requirements were
unjustified. Part 143 was developed in
response to the recommendations in
Sections 6.1 and 6.2 of the ABSG
Consulting report, which were based on
the risk analysis results in Section 4.3
of the report. See Uninspected Towing
Vessel Industry Analysis Project Final
Report, issued August 2006 and
prepared by ABSG Consulting Inc., and
Section III.C of the NPRM (76 FR
49978). An industry analysis project
team performed a detailed analysis of
the towing industry data from a number
of data sources, such as MISLE and site
visits. The team also used industry data
provided by AWO as part of the Coast
Guard-AWO Safety Partnership. Two
previous examinations of towing vessel
accident studies were also considered:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
The TSAC Towing Vessel Inspection
Working Group report (TSAC 2005) and
a report by the Coast Guard Allision
Working Group (BAWG 2003). These
risk analyses support characterizing the
proposed requirements as risk-based.
However, several comments asserted
that the functional requirements in
proposed subpart B, ‘‘Requirements for
All Towing Vessels,’’ are sufficient for
all existing towing vessels. These
commenters recommended the removal
of proposed subpart C, ‘‘Deferred
Requirements for Existing Towing
Vessels.’’ Further, the Coast Guard
believes that many existing towing
vessels were originally built to
acceptable national or marine standards.
Those would already be in substantial
compliance with many of the
requirements of subpart B of part 143 of
the final rule.
The machinery and electrical
requirements in subpart B will provide
the owners or managing operators of
existing towing vessels with the
standards that existing equipment and
installations must meet or should have
met during the construction of towing
vessels. Third-party inspections and
eventual certification of electrical and
machinery systems of existing towing
vessels that are in marginal condition or
poorly maintained may require some
upgrades but may not necessarily need
extensive modifications of the vessel’s
systems. Commenters provided
estimates of the cost of extensive
retrofits to existing vessels in the range
of $75,000 to $300,000 per vessel,
considerably higher than the cost
estimated in the NPRM Regulatory
Analysis ($5,000 to $20,000 per
individual requirement). Further,
comments indicated that the need for
retrofits to comply with the regulatory
requirements in proposed §§ 143.340–
143.360 would impact more than the
generally less than 5 percent of vessels
per requirement estimated in the NPRM
Regulatory Analysis. The net result in
total costs could exceed $300 million
(10-year, undiscounted). For these
reasons, the requirements in proposed
§§ 143.340–143.360 that were proposed
to apply to all towing vessels will now
apply only to newly built towing
vessels, which includes vessels
undergoing a major conversion.
Comments pertaining to the substance
of those standards are discussed later in
this preamble.
Requirements for Oil or Hazardous
Material in Bulk (Proposed Subpart D)
The proposed rule included deferred
requirements for vessels that tow oil or
hazardous material in bulk. In response
to comments indicating these provisions
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40067
were not appropriate for existing
vessels, we removed these requirements
from existing vessels and relocated the
provisions to subpart C on new towing
vessels. Comments pertaining to the
substance of those standards are
discussed later in this preamble.
Subpart C, ‘‘Requirements for New
Towing Vessels’’
Because of the organizational changes
discussed earlier in this preamble,
proposed subpart E for new towing
vessels is now designated subpart C. We
revised the applicability section in line
with the organizational changes
described in our discussion of subpart
A, and made nonsubstantive editorial
changes. We also removed proposed
§ 143.505, as its content is now covered
by the applicability section at § 143.500.
In § 143.510, we replaced the phrase
‘‘plan approval’’ with the more accurate
language ‘‘verification of compliance
with design standards.’’ We removed
§ 143.530 as unnecessary in light of
other revisions to the part.
The ‘‘classification option’’ has
changed little between the NPRM and
the final rule. For a new towing vessel,
the same three options apply in the final
rule as in the proposed rule: New
vessels may be built to recognized
classification society standards
(§ 143.515); to ABYC standards
(§ 143.520) for smaller towing vessels; or
to neither standard, but instead be
subject to the requirements set out in
subparts B and C of part 143. As an
alternative to complying with the
electrical system requirements that are
now listed in subpart C, the vessel may
instead comply with certain ABS rules
as set out in § 143.580; this alternative
is substantively the same as was
proposed in the NPRM.
As was the case in proposed
§ 143.515, even vessels built to ABS
rules or classed by ABS must comply
with specific provisions of part 143. In
this final rule, those provisions are the
requirements for vessels that move tank
barges carrying oil or hazardous
material in bulk (§§ 143.585 through
143.595), the readiness and testing
requirements of § 143.245, and the
pilothouse alerter requirements of
§ 143.450. The readiness and testing
requirements of § 143.245 help verify
proper in-service operation and safety of
main and emergency systems, above and
beyond the initial design requirements
of part 143. As discussed above, the
proposed potable water requirements
have been removed, but they remain a
health and safety requirement under
§ 140.510(a)(14). Also, in this final rule
we created flexibility by providing for
approval of towing vessels built to
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40068
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
recognized classification society rules
other than ABS’s.
Section 143.520(a) remains
substantially as proposed, but paragraph
(b) has been revised to remove several
requirements. New towing vessels of 65
feet or less in length that are built to the
ABYC standards listed in paragraph (a)
need only comply with the readiness
and testing requirements of § 143.245,
and with the requirements for vessels
that move tank barges carrying oil or
hazardous material in bulk (§§ 143.585
through 143.595) if applicable. Other
requirements have been removed for
these vessels, including the pilothouse
alerter requirements.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Pressure Vessels on New Vessels
We redesignated § 143.540 as
§ 143.545. With respect to proposed
§ 143.540(b), the Coast Guard received
several comments requesting alternate
standards to the ABS rule referenced for
pressure vessels. While the ABS rules
referenced are an industry standard for
pressure vessels, the Coast Guard may
determine other design standards, such
as the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel
Code, to be equivalent as described in
§ 143.210. Therefore, we made no
changes to this paragraph in response to
this comment.
Electrical Engineering Systems
Several comments also recommended
the proposed prescriptive requirements
in proposed §§ 143.340–143.360 should
not apply to new towing vessels. The
Coast Guard does not agree. The
proposed requirements of these sections
are based on the present acceptable
national or marine electrical engineering
standards. As explained in Section IV of
the preamble to the proposed rule, the
Coast Guard developed part 143 after
considering the reports provided by
ABSG Consulting and TSAC, which
were generated from marine casualty
cases and risks. Also, as stated in the
preamble to the proposed rule, the Coast
Guard conducted its own in-depth
analysis of the cases reviewed for the
ABSG report, along with deficiency
reports from examinations of towing
vessels during compliance exams
conducted pursuant to 33 CFR part 104
as part of the implementation of the
Maritime Transportation Security Act of
2002 (MTSA) (46 U.S.C. Chapter 701).
These reports provided evidence that
substandard machinery installation and
maintenance is a concern on towing
vessels. For example, from January 2006
through August 2008, the Coast Guard
conducted 768 of these MTSA
compliance examinations of towing
vessels and issued 2,949 deficiencies.
Electrical deficiencies involving
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
installation and maintenance accounted
for 8 percent (226) of the deficiencies.
This 8 percent deficiency rate highlights
the need to establish more specific
standards for electrical installations on
towing vessels. The current regulations
in subchapter C for electrical
installations on uninspected vessels are
minimal and not adequate for towing
vessels. In addition, the incremental
cost to incorporate the new standards
into the design and construction of a
new vessel are low in comparison of the
total construction costs of the vessel and
the potential reduction in risk of fire.
Several commenters provided cost
estimates to retrofit an existing vessel to
comply with the proposed requirements
in §§ 143.340–143.360 that range from
$75,000 to $300,000. These estimates
are higher than the cost estimated by
Coast Guard in the NPRM Regulatory
Analysis (which ranged from $5,000 to
$20,000 per requirement ($60,000 per
vessel if all of the requirements are
incurred). The comments also indicated
that far more vessels would require the
retrofits than was estimated in the
NPRM Regulatory Analysis. The NPRM
estimated annualized costs of part 143
at $3.2 million and the benefits at $5.7
million. If the high end of the costs per
vessel of $300,000 were used, the
annualized costs could as much as
triple. Increasing the affected
population for the retrofits as per the
comment would increase the costs even
more. Given the new information on the
potential range of costs and affected
population, the Coast Guard has
determined that the benefits of the
NPRM’s proposed deferred
requirements for existing vessels will
not outweigh the costs. Given the
potential cost burden of retrofitting
existing vessels, the baseline electrical
requirements for existing towing vessels
in the final rule, coupled with a robust
inspection regime, will establish an
adequate safety environment for towing
vessels.
The electrical requirements in this
final rule will provide the owners or
managing operators the design and
engineering standards for equipment
and installations for new construction.
The prescribed electrical power and
distribution system designs are based on
proven electrical recommendations,
practices, and consensus-based
standards.
Electrical Power Sources, Generators,
and Motors
We redesignated proposed § 143.340
as § 143.555, and made nonsubstantive
changes to simplify and shorten the
section. The Coast Guard received
several comments suggesting that
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
proposed § 143.340 be clarified so that
a backup generator could be used as a
secondary power source. The Coast
Guard agrees, and amended the text in
paragraph (a)(3) to better explain the
requirements for backup power source.
We also received a comment
suggesting the proposed § 143.340 may
be interpreted as requiring duplicate
essential systems such as radar or
emergency lighting. We did not intend
the original language to be read that
way, and have amended the
corresponding section of the final rule
to clarify that emergency
communications and navigation
equipment must be provided with a
backup power source.
We received a comment stating that
the electrical load analysis requirements
of proposed § 143.340 were ‘‘excessive
and unnecessary’’. Although the Coast
Guard believes that a load analysis is
required for nearly all vessels with
generators, we presume that load
analysis has already been done for
existing vessels and is therefore
applicable only to new towing vessels.
This change is reflected in this final
rule. We also simplified the analysis
requirement by removing proposed
paragraph (b)(2).
The Coast Guard received several
comments suggesting we include the
specific NEC reference in article 430 in
this section. The Coast Guard agrees and
amended the section by specifying that
Parts I through VII of article 430 are
required. These Parts of Article 430
further define the scope of motor
overcurrent protections required. We
also received comments suggesting that
the proposed requirements in § 143.340
will require ‘‘complete rewiring’’ of
inland towing vessels. This comment is
addressed by our decision to apply
these requirements only to new vessels.
The Coast Guard received several
comments suggesting we lower the
ambient temperature rating at paragraph
(b)(7) of this section from 50 °C to 40 °C,
similar to ABS rules. The Coast Guard
partially agrees. The Coast Guard
amended the section so that the
generator does not need to be certified
to operate in an ambient temperature of
50 °C if it can be shown that the space
the generator is in does not exceed 40
°C. This reduction in minimum ambient
temperature rating reflects an
established normal ambient temperature
allowance, even for large vessels
currently regulated by the Coast Guard.
With respect to proposed
§ 143.340(b)(9) (now designated
§ 143.555(b)(8)) the Coast Guard
received several comments suggesting
clarification on what the Coast Guard
meant by ‘‘two independent sources of
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
electricity’’ in this section. To clarify,
the prescriptive requirement in what is
now paragraph (b)(8) requires a
minimum of two sources of power. For
example, if a generator provides the
normal source of power for navigation
lights, there must be another generator
or a battery bank arranged as a
secondary power source. One
commenter suggested adding the word
‘‘essential’’ to paragraph (b)(8) this
section. The Coast Guard agrees, and
has modified the text accordingly. We
have also amended the section to
specify the radios and navigation
equipment required in §§ 140.715 and
140.725. This change is in line with
other comments suggesting that we
include the distress alerting
communications equipment listed in
§§ 140.715 and 140.725. These
comments also suggested that the
backup power source for the distress
alerting communication equipment have
a means of monitoring the voltage
available, and the source of supply
selected either by an automatic
switchover or a simple switch in the
vicinity of the emergency distress
alerting communications equipment.
The Coast Guard agrees that distress
alerting equipment should be added to
this section, and also that a means must
be provided to monitor the battery
condition, and amended the section
accordingly.
We received a comment suggesting
that, if a battery were to serve as the
required secondary power source, it
would need to be unnecessarily
oversized for the loads specified. We
mostly disagree; there is no requirement
that the secondary power source be a
battery (e.g., the secondary source could
be a generator). The electrical loads
specified in this section are not
necessarily large consumers, and any
battery sized for these loads needs to be
sized proportionally, not oversized.
Also, this requirement in proposed
§ 143.340 has been amended to apply
only to new towing vessels.
However, we agree with the
commenter that some alarms may not
require a secondary power source, and
have amended this section to be specific
as to which alarms require secondary
power.
We received comments suggesting
removal of the requirement in proposed
§ 143.350 to separate overcurrent
protection for essential and nonessential systems. We disagree, because
the intention is to prevent opening the
circuit on essential loads because of a
fault in a non-essential system. This
requirement has been amended to apply
only to new towing vessels.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
We received a comment suggesting
that ‘‘essential systems’’ be defined to
avoid confusion in the inspection
process. The Coast Guard agrees, and
notes that a proposed definition of
essential system was included in
proposed § 136.110. However, we have
amended the requirements of § 143.555
of the final rule to provide clarity on
this issue.
Electrical Grounding and Ground
Detection
We redesignated § 143.355 as
§ 143.570. With regard to proposed
§ 143.355 the Coast Guard received
several comments stating that most
towing vessels are ungrounded, and that
the section should specifically adopt the
ground detection requirements of 46
CFR 183.378. Proposed § 143.355 did
not prohibit the use of ungrounded
systems. The Coast Guard recognizes
that towing vessels can have either
grounded or ungrounded electrical
distribution systems. We agree with the
comment, however, and therefore added
detection requirements similar to 46
CFR 183.378. This requirement applies
only to new towing vessels, and the
requirements are based on vessels
regulated under subchapter T, which
have similar electrical systems. While
revising this section, we modified
paragraph (e) to consolidate paragraphs
(e)(1) and (3).
The Coast Guard also received several
comments stating that this section does
not allow the use of common two-prong
appliances less than 50 volts or twoprong double-insulated tools. The Coast
Guard considers the use of two-prong
double-insulated tools to be an
acceptable industry practice, and
amended the section to allow the use of
double-insulated tools, or two-prong
appliances of less than 50 volts.
Electrical Conductors, Connections, and
Equipment
We redesignated proposed § 143.360
as § 143.575. As discussed elsewhere in
this preamble, we received comments
stating that existing vessel compliance
with this section and other electrical
sections in the NPRM would involve
substantial costs and retrofitting. The
bulk of these comments are addressed
by making these electrical requirements
applicable only to new vessels.
With respect to proposed § 143.360,
the Coast Guard received several
comments suggesting we clarify
paragraph (a)(2) with respect to
overhead wiring. The Coast Guard
agrees, and amended the section to
specify that this requirement is
applicable to overhead and vertical
cable runs supported by cable hangers.
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40069
We received a comment suggesting
the use of a performance standard rather
than a specific cable hanging method.
The Coast Guard partially agrees with
the concern, but could not find an
acceptable performance standard, so we
have amended the section to allow a 48inch spacing, rather than the proposed
24 inches, to be consistent with
recognized electrical-contracting
standards.
In paragraph (a)(3) of that section, one
commenter suggested that wiring be
allowed within 24 inches of moving
machinery if the wiring is protected.
The Coast Guard agrees, and amended
this section to be applicable to cable and
wire runs. We also clarified that cable
and wire runs within 24 inches of
moving machinery must be adequately
protected to prevent damage, and added
text to clarify what ‘‘moveable
machinery’’ means.
In paragraph (b), one commenter
suggested replacing the phrase ‘‘may
not’’ with ‘‘must not’’; the Coast Guard
agrees that this language is clearer. This
requirement is consistent with the
permitted use of flexible cords or
extension cords in Section 400.7 of the
National Electrical Code (NEC), and
Section 24.6.1 of IEEE 45–2002.
In paragraph (c), the Coast Guard
received several comments stating that
this section prohibits the use of power
strips. The intent of this section is not
to prohibit the use of multi-outlet
adapters (power strips), but to prevent
‘‘daisy-chaining’’ of power strips, which
may overload the circuit. We have
amended this section to clarify the
requirement to prevent circuit overload
when using power strips.
Towing Vessels That Tow Oil or
Hazardous Material in Bulk
Because of the reorganization
discussed earlier, a separate subpart for
towing vessels that tow oil or hazardous
material is no longer required. Proposed
§§ 143.405 through 143.435 have been
incorporated into the final rule’s subpart
C for new vessels. The requirements of
proposed subpart D will not apply to
existing towing vessels. This change
responds to many comments arguing
that proposed subpart D should not
apply to existing vessels.
Commenters who opposed the
application of proposed subpart D to
existing vessels argued that the
proposed requirements were not based
on risk; would require unjustified or
wholesale retrofitting; would cause
severe economic penalty,
disproportionate financial hardship for
small towing companies, and might
eliminate certain classes of towing
vessels. Also, several comments asserted
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40070
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
that the Coast Guard ignored the decline
in the frequency and amount of oil
spills from tank barges over the last
twenty years. Other comments
mentioned that the proposed
requirements in subpart D will have
little impact on the prevention of oil
spills in the tank barge sector because,
as noted by TSAC, ‘‘Current industry
best practices have produced a dramatic
reduction in oil spills from tank barges
over the last decade and a half, with a
record low 919 gallons spilled (out of
nearly 65 billion gallons transported) in
2010, the last year for which complete
Coast Guard statistics are available.’’
Also, industry comments mentioned
that the preamble cites S. 1892, a bill
introduced into the 110th Congress, as
a reason for including the proposed
subpart D in part 143, and note that this
bill never became law.
We proposed subpart D based on the
statistics from the ABSG report, which
included high and low consequence
incidents. Given the casualty history
presented in the ABSG report, the Coast
Guard determined that the proposed
requirements could reduce the ongoing
risk of oil spills and the resulting
consequences. Data on oil spills through
2014 shows a continual pattern of a few
major spills contributing to the majority
of the volume spilled each year. Even
though a recent TSAC report notes a
dramatic reduction in oil spills from
tank barges over the last decade and a
half, the casualty data through 2014
indicates that minimum safety
standards for engineering system design,
coupled with a robust inspection
regime, would maintain or even further
reduce the risk of spills.
Several commenters provided
information on the cost to retrofit
existing vessels to comply with the
Subpart D requirements. The estimates
range for all of the deferred
requirements from $75,000 to $300,000
per vessel, higher than the Coast Guard
estimates in the NPRM Regulatory
Analysis. Existing vessels are already
designed and constructed, so requiring
a complete replacement of some vital
engineering systems is neither practical
nor justified by the safety benefit
achieved.
In light of the new information on the
costs for retrofitting existing vessels, the
requirements of the proposed §§ 143.340
through 143.435 have been removed for
existing vessels. The requirements are
retained in the final rule for new towing
vessels, as there is a smaller incremental
cost to incorporate the design features in
a new vessel.
Several commenters misinterpreted
the proposed requirements in proposed
§§ 143.405, 143.410, and 143.420 (now
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
§§ 143.585, 143.590, and 143.595)
regarding the installation of a second
main engine. The intention of the
proposed rule was to require
redundancy of necessary auxiliaries,
allowing a sustained or restored
propulsion capability of the towing
vessel—not to require redundant
engines. The proposed requirements did
not prohibit a towing vessel with single
propulsor, but only placed requirements
for support equipment (auxiliaries) on
vessels with one propulsor. The
requirements differentiate between
independent and/or redundant control
systems and the propulsion systems
under remote control. For example, on
a vessel with two propulsion engines,
the proposed rule requires the remote
control of one engine to be independent
of the remote control of the other
engine. For risk reduction, the proposed
requirements would ensure that when
one engine remote control fails, remote
control of the other engine would
remain operable. We have also modified
what is now § 143.595 for vessels with
one propulsor, to clarify which
equipment is considered a vital
auxiliary, and eliminated the
requirement that this equipment
‘‘automatically’’ assume the function of
the failed unit. Although it is acceptable
for vessels to have equipment that
automatically starts when other
equipment fails, it is not absolutely
necessary, and in fact it may be
preferred for crew members to visually
assess a failure or impending failure of
the primary equipment before deciding
to manually start the redundant
equipment.
In proposed § 143.405 (now
§ 143.585), one commenter suggested
preventative maintenance schedules
and additional required training in lieu
of some of the requirements in this
section. The Coast Guard disagrees.
While an attentive operator may notice
problems before the associated alarms
and redundancy requirements are
triggered, the alarms (with appropriate
delays) are required as a means to alert
the operator. We received a comment
suggesting separation of the propulsion
and steering requirements in this
section. The Coast Guard acknowledges
that propulsion and steering are two
separate and vital systems, but the
requirements for alternate arrangements
and independence for these systems as
specified apply to both propulsion and
steering. Additional propulsion
requirements are also specified in
§§ 143.590 and 143.595.
We also received a comment
suggesting the use of a ‘‘bow steering
module,’’ which is essentially an assist
vessel attached to a barge propelled by
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
a traditional towboat. Although the
Coast Guard agrees that a bow steering
module may be considered equivalent to
the requirements of an alternate means
of propulsion and/or steering, this type
of arrangement would need to be
determined in particular cases by the
OCMI or the Commandant for
equivalency.
With respect to proposed § 143.405
(now § 143.585), one commenter asked
whether paragraph (k) requires
automatic starting of a standby generator
or if the loads referenced should be on
battery backup. The Coast Guard agrees
that the proposed section was unclear
and amended the section by specifying
a second source of supply that is
capable of automatically starting, and of
helping to restore or maintain power to
propulsion, steering and related controls
when the main power source fails. This
requirement will provide continued or
restored operation of a towing vessel
that moves tank barges carrying oil and
hazardous material in bulk, even if the
primary systems fail. One commenter
was confused about what the Coast
Guard meant by ‘‘stored energy’’ in
paragraph (l). The Coast Guard clarified
this section by providing examples of
‘‘stored energy systems’’ that are
generally used onboard towing vessels.
We also simplified this section by
removing paragraph (l)(2) as not
necessary for towing vessels.
With respect to proposed § 143.420
(now § 143.595), we added a clarifying
description of ‘‘vital auxiliaries’’ in
paragraph (a).
One commenter asked if proposed
paragraph (d)(2) required two hydraulic
tanks for steering. In response to the
commenter, an acceptable arrangement
would consist of two independent
hydraulic tanks, or one hydraulic tank
separated by a solid baffle, which is
considered equivalent to two tanks.
However, the Coast Guard has
determined that the steering system
requirements of § 143.550 are sufficient,
that the requirements of § 143.595 are
intended only for vital auxiliaries for
propulsion, and so we have eliminated
the steering system paragraphs from this
section. Also, the fuel system
requirements of proposed § 143.420(c)
were redundant to current § 143.265, so
we removed that paragraph.
We received a comment suggesting
elimination of proposed redundancies
in systems for vessels towing oil or
hazardous material, and leaving those
types of decisions for a case by case
determination in the vessel’s TSMS. We
disagree, because it is important for
vessels with one propulsor to have
redundancies in the vital auxiliaries—
such as fuel, lube oil, and cooling
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
water—supporting the engine. However,
this section has been amended to apply
only to new towing vessels.
We received a comment suggesting
‘‘grandfathering’’ proposed deferred
requirements because of prohibitive
costs, and have addressed this comment
by applying these requirements to new
vessels only. Another commenter
requested clarification of ‘‘independent’’
as opposed to ‘‘redundant.’’ Those terms
have distinct meanings, but we agree
that the proposed text could be clearer,
and have amended §§ 143.115, 143.590,
and 143.595 to define and use the term
‘‘independent.’’ In this subpart,
‘‘independent’’ means the ability to
perform a function regardless of the
status of another system, and
‘‘redundant’’ is not used in subchapter
M.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
N. Construction and Arrangement (Part
144)
We received general comments
suggesting the requirements proposed in
part 144 were not justified by risk-based
decisions and should therefore be
removed. A commenter felt that some
proposed regulations in this part are too
stringent: For example, the commenter
felt that the stability requirements in
subparts A, B, and C of part 144 are not
reflective of the loss history for inland
vessels.
We disagree with the characterization
of proposed part 144 as not risk-based
and, further, we believe they represent
the minimum safety standard of
construction and arrangement that is
common to all inspected vessels. While
there are some requirements applicable
only to new towing vessels, these
requirements do not exceed the
requirements imposed on other types of
small inspected vessels and, for this
reason, we do not agree that they can be
considered to be too stringent. As for
existing towing vessels, we find no
requirements in this rule that would
require costly modifications to a
properly maintained and satisfactorily
functioning existing towing vessel.
Three commenters suggested that
organizing vessels into two subparts,
existing vessels and new vessels,
instead of three subparts, would be
easier for issues related to
grandfathering. We generally agree that
the proposed regulations would benefit
from reorganization, and we have
modified this part to delete
requirements repeated in other parts of
the subchapter or that were too vague.
Further, we agree with the commenters
with respect to organizing requirements
into a format that is more aligned with
other inspection subchapters.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
A majority of the requirements are
either the same or very similar to
requirements contained in the
Construction and Arrangement part in
subchapter T, Small Passenger Vessels
(46 CFR part 177). We aligned part 144
with the organization, and subpart and
section titles, of part 177. This
organizational choice also better reflects
the relatively large number of part 144
requirements that apply to both existing
and new vessels, and the relatively
small number that apply to new vessels
only. As a result of these changes, we
use the term ‘‘vessel’’ when discussing
requirements that apply to both new
and existing vessels, and use the
specific terms ‘‘new’’ or ‘‘existing’’
vessel to describe those that apply only
to one or the other. At the end of this
discussion of comments on part 144 and
structures and stability, we have
provided a derivation table that lists
part 144 section numbers in this final
rule and the proposed sections from
which they derived. Also, where
appropriate, we have noted the
corresponding part 177 section number
or an explanation of an edit.
We received several comments,
mainly from maritime companies
suggesting revisions to § 144.215.
Commenters suggested that special
consideration be given to structural
requirements for towing vessels
‘‘operating exclusively within [limited
geographic areas], and towing vessels
under 65 feet in length, in addition to
towing vessels of an unusual design.’’
We agree with these commenters that
the types of vessels for which special
consideration may be given in proposed
§ 144.215 should be clarified, and we
have adopted the suggested under-65feet-in-length measure to define what
we had described as ‘‘small vessels’’ in
the proposed rule. This rule also
provides that special consideration may
be given to vessels operating exclusively
within a limited geographic area,
because the OCMI is familiar with the
specific hazards of the limited
geographic areas within his or zone.
Commenters felt that proposed
§ 144.220(a) should be edited to ensure
that routine upgrades to equipment,
such as engine repowering, would not
require compliance verification.
Further, towing companies felt that
proposed § 144.220(a) and (b) should be
revised to clarify the intention of the
terms ‘‘major conversion or alteration’’
and ‘‘replacements in kind.’’
The Coast Guard believes that
compliance verification with design
standards for upgrades to equipment,
such as engine repowering, as in
proposed § 144.220(a), should be
retained because of possible changes to
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40071
stability and other vessel characteristics
related directly to safety. We have done
so in this final rule in our redesignated
verification of compliance section,
§ 144.135.
With respect to the request to clarify
the terms ‘‘major conversion or
alteration’’ and ‘‘replacement in kind’’
in proposed § 144.220(a) and (b), in
§ 136.110 we have clarified our
proposed definition of ‘‘major
conversion’’ and added a definition of
‘‘replacement in kind.’’ We note that
§ 144.135 uses the phrase ‘‘major
conversion or alteration’’: Although
‘‘alteration’’ is not defined in this rule,
we use the term as it currently used in
46 CFR 91.55–10 to mean an alteration
that involves the safety of the vessel.
Separately, we have reformatted the text
of § 144.135 in tabular form to make this
section easier to read.
The term ‘‘verification of compliance’’
in part 144 addresses verifying that the
design of a vessel meets the standards
used. To distinguish this activity from
the compliance verification required in
part 137 under the TSMS option, we
have added the words ‘‘with design
standards’’ to this term. We also
removed from this section the provision
that a verification of compliance be
performed upon request of the Coast
Guard because this is covered by part
136.
To provide more options for the
qualifications in proposed § 144.225,
now re-designated § 144.140, we have
extended the group of entities able to
verify compliance with design standards
to include the Coast Guard and certain
authorized classification societies, not
just ABS. For the purposes of this
verification, the authorized
classification society must have been
delegated the authority to issue a
SOLAS Cargo Ship Safety Construction
Certificate and the employee who
performs the verification must have the
proper qualifications. Similar references
to ABS with respect to a verification of
compliance with design standards have
been revised accordingly. Regardless of
the inspection option chosen, the
verification of compliance with design
standards can be performed by any one
of the persons or entities identified in
§ 144.140.
Some commenters discussed the costs
of developing plans for review. Two
maritime companies suggested that
proposed § 144.230, Procedures for
verification of compliance with
construction and arrangement
standards, would be costly for
companies with older vessels that were
constructed without plans produced by
a naval architect. A maritime company
suggested alternatives for hull structure
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40072
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
and piping, electrical, machinery
systems and stability reviews that it
viewed as more cost-effective.
Proposed § 144.230, now redesignated § 144.145, was intended for
vessels undergoing a major conversion
or alteration to the hull, machinery, or
equipment—as described in proposed
§ 144.135. A major conversion often
results in an extension of the vessel’s
service life. Therefore, the procedures in
§ 144.145, would not be invoked unless
required by § 144.135. Because
§ 144.135 does not require a verification
of compliance with design standards for
an existing vessel, we do not envision
that an owner or operator would need
to provide plans to ensure the existing
vessel complies with the standards
used. A new towing vessel will need to
undergo a verification of compliance
with design standards.
We have clarified procedures for
verification of compliance with design
standards to require copies of verified
plans be provided to the third-party
organization that conducts a survey, if
applicable, in addition to the OCMI.
Two commenters suggested that
because naval architects are well
qualified, a P.E.’s signature is not
needed for vessel construction. While
many naval architects are also licensed
P.E.s in the jurisdiction in which they
reside or conduct their business, not all
are. The benefits of P.E. licensure are
well documented and accepted in the
United States. The requirement for a
P.E.’s seal on vessel construction plans
may be considered commensurate with
that required for buildings within a
municipality. Accordingly, we clarified
in § 144.145 that the documents must be
stamped with the seal authorized for use
by the individual performing the
verification, whether that is the P.E. or
a representative of the recognized
classification society or the Coast Guard.
We acknowledge that there may be gaps
in documentation of smaller vessels, so
we have clarified that the term ‘‘plan’’
means drawings, calculations,
schematics, diagrams or other
documents and provide a list of what
those plans may include, based mostly
on 46 CFR 177.202.
We have clarified and revised the
provisions for sister vessels in proposed
§ 144.235, now re-designated § 144.155,
to be consistent with §§ 144.135,
144.140, and 144.145.
Two commenters said that the
marking requirements in proposed
§ 144.240 should include the same basic
colors used to mark piping for
flammable liquid, seawater cooling, and
firefighting systems proposed in
§ 143.270(c). We do not agree that
piping marking requirements in part 143
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
need to be repeated in part 144. We
made no changes from the proposed
rule based on these comments.
Both proposed § 144.310(a) for
existing vessels and proposed § 144.405
for new vessels specified that a vessel
classed by ABS would meet the
structural standards of part 144, because
ABS rules include stability standards
that generally meet those contained in
Coast Guard regulations. We have
consolidated those sections into
§ 144.120, stating that a vessel that is
classed by a recognized classification
society is in compliance with subparts
B and C of part 144. In accordance with
proposed § 136.210(c), as well as similar
changes in this rule, we have
acknowledged that structural and
stability standards contained in the
rules of other recognized classification
societies are commensurate with ABS
rules, and have extended this provision
to class by a recognized classification
society.
In a similar way, we recognized that
proposed § 136.210(d) deemed a vessel
with a valid load line certificate to be
in compliance with structural and
stability standards, among others, and
since proposed § 144.310(b) repeated
this, § 144.125 contains this text.
In proposed §§ 144.305 and 144.310,
we proposed structural standards for an
existing vessel. These are now
contained in § 144.200, which has been
aligned with §§ 144.120 and 144.125 to
avoid repetition. As provided in
proposed § 144.305(a), an existing vessel
to which no construction standard was
applicable would need only show that
it has been in satisfactory service and its
service history does not cause the
structure of the vessel to be questioned.
Similarly, structural standards for new
vessels that we proposed in § 144.410
are now contained in § 144.205. The use
of alternate design standards is covered
by § 136.115 as discussed elsewhere in
this preamble.
Because the requirements of proposed
§§ 142.220(c) and 144.350(a) were so
similar, we have merged them into
§ 144.415.
A commenter said that proposed
§ 144.315 and § 144.415 regarding
stability standards would not apply to
all vessels and was concerned about
grandfathering a number of vessels that
may be unstable and remain
uninspected. As discussed in more
detail elsewhere in this preamble, this
final rule focuses on the towing vessels
presenting the greatest risk. Further,
several commenters stated that stability
is not a problem on inland towing
vessels. The Coast Guard notes that
casualty records generally support this
view. For an existing vessel that will be
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
inspected, the stability standards for an
existing vessel in § 144.300 will require
the vessel to show it has a history of
satisfactory service that does not cause
its stability to be questioned, or meet a
similar standard that ensures adequate
stability. Stability standards for a new
vessel in § 144.305 will require the
vessel to show it complies with
minimum standards that are applied to
other inspected vessels. One commenter
suggested that a minimum freeboard of
‘‘like 24 inches’’ for all vessels would
improve stability standards. While the
Coast Guard agrees that a requirement
for such a freeboard may improve
stability, both the degree of the stability
improvement and its benefit are
unknown and, for this reason, a
freeboard requirement of this amount
was not included in this final rule.
An association commented that that
the proposed regulation (§ 144.355) does
not contain size requirements and
specifications for accommodation
spaces for the crew. The commenter
recommended several specifications to
be included in the regulations.
The Coast Guard declines to adopt the
suggested specifications. Our proposed
requirements for accommodation spaces
for the crew on towing vessels subject
to inspection under this subchapter
were contained in proposed § 144.355
and were generally taken from
subchapter T—small passenger vessels.
In response to comments, we have
amended proposed part 144 to include
a subpart dedicated to crew spaces.
Crew space requirements in this final
rule, as we proposed in the NPRM, are
based on performance standards rather
than prescriptive size requirements.
With respect to proposed storm rail
requirements in proposed § 144.340,
now re-designated § 144.810, we added
the option of hand grabs but removed
the requirement for storm rails on both
sides of a passageway more than 6 feet
wide because there are no towing
vessels to which this subchapter would
apply that would have such a wide
passageway.
An individual suggested the removal
of proposed § 144.345, Guards in
dangerous places, because of its
similarity to proposed § 143.230. We
decided to keep this requirement, now
designated § 144.820, in part 144 and
delete the similar requirement in part
143.
With respect to insulation of hot
piping, we retain the requirement for
existing vessels in proposed
§ 144.350(b), now redesignated
§ 144.830, and for new vessels we
provide a similar but more specific
requirement that aligns with an existing
requirement in 46 CFR 177.970.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
In reference to a collision event
involving the tug Caribbean Sea and a
‘‘Duck’’ tour boat in Philadelphia in
2010, a commenter recommended that
the NPRM include ‘‘height of eye’’
guidelines for towing vessels. The
commenter also suggested that the Coast
Guard consider including the
‘‘transmissivity of light’’ through glazing
materials on towing vessels in proposed
§ 144.325 or § 144.425.
The Coast Guard notes that while
‘‘height of eye’’ requirements are not
specifically addressed in this rule, the
regulations in subpart I require
windows and other openings at the
operating station to be properly located
to provide a clear field of vision. As
proposed in both §§ 144.325 and
144.425, the visibility of the windows
immediately forward of the operating
station in the pilothouse must allow for
40073
adequate visibility regardless of weather
conditions. In response to the idea to
include a ‘‘transmissivity of light’’
requirement, the Coast Guard notes that
46 CFR 177.1030(b) includes such a
standard for operating station visibility
for small passenger vessels and we
decided to include this same
requirement at what is now § 144.905(e).
TABLE 2—DERIVATION OF SECTIONS OF PART 144 FROM THE NPRM
Final rule
section No.
144.100 ........
144.105 ........
NPRM Section
No.(s)
144.100
144.200,
144.300,
144.305,
144.400
144.105
144.110
144.120 ........
144.125 ........
144.130
144.135
144.140
144.145
144.310(a),
144.405,
136.210(c)
144.310(b),
136.210(d)
........
........
........
........
136.115(b)
144.220
144.225
144.230
144.155 ........
144.235
144.160 ........
144.240
144.205
144.210
........
........
........
........
144.310
144.410
144.215
144.315
144.305 ........
144.415
144.310 ........
144.315 ........
144.320 ........
144.330 ........
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
144.200
144.205
144.215
144.300
144.415(d)
144.315(c),
144.415(e)
144.320(a)
144.320
144.400 ........
144.435(a)
144.405 ........
144.410 ........
144.415 ........
144.435(a)
144.435(b)
144.350(a),
144.435(c),
142.220(c)
144.435(d)
144.425 ........
VerDate Sep<11>2014
144.435(e)
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Notes (if necessary)
Revised text referring to ‘‘plan review and approval’’ to ‘‘verification of compliance’’ for clarity.
Created general applicability section, § 144.105, after removing definition section. Our revisions to part 144
eliminated subparts specifically for all vessels, existing vessels, and new vessels, so we combined applicability sections for those subparts into § 144.105. In paragraph (b) that refers to alterations or modifications,
text similar to that contained in SOLAS Chapter II–1/1.3, ‘‘. . . insofar as is deemed reasonable and practicable’’ is added to reflect actual process that will be addressed in the verification of compliance with design
standards.
Removed § 144.105, Definitions; added definition of ‘‘length between perpendiculars or LBP’’ to § 136.110. Derived definition for LBP term, used in final rule §§ 144.155 and 144.315, from § 170.055. We moved the content of the former § 144.110 to a consolidated central incorporation by reference section for the entire subchapter, § 136.112.
While proposed § 144.310(a) addressed only structural adequacy, proposed § 136.210(c) was broader and referred to compliance with the entire subchapter. This section reflects the general satisfaction of subparts B
and C of part 144 by vessels currently classed by a recognized classification society.
While proposed § 144.310(b) addressed only structural adequacy, proposed § 136.210(d) was broader and referred to compliance with the structural, drydocking, and stability requirements of the subchapter. This section reflects the satisfaction of structural, stability, and watertight integrity requirements by a vessel holding a
valid load line certificate.
Vessel in compliance with SOLAS is considered to be in compliance with part 144.
Verification of compliance requirements are placed into a table for clarity.
Qualifications revised into a table for clarity.
Procedures for verification are clarified with minor revisions that include a clarification that ‘‘stamped’’ means
the imprint of the seal of the P.E. and that ‘‘plans’’ include a list of drawings, diagrams, calculations, schematics and other similar documents.
Sister vessel verification clarified with general revisions. Among these is a change of ‘‘same plans’’ to ‘‘verified
plans’’ and ‘‘equipped with same machinery as the first vessel’’ to ‘‘equipped with machinery of the same
make and model as the original vessel.’’
General marking requirements clarified with general revisions including a more appropriate reference to draft
mark required in subchapter I at 46 CFR 97.40–10.
Proposed section on TSMS deleted because the proposed TSMS requirements are contained in parts 137 and
138.
Proposed section with general requirements deleted because the general requirement is repeated from parts
136 and 137.
Structural standards for existing vessels are contained in this section.
Structural standards included for new vessels including rules and alternatives.
This section is revised to clarify conditions under which OCMIs may act on special consideration.
Retains proposed stability requirements for an existing vessel with a stability document and added satisfactory
service, operational tests, or a satisfactory stability assessment as standards for an existing vessel without a
stability document; weight and moment history moved to § 144.315.
Contains stability requirements for new vessels; lifting requirements moved to § 144.310; weight and moment
history moved to § 144.315
New section for lifting requirements.
Weight and moment history requirements consolidated into one section.
Revised to refer to both new and existing vessels; section title changed to also refer to weathertight integrity.
Revised section to provide OCMI authority to require review of a vessel’s watertight or weathertight integrity.
Proposed paragraphs (a)(1), (2), and (3) are deleted as repetitions of requirements in §§ 140.610(a) and (f)
and § 143.270, respectively.
Fire protection requirements applied to a new vessel, except § 144.415 which applies to each new and existing
vessel.
Section title taken from § 177.405(a) with the requirements unchanged from the proposed rule.
Section title taken from § 177.405(c) with the requirements unchanged from the proposed rule.
Section title taken from § 177.405(b) with the requirements in three proposed sections merged.
The provisions in proposed § 144.435(d) are covered in § 142.225, Storage of flammable or combustible products.
Section title taken from § 177.405(f) with the requirements unchanged from the proposed rule.
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40074
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 2—DERIVATION OF SECTIONS OF PART 144 FROM THE NPRM—Continued
Final rule
section No.
NPRM Section
No.(s)
144.430 ........
144.500 ........
144.435(f)
144.330(a),
144.330(e)
144.330(b)
144.330(c)
144.330(d)
144.360(a)
144.360(c)
144.360(b)
144.355(b),(c)
144.355(a)
144.355(d)
144.335
144.340
144.505
144.510
144.515
144.600
144.605
144.610
144.700
144.710
144.720
144.800
144.810
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
144.820 ........
144.830 ........
144.905 ........
144.920 ........
144.345,
143.230
144.350(b)
144.325,
144.425
144.430
Notes (if necessary)
Section title taken from § 177.405(g) with the requirements unchanged from the proposed rule.
Requirements similar to § 177.500(a)
Requirements similar to § 177.500(b) and (c)
Requirements similar to § 177.500(n)
Requirements similar to § 177.500(o)
Added hand grabs as an option to storm rails and removed requirement for storm rails on both sides of a passageway more than 6 feet wide.
Proposed requirements for guards for exposed hazards in part 143 is merged with part 144 proposed requirement.
Hot piping insulation requirement for an existing vessel is retained and a more specific requirement for a new
vessel is based on § 177.970.
Proposed requirements for operating station visibility for both existing and new vessels are merged.
Changed ‘‘porthole’’ to ‘‘portlight’’ to match our intent for this requirement. In practice, this change is a nonsubstantive clarification because the requirement is only relevant to portholes with portlights.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
O. Miscellaneous Comments
In the NPRM we discussed comments
submitted in response to seven
questions we posed in a December 30,
2004, Inspection of Towing Vessels
notice. Some commenters commented
on those questions and that discussion.
One person stated that uninspected
towing vessels have been running
efficiently for more than a century and
that they have no problems that need to
be addressed by a TSMS. In response to
a discussion of grandfathering, another
commenter stated that many existing
towing vessels have operated in excess
of 40 to 60 years without a major
accident.
While towing vessels may be running
efficiently, and many may not be
involved in a major casualty, as we
noted in the NPRM, towing vessel
casualties continue to occur. Each year,6
there is an average of 18 fatalities, 35
injuries, $66 million in property
damages, and 446,000 gallons of oil
spilled. Additional damages occur after
towing vessel casualties in the form of
delays from lock and waterway closures.
A primary objective of this rulemaking
is to reduce fatalities, injuries, property
damaged, and oil spilled, by reducing
the risk of towing vessel casualties.
Others who commented on our
discussion of these questions from 2004
focused on specific subject areas
intended to be addressed by our
proposed regulatory text and the
6 Casualty consequences are from MISLE for
accidents from 2002–2007.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
reasoning we provided in the preamble
of the NPRM for that proposed text:
• Machinery and Electrical: A
commenter noted that space constraints
and crew abilities should be considered
before requiring new equipment on
small vessels.
• Applicability: Three commenters
suggested that existing vessels should be
‘‘grandfathered’’ to minimize the
expense and potential closing of
businesses that will not be able to
comply with new regulations. One
commenter felt that few vessels other
than those under 26 feet, or those used
for commercial recreational vessel
towing assistance, should be exempted
from the regulation, and that fleeters
should be exempted on a case-by-case
basis.
• Construction & Arrangement, Fire
Protection, and TSMS: One of those
commenters would only apply
grandfathering to equipment, hull
construction and structural fireprotection requirements, but
recommended that all vessels should
comply with the proposed SMS rules
within one year.
• TSMS: The same commenter
suggested that using the ISM Code from
2002 as a guideline in developing the
SMS requirements will allow for a
number of operators using the AWO
RCP to be compliant.
• Fire Protection: The commenter also
felt that existing vessels should be
treated differently from newly
constructed vessels because of the
likelihood that fire standards will make
it difficult to retrofit existing vessels.
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
While these comments are not in
direct response to the regulatory text we
proposed, we have addressed these
comments in the same section of the
preamble where we discuss comments
on the corresponding proposed
regulatory text. For example, for a
response to the comment regarding
whether existing and new vessels
should be treated differently
(‘‘grandfathered’’) with respect to fire
protection standards, see the Fire
Protection discussion of comments
section.
A towing company requested that the
Coast Guard consider issuing a
supplemental NPRM so the public and
industry will be able to review the
revisions to the rule before it is final. A
maritime company suggested that the
Coast Guard urge towing companies to
become familiar with tried and tested
engineering guides and standards. The
commenter also suggested that the
Bridging Program remain functioning
until all towing vessels are found to be
compliant with the rule.
We disagree with this commenter
about issuing a supplemental NPRM.
This final rule reflects consideration of
the thousands of comments we received
on the NPRM we published in 2011.
Regarding urging towing companies to
become familiar with tried and tested
engineering guides and standards, we
encourage towing companies to obtain
knowledge from such guides and
standards, but the purpose of this final
rule is to establish specific
requirements. This rule provides some
flexibility (e.g., the option to choose a
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
TSMS or Coast Guard inspection
regime) but it is not a guidance
document: it imposes requirements for
which penalties may be applied if the
requirements are not met. We have not
made changes from the proposed rule
based on this comment.
As for the Bridging Program, we are
currently in Phase 2 of that program.
During Phase 1, we conducted Industry
Initiated Examinations for companies
taking advantage of the opportunity to
participate in this Coast Guard program.
Phase 2 is focused on Risk-Based
Targeted Examinations and is scheduled
to continue until this final rule becomes
effective. Phase 3 will commence with
the implementation of the new
subchapter M towing vessel inspection
regulations and issuance of Certificates
of Inspection (COIs).
A commenter suggested that towing
vessel officers and officer candidates be
tested on the new towing vessel
inspections that appear in the final rule.
The commenter said the Coast Guard
provides only one opportunity to test
the ‘‘professional knowledge’’ of
candidates for Apprentice Mate/
Steersman, Mate/Pilot, and Master of
Towing Vessels, and that for years, it
tolerated insufficient knowledge of
existing regulations throughout the
towing industry by licensed officers,
management, and even Coast Guard
personnel assigned to boarding parties.
He noted that the Coast Guard’s Towing
Vessel ‘‘Bridging’’ program has done a
commendable job trying to reverse this
trend.
Before imposing training
requirements on those credentialed
under 46 CFR subchapter B, we would
want to receive comments in a separate
rulemaking on such proposed
requirements. As for Coast Guard
personnel conducting inspections under
subchapter M, it is our normal process
to draft a specific Performance
Qualification Standard to ensure that
inspectors are properly trained and fully
capable of performing such inspections.
Also in our oversight of TPOs, we will
be sure to assess the TPO personnel’s
comprehension of subchapter M
requirements.
One commenter felt that there is a
lack of adequately trained lookouts and
that providing the Master and Pilot with
a trained, well-rested lookout can avoid
many significant and costly towing
accidents.
We agree that a trained, well-rested
lookout would be more likely to help
avoid towing accidents than a tired
lookout who is not adequately trained.
The rule does not contain specific
training or hours of work requirements
for lookouts, although such training and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
fatigue management may be part of a
TSMS. We are considering developing a
separate rulemaking for hours of service
and crew endurance management based
on our authority under 46 U.S.C.
8904(c). If we do so, we will publish a
separate document in the Federal
Register. We have made no changes
from the proposed rule based on these
comments.
Two commenters urged the Coast
Guard to include a regulation that
requires companies to provide mariners
with a ‘‘letter of sea service’’ when the
mariner is renewing their credentials.
We believe this suggestion is outside
the scope of this rulemaking. We would
want to receive comments on this
suggestion in a separate rulemaking
before imposing such a requirement.
An individual and an association felt
that the ‘‘Bridging’’ book, updated with
regulations from this final rule and
other related regulations, should be
provided in electronic format to provide
a clear regulatory and policy statement
to the towing industry and thereafter the
Coast Guard should require the book or
an updated electronic copy be carried
aboard each towing vessel. One of these
commenters noted that when the Coast
Guard promulgated new oil pollution
regulations in 1973, they provided an
explanatory pamphlet and a required
completion of an ’’open-book’’ test on
the new regulations.
The Coast Guard notes that the Coast
Guard’s Bridging Program will cease to
be applicable to towing vessels once this
final rule becomes effective. We have
prepared a Small Entities Guide which
is available in the docket. With respect
to an electronic form of subchapter M
and other related regulations, we note
that this final rule and subchapter M
regulations that will become part of the
CFR will be available through
www.gpo.gov/fdsys.
An association commented on the
need for vessel route restrictions on a
COI to be done on a vessel-by-vessel
basis based upon reasonable safety
considerations, and the need for
adequate sea anchors and ground tackle
for towing vessels that service oceans
and coastwise routes.
A Coast Guard OCMI will make
vessel-specific determinations regarding
a vessel’s route and other operating
conditions which will be identified in
the vessel’s COI. Towing vessels come
in a variety of shapes, sizes, and
services, some of which could utilize
anchors and other ground tackle as
appropriate. An anchor that is
appropriate for the towing vessel would
not necessarily be adequate to
accommodate the tow. It is incumbent
upon the towing vessel owner or
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40075
managing operator to examine their
operating conditions and decide if
having an anchor and other ground
tackle is appropriate.
Two commenters suggested that
doubler plating is not acceptable as a
longstanding repair policy and
recommended that the use of doubler
plating be prohibited in regulation for
vessels that have been inspected, unless
it is approved by a Commandant.
The Coast Guard has not adopted this
recommendation. Second, since this
comment was submitted, ASTM has
issued a national consensus standard for
the use of doubler plates as a permanent
repair for vessels in all services. We
have made no changes from the
proposed rule based on these comments.
A commenter suggested that the
NFPA standards referenced in the
NPRM be updated to the current
editions. This commenter also requested
that we correct our references to NFPA
70, the National Electrical Code (NEC),
which are listed incorrectly as ‘‘National
Electric Code’’ in proposed §§ 136.110,
136.112, 143.120; 143.340(b)(6);
143.350(b); and Section II,
Abbreviations.
The Coast Guard believes it is not
necessary to update to the current
editions of the NFPA standards at this
time; in this final rule we have
maintained the NFPA editions that we
proposed in our NPRM. We have,
however, corrected the error in our
citations to NFPA 70, National Electrical
Code (NEC).
A maritime company felt that the
terminology used in the proposed rule
is broad and could be interpreted
differently depending on the reader. The
commenter gave ‘‘major defects’’ and
‘‘substantial’’ as examples of items
totally left up to the opinion of the
individual auditor, and suggested that
more precise terms be included to
ensure consistency in the application of
the regulations.
The Coast Guard notes that we did not
use the term ‘‘major defects’’ in the
NPRM. We did, however, use the term
‘‘major non-conformity,’’ which we also
defined. We also note that we have
added or amended definitions based on
many comments on our proposed rule.
In this final rule we do use the word
‘‘substantial,’’ or a version of it, in our
definition of ‘‘major conversion’’ in
§ 136.110 and in our revocation of TPO
approval section, § 139.150. We agree
that using more precise terms is
appropriate when one is available, but
sometimes a more flexible term is the
only appropriate term to use. We believe
this is true of our uses of the term
‘‘substantial’’ in this final rule and that
the common understanding and
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40076
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
definition of that term, combined with
Coast Guard interpretation of that term
in other regulations, does place
restrictions on how individual auditors
may interpret it. We have made no
changes from the proposed rule based
on this comment.
Lastly, a commenter suggested that
the Coast Guard implement a
notification system to remind vessel
owners of deadlines that are
approaching for their fleets.
The Coast Guard notes that it has a
system that is currently used for other
inspected vessels to provide owner and
managing operators with notification of
impending compliance deadlines and
plans to use this same system for towing
vessels inspected under this subchapter.
However, owners and managing
operators are still ultimately responsible
for meeting these deadlines and the
associated inspection requirements
including notification of the cognizant
OCMI as required in part 136.
P. Crew Endurance Management
Systems (CEMS)
We thank those who commented in
response to our Hours of Service (HOS)
and CEMS preamble discussion in the
NPRM (76 FR 49991–49997, Aug. 11,
2011). These comments have helped to
inform our consideration of HOS and
CEMS issues confronting the maritime
community.
As we stated in the NPRM, the Coast
Guard would later request public
comment on specific hours-of-service or
crew-endurance-management regulatory
text if it seeks to implement such
requirements. We are considering
developing a separate rulemaking for
HOS and CEM based on our authority
under 46 U.S.C. 8904(c). If we do so, we
will publish a separate document in the
Federal Register.
We have summarized HOS and CEM
comments below as a means of sharing
the valuable input we received on this
topic we discussed in the NPRM, but we
have limited our responses because we
are not proposing HOS or CEM
requirements in this document. In
general, we have only responded to
these comments when we want to refer
to what we said in the NPRM or point
to currently available guidance or
resources to address an issue raised. We
have attempted to sort these comment
summaries based on the questions we
asked in the NPRM.
Some commenters wondered why,
despite assembling sufficient data, the
Coast Guard seeks additional
information on potential requirements
to increase uninterrupted sleep
duration, while others described the
Coast Guard’s efforts to address hours of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
service as minimal and in need of
revision. Another commenter said
mariners resent the Coast Guard’s
failure to take a stand on maximum
work hours and safe minimum manning
requirements.
In the NPRM, the Coast Guard shared
its views on potential HOS and CEMS
program standards and requirements,
and sought additional data and other
information that we solicited through
specific questions because, as we stated,
we are ‘‘considering establishing hours
of service standards and requirements
for managing crew endurance, the
ability for a crewmember to maintain
performance within safety limits while
enduring job-related physiological and
psychological challenges.’’ (76 FR
49991, Aug. 11, 2011.)
We received several comments
suggesting that the traditional 2-watch
system be replaced by a 3-watch system
that provides more opportunity for
increased uninterrupted sleep. One
commenter said work durations should
be reduced to a maximum of 21 days,
with a phase-in of the 3-watch system
within 10 years. Another commenter
recommended that the Coast Guard
develop a NVIC to provide one or more
specific 2-watch rotation models that
would meet the work hour limitations
and minimum rest hour standards.
Several commenters noted that a ‘‘6on, 6-off’’ schedule is unsafe or
insufficient for allowing adequate rest.
One commenter said an ‘‘8-hour on, 4hour off; then 4-hour on, 8-hour off’’
schedule would achieve the maximum
hours of rest while maintaining the
current amount of crew. However,
another commenter said an ‘‘8:8:4:4’’
schedule may allow for less total sleep
over 24 hours than a ‘‘6:6:6:6’’ schedule.
We received several comments
referencing crew manning with respect
to potential work hour requirements.
Some commenters said any towing
vessel operating over 12 hours in any
24-hour period should be manned with
two full crews, not just with two
licensed officers. One commenter
recommended a safe manning level that
would support a 3-watch system for
vessels towing laden tank barges
containing oil or hazardous material in
bulk. Another commenter stated that the
Coast Guard should require a relief pilot
or three pilots onboard vessels (captain,
after watch pilot, and swing pilot).
Several commenters noted that crews
are increasingly undertaking
administrative duties, which can impact
appropriate manning and mariners’
opportunity for rest.
An element of a CEMS that might
improve the awareness of the lack of
opportunity for crew members to obtain
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
adequate sleep would be to keep a
record of each crew members’ work and
rest schedule. We note that NVIC 02–08,
Enclosure (4), provides a CEM program
evaluator checklist to capture areas that
need improvement and ways to go about
addressing those areas. Page 4 of
Enclosure (4) provides an example of
how a crew member might analyze their
current work/rest schedule to identify
any associated risks involving fatigue.
Several commenters suggested
regulations that limit the workday to 12
hours in a 24-hour period for all
mariners. One commenter said the
NPRM should mandate maximum workhour limitation for unlicensed
personnel and maximum allowable
work days and rotations.
We received numerous other
comments. One commenter said that
without clear and enforced work-hour
regulations and independent third-party
inspections, towing boat companies will
continue to exploit crews who are eager
to remain employed.
One commenter urged the Coast
Guard to promulgate HOS regulations
consistent with NTSB Safety
Recommendation M–99–1. A maritime
company recommended minimum
hours of rest similar to those set forth in
the latest STCW (Manila) amendments
(STCW 2010, Chapter VIII, Section A–
VIII/1).
One association noted that the Coast
Guard should have decided this issue
ever since that association first
presented it in May 2000 in National
Mariners Association Report #R–201
titled ‘‘Mariners Speak Out on
Violations of the 12-Hour Work Day.’’
We received several comments
supporting the implementation of an
HOS rule that would allow for sufficient
time off to obtain at least 8
uninterrupted hours of sleep, or at least
7 hours of uninterrupted sleep and an
additional sleep period in every 24 hour
period. However, some commenters said
the current statutory requirements in 46
U.S.C. 8104(g) are sufficient.
Several commenters opposed a
requirement for a minimum of 7 to 8
hours of uninterrupted sleep for
personnel on towing vessels. A
maritime company responded that
requirements should consist of a
minimum of one 6-hour period of
uninterrupted rest within a 24-hour
period and a minimum of 10 hours per
day of total rest. Two commenters stated
that the NPRM’s focus on a minimum of
8 hours of uninterrupted sleep fails to
acknowledge that a long sleep period in
conjunction with a nap of shorter
duration during a 24-hour period do not
result in a compromised mental and
physical state. Similarly, a commenter
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
said it is not the number of
uninterrupted hours of sleep per day
that is important for performance and
maintenance of alertness, but rather the
total hours of sleep per 24 hours. Also,
the commenter said data indicates that
shift workers who work 8 hours and
have 16 hours off to sleep only obtain
5 to 6 hours of sleep when sleep occurs
at the ‘‘wrong’’ circadian time.
We received one comment saying the
best method is to allow for anchor sleep
to occur during one sleep opportunity
and a nap sleep to occur during the
second sleep opportunity. A maritime
company responded that a Safe
Manning Document, with prescribed
watch requirements taking into account
the vessels route and service
requirements, would be the best way to
ensure that sufficient qualified
personnel are available for 12 hours of
work per day.
A maritime company responded that
the direct financial impact on its
company would be minimal, as most of
its vessels are already manned to allow
for 7 or 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep
(three in each department). However,
the commenter noted that the company
would lose some level of oversight and
daily productivity in performing, for
example, inspections and maintenance.
One commenter stated that sufficient
uninterrupted sleep for vessel crew is
the best insurance a vessel owner or
managing operator can have against
casualties. A maritime company stated
that there would be a benefit to
managing work periods in relation to
safety, but setting a minimum number of
consecutive hours without changing the
12-hour work period may make it
difficult to manage vessel operations in
a 24-hour period.
One commenter responded that
allowing crews a 7- to 8-hour sleep
opportunity does not mean
crewmembers will routinely obtain 7 to
8 hours of uninterrupted sleep because
it is impossible to mandate sleep.
We agree that a mandate to provide an
opportunity for a sufficient number of
hours of uninterrupted sleep will not
guarantee that crewmembers sleep for
the desired number of hours. But as we
suggested in the NPRM, providing the
opportunity ‘‘to increase uninterrupted
sleep duration to a threshold of at least
7 consecutive hours in one of the two
available off periods in the two-watch
system [would] increase the probability
that crewmembers will have the
opportunity to restore the cognitive
abilities necessary to maintain
situational awareness, even if the sleep
environment is not optimal.’’ 76 FR
49996, Aug. 11, 2011. As noted above,
log-keeping could be an effective way to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
gauge work and rest schedules
throughout daily onboard operations.
A maritime company responded that
while 7 hours of sleep is ideal, this does
not work well in a 12-hour work
schedule, and is still controversial even
within the pioneering companies that
initially implemented and tested the
CEMS practices. The commenter
concluded that the CEM training teaches
that this—getting 7 hours of sleep—is
the last and one of the least important
facets of the program.
Another maritime company
responded that, when given a 7- to 8hour sleep opportunity, mariners cannot
obtain 7–8 hours of uninterrupted sleep.
Thus, it is common in the towing vessel
industry to allow for two sleep
opportunities where each opportunity
allows for significant sleep such as on
a ‘‘6:6:6:6’’ square watch schedule.
We received many comments, mostly
from maritime companies, opposing a
potential requirement for a minimum of
7 to 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep for
personnel on towing vessels because no
current watchstanding system meets
this standard. Several commenters,
including maritime companies, said the
‘‘6 on/6 off’’ watch schedule has worked
for many years and should not be
altered. A maritime company responded
that the traditional ‘‘6 on/6 off’’ watch
schedules would have to be changed to
a ‘‘5/7/7/5,’’ or’’ 4/8/8/4,’’ and a ‘‘12/12’’
schedule may even need to be worked
depending on vessel operations.
Another commenter expressed concern
about the difficulty that operators would
have in finding experienced personnel
to meet the proposed watch standing
standards.
One commenter responded that it is
impossible to mandate that mariners
‘‘obtain a required number of hours of
uninterrupted sleep, such as 7–8
hours.’’ Instead, what is needed is to
change mariner culture such that
sufficient sleep is understood to be
important for optimal performance,
safety, and health.
A maritime company said a mandate
would undoubtedly change the entire
operation onboard, including meal
hours, voyage planning, etc.
Another maritime company
responded that a mandate that required
mariners to obtain 7 to 8 hours of
uninterrupted sleep would require the
use of pharmacological agents or
behavioral therapies (e.g., exercise,
sleep hygiene, cognitive behavioral
therapy for insomnia) that would enable
mariners to achieve the mandated hours
of uninterrupted sleep.
One commenter noted that many
factors, including electronic gadgets,
noise in the berthing spaces, and dietary
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40077
considerations can have an adverse
impact on a mariner’s ability to obtain
adequate sleep.
We received one comment that said
requiring 7 to 8 hours of uninterrupted
sleep would require one-third more
crewmembers than the company
presently can accommodate on board.
One commenter stated that recent
data on sleep make it unlikely that
crews on a ‘‘7:7:5:5’’ or an ‘‘8:8:4:4’’
watch schedule could obtain close to 7
or 8 hours of sleep, even when the
endogenous drive to sleep coincided
with a 7- or 8-hour rest period.
Two commenters said focus on
nutrition and hydration has helped
employees, but the companies have not
changed watch schedules. Two other
commenters responded that they have
implemented CEMS, but one noted that
it does not require that mariners receive
7 to 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep.
An association and another
commenter said a CEMS program alone
cannot account for the fatigue caused by
the existing 2-watch system on vessels
in 24-hour service. The commenters
stated that many mariners are unwilling
to adjust their lives to fulfill the
requirements of the system, and
employers who force the program upon
their mariners will encounter
resentment and retention problems.
A maritime company responded that
if a CEMS program enabled crews to
obtain 7 to 8 hours of total sleep over
a 24-hour period, such a program could
be effective in combating fatigue.
Another maritime company responded
that any operation can benefit from CEM
practices absent of work/rest changes.
Diet, exercise, and environmental
factors are all critical to improving
operations and reducing fatigue.
Another maritime company
responded that there is no evidence
HOS restrictions reduce casualties and
injuries, although this may be possible
if crews can achieve 7 to 8 hours of total
sleep on a day-to-day basis.
A maritime company commented that
no existing programs could be
considered equivalent to the Coast
Guard CEMS program. The alternative
would be a traditional ship ‘‘4/8’’ watch
schedule, which would require manning
increases for most companies.
One commenter responded that, yes,
a mandate would cause burden to
smaller companies with limited
resources. Another commenter said
requiring a crew management program
would increase the already large
financial burden of implementing these
proposed regulations on mid-sized and
smaller companies, as well as an
increased cost to the end consumer due
to the necessity of larger crews.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40078
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
A maritime company responded that
for a full CEMS program, a 4- to 5-year
period would be appropriate to allow
for training, implementation, and
auditing. Another maritime company
responded that there is no appropriate
phase-in period or method until
evidence is provided that
implementation of a new HOS
requirement is effective.
In their comment to the docket
(USCG–2006–24412–0187), the National
Transportation Safety Board indicated
they were pleased with the
comprehensiveness, relevance, and
timeliness of the literature that the Coast
Guard cited in the NPRM, and believes
that this literature aptly summarizes the
state-of-the-art of human factors and
physiological research on the effects of
fatigue on human performance. The
commenter went on to cite several
maritime and transportation accidents
in which operator fatigue was identified
as a contributing factor.
A maritime company noted that Coast
Guard cites the Fatigue Avoidance
Scheduling Tool (FAST) algorithm and
produces nine figures (Figs 2–10) for
assessing the effects of work and rest
schedules on human health and
performance, but there is no evidence in
the FAST model that mariners will be
able to obtain 7 to 8 hours of
uninterrupted sleep on a ‘‘7:7:5:5’’ or
‘‘8:8:4:4’’ rectangular watch. Another
maritime company disagreed with
scientific studies that have indicated
that uninterrupted sleep of less than 8
hours gives a worker a response time
equivalent to someone with blood
alcohol content of 0.05–0.08. Other
commenters recommended a study on
sleep requirements strictly related to
inland waterways vessels.
We received a few comments
supporting the structure of a CEMS
program, and stating that before work
hours or watchstanding practices are
changed, a program including crew
physical wellness and fatigue education
and training must be put into place. One
commenter supported additional
training for crew members in the area of
crew member fatigue and work and rest
periods.
There are currently several
opportunities to learn more about CEMS
and mariner fatigue. We recommend
talking with your company safety officer
for training options, or visit https://
www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/cg5211/cems.asp
for more information on CEM.
One commenter said the concept of
crew endurance is in effect a ‘‘BandAid’’ for a system that is broken, and
that the Coast Guard has objective
scientific evidence to take clear and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
definitive actions for establishing
maximum work-hour limitations.
We received several comments stating
that the Coast Guard’s emphasis on
uninterrupted sleep differs from the
description of CEMS in NVIC 02–08,
Criteria for Evaluating the Effectiveness
of Crew Endurance Management System
Implementation. Further, the
commenters said NPRM’s emphasis on
7 to 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep is
troubling not only because of its
inconsistency with prior Coast Guard
publications describing the purpose of
CEMS, but more importantly because it
reflects an incomplete and selective
treatment of the science behind sleep
and watchstanding.
As discussed in NVIC 02–08,
components of a CEMS that improve the
safety culture and sleep quality include
education, environmental changes, light
management, trained coaches, and
schedule changes. As indicated in
Enclosure (4) of NVIC 02–08, a crew’s
watch schedule should be evaluated
based on the opportunity for each
member to achieve a sufficient amount
of uninterrupted sleep.
A maritime company stated that the
CEMS demonstration project did not
provide any data to support any changes
in HOS or any endurance management
standards.
We received several comments
complaining about the Coast Guard’s
inaction regarding HOS and crew
endurance. However, many
commenters, mostly maritime
companies, said the towing vessel
inspection rule is not the proper place
for requirements regarding fatigue
management, which has implications
for the entire maritime industry and that
it would be more appropriate to address
the issues raised in the NPRM relating
to periods of rest and watchstanding in
a separate rulemaking project
particularly as it pertains to the marine
industry as a whole. One commenter
said any additional CEMS requirements
should be identified in a company’s
TSMS and not in regulation.
Several commenters said emphasis on
minimum required hours of sleep is not
justified by science or data. One
commenter said the NPRM is confusing
and lead a reader and, more
importantly, an inspector to draw the
wrong conclusions about how a vessel
watch should be set up. A maritime
company said there is a need for
literature that explores anchor sleep/nap
sleep strategies; compares sleep times
on different watch schedules where the
total amount of sleep and work
opportunities are equivalent; evaluates
the effectiveness of educational
programs to change the culture of crews
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
on board towing vessels; documents
why mariners do not obtain 7 to 8 hours
of sleep per 24 hours; and evaluates
effective strategies for the treatment of
sleep disorders.
One commenter said any requirement
for hours of service standards and crew
endurance management requirements
should apply to double-crewed
overnight boats and should not apply to
‘‘dinner bucket’’ or harbor boats.
We received two comments stating
that the Coast Guard should withdraw
its proposal until the following issues
are addressed: current abuses of existing
hours-of-service regulations for towing
vessel officers; the lack of any hours-of
service regulations for deckhands,
engineers and unlicensed crewmembers;
fatigue resulting from these abuses; and
the undermanning of towing vessels as
previously documented.
Another commenter said the NPRM
included no mention of previous
recommendations made by the Towing
Safety Advisory Committee (TSAC) on
CEMS and seeks comment on a different
approach that was not previously
brought to TSAC’s attention.
We received several comments stating
that the CEMS research being conducted
by Northwestern University on inland
towing vessels should influence the
Coast Guard’s direction on
watchstanding and CEMS.
Q. Economic Analysis Comments
The Coast Guard received numerous
comments from organizations and
individuals regarding the costs and
benefits associated with our proposed
subchapter M regulations.
When we published the NPRM in
2011, we were particularly interested in
the economic impact of implementing a
TSMS, and whether there were
alternatives to the TSMS and Coast
Guard inspection options that could
provide similar benefits at a lower cost.
Many commenters provided details
and opinions regarding the costs and
benefits of implementing the new
subchapter M requirements. The
comments involved the overall and
specific costs and benefits of the
requirements, the economic impact on
small entities, and the requests for
flexibilities that could provide relief to
towing vessel owners and operators. We
appreciate these comments and have
attempted to integrate them into our
Regulatory Analysis (RA). We address
the specific topics in the sections of this
preamble below.
1. Costs
We received numerous comments
from towing vessel industry
stakeholders regarding the specific costs
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
of subchapter M parts as well as general
remarks on overall costs of the new
requirements. Many commenters
expressed concern over subchapter M
requirements imposing undue costs on
vessel owners and operators without
providing any information or further
discussion.
One commenter stated the cost of
hiring a naval architect for stability
calculations would be in the tens of
thousands of dollars per vessel to
comply with construction and
arrangement standards, and verification
of compliance with those requirements.
As noted above in section IVI.N, the
Coast Guard has added additional
options for verification of compliance
with part 144. Section 144.300(b) now
offers three options for an existing
vessel without a stability document to
meet part 144 requirements: findings
based on the vessel’s operation or a
history of satisfactory service, successful
performance on operational tests, or a
satisfactory stability assessment. None
of these options would cost this
operator tens of thousands of dollars.
For example, the findings based on the
vessel’s operation or history of
satisfactory service is a documentation
activity that the Coast Guard estimates
will require 4 hours of time to compile
at a cost of approximately $200.
Operational tests are undertaken as part
of a standard inspection if needed at no
additional cost to the operator.
The commenter also believed that
additional equipment and redundancy
systems—specifically propulsion,
steering and related controls, electrical
installations, pilothouse alerter system
and towing machinery—required by
part 143 are unnecessary.
As discussed earlier, part 143 no
longer requires redundancy propulsion
or steering for existing vessels, and has
eliminated deferred electrical
requirements in proposed §§ 143.340
through 143.360 for existing vessels.
This final rule does retain a pilothouse
alerter system requirement for towing
vessels with overnight accommodations
and alternating watches (shift work), but
we have limited this requirement to
towing vessels more than 65 feet in
length. We also retained a requirement
for towing machinery (e.g., capstans and
winches) to be designed and installed to
maximize control of the tow. Both the
pilothouse alerter system and towing
machinery requirements have a delayed
implementation period for existing
vessels: 5 years after the issuance of the
first COI for the vessel. For a more
detailed discussion of these two
requirements, please see section IV.M
above.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
One commenter stated that the Coast
Guard estimated that bringing a single
towing vessel into compliance with
general requirements for propulsion,
steering, and related controls, which
appeared in § 143.405 in the NPRM,
would cost $20,000 and said that his
company spent $200,000 to replace
steering and propulsion systems of a
single vessel. The commenter estimated
that to bring his company’s 130 vessels
into compliance under subchapter M,
they would need to spend millions of
dollars. The commenter also said that
several thousand towing vessels would
be affected, as opposed to the Coast
Guard estimate of 26 towing vessels
being affected by the § 143.405
requirements.
As discussed earlier, the Coast Guard
acknowledges the potential for higher
costs to retrofit existing vessels. In this
final rule, the relevant requirements
have been moved to § 143.585 and the
applicability of these requirements has
been reduced to only apply to new
vessels (estimated at 88 per year) or
those undergoing a major conversion
(estimated at 13 per year) that move
tank barges carrying oil or hazardous
materials in bulk. We estimate the
incremental cost to comply with
§ 143.585 during the design and
construction stage for new vessels or
those undergoing major conversion to be
$10,000 per vessel.
Another commenter, referencing the
previous commenter’s remarks,
estimated that company would incur a
cost of $40 million to comply with
subchapter M. This commenter also
suggested that subchapter M costs will
be passed along to all the consumers in
the U.S. economy thereby putting the
U.S. economy at a disadvantage
compared to other world economies.
The Coast Guard has considered the
potential cost impact on individual
companies and the economy in
formulating the final rule. We balanced
costs against the beneficial impacts of
the rule in reducing the risk of towing
vessel accidents and the resulting
consequences, including fatalities,
injuries, and oil spills. Based on
information provided in the comments
from the public on the costs of some
requirements, we have revised the
applicability of some those
requirements to only newly constructed
or refurbished vessels to mitigate the
need for costly retrofits of existing
vessels. We have also added alternative
compliance options, such as allowing
service history in lieu of stability tests
for some vessels. We believe the
resulting final rule fulfills Congress’
mandate to bring towing vessels under
an inspection system to ensure and
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40079
improve safety, while minimizing costs
and potential impacts on the U.S.
economy.
Another commenter expressed
concern about the cost of the rule to
vessel owners and operators and stated
that the annual user fee could be ‘‘in the
$1,000 to $2,000 range’’ for each vessel.
The annual fee for towing vessels
inspected under subchapter M will be
$1,030. As we note in section IV.D
above, this is the existing annual
inspection fee in 46 CFR 2.10–101 for
any inspected vessel not listed in Table
2.10–101. This will be charged starting
a year after the initial COI is issued and
will remain the annual inspection fee
until a specific annual inspection fee for
towing vessels is promulgated through a
separate rulemaking.
The same commenter also estimated
that the negative impact on the
economy, of (river-canal) lock delays
due to towing vessel accidents, is only
$13.89 million of annual economic
impact and 0.13 percent of total
downtime, compared to an estimated
total negative economic impact of $10.8
trillion for all downtime on the lock.
The Coast Guard acknowledges that
lock delays from towing accidents may
only make up a small fraction of total
lock delays. However, that does not
negate the benefit that could be realized
through the rule by improving towing
vessel safety, and reducing accidents
and the resulting delays. Analyzing all
causes of lock delays and methods for
mitigating those delays not related to
towing vessel accidents is outside the
scope of this rulemaking.
One commenter submitted a number
of comments on the additional
operational costs due to subchapter M
requirements that included the impact
of periodic drydocking which may leave
the work force idle, additional
recordkeeping-staff requirements, the
limited supply of shipyards which may
increase the amount of time needed for
repairs and drydocking, and increases in
lending rates for marine loans from
financial institutions due to actual or
perceived risks.
With respect the impact of
drydocking, according to a 2013 report,
‘‘For smaller vessels, routine drydocking
can be done in the course of a single
day.’’ 7 The Coast Guard assumes 2 days
of for each drydock inspection and has
added an estimate of potential lost
revenues during that period. Drydocking
can be scheduled in advance with
shipyards to coincide with rest
requirements of crew, minimizing the
7 ‘‘Study of Engineering and Naval Architecture
Costs for Use in Regulatory Analysis’’, 17 April
2013 by ABS Consulting, page 30.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40080
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
potential for workforce idleness or
longer waits times.
The provisions of the rule are
intended to improve safety of towing
vessel operations, which over time
should reduce actual risks.
One commenter asked for more detail
on how the Coast Guard estimated the
annual government costs at $1.4
million. He interpreted this figure as a
need to hire 14 new full time
employees.
Coast Guard man-hours are calculated
based on assuming only a few hours per
vessel, although it might amount to a
large number of hours considering that
the affected population is more than
5,500 towing vessels. The Coast Guard
is flexible with respect to meeting
resource needs and may not hire new
full time employees to implement the
new subchapter M program.
Several commenters stated that the
preliminary RA underestimated the
various costs of subchapter M. In
particular, one commenter believed that
for existing vessels cost in man-hours
needed to develop vessel plans is much
higher than the estimate presented in
the RA. The commenter estimated that
cost of plan development alone will be
as high as $80,000, as opposed to the
Coast Guard estimate of $20,000. In
addition to these costs, the commenter
included an estimate of up to $30,000
for stability review, and $100,000 to
verify vessel compliance with
requirements in parts 140 through 144.
The Coast Guard acknowledges the
potential for higher costs for plan
development and stability review. As a
result, this final rule does not require an
existing vessel to undergo a verification
of compliance with design standards, so
there is no plan development cost for an
existing vessel unless that vessel either
undergoes a major conversion or
involves a new installation that is not a
replacement-in-kind. In the case of a
major conversion, the plans and
documentation needed would be
directly related to the scope of the
conversion. In the case of an installation
that is not a replacement-in-kind, the
plans needed would be limited to the
scope of the installation and to prove
that the vessel meets stability standards.
Moreover, the documentation required
is not restricted to traditional drawings;
sketches, schematics, diagrams,
specifications, and photographs can be
used to the degree needed to ensure the
vessel complies with the standards
used.
The same commenter suggested an
alternative approach to these plans that
they estimated would cost no more than
$30,000 per vessel: Having a P.E.
conduct a ship check to approve hull
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
structure, piping, electrical machinery
systems and stability test by using inhouse sketches and reviewing vessel
structure and systems. The total costs of
the program suggested by this
commenter ranged from $150,000 to
$180,000 when added to the other
vessel plan costs. The Coast Guard
views the suggested alternative
approach to be similar to the surveys
required under the TSMS option and,
therefore, to be redundant. Further, the
alternative approach suggested is not
really an alternative since sketches,
photographs, and similar documents are
included in the group of sufficient
documents needed for review in the
case of either a major conversion or a
new installation that is not a
replacement-in-kind on an existing
vessel.
Another commenter estimated that
the cost of retrofitting an existing towing
vessel to comply with subchapter M
ranges from $180,000 to $300,000. This
commenter also pointed out the
additional cost of a TSMS, which he
noted we estimated to be from $61,000
to $150,000 per company. The
commenter added that none of these
estimates accounts for the economic
impact of time spent out of service
while a vessel is being retrofitted.
The Coast Guard acknowledges that
the costs to retrofit vessels to meet
certain proposed requirement may have
been higher than estimated in the
NPRM. As a result of these higher costs,
the Coast Guard has removed those
requirements for existing vessels,
although the requirements are retained
for new vessels as the incremental costs
for a new vessel are lower. Removing
certain requirements for existing vessels
in Part 143 has the potential to reduce
most, or perhaps all, of the $180,000 to
$300,000 costs noted in the comment.
With regards to the TSMS costs, the rule
provides the Coast Guard inspection
option as an alternative if developing
and implementing a TSMS is deemed
too costly by a vessel owner. In response
to this and other comments, the Coast
Guard has included an estimate of lost
revenue in the Regulatory Analysis for
the final rule for drydock inspections
and activities to correct deficiencies that
exceed 1 day in duration. We have made
certain requirements no longer apply to
existing vessels and has made many
other changes to address that concern,
as discussed in previous sections.
One commenter stated that
subchapter M would require his
company to change electrical systems
on existing vessels at a cost of more than
$75,000 per vessel, and would
potentially cost the company $2,700,000
to comply.
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
While the Coast Guard finds it
unlikely that it would cost over $75,000
to bring a vessel in active service under
normal engineering practice into
compliance with subchapter M, the
Coast Guard acknowledges that some of
the requirements proposed for electrical
systems that required retrofitting of
existing towing vessels could result in
higher costs. In this final rule, we have
made many of those requirements only
applicable to new vessels. For more
details, see discussion of electrical
systems in section IV.M above.
One commenter estimated his
company’s average compliance cost to
be $225,000 per vessel or $3.375 million
for his entire fleet. A second
commenter, relying on an AWO figure,
estimates the cost of the proposed
requirements to be as much as $100,000
per towing vessel. A third commenter,
representing a group of offshore towing
vessel owners and operators, quoted
previous comments on compliance costs
and provided an average cost of
$180,000 to $300,000 per vessel.
The Coast Guard appreciates the
information from commenters on the
potential costs of the proposed
requirements in the NPRM. Given the
potential for higher cost impacts, we
have re-evaluated the requirements in
the proposal to identify opportunities to
minimize costs while still achieving risk
reduction. As described previously, we
have provided opportunities for lowercost compliance options for some
requirements and changed the
applicability of some requirements so
that existing vessels would not have to
undergo costly retrofits. The Coast
Guard estimates that the average cost of
compliance per vessel during the phasein period is $16,267 with an additional
$5,045 cost per company. The
deficiency data from the Bridging
Program and towing vessel boardings,
which represents over 99 percent of the
towing vessel fleet, indicates that many
deficiencies are relatively rare (5
percent or less of vessels), making it
unlikely that a vessel would incur the
cost of every regulatory requirement.
Finally, other commenters stated that
there are many hidden or unaccountedfor costs that the Coast Guard did not
incorporate into its preliminary RA.
These hidden costs are the same costs
mentioned by a previous commenter:
Lost revenues and wages due to periodic
inspections and repairs (including travel
to inspection locations), crew costs to
prepare for the inspection and undergo
the questioning during the audit or
survey, and management costs to
oversee the TSMS and inspection
scheduling.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Based on these and other comments,
the Coast Guard acknowledges that
potential for lost revenue and has added
an estimate of lost revenues for
drydocking and certain repairs (please
see Section 2.5 of the Regulatory
Analysis for details).
With respect to costs to prepare for
and undergo inspections, the Coast
Guard estimates 40 hours of time to
prepare for and undergo an inspection,
which could be accomplished by the
owner, operator, crew, or a combination.
We have used the owner or operator
wage rate to value the opportunity cost,
which would be a slight over-estimate if
crew instead performed the activities,
which includes scheduling the
inspections.
With regard to management costs to
oversee a TSMS, the NPRM regulatory
analysis provided an overall cost
estimate for a TSMS that included
management costs. For the final rule,
the Coast Guard does not expect
management costs for a TSMS to be
incrementally different than
management costs for an existing Safety
Management System.
Additionally, one commenter
believed that the preliminary RA did
not account for increased shipping rates
and transportation costs for industries
dependent on river transportation.
The Coast Guard has added an
evaluation of the potential for increased
shipping rates and transportation costs
in Appendix J of the Regulatory
Analysis. The average cost per vessel of
the final rule on a daily basis represents
an increase of 0.7 percent to 2.75% of
barge daily operating costs, exclusive of
fuel costs. The ability of towing vessel
owners to pass along these cost
increases to shippers will depend on
many factors that make up the elasticity
of demand, which will vary depending
on the cargo, route, and transportation
alternatives available. Towing vessels
and barges typically carry commodities
in bulk, including coal, petroleum,
crude materials (such as forest products,
sand, gravel, ores, scrap, and salt), and
food and farm products (Figure J–1).
The analysis of the impact of the
increase in towing vessel daily
operating costs on the shippers will be
different for each commodity and route.
An analysis of shipping rates for grain
indicates that barge shipping rates are
volatile, sometimes doubling from one
year to the next, reacting quickly to
sudden changes in export demand,
weather constraints on the rivers, or
larger-than-expected crops. The final
rule requirements are expected to
represent average increases in operating
costs of 0.7 to 2.75 percent, only a small
fraction of normal variability in rate.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
The market and shippers have adapted
to fluctuations in shipping rates, so that
increases of the size that may result
from the final rule are within normal
variations.
Further, the amount of increase in
costs will vary from company to
company. For example, many
companies already have a TSMS, so this
regulation would have a lesser impact
on those companies cost structure than
those companies that don’t have one.
The final rule brings all towing
companies up to a minimum standard of
safety and erodes the competitive
advantages of those companies
underinvesting in safety measures. By
reducing accidents, incidents and
casualties and resulting impacts
including delays, the final rule may also
increase the dependability and
timeliness of shipping by barge and
perhaps mitigate some limited aspects
of the volatility of rates.
2. Benefits
We received many comments in
support of the proposed rule. Many
commenters said that SMSs are costbeneficial and might lead to quantifiable
benefits. Commenters suggested that
SMSs might lead to benefits such as
fewer vessel accidents and personal
injuries, which would mean cost
savings from reduced insurance
premiums and avoidance of expenses
such as vessel repairs and time out of
service. However, no commenter
provided any data or analysis that
would directly quantify or monetize
such benefits.
Numerous commenters, while
agreeing with the proposed
requirements in principle, expressed a
concern that the costs of complying
with subchapter M would exceed the
benefits and should be either avoided
altogether or mitigated by following a
risk-based approach. The majority of
these commenters felt that benefits
should be justified by each towing
vessel’s individual casualty history and
risk. For example, a vessel that has not
been involved in any accident but is not
compliant with some or all of the
requirements of subchapter M should
not be considered a risk to the maritime
industry and should be granted
exemption or grandfathered from some
or all of subchapter M requirements.
The Coast Guard agrees in part. The
regulatory impact analysis we provide
in the docket discusses at length why
and how owners and operators of
regulated entities will benefit from the
requirements of the final rule. The fact
that no incident has occurred yet on a
particular vessel, especially one that
does not comply with the requirements
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40081
of the final rule, does not mean that the
vessel does not present any risk to the
maritime industry. In the next comment
section, we addressed requests to obtain
relief from certain costs commenters
deemed unnecessary and will point to
accomodations and flexibilities this
final rule provides.
3. Flexibilities To Provide Relief to
Towing Vessel Owners and Operators
We received numerous comments
from the towing vessel owners and
operators requesting greater flexibility
in the rule to reduce its costs to them.
They varied from full exemption from
all subchapter M regulations to
grandfathering on specific requirements.
These comments are addressed in this
section.
One commenter requested that the
Coast Guard grant his company either
an exemption from all requirements of
subchapter M or an extension of 20
years of grandfathering on existing
equipment on board his towing vessels.
Another commenter requested some
form of grandfather clause for existing
fleets from proposed §§ 143.340 through
143.360 electrical system requirements
citing complete rewiring costs at
$150,000 to $210,000 for each vessel.
Similarly, one commenter, without
being specific, suggested that many
requirements relating to mechanical and
electrical equipment and structural
standards for small operators should be
relaxed or eliminated. Also, the AWO
recommended that the Coast Guard
delete sections on electrical system
requirements in the final rule. Another
commenter argued that subchapter M
regulations are unnecessary and asked
for an exemption or extension for
longtime existing companies that have
always operated in full compliance with
existing regulations because these new
regulations may force them out of
business.
The Coast Guard believes it
inappropriate to grant an exemption
from all new requirements under
subchapter M or grandfathering of 20
years for existing equipment. However,
the Coast Guard agrees that some of the
requirements for machinery and
electrical systems in part 143 may have
been too burdensome and were
unnecessary for existing vessels, so they
have been removed from this final rule.
One commenter suggested that coal
and grain barge handlers, which are
generally small businesses, should not
have the same TSMS requirements as
larger companies. Another commenter
asked Coast Guard to provide a template
for a scaled-down version of a TSMS
that might be less overwhelming for
small towing vessel operations. A third
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40082
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
commenter suggested that small
operators should not be required to
implement and maintain certain parts of
the TSMS, such as the Behavioral-Based
Safety program.
In the final rule, TSMS requirements
are neither modified for different classes
of towing vessels nor scaled down or
exempted for small towing vessel
operators. However, as previously
noted, the TSMS is scalable. It can be
tailored to the operation of a small
company and simplified to address a
limited set of assets, process, and
personnel. For a small business operator
with a fleet of one or two vessels the
TSMS may be a short document.
Further, owners and operators can
choose the Coast Guard inspection
option.
Behavior-based safety has been
described as an approach that focuses
on what people do, analyzes why
people take these actions, and then
applies a research-supported
intervention strategy to obtain a more
desired outcome. (Geller, E. Scott,
2004). Subchapter M does not
specifically prescribe the use of
behavior-based safety to address specific
elements of the TSMS, however some
companies have chosen to use this
approach to help modify employees
behaviors to enhance safety within their
organization.
We do not believe a template is
needed to comply with TSMS
requirements. As discussed in previous
sections, we have clarified TSMS
requirements in this rule and we intend
to issue guidance documents related to
TSMSs and TPOs as necessary, and
these guides may contain examples of
such documents.
One commenter stated that the TSMS
should be the only approved method (to
obtain a Certificate of Inspection) under
the final rule and recommended that the
Coast Guard option be removed because
a TSMS is scalable and can be
developed in a cost-effective manner
that many small companies can adapt
to.
The Coast Guard disagrees that the
TSMS should be mandatory. Although
we recognize that the TSMS is scalable
and can be developed in a costconducive manner, some towing
companies may lack the resources or
expertise to develop and implement a
TSMS. The Coast Guard inspection
option is intended to provide greater
regulatory flexibility to such companies,
or any that may not want to use a TSMS
for other reasons. As noted above in
section IV.B, offering this option is
consistent with one of ABSG
Consulting’s recommendations in its
2006 final report to the Coast Guard. See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
docket submission USCG–2006–24412–
0017.
4. Small Business Impacts
We received several comments from
small business owners and operators on
the economic impact of subchapter M
requirements. Some were opposed to
the new requirements, but did not
provide specific information or data
about how they would be impacted.
Others requested either an exemption or
grandfathering from some or all of the
requirements, so that they could avoid
or mitigate the economic impacts and
continue to serve the towing vessel
industry. A discussion of comments
received on small business impacts
follows.
Many commenters felt that subchapter
M requirements would hurt small
business owners and their employees
and could put many small entities out
of business. However, they did not
provide specific data as to how much of
an economic burden they expected the
new requirements to place on their
operational costs. The most specific
comment was that new recordkeeping
requirements alone would mean that the
owner or operator would have to hire
one or more new full time workers.
Other commenters estimated the overall
costs of subchapter M requirements in a
range of $100,000 to $250,000 per vessel
and several million dollars per
company.
Other commenters expressed concern
that their companies would not be able
to pay for these unspecified subchapter
M requirements, and therefore, either be
forced out of business or be acquired by
larger entities in the towing vessel
industry. One commenter argued that
lenders will delay lending and review
existing ship mortgages to reassess their
collateral positions, because many
owners and operators of small towing
vessel fleets will not be able to afford
the costs to comply with subchapter M
requirements. Another commenter
stated that his company would lose the
ability to borrow against their boats if
they cannot comply with the new
regulations. One commenter estimated
that no less than 20 percent of the
aggregate U.S. towing fleet would be put
out of business if the NPRM, as written,
is published as a final rule. However,
these commenters did not provide
specific data or information to support
their concerns.
The Coast Guard appreciates these
comments on the potential economic
impact of the proposed rule on small
businesses. Based on these comments
and other comments on the range of
compliance costs, we have re-evaluated
the requirements in the proposal to
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
identify opportunities to minimize
impacts on small businesses while still
achieving risk reduction. As described
previously, we have provided
opportunities for lower-cost compliance
options for some requirements and
changed the applicability of some
requirements so that existing vessels
would not have to undergo costly
retrofits. The Coast Guard estimates that
the average cost of compliance per
vessel during the phase-in period is
$16,267, with an additional $5,045 cost
per company. The deficiency data from
the Bridging Program and towing vessel
boardings (which represents over 99
percent of the towing vessel fleet)
indicates that many deficiencies are
relatively rare (5 percent or less of
vessels), making it unlikely that a vessel
would incur the cost of every regulatory
requirement.
V. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this final rule after
considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking.
Below, we summarize our analyses
based on these statutes or executive
orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
E.O.s 12866 (‘‘Regulatory Planning
and Review’’) and 13563 (‘‘Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review’’)
direct agencies to assess the costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the
importance of quantifying both costs
and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility.
This final rule is a significant
regulatory action under section 3(f) of
E.O. 12866. The Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) has reviewed it
under that Order. It requires an
assessment of potential costs and
benefits under section 6(a)(3) of E.O.
12866. A final assessment is available in
the docket, and a summary follows.
A Final Regulatory Analysis (RA) is
available in the docket where indicated
under the ‘‘Public Participation and
Request for Comments’’ section of this
preamble. A summary of the RA
follows:
This rulemaking implements section
415 of the Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation Act of 2004. The intent
of the final rule is to promote safer work
practices and reduce casualties on
towing vessels by ensuring that
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
inspected towing vessels adhere to
prescribed safety standards and adopted
safety management systems. The Coast
Guard recognizes that establishing
minimum standards for the towing
vessel industry is necessary. Vessel
operation, maintenance, and design
must ensure the safe conduct of towing
vessels. The final rule improves the
safety and efficiency of the towing
vessel industry.
In this final rule, the Coast Guard
requires towing vessels subject to this
rulemaking to undergo annual Coast
Guard inspections or, in the alternative,
be part of a safety management system.
If the safety management system option
is chosen, the rule requires companies
that operate inspected towing vessels to
create a TSMS, continue with existing
systems that comply with the provisions
of the International Safety Management
(ISM) Code, or continue under another
system the Coast Guard determines to be
equivalent to the TSMS.
This final rule would allow each
towing vessel organization to customize
its approach to meeting the
requirements of the regulations, while it
provides continuous oversight using
audits, surveys, inspections, and
reviews of safety data. This would
improve the safety of towing vessels and
provide greater flexibility and efficiency
for towing vessel operators. As a result
of this rulemaking, operators would be
able to call upon third parties or the
Coast Guard to conduct compliance
activities when and where they are
needed.
Although the 2004 Act added towing
vessels to the list of vessels subject to
Coast Guard inspection and the 2010
Act directed the Secretary to issue a
final rule on the inspection of towing
vessels containing towing safety
management system provisions, they
did not prescribe how this inspection
program must be designed, developed
and implemented. Therefore, we
consider all the new parts under the
new subchapter M as discretionary, but
integral to the safe operations of towing
40083
vessels and necessary to fulfill Congress’
intent in the 2004 and 2010 Acts.
Additionally, when towing vessels
receive their Certificates of Inspection
this will trigger the following
requirements outside of subchapter M
for inspected vessels:
• Part 136, Certification will require
the assessment of user fees, per 46
U.S.C. 2110 and 46 CFR 2.10–101, Table
2.10–101; (requiring user fee for vessel
inspection services and certifications).
• 46 CFR 15.820(a) requires a Chief
Engineer on certain inland towing
vessels.
• 33 CFR 155.710(e)(1) requires a
Person-in-Charge (PIC) for certain fuel
transfers on towing vessels to be
credentialed officer or to hold an MMC
with a Tankerman-PIC endorsement.
See the ‘‘Discussion of Final Rule’’
section for a detailed discussion of this
final rule and see the RA for a detailed
discussion of costs, benefits and
alternatives considered. Table 3
summarizes the impacts of this
rulemaking.
TABLE 3—SUMMARY OF AFFECTED POPULATION, COSTS AND BENEFITS
Category
Final rule
Populations:
Applicability ..............................
Affected Population ..................
Costs:
Total Costs ($ millions, 7% discount rate).
Industry Costs ($ millions, 7%
discount rate).
Net Government Costs ($ millions, 7% discount rate).
Benefits:
Benefits ($ millions, 7% discount rate).
Unquantified Benefits ...............
All U.S. flag towing vessels engaged in pushing, pulling, or hauling alongside, with exceptions for work
boats and limited service towing vessels.
5,509 vessels.
1,086 companies.
$41.5 (annualized).
$291.2 (10-year).
$32.7 (annualized).
$229.6 (10-year).
$8.8 (annualized).
$61.6 (10-year).
$46.4 (annualized, millions).
$325.6 (10-year).
Reduced congestion and delays from lock, bridge and waterway closures.
Reduced risk of low and medium severity towing vessel accidents and accidents with limited information in
the case report.
Table 4 summarizes the changes in
the final rule as we moved from the
NPRM to this final rule, and Table 5
below summarizes the changes in the
RA. These changes to the RA came from
either policy changes, public comments
received after the publication of the
NPRM, or simply from updating the
data and information that informed our
regulatory analysis.
TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF NOTABLE CHANGES FROM NPRM TO FINAL RULE
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
NPRM
Section No.
FR Section
No.
1.03–55
15.535 ..........
15.535
136.172
138.310 ........
VerDate Sep<11>2014
138.310
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Impact on regulatory
analysis
Summary
Added section: ‘‘Appeals from decisions or actions under subchapter M of this
chapter’’.
Clarified that the requirements of § 15.515 apply in addition to those of this section, and that the requirements of this section apply regardless of assistance
towing or being under 200 GRT.
Maintains current requirements for existing towing vessels for 2 years or until the
vessel obtains a COI, whichever period is shorter.
Added ISO 9001–2008 as an option for auditor/assessor compliance ....................
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Added costs for appeals.
Included cost of compliance with § 15.515.
Maintains existing costs for
existing vessels.
No change—adds compliance flexibility.
40084
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF NOTABLE CHANGES FROM NPRM TO FINAL RULE—Continued
NPRM
Section No.
FR Section
No.
Impact on regulatory
analysis
Summary
138.505
Edited section to specify where in the Coast Guard audits should be sent .............
139.110 ........
139.110
139.120 ........
139.120
Introduced delineation that recognized classification societies qualify to do TPO
audits and authorized classification societies to do as TPO surveys.
Changed address to which applications should be sent, added paragraph requiring applications to include information about the organization’s means of assuring the availability of its personnel.
139.130 ........
139.130
139.160 ........
139.160
140.435 ........
140.435
140.505 and
140.520.
140.505
140.605 ........
140.605
140.645 ........
140.645
140.915 ........
140.915
141.305 ........
141.305
141.330 ........
141.330
141.340 ........
141.340
141.360 ........
141.360
142.215 ........
142.215
142.225 ........
142.225
143.200 ........
143.200
143.245 ........
143.230
143.420 ........
143.595
144.315 ........
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
138.505 ........
144.300,
144.315
For auditors, added ‘‘licensed mariner’’ to a list of types of relevant marine experience, and added ISO 9001–2008 as an option in addition to ISO 9001–2000.
Removed paragraph saying that the Coast Guard may require a replacement of a
third-party auditor.
Deleted requirements for certain vessels to carry automatic external defibrillators
and train crewmembers in their use.
Eliminated § 140.520 requirements for maintaining personnel hazard exposure
and medical records and revised § 140.505 requirement to keep records of
health and safety incidents, including any medical records associated with the
incidents.
Clarified requirements associated with stability letter are only applicable to vessels that already have a stability letter, added paragraph requiring all owners or
operators to maintain watertight integrity and stability.
Added paragraph accepting credentialed mariners as meeting the requirements of
this section.
Added examinations and tests, and fire-detection and fixed fire-extinguishing systems to the list of items that must be recorded in the TVR, and specified requirements for items recorded electronically.
Changes to Table 141.305: Removed buoyant apparatus and life float references
in cold water operation; removed life float and inflatable buoyant apparatus references in warm water operation; moved inflatable liferaft with SOLAS A pack
to bottom of both cold and warm water operation to delineate increasing level
of safety hierarchy; and inserted the term ‘‘rigid’’ in front of buoyant apparatus
so as not to confuse with inflatable buoyant apparatus. Added additional substitution options for survival craft in § 141.305(d)(2)(ii)–(iv) based on increasing
level of safety hierarchy of same.
Removed reference to Table 141.305 and limitations on approval of survival craft
starting in 2015, added the option of using a skiff for towing vessels that only
operate within 3 miles of shore, rephrased section.
Replaced reference to 46 CFR 199.620(c) with a reference to several approval
series, specified and rephrased requirements for lifejackets in TSMS.
Replaced reference to 46 CFR 199.70 with a reference to several approval series, specified and rephrased requirements for lifebuoys in TSMS.
Rephrased for clarity, added paragraph allowing approval by the Coast Guard,
OCMI, TPO, or a NRTL of new installations of fire-extinguishing or fire-detection equipment.
Rephrased for clarity, added FM 6050 as an acceptable standard for storage cabinet design.
Delayed implementation of part 143 requirements for existing vessels, consolidated applicability and grandfathering requirements from other subparts into
one section.
Rephrased for clarity, added requirements for alarms at operating stations, removed language describing possible exceptions.
Renamed, deleted requirements for propulsion engine fuel lines and independent
auxiliary steering systems.
Added possible standards for an existing vessel without a stability document to
meet.
No change—clarifies who
receives reports.
No change—adds compliance flexibility.
No change—clarifies who
receives reports and
assures availability of
personnel.
No change—adds compliance flexibility.
No change—adds compliance flexibility.
Removed costs of AEDs.
Greatly reduced costs for
keeping records on
crewmember health by
limiting them to those
associated with incidents, added costs for
records of safety incidents.
Revised costs to include
alternative methods of
compliance.
No change—adds compliance flexibility.
Revised costs for TVR.
No change—improves
readability and referencing; substitution allowance provides compliance flexibility.
No change—adds compliance flexibility.
No change—adds compliance flexibility.
No change—adds compliance flexibility.
No change—adds compliance flexibility.
No change—adds compliance flexibility.
Removed certain costs for
existing vessels, delays
other costs.
Added costs for alarms at
additional operating stations.
Removed costs for existing
vessels.
Revised costs to include
alternative methods of
compliance.
TABLE 5—CHANGES IN REGULATORY ANALYSIS FROM NPRM TO FINAL RULE
Element of regulatory analysis
Reason changed
Explanation of change
Credentialing requirements under
part 15.
Public comment .............................
Added cost estimate for requirements in part 15 that are triggered
when vessel becomes ‘‘inspected’’. 10-year undiscounted estimated at $2.8 million.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
40085
TABLE 5—CHANGES IN REGULATORY ANALYSIS FROM NPRM TO FINAL RULE—Continued
Element of regulatory analysis
Reason changed
Explanation of change
Parts 141 Lifesaving and 142 Fire
Protection.
Public comment .............................
Part 136 Certification and Part 137
Vessel Compliance.
Part 140 Operations ........................
Policy change ................................
Added cost estimates for requirements in Parts. 10-year
undiscounted estimated at $27.8 million for Part 141 and $7.0 million for Part 142.
Added cost estimates for appeals.
Machinery and electrical systems
equipment under part 143.
Policy change ................................
Construction
and
under part 144.
arrangement
Policy change ................................
Affected population .........................
Update to reflect current fleet composition and more comprehensive data sources.
Update to reflect current prices .....
Public comment .............................
Costs of equipment or activities ......
Wages .............................................
Benefit valuation ..............................
Accident analysis ............................
Impacts of Rule Requirements on
Cost to Shippers.
Public comment .............................
Updated BLS data .........................
Updated value of a statistical life
(VSL) and injuries values.
Updated data from recent years ...
Public comment .............................
Affected Population
We estimate that 1,086 owners and
managing operators (companies) would
incur additional costs from this
rulemaking. The rulemaking would
affect a total of 5,509 vessels owned and
operated by these companies. Our cost
assessment includes existing and new
vessels.
Costs
We estimated costs resulting from the
addition of subchapter M and costs in
Added costs for certain operational requirements, including navigation
assessments.
Grandfathering of existing vessels or vessels whose construction
began before the effective date of the final rule for §§ 143.555,
143.560, 143.565, 143.570, 143.575, 143.585, 143.605. 10-year
undiscounted estimated cost is $41.4 million in the final rule and
could exceed $300 million if not grandfathered (see Alternative 3).
Grandfathering of existing vessels or vessels whose construction
began before the effective date of the final rule for §§ 144.135 and
144.145(b). 10-year undiscounted estimated cost is $5.4 million in
the final rule.
Reviewed current data sources on towing vessel fleet and ownership
and increased affected population estimate to 5,509 (from 5,208 in
the NPRM).
Collected current price data or updated prices used in NPRM by CPI.
Incorporated public estimates for drydock inspections in the range of
costs. Added estimate for lost revenues during certain activities.
Revised labor cost by using May 2013 BLS data.
Updated VSL and injury valuation to reflect current guidance.
Reflected most recent 12 years of accident history (2002 to 2013).
Added assessment of cost to shippers in Appendix J.
other subchapters that result from the
inclusion of towing vessels as inspected
vessels, to industry and government.
During the initial phase-in period (years
1 and 2), we estimate the annual cost to
industry from subchapter M
requirements of the rulemaking to range
from $15.8 million to $26.5 million
(non-discounted). After the initial
phase-in, the annual costs to industry
from subchapter M requirements range
from $19.2 million to $56.4 million
(non-discounted). We estimate the total
present value cost to industry from
subchapter M requirements over the 10year period of analysis is $227.7
million, discounted at 7 percent, and
$286.8 million, discounted at 3 percent.
Over the period of analysis, we estimate
the annualized costs to be $32.4 million
at 7 percent and $33.6 million at 3
percent. Table 6 summarizes the costs of
this final rule to industry for subchapter
M requirements.
TABLE 6—SUMMARY OF SUBCHAPTER M COSTS TO INDUSTRY
[$ Millions]
Discounted
Year
Undiscounted
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
7%
3%
1 ...................................................................................................................................................
2 ...................................................................................................................................................
3 ...................................................................................................................................................
4 ...................................................................................................................................................
5 ...................................................................................................................................................
6 ...................................................................................................................................................
7 ...................................................................................................................................................
8 ...................................................................................................................................................
9 ...................................................................................................................................................
10 .................................................................................................................................................
$26.5
15.8
19.2
22.6
33.0
35.7
44.5
56.4
46.0
45.8
$24.8
13.8
15.7
17.2
23.6
23.8
27.7
32.8
25.0
23.3
$25.7
14.9
17.6
20.1
28.5
29.9
36.2
44.5
35.3
34.1
Total * ....................................................................................................................................
Annualized ...................................................................................................................................
345.6
227.7
32.4
286.8
33.6
* Values may not total due to rounding.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40086
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
‘‘inspected’’. We estimate the total
present value cost of the industry nonsubchapter M requirements over the 10year period of analysis to be $1.9
million, discounted at 7 percent, and
$2.4 million, discounted at 3 percent.
Additional costs to industry for
requirements outside of subchapter M
will result from the triggering of
certification for persons in charge
during oil transfer requirements by
designating towing vessels as
Over the period of analysis, we estimate
the annualized industry costs for
requirements outside of subchapter M to
be $0.3 million at 7 percent and 3
percent. Table 7 summarizes the costs of
this final rule to industry.
TABLE 7—SUMMARY OF COST TO INDUSTRY FOR REQUIREMENTS OUTSIDE OF SUBCHAPTER M
[$ Millions]
Discounted
Year
Undiscounted
7%
3%
1 ...................................................................................................................................................
2 ...................................................................................................................................................
3 ...................................................................................................................................................
4 ...................................................................................................................................................
5 ...................................................................................................................................................
6 ...................................................................................................................................................
7 ...................................................................................................................................................
8 ...................................................................................................................................................
9 ...................................................................................................................................................
10 .................................................................................................................................................
$0.0
0.0
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.0
0.4
0.4
0.4
$0.0
0.0
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.0
0.3
0.2
0.2
$0.0
0.0
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.0
0.3
0.3
0.3
Total * ....................................................................................................................................
Annualized ...................................................................................................................................
2.8
1.9
0.3
2.4
0.3
* Values may not total due to rounding
We estimate the total cost to industry
over the 10-year period of analysis to be
$229.6 million, discounted at 7 percent,
and $289.1 million, discounted at 3
percent. Over the period of analysis, we
estimate the annualized costs to
industry to be $32.7 million at 7 percent
and $33.9 million at 3 percent. Table 8
shows these estimates.
TABLE 8—SUMMARY OF TOTAL COST TO INDUSTRY
[$ Millions]
Discounted
Year
Undiscounted
7%
3%
1 ...................................................................................................................................................
2 ...................................................................................................................................................
3 ...................................................................................................................................................
4 ...................................................................................................................................................
5 ...................................................................................................................................................
6 ...................................................................................................................................................
7 ...................................................................................................................................................
8 ...................................................................................................................................................
9 ...................................................................................................................................................
10 .................................................................................................................................................
$26.5
15.8
19.7
23.0
33.4
36.1
44.5
56.8
46.4
46.2
$24.8
13.8
16.1
17.5
23.8
24.0
27.7
33.1
25.3
23.5
$25.7
14.9
18.0
20.4
28.8
30.2
36.2
44.8
35.6
34.4
Total * ....................................................................................................................................
Annualized ...................................................................................................................................
348.4
229.6
32.7
289.1
33.9
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
* Values may not total due to rounding
We anticipate that the government
will incur costs. For towing vessels that
choose to comply with annual Coast
Guard inspections, the government will
incur costs to conduct those
inspections. For other vessels choosing
the TSMS option to comply, the
government will incur costs to review
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
applications for a TSMS, conduct
random boardings and compliance
examinations, and oversee third parties.
Table 9A displays the full cost to the
government. We estimate the total
present value full cost to government
over the 10-year period of analysis to be
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
$85.6 million discounted at 7 percent
and $110.6 million discounted at 3
percent. Annualized full costs to
government are about $12.2 million at 7
percent and $13.0 million at 3 percent
discount rates.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40087
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 9A—SUMMARY OF FULL COST TO GOVERNMENT
[$ Millions]
Discounted
Year
Undiscounted
7%
3%
1 ...................................................................................................................................................
2 ...................................................................................................................................................
3 ...................................................................................................................................................
4 ...................................................................................................................................................
5 ...................................................................................................................................................
6 ...................................................................................................................................................
7 ...................................................................................................................................................
8 ...................................................................................................................................................
9 ...................................................................................................................................................
10 .................................................................................................................................................
$0.1
0.1
9.5
12.5
15.4
17.2
20.7
20.5
20.0
19.7
$0.1
0.1
7.7
9.5
11.0
11.4
12.9
11.9
10.9
10.0
$0.1
0.1
8.7
11.1
13.3
14.4
16.8
16.1
15.3
14.7
Total ......................................................................................................................................
Annualized ...................................................................................................................................
135.6
85.6
12.2
110.6
13.0
The user fee paid by towing vessel
owners and operators for obtaining the
COI is a transfer from industry to the
government. To avoid double-counting
of costs, we account for this transfer by
subtracting the amount of the user fee to
be collected from the government costs
to calculate government costs net of the
transfer. Table 9B shows the amount of
the user fees to be collected over the 10year analysis period.
TABLE 9B—TRANSFER: UNDISCOUNTED USER FEES TO BE COLLECTED BY THE GOVERNMENT IN PART 136 BY YEAR
[$ million]
Total
number of
user fees
collected
Year
1 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
2 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
3 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
4 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
5 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
6 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
7 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
8 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
9 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
10 .............................................................................................................................................................................
Total ..................................................................................................................................................................
Total annual
user fees
transferred
to govt. *
($ million)
0
0
1,604
3,150
4,352
5,509
5,509
5,509
5,509
5,509
$0.000
0.000
1.652
3.245
4.483
5.674
5.674
5.674
5.674
5.674
37.751
* The total annual user fees are calculated by multiplying the total number of user fees collected by the user fee, $1,030.
We estimate the total present value
cost to government net of the transfer
via user fee over the 10-year period of
analysis to be $61.6 million discounted
at 7 percent and $79.5 million
discounted at 3 percent. Annualized net
government costs are about $8.8 million
at 7 percent and $9.3 million at 3
percent discount rates. Table 9C
summarizes the net costs of this rule to
government after deducting the user fee
transfer.
TABLE 9C—SUMMARY OF GOVERNMENT COST NET OF TRANSFER PAYMENT
[$ Millions]
Discounted
Year
Undiscounted
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
7%
1 ...................................................................................................................................................
2 ...................................................................................................................................................
3 ...................................................................................................................................................
4 ...................................................................................................................................................
5 ...................................................................................................................................................
6 ...................................................................................................................................................
7 ...................................................................................................................................................
8 ...................................................................................................................................................
9 ...................................................................................................................................................
10 .................................................................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
$0.1
0.1
7.8
9.2
10.9
11.4
14.9
14.7
14.2
14.0
20JNR2
3%
$0.1
0.1
6.3
7.0
7.8
7.6
9.3
8.6
7.7
7.1
$0.1
0.1
7.1
8.2
9.4
9.6
12.1
11.6
10.9
10.4
40088
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 9C—SUMMARY OF GOVERNMENT COST NET OF TRANSFER PAYMENT—Continued
[$ Millions]
Discounted
Year
Undiscounted
7%
Total * ....................................................................................................................................
Annualized ...................................................................................................................................
97.3
3%
61.6
8.8
79.5
9.3
* Values may not total due to rounding
We estimate the combined total 10year present value cost of the
rulemaking to industry and government
is $291.2 million discounted at 7
percent, and $368.6 million discounted
at 3 percent. The annualized costs are
$41.5 million at 7 percent and $43.2
million at 3 percent.
Table 10 summarizes the total
combined costs of this rule.
TABLE 10—SUMMARY OF TOTAL COST (SUBCHAPTER M AND NON-SUBCHAPTER M INDUSTRY COSTS, NET GOVERNMENT
COSTS)
[$ Millions]
Discounted
Year
Undiscounted
7%
1 ...................................................................................................................................................
2 ...................................................................................................................................................
3 ...................................................................................................................................................
4 ...................................................................................................................................................
5 ...................................................................................................................................................
6 ...................................................................................................................................................
7 ...................................................................................................................................................
8 ...................................................................................................................................................
9 ...................................................................................................................................................
10 .................................................................................................................................................
Total * ....................................................................................................................................
Annualized ...................................................................................................................................
$26.6
15.9
27.5
32.2
44.3
47.5
59.5
71.5
60.6
60.2
445.8
3%
$24.9
13.8
22.4
24.5
31.6
31.7
37.0
41.6
33.0
30.6
291.2
41.5
$25.8
14.9
25.1
28.6
38.2
39.8
48.4
56.4
46.5
44.8
368.6
43.2
* Values may not total due to rounding
Economic Impacts of Towing Vessel
TABLE 11—SUMMARY OF TOTAL
ANNUALIZED COST BY PART—Con- Casualties
tinued
Towing vessel casualties are incidents
Table 11 summarizes the total
combined costs of this rule by part.
TABLE 11—SUMMARY OF TOTAL
ANNUALIZED COST BY PART
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Part
Annualized costs
(7%, millions)
Costs to Industry
136: Certification ...........
137: Compliance ...........
138: Towing Safety
Management System
139: Third-Party Organizations .......................
140: Operations ............
141: Lifesaving ..............
142: Firefighting ............
143: Mechanical and
Electrical ....................
144: Construction and
Arrangement ..............
$3.4
10.8
2.0
0.04
7.3
3.2
0.8
4.0
0.6
Total Subchapter M
Costs * .......................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:30 Jun 17, 2016
32.4
Jkt 238001
(i.e., accidents) that involve the towing
vessel and possibly other vessels such
as barges, other commercial vessels, and
recreational vessels. Towing vessel
Non-Subchapter M
Costs .........................
0.3 accidents can cause a variety of negative
Total to Industry * ..........
32.7 economic impacts, including loss of life,
Net Government Costs
8.8 injuries, property damage, delays on
Total Rule Cost * ...........
41.5 transportation infrastructure, and
damage to the environment.
* Values may not total due to rounding
Based on Coast Guard Marine
The total, 10-year undiscounted costs Information for Safety and Law
of statutory mandate requirements are as Enforcement (MISLE) data for the recent
follows:
period of 2002–2013, towing vessel
• $38.1 million for the annual vessel
accidents are associated with 18
inspection fees under 46 CFR 2.10–101, fatalities per year. Towing vessel
Table 2.10–101 for vessels requiring a
accidents also result in an average of 37
certification of inspection.
reportable injuries per year (for the
• $2.8 million for credentialing
period of 2002–2013). Table 12
requirements outside of subchapter M
summarizes some of the negative
that are triggered when a vessel becomes impacts resulting from towing vessel
‘‘inspected’’.
accidents.
Part
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4701
Annualized costs
(7%, millions)
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
40089
TABLE 12—NEGATIVE IMPACTS FROM TOWING VESSEL ACCIDENTS
[2002–2013]
Average
per year
Average monetary
damage per
year
(in millions)
Impact
Total effects
Total monetary damages (in millions)
Fatalities (See Note 1) ...............................
Injuries ........................................................
Property Damage (See Note 2) .................
Gallons of Oil Spilled .................................
217 ............................................................
443 ............................................................
603 incidents with property damage .........
5,192,937 gallons of oil spilled .................
$1,974.700 ..............
$300.145 .................
$600.055 .................
$408.251 (See Note
3).
18
37
50
432,745
$164.558
25.012
50.005
34.021
Total Damage .....................................
....................................................................
$3,283.151 ..............
........................
273.596
Notes: (1) Fatality values are based on a $9.1 million value of a statistical life referenced in Guidance on Treatment of the Economic Value of
a Statistical Life in U.S. Department of Transportation Analyses, US DOT, 2013, available at https://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.dev/files/docs/
VSL%20Guidance%202013.pdf.
(2) Property damage includes property and cargo damages as reported in MISLE.
(3) Oil spilled damages are based on a $254 damage per gallon of oil spilled as indicated by Inspection of Towing Vessels, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Preliminary Regulatory Analysis and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, USCG–2006–24412, July 2011, available at https://
www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=USCG-2006-24412-0002 adjusted for actual costs for certain high volume gallons of oil spilled gallons
of oil spilled spills reported to the National Pollution Funds Center.
Benefits of the Towing Vessel Final Rule
The Coast Guard developed the
requirements in the rule by researching
both the human factors and equipment
failures that contribute to the risk of
towing vessel accidents. We believe that
the rule would comprehensively
address a wide range of risks of towing
vessel accidents and supports the main
goal of improving safety in the towing
industry. The primary benefit of the
final rule is an increase in vessel safety
and a resulting decrease in the risk of
towing vessel accidents and their
consequences.
Based on Coast Guard investigation
findings for towing vessel accident cases
from 2002–2013, we estimate that the
final rule would lead to significant
reductions in fatalities, injuries,
property damaged, and oil spilled.
These improvements in safety are
expected to occur over a 10-year period
as the various provisions of the final
rule are phased-in. Accounting for this
phase-in of requirements and resulting
benefits, we estimate total 10-year
discounted benefits at $325.6 million
discounted at 7 percent and $403.8
million discounted at 3 percent. Over
the same period of analysis, we estimate
annualized benefits of the final rule to
be $46.4 million at a 7 percent discount
rate and about $47.3 million at a 3
percent discount rate, respectively.
Table 13 displays the monetized
benefits of this final rule associated with
reducing fatalities, injuries, property
damage, and oil spilled, resulting from
towing vessel accidents.
TABLE 13—TOTAL BENEFITS
[$ Millions] *
Total
Year
Undiscounted
benefits
Discounted benefits
7%
3%
$26.2
26.2
50.8
52.0
53.2
54.4
54.4
54.4
54.4
54.4
$24.5
22.9
41.4
39.7
37.9
36.3
33.9
31.7
29.6
27.7
$25.4
24.7
46.5
46.2
45.9
45.6
44.3
43.0
41.7
40.5
Total ......................................................................................................................................
Annualized ...................................................................................................................................
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
1 ...................................................................................................................................................
2 ...................................................................................................................................................
3 ...................................................................................................................................................
4 ...................................................................................................................................................
5 ...................................................................................................................................................
6 ...................................................................................................................................................
7 ...................................................................................................................................................
8 ...................................................................................................................................................
9 ...................................................................................................................................................
10 .................................................................................................................................................
480.6
325.6
46.4
403.8
47.3
* Values may not total due to rounding.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:30 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40090
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Table 14 displays the annualized
benefits broken out by Part. Part 140
accounts for the largest share of the
benefits at $17.1 million annualized at
a 7 percent discount rate.
TABLE 14—TOTAL ANNUALIZED
BENEFITS BY PART
[$ millions] *
Annualized
quantified
benefits
Part
7%
136–138 ................................
139 ........................................
140 ........................................
141 ........................................
142 ........................................
143 ........................................
144 ........................................
$3.1
1.1
17.1
4.4
1.2
11.1
8.3
Total Rule Benefits ........
46.4
* Values may not total due to rounding.
Unquantified Benefits
These estimates do not include the
value of benefits that we have not
quantified, including preventing delays
and congestion due to towing vessel
accidents. We are unable to monetize
the value of preventing other
consequences of towing vessel
accidents, including delays and
congestion, due to a lack of data and
information. However, as discussed in
the Regulatory Analysis available in the
docket, the potential value of other
benefits could be substantial if towing
vessel accidents cause long waterway,
bridge, or road closures. For large
accidents that result in long delays, the
economic consequences may include
the following:
• Productivity losses and operating
costs for stalled barge and other traffic;
• Delays in the acquisition of
production inputs that can impact
timely operation of manufacturing or
other processes;
• Blockages of U.S. exports that can
result in decreased revenue from
importing foreign companies;
• Loss of quality for industries
dealing with time sensitive products or
products with a limited shelf life, such
as commercial fishing seafood
processors, seafood dealers, or other
food processors and manufacturers; and
• Reduced recreational opportunities,
resulting in social welfare losses.
To estimate the amount of delay
caused by towing vessel incidents, we
examined the 20 most severe recorded
towing vessel incidents from MISLE and
sample cases for these other
consequences and quantified their
effects. Of the 20 incidents we were able
to use archived journal sources and
Coast Guard incident reports to estimate
number of vessels subject to a delay and
total hours of delay for 13 incidents.
Based on our analysis detailed in the
Regulatory Analysis, these 13 incidents
resulted in 28,883 vessel hours of delay.
If we apply a low end estimate of the
costs to operate a towing vessel per
hour, the delay costs for these 13
incidents at least exceeded $10 million.
However, we do not have sufficient
information to scale up these examples
to a nationwide estimate.
In addition, the evaluation of
potential benefits from reducing the risk
of accidents is dependent upon the
amount of information and findings in
the report of the incident found in
MISLE. The benefit estimates do not
include accidents for which there was a
lack of detailed information in the case
report to make a risk reduction
determination, resulting in an
underestimation of benefits. Lack of
data in the cases of the low and medium
severity incidents, implies that our
benefits are underestimated.
Comparison of Costs to Benefits
The estimate for the total costs of the
rule is $41.5 million (annualized at a 7
percent discount rate). The estimate for
monetized benefits is $46.4 million
(annualized at a 7 percent discount
rate), based on the mitigation of risks
from towing vessel accidents in terms of
lives lost, injuries, oil spilled, and
property damage. Subtracting the
monetized costs from the monetized
benefits yields a net benefit of $4.9
million. We also identified, but did not
monetize, other benefits from reducing
the risk of accidents that have secondary
consequences of delays and congestions
on waterways, highways, and railroads.
As shown in Table 15 below, by part,
the operational requirements in part 140
have the highest net benefits at $9.8
million. Parts 139 and 141 through 144
also have positive net benefits. Parts 136
through 138 have negative net benefits
of ¥$13.2 million. Parts 136 through
138 contain the requirements for
inspection, obtaining COIs, and TSMSs.
These activities facilitate the
enforcement of the requirements in the
other parts, so it is difficult to separate
benefits solely for the activities in Parts
136 through 138.
TABLE 15—COMPARISON OF BENEFITS AND COSTS BY PART ANNUALIZED, 7 PERCENT
[$ millions]
Part
Description
Costs
Benefits
Net benefits
Costs to Industry
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
136–138 ..........................................................
139 ..................................................................
140 ..................................................................
141 ..................................................................
142 ..................................................................
143 ..................................................................
144 ..................................................................
Non-subchapter M Costs ................................
Government Cost ............................................
Certification, Inspection, TSMS ......................
TPOs ..............................................................
Operations ......................................................
Lifesaving .......................................................
Fire Prevention ...............................................
Mechanical and Electrical ..............................
Construction and Arrangements ....................
.........................................................................
.........................................................................
$16.3
0.04
7.3
3.2
0.8
4.0
0.6
0.3
8.8
$3.1
1.1
17.1
4.4
1.2
11.1
8.3
* NQ
* NQ
($13.2)
1.1
9.8
1.2
0.4
7.1
7.7
* NQ
* NQ
Total Combined Cost of Final Rule .........
.........................................................................
41.5
46.4
4.9
* NQ = Not quantified
Totals may not add due to rounding.
Overall, the regulatory analysis
indicates that the preferred alternative
provides owners and managing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
operators of towing vessels the ability to
customize compliance to their
individual business models, move the
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
industry into inspected status, and
improve safety.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Alternatives
At all stages of this rulemaking,
including the development of the
NPRM, review of public comments, and
the preparation of this final rule, we
considered numerous alternatives to the
rule requirements. During this process,
we weighed the burden posed by a
requirement or group of requirements
against baseline risk and potential risk
reduction with the goal of improving
safety of crew and public, and
enhancing environmental protection,
while minimizing the cost burden on
industry and government. We have
quantified the costs and benefits for
three alternatives that are illustrative of
the types and range of the many
alternatives that considered throughout
the rulemaking process. The alternatives
explored include the following:
• Alternative 1: Limits the regulatory
requirements to only the minimum
required to meet the statutory
requirements of inspecting towing
vessels. Parts 136 to 139 are retained,
related to conducting inspections,
issuing COIs, using TSMS’s and
overseeing third parties. All operational,
fire and safety, equipment and design
requirements are removed.
• Alternative 2: Delays the
operational requirements (Part 140)
40091
from becoming effective in Year 3 of the
rule (after the 2-year implementation
period) to after the first round of initial
inspections and issuance of COIs is
complete (Year 6).
• Alternative 3: Does not
‘‘grandfather’’ existing vessels for
certain requirements in part 143 (i.e.,
these requirements would apply to both
new and existing vessels).
Alternatives 1–3 have net costs,
compared to net benefits under the
preferred alternative. A summary of the
costs and benefits of the alternatives are
presented in Table 16.
TABLE 16—SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES
[$ millions, 7% discount rate]
Annualized
cost
Alternative
Summary
Preferred Alternative: Final rule ..
Alternative 1: Parts 136–139: Inspection/TSMS only.
Alternative 2: Delayed Implementation of part 140.
Alternative 3: No grandfathering
of certain equipment and design requirements in part 143.
Full implementation of parts 136–144 ...................
Full implementation of parts 136–139. Removes
all other requirements.
Full implementation of parts 136–139, parts 141–
144. Delayed implementation of part 140.
Full implementation of parts 136–142. No
grandfathering of certain requirements in Part
143.
Annualized
benefits
Net benefits or net
costs *
$41.5
$25.4
$46.4
$4.2
$4.9 net benefits.
($21.2) net costs.
$38.2
$21.1
($17.1) net costs.
$82.3
$55.9
($26.5) net costs.
* Net benefits do not include unquantified congestion and delay benefits.
Totals may not add due to rounding.
The RA available in the docket
includes an analysis of the costs of this
rulemaking by requirement and
provides an assessment of potential
monetized, quantified and nonquantified benefits of this rulemaking.
The RA also contains details and
analysis of other alternatives considered
for this rulemaking.
B. Small Entities
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Overview of the Final Regulatory
Flexibility Act Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub.
L. 96–354)(RFA) establishes ‘‘as a
principle of regulatory issuance that
agencies shall endeavor, consistent with
the objectives of the rule and of
applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and
informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and
governmental jurisdictions subject to
regulation. To achieve this principle,
agencies are required to solicit and
consider flexible regulatory proposals
and to explain the rationale for their
actions to assure that such proposals are
given serious consideration.’’
The RFA and Executive Order 13272
require a review of proposed and final
rules to assess their impacts on small
entities. An agency must prepare an
initial regulatory flexibility analysis
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
(IRFA) unless it determines and certifies
that a rule, if promulgated, would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
During the NPRM stage, the Coast Guard
published an IRFA to aid the public in
commenting on the potential small
entity impacts of the provisions in the
NPRM. All interested parties were
invited to submit data and information
regarding the potential economic impact
that would result from adoption of the
proposals in the NPRM.
When an agency promulgates a final
rule under 5 U.S.C. 553, after being
required by that section or any other law
to publish a general NPRM, or
promulgates a final interpretative rule
involving the internal revenue laws of
the United States as described in 5
U.S.C. 603(a), the agency must prepare
a final regulatory flexibility assessment
(FRFA) or have the head of the agency
certify pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that
the rule will not, if promulgated, have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The RFA also requires an agency to
conduct a FRFA unless it determines
and certifies that a rule is not expected
to have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities.
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
The Coast Guard did not certify that
the final rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. We received
comments and data from several
commenters on the IRFA, and that
information was considered for the
FRFA. The RFA prescribes the content
of the FRFA in section 604(a), which we
discuss below.
In accordance with the RFA (5 U.S.C.
601–612), the Coast Guard prepared the
FRFA in the Regulatory Analysis
document that examines the impacts of
the final rule on small entities (5 U.S.C.
601, et seq.). A small entity may be:
• A small independent business,
defined as any independently owned
and operated business not dominant in
its field that qualifies as a small
business per the Small Business Act (5
U.S.C. 632);
• A small not-for-profit organization;
and;
• A small governmental jurisdiction
(locality with fewer than 50,000 people).
This FRFA addresses the following:
(1) A statement of the need for, and
objectives of, the rule;
(2) A statement of the significant
issues raised by the public comments in
response to the IRFA, a statement of the
assessment of the agency of such issues,
and a statement of any changes made in
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40092
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
the proposed rule as a result of such
comments;
(3) The response of the agency to any
comments filed by the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration (SBA) in response to the
proposed rule, and a detailed statement
of any change made to the proposed rule
in the final rule as a result of the
comments;
(4) A description of and an estimate
of the number of small entities to which
the rule will apply or an explanation of
why no such estimate is available;
(5) A description of the projected
reporting, recordkeeping and other
compliance requirements of the rule,
including an estimate of the classes of
small entities which will be subject to
the requirement and the type of
professional skills necessary for
preparation of the report or record;
(6) A description of the steps the
agency has taken to minimize the
significant economic impact on small
entities consistent with the stated
objectives of applicable statutes,
including a statement of the factual,
policy, and legal reasons for selecting
the alternative adopted in the final rule
and why each one of the other
significant alternatives to the rule
considered by the agency which affect
the impact on small entities was
rejected.
Below is a discussion of the FRFA for
each of these six elements:
(1) A statement of the need for, and
objectives of, the rule
The need for Federal regulatory action
is due to the risk of potential accidents
caused by towing vessels on the nation’s
maritime system. The consequences of
towing vessel accidents can be severe,
including fatalities; injuries; damage to
property, infrastructure and the
environment; and closure of
transportation assets and subsequent
delays. There is also a public demand
for improvements in the management of
the nation’s waterways.
The casualties resulting from towing
vessel accidents are examples of
negative externalities that are relevant to
this final rule. The cost of a higher
safety standard is borne by the towing
vessel owner or operator, while the cost
of an accident could be distributed
across various entities, including the
vessel owner or operator, crew, other
vessel owners or operators, federal,
state, and local public service providers,
businesses, and private citizens. The
material failure of the private market in
reaching the socially optimal outcome
increases the risk to the public. An
uncompensated increase in risk
currently exists due to inconsistent
safety practices in the marine towing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
industry. Regulatory action is required
to take steps to reduce risk industrywide and thereby obtain the socially
optimal outcome.
This final rule is authorized and made
necessary by the 2004 Act, which made
towing vessels subject to inspection.
Further, the 2010 Act authorized the
Secretary to issue a rule containing
towing safety management system
provisions promulgated under 46 U.S.C.
3306(j).
The objective of this regulatory action
is to enhance the safe operations of
towing vessels on our nation’s
waterways. The final rule seeks to fulfill
this objective by including towing
vessels on the list of vessels that Coast
Guard must inspect, improving the
working environment of towing vessel
crews, and placing responsibility for the
safe operation of towing vessels on the
owners or operators of the vessels. The
requirements of the final rule are
designed to encourage companies to
engage at every level to improve safe
operations, maintenance and design and
adhere to prescribed safety standards.
(2) A statement of the significant
issues raised by the public comments in
response to the initial regulatory
flexibility analysis, a statement of the
assessment of the agency of such issues,
and a statement of any changes made in
the proposed rule as a result of such
comments
On August 11, 2011, the Coast Guard
published an NPRM titled ‘‘Inspection
of Towing Vessels’’ in the Federal
Register (76 FR 49976). The Coast Guard
then held four public meetings, one
each in Newport News, VA; New
Orleans, LA; St. Louis, MO; and Seattle,
WA. We received and considered a
combined total of more than 3,000
comments, from more than 265 written
submissions and oral statements from
105 persons at public meetings, in
developing this final rule. We
summarized these comments in the
‘‘Discussion of Comments and Changes’’
section of the preamble for the final
rule.
We received several comments from
small business owners and operators on
the economic impact of subchapter M
regulations. Some commenters were
opposed to new regulations and did not
provide specific information or data on
how they will be impacted by its
requirements. Many other commenters
requested either exemption or
grandfathering from all or some of these
regulations. These commenters wanted
to completely avoid or mitigate the
impact of the regulations so they could
continue to serve the towing vessel
industry. Below is a discussion of
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
comments received on small business
impacts.
Some commenters felt that subchapter
M requirements would hurt small
business owners and their employees,
and could put many small entities out
of business. However, they did not
provide specific data on how much of
a burden the requirements might be on
their operational costs. The most
specific comment received noted that
recordkeeping proposals alone would
require him to hire one or more new full
time workers. Some other commenters
pointed to the overall costs of
subchapter M regulations that were
previously put in a range of $100,000 to
$250,000, per vessel, and potentially
several million dollars per company for
business entities that owned multiple
towing vessels.
Several other commenters, similar to
the previous group of commenters also
expressed concern that their company
would not be able to pay for these
requirements, and therefore, either be
forced out of business or be acquired by
larger entities in the towing vessel
industry. Due to these costly subchapter
M regulations one commenter argued
that lenders would delay lending and
review existing ship mortgages to
reassess their collateral positions. This
commenter noted that this is because
many small towing vessel owners and
operators could not afford to comply
with the requirements of the
regulations. Another commenter stated
that his company would lose the ability
to borrow against their boats if they
can’t comply with the proposed
regulations. One commenter estimated
that no less than 20 percent of the
aggregate U.S. towing fleet would be put
out of service, if the final rule goes into
effect as written in the NPRM.
The Coast Guard appreciates these
comments on the economic impact of
the final rule on small entities.
Cognizant of regulatory impacts on
small entities, the Coast Guard sought to
minimize these impacts and has
structured the final rule with this end in
mind. The Coast Guard’s efforts to
minimize the cost impacts on small
entities in the final rule include the
following.
• Inspection compliance options: The
Coast Guard has retained from the
proposed rule flexibility in the method
for complying with inspections, either
through Coast Guard inspections or a
TSMS. Some commenters suggested that
a TSMS be mandatory for all towing
owners and operators and their vessels.
However, the Coast Guard has instead
continued to allow either option, so that
small entities can chose the approach
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
that minimizes impacts on their
particular business operations.
• Automatic External Defibrillator
(AED): The Coast Guard has removed
the requirement for towing vessels to
have AEDs to reduce the cost impact of
the final rule. The savings resulting
from this change would be estimated at
$2,500 per unit for each vessel.
• Pilothouse alerters: The Coast
Guard has retained the requirement for
pilothouse alerters, but has limited
applicability to larger towing vessels (in
excess of 65 ft) with potentially higher
risk profiles. To reduce the burden of
this requirement, the Coast Guard has
also allowed for a longer
implementation period. For vessels less
than 65 feet, the savings are the $5,410
cost of the alerter per vessel.
• Equivalence of existing SMSs: For
owners and operators that choose the
TSMS option, the Coast Guard has
sought to minimize additional effort to
develop and implement a TSMS by
establishing a process for granting
equivalency between an existing SMS
and a TSMS. Also, under the final rule,
compliance with ISM is equivalent to a
TSMS. This change has the potential to
minimize efforts for the 51 percent of
the affected population covered by an
existing SMS, but the amount of the
savings has not been quantified.
• Removing certain requirements for
existing vessels: In response to
comments received on the NPRM, the
Coast Guard has removed certain
requirements in parts 143 and 144 for
existing vessels to decrease the cost. In
the NPRM, the Coast Guard estimated
that certain requirements could cost in
the range of $5,000 to $20,000 per
requirement per vessel, at a total of
approximately $60,000 per vessel.
Commenters provided estimates at or
exceeding $100,000 to $150,000 to
retrofit vessels to meet these
requirements.
• Stability documents: The Coast
Guard has changed certain requirements
in part 144 to offer additional methods
for compliance. One commenter
estimated that it could cost tens of
thousands of dollars to have a naval
architect generate stability calculations
under the NPRM proposal. Section
144.300(b) now offers three options for
an existing vessel without a stability
document to meet part 144
requirements: Findings based on the
vessel’s operation or a history of
satisfactory service, successful
performance on operational tests, or a
satisfactory stability assessment. In
particular, allowing for a vessel’s history
of satisfactory service in the final rule
provides a lower cost method for
compliance, which should serve to
reduce the cost on small entities.
(3) The response of the agency to any
comments filed by the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration in response to the
proposed rule, and a detailed statement
of any change made to the proposed
rule in the final rule as a result of the
comments
The Coast Guard did not receive any
comments from the SBA’s Office of
Advocacy regarding the impact that the
proposed rule would have on small
entities.
(4) A description of and an estimate
of the number of small entities to which
the rule will apply or an explanation of
why no such estimate is available
The final rule will affect the owners
and operators of certain towing vessels.
We constructed a towing vessel fleet
database based on data from the
Waterborne Transportation Lines of the
40093
U.S., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; the
Inland River Record, Waterways
Journal; the Coast Guard’s MISLE
system; Web sites and other public
sources. From this database we
identified 5,509 vessels affected by this
rule. There are 1,096 companies that
own or operate these vessels.
We used available operator name and
address information to research public
and proprietary databases for entity type
(subsidiary or parent company), primary
line of business, employee size,
revenue, and other information. We
found 20 vessels owned by 17
governments and 6 owned by nonprofits. The remainder are business
entities. For governmental jurisdictions,
we determined whether the jurisdiction
had populations of less than 50,000 as
per the criteria in the RFA. For
nonprofits, we qualitatively evaluated
whether the nonprofit was
independently owned and operated and
is not dominant in its field. For the
businesses, we matched the owner
information to the SBA’s ‘‘Table of
Small Business Size Standards’’ to
determine if an entity is small in its
primary line of business as classified in
the North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS). Of the
20 vessels owned by 13 governments, 5
are owned by small government
jurisdictions (with fewer than 50,000
people). Of the 6 vessels owned by 3
non-profits, all are owned by non-profits
that are independently operated and not
dominant in their field.
There are a total of 26 NAICS-coded
industries in the final rule’s affected
population and we show below the 11
industries that appeared most frequently
in the affected population of owners or
operators of towing vessels.
TABLE 17—ELEVEN MOST FREQUENT INDUSTRIES AFFECTED BY THE FINAL RULE
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
NAICS
Code
483211
488330
483113
238910
483111
213112
237310
336611
423320
Count of
towing
vessel
entities in
each NAICS
code
Percent of
total
number of
towing
vessel
entities
Description
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
444190 ..
488320 ..
Small entity definition
Inland Water Freight Transportation .............................................
Navigational Services To Shipping ...............................................
Coastal and Great Lakes Freight Transportation .........................
Site Preparation Contractors ........................................................
Deep Sea Freight Transportation .................................................
Support Activities For Oil & Gas Operations ................................
Highway Street & Bridge Construction .........................................
Ship Building & Repairing .............................................................
Brick, Stone/Related Construction Material Merchant Wholesalers.
Other Building Material Dealers ...................................................
Marine Cargo Handling .................................................................
<500 Employees .......................
<$38,500,000 ............................
<500 Employees .......................
<$14,000,000 ............................
<500 Employees .......................
<$35,500,000 ............................
<$33,500,000 ............................
<1,000 Employees ....................
<100 Employees .......................
71
48
42
13
10
5
4
4
4
31.8
21.5
18.8
5.8
4.5
2.2
1.8
1.8
1.8
<$19,000,000 ............................
<$38,500,000 ............................
3
3
1.3
1.3
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40094
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
We randomly selected a sample size
of the 5,509 towing vessels to reach the
95 percent confidence level. This
sample produced a set of 223 businesses
that own and operate the towing vessels.
No governments or non-profits were in
our sample. Of the 223 businesses, there
were 43 companies that exceeded SBA
small business size standards, 113
companies considered small by the
SBA, and 67 companies for which no
information was available. For the
purposes of this analysis, we consider
all entities for which information was
not available to be small. Thus, there are
180 businesses in our sample we
consider to be small entities.
Cost Methodology—Analysis Periods,
Variable Costs, and Fixed Costs
The cost incurred by a particular
small entity over the 10-year period of
analysis varies based on the period of
years in question. For the purposes of
this FRFA, we analyzed the cost impacts
on small entities for a representative
year within two periods, as the phasein period of the initial two years and the
full implementation period from Years 3
through 10 have unique costs. During
the phase-in period, companies will face
initial implementation costs, such as the
TSMS and conducting initial vessel
surveys. Over the following full
implementation period, companies will
face ongoing costs associated with
periodic surveys, vessels will operate
under their COIs and companies will
face ongoing costs associated with
obtaining and renewing COIs, periodic
surveys and audits, drydock
inspections, and Coast Guard
inspections. The scheduling of all these
activities are dependent on a number of
factors, such as the following:
• A vessel operating under the TSMS
option will be subject to management
and vessel audits and the operating
company will need to obtain a TSMS
Certificate.
• Many of the requirements are based
on when a vessel obtains its first COI,
which lasts for five years. The rule
states that vessel owners/operators must
spread out the initial COI over two-tofour years, depending on the size of the
fleet.
• A vessel operating in salt water
must have two drydock inspections in
every 5-year period, while one operating
in fresh water only needs one.
We anticipate that the entities will
manage the compliance activities so that
costs are efficiently managed. For
example, an owner with vessels
operating under the TSMS options
having a fleet of vessels in the upper
Mississippi River may want to have the
Coast Guard inspect all vessels at one
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
time during the winter when that stretch
of the River is closed and the vessels are
idle. As a counter example, and entity
with a fleet in constant operation may
want to spread the Coast Guard
inspections over the five-year period to
minimize disruptions to service. Thus,
there is no one year in the full
implementation period that contains all
the cost elements for all vessels. To
provide a single reference year we
constructed a hypothetical ‘‘heavy load’’
year that contains all the requirements
for a vessel and an entity. This year
includes a COI renewal for a TSMS
vessel, the Coast Guard inspection, and
a drydock inspection and other costs
that apply throughout this period. As
described below, the construct of the
‘‘heavy load year’’ enabled the
comparison of the costs for one year to
revenue for one year.
To conduct the small entity revenue
impact analysis we divided the total
annual costs of an entity for the two
periods into these three components:
vessel annual variable costs, vessel
annual fixed costs, and unit annual
entity costs. Vessel annual variable costs
are those that are dependent upon the
characteristics or condition of the
vessel. Vessel annual fixed costs are
those that apply to all vessels, such as
the requirement to post the COI. Unit
annual entity costs are those that accrue
at the management level of the entity.
The annual costs for an entity are
calculated for the phase-in and full
implementation periods using the
following equations:
Equation 1: Vessel Annual Unit Cost
= Vessel Annual Variable Cost + Vessel
Annual Fixed Cost
Equation 2: Total Annual Vessel Costs
= Vessel Annual Unit Cost (eq. 1) *
number of vessels
Equation 3: Total Entity Costs = Total
Annual Vessel Costs (eq. 2) + Unit
Annual Entity Costs
Vessel annual fixed costs and unit
annual entity costs are derived for the
phase-in and full-implementation
periods from data in the cost model
from the regulatory analysis. The fixed
costs for the phase-in period are the
same in both years. For the fullimplementation period we used the
costs associated with the hypothetical
‘‘heavy load’’ year, described above.
Table 18 shows these costs for the two
periods.
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
TABLE 18—ANNUAL VESSEL FIXED
COSTS AND UNIT ENTITY COSTS
FOR PHASE-IN AND FULL-IMPLEMENTATION PERIODS
Period
Phase-In ...................
Full Implementation ..
Annual
vessel
fixed
cost
Annual
entity
unit
cost
$11,480
5,045
$23,737
5,250
In the regulatory analysis, we used
MISLE deficiency data to estimate the
number of vessels that would need to
make changes to comply with various
system or equipment standards. This
generated population based estimates,
but did not identify the specific vessels
that would incur these compliance
costs.
To estimate vessel variable costs, we
adopted the Monte Carlo methodology
used in the IRFA. We used the Monte
Carlo as a tool to resolve the
uncertainties related to which vessels
will need to comply with which
requirements, each with their own unit
costs and affected populations. The
Monte Carlo model we developed
accounts for the ranges of unit costs and
affected populations across the
requirements by taking as inputs the
specific unit costs and affected
populations for each requirement. The
output of the model is a distribution of
total variable costs.
The Monte Carlo model simulated a
one-year variable costs for the phase-in
and full-implementation periods
separately. The inputs are from the cost
estimates of each requirement: The
affected population recast as a
percentage of the total vessel
population, and the unit costs. Each
simulation was run 10,000 times to
produce a distribution of costs. For a
point estimate of the vessel annual
variable costs we took the average value
of each distribution, which yielded
$4,787 for the phase-in period and
$9,866 for the full implementation
period.
To summarize from the presentations
above, the parameters for the phase-in
period are the following:
Vessel Annual Variable Cost = $4,787
Vessel Annual Fixed Cost = $11,480
Entity Annual UnitCost = $5,045.
Applying Equation 1 from above,
Vessel Annual Unit Cost = $16,267
(Vessel Annual Variable Cost, $4,787, +
Vessel Annual Fixed Cost, $11,480).
The variable inputs are the number of
vessels operated by each entity, which
is found in the Affected Population
Database, and the entity’s revenue.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
We developed an annual revenue
impact analysis for the average company
in our sample. The average number of
vessels per company in our sample is
1.7, so the two-vessel example is
representative of an average company.
We estimate this average two-vessel
owning small entity will incur an
annual cost of $37,579 during the two-
year phase-in period of this rule.
Consequently, the total two-year
implementation cost for the average
small entity is estimated at $75,158. The
average annual revenue across the
sample is $10,058,187. With these
inputs we derived an estimate of the
annual revenue impact for the average
entity in the sample. The results of this
40095
analysis are shown as Example 1 in
Table 19. Examples 2 through 4 show
the calculations for examples of
applying Equations 2 and 3 for three
hypothetical companies, with one-,
three-, and four-vessel fleets,
respectively.
TABLE 19—EXAMPLES OF ANNUAL REVENUE IMPACT CALCULATIONS DURING THE PHASE-IN PERIOD FOR THE AVERAGESIZE FLEET (2 VESSELS) AND HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLES FOR 1-, 3-, AND 4-VESSEL FLEETS
[Revenue for example 2 is sample average, others are hypothetical]
(A) Entity name
(C) Vessel
annual unit
cost
(B) Fleet
size
Example 1 (Average
Entity) .......................
2
(D) Vessel
annual cost
(B * C)
$16,267
(E) Entity
annual unit
cost
$32,534
(F) Total
annual cost
(D + E)
(G) Annual
revenue
(H) Annual
revenue
impact
(F/G)
%
$5,045
$37,579
$10,058,187
0.40
5,045
5,045
5,045
21,312
53,846
70,113
5,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
0.43
0.36
0.35
Hypothetical Examples
Example 2 ....................
Example 3 ....................
Example 4 ....................
1
3
4
16,267
16,267
16,267
For the 92 businesses with revenue
data, we calculated the total costs for
each small entity and a revenue impact
16,267
48,801
65,068
as a percentage of revenue. Table 21
presents the annual revenue impact on
small entities for the phase-in and full
implementation periods.
TABLE 21—PERCENTAGE OF ESTIMATED ANNUAL REVENUE IMPACT ON AFFECTED SMALL ENTITIES
Annual
impacts from phase-in
costs
(average of Years 1–2)
Annual
impacts from
implementation
costs
(‘‘heavy load’’ year)
Revenue impact range
Number of
entities
Percent of
entities
Number of
entities
Percent of
entities
60
19
2
5
6
65.2
20.7
2.2
5.4
6.5
44
27
8
2
11
47.8
29.3
8.7
2.2
12.0
Total ..........................................................................................................
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
0% <= 1% ........................................................................................................
1% <= 3% ........................................................................................................
3% <= 5% ........................................................................................................
5% <= 10% ......................................................................................................
Above 10% ......................................................................................................
92
100.0
92
100.0
During the phase-in period, for the
average cost per year, our analysis
indicates that nearly 65 percent of the
small entities will have an annual
revenue impact of 1% or less.
Approximately 28.3 percent of the small
entities will have an annual revenue
impact of between 3 percent and 10
percent. The remaining 6.5 percent of
the small entities will have an annual
revenue impact of over 10 percent.
After full implementation of
inspections and COIs, we estimate that
47.8 percent of the small entities will
have an annual revenue impact of 1%
or less. Approximately 40.2 percent of
the small entities will have an annual
revenue impact of between 3 percent
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
and 10 percent. The remaining 12.0
percent of the small entities will have
an annual revenue impact of over 10
percent.
(5) A description of the projected
reporting, recordkeeping and other
compliance requirements of the rule,
including an estimate of the classes of
small entities which will be subject to
the requirement and the type of
professional skills necessary for
preparation of the report or record
Under the provisions of the final rule,
5,509 towing vessels owned by 1,096
towing vessel companies will be
required to conduct a variety of
reporting and recordkeeping activities,
related to obtaining and renewing a COI,
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
which will involve compiling
information, submission, and third part
review. Additionally, information will
be collected at the vessel and company
level regarding safety, operations, drills,
record keeping, and general compliance.
These requirements will be added as a
new collection of information with the
OMB control number 1625–0117 with
the title ‘‘Towing Vessels—Title 46 CFR
Subchapter M. Please refer to Chapter
11, ‘‘Paperwork Reduction Act’’, the
Regulatory Analysis for further detail.
(6) A description of the steps the
agency has taken to minimize the
significant economic impact on small
entities consistent with the stated
objectives of applicable statutes,
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40096
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
including a statement of the factual,
policy, and legal reasons for selecting
the alternative adopted in the final rule
and why each one of the other
significant alternatives to the rule
considered by the agency which affect
the impact on small entities was
rejected
Prior to this rulemaking, the Coast
Guard participated in the TSAC
meetings that helped formulate our
proposals in the NPRM. Small entities
had the opportunity to participate in
this Committee and the Economic
Analysis Working Group.
The Coast Guard has made a number
of changes from the proposals in the
NPRM after consideration of public
comments. A full discussion of
comments and Coast Guard responses is
found in the ‘‘Discussion of Comments
and Changes’’ section above. In
developing both the original proposal
and the final rule, the following are
examples of the Coast Guard’s efforts to
minimize the economic impact on small
entities.
Inspection compliance options: The
Coast Guard has retained from the
proposal the choice of method for
complying with inspections, either
through Coast Guard inspections or a
TSMS. Some commenters suggested that
a TSMS be mandatory for all towing
owners and operators and their vessels.
However, the Coast Guard has instead
continued to allow either option, so that
small entities can choose the approach
that minimizes impacts on their
particular business operations.
AED: The Coast Guard has removed
the requirement for towing vessels to
have AEDs to reduce the cost impact of
the final rule.
Pilothouse alerters: The Coast Guard
has retained the requirement for
pilothouse alerters, but has limited
applicability to larger towing vessels (in
excess of 65 ft) with potentially higher
risk profiles. To reduce burden of this
requirement the Coast Guard has also
allowed for a longer implementation
period.
Equivalence of existing SMSs: For
owners and operators that chose the
TSMS option, Coast Guard has sought to
minimize effort to develop and
implement a TSMS by establishing a
process for granting equivalency
between an existing SMS and a TSMS.
Also, under the final rule, compliance
with ISM is equivalent to a TSMS.
Removing certain requirements for
existing vessels: In response to
comments received on the NPRM, the
Coast Guard has removed certain
requirements in parts 143 and 144 for
existing vessels to decrease the cost.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
Stability documents: The Coast Guard
has changed certain requirements in
part 144 to offer additional methods for
compliance. Section 144.300(b) now
offers three options for an existing
vessel without a stability document to
meet part 144 requirements: Findings
based on the vessel’s operation or a
history of satisfactory service, successful
performance on operational tests, or a
satisfactory stability assessment. In
particular, allowing for a vessel’s history
of satisfactory service in the final rule
provides a lower cost method for
compliance, which should serve of
compliance to reduce the cost on small
entities.
The Coast Guard discusses the full
range of alternatives considered in
Section 6 of the RA. We monetized the
impacts of three alternatives. Table 13
above summarizes the costs, benefits
and net benefits of the alternatives
considered and the preferred alternative
adopted in the final rule.
Alternative 1 estimates impacts of
only implementing the inspection
requirements of the final rule, without
the operational, lifesaving, fire
protection, machinery and electrical,
and construction and arrangement
requirements. Although this approach
reduces the cost impacts of the final
rule, the benefits fall by almost 85
percent. The annualized net impact of
the rule (benefits minus costs) falls from
$4.5 million in net benefits for the
preferred alternative to a net cost of
$21.2 million. Requiring only the
inspection requirements without also
increasing the standards in the other
CFR parts fails to meet the objective of
improving towing vessel safety and
decreasing the risk of towing vessel
accidents to a substantive degree. The
Coast Guard developed and chose the
comprehensive approach that combines
an inspection regime with improved
standards as it results in the greater
societal outcomes, as demonstrated by
the net benefits.
Similarly, Alternative 2, which
estimates the impact of delaying
implementation of the operational
standards found in Part 140, also results
in lower annualized net impacts: $4.5
million net benefits for the preferred
alternative and $17.1 million net costs
for Alternative 2. The Coast Guard chose
not to delay implementation of the
operational standards in part 140 as it
results in the greater societal outcomes,
as demonstrated by the net benefits.
Alternative 3 analyzes the impacts of
not removing certain requirements in
parts 143 and 144 (as discussed above).
Alternative 3 has a greater cost burden,
including greater impact on small
entities, than the preferred alternative
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
and results in net costs of $26.4 million.
For these reasons, the Coast Guard has
applied the certain requirements in
parts 143 and 144 to only new vessels
and reduced the burden on small
entities.
We are interested in the potential
impacts from this final rule on small
businesses and we request public
comment on these potential impacts.
C. Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
we want to assist small entities in
understanding this final rule so that
they can better evaluate its effects on
them and participate in the rulemaking.
As noted, we have prepared a Small
Entities Guide for this rule and have
placed in it the docket for this
rulemaking. If the final rule would affect
your small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please consult
LCDR Will Nabach, Project Manager,
CG–OES–2, Coast Guard, telephone
202–372–1386. 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 final rule would call for a
collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520). As defined in 5 CFR
1320.3(c), ‘‘Collection of Information’’
comprises reporting, recordkeeping,
monitoring, posting, labeling, and other,
similar actions. The title and
description of the information
collections, a description of those who
must collect the information, and an
estimate of the total annual burden
follow. The estimate covers the time for
reviewing instructions, searching
existing sources of data, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the
collection.
Title: Towing Vessels—Title 46 CFR
Subchapter M.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Summary of the Collection of
Information: Owners and managing
operators of inspected towing vessels
would be required to either develop and
maintain documentation for their safety
management system and arrange
periodic audits and surveys through
third-party organizations, or to
demonstrate compliance with the
subchapter M to Coast Guard inspectors.
Additional documentation would be
required to obtain a Certificate of
Inspection for each vessel, comply with
crew and vessel operational safety
standards, vessel equipment and system
standards, procedures and schedules for
routine tests and inspections of towing
vessels and their onboard equipment
and systems. The new requirements for
third-party auditors and surveyors
include obtaining Coast Guard approval
and renewing it periodically. The Coast
Guard would be burdened by reviewing
required reports, conducting
compliance examinations of towing
vessels and overseeing third-party
auditors and surveyors through
approval and observation.
Need for Information: The
information is necessary for the proper
administration and enforcement of the
towing vessel inspection program.
Proposed use of Information: The
Coast Guard would use this information
to document that towing vessels meet
inspection requirements of subchapter
M.
Description of the Respondents: The
respondents are the owners and
managing operators of towing vessels
and third-party auditors and surveyors
that would be required to complete
various forms, reports and keep reports.
Number of Respondents: The 5,694
respondents are the owners and
operators of 5,509 affected towing
vessels and 185 entities that employ the
third-party auditors and surveyors.
Frequency of Response: The average
responses per year are 7,660,257.
Estimate of Total Annual Burden: The
total annual burden is 181,669 hours.
As required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3507(d)), we have submitted a copy of
this rule to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for its review of the
collection of information.
You need not respond to a collection
of information unless it displays a
currently valid control number from
OMB. Before the Coast Guard could
enforce the collection of information
requirements in this rule, OMB would
need to approve the Coast Guard’s
request to collect this information.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
40097
E. Federalism
H. Civil Justice Reform
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 is consistent
with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements
described in E.O. 13132. Our analysis is
explained below.
It is well settled that States may not
regulate in categories reserved for
regulation by the Coast Guard. It is also
well settled that all of the categories
covered in 46 U.S.C. 3306, 3703, 7101,
and 8101 (design, construction,
alteration, repair, maintenance,
operation, equipping, personnel
qualification, and manning of vessels),
as well as the reporting of casualties and
any other category in which Congress
intended the Coast Guard to be the sole
source of a vessel’s obligations, are
within the field foreclosed from
regulation by the States. (See the
decision of the Supreme Court in the
consolidated cases of United States v.
Locke and Intertanko v. Locke, 529 U.S.
89, 120 S.Ct. 1135 (March 6, 2000)).
This rule covers all of the foreclosed
categories, as it establishes regulations
covering a new category of inspected
vessels, as mandated by Congress.
Because the States are now foreclosed
from regulating towing vessels in these
categories, the rule is consistent with
the principles of federalism and
preemption requirements in Executive
Order 13132.
This rule meets applicable standards
in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of E.O. 12988
(‘‘Civil Justice Reform’’), to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and
reduce burden.
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, requires
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their discretionary regulatory actions. In
particular, the Act addresses actions
that may result in the expenditure by a
State, local, or tribal government, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Though this rule
will not result in such an expenditure,
we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
G. Taking of Private Property
This rule will not cause a taking of
private property or otherwise have
taking implications under E.O. 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
I. Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under E.O.
13045 (‘‘Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks’’). This rule is not an
economically significant rule and would
not create an environmental risk to
health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.
J. Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications under E.O. 13175
(‘‘Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments’’), because it
would not have a substantial direct
effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.
K. Energy Effects
We have analyzed this rule under E.O.
13211 (‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’).
We have determined that it is not a
‘‘significant energy action’’ under E.O.
13211, because although it is a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
E.O. 12866, it is not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy, and the
Administrator of OMB’s Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs has
not designated it as a significant energy
action.
L. Technical Standards and 1 CFR Part
51
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act, codified as a
note to 15 U.S.C. 272, directs agencies
to use voluntary consensus standards in
their regulatory activities unless the
agency provides Congress, through
OMB, with an explanation of why using
these standards would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus
standards are technical standards (e.g.,
specifications of materials, performance,
design, or operation; test methods;
sampling procedures; and related
management systems practices) that are
developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus standards bodies.
This final rule uses the following
voluntary consensus standards from:
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40098
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
The American Boat and Yacht Council
(ABYC)—
• ABYC E–11 (2003), AC and DC
Electrical Systems on Boats. This
standard covers the design,
construction, and installation of
direct current (DC) electrical
systems on boats and of alternating
current (AC) electrical systems on
boats. ABYC H–2 (2000),
Ventilation of Boats Using Gasoline.
This standard covers the design,
construction, and installation of
ventilation systems of engine and
fuel tank compartments of boats
using gasoline for mechanical
power, propulsion, or auxiliary
generators. ABYC H–22 (2005),
Electric Bilge Pump Systems. This
standard covers the design,
construction, installation,
operation, and control of electric
bilge pump systems on boats.
• ABYC H–24 (2007), Gasoline Fuel
Systems. This standard covers the
design, choice of materials for,
construction, installation, repair,
and maintenance of permanently
installed gasoline fuel systems on
boats.’’
• ABYC H–25 (2003), Portable
Gasoline Fuel Systems. This
standard covers the design,
construction and stowage of
portable tanks with related fuel
lines and accessories comprising a
portable gas fuel system for boats.
• ABYC H–32 (2004), Ventilation of
Boats Using Diesel Fuel. This
standard covers the design,
construction, and installation of
ventilation systems of boats using
diesel fuel only for electrical
generation, mechanical power, and
propulsion.
• ABYC H–33 (2005), Diesel Fuel
Systems. This standard covers the
design, choice of materials,
construction, installation, repair,
and maintenance of permanently
installed diesel fuel systems on
boats.
• ABYC P–1 (2002), Installation of
Exhaust Systems for Propulsion and
Auxiliary Engines. This standard
covers the design, installation and
selection of materials for exhaust
systems for marine engines of boats.
• ABYC P–4 (2004), Marine Inboard
Engines and Transmissions. This
standard covers the design,
construction, installation, and
selection of materials for inboard
engines and transmissions on boats.
The American Bureau of Shipping
(ABS)—
• ABS Rules for Building and
Classing Steel Vessels for Service
on Rivers and Intracoastal
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
Waterways, 2007. These standards
are for barges, towboats, cargo
vessels and passenger vessels in
service on major rivers and on
connecting intracoastal waterways.
They are applicable to those
features that are permanent in
nature and can be verified by plan
review, calculation, physical survey
or other appropriate means.
• ABS Rules for Building and
Classing Steel Vessels Under 90
Meters (295 Feet) in Length, 2006.
These standards are applicable to
self-propelled steel vessels under 90
meters (295 feet) in length intended
for unrestricted ocean service,
except where specifically
mentioned otherwise.
The American Society for Quality
(ASQ), Quality Press—
• ANSI/ISO/ASQ Q9001–2000,
American National Standard:
Quality management systems—
Requirements. This standard
specifies requirements for an
organization’s quality management
system.
FM Approvals—
• FM 6050–1996, Approval Standard
for Storage Cabinets (Flammable
and Combustible Liquids). This
standard contains performance and
construction requirements for
cabinets designed to provide safe
and secure storage for flammable
and combustible liquids.
The International Maritime
Organization (IMO)—
• Resolution A.520(13), Code of
Practice for the Evaluation, Testing
and Acceptance of Prototype Novel
Life-saving Appliances and
Arrangements, November 17, 1983.
This code prescribes the appliance
and arrangement criteria which
should be taken into account and
prototype tests which should be
carried out for the evaluation of
novel designs for international
acceptance. Resolution A.658(16),
Use and Fitting of Retro-Reflective
Materials on Life-saving
Appliances, October 19, 1989. This
resolution details the requirements
for use, fitting, and size/type of
retro-reflective materials on lifesaving appliances.
• Resolution A.688(17), Fire Test
Procedures For Ignitability of
Bedding Components, 1991. This
resolution details the fire test
procedures to determine the
ignitability of bedding components.
• Resolution A.760(18), Symbols
Related to Life-Saving Appliances
and Arrangements, November 4,
1993. This resolution details the
requirements for symbols related to
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
life-saving appliances and
arrangements.
• International Convention for the
Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974,
as amended. This international
convention is designed to improve
the safety of shipping.
The International Organization for
Standardization (ISO)—
• ISO 9001–2008(E), International
Standard: Quality management
systems—Requirements, Fourth
edition, dated November 15, 2008.
This international standard details
the requirements for quality
management systems.
• ISO 14726–2008(E), International
Standard: Ships and marine
technology-Identification colours
for the content of piping systems,
First edition, dated May 1, 2008.
This international standard
specifies main colors and additional
colors for identifying piping
systems in accordance with the
content or function on board ships
and marine structures.
The National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA)—
• NFPA 10, Standard for Portable Fire
Extinguishers, 2007 Edition,
effective August 17, 2006. The
provisions of this standard apply to
the selection, installation,
inspection, maintenance, and
testing of portable extinguishing
equipment.
• NFPA 70, National Electrical Code
(NEC), 2002 Edition, effective
August 2, 2001. The provisions of
this standard apply to the design,
modification, construction,
inspection, maintenance, and
testing of electrical systems/
installations and equipment.
• NFPA 302, Fire Protection Standard
for Pleasure and Commercial Motor
Craft, 1998 Edition. This standard
specifies provisions for fire
protection on pleasure and
commercial motor craft.
• NFPA 306, Standard for the Control
of Gas Hazards on Vessels, 2014
Edition, effective June 17, 2013.
This standard describes the
conditions required before a space
can be entered or work can be
started, continued, or started and
continued on any vessel under
construction, alteration, or repair,
or on any vessel awaiting
shipbreaking.
• NFPA 750, Standard on Water Mist
Fire Protection Systems, 2006
Edition, effective February 16, 2006.
This standard contains the
minimum requirements for the
design, installation, maintenance,
and testing of water mist fire
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
protection systems.
• NFPA 1971, Standard on Protective
Ensembles for Structural Fire
Fighting and Proximity Fire
Fighting, 2007 Edition, effective
August 17, 2006. This standard
specifies the minimum design,
performance, testing, and
certification requirements for
certain types of fire fighting
protective ensembles and ensemble
elements that include coats,
trousers, coveralls, helmets, gloves,
footwear, and interface
components.
The Society of Automotive Engineers
(SAE)—
• ANSI/SAE Z 26.1–1996, American
National Standard for Safety
Glazing Materials for Glazing Motor
Vehicles and Motor Vehicle
Equipment Operating on Land
Highways—Safety Standard. This
standard provides specifications
and methods of testing for safety
glazing material used for
windshields, windows, and
partitions of land and marine
vehicles and aircraft.
• SAE J1475–Revised JUN96—
Hydraulic Hose Fitting for Marine
Applications, revised June 1996.
This standard covers general and
performance specifications for
certain hydraulic hose fittings used
in conjunction with nonmetallic
flexible hoses for marine
applications.
• SAE J1942–Revised APR2007—
Hose and Hose Assemblies for
Marine Applications, revised April
2007. This standard covers specific
requirements for several styles of
hose and/or hose assemblies in
systems on board commercial
vessels inspected and certificated
by the U.S. Coast Guard.
UL (formerly Underwriters Laboratories,
Inc.)—
• UL 217, Standard for Safety for
Single and Multiple Station Smoke
Alarms, Sixth Edition, dated August
25, 2006. Along with other types of
smoke alarms used in different
settings, this standard specifies
requirements for smoke alarms
intended for use in recreational
boats.
• UL 1104, Standard for Safety for
Marine Navigation Lights, Second
Edition, dated October 29, 1998.
These requirements cover marine
navigation light fixtures intended
for use in accordance with the
applicable U. S. Coast Guard
regulations.
• UL 1275, Standard for Safety for
Flammable Liquid Storage Cabinets,
Third Edition, dated June 30, 2005.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
These requirements cover cabinets
intended to be used to provide an
indoor storage area for limited
quantities of flammable and
combustible liquids in containers in
compliance with specified
standards.
Consistent with 1 CFR part 51
incorporation-by-reference provisions,
this material is reasonably available.
Interested persons have access to it
through their normal course of business,
may purchase it from sources listed in
46 CFR 136.112, or may view a copy by
the means we have identified in the
ADDRESSES section. Section 136.112 also
identifies the sections that reference
these standards.
M. Environment
We have analyzed this final rule
under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023–01
and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42
U.S.C. 4321–4370f, and have concluded
that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. A final
environmental analysis checklist and
categorical exclusion determination
supporting this determination are
available in the docket where indicated
under the ADDRESSES section of this
preamble. This final rule involves
regulations that are procedural;
regulations concerning the training of
maritime personnel; regulations
concerning manning, documentation,
inspection and equipping of vessels;
regulations concerning equipment
approval and carriage requirements;
regulations concerning vessel operation
safety standards; and Congressionally
mandated regulations designed to
improve or protect the environment.
This action falls under section 2.B.2,
figure 2–1, paragraphs (34)(a), (c), (d),
and (e) of the Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, and under section 6(a) and
(b) of the ‘‘Appendix to National
Environmental Policy Act: Coast Guard
Procedures for Categorical Exclusions,
Notice of Final Agency Policy’’ (67 FR
48243, July 23, 2002).
List of Subjects
46 CFR Part 1
Administrative practice and
procedure, Organization and functions
(Government agencies), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40099
46 CFR Part 2
Marine safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Vessels.
46 CFR Part 15
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Seamen, Vessels.
46 CFR Part 136
Incorporation by reference, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements,
Towing vessels.
46 CFR Part 137
Marine safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Towing
vessels.
46 CFR Part 138
Incorporation by reference, Marine
safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Towing vessels.
46 CFR Part 139
Incorporation by reference, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements,
Towing vessels.
46 CFR Part 140
Incorporation by reference, Marine
safety, Occupational health and safety,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Towing vessels.
46 CFR Part 141
Incorporation by reference, Marine
safety, Occupational health and safety,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Towing vessels.
46 CFR Part 142
Fire prevention, Incorporation by
reference, Marine safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Towing
vessels.
46 CFR Part 143
Hazardous materials transportation,
Incorporation by reference, Marine
safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Towing vessels.
46 CFR Part 144
Cargo vessels, Incorporation by
reference, Marine safety, Oil and gas
exploration, Passenger vessels,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Towing vessels.
46 CFR Part 199
Cargo vessels, Marine safety, Oil and
gas exploration, Passenger vessels,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 46
CFR parts 1, 2, 15, and 199 and adds 46
CFR subchapter M, consisting of parts
136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143,
and 144 as follows:
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40100
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
46 CFR CHAPTER I
PART 1—ORGANIZATION, GENERAL
COURSE AND METHODS GOVERNING
MARINE SAFETY FUNCTIONS
1. The authority citation for part 1 is
revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552; 14 U.S.C. 633; 46
U.S.C. 7701; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 93; Secs. 101,
888, and 1512, Pub. L. 107–296, 116 Stat.
2135; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1; § 1.01–35 also issued
under the authority of 44 U.S.C. 3507; and
§ 1.03–55 also issued under the authority of
46 U.S.C. 3306(j).
■
2. Add § 1.03–55 to read as follows:
§ 1.03–55 Appeals from decisions or
actions under subchapter M of this chapter.
(a) Any person directly affected by a
decision or action by a classification
society or a third-party organization
performing a survey under subchapter
M of this chapter may, after requesting
reconsideration of the decision or action
by the classification society or thirdparty organization, make a formal
appeal to the cognizant OCMI.
(b) Any person directly affected by a
decision or action by a classification
society or a third-party organization
performing an audit under subchapter
M of this chapter may, after requesting
reconsideration of the decision or action
by the classification society or thirdparty organization, make a formal
appeal to the District Commander of the
district in which the audit was
performed.
(c) Any third-party organization or
person from a third-party organization
directly affected by a decision or action
of the Coast Guard Towing Vessel
National Center of Expertise (TVNCOE)
may submit a formal appeal to
Commandant (CG–CVC) for appeals of
decisions by the TVNCOE related to
subchapter M of this chapter.
(d) Any person directly affected by a
decision or action by an OCMI or
District Commander may make a formal
appeal pursuant to § 1.03–20 or § 1.03–
25, respectively.
PART 2—VESSEL INSPECTIONS
3. The authority citation for part 2
continues to read as follows:
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
■
Authority: Sec. 622, Pub. L. 111–281; 33
U.S.C. 1903; 43 U.S.C. 1333; 46 U.S.C. 2103,
2110, 3306, 3703; E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801,
3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277, sec. 1–105;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1(II)(77), (90), (92)(a), (92)(b).
4. Amend § 2.01–7 as follows:
a. In paragraph (a) introductory text,
before the word ‘‘as’’, add the word
‘‘either’’; and remove the colon, and
■
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
add, in its place, the words ‘‘or, if the
vessel is a towing vessel, as provided in
paragraph (b) of this section.’’;
■ b. Redesignate paragraph (b) as
paragraph (c);
■ c. Add new paragraph (b) and
paragraph (c)(7) to newly redesignated
paragraph (c).
The addition reads as follows:
§ 2.01–7 Classes of vessels (including
motorboats) examined or inspected and
certificated.
*
*
*
*
*
(b)(1) A U.S.-flag towing vessel is
subject to inspection and certifying
regulations in subchapter M of this
chapter except:
(i) A vessel less than 26 feet (7.92
meters) in length measured from end to
end over the deck (excluding the sheer),
unless that vessel is pushing, pulling, or
hauling a barge that is carrying oil or
hazardous material in bulk;
(ii) A vessel engaged in one or more
of the following:
(A) Assistance towing as defined in
§ 136.110 of this chapter;
(B) Towing recreational vessels for
salvage; or
(C) Transporting or assisting the
navigation of recreational vessels within
and between marinas and marina
facilities, within a limited geographic
area, as determined by the local Captain
of the Port;
(iii) A workboat operating exclusively
within a worksite and performing
intermittent towing within the worksite;
(iv) A seagoing towing vessel of 300
gross tons or more subject to the
provisions of subchapter I of this
chapter;
(v) A vessel inspected under other
subchapters of this chapter that may
perform occasional towing;
(vi) A public vessel as defined in 46
U.S.C. 2101;
(vii) A vessel which has surrendered
its Certificate of Inspection and is laid
up, dismantled, or otherwise out of
service; and
(viii) A propulsion unit used for the
purpose of propelling or controlling the
direction of a barge where the unit is
controlled from the barge, is not
normally manned, and is not utilized as
an independent vessel.
(2) A towing vessel not subject to
subchapter M of this chapter should
refer to table 2.01–7 of this section.
(c) * * *
(7) For towing vessels, see part 136 of
subchapter M of this chapter.
§ 2.10–25
[Amended]
5. In § 2.10–25, in the definition of
‘‘Sea-going towing vessel’’, after the
second occurrence of the word
■
PO 00000
Frm 00098
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
‘‘alongside’’, add the phrase ‘‘, that has
been issued a Certificate of Inspection
under the provisions of subchapter I of
this chapter’’.
PART 15—MANNING REQUIREMENTS
6. The authority citation for part 15 is
revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 2101, 2103, 3306,
3703, 8101, 8102, 8103, 8104, 8105, 8301,
8304, 8502, 8503, 8701, 8702, 8901, 8902,
8903, 8904, 8905(b), 8906 and 9102; sec. 617,
Pub. L. 111–281, 124 Stat. 2905; and
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
§ 15.501
[Amended]
7. Amend § 15.501(b) by removing the
word ‘‘Emergency’’ and adding, in its
place, the lower case word
‘‘emergency’’.
■ 8. Revise § 15.505 to read as follows:
■
§ 15.505 Changes in the certificate of
inspection.
All requests for changes in manning
as indicated on the COI must be sent
to—
(a) The Officer in Charge, Marine
Inspection (OCMI) who last issued the
COI; or
(b) The OCMI conducting the
inspection, if the request is made in
conjunction with an inspection for
certification.
§ 15.510
[Amended]
9. Amend § 15.510 by removing the
word ‘‘therefrom’’.
■ 10. Add § 15.535 to read as follows:
■
§ 15.535
Towing vessels.
(a) Applicability. Except as provided
in this paragraph (a), the requirements
in this section apply to a towing vessel
subject to subchapter M of this chapter.
Vessels subject to this section must also
meet the requirements in § 15.515(c). A
towing vessel at least 8 meters (26 feet)
in length, measured from end to end
over the deck (excluding sheer), that is
not subject to subchapter M must meet
the requirements in paragraph (b) of this
section if it is—
(1) A seagoing towing vessel of 300
gross tons or more subject to the
provisions of subchapter I of this
chapter;
(2) A vessel inspected under other
subchapters of this chapter that may
perform occasional towing; or
(3) A public vessel as defined in 46
U.S.C. 2101.
(b) Towing vessels 8 meters or more in
length. Every towing vessel of at least 8
meters (26 feet) in length, measured
from end to end over the deck
(excluding sheer), must be under the
direction and control of a person
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
holding a MMC endorsed as master or
mate (pilot) of towing vessels or as
master or mate of vessels of greater than
200 gross register tons, holding a
completed Towing Officer Assessment
Record signed by a designated examiner
indicating that the officer is proficient
in the operation of towing vessels upon
the appropriate route.
(c) Towing Vessels of Any Length on
the Lower Mississippi River. In addition
to the requirements of paragraph (b) of
this section, any towing vessel operating
in the pilotage waters of the Lower
Mississippi River must be under the
control of an officer who holds either a
first-class pilot’s endorsement for that
route, or MMC officer endorsement for
the Western Rivers, or who meets the
requirements of either paragraph (c)(1)
or (2) of this section, as applicable.
(1) Moving tank or hazardous material
barges. To operate a towing vessel with
tank barges or a tow of barges carrying
hazardous material regulated under
subchapter N or O of this chapter, the
officer in charge of the towing vessel
must have completed at least 12 round
trips over this route as an observer, with
at least 3 of those trips during hours of
darkness, and must provide evidence to
the Coast Guard upon request that at
least 1 of the 12 round trips occurred
within the last 5 years.
(2) Moving uninspected barges or no
barges. To operate a towing vessel
without barges or a tow of uninspected
barges, the officer in charge of the
towing vessel must have completed at
least 4 round trips over this route as an
observer, with at least 1 of those trips
during hours of darkness, and must
provide evidence to the Coast Guard
upon request that at least 1 of the 4
round trips occurred within the last 5
years.
11. Amend § 15.610 as follows:
a. Revise the section heading;
■ b. Redesignate paragraphs (a) and (b)
as paragraphs (b) and (c), respectively;
■ c. Add new paragraph (a); and
■ d. In newly redesignated paragraph
(c):
■ i. Remove the reference ‘‘paragraph
(a)’’ wherever it appears, and add, in
each place, the reference ‘‘paragraph
(b)’’;
■ ii. Remove the reference ‘‘paragraphs
(b)(1) or (b)(2)’’ and add, in its place, the
reference ‘‘paragraph (c)(1) or (2)’’; and
■ iii. In paragraphs (c)(1) and (2), add
the words ‘‘to the Coast Guard’’
immediately after the word ‘‘evidence’’.
The revision and additions read as
follows:
■
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
§ 15.610 Master and mate (pilot) of
uninspected towing vessels.
(a) The requirements in this section
apply to towing vessels, except for—
(1) Towing vessels that are subject to
subchapter M in accordance with
§ 136.105 of this chapter;
(2) Towing vessels that are seagoing
and 300 gross or more tons subject to
the provisions of subchapter I of this
chapter;
(3) Towing vessels that are inspected
under other subchapters of this chapter
that may perform occasional towing;
and
(4) Towing vessels that are public
vessels as defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 15.815
136.200 Certificate required.
136.202 Certificate of Inspection phase-in
period.
136.205 Description.
136.210 Obtaining or renewing a COI.
136.212 Inspection for certification.
136.215 Period of validity.
136.220 Posting.
136.230 Routes permitted.
136.235 Certificate of Inspection
amendment.
136.240 Permit to proceed.
136.245 Permit to carry an excursion party
or temporary extension or alteration of
route.
136.250 Load lines.
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3301, 3306,
3308, 3316, 8104, 8904; 33 CFR 1.05; DHS
Delegation 0170.1.
Subpart A—General
[Amended]
12. In § 15.815(c), remove the word
‘‘uninspected’’.
■ 13. Add 46 CFR subchapter M,
comprised of parts 136, 137, 138, 139,
140, 141, 142, 143, and 144, to read as
follows:
§ 136.100
SUBCHAPTER M—Towing Vessels
§ 136.105
■
PART 136—CERTIFICATION
PART 137—VESSEL COMPLIANCE
PART 138—TOWING SAFETY
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (TSMS)
PART 139—THIRD–PARTY
ORGANIZATIONS
PART 140—OPERATIONS
PART 141—LIFESAVING
PART 142—FIRE PROTECTION
PART 143—MACHINERY AND
ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS AND
EQUIPMENT
PART 144—CONSTRUCTION AND
ARRANGEMENT
PART 136—CERTIFICATION
Sec.
Subpart A—General
136.100 Purpose.
136.105 Applicability.
136.110 Definitions.
136.112 Incorporation by reference.
136.115 Equivalents.
136.120 Special consideration.
136.130 Options for documenting
compliance to obtain a Certificate of
Inspection.
136.172 Temporary compliance for existing
towing vessels.
136.175 Approved equipment.
136.180 Appeals.
Subpart B—Certificate of Inspection
PO 00000
Frm 00099
Fmt 4701
40101
Sfmt 4700
Purpose.
This part sets out the applicability for
this subchapter and describes the
requirements for obtaining and
renewing a Certificate of Inspection
(COI).
Applicability.
(a) This subchapter is applicable to all
U.S.-flag towing vessels as defined in
§ 136.110 engaged in pushing, pulling,
or hauling alongside, except—
(1) A vessel less than 26 feet (7.92
meters) in length measured from end to
end over the deck (excluding the sheer),
unless that vessel is pushing, pulling, or
hauling a barge that is carrying oil or
hazardous material in bulk;
(2) A vessel engaged in one or more
of the following:
(i) Assistance towing as defined in
§ 136.110;
(ii) Towing recreational vessels for
salvage; or
(iii) Transporting or assisting the
navigation of recreational vessels within
and between marinas and marina
facilities, within a limited geographic
area, as determined by the local Captain
of the Port (COTP);
(3) A workboat operating exclusively
within a worksite and performing
intermittent towing within the worksite;
(4) A seagoing towing vessel of 300
gross tons or more subject to the
provisions of subchapter I of this
chapter;
(5) A vessel inspected under other
subchapters of this chapter that may
perform occasional towing;
(6) A public vessel as defined in 46
U.S.C. 2101;
(7) A vessel that has surrendered its
COI and is laid up, dismantled, or
otherwise out of service; and
(8) A propulsion unit used for the
purpose of propelling or controlling the
direction of a barge where the unit is
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40102
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
controlled from the barge, is not
normally manned, and is not utilized as
an independent vessel.
(b) [Reserved]
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 136.110
Definitions.
As used in this subchapter:
ABS Rules means the standards
developed and published by the
American Bureau of Shipping regarding
the design, construction and
certification of commercial vessels.
Accommodation space means any:
(1) Messroom;
(2) Lounge;
(3) Sitting area;
(4) Recreation room;
(5) Quarters;
(6) Toilet space;
(7) Shower room;
(8) Galley;
(9) Berthing space;
(10) Clothing-changing room; or
(11) A similar space open to
individuals.
Anniversary date means the day and
the month of each year that corresponds
to the date of expiration on the COI or
Towing Safety Management System
(TSMS) Certificate.
Approval series means the first six
digits of a number assigned by the Coast
Guard to approved equipment. Where
approval is based on a subpart of 46
CFR chapter I, subchapter Q, the
approval series corresponds to the
number of the subpart. A list of
approved equipment, including all of
the approval series, is available at
https://cgmix.uscg.mil/Equipment/
EquipmentSearch.aspx.
Assistance towing means towing a
disabled vessel for consideration as
defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101.
Audit means a systematic,
independent, and documented
examination to determine whether
activities and related results comply
with a vessel’s TSMS, or with another
applicable Safety Management System
(SMS), and whether these planned
arrangements are implemented suitably
to achieve stated objectives. This
examination includes a thorough review
of appropriate reports, documents,
records, and other objective evidence to
verify compliance with applicable
requirements.
(1) The audit may include, but is not
limited to:
(i) Examining records;
(ii) Asking responsible persons how
they accomplish their assigned duties;
(iii) Observing persons performing
specific tasks within their assigned
duties;
(iv) Examining equipment to ensure
proper maintenance and operation; and
(v) Checking training records and
work environments.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
(2) The audit may be limited to the
random selection of a representative
sampling throughout the system that
presents the auditor with sufficient,
objective evidence of system
compliance.
Authorized classification society
means a recognized classification
society that has been delegated the
authority to conduct certain functions
and certifications on behalf of the Coast
Guard.
Berthing space means a space that is
intended to be used for sleeping, and is
provided with installed bunks and
bedding.
Bollard pull means the maximum
static pulling force that a towing vessel
can exert on another vessel or on an
object when its propulsion engines are
applying thrust at maximum
horsepower.
Change in ownership means any
change resulting in a change in the dayto-day operational control of a thirdparty organization (TPO) that conducts
audits and surveys, or a change that
results in a new entity holding more
than 50 percent of the ownership of the
TPO.
Class Rules means the standards
developed and published by a
classification society regarding the
design, construction, and certification of
commercial vessels.
Coastwise means a route that is not
more than 20 nautical miles offshore on:
(1) Any ocean;
(2) The Gulf of Mexico;
(3) The Caribbean Sea;
(4) The Bering Sea;
(5) The Gulf of Alaska; or
(6) Such other similar waters as may
be designated by a Coast Guard District
Commander.
Cold water means water where the
monthly mean low water temperature is
normally 15 degrees Celsius (59 degrees
Fahrenheit) or less.
Commandant means the Commandant
of the U.S. Coast Guard or an authorized
representative of the Commandant of
the U.S. Coast Guard.
Conflict of interest means a conflict
between an individual’s or an
organization’s private interests and the
interests of another party they are
providing a service to or for, including
when acting in a capacity which serves
the public good.
Crewmember means crewmember as
defined in 46 CFR 16.105.
Deficiency means a failure to meet the
minimum requirements of the vessel
inspection laws or regulations.
Disabled vessel means a vessel that
needs assistance, whether docked,
moored, anchored, aground, adrift, or
under way, but does not mean a barge
PO 00000
Frm 00100
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
or any other vessel not regularly
operated under its own power.
Downstreaming means a procedure in
which a towing vessel moves
downstream with the current in order to
approach and land squarely on another
object, such as a fleet, a dock, or another
tow.
Drydock examination means hauling
out a vessel or placing a vessel in a
drydock or slipway for an examination
of all accessible parts of the vessel’s
underwater body and of all through-hull
fittings and appurtenances.
Electronic position fixing device
means a navigation receiver that meets
the requirements of 33 CFR 164.41.
Engine room means the enclosed
space where any main-propulsion
engine is located. It comprises all deck
levels within that space.
Essential system means a system that
is required to ensure a vessel’s
survivability, maintain safe operation,
control the vessel, or to ensure safety of
onboard personnel, including:
(1) Systems for:
(i) Detection or suppression of fire;
(ii) Emergency dewatering or ballast
management;
(iii) Navigation;
(iv) Internal and external
communication;
(v) Vessel control, including
propulsion, steering, maneuverability
and their vital auxiliaries;
(vi) Emergency evacuation and
abandonment;
(vii) Lifesaving; and
(viii) Control of a tow;
(2) Any critical system identified in a
SMS compliant with the International
Safety Management (ISM) Code
requirements of 33 CFR part 96; and
(3) Any other marine engineering
system identified in an approved TSMS
or identified by the cognizant Officer in
Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) as
essential to the vessel’s survival, ability
to maintain safe operation, ability to
control the vessel, or to ensure the
safety of onboard personnel.
Excepted vessel means a towing
vessel that is subject to this subchapter
but is excepted from certain provisions
contained within this subchapter. An
excepted vessel is:
(1) Used solely:
(i) Within a limited geographic area,
as defined in this section;
(ii) For harbor-assist, as defined in
this section; or
(iii) For response to an emergency or
a pollution event; or
(2) Excepted by the cognizant OCMI
for purposes of some or all of the
requirements in §§ 142.315 through
142.330, 143.235, 143.265, and subpart
C of part 143 of this subchapter, based
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
on consideration of those requirements
and on reasons submitted by the vessel
owner or managing operator as to why
the vessel does not need to meet these
requirements for the safe operation of
the vessel.
Excursion party means a temporary
operation not permitted by the vessel’s
COI. It is typically recreational in nature
and 1 day or less in duration.
Existing towing vessel means a towing
vessel, subject to inspection under this
subchapter, that is not a new towing
vessel, as defined in this section.
External audit means an audit
conducted by a party with no direct
affiliation to the vessel, owner, or
managing operator being audited.
External survey program means a
survey program conducted by a party
with no direct affiliation to the vessel,
owner, or managing operator being
surveyed.
Fixed fire-extinguishing system
means:
(1) A carbon dioxide system that
meets the requirements of 46 CFR
subpart 76.15 and 46 CFR 78.47–9 and
78.47–11, and that is approved by the
Commandant;
(2) A clean agent system that satisfies
the requirements in 46 CFR subpart
95.16 and in 46 CFR 97.37–9, and is
approved by the Commandant; or
(3) A manually operated, water mist
system that satisfies NFPA 750
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112) and is approved by the
Commandant.
Fleeting area means a limited
geographic area, as determined by the
local COTP, where individual barges are
moored or assembled to make a tow.
These barges are not in transport, but
are temporarily marshaled and waiting
for pickup by different towing vessels
that will transport them to various
destinations.
Galley means a space containing
appliances with cooking surfaces that
may exceed 121 degrees Celsius (250
degrees Fahrenheit) such as ovens,
griddles, and deep fat fryers.
Great Lakes means a route on the
waters of any of the Great Lakes and of
the St. Lawrence River as far east as a
straight line drawn from Cap de Rosiers
to West Point, Anticosti Island, and
west of a line along the 63rd meridian
from Anticosti Island to the north shore
of the St. Lawrence River.
Gross tons means the gross ton
measurement of the vessel under 46
U.S.C. Chapter 145, Regulatory
Measurement. For a vessel measured
under only 46 U.S.C. Chapter 143,
Convention Measurement, the vessel’s
gross tonnage measured under 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 143 is used to apply all
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
thresholds expressed in terms of gross
tons.
Harbor of safe refuge means a port,
inlet, or other body of water normally
sheltered from heavy seas by land, and
in which a vessel can navigate and
safely moor. The suitability of a location
as a harbor of safe refuge will be
determined by the cognizant OCMI, and
varies for each vessel, dependent on the
vessel’s size, maneuverability, and
mooring gear.
Harbor-assist means the use of a
towing vessel during maneuvers to
dock, undock, moor, or unmoor a vessel,
or to escort a vessel with limited
maneuverability.
Horsepower means the horsepower
stated on the vessel’s COI, which is the
sum of the manufacturer’s listed brake
horsepower for all installed propulsion
engines.
Inland waters means the navigable
waters of the United States shoreward of
the Boundary Lines as described in 46
CFR part 7, excluding the Great Lakes
and, for towing vessels, excluding the
Western Rivers.
Internal Audit means an audit that is
conducted by a party that has a direct
affiliation to the vessel, owner, or
managing operator being audited.
Internal survey program means a
survey program that is conducted by a
party which has a direct affiliation to
the vessel, owner, or managing operator
being surveyed.
International voyage means a voyage
between a country to which the
International Convention for Safety of
Life at Sea, 1974, as amended (SOLAS)
applies and a port outside that country.
A country, as used in this definition,
includes every territory for the
international relations of which a
contracting government to the
Convention is responsible or for which
the United Nations is the administering
authority. For the United States, the
term ‘‘territory’’ includes the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, all
possessions of the United States, and all
lands held by the United States under
a protectorate or mandate. For the
purposes of this subchapter, vessels are
not considered as being on an
‘‘international voyage’’ when solely
navigating the Great Lakes and the St.
Lawrence River as far east as a straight
line drawn from Cap des Rosiers to West
Point, Anticosti Island and, on the north
side of Anticosti Island, the 63rd
meridian.
Lakes, bays, and sounds means a
route on any of the following waters:
(1) A lake other than the Great Lakes.
(2) A bay.
(3) A sound.
PO 00000
Frm 00101
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40103
(4) Such other similar waters as may
be designated by the cognizant Coast
Guard District Commander.
Length means the horizontal distance
measured from end to end over the
deck, excluding the sheer. Fittings and
attachments are not included in the
length measurement.
Length between perpendiculars or
LBP means the horizontal distance
measured between perpendiculars taken
at the forward-most and after-most
points on the waterline corresponding
to the deepest operating draft. For a
vessel that has underwater projections
extending forward of the forward-most
point or aft of the after-most point on
the deepest waterline of the vessel, the
Commanding Officer, U.S. Coast Guard
Marine Safety Center, may include the
length or a portion of the length of the
underwater projections in the value
used in the LBP for the purposes of this
subchapter. The length, or a portion of
the length, of projections that contribute
more than 2 percent of the underwater
volume of the vessel is normally added
to the actual LBP.
Limited coastwise means a route that
is not more than 20 nautical miles from
a harbor of safe refuge, as defined in this
section.
Limited geographic area means a local
area of operation as determined by the
local COTP. This area is usually within
a single harbor or port.
Machinery space means any enclosed
space that either contains an installed
internal combustion engine, machinery,
or systems that would raise the ambient
temperature above 45 degrees Celsius
(113 degrees Fahrenheit) in all
environments the vessel operates in.
Major conversion means a conversion
of a vessel that:
(1) Substantially changes the
dimensions or carrying capacity of the
vessel;
(2) Changes the type of the vessel;
(3) Substantially prolongs the life of
the vessel; or
(4) Otherwise so changes the vessel
that it is essentially a new vessel, as
determined by the Commandant.
Major non-conformity means a nonconformity that poses a serious threat to
personnel, vessel safety, or the
environment, and requires immediate
corrective action.
Managing operator means an
organization or person, such as the
manager or the bareboat charterer of a
vessel, who has assumed the
responsibility for operation of the vessel
from the vessel owner and who, on
assuming responsibility, has agreed to
take over all the duties and
responsibilities imposed by this
subchapter.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40104
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Nationally recognized testing
laboratory or NRTL means an
organization that the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) has recognized as meeting the
requirements in 29 CFR 1910.7. These
requirements are for the capability,
control programs, complete
independence, and reporting and
complaint-handling procedures to test
and certify specific types of products for
workplace safety. This means, in part,
that an organization must have the
necessary capability both as a product
safety testing laboratory and as a
product certification body to receive
OSHA recognition as an NRTL.
New towing vessel means a towing
vessel, subject to inspection under this
subchapter, that:
(1) Had its keel laid or was at a similar
stage of construction on or after July 20,
2017; or
(2) Underwent a major conversion
that was initiated on or after July 20,
2017.
Non-conformity means a situation
where objective evidence indicates that
a specified SMS requirement is not
fulfilled.
Objective evidence means quantitative
or qualitative information, records, or
statements of fact pertaining to safety or
to the existence and implementation of
an SMS element, which is based on
observation, measurement, or testing
that can be verified. This may include,
but is not limited to, towing gear
equipment certificates and maintenance
documents, training records, repair
records, Coast Guard documents and
certificates, surveys, classification
society reports, or TPO records.
Oceans means a route that is more
than 20 nautical miles offshore on any
of the following waters:
(1) Any ocean.
(2) The Gulf of Mexico.
(3) The Caribbean Sea.
(4) The Bering Sea.
(5) The Gulf of Alaska.
(6) Such other similar waters as may
be designated by the cognizant Coast
Guard District Commander.
Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection
or OCMI means an officer of the Coast
Guard designated as such by the Coast
Guard and who, under the direction of
the Coast Guard District Commander, is
in charge of a marine inspection zone,
described in 33 CFR part 3, for the
performance of duties with respect to
the inspection, enforcement, and
administration of vessel safety and
navigation laws and regulations. The
‘‘cognizant OCMI’’ is the OCMI who has
immediate jurisdiction over a vessel for
the purpose of performing these duties.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
Officer in charge of a (or the)
navigational watch means the same as
in 46 CFR 10.107.
Oil or hazardous material in bulk, as
used in this subchapter, means that the
towing vessel tows, pushes, or hauls
alongside a tank barge or barges
certificated to carry cargoes under
subchapters D or O of this chapter.
Operating station means a steering
station on the vessel, or the barge being
towed or pushed, from which the vessel
is normally navigated.
Owner means the owner of a vessel,
as identified on the vessel’s certificate of
documentation or state registration.
Persons in addition to the crew mean
any people onboard the vessel,
including passengers, who are not a
crewmember.
Policy means a specific statement of
principles or a guiding philosophy that
demonstrates a clear commitment by
management, or a statement of values or
intentions that provide a basis for
consistent decision making.
Power and lighting circuit means a
branch circuit as defined in Article 100
of NFPA’s National Electrical Code
(NEC) (incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112) that serves any essential
system, distribution panel, lighting,
motor or motor group, or group of
receptacles. Where multiple loads are
served, the circuit is considered to be
the conductor run that will carry the
current common to all the loads. ‘‘Power
limited circuit’’ conductors under
Article 725 of the NEC and
‘‘instrumentation’’ conductors under
Article 727 of the NEC are not
considered to be power and lighting
circuits.
Pressure vessel, fired or unfired,
means a closed tank or cylinder
containing gas, vapor, or liquid, or a
combination thereof, under pressure
greater than atmospheric pressure.
Procedure means a specification of a
series of actions or operations that must
be executed in the same manner in
order to uniformly comply with
applicable policies.
Protected waters means sheltered
waters presenting no special hazards,
such as most rivers, harbors, and lakes,
and that is not determined to be
exposed waters or partially protected
waters by the cognizant OCMI.
Propulsor means a device (e.g.,
propeller or water jet) that imparts force
to a column of water in order to propel
a vessel, together with any equipment
necessary to transmit the power from
the propulsion machinery to the device
(shafting, gearing, etc.).
Recognized classification society
means a classification society
PO 00000
Frm 00102
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
recognized by the Coast Guard in
accordance with part 8 of this chapter.
Replacement in kind means
replacement of equipment or
components that have the same
technical specifications as the original
item and provide the same service. If the
replacement item upgrades the system
in any way, the change is not a
replacement in kind.
Rescue boat means a boat designed to
rescue persons in distress and to
marshal survival craft.
Rivers means a route on any river,
canal, or other similar body of water
designated by the cognizant OCMI.
Safety Management System or SMS
means a structured and documented
system that enables personnel involved
in vessel operations or management, as
identified in the SMS, to effectively
implement the safety and environmental
protection requirements of this
subchapter, and is routinely exercised
and audited.
Skiff means a small auxiliary boat
carried on board a towing vessel.
Survey means an examination of the
vessel, including its systems and
equipment, to verify compliance with
applicable regulations, statutes,
conventions, and treaties.
Terminal gear means the additional
equipment or appurtenances at either
end of the hawser or tow cable that
connects the towing vessel and its tow
together. Terminal gear may include
such items as winches, thimbles,
chafing gear, shackles, pendants, or
bridles.
Third-party organization or TPO
means an organization approved by the
Coast Guard to conduct independent
verifications to assess whether towing
vessels or their TSMSs comply with
applicable requirements contained in
this subchapter.
Tow means the barge(s), vessel(s), or
object(s) being pulled, pushed, or
hauled alongside a towing vessel.
Towing vessel means a commercial
vessel engaged in or intending to engage
in the service of pulling, pushing, or
hauling alongside, or any combination
of pulling, pushing, or hauling
alongside.
Towing Safety Management System or
TSMS means an SMS for a towing vessel
as described in part 138 of this
subchapter.
Towing vessel record or TVR means a
book, notebook, or electronic record
used to document events as required by
this subchapter.
Unsafe condition means a major nonconformity observed on board a vessel,
or an incident that would cause the
owner or managing operator to request
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
a permit to proceed from the Coast
Guard.
Unsafe practice means a habitual or
customary action or method, or a single
action, that creates a significant risk of
harm to life, property, or the marine
environment, or that contravenes a
recognized standard of care contained in
law; regulation; applicable international
convention; or international, national,
or industry consensus standard.
Warm water means water where the
monthly mean low water temperature is
normally more than 15 degrees Celsius
(59 degrees Fahrenheit).
Western Rivers means the Mississippi
River, its tributaries, South Pass, and
Southwest Pass, to the navigational
demarcation lines dividing the high seas
from harbors, rivers, and other inland
waters of the United States, and the Port
Allen-Morgan City Alternate Route, and
that part of the Atchafalaya River above
its junction with the Port Allen-Morgan
City Alternate Route including the Old
River and the Red River, and those
waters specified in 33 CFR 89.25 and
89.27, and such other, similar waters as
are designated by the COTP.
Workboat means a vessel that pushes,
pulls, or hauls alongside within a
worksite.
Worksite means an area specified by
the cognizant OCMI within which
workboats are operated over short
distances for moving equipment in
support of dredging, construction,
maintenance, or repair work. A worksite
may include shipyards, owner’s yards,
or lay-down areas used by marine
construction projects. This definition
does not include the movement of
barges carrying oil or hazardous
material in bulk.
Work space means any area on the
vessel where the crew may be present
while on duty and performing their
assigned tasks.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 136.112
Incorporation by reference.
(a) Certain material is incorporated by
reference into this subchapter 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 a document
in the Federal Register and the material
must be available to the public. All
approved material is available for
inspection at the U.S. Coast Guard,
Office of Design and Engineering
Standards (CG–ENG), 2703 Martin
Luther King Jr. Avenue SE., Stop 7509,
Washington, DC 20593–7509, and is
available from the sources listed below.
It is also available for inspection at the
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call 202–741–6030 or
go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal_
register/code_of_federalregulations/ibr_
locations.html.
(b) American Boat and Yacht Council
(ABYC), 613 Third Street, Suite 10,
Annapolis, MD 21403, 410–990–4460,
https://www.abycinc.org/.
(1) E–11 (2003)—AC and DC Electrical
Systems on Boats, dated July 2003, IBR
approved for § 143.520(a) of this
subchapter.
(2) H–2 (2000)—Ventilation of Boats
Using Gasoline, dated July 2000, IBR
approved for § 143.520(a) of this
subchapter.
(3) H–22 (2005)—Electric Bilge Pump
Systems, dated July 2005, IBR approved
for § 143.520(a) of this subchapter.
(4) H–24 (2007)—Gasoline Fuel
Systems, dated July 2007, IBR approved
for § 143.520(a) of this subchapter.
(5) H–25 (2003)—Portable Gasoline
Fuel Systems, reaffirmed July 2003, IBR
approved for §§ 143.265(b) and
143.520(a) of this subchapter.
(6) H–32 (2004)—Ventilation of Boats
Using Diesel Fuel, dated July 2004, IBR
approved for § 143.520(a) of this
subchapter.
(7) H–33 (2005)—Diesel Fuel Systems,
dated July 2005, IBR approved for
§§ 143.265(e) and 143.520(a) of this
subchapter.
(8) P–1 (2002)—Installation of
Exhaust Systems for Propulsion and
Auxiliary Engines, dated July 2002, IBR
approved for §§ 143.520(a) and 144.415
of this subchapter.
(9) P–4 (2004)—Marine Inboard
Engines and Transmissions, dated July
2004, IBR approved for § 143.520(a) of
this subchapter.
(c) American Bureau of Shipping
(ABS), ABS Plaza, 16855 Northchase
Drive, Houston, TX 77060, 281–877–
5800, https://www.eagle.org.
(1) Rules for Building and Classing
Steel Vessels for Service on Rivers and
Intracoastal Waterways, 2007, IBR
approved for §§ 143.515(a), 143.540(b),
143.550(a), 143.580(b), and 144.205(a) of
this subchapter.
(2) Rules for Building and Classing
Steel Vessels Under 90 Meters (295
Feet) in Length, 2006, including
Supplement to Part 1 (dated January 1,
2008) and Corrigenda Notices 1 to 13 (in
effect as of July 1, 2010), IBR approved
for §§ 143.515(a), 143.540(a), 143.545(b),
143.550(a), 143.555(b), 143.580(a),
143.600, and 144.205(a) of this
subchapter.
(d) American Society for Quality
(ASQ), Quality Press, P.O. Box 3005,
Milwaukee, WI 53201–3005, 800–248–
1946, https://asq.org/.
PO 00000
Frm 00103
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40105
(1) ANSI/ISO/ASQ Q9001–2000,
Quality management systems—
Requirements, approved December 13,
2000, IBR approved for §§ 138.310(d),
139.120(d) and 139.130(b) of this
subchapter.
(2) [Reserved]
(e) FM Approvals, P.O. Box 9102,
Norwood, MA 02062, 781–440–8000,
https://www.fmglobal.com/.
(1) Approval Standard for Storage
Cabinets (Flammable and Combustible
liquids), Class Number 6050 (Standard
6050), dated December 1996, IBR
approved for § 142.225(c) of this
subchapter.
(2) [Reserved]
(f) International Maritime
Organization (IMO), Publications
Section, 4 Albert Embankment, London
SE1 7SR, United Kingdom, +44 (0)20
7735 7611, https://www.imo.org/.
(1) Resolution A.520(13)—Code of
Practice for the Evaluation, Testing and
Acceptance of Prototype Novel Lifesaving Appliances and Arrangements,
adopted November 17, 1983, IBR
approved for § 141.225(c) of this
subchapter.
(2) Resolution A.658(16)—Use and
Fitting of Retro-Reflective Materials on
Life-saving Appliances, adopted
October 19, 1989, IBR approved for
§ 141.340(f) of this subchapter.
(3) Resolution A.688(17)—Fire Test
Procedures For Ignitability of Bedding
Components, adopted November 6,
1991, IBR approved for § 144.430(b) of
this subchapter.
(4) Resolution A.760(18)—Symbols
Related to Life-Saving Appliances and
Arrangements, adopted November 4,
1993, IBR approved for § 141.340(h) of
this subchapter.
(5) International Convention for the
Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, as amended
(SOLAS), Consolidated Edition
(including Erratum), 2009, IBR
approved for §§ 136.115(b), 141.105(b)
and (c), and 142.205(a) of this
subchapter.
(g) International Organization for
Standardization (ISO), Case Postal 56,
CH–1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland, +41
22 749 01 11, https://www.iso.org/.
(1) ISO 9001:2008(E)—International
Standard: Quality management
systems—Requirements, Fourth edition,
dated November 15, 2008 (corrected
version dated July 15, 2009), IBR
approved for §§ 138.310(d) and
139.130(b) of this subchapter.
(2) ISO 14726:2008(E)—International
Standard: Ships and marine technologyIdentification colours for the content of
piping systems, First edition, dated May
1, 2008, IBR approved for § 143.250(e) of
this subchapter.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
40106
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(h) National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA), 1 Batterymarch
Park, Quincy, MA 02169, 800–344–
3555, https://www.nfpa.org/.
(1) NFPA 10—Standard for Portable
Fire Extinguishers, 2007 Edition,
effective August 17, 2006, IBR approved
for § 142.240(a) of this subchapter.
(2) NFPA 70—National Electrical
Code (NEC), 2002 Edition, effective
August 2, 2001, IBR approved for
§§ 136.110, 143.555(b), and 143.565(b)
of this subchapter.
(3) NFPA 302—Fire Protection
Standard for Pleasure and Commercial
Motor Craft, 1998 Edition, IBR approved
for §§ 143.265(e) and 144.415 of this
subchapter.
(4) NFPA 306—Standard for the
Control of Gas Hazards on Vessels, 2014
Edition, effective June 17, 2013, IBR
approved for § 140.665(a) of this
subchapter.
(5) NFPA 750—Standard on Water
Mist Fire Protection Systems, 2006
Edition, effective February 16, 2006, IBR
approved for § 136.110.
(6) NFPA 1971—Standard on
Protective Ensembles for Structural FireFighting and Proximity Fire-Fighting,
2007 Edition, effective August 17, 2006,
IBR approved for § 142.226(a) of this
subchapter.
(i) Society of Automotive Engineers
(SAE), 400 Commonwealth Drive,
Warrendale, PA 15096, 724–776–4841,
https://www.sae.org/.
(1) ANSI/SAE Z 26.1–1996, American
National Standard for Safety Glazing
Materials for Glazing Motor Vehicles
and Motor Vehicle Equipment
Operating on Land Highways—Safety
Standard, approved August 11, 1997,
IBR approved for § 144.905(e) of this
subchapter.
(2) SAE J1475 Revised JUN96—
Hydraulic Hose Fitting for Marine
Applications, revised June 1996, IBR
approved for § 143.265(d) of this
subchapter.
(3) SAE J1942 Revised APR2007—
Hose and Hose Assemblies for Marine
Applications, revised April 2007, IBR
approved for § 143.265(d) of this
subchapter.
(j) UL (formerly Underwriters
Laboratories, Inc.), 12 Laboratory Drive,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, 919–
549–1400, https://www.ul.com/.
(1) UL 217—Standard for Safety for
Single and Multiple Station Smoke
Alarms, Sixth Edition, dated August 25,
2006 (including revisions through
November 20, 2012), IBR approved for
§ 142.330(b) of this subchapter.
(2) UL 1104—Standards for Safety for
Marine Navigation Lights, Second
Edition, dated October 29, 1998, IBR
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
approved for § 143.415(a) of this
subchapter.
(3) UL 1275—Standard for Safety for
Flammable Liquid Storage Cabinets,
Third Edition, dated June 30, 2005
(including revisions through February
26, 2010), IBR approved for § 142.225(c)
of this subchapter.
§ 136.115
Equivalents.
(a) The Coast Guard may approve any
arrangement, fitting, appliance,
apparatus, equipment, calculation,
information, or test that provides a level
of safety equivalent to that established
by any specific provision of this
subchapter. Submit requests for
approval to the Coast Guard via the
cognizant OCMI. The Marine Safety
Center may require engineering
evaluations and tests to verify the
equivalence.
(b) The Coast Guard may accept
compliance with the provisions of
SOLAS applicable to the vessel’s size
and route (incorporated by reference,
see § 136.112), as an equivalent to
specific requirements of this subchapter.
Submit requests for a determination of
equivalency for a particular vessel to the
Coast Guard via the cognizant OCMI.
(c) Alternative compliance
arrangement provisions related to SMSs
are contained in § 138.225 of this
subchapter.
(d) Alternate compliance
arrangements must be documented
within the TSMS applicable to the
vessel.
§ 136.120
Special consideration.
Based on a review of relevant
information and on the TSMS
applicable to the vessel, the cognizant
OCMI who issues the COI may give
special consideration to authorizing
departures from specific requirements,
when unusual circumstances or
arrangements warrant such departures
and when an equivalent level of safety
is provided.
§ 136.130 Options for documenting
compliance to obtain a Certificate of
Inspection.
(a) There are two options for
documenting compliance with the
requirements in this subchapter to
obtain a COI:
(1) The Coast Guard option, in which
all inspections of the towing vessel are
conducted by the Coast Guard, as
discussed in § 136.210 and parts 137
and 140 through 144 of this subchapter;
or
(2) The TSMS option, as discussed in
§ 136.210, and in parts 137 through 144
of this subchapter.
(b) Regardless of the option chosen,
the Coast Guard is responsible for
PO 00000
Frm 00104
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
issuing a towing vessel COI, and may
board a vessel at any time to verify
compliance and take appropriate action.
(c) An owner or managing operator
choosing the Coast Guard option may
use a management system, vessel
operations manual, towing vessel record
(TVR), or logbook to meet this
subchapter’s recordkeeping
requirements.
(d) When submitting an application
for inspection, the owner or managing
operator must specify on the application
which option he or she chooses for each
particular towing vessel. Owners or
managing operators may choose
different options for the individual
vessels within their fleets.
(e) Requests to change options during
the period of validity of an existing COI
must be accompanied by an application
to the OCMI for a new COI. If the
requirements for the new option are
met, the OCMI will issue the vessel a
new COI.
§ 136.172 Temporary compliance for
existing towing vessels.
An existing towing vessel subject to
this subchapter will remain subject to
Coast Guard regulations applicable to
the vessel on July 19, 2016 until either
July 20, 2018 or the date the vessel
obtains a COI, whichever date is earlier.
§ 136.175
Approved equipment.
Where equipment in this subchapter
is required to be of an approved type,
such equipment requires the specific
approval of the Coast Guard. A list of
approved equipment and materials may
be found online at https://
cgmix.uscg.mil/Equipment/
EquipmentSearch.aspx. Any OCMI may
be contacted for information concerning
approved equipment and materials.
§ 136.180
Appeals.
Any person directly affected by a
decision or action taken under this
subchapter, by or on behalf of the Coast
Guard, may appeal in accordance with
46 CFR 1.03.
Subpart B—Certificate of Inspection
§ 136.200
Certificate required.
(a) A towing vessel may not be
operated without having onboard a
valid COI issued by the Coast Guard as
required by § 136.202.
(b) Each towing vessel certificated
under the provisions of this subchapter
must be in full compliance with the
terms of the COI.
(c) If necessary to prevent the delay of
the vessel, the Coast Guard may issue a
temporary COI to a towing vessel,
pending the issuance and delivery of the
permanent COI. The temporary COI
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
must be carried in the same manner as
the regular COI and is equivalent to the
permanent COI that it represents.
(d) A towing vessel on a foreign
voyage between a port in the United
States and a port in a foreign country
whose COI expires during the voyage
may lawfully complete the voyage
without a valid COI, provided the
voyage is completed within 30 days of
expiration, and provided that the COI
did not expire within 15 days of sailing
on the foreign voyage from a U.S. port.
§ 136.202 Certificate of Inspection phasein period.
(a) All owners or managing operators
of more than one existing towing vessel
required to have a COI by this
subchapter must ensure that each
existing towing vessel under their
ownership or control is issued a valid
COI according to the following
schedule:
(1) By July 22, 2019, at least 25
percent of the towing vessels must have
valid COIs on board;
(2) By July 20, 2020, at least 50
percent of the towing vessels must have
valid COIs on board;
(3) By July 19, 2021, at least 75
percent of the towing vessels must have
valid COIs on board; and
(4) By July 19, 2022, 100 percent of
the towing vessels must have valid COIs
on board.
(b) All owners or managing operators
of only one existing towing vessel
required to have a COI by this
subchapter must ensure the vessel has
an onboard, valid COI by July 20, 2020.
(c) A new towing vessel must obtain
a COI before it enters into service.
§ 136.205
Description.
A towing vessel’s COI describes the
vessel, routes that it may travel,
minimum manning requirements and
total persons allowed onboard, safety
equipment and appliances required to
be onboard, horsepower, and other
information pertinent to the vessel’s
operations as determined by the OCMI.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 136.210
Obtaining or renewing a COI.
Owners and managing operators must
submit Form CG–3752, ‘‘Application for
Inspection of U.S. Vessel,’’ to the
cognizant OCMI where the inspection
will take place. The owner or managing
operator must submit the application at
least 30 days before the vessel will
undergo the initial inspection for
certification. The owner or managing
operator must schedule an inspection
for this initial certification with the
cognizant OCMI at least 3 months before
the vessel is to undergo the inspection
for certification.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
(a) In addition to Form CG–3752, the
owner or managing operator must
submit:
(1) For initial certification:
(i) Vessel particular information; and
(ii) Number of persons in addition to
the crew, if requested; or
(2) For a renewal of certification:
(i) Any changes to the information in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section; and
(ii) A description of any modifications
to the vessel.
(b) In addition to Form CG–3752 and
the requirements of paragraph (a) of this
section, the owner or managing operator
of vessels utilizing the TSMS option
must submit:
(1) Objective evidence that the owner
or managing operator and the vessel are
in compliance with the TSMS
requirements in part 138 of this
subchapter; and
(2) Objective evidence that the
vessel’s structure, stability, and
essential systems comply with the
applicable requirements of this
subchapter for the intended route and
service. This objective evidence may be
in the form of a survey report issued by
a TPO or another form acceptable to the
Coast Guard.
§ 136.212
Inspection for certification.
(a) Frequency of inspections. After a
towing vessel receives its initial COI,
the OCMI will inspect a towing vessel
subject to this subchapter located in his
or her jurisdiction at least once every 5
years. The OCMI must ensure that every
towing vessel is of a structure suitable
for its intended route. If the OCMI
deems it necessary, he or she may direct
the vessel to get underway, and may
adopt any other suitable means to test
the towing vessel and its equipment.
(b) Nature of inspection. The
inspection will ensure that the vessel is
in satisfactory condition and fit for the
service for which it is intended, and that
it complies with the applicable statutes
and regulations for such vessels. The
inspection will include inspections of
the structure, pressure vessels and their
appurtenances, piping, main and
auxiliary machinery, electrical
installations, lifesaving appliances, fire
detecting and extinguishing equipment,
pilot boarding equipment, and other
equipment. The inspection will also
determine that the vessel is in
possession of any valid certificates or
licenses issued by the Federal
Communications Commission, if
required. The inspection will also
include an examination of the vessel’s
lights, means of making sound signals
and distress signals, and pollution
prevention systems and procedures.
PO 00000
Frm 00105
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40107
(c) Time of issuance of COI. The
OCMI will issue a vessel a new COI after
the vessel successfully completes the
inspection for certification.
§ 136.215
Period of validity.
(a) A COI for a towing vessel is valid
for 5 years from the date of issue.
(b) For a towing vessel utilizing the
TSMS option, the COI is invalid upon
the expiration or revocation of the
owner or managing operator TSMS
certificate or the ISM Code Certificate.
(c) A COI may be suspended and
withdrawn or revoked by the cognizant
Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection at
any time for noncompliance with the
requirements of this subchapter.
§ 136.220
Posting.
(a) The original COI must be framed
under glass or other transparent material
and posted in a conspicuous place
onboard the towing vessel.
(b) If posting is impracticable, the COI
must be kept on board in a weathertight
container and must be readily available.
§ 136.230
Routes permitted.
(a) The area of operation for each
towing vessel and any necessary
operational limits are determined by the
cognizant OCMI and recorded on the
vessel’s COI. Each area of operation,
referred to as a route, is described on the
COI under the major headings
‘‘Oceans,’’ ‘‘Coastwise,’’ ‘‘Limited
Coastwise,’’ ‘‘Great Lakes,’’ ‘‘Lakes,
Bays, and Sounds,’’ or ‘‘Rivers,’’ as
applicable. Additional limitations
imposed or extensions granted are
described by reference to bodies of
waters, geographical points, distances
from geographical points, distances
from land, depths of channel, seasonal
limitations, and similar factors.
(b) Operation of a towing vessel on a
route of lesser severity than those
specifically described or designated on
the COI is permitted, unless the route is
expressly prohibited on the COI. The
general order of decreasing severity of
routes is: Oceans; coastwise; limited
coastwise; Great Lakes; lakes, bays, and
sounds; and rivers. The cognizant OCMI
may prohibit a vessel from operating on
a route of lesser severity than the
primary route on which a vessel is
authorized to operate, if local conditions
necessitate such a restriction.
(c) When designating a permitted
route or imposing any operational limits
on a towing vessel, the cognizant OCMI
may consider:
(1) The route-specific requirements of
this subchapter;
(2) The performance capabilities of
the vessel based on design, scantlings,
stability, subdivision, propulsion,
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40108
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
speed, operating modes,
maneuverability, and other
characteristics;
(3) The suitability of the vessel for
nighttime operations and use in all
weather conditions;
(4) Vessel operations in globally
remote areas or severe environments not
covered by this subchapter. Such areas
may include, but are not limited to,
polar regions, remote islands, areas of
extreme weather, or other remote areas
where timely emergency assistance
cannot be anticipated; and
(5) The TSMS applicable to the vessel,
if the vessel has one.
§ 136.235 Certificate of Inspection
amendment.
(a) An amended COI may be issued at
any time by the cognizant OCMI. The
amended COI replaces the original, but
the expiration date remains the same as
that of the original. An amended COI
may be issued to authorize and record
a change in the dimensions, gross
tonnage, owner, managing operator,
manning, persons permitted, route
permitted, conditions of operations, or
equipment of a towing vessel, from that
specified in the current COI.
(b) The owner or managing operator of
the towing vessel must make a request
for an amended COI to the cognizant
OCMI any time there is a change in the
character of the vessel or in its route,
equipment, ownership, operation, or
similar factors specified in its current
COI. The OCMI may need to conduct an
inspection before issuing an amended
COI.
(c) For those vessels selecting the
TSMS option, the owner or managing
operator of the towing vessel must
provide to the OCMI objective evidence
of compliance with the requirements in
this subchapter prior to the issuance of
an amended COI. The evidence must:
(1) Be from a TPO and prepared in
accordance with parts 138 and 139 of
this subchapter; and
(2) Consider the change in the
character of a vessel or in its route,
equipment, ownership, operation, or
similar factors specified in the vessel’s
current COI.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 136.240
Permit to proceed.
Permission to proceed to another port
for repairs (Form CG–948) may be
required for a towing vessel that is no
longer in compliance with its COI. This
permission may be necessary in certain
situations, including damage to the
vessel, failure of an essential system, or
failure to comply with a regulation,
including failure to comply with the
TSMS requirements, if appropriate.
(a) What a vessel with a TSMS must
do before proceeding to another port for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
repairs. A vessel with a TSMS may
proceed to another port for repair, if:
(1) In the judgment of the owner,
managing operator, or master, the trip
can be completed safely;
(2) The TSMS addresses the condition
of the vessel that has resulted in noncompliance and the necessary
conditions under which the vessel may
safely proceed to another port for repair;
(3) The vessel proceeds as provided in
the TSMS and does not tow while
proceeding, unless the owner or
managing operator determines that it is
safe to do so; and
(4) The owner or managing operator
notifies the cognizant OCMI in whose
zone the non-compliance occurred or is
discovered, before the vessel proceeds.
The owner or operator must also notify
the cognizant OCMI in any other OCMI
zones through which the vessel will
transit.
(b) What another vessel must do
before proceeding to another port for
repairs. If a vessel does not have a
TSMS, or a vessel has one but it does
not address the condition of the vessel
that has resulted in non-compliance or
the necessary conditions under which
the vessel may safely proceed to another
port for repair, the owner, managing
operator, or master must request
permission to proceed from the
cognizant OCMI in whose zone the noncompliance occurs or is discovered.
This permission operates as follows:
(1) The request for permission to
proceed may be made electronically, in
writing, or orally. The cognizant OCMI
may require a written description, a
damage survey, or other documentation
to assist in determining the nature and
seriousness of the non-compliance.
(2) The vessel will not engage in
towing, unless the cognizant OCMI
determines it is safe to do so.
(3) The Coast Guard may issue the
permit either on Form CG–948, ‘‘Permit
to Proceed to Another Port for Repairs,’’
or in letter form, and will state the
conditions under which the vessel may
proceed to another port for repair.
(c) Inspection or examination. The
cognizant OCMI may require an
inspection of the vessel by a Coast
Guard Marine Inspector or an
examination by a surveyor from a TPO
prior to the vessel proceeding.
§ 136.245 Permit to carry excursion party
or temporary extension or alteration of
route.
(a) A towing vessel must obtain
approval to engage in an excursion prior
to carrying a greater number of persons
than permitted by the COI, or to
temporarily extend or alter its area of
operation.
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(b) For a vessel utilizing the TSMS
option, the vessel may engage in an
excursion, if:
(1) In the opinion of the owner,
managing operator, or master the
operation can be undertaken safely;
(2) The TSMS addresses the
temporary excursion operation
contemplated; the necessary conditions
under which the vessel may safely
conduct the operation, including the
number of persons the vessel may carry;
the crew required; and any additional
lifesaving or safety equipment required;
(3) The vessel proceeds as provided in
the TSMS; and
(4) The owner, managing operator, or
master notifies the cognizant OCMI at
least 48 hours prior to the temporary
excursion operation. The cognizant
OCMI may require submission of
pertinent provisions of the TSMS
applicable to the vessel for review and
onboard verification of compliance. If
the cognizant OCMI has reasonable
cause to believe that the TSMS
applicable to the vessel is insufficient
for the intended excursion, additional
information may be requested and/or
additional requirements may be
imposed.
(c) If the towing vessel is not under a
TSMS, or the TSMS applicable to the
vessel does not address the temporary
excursion operation:
(1) The owner or managing operator
must submit an application to the
cognizant OCMI. The application must
state the intended route, number of
passengers or guests, and any other
conditions applicable to the excursion
that exceed those specified in its COI.
(2) The cognizant OCMI may issue the
permit either on Form CG–949, ‘‘Permit
To Carry Excursion Party,’’ or in letter
form. The cognizant OCMI will indicate
on the permit the conditions under
which it is issued, the number of
persons the vessel may carry, the crew
required, any additional lifesaving or
safety equipment required, the route for
which the permit is granted, and the
dates on which the permit is valid. The
application may be made electronically,
in writing, or orally.
(3) The vessel may not engage in
towing during the excursion, unless the
cognizant OCMI determines it is safe to
do so.
(d) The cognizant OCMI may require
an inspection of the vessel by a Coast
Guard Marine Inspector or an
examination by a surveyor from a TPO
prior to the vessel proceeding.
§ 136.250
Load lines.
Vessels described in Table 136.250 of
this section that operate on the Great
Lakes or outside the Boundary Lines, as
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
set forth in 46 CFR part 7, are subject
to load line requirements in subchapter
40109
E of this chapter in the following
circumstances:
TABLE 136.250
A vessel that—
Is subject to load line requirements in subchapter E of this chapter if it is—
(a) Is on an international voyage—
(1)
(2)
(1)
(2)
(b) Is on a domestic voyage— .......
Seventy nine (79) feet (24 meters) or more in length and built on or after July 21, 1968; or
One hundred and fifty (150) gross tons or more if built before July 21, 1968.
Seventy nine (79) feet (24 meters) or more in length and built on or after January 1, 1986; or
One hundred and fifty (150) gross tons or more if built before January 1, 1986.
§ 137.120
PART 137—VESSEL COMPLIANCE
Sec.
Subpart A—General
137.100 Purpose.
137.120 Responsibility for compliance.
137.130 Program for vessel compliance for
the Towing Safety Management System
(TSMS) option.
137.135 Reports and documentation
required for the TSMS option.
Subpart B—Inspections and Surveys for
Certification
137.200 Documenting compliance for the
Coast Guard inspection option.
137.202 Documenting compliance for the
TSMS option.
137.205 External survey program.
137.210 Internal survey program.
137.212 Coast Guard oversight of vessel
survey program for vessels under the
TSMS option.
137.215 General conduct of survey.
137.220 Scope.
Subpart C—Drydock and Internal Structural
Surveys
137.300 Intervals for drydock and internal
structural examinations.
137.302 Documenting compliance for the
Coast Guard inspection option.
137.305 Documenting compliance for the
TSMS option.
137.310 External survey program.
137.315 Internal survey program.
137.317 Coast Guard oversight of drydock
and internal structural examination
program for vessels under the TSMS
option.
137.320 Vessels holding a valid load line
certificate.
137.322 Classed vessels.
137.325 General conduct of examination.
137.330 Scope of the drydock examination.
137.335 Underwater survey in lieu of
drydocking.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3301, 3306,
3308, 3316, 8104, 8904; 33 CFR 1.05; DHS
Delegation 0170.1.
Subpart A—General
§ 137.100
Purpose.
This part describes the procedures
owners or managing operators of towing
vessels must use to demonstrate
compliance with the requirements of
this subchapter.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
Responsibility for compliance.
(a) The owner and managing operator
must ensure that the towing vessel is in
compliance with this subchapter and
other applicable laws and regulations at
all times.
(b) Non-conformities and deficiencies
must be corrected in a timely manner.
§ 137.130 Program for vessel compliance
for the Towing Safety Management System
(TSMS) option.
The owner or managing operator of a
towing vessel choosing to use the TSMS
option must implement an external or
internal survey program for vessel
compliance. The program for vessel
compliance can be either:
(a) An external survey program, in
which the owner or managing operator
would have a third-party organization
(TPO) conduct either the surveys
required by § 137.205, the examinations
required by § 137.310, or both; or
(b) An internal survey program, in
which the owner or managing operator
would conduct either the surveys
required by § 137.210, the examinations
required by § 137.315, or both, using
internal resources or contracted
surveyors. The internal survey program
would be conducted with the oversight
of a TPO.
(c) Each program of either type must
include:
(1) Owner or managing operator
policy regarding the surveying and
examination of towing vessels;
(2) Procedures for conducting towing
vessel surveys and examinations, as
described in this part;
(3) Procedures for reporting and
correcting non-conformities and
deficiencies;
(4) Identification of the individual or
individuals responsible for the
management of the program, and their
qualifications; and
(5) Documentation of compliance
activities.
§ 137.135 Reports and documentation
required for the TSMS option.
(a) The TSMS option requires a report
detailing each internal survey of a
towing vessel. Each report must include:
(1) Vessel name;
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(2) Other vessel identifier, such as an
official number or State number;
(3) Name and business address of
owner or managing operator;
(4) Date and location of the survey;
(5) Date the report of the survey was
issued, if different than the date the
survey was concluded;
(6) Name of the surveyors;
(7) Name and business address of the
TPO the surveyors represent, if
applicable;
(8) Signatures of surveyors;
(9) A descriptive list of the items
examined or witnessed during each
survey;
(10) A descriptive list of all nonconformities identified during each
survey, including those that were
corrected during the course of the
survey;
(11) A descriptive list of:
(i) All non-conformities remaining at
the end of each survey;
(ii) The required corrective actions;
(iii) The latest date of required
corrective action; and
(iv) A description of the means by
which the corrective actions were
verified;
(12) A descriptive list of items that
need to be repaired or replaced before
the vessel continues service; and
(13) A statement that the vessel
complies with the applicable
requirements of this subchapter and is
fit for its route and service, subject to
the correction of non-conformities.
(b) The owner or managing operator
must provide objective evidence of
compliance with this part in accordance
with the TSMS applicable to the vessel.
Subpart B—Inspections and Surveys
for Certification
§ 137.200 Documenting compliance for the
Coast Guard inspection option.
A towing vessel subject to this
subchapter and choosing the Coast
Guard inspection option, or required to
have the Coast Guard inspection option,
must undergo an annual inspection
within 3 months before or after the COI
anniversary date.
(a) Owners and managing operators
must contact the cognizant Officer in
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40110
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) to
schedule an inspection at a time and
place the OCMI approves. No written
application is required.
(b) Annual inspections will be similar
to the inspection for certification but
will cover less detail unless the marine
inspector finds deficiencies or
determines that a major change has
occurred since the last inspection. If the
marine inspector finds deficiencies or
finds that a major change to the vessel
has occurred, he or she will conduct a
more detailed inspection to ensure that
the vessel is in satisfactory condition
and fit for the service for which it is
intended. If the vessel passes the annual
inspection, the Coast Guard will
endorse the vessel’s current Certificate
of Inspection (COI).
(c) If the annual inspection reveals the
need, the owner or managing operator
must make any or all repairs or
improvements within the time period
specified by the OCMI. The OCMI may
use Form CG–835, ‘‘Notice of Merchant
Marine Inspection Requirements,’’ to
record deficiencies discovered during
the inspection. The OCMI will then give
a copy of the completed form to the
master of the vessel.
(d) Nothing in this subpart limits the
marine inspector from conducting any
tests or inspections he or she deems
necessary to be assured of the vessel’s
seaworthiness or fitness for its route and
service.
§ 137.202 Documenting compliance for the
TSMS option.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
The owner or managing operator of a
towing vessel that chooses the TSMS
option for a towing vessel must
document compliance with this subpart
as follows:
(a) Prior to obtaining the vessel’s
initial COI, the owner or managing
operator must provide a report to the
Coast Guard of a survey as described in
§ 137.215 that demonstrates that the
vessel complies the requirements of this
part.
(b) For the re-issuance of the vessel’s
COI, the owner or managing operator
must:
(1) Provide objective evidence of an
external survey program as described in
§ 137.205; or
(2) Provide objective evidence of an
internal survey program as described in
§ 137.210.
§ 137.205
External survey program.
(a) The owner or managing operator of
a towing vessel that has selected the
TSMS option and who has chosen to
demonstrate compliance through an
external survey program must:
(1) Have the vessel surveyed annually
by a surveyor from a TPO;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
(2) Ensure the survey is conducted in
accordance with § 137.215;
(3) Ensure the survey is conducted
within 3 months of the anniversary date
of the COI;
(4) Ensure the TSMS applicable to the
vessel includes policies and procedures
for complying with this section; and
(5) Make the applicable sections of the
TSMS available to the surveyor.
(b) The TPO must issue a report that
meets the requirements in § 137.135.
§ 137.210
Internal survey program.
(a) The owner or managing operator of
a towing vessel that has selected the
TSMS option and who has chosen to
demonstrate vessel compliance through
an internal survey program must ensure
that the TSMS applicable to the vessel
includes:
(1) Procedures for surveying and
testing described in § 137.215;
(2) Equipment, systems, and onboard
procedures to be surveyed;
(3) Identification of items that would
need repair or replacement before the
vessel could continue in service, such as
deficiencies identified on Form CG–835,
‘‘Notice of Merchant Marine Inspection
Requirements,’’ noted survey
deficiencies, non-conformities, or other
corrective action reports;
(4) Procedures for documenting and
reporting non-conformities and
deficiencies;
(5) Procedures for reporting and
correcting major non-conformities;
(6) The responsible person or persons
in management who have the authority
to:
(i) Stop all vessel operations pending
the correction of non-conformities and
deficiencies;
(ii) Oversee vessel compliance
activities; and
(iii) Track and verify that nonconformities and deficiencies were
corrected;
(7) Procedures for recordkeeping; and
(8) Procedures for assigning personnel
with requisite experience and expertise
to carry out the elements of the survey.
(b) The owner or managing operator is
not required to survey the items as
described in § 137.220 as one event, but
may survey items on a schedule over
time, provided that the interval between
successive surveys of any item does not
exceed 1 year, unless otherwise
prescribed.
§ 137.212 Coast Guard oversight of vessel
survey program for vessels under the TSMS
option.
If the cognizant OCMI has reasonable
cause to believe that a vessel’s survey
program is deficient, that OCMI may:
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(a) Require an audit or survey of the
vessel in the presence of a
representative of the cognizant OCMI;
(b) Increase the frequency of the
audits;
(c) For vessels under the internal
survey program, require that the vessel
comply with the external survey
program requirements of § 137.205;
(d) Require any other specific action
within his or her authority that he or
she considers appropriate; or
(e) For repeatedly deficient surveys,
remove the vessel and or owner or
managing operator from using the TSMS
option.
§ 137.215
General conduct of survey.
(a) When conducting a survey of a
towing vessel as required by this
subpart, the surveyor must determine
that the item or system functions as
designed, is free of defects or
modifications that reduce its
effectiveness, is suitable for the service
intended, and functions safely in a
manner consistent for vessel type,
service and route.
(b) The survey must address the items
in § 137.220 as applicable, and must
include:
(1) A review of certificates and
documentation held on the vessel;
(2) A visual examination and tests of
the vessel and its equipment and
systems in order to confirm that their
condition is properly maintained and
that proper quantities are onboard;
(3) A visual examination of the
systems used in support of drills or
training to determine that the
equipment utilized during a drill
operates as intended; and
(4) A visual examination to confirm
that unapproved modifications were not
made to the vessel or its equipment.
(c) Beyond the minimum standards
required by this section, the
thoroughness and stringency of the
survey will depend upon the condition
of the vessel and its equipment. If a
surveyor finds a vessel to have multiple
deficiencies indicative of systematic
failures to maintain the installed
equipment, he or she will conduct an
expanded examination to ensure all
deficiencies are identified and
corrective action is promptly taken.
(d) The owner or managing operator
must notify the cognizant OCMI when
the condition of the vessel, its
equipment, systems, or operations,
create an unsafe condition.
(e) The cognizant OCMI may require
that the owner or managing operator
provide for the attendance of a surveyor
or auditor from a TPO to assist with
verifying compliance with this part.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 137.220
Scope.
The owner or managing operator of a
towing vessel that has selected the
TSMS option must examine or must
have examined the following systems,
equipment, and procedures to ensure
that the vessel and its equipment are
suitable for the service for which the
vessel is certificated:
(a) TSMS. (1) Verify that the vessel is
enrolled in a TSMS that complies with
part 138 of this subchapter.
(2) Verify that the policies and
procedures applicable to the vessel are
available to the crew.
(3) Verify that internal and external
audits are conducted in accordance with
the approved TSMS.
(4) Verify that recordkeeping
requirements are met.
(b) Hull structure and appurtenances.
Verify that the vessel complies with part
144 of this subchapter, examine the
condition of, and where appropriate,
witness the operation of the following:
(1) All accessible parts of the exterior
and interior of the hull, the watertight
bulkheads, and weather decks.
(2) All watertight closures in the hull,
decks, and bulkheads, including
through hull fittings and sea valves.
(3) Superstructure, masts, and similar
arrangements constructed on the hull.
(4) Railings and bulwarks and their
attachments to the hull structure.
(5) The presence of appropriate
guards or rails.
(6) All weathertight closures above
the weather deck and the provisions for
drainage of sea water from the exposed
decks.
(7) Watertight doors, verifying local
and remote operation and proper fit.
(8) All accessible interior spaces to
ensure that they are adequately
ventilated and drained, and that means
of escape are maintained and operate as
intended.
(9) Vessel markings.
(c) Machinery, fuel, and piping
systems. Verify that the vessel complies
with applicable requirements contained
in part 143 of this subchapter, examine
the condition of, and where appropriate,
witness the operation of:
(1) Engine control mechanisms,
including primary and alternate means,
if the vessel is equipped with alternate
means, of starting machinery,
directional controls, and emergency
shutdowns;
(2) All machinery essential to the
routine operation of the vessel,
including generators and cooling
systems;
(3) All fuel systems, including fuel
tanks, tank vents, piping, and pipe
fittings;
(4) All valves in fuel lines, including
local and remote operation;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
(5) All overboard discharge and intake
valves and watertight bulkhead pipe
penetration valves;
(6) Means provided for pumping
bilges; and
(7) Machinery shut-downs and
alarms.
(d) Steering systems. Examine the
condition of, and where appropriate,
witness the operation of:
(1) Steering systems and equipment
ensuring smooth operation;
(2) Auxiliary means of steering, if
installed; and
(3) Alarms.
(e) Pressure vessels and boilers. Verify
that the vessel complies with applicable
requirements in part 143 of this
subchapter.
(f) Electrical. Verify that the vessel
complies with applicable requirements
in part 143 of this subchapter, examine
the condition of, and where appropriate,
witness the operation of:
(1) All cables, as far as practicable,
without undue disturbance of the cable
or electrical apparatus;
(2) Circuit breakers, including testing
by manual operation;
(3) Fuses, including ensuring the
ratings of fuses are suitable for the
service intended;
(4) All generators, motors, lighting
fixtures, and circuit interrupting
devices;
(5) Batteries including security of
stowage;
(6) Electrical equipment, which
operates as part of or in conjunction
with a fire detection or alarm system
installed onboard, to ensure operation
in case of fire; and
(7) All emergency electrical systems,
including any automatic systems if
installed.
(g) Lifesaving. Verify that the vessel
complies with applicable requirements
contained in part 141 of this subchapter
and examine the condition of lifesaving
equipment and systems as follows:
(1) Verify that the vessel is equipped
with the required number of lifejackets,
work vests, and immersion suits.
(2) Verify the serviceable condition of
each lifejacket, work vest, and marine
buoyant device.
(3) Verify that each item of lifesaving
equipment found to be defective has
been repaired or replaced.
(4) Verify that each lifejacket, other
personal floatation device, or other
lifesaving device found to be defective
and incapable of repair was destroyed or
removed.
(5) Verify that each piece of expired
lifesaving equipment has been replaced.
(6) Examine each survival craft and
launching appliance in accordance with
subchapter W of this chapter.
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40111
(7) Verify the servicing of each
inflatable liferaft, inflatable buoyant
apparatus, and inflatable lifejacket as
required by subchapter W of this
chapter.
(8) Verify the proper servicing of each
hydrostatic release unit, other than a
disposable hydrostatic release unit, as
required under subchapter W of this
chapter.
(9) Verify that the vessel’s crew
conducted abandon ship and man
overboard drills under simulated
emergency conditions.
(h) Fire protection. Verify that the
vessel complies with applicable
requirements contained in part 142 of
this subchapter, and examine or verify
the fire protection equipment and
systems as follows:
(1) Verify that the vessel is equipped
with the required fire protection
equipment for the vessel’s route and
service.
(2) Verify that the inspection, testing,
and maintenance as required by
§ 142.240 of this subchapter are
performed.
(3) Verify that the training
requirements of § 142.245 of this
subchapter are carried out.
(i) Towing gear. Verify that the vessel
complies with the applicable
requirements in parts 140 of this
subchapter, and examine or verify the
condition of, and where appropriate, the
operation of the following:
(1) Deck machinery including
controls, guards, alarms and safety
features.
(2) Hawsers, wires, bridles, push gear,
and related vessel fittings for damage or
wear.
(3) Verify that the vessel complies
with 33 CFR part 164, if applicable.
(j) Navigation equipment. Verify that
the vessel complies with the applicable
requirements in part 140 of this
subchapter, and examine or verify the
condition of and, where appropriate, the
operation of the following:
(1) Navigation systems and
equipment.
(2) Navigation lights.
(3) Navigation charts or maps
appropriate to the area of operation and
corrected up to date.
(4) Examine the operation of
equipment and systems necessary to
maintain visibility through the
pilothouse windows.
(5) Verify that the vessel complies
with 33 CFR part 164, if applicable.
(k) Sanitary examination. Examine
the quarters, toilet and washing spaces,
galleys, serving pantries, lockers, and
similar spaces to ensure that they are
clean and decently habitable.
(l) Unsafe practices. (1) Verify that all
observed unsafe practices, fire hazards,
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40112
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
and other hazardous situations are
corrected, and that all required guards
and protective devices are in
satisfactory condition.
(2) Verify that bilges and other spaces
are free of excessive accumulation of oil,
trash, debris, or other matter that might
create a fire hazard, clog bilge pumping
systems, or block emergency escapes.
(m) Vessel personnel. Verify that the:
(1) Vessel is manned in accordance
with the vessel’s COI;
(2) Crew is maintaining vessel logs
and records in accordance with
applicable regulations and the TSMS
appropriate to the vessel;
(3) Crew is complying with the crew
safety and personnel health
requirements of part 140 of this
subchapter; and
(4) Crew has received training
required by parts 140, 141, and 142 of
this subchapter.
(n) Prevention of oil pollution.
Examine the vessel to ensure
compliance with the oil pollution
prevention requirements in § 140.655 of
this subchapter.
(o) Miscellaneous systems and
equipment. Examine all items in the
vessel’s outfit, such as ground tackle,
markings, and placards that are required
to be carried in accordance with the
regulations in this subchapter.
Subpart C—Drydock and Internal
Structural Surveys
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 137.300 Intervals for drydock and
internal structural examinations.
(a) Regardless of the option chosen to
obtain a COI, upon obtaining a COI each
towing vessel must then undergo a
drydock and internal structural
examination at the following intervals:
(1) A vessel that is exposed to salt
water more than 6 months in any 12month period since the last examination
or initial certification must undergo a
drydock and internal structural
examination at least twice every 5 years,
with not more than 36 months between
examinations.
(2) A vessel that is exposed to salt
water not more than 6 months in any
12-month period since the last
examination or initial certification must
undergo a drydock and internal
structural examination at least once
every 5 years.
(b) The cognizant OCMI may require
additional examinations of the vessel
whenever he or she discovers or
suspects damage or deterioration to hull
plating or structural members that may
affect the seaworthiness or fitness for
the route or service of a vessel. These
examinations may include a drydock
examination, including:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
(1) An internal structural examination
of any affected space of a vessel,
including its fuel tanks;
(2) A removal of the vessel from
service to assess the extent of the
damage and to affect permanent repairs;
or
(3) An adjustment of the drydock
examination intervals to monitor the
vessel’s structural condition.
§ 137.302 Documenting compliance for the
Coast Guard inspection option.
The managing owner or managing
operator of a towing vessel, who has
selected the Coast Guard inspection
option, must make their vessel available
for the Coast Guard to conduct the
examinations required by this subpart in
accordance with the intervals prescribed
in § 137.300.
§ 137.305 Documenting compliance for the
TSMS option.
The owner or managing operator of a
towing vessel, who has selected the
TSMS option, must document
compliance with this subpart as follows:
(a) For vessels under the external
survey program, provide objective
evidence of compliance with § 137.310.
(b) For vessels under the internal
survey program, provide objective
evidence of compliance with § 137.315.
(c) Provide objective evidence that the
vessel has undergone a drydock and
internal structural examination,
including options permitted in
§ 137.320 or § 137.322.
§ 137.310
External survey program.
(a) The owner or managing operator of
a towing vessel that has selected the
TSMS option and who has chosen to
demonstrates compliance through an
external survey program must:
(1) Have the vessel examined by a
surveyor from a TPO at the intervals
prescribed in § 137.300;
(2) Ensure the examination is
conducted in accordance with
§ 137.325;
(3) Ensure the TSMS applicable to the
vessel includes policies and procedures
for complying with this section; and
(4) Make the applicable sections of the
TSMS available to the surveyor.
(b) The drydock examination and
internal structural examination must be
documented in a report that contains
the information required in § 137.135.
§ 137.315
Internal survey program.
(a) The owner or managing operator of
a towing vessel that has selected the
TSMS option and who has chosen to
demonstrate vessel compliance with
this subpart through an internal survey
program must ensure that the TSMS
applicable to the vessel includes:
PO 00000
Frm 00110
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(1) A survey program that meets the
requirements contained in § 137.325;
(2) Qualifications of the personnel
authorized to carry out a survey
program that are comparable to the
requirements of a surveyor from a TPO
as described in § 139.130 of this
subchapter;
(3) Procedures for documenting and
reporting non-conformities and
deficiencies;
(4) Procedures for reporting and
correcting major non-conformities;
(5) The identification of a responsible
person in management who has the
authority to stop all vessel operations
pending corrections, to oversee vessel
compliance activities, and to track and
verify the corrections of nonconformities and deficiencies; and
(6) Objective evidence that supports
the completion of all elements of a
vessel’s drydock and internal structural
examinations.
(b) The owner or managing operator
must notify the TPO responsible for
auditing the TSMS whenever activities
related to credit drydocking or internal
structural examinations are to be carried
out prior to commencing the activities.
(c) The interval between examinations
of each item may not exceed the
applicable interval described in
§ 137.300.
(d) The owner or managing operator
must notify the cognizant OCMI of the
zone within which activities related to
credit drydocking or internal structural
examinations are to be carried out prior
to commencing the activities.
§ 137.317 Coast Guard oversight of
drydock and internal structural examination
program for vessels under the TSMS
option.
If the cognizant OCMI has reasonable
cause to believe the program for the
drydock examination and internal
structural examination is deficient, he
or she may:
(a) Require an audit of ongoing
drydocking procedures and of
documentation applicable to the vessel,
in the presence of a representative of the
cognizant OCMI;
(b) Increase the frequency of the
audits;
(c) For vessels under the internal
survey program, require an examination
by a TPO;
(d) Require any other action within
his or her authority that he or she
considers appropriate; or
(e) For continued deficiencies, remove
the vessel, owner, managing operator, or
all three, from the TSMS option.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
§ 137.320 Vessels holding a valid load line
certificate.
A drydock and internal structural
examination performed for a towing
vessel to maintain a valid load line
certificate issued in accordance with
subchapter E of this chapter would
count as an examination required under
§ 137.300.
§ 137.322
Classed vessels.
(a) A drydock and internal structural
examination performed for a towing
vessel to maintain class by the
American Bureau of Shipping in
accordance with their rules, as
appropriate for the intended service and
routes, would count as an examination
required under § 137.300.
(b) A drydock and internal structural
examination performed for a towing
vessel to maintain class by a recognized
classification society in accordance with
their rules, as appropriate for the
intended service and routes, would
count as an examination required under
§ 137.300, provided the Coast Guard has
accepted their applicable rules.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 137.325
General conduct of examination.
(a) When conducting an examination
of a towing vessel as required by this
subpart, the surveyor must determine
whether any defect, deterioration,
damage, or modifications of the hull and
related structure and components may
adversely affect the vessel’s
seaworthiness or fitness or suitability
for its route or service.
(b) The examination must address the
items in § 137.330 as applicable, and
must include:
(1) Access to internal spaces as
appropriate;
(2) A visual examination of the
external structure of the vessel to
confirm that the condition is properly
maintained; and
(3) A visual examination to confirm
that unapproved modifications were not
made to the vessel.
(c) The thoroughness and stringency
of the examination will depend upon
the condition of the vessel.
(d) The owner or managing operator
must notify the cognizant OCMI when
the condition of the vessel may create
an unsafe condition.
(e) The cognizant OCMI may require
the owner or managing operator to
provide for the attendance of a surveyor
or auditor from a TPO to assist with
verifying the vessel’s compliance with
the requirements in this subpart.
§ 137.330 Scope of the drydock
examination.
(a) This regulation applies to all
towing vessels covered by this
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
subchapter. The drydock examination
must be conducted while the vessel is
hauled out of the water or placed in a
drydock or slipway. The Coast Guard
inspector or surveyor conducting this
examination must:
(1) Examine the exterior of the hull,
including bottom, sides, headlog, and
stern, and examine all appendages for
damage, fractures, wastage, pitting, or
improper repairs;
(2) Examine each tail shaft for bends,
cracks, and damage, including the
sleeves or other bearing contact surfaces
on the tail shaft for wear. The tail shaft
need not be removed for examination if
these items can otherwise be properly
evaluated;
(3) Examine the rudders for damage,
the upper and lower bearings for wear,
and the rudder stock for damage or
wear. Rudders need not be removed for
examination if these items can be
otherwise properly evaluated. This also
includes other underwater components
of steering and propulsion mechanisms;
(4) Examine the propellers for cracks
and damage;
(5) Examine the exterior components
of the machinery cooling system for
leaks, damage, or deterioration;
(6) Open and examine all sea chests,
through-hull fittings, and strainers for
damage, deterioration, or fouling; and
(7) On wooden vessels, pull fastenings
as required for examination.
(b) An internal structural examination
required by this part may be conducted
while the vessel is afloat or while it is
out of the water. It consists of a
complete examination of the vessel’s
main strength members, including the
major internal framing, the hull plating
and planking; voids; and ballast, cargo,
and fuel oil tanks. Where the internal
framing, plating, or planking of the
vessel is concealed, sections of the
lining, ceiling, or insulation may be
removed or the parts otherwise probed
or exposed to determine the condition
of the hull structure. Fuel oil tanks need
not be cleaned out and internally
examined if the general condition of the
tanks is determined to be satisfactory by
an external examination.
§ 137.335 Underwater survey in lieu of
drydocking.
(a) This section applies to all towing
vessels subject to this subchapter. If a
TSMS is applicable to the vessel, the
TSMS may include policies and
procedures for employing and
documenting an underwater survey in
lieu of drydocking (UWILD). A vessel is
eligible for UWILD if the Coast Guard
determines that:
(1) There is no obvious damage or
defect in the hull adversely affecting the
PO 00000
Frm 00111
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40113
seaworthiness or fitness for the vessel’s
route or service;
(2) The vessel has been operated
satisfactorily since the last drydocking;
(3) The vessel is less than 15 years of
age;
(4) The vessel has a steel or aluminum
hull; and
(5) The vessel is fitted with a hull
protection system.
(b) The owner or managing operator
must submit an application to the
cognizant OCMI at least 90 days before
the vessel’s next required drydock
examination. The application must
include:
(1) The procedure for carrying out the
underwater survey;
(2) The time and place of the
underwater survey;
(3) The method used to accurately
determine the diver’s or the remotely
operated vehicle’s location relative to
the hull;
(4) The means for examining all
through-hull fittings and appurtenances;
(5) The condition of the vessel,
including the anticipated draft of the
vessel at the time of the survey;
(6) A description of the hull
protection system; and
(7) The names and qualifications of all
personnel involved in conducting the
UWILD.
(c) If a vessel is 15 years of age or
older, the Commandant may approve a
UWILD at alternating intervals provided
that:
(1) All provisions of paragraphs (a)
and (b) of this section are complied
with, except that the vessel does not
need to be less than 15 years of age; and
(2) During the vessel’s drydock
examination preceding the underwater
survey, a complete set of hull gauging
was taken which indicated that the
vessel was free from hull deterioration.
PART 138—TOWING SAFETY
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (TSMS)
Sec.
Subpart A—General
138.100 Purpose.
138.115 Compliance.
Subpart B—Towing Safety Management
System (TSMS)
138.205 Purpose of a TSMS.
138.210 Objectives of a TSMS.
138.215 Functional requirements of a
TSMS.
138.220 TSMS elements.
138.225 Existing safety management
systems (SMSs).
Subpart C—Documenting Compliance
138.305 TSMS certificate.
138.310 Internal audits for a TSMS
certificate.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40114
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
138.315 External audits for a TSMS
certificate.
Subpart D—Audits
138.400 General.
138.405 Conduct of internal audits.
138.410 Conduct of external audits.
Subpart E—Coast Guard or Organizational
Oversight and Review
138.500 Notification prior to audit.
138.505 Submittal of external audit results.
138.510 Required attendance.
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3301, 3306,
3308, 3316, 8104, 8904; 33 CFR 1.05; DHS
Delegation 0170.1.
Subpart A—General
§ 138.100
Purpose.
The purpose of this part is to
prescribe requirements for owners or
managing operators of towing vessels
who adopt a Towing Safety
Management System (TSMS) under this
subchapter.
§ 138.115
Compliance.
Owners or managing operators
selecting the TSMS option must obtain
a TSMS certificate issued under
§ 138.305 at least 6 months before
obtaining a Certificate of Inspection
(COI) for any of their vessels covered by
the TSMS certificate.
Subpart B—Towing Safety
Management System (TSMS)
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 138.205
Purpose of a TSMS.
(a) The purpose of a TSMS is to
establish policies, procedures, and
required documentation to ensure the
owner or managing operator meets its
established goals while ensuring
continuous compliance with all
regulatory requirements. The TSMS
must contain a method to ensure all
levels of the organization are working
within the framework.
(b) A TSMS establishes and
maintains:
(1) Management policies and
procedures that serve as an operational
protocol for all levels within
management;
(2) Procedures to produce objective
evidence that demonstrates compliance
with the requirements of this
subchapter;
(3) Procedures for an owner or
managing operator to evaluate that they
are following their own policies and
procedures and complying with the
requirements of this subchapter;
(4) Arrangements for a periodic
evaluation by an independent thirdparty organization (TPO) to determine
how well an owner or managing
operator and their towing vessels are
complying with their stated policies and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
procedures, and to verify that those
policies and procedures comply with
the requirements of this subchapter; and
(5) Procedures for correcting problems
identified by management personnel
and TPOs and facilitating continuous
improvement.
§ 138.210
Objectives of a TSMS.
The TSMS, through policies,
procedures, and documentation, must:
(a) Demonstrate management
responsibility. The management must
demonstrate that they implemented the
policies and procedures as contained in
the TSMS and the entire organization is
adhering to their safety management
program.
(b) Document management
procedures. A TSMS must describe and
document the owner or managing
operator’s organizational structure,
responsibilities, procedures, and
resources which ensure quality
monitoring.
(c) Ensure document and data
control. There must be clear
identification of what types of
documents and data are to be
controlled, and who is responsible for
controlling activities, including
approval, issue, distribution,
modification, removal of obsolete
materials, and other related
administrative functions.
(d) Provide a process and criteria for
selection of third parties. Procedures for
selection of TPOs must exist that
include how third parties are evaluated,
including selection criteria.
(e) Establish a system of
recordkeeping. Records must be
maintained to demonstrate effective
implementation of the TSMS. This must
include audit records, non-conformity
reports and corrective actions, auditor
qualifications, auditor training, and
other records as considered necessary.
(f) Identify and meet training needs.
The owner or operator must establish
and maintain documented procedures
for identifying training needs and
providing training.
(g) Ensure adequate resources.
Identify adequate resources and
procedures necessary to comply with
the TSMS.
§ 138.215
TSMS.
Functional requirements of a
The functional requirements of a
TSMS include:
(a) Policies and procedures to provide
direction for the safe operation of
towing vessels and protection of the
marine environment in compliance with
applicable U.S. law, including the Code
of Federal Regulations, and, if on an
international voyage, applicable
PO 00000
Frm 00112
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
international conventions to which the
United States is a party;
(b) Defined levels of authority and
lines of communication between
shoreside and vessel personnel;
(c) Procedures for reporting accidents
and non-conformities;
(d) Procedures to prepare for and
respond to emergency situations by
shoreside and vessel personnel;
(e) Procedures for verification of
vessel compliance with this subchapter;
(f) Procedures for internal auditing of
the TSMS, including shoreside and
vessel operations;
(g) Procedures for external audits;
(h) Procedures for management
review of internal and external audit
reports and correction of nonconformities; and
(i) Procedures to evaluate
recommendations made by management
and other personnel.
§ 138.220
TSMS elements.
The TSMS must include the elements
listed in paragrahs (a) through (d) of this
section. If an element listed is not
applicable to an owner or managing
operator, appropriate justification must
be documented and is subject to
acceptance by the TPO.
(a) Administration and management
organization. A policy must be in place
that outlines the TSMS culture and how
management intends to ensure
compliance with this subpart.
Supporting this policy, the following
procedures and documentation must be
included:
(1) Management organization—(i)
Responsibilities. The management
organization, authority, and
responsibilities of individuals must be
documented.
(ii) Designated person. Each owner or
managing operator must designate in
writing the shoreside person(s)
responsible for ensuring the TSMS is
implemented and continuously
functions throughout management and
the fleet. They must also designate the
shoreside person(s) responsible for
ensuring that the vessels are properly
maintained and in operable condition,
including those responsible for
emergency assistance to each towing
vessel.
(iii) Master authority. Each owner or
managing operator must define the
scope of the master’s authority. The
master’s authority must provide for the
ability to make final determinations on
safe operations of the towing vessel.
Specifically, it must provide the
authority for the master to cease
operation if an unsafe condition exists.
(2) Audits—(i) Procedures for
conducting internal and external audits.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
The TSMS must contain procedures for
audits in accordance with §§ 138.310
and 138.315.
(ii) Procedures for identifying and
correcting non-conformities. The TSMS
must contain procedures for any person
to report non-conformities. The
procedures must describe how an initial
report should be made and the actions
taken to follow-up and ensure
appropriate resolution.
(b) Personnel. Policies must be in
place that cover the owner or managing
operator’s approach to managing
personnel, including, but not limited to,
employment, training, and health and
safety of personnel. Supporting these
polices, the following procedures and
documentation must be included:
(1) Employment procedures. The
TSMS must contain procedures related
to the employment of individuals.
Procedures must be in place to ensure
adequate qualifications of personnel, to
include background checks, compliance
with drug and alcohol standards, and
that personnel are able to perform
required tasks.
(2) Training of personnel. The TSMS
must contain a policy related to the
training of personnel, including:
(i) New-hire orientation;
(ii) Duties associated with the
execution of the TSMS;
(iii) Execution of operational duties;
(iv) Execution of emergency
procedures;
(v) Occupational health;
(vi) Crew safety; and
(vii) Training required by this
Subchapter.
(c) Verification of vessel compliance.
Policies must be in place that cover the
owner or managing operator’s approach
for ensuring vessel compliance,
including, but not limited to, policies on
maintenance and survey, safety, the
environment, security, and emergency
preparedness. Supporting these policies,
the following procedures and
documentation must be included:
(1) Maintenance and survey.
Procedures outlining the owner or
managing operator’s survey regime must
specify all maintenance, examination,
and survey requirements, including the
minimum qualifications of persons
assigned to carry out required surveys
the owner or managing operator is using
the internal examination program.
Applicable documentation must be
maintained for all activities for a period
of 5 years.
(2) Safety, environment, and security.
Procedures must be in place to ensure
safety of property, the environment, and
personnel. This must include
procedures to ensure the selection of the
appropriate vessel, including adequate
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
maneuverability and horsepower,
appropriate rigging and towing gear,
proper management of the navigational
watch, and compliance with applicable
security measures.
(d) Compliance with this subchapter.
Procedures and documentation must be
in place to ensure that each towing
vessel complies with the operational,
equipment, and personnel requirements
of this subchapter.
§ 138.225 Existing safety management
systems (SMSs).
(a) A safety management system
(SMS) which is fully compliant with the
International Safety Management (ISM)
Code requirements, implemented in 33
CFR part 96, will be deemed in
compliance with TSMS-related
requirements in this subchapter.
(b) Other existing SMSs may be
considered for acceptance as meeting
the TSMS requirements of this part. The
Coast Guard may:
(1) Accept such system in full;
(2) Require modifications to the
system as a condition of acceptance; or
(3) Reject the system.
(c) An owner or managing operator
who seeks to meet TSMS requirements
using provisions in paragraph (a) or (b)
of this section must submit
documentation to the Coast Guard based
on the initial audit and one full audit
cycle of at least 3 years.
(d) The Coast Guard may elect to
inspect equipment and records,
including:
(1) Contents of the SMS;
(2) Objective evidence of internal and
external audits;
(3) Objective evidence that nonconformities were identified and
corrected; and
(4) Objective evidence of vessel
compliance with applicable regulations.
Subpart C—Documenting Compliance
§ 138.305
TSMS certificate.
(a) The owner or managing operator
will be issued a TSMS certificate by a
TPO when his or her organization is
deemed in compliance with the TSMS
requirements. It should be kept on file
at the owner or managing operator’s
shoreside office and available for
review, at the request of the Coast
Guard.
(b) A TSMS certificate is valid for 5
years from the date of issue, unless
suspended, revoked or rescinded as
provided in paragraphs (d) and (e) of
this section.
(c) The vessel owner or managing
operator must maintain a list of vessels
currently covered by each TSMS
certificate and must provide it to the
Coast Guard upon request.
PO 00000
Frm 00113
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40115
(d) A TSMS certificate may be
suspended or revoked by the Coast
Guard at any time for non-compliance
with the requirements of this part.
(e) The TPO that issued the TSMS
certificate may rescind the certificate for
non-compliance with the requirements
of this part.
(f) A copy of the TSMS certificate
must be maintained on each towing
vessel that is covered by the TSMS
certificate and on file at the owner or
managing operator’s shoreside office.
§ 138.310 Internal audits for a TSMS
certificate.
(a) Internal management audits must
be conducted annually, within 3 months
of the anniversary date of the TSMS
certificate, to ensure the owner or
managing operator is effectively
implementing all elements of their
TSMS.
(b) The internal management audit
must ensure that management has
implemented the TSMS throughout all
levels of the organization, including
audits of all the owner or managing
operator’s towing vessels to which a
TSMS applies to ensure implementation
at the operational level.
(c) The results of internal audits must
be documented and maintained for a
period of 5 years and made available to
the Coast Guard upon request.
(d) Internal auditors:
(1) Must have knowledge of the
management, its SMS, and the standards
contained in this subchapter;
(2) Must have completed an ANSI/
ISO/ASQ Q9001–2000 or ISO
9001:2008(E) (incorporated by reference,
see § 136.112 of this subchapter)
internal auditor/assessor course or Coast
Guard-recognized equivalent;
(3) May not be the designated person,
or any other person, within the
organization that is responsible for
development or implementation of the
TSMS; and
(4) Must be independent of the
procedures being audited, unless this is
impracticable due to the size and the
nature of the organization.
§ 138.315 External audits for a TSMS
certificate.
External audits for obtaining and
renewing a TSMS certificate are
conducted through a TPO and must
include both management and vessels as
follows:
(a) Management audits. (1) Prior to
the issuance of an owner or managing
operator’s initial TSMS certificate, or
subsequent renewals, an external
management audit must be conducted
by an auditor from a TPO.
(2) A mid-period external
management audit must be conducted
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40116
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
between the 27th and 33rd month of the
certificate’s period of validity.
(b) Vessel audits. (1) An external audit
must be conducted prior to the issuance
of the initial COI for vessels subject to
an owner or managing operator’s TSMS
that have been owned or operated for 6
or more months prior to receiving the
initial COI.
(2) An external audit must be
conducted no later than 6 months after
the issuance of the initial COI for
vessels subject to the owner or
managing operator’s TSMS that have
been owned or operated for fewer than
6 months prior to receiving the initial
COI.
(3) An external audit of all vessels
covered by a TSMS certificate must be
conducted during the 5-year period of
validity of the TSMS certificate. The
vessels must be selected randomly and
distributed as evenly as possible.
(4) External audits may include the
use of objective evidence which may be
available at the owner or managing
operator’s corporate office. Some
portions of this audit require visiting
each vessel at some point during the 5year period of validity of the TSMS
certificate.
(c) Documentation. The results of the
external audit must be documented and
maintained for a period of 5 years and
made available to the Coast Guard or the
external auditor upon request.
Subpart D—Audits
§ 138.400
General.
Management and vessels are subject
to internal and external audits to assess
compliance with TSMS and the vessel
standards requirements of this
subchapter.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 138.405
Conduct of internal audits.
(a) Internal audits are conducted by,
or on behalf of, the management and
may be performed by a designated
employee or by contracted individual(s)
who conduct the audit as if an employee
of the owner or managing operator.
(b) Internal audits are not necessarily
conducted as one event; they can be
taken in segments over time.
(c) Internal audits must be of
sufficient depth and breadth to ensure
the owner or managing operator
established adequate procedures and
documentation to comply with the
TSMS requirements of this part, that the
TSMS was implemented throughout all
levels of the organization, and that the
owner or managing operator’s vessels
comply with this subchapter and the
TSMS.
(d) The auditor must have the
authority to examine documentation,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
question personnel, examine vessel
equipment, witness system testing, and
observe personnel training, including
drills, as necessary to verify TSMS
effectiveness.
§ 138.410
Conduct of external audits.
(a) External audits must be conducted
by an auditor from a TPO and cover all
elements of the TSMS requirements of
this subchapter, but may be conducted
on a sampling basis of each of those
TSMS elements.
(b) External audits must be of
sufficient depth and breadth to ensure
the owner or operating manager
effectively implemented its TSMS
throughout all levels of the organization,
including onboard its vessels.
(c) The auditor must be provided
access to examine any requested
documentation, question personnel,
examine vessel equipment, witness
system testing, and observe personnel
training, including drills, as necessary
to verify TSMS effectiveness.
(d) The auditor may broaden the
scope of the audit if:
(1) The TSMS is incomplete or not
effectively implemented;
(2) Conditions found are not
consistent with the records; or
(3) Unsafe conditions are identified.
(e) The auditor may verify compliance
with vessel standards and TSMS
requirements through a review of
objective evidence such as checklists,
invoices, and reports, and may conduct
a visual sampling onboard the vessels to
determine whether or not the conditions
onboard the vessel are consistent with
the records reviewed.
(f) If an auditor identifies a major nonconformity during the course of the
external audit, then the auditor must
notify the local Officer in Charge,
Marine Inspection (OCMI) within 24
hours and the owner or managing
operator’s designated representative in
accordance with the TSMS applicable to
the vessel.
Subpart E—Coast Guard or
Organizational Oversight and Review
§ 138.500
Notification prior to audit.
(a) The owner or managing operator of
a towing vessel must notify the local
OCMI at least 72 hours prior to an
external audit being conducted under
this part.
(b) The Coast Guard may require that
a Coast Guard representative accompany
the auditor during part, or all, of an
external audit.
(c) The Coast Guard may conduct a
separate audit of the owner or managing
operator or its towing vessels, at its
discretion.
PO 00000
Frm 00114
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
§ 138.505
results.
Submittal of external audit
(a) Submission of external
management audits. The results of an
external management audit as required
by § 138.315 must be submitted to the
Towing Vessel National Center of
Expertise within 30 days of audit
completion by the TPO conducting the
external audit. The mailing address for
the Coast Guard Towing Vessel National
Center of Expertise is 504 Broadway
Street, Suite 101, Paducah, Kentucky
42001.
(b) Submission of external vessel
audits. The results of any external
vessel audits required by § 138.315 must
be submitted to the cognizant OCMI
within 30 days of audit completion by
the TPO conducting the external audit.
(c) Electronic submissions. The results
of external audits required by this
section may be submitted electronically
so long as the means used allows the
Coast Guard to reliably verify the person
making the submission and the
authenticity of the records submitted.
For those seeking to submit external
audit records to the Coast Guard
electronically, the TSMS must address
the means to be used to make these
electronic submissions.
§ 138.510
Required attendance.
(a) The TPO and the owner or
managing operator may be required to
explain or otherwise demonstrate areas
of the TSMS to the Coast Guard if there
is evidence that a TSMS, for which a
TSMS certificate was issued, is not in
compliance with the provisions of this
part. The Coast Guard may require a
third party’s attendance at the vessel or
the office of the owner or managing
operator for this purpose.
(b) The Coast Guard will not bear any
of the costs for a third party’s
attendance at the vessel or the office of
the owner or managing operator when
complying with this provision.
PART 139—THIRD-PARTY
ORGANIZATIONS
Sec.
139.100 Purpose.
139.110 Organizations not subject to
further approval.
139.115 General.
139.120 Application for approval as a TPO.
139.125 Approval of TPO.
139.130 Qualifications of auditors and
surveyors.
139.135 Addition and removal of auditors
and surveyors.
139.140 Renewal of TPO approval.
139.145 Suspension of approval.
139.150 Revocation of approval.
139.155 Appeals of suspension or
revocation of approval.
139.160 Coast Guard oversight activities.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
139.165
Documentation.
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3301, 3306,
3308, 3316, 8104, 8904; 33 CFR 1.05; DHS
Delegation 0170.1.
§ 139.100
Purpose.
(a) This part states the requirements
applicable to third-party organizations
(TPOs) that conduct audits and surveys
for towing vessels as required by this
subchapter.
(b) The Commandant delegates to the
Towing Vessel National Center of
Expertise (TVNCOE) the authority to
carry out the functions of this part
associated with approval of TPOs,
including revocation and suspension of
approval.
§ 139.110 Organizations not subject to
further approval.
(a) A recognized classification society,
which has satisfied the requirements in
46 CFR 8.230, meets the requirements of
a TPO for the purposes of this part and
may perform the work as a third-party
auditor.
(b) An authorized classification
society, which has been authorized
under 46 CFR part 8, subpart C or D,
meets the requirements of a TPO for the
purposes of this part and may perform
the work as a third-party surveyor.
(c) The organizations qualifying as
TPOs under paragraph (a) or (b) of this
section must ensure that employees
providing services under this part hold
proper qualifications for the particular
type of service being performed.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 139.115
General.
(a) The Coast Guard approves TPOs to
carry out functions related to ensuring
that towing vessels comply with
provisions of this subchapter.
Organizations may be approved to:
(1) Conduct audits of a Towing Safety
Management System (TSMS), and the
vessels to which the TSMS applies, to
verify compliance with the applicable
provisions of this subchapter;
(2) Issue TSMS certificates to the
owner or managing operator who is in
compliance with part 138 of this
subchapter;
(3) Conduct surveys of towing vessels
to verify compliance with the applicable
provisions of this subchapter; and
(4) Issue survey reports detailing the
results of surveys, carried out in
compliance with part 137 of this
subchapter.
(b) An organization seeking approval
under this part must provide objective
evidence to the Coast Guard that its
program:
(1) Is independent of the owner or
managing operator and vessels that it
audits or surveys;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
(2) Operates within a quality
management system acceptable to the
Coast Guard;
(3) Ensures its auditors and surveyors
are qualified and maintain continued
competence;
(4) Demonstrates the ability to carry
out the responsibilities of approval; and
(5) Meets all other requirements of
this part.
(c) A list of TPOs will be maintained
by the Coast Guard, and made available
upon request.
§ 139.120
TPO.
Application for approval as a
An organization, which may include
a business entity or an association,
desiring to be approved as a TPO under
this part must submit a written request
to the Towing Vessel National Center of
Expertise, 504 Broadway St Suite 101,
Paducah, KY 42001. The organization
must provide the following information:
(a) A description of the organization,
including the ownership, structure, and
organizational components.
(b) A general description of the clients
being served or intended to be served.
(c) A description of the types of work
performed by the organization or by the
principals of the organization in the
past, noting the amount and extent of
such work performed within the
previous 3 years.
(d) Objective evidence of an internal
quality system based on ANSI/ISO/ASQ
Q9001–2000 (incorporated by reference,
see § 136.112 of this subchapter) or an
equivalent quality standard.
(e) Organization procedures and
supporting documentation that describe
processes used to perform an audit and
records to show system effectiveness.
(f) Copies of checklists, forms, or
other tools to be used as guides or for
recording the results of audits and/or
surveys.
(g) Organization procedures for
appeals and grievances.
(h) The organization’s code of ethics
applicable to the organization and its
auditors and/or surveyors.
(i) A list of the organization’s auditors
and/or surveyors who meet the
requirements of § 139.130. This list
must include the experience,
background, and qualifications for each
auditor and/or surveyor.
(j) A description of the organization’s
means of assuring continued
competence of its personnel.
(k) The organization’s procedures for
terminating or removing auditors and/or
surveyors.
(l) A description of the organization’s
means of assuring the availability of its
personnel to meet the needs of the
towing companies for conducting audits
PO 00000
Frm 00115
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40117
and surveys within the intervals
established in this subchapter.
(m) A description of the
organization’s apprentice or associate
program for auditors and/or surveyors.
(n) A statement that the Coast Guard
may inspect the organization’s facilities
and records and may accompany
auditors and/or surveyors in the
performance of duties related to the
requested approval.
(o) Disclosure of any potential
conflicts of interest.
(p) A statement that the organization,
its managers, and employees engaged in
audits and/or surveys are not, and will
not be involved in any activities which
could result in a conflict of interest or
otherwise limit the independent
judgment of the auditor and/or surveyor
or organization.
(q) Any additional information that
the applicant deems pertinent.
§ 139.125
Approval of TPOs.
(a) The Commandant delegates to the
Towing Vessel National Center of
Expertise (TVNCOE) the authority to
carry out the review and approval
described in this section, and the related
authority to suspend and revoke
approval.
(b) The Coast Guard will review the
request and notify the organization in
writing whether their request is granted.
(c) If a request for approval is denied,
the Coast Guard will inform the
organization of the reasons for the
denial and will describe what
corrections are required for an approval
to be granted.
(d) An approval for a TPO that meets
the requirements of this part will expire:
(1) Five years after the last day of the
month in which it is granted;
(2) When the TPO gives notice that it
will no longer offer towing vessel audit
and/or survey services;
(3) When revoked by the Coast Guard
in accordance with § 139.150; or
(4) On the date of a change in
ownership, as defined in § 136.110, of
the TPO for which approval was
granted.
§ 139.130 Qualifications of auditors and
surveyors.
(a) A prospective auditor or surveyor
must have the skills and experience
necessary to assess compliance with all
requirements of this subchapter.
(b) Auditors must meet the following
qualifications:
(1) High school diploma or
equivalent.
(2) Four years of working on towing
vessels or other relevant marine
experience such as Coast Guard marine
inspector, licensed mariner, military
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40118
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
personnel with relevant maritime
experience, or marine surveyor.
(3) Successful completion of an ANSI/
ISO/ASQ Q9001–2000 or ISO
9001:2008(E) (incorporated by reference,
see § 136.112 of this subchapter) lead
auditor/assessor course or Coast Guard
recognized equivalent.
(4) Successful completion of a
training course for the auditing of a
TSMS.
(5) Audit experience, as demonstrated
by:
(i) Documented experience in
auditing the ISM Code or the American
Waterways Operators Responsible
Carrier Program, consisting of at least
two management audits and six vessel
audits within the past 5 years; or
(ii) Successful completion of an
auditor apprenticeship, consisting of at
least one management audit and three
vessel audits under the direction of a
lead auditor.
(c) Surveyors must meet the following
qualifications:
(1) High school diploma or
equivalent.
(2) At least one of the following:
(i) Four years of experience working
on towing vessels as master, mate
(pilot), or engineer; or
(ii) Other relevant marine experience
such as Coast Guard marine inspector,
military personnel with relevant
maritime experience, marine surveyor,
accredited marine surveyor, experience
on vessels of similar operating and
physical characteristics.
§ 139.135 Addition and removal of auditors
and surveyors.
(a) A TPO must maintain a list of
current and former auditors and
surveyors.
(b) To add an auditor or surveyor, the
TPO must submit that person’s
experience, background, and
qualifications to the TVNCOE.
(c) The TVNCOE must be notified
when an auditor or surveyor is removed
from employment.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 139.140
Renewal of TPO approval.
(a) To renew an approval, a TPO must
submit a written request to the TVNCOE
at the address listed in § 139.120.
(b) For the request to be approved, the
Coast Guard must be satisfied that the
applicant continues to fully meet
approval criteria.
(c) The Coast Guard may request any
additional information necessary to
properly evaluate the request.
§ 139.145
Suspension of approval.
(a) The Coast Guard may suspend the
approval of a TPO approved under this
part whenever the Coast Guard
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
determines that the TPO does not
comply with the provisions of this part.
The Coast Guard must:
(1) Notify the TPO in writing of the
intention to suspend the approval;
(2) Provide the details of the TPO’s
failure to comply with this part; and
(3) Advise the TPO of the time period,
not to exceed 60 days, within which the
TPO must correct its failure to comply
with this part. If the TPO fails to correct
its failure to comply with this part
within the time period allowed, the
approval will be suspended.
(b) The Coast Guard may also partially
suspend the approval of a TPO, using
the process described in paragraph (a) of
this section. This may include
suspension of an individual auditor or
surveyor or suspension of the authority
of the TPO to carry out specific duties
whenever the Coast Guard determines
that the provisions of this part are not
complied with.
§ 139.150
Revocation of approval.
(a) The Coast Guard may revoke the
approval of a TPO if the organization
has demonstrated a pattern or history of:
(1) Failure to comply with this part;
(2) Substantial deviations from the
terms of the approval granted under this
part; or
(3) Failures, including ethical
violations, conflicts of interest, or
inadequate performance, that indicate to
the Coast Guard that the TPO is no
longer capable of carrying out its duties
as a TPO.
(b) If the Coast Guard seeks to revoke
the approval of a TPO, it must:
(1) Notify the TPO in writing of the
intention to revoke the approval;
(2) Provide the details of the TPO’s
demonstrated pattern or history of
actions described in paragraph (a) of
this section; and
(3) Advise the TPO that it may appeal
this decision to the Coast Guard in
accordance with the provisions of 46
CFR subpart 1.03.
§ 139.155 Appeals of suspension or
revocation of approval.
Anyone directly affected by a decision
to suspend or revoke an approval
granted under this part may appeal the
decision to the Coast Guard in
accordance with the provisions of 46
CFR subpart 1.03.
§ 139.160
Coast Guard oversight activities.
(a) The Coast Guard will provide
notice to the TPO 48 hours in advance
of any site visit, unless the visit is in
response to a complaint or other
evidence of regulatory non-compliance.
During the visit, the Coast Guard may:
(1) Inspect a TPO’s records;
PO 00000
Frm 00116
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(2) Conduct interviews of auditors or
surveyors to aid in the evaluation of the
organization; and
(3) Observe audits or surveys.
(b) The Coast Guard may require that
the owner or managing operator make
available a copy of the TSMS upon
request.
(c) The Coast Guard may require a
revision of a previously approved TSMS
if it is determined that requirements of
this subchapter are not met.
§ 139.165
Documentation.
(a) Each TPO must retain the results
of each survey or audit conducted under
its approval, including:
(1) The names of the auditors and/or
surveyors;
(2) The results of each audit or survey
conducted; and
(3) Documentation showing
continuing actions relative to an audit
or survey, such as resolution of
deficiencies and non-conformities.
(b) Each TPO must also retain the
results of audits of their organization
conducted by the Coast Guard.
(c) Records required by this part must
be retained for a period of 5 years.
PART 140—OPERATIONS
Sec.
Subpart A—General
140.100 Purpose.
140.105 Applicability and delayed
implementation for existing vessels.
Subpart B—General Operational Safety
140.205 General vessel operation.
140.210 Responsibilities of the master and
crew.
Subpart C—[Reserved]
Subpart D—Crew Safety
140.400 Personnel records.
140.405 Emergency duties and duty
stations.
140.410 Safety orientation.
140.415 Orientation for individuals that are
not crewmembers.
140.420 Emergency drills and instruction.
140.425 Fall overboard prevention.
140.430 Wearing of work vests.
140.435 First aid equipment.
Subpart E—Safety and Health
140.500 General.
140.505 General health and safety
requirements.
140.510 Identification and mitigation of
health and safety hazards.
140.515 Training requirements.
Subpart F—Vessel Operational Safety
140.600 Applicability.
140.605 Vessel stability.
140.610 Hatches and other openings.
140.615 Examinations and tests.
140.620 Navigational safety equipment.
140.625 Navigation underway.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
140.630 Lookout.
140.635 Navigation assessment.
140.640 Pilothouse resource management.
140.645 Navigation safety training.
140.650 Operational readiness of lifesaving
and fire suppression and detection
equipment.
140.655 Prevention of oil and garbage
pollution.
140.660 Vessel security.
140.665 Inspection and testing required
when making alterations, repairs, or
other such operations involving riveting,
welding, burning, or like fire-producing
actions.
140.670 Use of auto pilot.
Subpart G—Navigation and Communication
Equipment
140.700 Applicability.
140.705 Charts and nautical publications.
140.710 Marine radar.
140.715 Communications equipment.
140.720 Navigation lights, shapes, and
sound signals.
140.725 Additional navigation equipment.
Subpart H—Towing Safety
140.800
140.801
140.805
140.820
Applicability.
Towing gear.
Towing safety.
Recordkeeping for towing gear.
140.900 Marine casualty reporting.
140.905 Official logbooks.
140.910 Towing vessel record or record
specified by TSMS.
140.915 Items to be recorded.
Subpart J—Penalties
Statutory penalties.
Suspension and revocation.
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3301, 3306,
3308, 3316, 8104, 8904; 33 CFR 1.05; DHS
Delegation 0170.1.
Subpart A—General
§ 140.100
Purpose.
This part contains the health, safety,
and operational requirements for towing
vessels and the crewmembers serving
onboard them.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 140.105 Applicability and delayed
implementation for existing vessels.
This part applies to all towing vessels
subject to this subchapter.
(a) With the exception § 140.500,
which has a later implementation date,
an existing towing vessel must comply
with the requirements in this part no
later than either July 20, 2018 or the
date the vessel obtains a Certificate of
Inspection (COI), whichever date is
earlier.
(b) The delayed implementation
provisions in paragraph (a) of this
section do not apply to a new towing
vessel.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
§ 140.205
General vessel operation.
(a) A vessel must be operated in
accordance with applicable laws and
regulations and in such a manner as to
afford protection against hazards to life,
property, and the environment.
(b) Towing vessels with a Towing
Safety Management System (TSMS)
must be operated in accordance with the
TSMS applicable to the vessel.
(c) Vessels must be manned in
accordance with the COI. Manning
requirements are contained in part 15 of
this chapter.
(d) Each crewmember that is required
to hold a Merchant Mariner Credential
(MMC) must have the credential on
board and available for examination at
all times when the vessel is operating.
(e) All individuals who are not
required to hold an MMC permitted
onboard the vessel must have and
present on request a valid personal
identification that meets the
requirements set forth in 33 CFR
101.515.
§ 140.210 Responsibilities of the master
and crew.
Subpart I—Vessel Records
140.1000
140.1005
Subpart B—General Operational Safety
(a) The safety of the towing vessel is
the responsibility of the master and
includes:
(1) Adherence to the provisions of the
COI;
(2) Compliance with the applicable
provisions of this subchapter;
(3) Compliance with the TSMS, if one
is applicable to the vessel; and
(4) Supervision of all persons onboard
in carrying out their assigned duties.
(b) If the master or officer in charge of
a navigational watch believes it is
unsafe for the vessel to proceed, that an
operation endangers the vessel or crew,
or that an unsafe condition exists, he or
she must ensure that adequate
corrective action is taken and must not
proceed until it is safe to do so.
(c) Nothing in this subpart may be
construed in a manner which limits the
master or officer in charge of a
navigational watch, at his or her own
responsibility, from diverting from the
route prescribed in the COI or taking
such steps as deemed necessary and
prudent to assist vessels in distress or
for other emergency conditions.
(d) It is the responsibility of the crew
to:
(1) Adhere to the provisions of the
COI;
(2) Comply with the applicable
provisions of this subchapter;
(3) Comply with the TSMS, if one is
applicable to the vessel;
(4) Ensure that the master or officer in
charge of a navigational watch is made
PO 00000
Frm 00117
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40119
aware of all known aspects of the
condition of the vessel, including:
(i) Those vessels being pushed,
pulled, or hauled alongside; and
(ii) Equipment and other accessories
used for pushing, pulling, or hauling
alongside other vessels.
(5) Minimize any distraction from the
operation of the vessel or performance
of duty; and
(6) Report unsafe conditions to the
master or officer in charge of a
navigational watch and take effective
action to prevent accidents.
Subpart C—[Reserved]
Subpart D—Crew Safety
§ 140.400
Personnel records.
(a) The master of each towing vessel
must keep an accurate list of
crewmembers and their assigned
positions and responsibilities aboard the
vessel.
(b) The master must keep an accurate
list of individuals to be carried as
persons in addition to the crew and any
passengers.
(c) The date and time that a
navigation watchstander, including
master, officer in charge of a
navigational watch, and lookout
assumes a watch and is relieved of a
watch must be recorded in the towing
vessel record (TVR), official logbook, or
in accordance with the TSMS applicable
to the vessel. If an engineering watch is
maintained, comparable records
documenting the engineering watch are
required.
§ 140.405
stations.
Emergency duties and duty
(a) Crewmembers must meet the
requirements in §§ 15.405 and 15.1105
of this chapter, as appropriate.
(b) Any towing vessel with alternating
watches (shift work) or overnight
accommodations must identify the
duties and duty stations of each person
onboard during an emergency,
including:
(1) Responding to fires and flooding;
(2) Responding to emergencies that
necessitate abandoning the vessel;
(3) Launching survival craft;
(4) Taking action during heavy
weather;
(5) Taking action in the event of a
person overboard;
(6) Taking action relative to the tow;
(7) Taking action in the event of
failure of propulsion, steering, or
control system;
(8) Managing individuals onboard
who are not crewmembers;
(9) Managing any other event or
condition which poses a threat to life,
property, or the environment; and
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40120
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(10) Responding to other special
duties essential to addressing
emergencies as determined by the TSMS
applicable to the vessel, if a TSMS is
used.
(c) The emergency duties and duty
stations required by this section must be
posted at each operating station and in
a conspicuous location in a space
commonly visited by crewmembers. If
posting is impractical, such as in an
open boat, they may be kept onboard in
a location readily available to the crew.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 140.410
Safety orientation.
(a) Personnel must meet the
requirements in §§ 15.405 and 15.1105
of this chapter, as appropriate.
(b) Prior to getting underway for the
first time on a particular towing vessel,
each crewmember must receive a safety
orientation on:
(1) His or her duties in an emergency;
(2) The location, operation, and use of
lifesaving equipment;
(3) Prevention of falls overboard;
(4) Personal safety measures;
(5) The location, operation, and use of
Personal Protective Equipment;
(6) Emergency egress procedures;
(7) The use and operation of
watertight and weathertight closures;
(8) Responsibilities to provide
assistance to individuals that are not
crewmembers;
(9) How to respond to emergencies
relative to the tow; and
(10) Awareness of, and expected
response to, any other hazards inherent
to the operation of the towing vessel
which may pose a threat to life,
property, or the environment.
(c) The safety orientation provided to
crewmembers who received a safety
orientation on another vessel may be
modified to cover only those areas
unique to the other vessel on which
service will occur.
(d) Safety orientations and other crew
training must be documented in the
TVR, official logbook, or in accordance
with the TSMS applicable to the vessel.
The entry must include:
(1) The date of the safety orientation
or training;
(2) A general description of the safety
orientation or training topics;
(3) The name(s) and signature(s) of
individual(s) providing the orientation
or training; and
(4) The name(s) of the individual(s)
receiving the safety orientation or
training.
§ 140.415 Orientation for individuals that
are not crewmembers.
Individuals, who are not
crewmembers, on board a towing vessel
must receive a safety orientation prior to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
getting underway or as soon as
practicable thereafter, to include:
(a) The location, operation, and use of
lifesaving equipment;
(b) Emergency procedures;
(c) Methods to notify crewmembers in
the event of an emergency; and
(d) Prevention of falls overboard.
§ 140.420 Emergency drills and
instruction.
(a) Master’s responsibilities. The
master of a towing vessel must ensure
that drills are conducted and
instructions are given to ensure that all
crewmembers are capable of performing
the duties expected of them during
emergencies. This includes abandoning
the vessel, recovering persons from the
water, responding to onboard fires and
flooding, or responding to other threats
to life, property, or the environment.
(b) Nature of drills. Each drill must,
as far as practicable, be conducted as if
there was an actual emergency.
(c) Annual instruction for each crew
member. Unless otherwise stated, each
crewmember must receive the
instruction required by this section
annually.
(d) Instructions and drills required.
The following instruction and drills are
required:
(1) Response to fires, as required by
§ 142.245 of this subchapter;
(2) Launching of a skiff, if listed as an
item of emergency equipment to
abandon ship or recover a personoverboard;
(3) Instruction on the use of davitlaunched liferafts, if installed.
(4) If a rescue boat is installed,
instruction on how it must be launched,
with its assigned crew aboard, and
maneuvered in the water as if during an
actual man-overboard situation.
(5) Credentialed mariners holding an
officer endorsement do not require
instruction in accordance with
paragraphs (d)(1), (3), and (4) of this
section.
(e) Alternative forms of instruction.
(1) Instruction as required by this
section may be conducted via an
electronic format followed by a
discussion and demonstration by a
competent individual. This instruction
may occur either on board or off the
vessel but must include the equipment
that is the subject of the instruction.
(2) Instruction as required by this
section may be performed in accordance
with the TSMS applicable to the vessel,
provided that it meets the minimum
requirements of this section.
(f) Location of drills, full crew
participation, and use of equipment. As
far as practicable, drills must take place
on board the vessel. They must include:
PO 00000
Frm 00118
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(1) Participation by all crewmembers;
and
(2) Actual use of, or realistic
simulation of the use of, emergency
equipment.
(g) Recordkeeping. Records of drills
and instruction must be maintained in
the TVR, official logbook, or in
accordance with the TSMS applicable to
the vessel. The record must include:
(1) The date of the drill and
instruction;
(2) A description of the drill scenario
and instruction topics;
(3) The personnel involved.
§ 140.425
Fall overboard prevention.
(a) The owner or managing operator of
a towing vessel must establish
procedures to address fall overboard
prevention and recovery of persons in
the water, including, but not limited to:
(1) Personal protective equipment;
(2) Safely working on the tow;
(3) Safety while line handling;
(4) Safely moving between the vessel
and a tow, pier, structure, or other
vessel; and
(5) Use of retrieval equipment.
(b) The owner, managing operator, or
master must ensure that all persons on
board comply with the policies and
procedures in this section.
§ 140.430
Wearing of work vests.
(a) Personnel dispatched from the
vessel or that are working in an area on
the exterior of the vessel without rails
and guards must wear a lifejacket
meeting requirements in 46 CFR
141.340, an immersion suit meeting
requirements in 46 CFR 141.350, or a
work vest approved by the Commandant
under 46 CFR subpart 160.053. When
worn at night, the work vest must be
equipped with a light that meets the
requirements of 46 CFR 141.340(g)(1).
Work vests may not be substituted for
the lifejackets required by 46 CFR part
141.
(b) Each storage container containing
a work vest must be marked ‘‘WORK
VEST’’.
§ 140.435
First aid equipment.
Each towing vessel must be equipped
with an industrial type first aid cabinet
or kit, appropriate to the size of the crew
and operating conditions. Each towing
vessel operating on oceans, coastwise,
or Great Lakes routes must have a means
to take blood pressure readings, splint
broken bones, and apply large bandages
for serious wounds.
Subpart E—Safety and Health
§ 140.500
General.
(a) No later than July 22, 2019, the
owner or managing operator must
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
implement a health and safety plan. The
health and safety plan must document
compliance with this part and include
recordkeeping procedures.
(b) The owner, managing operator, or
master must ensure that all persons on
board a towing vessel comply with the
health and safety plan.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 140.505 General health and safety
requirements.
(a) The owner or managing operator
must implement procedures for
reporting unsafe conditions and must
have records of the activities conducted
under this section. The owner or
managing operator must maintain
records of health and safety incidents
that occur on board the vessel,
including any medical records
associated with the incidents. Upon
request, the owner or managing operator
must provide crewmembers with
incident reports and the crewmember’s
own associated medical records.
(b) All vessel equipment must be used
in accordance with the manufacturer’s
recommended practice and in a manner
that minimizes risk of injury or death.
This includes machinery, deck
machinery, towing gear, ladders,
embarkation devices, cranes, portable
tools, and safety equipment.
(c) All machinery and equipment that
is not in proper working order
(including missing or malfunctioning
guards or safety devices) must be
removed; made safe through marking,
tagging, or covering; or otherwise made
unusable.
(d) Personal Protective Equipment
(PPE). (1) Appropriate Personal
Protective Equipment (PPE) must be
made available and on hand for all
personnel engaged in an activity that
requires the use of PPE.
(2) PPE must be suitable for the
vessel’s intended service; meet the
standards of 29 CFR part 1910, subpart
I; and be used, cleaned, maintained, and
repaired in accordance with
manufacturer’s requirements.
(3) All individuals must wear PPE
appropriate to the activity being
performed;
(4) All personnel engaged in an
activity must be trained in the proper
use, limitations, and care of the PPE
specified by this subpart;
(e) The vessel, including crew’s
quarters and the galley, must be kept in
a sanitary condition.
§ 140.510 Identification and mitigation of
health and safety hazards.
(a) The owner or managing operator
must implement procedures to identify
and mitigate health and safety hazards,
including but not limited to:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
(1) Tools and equipment, including
deck machinery, rigging, welding and
cutting, hand tools, ladders, and
abrasive wheel machinery found on
board the vessel;
(2) Slips, trips, and falls;
(3) Working aloft;
(4) Hazardous materials;
(5) Confined space entry;
(6) Blood-borne pathogens and other
biological hazards;
(7) Electrical;
(8) Noise;
(9) Falls overboard;
(10) Vessel embarkation and
disembarkation (including pilot
transfers);
(11) Towing gear, including winches,
capstans, wires, hawsers and other
related equipment;
(12) Personal hygiene;
(13) Sanitation and safe food
handling; and
(14) Potable water supply.
(b) As far as practicable, the owner or
managing operator must implement
other types of safety control measures
before relying on Personal Protective
Equipment. These controls may include
administrative, engineering, source
modification, substitution, process
change or controls, isolation,
ventilation, or other controls.
§ 140.515
Training requirements.
(a) All crewmembers must be
provided with health and safety
information and training that includes:
(1) Content and procedures of the
owner or managing operator’s health
and safety plan;
(2) Procedures for reporting unsafe
conditions;
(3) Proper selection and use of PPE
appropriate to the vessel operation;
(4) Safe use of equipment including
deck machinery, rigging, welding and
cutting, hand tools, ladders, and
abrasive wheel machinery found
onboard the vessel;
(5) Hazard communication and cargo
knowledge;
(6) Safe use and storage of hazardous
materials and chemicals;
(7) Confined space entry;
(8) Respiratory protection; and
(9) Lockout/Tagout procedures.
(b) Individuals, other than
crewmembers, must be provided with
sufficient information or training on
hazards relevant to their potential
exposure on or around the vessel.
(c) Crewmember training required by
this section must be conducted as soon
as practicable, but not later than 5 days
after employment.
(d) Refresher training must be
repeated annually and may be
conducted over time in modules
PO 00000
Frm 00119
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40121
covering specific topics. Refresher
training may be less comprehensive,
provided that the information presented
is sufficient to provide employees with
continued understanding of workplace
hazards. The refresher training of
persons subject to this subpart must
include the information and training
prescribed in this section.
(e) The owner, managing operator, or
master must determine the appropriate
training and information to provide to
each individual permitted on the vessel
who is not a crewmember, relative to
the expected risk exposure of the
individual.
(f) All training required in this section
must be documented in owner or
managing operator’s records.
Subpart F—Vessel Operational Safety
§ 140.600
Applicability.
This subpart applies to all towing
vessels unless otherwise specified.
Certain vessels remain subject to the
navigation safety regulations in 33 CFR
part 164.
§ 140.605
Vessel stability.
(a) Prior to getting underway, and at
all other times necessary to ensure the
safety of the vessel, the master or officer
in charge of a navigational watch must
determine whether the vessel complies
with all stability requirements in the
vessel’s trim and stability book, stability
letter, COI, and Load Line Certificate, as
applicable.
(b) A towing vessel must be
maintained and operated so the
watertight integrity and stability of the
vessel are not compromised.
§ 140.610
Hatches and other openings.
(a) All towing vessels must be
operated in a manner that minimizes the
risk of down-flooding and progressive
flooding.
(b) The master must ensure that all
hatches, doors, and other openings
designed to be watertight or weathertight function properly.
(c) The master or officer in charge of
a navigational watch must ensure all
hatches and openings of the hull and
deck are kept tightly closed except:
(1) When access is needed through the
opening for transit;
(2) When operating on rivers with a
tow, if the master determines the safety
of the vessel is not compromised; or
(3) When operating on lakes, bays,
and sounds, without a tow during calm
weather, and only if the master
determines that the safety of the vessel
is not compromised.
(d) Where installed, all watertight
doors in watertight bulkheads must be
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40122
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
closed during the operation of the
vessel, unless they are being used for
transit between compartments; and
(e) When downstreaming, all exterior
openings at the main deck level must be
closed.
(f) Decks and bulkheads designed to
be watertight or weathertight must be
maintained in that condition.
§ 140.615
Examinations and tests.
(a) This section applies to a towing
vessel not subject to 33 CFR 164.80.
(b) Prior to getting underway, the
master or officer in charge of a
navigational watch of the vessel must
examine and test the steering gear,
signaling whistle, propulsion control,
towing gear, navigation lights,
navigation equipment, and
communication systems of the vessel.
This examination and testing does not
need to be conducted more than once in
any 24-hour period.
(c) The results of the examination and
testing must be recorded in the TVR,
official logbook, or in accordance with
the TSMS applicable to the vessel.
§ 140.620
Navigational safety equipment.
(a) This section applies to a towing
vessel not subject to the requirements of
33 CFR 164.82.
(b) The owner, managing operator, or
master of each towing vessel must
maintain the required navigationalsafety equipment in a fully-functioning,
operational condition.
(c) Navigational safety equipment
such as radar, gyrocompass, echo depthsounding or other sounding device,
automatic dependent surveillance
equipment, or navigational lighting that
fails during a voyage must be repaired
at the earliest practicable time. The
owner, managing operator, or master
must consider the state of the
equipment (along with such factors as
weather, visibility, traffic, and the
dictates of good seamanship) when
deciding whether it is safe for the vessel
to proceed.
(d) The failure and subsequent repair
or replacement of navigational safety
equipment must be recorded. The
record must be made in the TVR, official
logbook, or in accordance with the
TSMS applicable to the vessel.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 140.625
Navigation underway.
(a) At all times, the movement of a
towing vessel and its tow must be under
the direction and control of a master or
mate (pilot) properly licensed under
subchapter B of this chapter.
(b) The master or officer in charge of
a navigational watch must operate the
vessel in accordance with the
conditions and restrictions stated on the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
COI and the TSMS applicable to the
vessel.
Note to § 140.625. Certain towing
vessels subject to § 140.625 are also
subject to the requirements of 33 CFR
164.78.
§ 140.630
Lookout.
(a) Throughout the trip or voyage the
master and officer in charge of the
navigational watch must assess the
requirement for a lookout, consistent
with 33 CFR 83.05. A lookout in
addition to the master or mate (pilot)
should be added when necessary to:
(1) Maintain a state of vigilance with
regard to any significant change in the
operational environment;
(2) Assess the situation and the risk of
collision/allision;
(3) Anticipate stranding and other
dangers to navigation; and
(4) Detect any other potential hazards
to safe navigation.
(b) In determining the requirement for
a lookout, the officer in charge of the
navigational watch must take full
account of relevant factors including,
but not limited to: state of weather,
visibility, traffic density, proximity of
dangers to navigation, and the attention
necessary when navigating in areas of
increased vessel traffic.
§ 140.635
Navigation assessment.
(a) The officer in charge of a
navigational watch must conduct a
navigation assessment for the intended
route and operations prior to getting
underway. The navigation assessment
must incorporate the requirements of
pilothouse resource management of
§ 140.640, assess operational risks, and
anticipate and manage workload
demands. At a minimum, this
assessment must consider:
(1) The velocity and direction of
currents in the area being transited;
(2) Water depth, river stage, and tidal
state along the route and at mooring
location;
(3) Prevailing visibility and weather
conditions and changes anticipated
along the intended route;
(4) Density (actual and anticipated) of
marine traffic;
(5) The operational status of
pilothouse instrumentation and
controls, to include alarms,
communication systems, variation and
deviation errors of the compass, and any
known nonconformities or deficiencies;
(6) Air draft relative to bridges and
overhead obstructions taking tide and
river stage into consideration;
(7) Horizontal clearance, to include
bridge transits;
(8) Lock transits;
PO 00000
Frm 00120
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(9) Navigation hazards such as logs,
wrecks or other obstructions in the
water;
(10) Any broadcast notice to mariners,
safety or security zones or special
navigation areas;
(11) Configuration of the vessel and
tow, including handling characteristics,
field of vision from the pilothouse, and
activities taking place onboard;
(12) The knowledge, qualifications,
and limitations of crewmembers who
are assigned as members on watch and
the experience and familiarity of
crewmembers with the towing vessels
particulars and equipment; and
(13) Any special conditions not
covered above that impact the safety of
navigation.
(b) The officer in charge of a
navigational watch must keep the
navigation assessment up-to-date to
reflect changes in conditions and
circumstances. This includes updates
during the voyage or trip as necessary.
At each change of the navigational
watch, the oncoming officer in charge of
the navigational watch must review the
current navigation assessment for
necessary changes.
(c) The officer in charge of a
navigational watch must ensure that the
navigation assessment and any updates
are communicated to other members of
the navigational watch.
(d) A navigation assessment entry
must be recorded in the TVR, official
log, or in accordance with the TSMS
applicable to the vessel. The entry must
include the date and time of the
assessment, the name of the individual
making the assessment, and the starting
and ending points of the voyage or trip
that the assessment covers.
Note to § 140.635. Certain towing
vessels subject to § 140.635 are also
subject to the voyage planning
requirements of 33 CFR 164.80.
§ 140.640 Pilothouse resource
management.
(a) The officer in charge of a
navigational watch must:
(1) Ensure that other members of the
navigational watch have a working
knowledge of the navigation assessment
required by § 140.635, and understand
the chain of command, the decisionmaking process, and the fact that
information sharing is critical to the
safety of the vessel.
(2) Ensure that the navigation
assessment required by § 140.635 is
complete, updated, communicated and
available throughout the trip.
(3) Ensure that watch change
procedures incorporate all items listed
in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
(4) Take actions (to include delaying
watch change or pausing the voyage) if
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
there is reasonable cause to believe that
an oncoming watchstander is not
immediately capable of carrying out his
or her duties effectively.
(5) Maintain situational awareness
and minimize distractions.
(b) Prior to assuming duties as officer
in charge of a navigational watch, a
person must:
(1) Complete the navigation
assessment required by § 140.635;
(2) Verify the operational condition of
the towing vessel; and
(3) Verify that there are adequate
personnel available to assume the
watch.
(c) If at any time the officer in charge
of a navigational watch is to be relieved
when a maneuver or other action to
avoid any hazard is taking place, the
relief of that officer in charge of a
navigational watch must be deferred
until such action has been completed.
§ 140.645
Navigation safety training.
(a) Prior to assuming duties related to
the safe operation of a towing vessel,
each crewmember must receive training
to ensure that they are familiar with:
(1) Watchstanding terms and
definitions;
(2) Duties of a lookout;
(3) Communication with other
watchstanders;
(4) Change of watch procedures;
(5) Procedures for reporting other
vessels or objects; and
(6) Watchstanding safety.
(b) Crewmember training must be
recorded in the TVR, official logbook, or
in accordance with the TSMS applicable
to the vessel.
(c) Credentialed mariners holding
Able Seaman or officer endorsements
will be deemed to have met the training
requirements in this section.
§ 140.650 Operational readiness of
lifesaving and fire suppression and
detection equipment.
The owner, managing operator, or
master of a towing vessel must ensure
that the vessel’s lifesaving and fire
suppression and detection equipment
complies with the applicable
requirements of parts 141 and 142 of
this subchapter and is in good working
order.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 140.655 Prevention of oil and garbage
pollution.
(a) Each towing vessel must be
operated in compliance with:
(1) Applicable sections of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, including
section 311 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, as amended (33
U.S.C. 1321);
(2) Applicable sections of the Act to
Prevent Pollution from Ships (33 U.S.C.
1901 et seq.); and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
(3) Parts 151, 155, and 156, of 33 CFR,
as applicable.
(b) Each towing vessel must be
capable of preventing all oil spills from
reaching the water during transfers by:
(1) Pre-closing the scuppers/freeing
ports, if the towing vessel is so
equipped;
(2) Using fixed or portable
containment of sufficient capacity to
contain the most likely spill, if 33 CFR
155.320 does not apply; or
(3) Pre-deploying sorbent material on
the deck around vents and fills.
(c) No person may intentionally drain
oil or hazardous material into the bilge
of a towing vessel from any source. For
purposes of this section, ‘‘oil’’ has the
same meaning as ‘‘oil’’ defined in 33
U.S.C. 1321.
§ 140.660
Vessel security.
Each towing vessel must be operated
in compliance with:
(a) The Maritime Transportation
Security Act of 2002 (46 U.S.C. Chapter
701); and
(b) 33 CFR parts 101 and 104, as
applicable.
§ 140.665 Inspection and testing required
when making alterations, repairs, or other
such operations involving riveting, welding,
burning, or like fire-producing actions.
(a) The inspections and issuance of
certificates required by this section must
be conducted in accordance with the
provisions of NFPA 306 (incorporated
by reference, see § 136.112 of this
subchapter) before alterations, repairs,
or other operations involving riveting,
welding, burning, or other fire
producing actions may be made aboard
a vessel.
(b) Until an inspection has been made
to determine that such operation can be
undertaken with safety, no alterations,
repairs, or other such operations
involving riveting, welding, burning, or
like fire-producing actions must be
made:
(1) Within or on the boundaries of
cargo tanks which have been used to
carry combustible liquid or chemicals in
bulk;
(2) Within or on the boundaries of
fuel tanks; or,
(3) To pipe lines, heating coils,
pumps, fittings, or other appurtenances
connected to such cargo or fuel tanks.
(c) Such inspections must be made
and evidenced as follows:
(1) In ports or places in the United
States or its territories and possessions
the inspection must be made by a
marine chemist certificated by the
National Fire Protection Association.
However, if the services of such
certified marine chemist are not
PO 00000
Frm 00121
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40123
reasonably available, the Officer in
Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI),
upon the recommendation of the vessel
owner and his or her contractor or their
representative, must select a person
who, in the case of an individual vessel,
must be authorized to make such
inspection. If the inspection indicated
that such operations can be undertaken
with safety, a certificate setting forth the
fact in writing and qualified as may be
required, must be issued by the certified
marine chemist or the authorized person
before the work is started. Such
qualifications must include any
requirements as may be deemed
necessary to maintain the safe
conditions in the spaces certified
throughout the operation and must
include such additional tests and
certifications as considered required.
Such qualifications and requirements
must include precautions necessary to
eliminate or minimize hazards that may
be present from protective coatings or
residues from cargoes.
(2) When not in such a port or place,
and a marine chemist or such person
authorized by the OCMI, is not
reasonably available, the inspection
must be made by the master or person
in charge and a proper entry must be
made in the vessel’s logbook.
(d) The master or person in charge
must secure copies of certificates issued
by the certified marine chemist or such
person authorized by the OCMI. The
master or person in charge must
maintain a safe condition on the vessel
by full observance of all qualifications
and requirements listed by the marine
chemist or person authorized by the
OCMI in the certificate.
§ 140.670
Use of auto pilot.
Except for towing vessels in
compliance with requirements in 33
CFR 164.13(d), when an automatic pilot
is used in areas of high traffic density,
conditions of restricted visibility, or any
other hazardous navigational situations,
the master must ensure that:
(a) It is possible to immediately
establish manual control of the ship’s
steering;
(b) A competent person is ready at all
times to take over steering control; and
(c) The changeover from automatic to
manual steering and vice versa is made
by, or under, the supervision of the
officer in charge of the navigational
watch.
Subpart G—Navigation and
Communication Equipment
§ 140.700
Applicability.
This subpart applies to all towing
vessels unless otherwise specified.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40124
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Certain towing vessels are also subject
to the navigation safety regulations in 33
CFR part 164.
§ 140.705 Charts and nautical
publications.
(a) This section applies to a towing
vessel not subject to the requirements of
33 CFR 164.72.
(b) A towing vessel must carry
adequate and up-to-date charts, maps,
and nautical publications for the
intended voyage, including:
(1) Charts, including electronic charts
acceptable to the Coast Guard, of
appropriate scale to make safe
navigation possible. Towing vessels
operating on the Western Rivers must
have maps of appropriate scale issued
by the Army Corps of Engineers or a
river authority;
(2) ‘‘U.S. Coast Pilot’’ or similar
publication;
(3) Coast Guard light list; and
(4) Towing vessels that operate the
Western Rivers must have river stage(s)
or Water Surface Elevations as
appropriate to the trip or route, as
published by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers or a river authority, must be
available to the person in charge of the
navigation watch.
(c) Extracts or copies from the
publications listed in paragraph (b) of
this section may be carried, so long as
they are applicable to the route.
§ 140.710
Marine radar.
Requirements for marine radar are set
forth in 33 CFR 164.72.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 140.715
Communications equipment.
(a) Towing vessels must meet the
communications requirements of 33
CFR part 26 and 33 CFR 164.72, as
applicable.
(b) Towing vessels not subject to the
provisions of 33 CFR part 26 or 33 CFR
164.72 must have a Very High
Frequency-Frequency Modulated (VHF–
FM) radio installed and capable of
monitoring VHF–FM Channels 13 and
16, except when transmitting or
receiving traffic on other VHF–FM
channels, when participating in a Vessel
Traffic Service (VTS), or when
monitoring a channel of a VTS. The
VHF–FM radio must be installed at each
operating station and connected to a
functioning battery backup.
(c) All towing vessels must have at
least one properly operating handheld
VHF–FM radio in addition to the radios
otherwise required.
§ 140.720 Navigation lights, shapes, and
sound signals.
Each towing vessel must be equipped
with navigation lights, shapes, and
sound signals in accordance with the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
International Regulations for Prevention
of Collisions at Sea (COLREGS) or 33
CFR part 84 as appropriate to its area of
operation.
§ 140.725 Additional navigation
equipment.
Towing vessels must be equipped
with the following equipment, as
applicable to the area of operation:
(a) Fathometer (except Western
Rivers).
(b) Search light, controllable from the
vessel’s operating station and capable of
illuminating objects at a distance of at
least two times the length of the tow.
(c) Electronic position-fixing device,
satisfactory for the area in which the
vessel operates, if the towing vessel
engages in towing seaward of the
navigable waters of the U.S. or more
than 3 nautical miles from shore on the
Great Lakes.
(d) Illuminated magnetic compass or
an illuminated swing-meter (Western
Rivers vessels only). The compass or
swing-meter must be readable from each
operating station.
Note to § 140.725. Certain towing
vessels subject to § 140.725 are also
subject to the requirements of 33 CFR
164.72 and Automatic Identification
System requirements of 33 CFR 164.46.
Subpart H—Towing Safety
§ 140.800
Applicability.
This subpart applies to all towing
vessels unless otherwise specified.
Certain vessels are also subject to the
navigation safety regulations in 33 CFR
parts 163 and 164.
§ 140.801
Frm 00122
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
§ 140.805
Towing safety.
Prior to getting underway, and giving
due consideration to the prevailing and
expected conditions of the trip or
voyage, the officer in charge of the
navigational watch for a towing vessel
must ensure that:
(a) The barges, vessels, or objects
making up the tow are properly
configured and secured;
(b) Equipment, cargo, and industrial
components on board the tow are
properly secured and made ready for
transit;
(c) The towing vessel is safely and
securely made up to the tow; and
(d) The towing vessel has appropriate
horsepower or bollard pull and is
capable of safely maneuvering the tow.
§ 140.820
Recordkeeping for towing gear.
(a) The results of the inspections
required by 33 CFR 164.76 must be
documented in the TVR, official
logbook, or in accordance with the
TSMS applicable to the vessel.
(b) A record of the type, size, and
service of each towline, face wire, and
spring line, used to make the towing
vessel fast to her tow, must be available
to the Coast Guard or third-party auditor
for review. The following minimum
information is required in the record:
The dates when examinations were
performed, the identification of each
item of towing gear examined, and the
name(s) of the person(s) conducting the
examinations.
Subpart I—Vessel Records
Towing gear.
The owner, managing operator, master
or officer in charge of a navigational
watch of a towing vessel must ensure
the following:
(a) The strength of each component
used for securing the towing vessel to
the tow and for making up the tow is
adequate for its intended service.
(b) The size, material, and condition
of towlines, lines, wires, push gear,
cables, and other rigging used for
making up a tow or securing the towing
vessel to a tow must be appropriate for:
(1) The horsepower or bollard pull of
the vessel;
(2) The static loads and dynamic
loads expected during the intended
service;
(3) The environmental conditions
expected during the intended service;
and
(4) The likelihood of mechanical
damage.
(c) Emergency procedures related to
the tow have been developed and
appropriate training provided to the
PO 00000
crew for carrying out their emergency
duties.
§ 140.900
Marine casualty reporting.
Each towing vessel must comply with
the requirements of part 4 of this
chapter for reporting marine casualties
and retaining voyage records.
§ 140.905
Official logbooks.
(a) A towing vessel of the United
States, except one on a voyage from a
port in the United States to a port in
Canada, is required by 46 U.S.C. 11301
to have an official logbook if the vessel
is:
(1) On a voyage from a port in the
United States to a foreign port; or
(2) Of at least 100 gross tons and on
a voyage between a port in the United
States on the Atlantic Ocean and one on
the Pacific Ocean.
(b) The Coast Guard furnishes,
without fee, to masters of vessels of the
United States, the official logbook as
Form CG–706B or CG–706C, depending
on the number of persons employed as
crew. The first several pages of this
logbook list various acts of Congress
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
governing logbooks and the entries
required in them.
(c) When a voyage is completed, or
after a specified time has elapsed, the
master must file the official logbook
containing required entries with the
cognizant OCMI at or nearest the port
where the vessel may be.
§ 140.910 Towing vessel record or record
specified by TSMS.
(a) This section applies to a towing
vessel other than a vessel operating only
in a limited geographic area or a vessel
required by § 140.905 to maintain an
official logbook.
(b) A towing vessel subject to this
section must maintain a TVR or in
accordance with the TSMS applicable to
the towing vessel.
(c) The TVR must include a
chronological record of events as
required by this subchapter. The TVR
may be electronic or paper.
(d) Except as required by §§ 140.900
and 140.905, records do not need to be
filed with the Coast Guard, but must be
kept available for review by the Coast
Guard upon request. Records, unless
required to be maintained for a longer
period by statute or other federal
regulation, must be retained for at least
1 year after the date of the latest entry.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 140.915
Items to be recorded.
(a) The following list of items must be
recorded in the TVR, official logbook, or
in accordance with the TSMS applicable
to the vessel:
(1) Personnel records, in accordance
with § 140.400;
(2) Safety orientation, in accordance
with § 140.410;
(3) Record of drills and instruction, in
accordance with § 140.420;
(4) Examinations and tests, in
accordance with § 140.615;
(5) Operative navigational safety
equipment, in accordance with
§ 140.620;
(6) Navigation assessment, in
accordance with § 140.635;
(7) Navigation safety training, in
accordance with § 140.645;
(8) Oil residue discharges and
disposals, in accordance with § 140.655;
(9) Record of inspection of towing
gear, in accordance with § 140.820; and
(10) Fire-detection and fixed fireextinguishing, in accordance with
§ 142.240.
(b) For the purposes of this
subchapter, if items are recorded
electronically in a TVR or other record
as specified by the TSMS applicable to
the towing vessel, these electronic
entries must include the date and time
of entry and name of the person making
the entry. If after an entry has been
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
made, someone responsible for entries
determines there is an error in an entry,
any entries to correct the error must
include the date and time of entry and
name of the person making the
correction and must preserve a record of
the original entry being corrected.
Note to § 140.915. For towing vessels
subject to 46 U.S.C. 11301, there are
statutory requirements in that U.S. Code
section for additional items that must be
entered in the official logbook.
Regarding requirements outside this
subchapter, such as requirements in 33
CFR 151.25 to make entries in an oil
record book, § 140.915 does not change
those requirements.
Subpart J—Penalties
§ 140.1000
§ 140.1005
Statutory penalties.
Suspension and revocation.
An individual is subject to
proceedings under the provisions of 46
U.S.C. 7703 and 7704, and part 5 of this
chapter with respect to suspension or
revocation of a license, certificate,
document, or credential if the
individual holds a license, certificate of
registry, merchant mariner document, or
merchant mariner credential and:
(a) Commits an act of misconduct,
negligence or incompetence;
(b) Uses or is addicted to a dangerous
drug; or
(c) Violates or fails to comply with
this subchapter or any other law or
regulation intended to promote marine
safety; or
(d) Becomes a security risk, as
described in 46 U.S.C. 7703.
PART 141—LIFESAVING
Subpart A—General
141.100 Purpose.
141.105 Applicability and delayed
implementation for existing vessels.
Subpart B—General Requirements for
Towing Vessels
141.200 General provisions.
141.225 Alternate arrangements or
equipment.
141.230 Readiness.
141.235 Inspection, testing, and
maintenance.
141.240 Requirements for training crews.
Subpart C—Lifesaving Requirements for
Towing Vessels
141.305 Survival craft requirements for
towing vessels.
141.310 Stowage of survival craft.
Frm 00123
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3301, 3306,
3308, 3316, 8104, 8904; 33 CFR 1.05; DHS
Delegation 0170.1.
Subpart A—General
Purpose.
This part contains requirements for
lifesaving equipment, arrangements,
systems, and procedures on towing
vessels.
§ 141.105 Applicability and delayed
implementation for existing vessels.
(a) This part applies to all towing
vessels subject to this subchapter.
(1) An existing towing vessel must
comply with the requirements in this
part no later than either July 20, 2018 or
the date the vessel obtains a Certificate
of Inspection (COI), whichever date is
earlier.
(2) The delayed implementation
provisions in paragraph (a)(1) of this
section do not apply to a new towing
vessel.
(b) A towing vessel on an
international voyage, subject to SOLAS
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112 of this subchapter), must meet
the applicable requirements in
subchapter W of this chapter.
(c) Towing vessels in compliance with
SOLAS Chapter III will be deemed in
compliance with this part.
Subpart B—General Requirements for
Towing Vessels
Sec.
PO 00000
141.315 Marking of survival craft and
stowage locations.
141.320 Inflatable survival craft placards.
141.325 Survival craft equipment.
141.330 Skiffs as survival craft.
141.340 Lifejackets.
141.350 Immersion suits.
141.360 Lifebuoys.
141.370 Miscellaneous lifesaving
requirements for towing vessels.
141.375 Visual distress signals.
141.380 Emergency position indicating
radio beacon (EPIRB).
141.385 Line throwing appliance.
§ 141.100
Violations of the provisions of this
subchapter will subject the violator to
the applicable penalty provisions of
Subtitle II of Title 46, and Title 18,
United States Code.
40125
§ 141.200
General provisions.
(a) Unless otherwise specified, all
lifesaving equipment must be approved
by the Commandant under the approval
series specified in each section.
Lifesaving equipment for personal use
which is not required by this part need
not be approved by the Commandant.
(b) A listing of approved equipment
and materials may be found at https://
cgmix.uscg.mil/equipment. Each
cognizant Officer in Charge, Marine
Inspection (OCMI) may be contacted for
information concerning approved
equipment and materials.
(c) Equipment requirements are based
on the area in which a towing vessel is
operating, not the route for which it is
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40126
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
certificated. However, the towing vessel
must be equipped per the requirements
of its certificated route at the time of
certification.
§ 141.225 Alternate arrangements or
equipment.
(a) Alternate arrangements or
equipment to comply with this part may
be approved in accordance with
§ 136.115 of this subchapter.
(b) If a Towing Safety Management
System (TSMS) is applicable to the
towing vessel, alternative means for
complying with §§ 141.340, 141.350,
and 141.360 may be approved by a
third-party organization (TPO) and
documented in the TSMS applicable to
the vessel.
(c) The Coast Guard may approve a
novel lifesaving appliance or
arrangement as an equivalent if it has
performance characteristics at least
equivalent to the appliance or
arrangement required under this
subchapter, and if it has been evaluated
and tested under IMO Resolution
A.520(13) (incorporated by reference,
see § 136.112 of this subchapter).
Requests for evaluation of novel
lifesaving appliances must be sent to the
Commandant (CG–ENG).
(d) The cognizant OCMI may require
a towing vessel to carry specialized or
additional lifesaving equipment if:
(1) He or she determines that the
conditions of the voyage render the
requirements of this part inadequate; or
(2) The towing vessel is operated in
globally remote areas or severe
environments not covered under this
part. Such areas may include, but are
not limited to, polar regions, remote
islands, areas of extreme weather, and
other remote areas where timely
emergency assistance cannot be
anticipated.
§ 141.230
Readiness.
The master must ensure that all
lifesaving equipment is properly
maintained and ready for use at all
times.
§ 141.235 Inspection, testing, and
maintenance.
(a) All lifesaving equipment must be
tested and maintained in accordance
with the minimum requirements of
§ 199.190 of this chapter, as applicable,
and the vessel’s TSMS, if the vessel has
a TSMS.
(b) Inspections and tests of lifesaving
equipment must be recorded in the
TVR, official logbook, or in accordance
with any TSMS applicable to the vessel.
The following minimum information is
required:
(1) The dates when inspections and
tests were performed, the number or
other identification of each unit
inspected and tested, the results of the
inspections and tests, and the name of
the crewmember, surveyor or auditor
and any others conducting the
inspections and tests; and
(2) Receipts and other records
documenting these inspections and tests
must be retained for at least 1 year after
the expiration of the COI and made
available upon request.
§ 141.240
Requirements for training crews.
Training requirements are contained
in part 140 of this subchapter.
Subpart C—Lifesaving Requirements
for Towing Vessels
§ 141.305 Survival craft requirements for
towing vessels.
(a) General purpose. Survival craft
provide a means for survival when
evacuation from the towing vessel is
necessary. The craft and related
equipment should be selected so as to
provide for the basic needs of the crew,
such as shelter from life threatening
elements, until rescue resources are
expected to arrive, taking into account
the scope and nature of the towing
vessel’s operations.
(b) Functional requirements. A towing
vessel’s survival craft must meet the
functional requirements of paragraphs
(b)(1) through (5) of this section.
Functional requirements describe the
objectives of the regulation. Survival
craft must:
(1) Be readily accessible;
(2) Have an aggregate capacity
sufficient to accommodate the total
number of individuals onboard, as
specified in paragraph (c) of this
section;
(3) Provide a means for sheltering its
complement appropriate to the route;
(4) Provide minimum equipment for
survival if recovery time is expected to
be greater than 24 hours; and
(5) Be marked so that an individual
not familiar with the operation of the
specific survival craft has sufficient
guidance to utilize the craft for its
intended use.
(c) Compliance options. A towing
vessel must meet the applicable
functional requirements. Compliance
with the functional requirements of
paragraph (b) of this section may be met
by one of these two options:
(1) A towing vessel that meets the
prescriptive requirements of paragraph
(d) of this section will have complied
with the functional requirements; or
(2) If an owner or managing operator
chooses to meet the functional
requirement through means other than
as specified in paragraph (c)(1) of this
section, the means must be accepted by
the cognizant OCMI or, if the vessel has
a TSMS, then by a TPO and, in the latter
case, documented in the TSMS
applicable to the vessel. The design,
testing, and examination scheme for
meeting these functional requirements
must be included as part of the TSMS
applicable to the vessel.
(d) Prescriptive requirements. (1)
Except as provided in paragraphs (d)(2)
through (4) of this section, each towing
vessel must carry the survival craft
specified in Table 141.305 of this
section, as appropriate for the towing
vessel, in an aggregate capacity to
accommodate the total number of
individuals onboard.
TABLE 141.305—SURVIVAL CRAFT
Area of operation
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Equipment
(approval series)
Limited
geographic
area or
protected
waters
Great Lakes and lakes, bays,
and sounds as defined in
§ 136.110
Rivers
≤3 miles
from shore
>3 miles
from shore
Coastwise and ltd. coastwise
Oceans
≤ 3 miles
from shore
> 3 miles
from shore
Cold Water Operation
Inflatable Buoyant Apparatus
(160.010).
Inflatable Liferaft with SOLAS B
Pack (160.151).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:30 Jun 17, 2016
None 1 .........
2 100%
2 100%
......................
2 100%
None 1 .........
......................
......................
100%
......................
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00124
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
100%
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
40127
TABLE 141.305—SURVIVAL CRAFT—Continued
Area of operation
Equipment
(approval series)
Inflatable Liferaft with SOLAS A
Pack (160.151).
Great Lakes and lakes, bays,
and sounds as defined in
§ 136.110
Limited
geographic
area or
protected
waters
Rivers
None 1 .........
......................
Coastwise and ltd. coastwise
Oceans
≤3 miles
from shore
>3 miles
from shore
≤ 3 miles
from shore
> 3 miles
from shore
......................
......................
......................
......................
100%
Warm Water Operation
Rigid Buoyant Apparatus
(160.010).
Inflatable Liferaft with SOLAS B
Pack (160.151).
Inflatable Liferaft with SOLAS A
Pack (160.151).
None 1 .........
2 100%
2 100%
2 100%
2 100%
None 1 .........
......................
......................
......................
......................
3 100%
None 1 .........
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
100%
1 No
survival craft are required unless deemed necessary by the cognizant OCMI or a TSMS applicable to the towing vessel.
skiff that meets requirements in § 141.330(a) through (f) may be substituted for all or part of required equipment.
3 Inflatable buoyant apparatus (approval series 160.010) may be accepted or substituted if the vessel carries a 406 MHz Cat 1 emergency position indicating radio beacon (EPIRB) meeting 47 CFR part 80.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
2A
(2) The following approved survival
craft may be substituted for survival
craft required by Table 141.305 of this
section:
(i) A lifeboat approved under
approval series 160.135 may be
substituted for any survival craft
required by this section, provided it is
arranged and equipped in accordance
with part 199 of this chapter.
(ii) An inflatable liferaft approved
under approval series 160.051 or
160.151, may be substituted for an
inflatable buoyant apparatus or rigid
buoyant apparatus.
(iii) An inflatable buoyant apparatus
approved under approval series 160.010
may be substituted for a rigid buoyant
apparatus.
(iv) A life float approved under
approval series 160.027 may be
substituted for a rigid buoyant
apparatus.
(3) Unless it is determined to be
necessary by the cognizant OCMI under
§ 141.225, or a TSMS applicable to the
towing vessel, each towing vessel that
operates solely on rivers need not carry
survival craft if:
(i) It carries a 406 MHz Cat 1 EPIRB
meeting 47 CFR part 80;
(ii) It is designed for pushing ahead
and has a TSMS that contains
procedures for evacuating crewmembers
onto the tow or other safe location; or
(iii) It operates within 1 mile of shore.
(4) A towing vessel which is not
required by this part to carry survival
craft may carry a non-approved survival
craft as excess equipment, provided that
it is maintained in good working
condition and maintained according to
the manufacturer’s instructions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:30 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
§ 141.310
Stowage of survival craft.
Survival craft must be stowed in
accordance with the requirements of
§ 199.130 of this chapter, as far as is
practicable on existing towing vessels.
§ 141.315 Marking of survival craft and
stowage locations.
Survival craft and stowage locations
must be marked in accordance with the
requirements of §§ 199.176 and 199.178
of this chapter.
§ 141.320
Inflatable survival craft placards.
Every towing vessel equipped with an
inflatable survival craft must have, in
conspicuous places near each inflatable
survival craft, approved placards or
other posted instructions for launching
and inflating inflatable survival craft.
§ 141.325
Survival craft equipment.
(a) Each item of survival craft
equipment must be of good quality,
effective for the purpose it is intended
to serve, and secured to the craft.
(b) Each towing vessel carrying a
lifeboat must carry equipment in
accordance with § 199.175 of this
chapter.
(c) Each life float and rigid buoyant
apparatus must be fitted with a lifeline,
pendants, a painter, and floating electric
water light approved under approval
series 161.010.
§ 141.330
Skiffs as survival craft.
A skiff may be substituted for all or
part of the approved survival craft for
towing vessels that do not operate more
than 3 miles from shore. A skiff used as
a survival craft does not require Coast
Guard approval but must:
PO 00000
Frm 00125
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(a) Be capable of being launched
within 5 minutes under all
circumstances;
(b) Be of suitable size for all persons
on board the towing vessel;
(c) Not exceed the loading specified
on the capacity plate required by 33
CFR 183.23;
(d) Not contain modifications
affecting the buoyancy or structure of
the skiff;
(e) Be of suitable design for the
vessel’s intended service; and
(f) Be marked in accordance with
§§ 199.176 and 199.178 of this chapter.
§ 141.340
Lifejackets.
(a) Each towing vessel must carry at
least one appropriately-sized lifejacket,
approved under approval series
160.002, 160.005, 160.055, 160.155, or
160.176, for each person on board.
(b) For towing vessels with berthing
aboard, a sufficient number of
additional lifejackets must be carried so
that a lifejacket is immediately available
for persons at each normally manned
watch station.
(c) Where alternative means are used
to meet the requirements of this section,
as permitted by § 141.225, there must be
at least one lifejacket for each person
onboard. Any TSMS applicable to the
towing vessel must specify the number
and location of lifejackets in such a
manner as to facilitate immediate
accessibility at normally occupied
spaces including, but not limited to,
accommodation spaces and watch
stations.
(d) Lifejackets must be readily
accessible.
(e) If the towing vessel carries
inflatable lifejackets they must be of
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40128
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
similar design to each other and have
the same mode of operation.
(f) Each lifejacket must be marked:
(1) In block capital letters with the
name of the vessel; and
(2) With Type I retro-reflective
material approved under approval series
164.018. The arrangement of the retroreflective material must meet IMO
Resolution A.658(16) (incorporated by
reference, see § 136.112 of this
subchapter).
(g) Lifejackets must have the
following attachments and fittings:
(1) Each lifejacket must have a
lifejacket light approved under approval
series 161.012 or 161.112 securely
attached to the front shoulder area of the
lifejacket.
(2) Each lifejacket must have a whistle
firmly secured by a cord to the
lifejacket.
(h) Stowage positions for lifejackets
stowed in a berthing space or stateroom
and all lifejacket containers must be
marked in block capital letters and
numbers with the minimum quantity,
identity, and, if sizes other than adult or
universal sizes are used on the vessel,
the size of the lifejackets stowed inside
the container. The equipment may be
identified in words or with the
appropriate symbol from IMO
Resolution A.760(18) (incorporated by
reference, see § 136.112 of this
subchapter).
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 141.350
Immersion suits.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph
(a)(4) of this section, each towing vessel
operating north of lat. 32° N. or south
of lat. 32° S. must carry the number of
immersion suits as prescribed in this
paragraph (a):
(1) Each towing vessel operating in
those regions must carry at least one
appropriate-size immersion suit,
approved under approval series
160.171, for each person onboard.
(2) In addition to the immersion suits
required under paragraph (a)(1) of this
section, each watch station, work
station, and industrial work site must
have enough immersion suits to equal
the number of persons normally on
watch in, or assigned to, the station or
site at one time. However, an immersion
suit is not required at a station or site
for a person whose cabin or berthing
area (and the immersion suits stowed in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
that location) is readily accessible to the
station or site.
(3) Where alternative means are used
to meet the requirements of this section,
as permitted by § 141.225, there must be
at least one immersion suit of the
appropriate size for each person
onboard. Any TSMS applicable to the
towing vessel must specify the number
and location of immersion suits in such
a manner as to facilitate immediate
accessibility at normally occupied
spaces including, but not limited to,
accommodation spaces and watch
stations.
(4) A towing vessel operating on
rivers or in a limited geographic area is
not required to carry immersion suits.
(b) Immersion suits carried on towing
vessels must meet the requirements of
§ 199.70(c) and (d) of this chapter.
§ 141.360
Lifebuoys.
(a) A towing vessel must carry
lifebuoys as follows:
(1) A towing vessel less than 26 feet
length must carry a minimum of one
lifebuoy of not less than 510 millimeters
(20 inches) in diameter.
(2) A towing vessel of at least 26 feet,
but less than 79 feet, in length must
carry a minimum of two lifebuoys
located on opposite sides of the vessel
where personnel are normally present.
Lifebuoys must be at least 610
millimeters (24 inches) in diameter.
(3) A towing vessel 79 feet or more in
length must carry four lifebuoys, with
one lifebuoy located on each side of the
operating station. Lifebuoys must be at
least 610 millimeters (24 inches) in
diameter.
(4) Where alternative means are used
to meet the requirements of this section,
as permitted by § 141.225, any TSMS
applicable to the towing vessel must
specify the number and location of
lifebuoys in such a manner as to
facilitate rapid deployment of lifebuoys
from exposed decks, including the pilot
house.
(b) Each lifebuoy on a towing vessel
must:
(1) Be approved under approval series
160.050 or 160.150;
(2) Be capable of being rapidly cast
loose;
(3) Not be permanently secured to the
vessel in any way;
(4) Be marked in block capital letters
with the name of the vessel; and
PO 00000
Frm 00126
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(5) Be orange in color, if on a vessel
on an oceans or coastwise route.
(c) Lifebuoys must have the following
attachments and fittings:
(1) At least one lifebuoy must have a
lifeline, secured around the body of the
lifebuoy. If more than one lifebuoy is
carried, at least one must not have a
lifeline attached. Each lifeline on a
lifebuoy must:
(i) Be buoyant;
(ii) Be of at least 18.3 meters (60 feet)
in length;
(iii) Be non-kinking;
(iv) Have a diameter of at least 7.9
millimeters (5⁄16 inch);
(v) Have a breaking strength of at least
5 kilonewtons (1,124 pounds); and
(vi) Be of a dark color if synthetic, or
of a type certified to be resistant to
deterioration from ultraviolet light.
(2) At least two lifebuoys on a towing
vessel greater than 26 feet must be fitted
with a floating electric water light
approved under approval series 161.010
or 161.110, unless the towing vessel is
limited to daytime operation, in which
case no floating electric water light is
required.
(3) If a towing vessel carries only one
lifebuoy, the lifebuoy must be fitted
with a floating electric water light
approved under approval series 161.010
or 160.110, unless the towing vessel is
limited to daytime operation, in which
case no floating electric water light is
required. The water light must be
attached by the lanyard with a
corrosion-resistant clip to allow the
water light to be quickly disconnected
from the lifebuoy. The clip must have a
strength of at least 22.7 kilograms (50
pounds).
(4) Each lifebuoy with a floating
electric water light must have a lanyard
of at least 910 millimeters (3 feet) in
length, but not more than 1,830
millimeters (6 feet), securing the water
light around the body of the lifebuoy.
§ 141.370 Miscellaneous life saving
requirements for towing vessels.
Miscellaneous lifesaving requirements
are summarized in Table 141.370 of this
section. Equipment requirements are
based on the area in which a towing
vessel is operating, not the route for
which it is certificated.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
40129
TABLE 141.370—MISCELLANEOUS LIFESAVING EQUIPMENT
Area of operation
Equipment
(46 CFR section)
Visual Distress Signals
(§ 141.375).
EPIRBs (§ 141.380) .............
Line Throwing Appliances
(§ 141.385).
1 Great
§ 141.375
Rivers
3 day and 3
night.
......................
......................
3 day and 3
night.
......................
......................
Coastwise and ltd. coastwise
Oceans
≤ 3 miles
from shore
≤ 3 miles
from shore
≤ 3 miles
from shore
> 3 miles
from shore
3 day and 3
night.
......................
......................
6 day and 6
night.
1 1 .................
......................
3 day and 3
night.
1¥ ................
......................
6 day and 6
night.
1 ...................
1¥ ................
6 day and 6
night.
1
1
Lakes service only.
Visual distress signals.
(a) Carriage requirement. A towing
vessel must carry a combination of day
and night visual distress signals
indicated in Table 141.370 of § 141.370
for specified areas where the vessel
operates.
(b) Day and night visual distress
signals. Hand-held red flare distress
signals, approved under approval series
160.021 or 160.121, and hand-held
rocket-propelled parachute red flares,
approved under approval series 160.036
or 160.136, are acceptable as both day
and night signals.
(c) Signals for day visual distress only.
Floating orange smoke signals, approved
under approval series 160.022, 160.122,
or 160.157, and hand-held orange smoke
distress signals, approved under
approval series 160.037, are only
acceptable as day signals.
(d) Limited geographic area. A vessel
operating in a limited geographic area
on a short run limited to approximately
30 minutes away from the dock is not
required to carry visual distress signals
under this section.
(e) Stowage. Each pyrotechnic distress
signal carried to meet this section must
be stowed in either:
(1) A portable watertight container
carried at the operating station. Portable
watertight containers for pyrotechnic
distress signals must be of a bright color
and must be clearly marked in legible
contrasting letters at least 12.7
millimeters (0.5 inches) high with
‘‘DISTRESS SIGNALS’’; or
(2) A pyrotechnic locker secured
above the freeboard deck, away from
heat, in the vicinity of the operating
station.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Great Lakes and lakes, bays,
and sounds as defined in
§ 136.110
Limited
geographic
area
§ 141.380 Emergency position indicating
radio beacon (EPIRB).
(a) Each towing vessel operating on
oceans, coastwise, limited coastwise, or
beyond 3 nautical miles from shore
upon the Great Lakes must carry a
Category 1, 406 MHz satellite
Emergency Position Indicating Radio
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
Beacon (EPIRB) that meets the
requirements of 47 CFR part 80.
(b) When the towing vessel is
underway, the EPIRB must be stowed in
its float-free bracket with the controls
set for automatic activation and be
mounted in a manner so that it will float
free if the towing vessel sinks.
(c) The name of the towing vessel
must be marked or painted in clearly
legible letters on each EPIRB, except on
an EPIRB in an inflatable liferaft.
(d) The owner or managing operator
must maintain valid proof of
registration.
Note to paragraph (d). Registration
information can be found at
www.beaconregistration.noaa.gov/.
Subpart B—General Requirements for
Towing Vessels
142.205 Alternate standards.
142.210 Alternate arrangements or
equipment.
142.215 Approved equipment.
142.220 Fire hazards to be minimized.
142.225 Storage of flammable or
combustible products.
142.226 Firefighter’s outfit.
142.227 Fire axe.
142.230 Hand-portable fire extinguishers
and semi-portable fire-extinguishing
systems.
142.235 Vessels contracted for prior to
November 19, 1952.
142.240 Inspection, testing, maintenance,
and records.
142.245 Requirements for training crews to
respond to fires.
§ 141.385
Subpart C—Fire Extinguishing and
Detection Requirements
142.300 Excepted vessels.
142.315 Additional fire-extinguishing
equipment requirements.
142.325 Fire pumps, fire mains, and fire
hoses.
142.330 Fire-detection system
requirements.
Line throwing appliance.
Each towing vessel operating in
oceans and coastwise service must have
a line throwing appliance approved
under approval series 160.040.
(a) Stowage. The line throwing
appliance and its equipment must be
readily accessible for use.
(b) Additional equipment. The line
throwing appliance must have:
(1) The equipment on the list
provided by the manufacturer with the
approved appliance; and
(2) An auxiliary line that:
(i) Is at least 450 meters (1,500 feet)
long;
(ii) Has a breaking strength of at least
40 kilonewtons (9,000 pounds-force);
and
(iii) Is, if synthetic, of a dark color or
certified by the manufacturer to be
resistant to deterioration from
ultraviolet light.
PART 142—FIRE PROTECTION
Sec.
Subpart A —General
142.100 Purpose.
142.105 Applicability and delayed
implementation for existing vessels.
PO 00000
Frm 00127
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3301, 3306,
3308, 3316, 8104, 8904; 33 CFR 1.05; DHS
Delegation 0170.1.
Subpart A—General
§ 142.100
Purpose.
This part contains requirements for
fire suppression and detection
equipment and arrangements on towing
vessels.
§ 142.105 Applicability and delayed
implementation for existing vessels.
This part applies to all towing vessels
subject to this subchapter.
(a) An existing towing vessel must
comply with the requirements in this
part no later than either July 20, 2018 or
the date the vessel obtains a Certificate
of Inspection (COI), whichever date is
earlier.
(b) The delayed implementation
provisions in paragraph (a) of this
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40130
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
section do not apply to a new towing
vessel.
Subpart B—General Requirements for
Towing Vessels
§ 142.205
Alternate standards.
(a) Towing vessels in compliance with
Chapter II–2 of SOLAS (incorporated by
reference, see § 136.112 of this
subchapter) will be deemed to be in
compliance with this part.
(b) Towing vessels that comply with
other alternate standards, deemed by the
Commandant to provide an equivalent
level of safety and performance, will be
in compliance with this part.
§ 142.210 Alternate arrangements or
equipment.
(a) Alternate arrangements or
equipment to comply with this part may
be approved in accordance with
§ 136.115 of this subchapter.
(b) All owners or operators of towing
vessels with a Towing Safety
Management System (TSMS) may
comply with the requirements of
subpart B of this part by outfitting their
vessels with appropriate alternate
arrangements or equipment so long as
these variations provide an equivalent
level of safety and performance and are
properly documented in the TSMS.
(c) The cognizant Officer in Charge,
Marine Inspection (OCMI) may require
a towing vessel to carry specialized or
additional fire protection, suppression,
or detection equipment if:
(1) He or she determines that the
conditions of the voyage render the
requirements of this part inadequate; or
(2) The towing vessel is operated in
globally remote areas or severe
environments not covered under this
part. These areas may include, but are
not limited to, polar regions, remote
islands, areas of extreme weather, and
other remote areas where timely
emergency assistance cannot be
anticipated.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 142.215
Approved equipment.
(a) All hand-portable fire
extinguishers, semi-portable fireextinguishing systems, and fixed fireextinguishing systems required by this
part must be approved by the
Commandant (CG–ENG). Where other
equipment in this part is required to be
approved, such equipment requires the
specific approval of the Commandant.
(b) A listing of approved equipment
and materials may be found online at
https://cgmix.uscg.mil/equipment. Each
cognizant OCMI may be contacted for
information concerning approved
equipment and materials.
(c) New installations of fireextinguishing and fire-detection
equipment of a type not required, or in
excess of that required by this part, may
be permitted if Coast Guard approved,
or if accepted by the local OCMI, a TPO,
or a Nationally Recognized Testing
Laboratory (NRTL). Existing equipment
and installations not meeting the
applicable requirements of this part may
be continued in service so long as they
are in good condition and accepted by
the local OCMI or TPO.
§ 142.220
Fire hazards to be minimized.
Each towing vessel must be
maintained and operated so as to
minimize fire hazards and to ensure the
following:
(a) All bilges and void spaces are kept
free from accumulation of combustible
and flammable materials and liquids
insofar as practicable.
(b) Storage areas are kept free from
accumulation of combustible and
flammable materials insofar as
practicable.
§ 142.225 Storage of flammable or
combustible products.
(a) Paints, coatings, or other
flammable or combustible products
onboard a towing vessel must be stored
in a designated storage room or cabinet
when not in use.
(b) If a storage room is provided, it
may be any room or compartment that
is free of ignition sources.
(c) If a dedicated storage cabinet is
provided it must be secured to the
vessel so that it does not move and must
be either:
(1) A flammable liquid storage cabinet
that satisfies UL 1275 (incorporated by
reference, see § 136.112 of this
subchapter); or
(2) A flammable liquid storage cabinet
that satisfies FM Approvals Standard
6050 (incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112 of this subchapter); or
(3) Another suitable steel container
that provides an equivalent level of
protection.
(d) A B–II portable fire extinguisher
must be located near the storage room
or cabinet. This is in addition to the
portable fire extinguishers required by
Tables 142.230(d)(1) and 142.230(d)(2)
of § 142.230.
§ 142.226
Firefighter’s outfit.
Each towing vessel 79 feet or more in
length operating on oceans and
coastwise routes that does not have an
installed fixed fire-extinguishing system
must have the following:
(a) At least two firefighter’s outfits
that meet NFPA 1971 (incorporated by
reference, see § 136.112 of this
subchapter); and
(b) Two self-contained breathing
apparatus of the pressure demand, open
circuit type, approved by the National
Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health (NIOSH), under 42 CFR part 84.
The breathing apparatus must have a
minimum 30-minute air supply and full
facepiece.
§ 142.227
Fire axe.
Each towing vessel must be equipped
with at least one fire axe that is readily
accessible for use from the exterior of
the vessel.
§ 142.230 Hand-portable fire extinguishers
and semi-portable fire-extinguishing
systems.
(a) Hand-portable fire extinguishers
and semi-portable fire-extinguishing
systems are classified by a combination
letter and Roman numeral. The letter
indicates the type of fire which the unit
could be expected to extinguish, and the
Roman numeral indicates the relative
size of the unit.
(b) For the purpose of this subchapter,
all required hand-portable fire
extinguishers and semi-portable fireextinguishing systems must include
Type B classification, suitable for
extinguishing fires involving flammable
liquids, grease, etc.
(c) The number designations for size
run from ‘‘I’’ for the smallest to ‘‘V’’ for
the largest. Sizes I and II are handportable fire extinguishers; sizes III, IV,
and V are semi-portable fireextinguishing systems, which must be
fitted with hose and nozzle or other
practical means to cover all portions of
the space involved. Examples of the
sizes for some of the typical handportable fire extinguishers and semiportable fire-extinguishing systems
appear in Table 142.230(c) of this
section.
TABLE 142.230(c)—PORTABLE AND SEMI-PORTABLE EXTINGUISHERS
Foam, liters
(gallons)
Classification
B–I ..............................................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00128
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Carbon dioxide,
kilograms
(pounds)
4.75 (1.25)
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
2 (4)
20JNR2
Dry chemical,
kilograms
(pounds)
1 (2)
40131
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 142.230(c)—PORTABLE AND SEMI-PORTABLE EXTINGUISHERS—Continued
B–II .............................................................................................................................
B–III ............................................................................................................................
B–IV ...........................................................................................................................
B–V ............................................................................................................................
(d)(1) Towing vessels of 65 feet or less
in length must carry at least the
minimum number of hand-portable fire
Carbon dioxide,
kilograms
(pounds)
Foam, liters
(gallons)
Classification
9.5 (2.5)
45 (12)
75 (20)
125 (33)
Dry chemical,
kilograms
(pounds)
7 (15)
16 (35)
23 (50)
45 (100)
4.5
9
13.5
23
(10)
(20)
(30)
(50)
extinguishers set forth in Table
142.230(d)(1) of this section.
TABLE 142.230(d)(1)—B–I HAND-PORTABLE FIRE EXTINGUISHERS
Minimum number of B–I hand-portable fire
extinguishers required 1
Length, feet
No fixed
fire-extinguishing system in machinery
space
Fixed
fire-extinguishing system in machinery
space
Under 26 2 ........................................................................................................................................
26 and over, but under 40 ...............................................................................................................
40 and over, but not over 65 ...........................................................................................................
1
2
3
0
1
2
1 One
2 See
B–II hand-portable fire extinguisher may be substituted for two B–I hand-portable fire extinguishers.
§ 136.105 of this subchapter concerning vessels under 26 feet.
(2) Towing vessels of more than 65
feet in length must carry at least the
minimum number of hand-portable fire
extinguishers set forth in Table
142.230(d)(2) of this section.
TABLE 142.230(d)(2)—B–II HAND-PORTABLE FIRE EXTINGUISHERS
Over
Not over
Minimum number
of B–II handportable fire extinguishers
...................................................................................................
50 ..............................................................................................
100 ............................................................................................
500 ............................................................................................
1,000 .........................................................................................
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Gross tonnage—
50 .............................................................................................
100 ...........................................................................................
500 ...........................................................................................
1,000 ........................................................................................
...................................................................................................
1
2
3
6
8
(i) In addition to the hand-portable
extinguishers required by paragraph
(d)(2) of this section, one Type B–II
hand-portable fire extinguisher must be
fitted in the engine room for each 1,000
brake horsepower of the main engines or
fraction thereof. A towing vessel is not
required to carry more than six
additional B–II extinguishers in the
engine room for this purpose,
irrespective of horsepower.
(ii) [Reserved]
(e) The frame or support of any size
III, IV, or V semi-portable extinguisher
fitted with wheels must be welded or
otherwise permanently attached to a
steel bulkhead or deck to prevent it from
rolling under heavy sea conditions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
§ 142.235 Vessels contracted for prior to
November 19, 1952.
§ 142.240 Inspection, testing,
maintenance, and records.
(a) Towing vessels contracted for
construction prior to November 19,
1952, must meet the applicable
provisions of this part concerning the
number and general type of equipment
required.
(b) Existing equipment and
installations previously approved, but
not meeting the applicable requirements
for approval by the Commandant, may
be continued in service so long as they
are in good condition.
(c) All new installations and
replacements must meet the
requirements of this part.
(a) Inspection and testing. All handportable fire extinguishers, semiportable fire-extinguishing systems, firedetection systems, and fixed fireextinguishing systems, including
ventilation, machinery shutdowns, and
fixed fire-extinguishing system
pressure-operated dampers onboard the
vessel, must be inspected or tested at
least once every 12 months, as
prescribed in paragraphs (a)(1) through
(8) of this section, or more frequently if
otherwise required by the TSMS
applicable to the vessel.
(1) Portable fire extinguishers must be
tested in accordance with the
inspection, maintenance procedures and
hydrostatic pressure tests required by
Chapters 7 and 8 of NFPA 10, Portable
PO 00000
Frm 00129
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40132
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Fire Extinguishers (incorporated by
reference, see § 136.112 of this
subchapter), with the frequency as
specified by NFPA 10. In addition,
carbon dioxide and Halocarbon portable
fire extinguishers must be refilled when
the net content weight loss exceeds that
specified for fixed systems in Table
142.240 of this section.
(2) Semi-portable and fixed fireextinguishing systems must be
inspected and tested, as required by
Table 142.240 of this section, in
addition to the tests required by
§§ 147.60 and 147.65 of this chapter.
(3) Flexible connections and
discharge hoses on all semi-portable
extinguishers and fixed extinguishing
systems must be inspected and tested in
accordance with § 147.65 of this
chapter.
(4) All cylinders containing
compressed gas must be tested and
marked in accordance with § 147.60 of
this chapter.
(5) All piping, controls, valves, and
alarms must be inspected; and the
operation of controls, alarms,
ventilation shutdowns, and pressureoperated dampers for each fixed fireextinguishing system and detecting
system must be tested, to determine that
the system is operating properly.
(6) The fire main system must be
charged, and sufficient pressure must be
verified at the most remote and highest
outlets.
(7) All fire hoses must be inspected
for excessive wear, and subjected to a
test pressure equivalent to the
maximum service pressure. All fire
hoses which are defective and incapable
of repair must be destroyed.
(8) All smoke- and fire-detection
systems, including detectors and alarms,
must be tested.
TABLE 142.240—SEMI-PORTABLE AND FIXED FIRE-EXTINGUISHING SYSTEMS
Type system
Test
Carbon dioxide ................................
Weigh cylinders. Recharge if weight loss exceeds 10 percent of weight of the charge. Test time delays,
alarms, and ventilation shutdowns with carbon dioxide, nitrogen, or other nonflammable gas as stated in
the system manufacturer’s instruction manual. Inspect hoses for damage or decay. Ensure that nozzles
are unobstructed. Cylinders must be tested and marked, and all flexible connections on fixed carbon dioxide systems must be tested or renewed, as required by §§ 147.60 and 147.65 of this chapter.
Recharge or replace if weight loss exceeds 5 percent of the weight of the charge or if cylinder has a pressure gauge, recharge cylinder if pressure loss exceeds 10 percent adjusted for temperature. Test time
delays, alarms, and ventilation shutdowns with carbon dioxide, nitrogen, or other nonflammable gas as
stated in the system manufacturer’s instruction manual. Inspect hoses for damage or decay. Ensure that
nozzles are unobstructed. Cylinders must be tested and marked, and all flexible connections to Halon
1301 and halocarbon cylinders must be tested or renewed, as required by §§ 147.60 and 147.65 or
§ 147.67 of this chapter.
NOTE: Halon 1301 system approvals have expired, but existing systems may be retained if they are in
good and serviceable condition to the satisfaction of the Coast Guard inspector.
Inspect pressure cartridge and replace if end is punctured or if determined to have leaked or is in an unsuitable condition. Inspect hose and nozzle to see if they are clear. Insert charged cartridge. Ensure dry
chemical is free flowing (not caked) and extinguisher contains full charge.
See that pressure gauge is within operating range. If not, or if the seal is broken, weigh or otherwise determine that extinguisher is fully charged with dry chemical. Recharge if pressure is low or dry chemical is
needed.
See that pressure gauge, if so equipped, is within the operating range. If not, or if the seal is broken,
weigh or otherwise determine that extinguisher is fully charged with foam. Recharge if pressure is low or
foam is needed. Replace premixed agent every 3 years.
Recharge or replace if cylinder pressure loss exceeds 5 percent, adjusted for temperature. Test time
delays, alarms, and ventilation shutdowns with carbon dioxide, nitrogen, or other nonflammable gas as
stated in the system manufacturer’s instruction manual. Inspect hoses and nozzles to ensure they are
clear.
Test and inspect system in accordance with the maintenance instructions in the system manufacturer’s design, installation, operation, and maintenance manual.
Halon and Halocarbon ....................
Dry Chemical (cartridge operated)
Dry chemical (stored pressure) ......
Foam (stored pressure) ..................
Inert gas ..........................................
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Water mist .......................................
(b) Maintenance. In addition to the
requirements in paragraph (a) of this
section, all fire-suppression and
detection equipment and systems on
board a towing vessel must be
maintained in accordance with the
attached nameplate, manufacturer’s
approved design manual, or as
otherwise provided in any TSMS
applicable to the vessel.
(c) Records. (1) The records of
inspections and tests of fire-detection
systems and fixed fire-extinguishing
systems must be recorded in the TVR,
official logbook, or in accordance with
any TSMS applicable to the vessel. The
following minimum information is
required:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
(i) The dates when inspections and
tests were performed, the number and
any other identification of each unit
inspected and tested, the results of the
inspections and tests, and the name of
the crewmember, surveyor or auditor
and any others conducting the
inspections and tests, must be included.
(ii) Receipts and other records
generated by these inspections and tests
must be retained for at least 1 year and
made available upon request.
(2) The records of inspections and
tests of hand-portable fire extinguishers
and semi-portable fire-extinguishing
systems may be recorded in accordance
with paragraph (c)(1) of this section, or
on a tag attached to each unit by a
qualified servicing organization.
PO 00000
Frm 00130
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
§ 142.245 Requirements for training crews
to respond to fires.
(a) Drills and instruction. The master
of a towing vessel must ensure that each
crewmember participates in fire-fighting
drills and receives instruction at least
once each month. The instruction may
coincide with the drills, but is not
required to do so. All crewmembers
must be familiar with their fire-fighting
duties, and, specifically how to:
(1) Fight a fire in the engine room and
elsewhere onboard the towing vessel,
including how to:
(i) Operate all of the fire-extinguishing
equipment onboard the towing vessel;
(ii) Stop any mechanical ventilation
system for the engine room and
effectively seal all natural openings to
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
the space to prevent leakage of the
extinguishing agent; and
(iii) Operate the fuel shut-off(s) for the
engine room.
(2) Activate the general alarm;
(3) Report inoperative alarm systems
and fire-detection systems; and
(4) Don a firefighter’s outfit and a selfcontained breathing apparatus, if the
vessel is so equipped.
(b) Alternative form of instruction.
Video training, followed by a discussion
led by someone familiar with the
contingencies listed in paragraph (a) of
this section, is an acceptable, alternative
form of instruction. This instruction
may occur either onboard or off the
towing vessel.
(c) Participation in drills. Drills must
take place onboard the towing vessel as
if there were an actual emergency. They
must include:
(1) Participation by all crewmembers;
(2) Breaking out and using, or
simulating the use of, emergency
equipment;
(3) Testing of all alarm and detection
systems by operation of the test switch
or by activation of one or more devices;
(4) Putting on protective clothing by
at least one person, if the towing vessel
is so equipped; and
(5) Functionally testing the selfpriming capability of the portable fire
pump, if the towing vessel is so
equipped.
(d) Safety orientation. The master
must ensure that each crewmember who
has not participated in the drills
required by paragraph (a) of this section
and received the instruction required by
that paragraph (a) receives a safety
orientation within 24 hours of reporting
for duty. The safety orientation must
cover the particular contingencies listed
in paragraph (a) of this section.
Note to § 142.245. See § 140.915 for
requirements for keeping records of
training.
Subpart C—Fire Extinguishing and
Detection Equipment Requirements
§ 142.300
Excepted vessels.
Excepted vessels, as defined in
§ 136.110 of this subchapter, need not
comply with the provisions of
§§ 142.315 through 142.330.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 142.315 Additional fire-extinguishing
equipment requirements.
(a) A towing vessel that is:
(1) Certificated for rivers, lakes, bays,
and sounds, less than 3 nautical miles
from shore on the Great Lakes; or
(2) Certificated for limited coastwise,
coastwise, oceans or waters beyond 3
nautical miles from shore on the Great
Lakes, whose contract for construction
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
was executed prior to August 27, 2003;
or
(3) Pushing a barge ahead or hauling
a barge alongside, when the barge’s
coastwise, limited coastwise, or Great
Lakes route is restricted, as indicated on
its COI, so that the barge may operate
‘‘in fair weather only, within 12 miles
of shore’’ or with words to that effect,
must be equipped with either:
(i) An approved B–V semi-portable
fire-extinguishing system to protect the
engine room; or
(ii) A fixed fire-extinguishing system
installed to protect the engine room.
(b) A towing vessel that is certificated
for limited coastwise, coastwise, oceans,
or beyond 3 nautical miles from shore
on the Great Lakes whose contract for
construction was executed on or after
August 27, 2003, except for those
specified in paragraph (a)(3) of this
section, must be equipped with both:
(1) An approved B–V semi-portable
fire-extinguishing system to protect the
engine room; and
(2) A fixed fire-extinguishing system
installed to protect the engine room.
§ 142.325
hoses.
Fire pumps, fire mains, and fire
Each towing vessel must have either
a self-priming, power-driven, fixed fire
pump, a fire main, and hoses and
nozzles in accordance with paragraphs
(a) through (d) of this section; or a
portable pump, and hoses and nozzles,
in accordance with paragraphs (e) and
(f) of this section.
(a) A fixed fire pump must be capable
of:
(1) Delivering water simultaneously
from the two highest hydrants, or from
both branches of the fitting if the highest
hydrant has a Siamese fitting, at a pitottube pressure of at least 344 kilopascals
(kPa) (50 pounds per square inch (psi)),
and a flow rate of at least 300 liters per
minute (lpm) (80 gallons per minute
(gpm)); and
(2) Being energized remotely from a
safe place outside the engine room and
at the pump.
(b) All suction valves necessary for
the operation of the fire main must be
kept in the open position or capable of
operation from the same place where
the remote fire pump control is located.
(c) The fire main must have a
sufficient number of fire hydrants with
attached hose to allow a stream of water
to reach any part of the machinery space
using a single length of fire hose.
(d) The hose must be a lined
commercial fire hose 15 meters (50 feet)
in length, at least 40 millimeters (1.5
inches) in diameter, and fitted with a
nozzle made of corrosion-resistant
material capable of providing a solid
stream and a spray pattern.
PO 00000
Frm 00131
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40133
(e) The portable fire pump must be
self-priming and power-driven, with:
(1) A minimum capacity of at least
300 LPM (80 gpm) at a discharge gauge
pressure of not less than 414 kPa (60
psi), measured at the pump discharge;
(2) A sufficient amount of lined
commercial fire hose 15 meters (50 feet)
in length, at least 40 mm (1.5 inches) in
diameter and immediately available to
attach to it so that a stream of water will
reach any part of the vessel; and
(3) A nozzle made of corrosionresistant material capable of providing a
solid stream and a spray pattern.
(f) The pump must be stowed with its
hose and nozzle outside of the
machinery space.
§ 142.330 Fire-detection system
requirements.
(a) Fire-detection systems. Except as
provided in paragraph (a)(8) of this
section, each towing vessel must have a
fire-detection system installed to detect
engine room fires. The owner or
managing operator must ensure the
following:
(1) Each detector, control panel,
remote indicator panel, and fire alarm
are approved by the Commandant under
approval series 161.002 or listed by a
NRTL as set forth in 29 CFR 1910.7;
(2) The system is installed, tested, and
maintained in accordance with the
manufacturer’s design manual;
(3) The system is arranged and
installed so a fire in the engine room
automatically sets off alarms on a fire
detection control panel at the operating
station. On vessels with more than one
operating station, only one of them must
be outfitted with a fire detection control
panel. Any other operating station must
be outfitted with either a fire detection
control panel or a remote indicator
panel;
(4) The control panel includes:
(i) A power available light;
(ii) An audible to notify crew of a fire;
(iii) Visual alarm alarms to identify
the zone or zones of origin of the fire;
(iv) A means to silence the audible
alarm while maintaining indication by
the visual alarms;
(v) A circuit-fault detector test-switch,
or internal supervision of circuit
integrity; and
(vi) Labels for all switches and
indicator lights, identifying their
functions.
(5) The system draws power from two
sources. Switchover from the primary
source to the secondary source may be
either manual or automatic;
(6) The system serves no other
purpose, unless it is an engine room
monitoring system complying with
paragraph (a)(8) of this section; and
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40134
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(7) The design of the system and its
installation on the towing vessel is
certified and inspected by a registered
professional engineer with experience
in fire-detection system design, by a
technician with qualifications as a
National Institute for Certification in
Engineering Technologies (NICET) level
IV fire alarm engineering technician, or
by an authorized classification society
with equivalent experience, to comply
with paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) of this
section.
(8) A towing vessel whose
construction was contracted for prior to
January 18, 2000, may use an existing
engine room monitoring system (with
fire-detection capability) instead of a
fire-detection system, if the monitoring
system is operable and complies with
paragraphs (a)(2) through (7) of this
section, and uses detectors listed by an
NRTL.
(b) Smoke detection in berthing
spaces. Each towing vessel must be
equipped with a means to detect smoke
in the berthing spaces and lounges that
alerts individuals in those spaces. This
may be accomplished by an installed
detection system, or by using individual
battery-operated detectors meeting UL
217 (incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112 of this subchapter). Detection
systems or individual detectors must be
kept operational at all times when the
crew is onboard the towing vessel.
(c) Heat-detection system in galley.
Each new towing vessel equipped with
a galley must have a heat-detection
system with one or more restorable heatsensing detectors to detect fires in the
galley. The system must be arranged to
sound an audible alarm at each
operating station. This may be a
separate zone in the detection system
required by paragraph (a) of this section,
or a separate detection system
complying with paragraphs (a)(1) and
(2) of this section.
PART 143—MACHINERY AND
ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS AND
EQUIPMENT
Sec.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Subpart A—General
Subpart B—Requirements for All Towing
Vessels
143.200 Applicability.
143.205 General.
143.210 Alternate design or operational
considerations.
143.215 Existing vessels built to class.
143.220 Machinery space fire prevention.
143.225 Control and monitoring
requirements.
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Subpart C—Requirements for New Towing
Vessels
143.500 Applicability.
143.510 Verification of compliance with
design standards.
143.515 Towing vessels built to recognized
classification society rules.
143.520 Towing vessels built to American
Boat and Yacht Council standards.
143.540 Pumps, pipes, valves, and fittings
for essential systems.
143.545 Pressure vessels.
143.550 Steering systems.
143.555 Electrical power sources,
generators, and motors.
143.560 Electrical distribution panels and
switchboards.
143.565 Electrical overcurrent protection
other than generators and motors.
143.570 Electrical grounding and ground
detection.
143.575 Electrical conductors, connections,
and equipment.
143.580 Alternative electrical installations.
143.585 General requirements for
propulsion, steering, and related controls
on vessels that move tank barges carrying
oil or hazardous material in bulk.
143.590 Propulsor redundancy on vessels
that move tank barges carrying oil or
hazardous material in bulk.
143.595 Vessels with one propulsor that
move tank barges carrying oil or
hazardous material in bulk.
143.600 Alternative standards for vessels
that move tank barges carrying oil or
hazardous material in bulk.
143.605 Demonstration of compliance on
vessels that move tank barges carrying
oil or hazardous material in bulk.
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3301, 3306,
3308, 3316, 8104, 8904; 33 CFR 1.05; DHS
Delegation No. 0170.1.
Subpart A—General
143.100 Purpose.
143.105 Applicability.
143.115 Definitions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
143.230 Alarms and monitoring.
143.235 General alarms.
143.240 Communication requirements.
143.245 Readiness and testing.
143.250 System isolation and markings.
143.255 Fuel system requirements.
143.260 Fuel shutoff requirements.
143.265 Additional fuel system
requirements for towing vessels built
after January 18, 2000.
143.270 Piping systems and tanks.
143.275 Bilge pumps or other dewatering
capability.
143.300 Pressure vessels.
143.400 Electrical systems, general.
143.410 Shipboard lighting.
143.415 Navigation lights.
143.450 Pilothouse alerter system.
143.460 Towing machinery.
Jkt 238001
§ 143.100
Purpose.
This part contains requirements for
the design, installation, and operation of
primary and auxiliary machinery and
electrical systems and equipment on
towing vessels.
§ 143.105
Applicability.
This part applies to all towing vessels
subject to this subchapter. The specific
PO 00000
Frm 00132
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
applicability of requirements in each
subpart is set forth in that subpart.
§ 143.115
Definitions.
The definitions provided in § 136.110
of this subchapter apply to this part. In
addition, the following definition
applies exclusively to this part:
Independent means the equipment is
arranged to perform its required
function regardless of the state of
operation, or failure, of other
equipment.
Subpart B—Requirements for All
Towing Vessels
§ 143.200
Applicability.
(a) This subpart applies to all towing
vessels subject to this subchapter.
(b) Except as noted paragraph (c) of
this section, which lists later
implementation dates for requirements
in §§ 143.450 and 143.460, an existing
towing vessel must comply with the
applicable requirements in this part no
later than either July 20, 2018 or the
date the vessel obtains a Certificate of
Inspection (COI), whichever date is
earlier. The delayed implementation
provisions in this section do not apply
to a new towing vessel.
(c) Existing vessels must meet the
pilothouse alerter and towing
machinery requirements of §§ 143.450
and 143.460 no later than 5 years after
the issuance of the first COI for the
vessel.
§ 143.205
General.
(a) Machinery and electrical systems
must be designed and maintained to
provide for safe operation of the towing
vessel and safety of persons onboard
under normal and emergency
conditions.
(b) The crew of each towing vessel
must demonstrate the ability to operate
the primary and auxiliary machinery
and electrical systems for which they
are responsible, and to do so under
normal and emergency conditions. This
includes, but is not limited to, responses
to alarms and restoration of propulsion
and steering in the event of failure.
(c) Propulsion machinery, including
main engines, reduction gears, shafting,
bearings, and electrical equipment and
systems, must:
(1) Be maintained to ensure proper
operation;
(2) Be suitable for route and service;
and
(3) Have suitable propulsion controls
to provide the operator full control at
each operating station.
(d) Repairs and minor alterations to
existing towing vessels must be made in
accordance with this part. New
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
installations that are not replacements
in kind must comply with the
requirements of subpart C of this part,
if applicable.
§ 143.210 Alternate design or operational
considerations.
(a) Machinery or electrical systems of
a novel design, unusual form, or special
material that cannot be reviewed or
approved in accordance with this part,
may be approved by the Commanding
Officer, Marine Safety Center. It must be
shown by systematic analysis, based on
engineering principles, that the
machinery or electrical equipment or
system provides an equivalent level of
safety. The owner or managing operator
must submit detailed plans, material
component specifications, and design
criteria, including the expected towing
vessel service and operating
environment, to the Marine Safety
Center. Examples of novel design
include use of liquefied natural gas,
compressed natural gas, or propane fuel
for propulsion, and hybrid, fuel cell, or
battery propulsion.
(b) Alternate arrangements or
equipment to comply with this part may
be approved in accordance with
§ 136.115 of this subchapter.
§ 143.215
Existing vessels built to class.
(a) An existing towing vessel classed
by a recognized classification society, as
appropriate for the intended service and
routes, is considered in compliance
with the machinery and electrical
standards of this subpart.
(b) An existing vessel built and
equipped to conform to a recognized
classification society’s rules,
appropriate for the intended service and
routes, but not currently classed, may be
deemed by the Officer in Charge, Marine
Inspection (OCMI), or third-party
organization (TPO), to be in compliance
with this part, provided that the towing
vessel conforms to the class rules.
(c) Existing vessels meeting either
paragraph (a) or (b) of this section must
also meet the requirements of
§§ 143.245 and 143.450.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 143.220
Machinery space fire prevention.
(a) All seals and gaskets must be
properly maintained to prevent leaks of
flammable or combustible liquid, as
those terms are defined in 46 CFR
subpart 30.10, into the machinery space.
(b) Piping and machinery components
that exceed 220 °C (428 °F), including
fittings, flanges, valves, exhaust
manifolds, and turbochargers, must be
insulated. Measures must be in place to
prevent flammable or combustible
liquid piping leaks from coming into
contact with these components.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
(c) Flammable and combustible
products must not be stored in
machinery spaces, unless they are
stored in a suitable container that meets
the requirements of § 142.225 of this
subchapter.
§ 143.225 Control and monitoring
requirements.
(a) Each towing vessel must have a
means to monitor and control the
amount of thrust, rudder angle, and (if
applicable) direction of thrust, at each
operating station.
(b) Each towing vessel equipped with
rudder(s) must have a means to monitor
and control the position of the rudder(s)
at each operating station.
§ 143.230
Alarms and monitoring.
(a) Each towing vessel must have a
reliable means to provide notification
when an emergency condition exists or
an essential system develops problems
that require attention. The following
alarms must be provided:
(1) Main engine low lubricating oil
pressure;
(2) Main engine high cooling water
temperature;
(3) Auxiliary generator engine low
lubricating oil pressure;
(4) Auxiliary generator engine high
cooling water temperature;
(5) High bilge levels;
(6) Low hydraulic steering fluid
levels, if applicable; and
(7) Low fuel level, if fitted with a day
tank.
(b) Alarms must:
(1) Be visible and audible at each
operating station. The alarm located at
the operating station may be a summary
alarm; if the alarm at the operating
station is a summary alarm, the specific
alarm condition must be indicated at the
machinery or bilge location;
(2) Have a means to test actuation at
each operating station or have a
continuous self-monitoring alarm
system which actuates if an alarm point
fails or becomes disabled;
(3) Continue until they are
acknowledged; and
(4) Not interfere with night vision at
the operating station.
(c) The following systems must be
equipped with gauges at the machinery
location:
(1) Main engine lubricating oil
pressure and main engine RPM;
(2) Main engine cooling water
temperature;
(3) Auxiliary generator engine
lubricating oil pressure and auxiliary
generator engine RPM;
(4) Auxiliary generator engine cooling
water temperature; and
PO 00000
Frm 00133
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40135
(5) Hydraulic steering fluid pressure,
if the vessel is equipped with hydraulic
steering systems.
§ 143.235
General alarms.
(a) This section does not apply to an
excepted vessel as defined in § 136.110
of this subchapter.
(b) Each towing vessel must be fitted
with a general alarm that:
(1) Is activated at each operating
station and can notify persons onboard
in the event of an emergency;
(2) Is capable of notifying persons in
any accommodation, work space, and
the engine room;
(3) Has installed, in the engine room
and any other area where background
noise makes a general alarm hard to
hear, a supplemental flashing red light
that is identified with a sign that reads:
‘‘Attention General Alarm—When
Alarm Sounds or Flashes Go to Your
Station’’; and
(4) A public-address (PA) system or
other means of alerting all persons on
the towing vessel may be used in lieu
of the general alarm in paragraph (b) of
this section if the system meets the
requirements of paragrahs (b)(2) and (3)
of this section.
§ 143.240
Communication requirements.
(a) This section does not apply to an
excepted towing vessel as defined in
§ 136.110 of this subchapter.
(b) Each towing vessel must be fitted
with a communication system between
the pilothouse and the engine room that:
(1) Consists of either fixed or portable
equipment, such as a sound-powered
telephone, portable radios, or other
reliable method of voice
communication, with a main or reserve
power supply that is independent of the
towing vessel’s electrical system; and
(2) Provides two-way voice
communication and calling between the
pilothouse and either the engine room
or a location immediately adjacent to an
exit from the engine room.
(c) Towing vessels with more than
one propulsion unit and independent
pilothouse control for all engines are not
required to have internal
communication systems.
(d) When the pilothouse engine
controls and the access to the engine
room are within 3 meters (10 feet) of
each other and allow unobstructed
visible contact between them, direct
voice communication is acceptable
instead of a communication system.
§ 143.245
Readiness and testing.
(a) Essential systems or equipment
must be regularly tested and examined.
Tests and examinations must verify that
the system or equipment functions as
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40136
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
designed. If a component is found
unsatisfactory, it must be repaired or
replaced. Test and examination
procedures must be in accordance with
manufacturer’s instructions or the
Towing Safety Management System
(TSMS) applicable to the vessel, if the
vessel has a TSMS.
(b) Each towing vessel must perform
the applicable tests in Table 143.245(b)
of this section. The tests required by this
section must be recorded in accordance
with part 140 of this subchapter.
TABLE 143.245(b)—REQUIRED TESTS AND FREQUENCY
Tests of:
Frequency:
Propulsion controls; ahead and astern at the operating station ..............
Before the vessel gets underway, but no more than once in any 24
hour period.
Before the vessel gets underway, but no more than once in any 24
hour period.
Weekly.
At least once every 3 months.
At least once every 3 months.
Steering controls at the operating station ................................................
Pilothouse alerter system .........................................................................
All alternate steering and propulsion controls ..........................................
Power supply for alarm actuation circuits for alarms required by
§ 143.230.
Communications required by § 143.240 ...................................................
General alarm if the vessel is so equipped .............................................
Emergency lighting and power if the vessel is so equipped ...................
Charge of storage batteries if the vessel is so equipped, for emergency
lighting and power.
Alarm setpoints .........................................................................................
Pressure vessel relief valves ....................................................................
All other essential systems .......................................................................
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 143.250
System isolation and markings.
Electrical equipment, piping for
flammable or combustible liquid,
seawater cooling, or fire-fighting
systems must be provided with isolation
devices and markings as follows:
(a) Electrical equipment must be
provided with circuit isolation and must
be marked as described in § 143.400.
(b) Electrical panels or other
enclosures containing more than one
source of power must be fitted with a
sign warning persons of this condition
and identifying where to secure all
sources.
(c) Piping for flammable or
combustible liquid, seawater cooling, or
firefighting systems must be fitted with
isolation valves that are clearly marked
by labeling or color coding that enables
the crew to identify its function.
(d) Any piping system that penetrates
the hull below the waterline must be
fitted with an accessible valve, located
as close to the hull penetration as is
practicable, for preventing the
accidental admission of water into the
vessel either through such pipes or in
the event of a fracture of such pipe. The
valve must be clearly marked by
labeling or color coding that enables the
crew to identify its function.
(e) Color coding required by this
section may be met by complying with
coding standards contained in the ISO
14726:2008(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 136.112 of this
subchapter), or in accordance with the
TSMS applicable to the vessel.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
§ 143.255
Weekly.
Weekly.
At least once every 3 months.
At least once every 3 months.
Twice every 5 years, with no more than 3 years elapsing since last
test.
Twice every 5 years, with no more than 3 years elapsing since last
test.
At least once every 3 months.
Fuel system requirements.
(a) Fuel systems for towing vessel
main engines and generators must have
a documented maintenance plan to
ensure proper operation of the system.
(b) A continuous supply of clean fuel
must be provided to main propulsion
engines and generators.
(c) The fuel system must include
filters and/or purifiers. Where filters are
used:
(1) A supply of spare fuel filters must
be provided onboard; and
(2) Fuel filters must be replaced in
accordance with manufacturer’s
requirements or the vessel’s TSMS, if
applicable.
(d) Except as otherwise permitted
under § 143.210 or § 143.520, no fuel
other than diesel fuel may be used.
§ 143.260
Fuel shutoff requirements.
(a) This section does not apply to an
excepted towing vessel as defined in
§ 136.110 of this subchapter.
(b) To stop the flow of fuel in the
event of a fire or break in the fuel line,
a remote fuel shutoff valve must be
fitted on any fuel line that supplies fuel
directly to a propulsion engine or
generator prime mover.
(c) The valve must be installed in the
fuel piping directly outside of the fuel
oil supply tank.
(d) The valve must be operable from
a safe place outside the space where the
valve is installed.
(e) Each remote valve control must be
marked in clearly legible letters, at least
25 millimeters (1 inch) high, indicating
PO 00000
Frm 00134
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
the purpose of the valve and the way to
operate it.
§ 143.265 Additional fuel system
requirements for towing vessels built after
January 18, 2000.
(a) Applicability. This section applies
to towing vessels that are not excepted
vessels, as defined in § 136.110 of this
subchapter, and that were built after
January 18, 2000. Except for outboard
engines or portable bilge or fire pumps,
each fuel system must comply with this
section.
(b) Portable fuel systems. The vessel
must not incorporate or carry portable
fuel systems, including portable tanks
and related fuel lines and accessories,
except when used for outboard engines
or portable bilge or fire pumps. The
design, construction, and stowage of
portable tanks and related fuel lines and
accessories must comply with the ABYC
H–25 (incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112 of this subchapter).
(c) Vent pipes for integral fuel tanks.
Each integral fuel tank must have a vent
that connects to the highest point of the
tank, discharges on a weather deck
through a bend of 180 degrees, and is
fitted with a 30-by-30-mesh corrosionresistant flame screen. Vents from two
or more fuel tanks may combine in a
system that discharges on a weather
deck. The net cross-sectional area of the
vent pipe for the tank must be not less
than 312.3 square millimeters (0.484
square inches), for any tank filled by
gravity. The cross-sectional area of the
vent pipe, or the sum of the vent areas
when multiple vents are used, must not
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
be less than that of the fill pipe crosssectional area for any tank filled by
pump pressure.
(d) Fuel piping. Except as permitted in
paragraphs (d)(1) through (3) of this
section, each fuel line must be seamless
and made of steel, annealed copper,
nickel-copper, or copper-nickel. Each
fuel line must have a wall thickness no
less than 0.9 millimeters (0.035 inches)
except for the following:
(1) Aluminum piping is acceptable on
an aluminum-hull towing vessel if it is
at least Schedule 80 in thickness.
(2) Nonmetallic flexible hose is
acceptable if it:
(i) Is used in lengths of not more than
0.76 meters (30 inches);
(ii) Is visible and easily accessible;
(iii) Does not penetrate a watertight
bulkhead;
(iv) Is fabricated with an inner tube
and a cover of synthetic rubber or other
suitable material reinforced with wire
braid; and
(v) Either:
(A) If designed for use with
compression fittings, is fitted with
suitable, corrosion-resistant,
compression fittings, or fittings
compliant with the SAE J1475 Revised
JUN96 (incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112 of this subchapter); or
(B) If designed for use with clamps, is
installed with two clamps at each end
of the hose. Clamps must not rely on
spring tension and must be installed
beyond the bead or flare or over the
serrations of the mating spud, pipe, or
hose fitting.
(3) Nonmetallic flexible hose
complying with SAE J1942 Revised
APR2007 (incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112 of this subchapter), is also
acceptable.
(e) Alternative standards. A towing
vessel of less than 79 feet in length may
comply with any of the following
standards for fuel systems instead of
those of paragraph (d) in this section:
(1) ABYC H–33 (incorporated by
reference, see § 136.112 of this
subchapter);
(2) Chapter 5 of NFPA 302
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112 of this subchapter); or
(3) 33 CFR chapter I, subchapter S
(Boating Safety).
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 143.270
Piping systems and tanks.
Piping and tanks exposed to the
outside of the hull must be made of
metal and maintained in a leak free
condition.
§ 143.275 Bilge pumps or other dewatering
capability.
There must be an installed or portable
bilge pump for emergency dewatering.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
Any portable pump must have sufficient
hose length and pumping capability. All
installed bilge piping must have a
check/foot valve in each bilge suction
that prevents unintended backflooding
through bilge piping.
§ 143.300
Pressure vessels.
(a) Pressure vessels over 5 cubic feet
in volume and over 15 pounds per
square inch maximum allowable
working pressure (MAWP) must be
equipped with an indicating pressure
gauge (in a readily visible location) and
with one or more spring-loaded relief
valves. The total relieving capacity of
such relief valves must prevent pressure
from exceeding the MAWP, as
established by the manufacturer, by
more than 10 percent.
(b) Pressure vessels must be externally
examined annually. Relief valves must
be tested in accordance with § 143.245.
(c) All pressure vessels must have the
MAWP indicated by a stamp,
nameplate, or other means visible to the
crew.
(d) Pressure vessels installed after July
20, 2016 must meet the requirements of
§ 143.545.
§ 143.400
Electrical systems, general.
(a) Electrical systems and equipment
must function properly and minimize
system failures and fire and shock
hazards.
(b) Installed electrical power source(s)
must be capable of carrying the
electrical load of the towing vessel
under normal operating conditions.
(c) Electrical equipment must be
marked with its respective current and
voltage ratings.
(d) Individual circuit breakers on
switchboards and distribution panels
must be labeled with a description of
the loads they serve.
(e) Electrical connections must be
suitably installed to prevent them from
coming loose through vibration or
accidental contact.
(f) Electrical equipment and electrical
cables must be suitably protected from
wet and corrosive environments.
(g) Electrical components that pose an
electrical hazard must be in an
enclosure.
(h) Electrical conductors passing
though watertight bulkheads must be
installed so that the bulkhead remains
watertight.
(i) The connections of flexible cable
plugs and socket outlets must be
designed to prevent unintended
separation.
§ 143.410
Shipboard lighting.
(a) Sufficient lighting suitable for the
marine environment must be provided
within crew working and living areas.
PO 00000
Frm 00135
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40137
(b) Emergency lighting must be
provided for all internal crew working
and living areas. Emergency lighting
sources must provide for sufficient
illumination under emergency
conditions to facilitate egress from each
space and must be either:
(1) Automatic, battery-operated with a
duration of no less than 2 hours; or
(2) Non-electric, phosphorescent
adhesive lighting strips that are
installed along escape routes and
sufficiently visible to enable egress with
no power.
(c) Each towing vessel must be
equipped with at least two portable,
battery-powered lights. One must be
located in the pilothouse and the other
at the access to the engine room.
§ 143.415
Navigation lights.
(a) Towing vessels more than 65 feet
in length must use navigation lights that
meet UL 1104 (incorporated by
reference, see § 136.112 of this
subchapter) or other standards accepted
by the Coast Guard.
(b) Towing vessels 65 feet or less in
length may meet the requirements listed
in 33 CFR 183.810 or paragraph (a) of
this section.
§ 143.450
Pilothouse alerter system.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph
(d) or (e) of this section, a towing vessel
with overnight accommodations and
alternating watches (shift work), when
pulling, pushing or hauling alongside
one or more barges, must have a system
to detect when its master or mate (pilot)
becomes incapacitated. The system
must:
(1) Have an alarm in the pilothouse
distinct from any other alarm;
(2) Require action from the master or
officer in charge of a navigational watch,
during an interval not to exceed 10
minutes, in order to reset the alarm
timer; and
(3) Immediately (within 30 seconds)
notify another crewmember if the
pilothouse alarm is not acknowledged.
(b) The time interval for the system
alarm must be adjustable. The time may
be adjusted by the owner or managing
operator but must not be in excess of 10
minutes. This time interval, and
information on alerter operation, must
be provided on board and specified in
the vessel’s TSMS if applicable.
(c) The system alarm may be reset
physically (e.g. a push button), or the
reset may be accomplished by a link to
other pilothouse action such as rudder
or throttle control movement, or motion
detection of personnel.
(d) A towing vessel need not comply
with this section if a second person is
provided in the pilothouse.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40138
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(e) Towing vessels 65 feet or less in
length are not required to have a
pilothouse alerter system.
§ 143.460
Towing machinery.
(a) Towing machinery such as
capstans, winches, and other
mechanical devices used to connect the
towing vessel to the tow must be
designed and installed to maximize
control of the tow.
(b) Towing machinery for towing
astern must have sufficient safeguards,
e.g., towing bitt with crossbar, to
prevent the machinery from becoming
disabled in the event the tow becomes
out of line.
(c) Towing machinery used to connect
the towing vessel to the tow must be
suitable for its intended service. It must
be capable of withstanding exposure to
the marine environment, likely
mechanical damage, static and dynamic
loads expected during intended service,
the towing vessel’s horsepower, and
arrangement of the tow.
(d) When a winch that has the
potential for uncontrolled release under
tension is used, a warning must be in
place at the winch controls that
indicates this. When safeguards
designed to prevent uncontrolled
release are utilized, they must not be
disabled.
(e) Each owner or managing operator
must develop procedures to routinely
examine, maintain, and replace
capstans, winches, and other machinery
used to connect the towing vessel to the
tow.
Subpart C—Requirements for New
Towing Vessels
§ 143.500
§ 143.520 Towing vessels built to
American Boat and Yacht Council
standards.
Applicability.
(a) This subpart applies to a new
towing vessel, as defined in § 136.110 of
this subchapter, unless it is an excepted
vessel.
(b) Machinery or electrical systems of
a novel design, unusual form, or special
material must meet section § 143.210.
(c) Unless otherwise noted in
§§ 143.515 and 143.520, new towing
vessels must also meet the requirements
of subpart B of this part.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 143.510 Verification of compliance with
design standards.
Verification of compliance with the
machinery and electrical design
standards in this subpart is obtained by
following the provisions in §§ 144.135
through 144.145 of this subchapter.
§ 143.515 Towing vessels built to
recognized classification society rules.
(a) Except as noted in paragraph (c) of
this section, a towing vessel classed by
the American Bureau of Shipping
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
(ABS), in accordance with the ABS
Rules for Building and Classing Steel
Vessels Under 90 Meters (295 Feet) in
Length, or the ABS Rules for Building
and Classing Steel Vessels for Service
on Rivers and Intracoastal Waterways
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112 of this subchapter), as
appropriate for the intended service and
routes, complies with this subpart.
(b) Except as noted in paragraph (c) of
this section, a towing vessel built and
equipped to conform to the ABS rules
specified in paragraph (a) of this section
and appropriate for the intended service
and routes, but not currently classed,
may be deemed by the OCMI or a TPO
to be in compliance with this subpart if
it can be shown that the vessel
continues to conform to the ABS rules.
(c) A vessel that complies with this
subpart as described in paragraph (a) or
(b) must also meet the requirements
described in §§ 143.585 through 143.595
or the requirements of § 143.600 if it
moves tank barges carrying oil or
hazardous material in bulk.
(d) Vessels meeting either paragraph
(a) or (b) of this section are considered
as being in compliance with subpart B
of this part except for the readiness and
testing requirements of § 143.245, and
pilothouse alerter requirements of
§ 143.450.
(e) Towing vessels built to other
recognized classification society rules,
appropriate for the intended route and
service, may be considered compliant
with provisions in this subpart upon
approval by the Coast Guard.
(a) Except as noted in paragraphs (b)
and (c) of this section, a new towing
vessel 65 feet (19.8 meters) or less in
length built to conform with the
American Boat and Yacht Council
(ABYC) standards listed in this
paragraph (a) (incorporated by
reference, see § 136.112 of this
subchapter), complies with this subpart:
(1) E–11 (2003)—AC & DC Electrical
Systems on Boats;
(2) H–2 (2002)—Ventilation of Boats
Using Gasoline;
(2) H–22 (2005)—Electric Bilge Pump
Systems;
(3) H–24 (2007)—Gasoline Fuel
Systems;
(4) H–25 (2003)—Portable Gasoline
Fuel Systems;
(5) H–32 (2004)—Ventilation of Boats
Using Diesel Fuel;
(6) H–33 (2005)—Diesel Fuel Systems;
(7) P–1 (2002)—Installation of
Exhaust Systems for Propulsion and
Auxiliary Engines; and
PO 00000
Frm 00136
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(8) P–4 (2004)—Marine Inboard
Engines and Transmissions.
(b) New towing vessels, 65 feet or less
in length, built to the ABYC standards
specified in this section are considered
compliant with subpart B of this part
except for the readiness and testing
requirements of § 143.245.
(c) If the vessel moves tank barges
carrying oil or hazardous material in
bulk, it must meet either the
requirements described in §§ 143.585
through 143.595 or the requirements
described in § 143.600.
§ 143.540 Pumps, pipes, valves, and
fittings for essential systems.
(a) Pumps, pipes, valves, and fittings
in essential systems on vessels must
meet ABS Rules for Building and
Classing Steel Vessels Under 90 Meters
(295 Feet) in Length (incorporated by
reference, see § 136.112 of this
subchapter), Part 4, Chapter 4.
(b) Pumps, pipes, valves, and fittings
in essential systems on towing vessels
operating exclusively on rivers or
intracoastal waterways may meet ABS
Rules for Building and Classing Steel
Vessels for Service on Rivers and
Intracoastal Waterways (incorporated by
reference, see § 136.112 of this
subchapter), Part 4, Chapter 3.
§ 143.545
Pressure vessels.
(a) In lieu of meeting the requirements
of § 143.300, pressure vessels installed
on new towing vessels must meet the
requirements of this section.
(b) Pressure vessels over 5 cubic feet
in volume and more than 15 psi
maximum allowable working pressure
must meet ABS Rules for Building and
Classing Steel Vessels under 90 Meters
(295 Feet) in Length (incorporated by
reference, see § 136.112 of this
subchapter), Part 4, Chapter 1, Section
1.
§ 143.550
Steering systems.
(a) Steering systems must meet ABS
Rules for Building and Classing Steel
Vessels under 90 Meters (295 Feet) in
Length (incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112 of this subchapter), Part 4,
Chapter 3, Section 3.
(b) Steering systems on new towing
vessels operating exclusively on rivers
or intracoastal waterways may meet
ABS Rules for Building and Classing
Steel Vessels for Service on Rivers and
Intracoastal Waterways (incorporated by
reference, see § 136.112 of this
subchapter), Part 4, Chapter 2, Section
3.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 143.555 Electrical power sources,
generators, and motors.
(a) General requirements. (1) There
must be a source of electrical power
sufficient for:
(i) All essential systems as defined by
§ 136.110 of this subchapter;
(ii) Minimum conditions of
habitability; and
(iii) Other installed or portable
systems and equipment.
(2) Generators and motors must be
suitably rated for the environment
where they operate, marked with their
respective ratings, and suitably
protected against overcurrent.
(3) A towing vessel, other than an
excepted vessel, must have a backup or
a second power source that has
adequate capacity to supply power to
essential alarms, lighting, radios,
navigation equipment, and any other
essential system identified by the
cognizant OCMI or a TPO.
(b) Specific requirements. (1) The
owner or managing operator must
complete a load analysis that shows that
the electrical power source is sufficient
to power the sum of connected loads
described in paragraph (a)(1) of this
section utilizing an appropriate load
factor for each load. A record of the
analysis must be retained by the owner
or managing operator.
(2) Installed generators and motors
must have a data plate listing rated
kilowatts and power factor (or current),
voltage, and rated ambient temperature.
(3) Generators must be provided with
overcurrent protection no greater than
115 percent of their rated current and
utilize a switchboard or distribution
panel.
(4) Motors must be provided with
overcurrent protection that meets Parts
I through VII, Article 430 of NFPA’s
National Electrical Code (NEC)
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112 of this subchapter). Steering
motor circuits must be protected as per
Part 4 Chapter 6 Section 2, Regulation
11 (except 11.7) ofABS Rules for
Building and Classing Steel Vessels
Under 90 Meters (295 feet) in Length
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112 of this subchapter).
(5) Generators and motors installed in
machinery spaces must be certified to
operate in an ambient temperature of 50
°C or be derated, or it can be shown that
40 °C ambient temperature will not be
exceeded in these spaces.
(6) Each generator and motor, except
a submersible-pump motor, must be in
an accessible space which is adequately
ventilated and as dry as practicable, and
must be mounted above the bilges.
(7) A generator driven by a main
propulsion unit (such as a shaft
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
generator) may be considered one of the
power sources required by paragraph (a)
of this section.
(8) Other than excepted vessels, each
towing vessel must be arranged so that
the following essential loads can be
energized from two independent
sources of electricity:
(i) High bilge level alarm required by
§ 143.230;
(ii) Emergency egress lighting, unless
the requirements of § 143.410(b)(1) or
(2) are met;
(iii) Navigation lights;
(iv) Pilothouse lighting;
(v) Engine room lighting;
(vi) Any installed radios and
navigation equipment as required by
§§ 140.715 and 140.725;
(vii) All distress alerting
communications equipment listed in
§§ 140.715 and 140.725;
(viii) Any installed fire detection
system; and
(ix) Any essential system identified by
the cognizant OCMI or TPO, if
applicable.
(9) If a battery is used as the second
source of electricity required by
paragraph (b)(8) of this section, it must
be capable of supplying the loads for at
least three hours. There must be a
means to monitor the condition of the
battery backup power source.
§ 143.560 Electrical distribution panels
and switchboards.
(a) Each distribution panel or
switchboard on a towing vessel must be:
(1) In a location that is accessible, as
dry as practicable, adequately
ventilated, and protected from falling
debris and dripping or splashing water;
and
(2) Totally enclosed and of the deadfront type.
(b) Each switchboard accessible from
the rear must be constructed to prevent
a person’s accidental contact with
energized parts.
(c) Nonconductive mats or grating
must be provided on the deck in front
of each switchboard and, if it is
accessible from the rear, on the deck
behind the switchboard.
(d) Each un-insulated current-carrying
part must be mounted on
noncombustible, nonabsorbent, and
high-dielectric insulating material.
(e) Equipment mounted on a door of
an enclosure must be constructed or
shielded so that a person will not come
into accidental contact with energized
parts.
§ 143.565 Electrical overcurrent protection
other than generators and motors.
(a) General requirement. Power and
lighting circuits on towing vessels must
PO 00000
Frm 00137
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40139
be protected by suitable overcurrent
protection.
(b) Specific requirements. (1) Cable
and wiring used in power and lighting
circuits must have overcurrent
protection that opens the circuit at the
standard setting closest to 80 percent of
the manufacturer’s listed ampacity.
Overcurrent protection setting
exceptions allowed by NFPA’s National
Electrical Code (NEC), Article 240
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112 of this subchapter) may be
employed.
(2) If the manufacturer’s listed
ampacity is not known, tables
referenced in Article 310.15(B) of the
NEC (incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112 of this subchapter) must be
used, assuming a temperature rating of
75 °C and an assumed temperature of 50
°C for machinery spaces and 40 °C for
other spaces.
(3) Overcurrent protection devices
must be installed in a manner that will
not open the path to ground in a circuit;
only ungrounded conductors must be
protected. Overcurrent protection must
be coordinated such that an overcurrent
situation is cleared by the circuit
breaker or fuse nearest to the fault.
(4) Each transformer must have
protection against overcurrent that
meets Article 450 of the NEC
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112 of this subchapter).
(5) On a towing vessel, other than an
excepted vessel as defined in § 136.110
of this subchapter, essential systems and
non-essential systems must not be on
the same circuit or share the same
overcurrent protective device.
§ 143.570 Electrical grounding and ground
detection.
(a) An ungrounded distribution
system must be provided with a ground
detection system located at the main
switchboard or distribution panel that
provides continuous indication of
circuit status to ground, with a
provision to temporarily remove the
indicating device from the reference
ground.
(b) A dual voltage or grounded
electrical distribution system must have
the neutral suitably grounded. There
must be only one connection to ground,
regardless of the number of power
sources. This connection must be at the
main switchboard or distribution panel.
(c) On a metallic towing vessel, a
grounded distribution system must be
grounded to the hull. This grounded
system must be connected to a common,
non-aluminum ground plate. The
ground plate must have only one
connection to the main switchboard or
distribution panel, and the connection
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40140
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
must be readily accessible for
examination.
(d) On a nonmetallic towing vessel,
all electrical equipment must be
grounded to a common ground.
Multiple ground plates bonded together
are acceptable.
(e) Each grounding conductor of a
cable must be identified by one of the
following means:
(1) Green braid or green insulation; or
(2) Stripping the insulation from the
entire exposed length of the grounding
conductor.
(f) A towing vessel’s hull may not
carry current as a conductor, except for
an impressed-current cathodicprotection system or a battery system
used to start an engine.
(g) Cable armor may not be used to
ground electrical equipment or systems.
(h) Each receptacle outlet and
attachment plug for a portable lamp,
tool, or similar apparatus operating at
100 or more volts must have a
grounding pole and a grounding
conductor in the portable cord.
(i) In a grounded distribution system,
only grounded, three-prong appliances
may be used. This does not apply to
double-insulated appliances or tools
and appliances of 50 volts or less.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 143.575 Electrical conductors,
connections, and equipment.
(a) Each cable and wire on a towing
vessel must be installed to meet the
following requirements:
(1) Each conductor must have
sufficient current-carrying capacity for
the circuit in which it is used.
(2) Cable hangers for overhead and
vertical cable runs must be installed
with metal supports and retention
devices at least every 48 inches.
(3) Each wire and cable run must be
installed in a manner to prevent contact
with personnel, mechanical hazards,
and leaking fluids. Wire and cable runs
must not be installed in bilges, across a
normal walking path, or less than 24
inches from the path of movable
machinery (e.g., cranes, elevators,
forktrucks, etc., where the machinery
location can change) unless adequately
protected.
(4) Connections and terminations
must be suitable for the installed
conductors, and must retain the original
electrical, mechanical, flame-retarding,
and where necessary, fire-resisting
properties of the conductor. If twist-on
types of connectors are used, the
connections must be made within an
enclosure and the insulated cap of the
connector must be secured to prevent
loosening due to vibration. Twist-on
type of connectors may not be used for
making joints in cables, facilitating a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
conductor splice, or extending the
length of a circuit.
(5) Each cable and wire must be
installed so as to avoid or reduce
interference with radio reception and
compass indication.
(6) Each cable and wire must be
protected from the weather.
(7) Each cable and wire must be
supported in order to avoid chafing or
other damage.
(8) Each cable and wire must be
protected by metal coverings or other
suitable means, if in areas subject to
mechanical abuse.
(9) Each cable and wire must be
suitable for low temperature and high
humidity, if installed in refrigerated
compartments.
(10) Each cable and wire must be
located outside a tank, unless it supplies
power to equipment in the tank.
(11) If wire is installed in a tank, it
must have sheathing or wire insulation
compatible with the fluid in a tank.
(b) Extension cords must not be used
as a permanent connection to a source
of electrical power.
(c) Multi-outlet adapters (power
strips) may not be connected to other
adapters (‘‘daisy-chained’’), or otherwise
used in a manner that could overload
the capacity of a receptacle.
§ 143.580 Alternative electrical
installations.
In lieu of meeting the requirements of
§§ 143.555 through 143.575, a vessel
may meet the following:
(a) ABS Rules for Building and
Classing Steel Vessels Under 90 Meters
(295 Feet) in Length (incorporated by
reference, see § 136.112 of this
subchapter), Part 4, Chapter 6; or
(b) ABS Rules for Building and
Classing Steel Vessels for Service on
Rivers and Intracoastal Waterways
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112 of this subchapter), Part 4,
Chapter 5, if they operate exclusively on
rivers or intracoastal waterways.
§ 143.585 General requirements for
propulsion, steering, and related controls
on vessels that move tank barges carrying
oil or hazardous material in bulk.
(a) There must be an alternate means
to control the propulsion and steering
system which must:
(1) Be independent of the primary
control required by § 143.225;
(2) Be located at or near the
propulsion and steering equipment; and
(3) Be readily accessible and suitable
for prolonged operation.
(b) There must be a means to
communicate between each operating
station and the alternate propulsion and
steering controls.
PO 00000
Frm 00138
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(c) There must be a means to stop
each propulsion engine and steering
motor from each operating station.
(d) The means to monitor the amount
of thrust, rudder angle, and if
applicable, direction (ahead or astern) of
thrust must be independent of the
controls required by § 143.225.
(e) The propulsion control system
required by § 143.225 must be designed
so that, in the event of a single failure
of any component of the system,
propeller speed and direction of thrust
are maintained or reduced to zero.
(f) On a towing vessel with an
integrated steering and propulsion
system, such as a Z-drive, the control
system required by § 143.225 must be
designed so that, in the event of a single
failure of any component of the system,
propeller speed and direction of thrust
are maintained or the propeller speed is
reduced to zero.
(g) An audible and visual alarm must
actuate at each operating station when:
(1) The propulsion control system
fails;
(2) A non-follow up steering control
system fails, if installed; and
(3) The ordered rudder angle does not
match the actual rudder position on a
follow-up steering control system, if
installed. This alarm must have an
appropriate delay and error tolerance to
eliminate nuisance alarms.
(h) Alarms must be separate and
independent of the control system
required by § 143.225.
(i) A means of communication must
be provided between each operating
station and any crewmember(s) required
to respond to alarms.
(j) The two sources of electricity
required by § 143.555(a)(3) and (b)(8)
must be capable of powering electrical
loads needed to maintain propulsion,
steering, and related controls for not less
than 3 hours.
(k) The second source of supply
required by § 143.555(a)(3) must
automatically start to help restore or
maintain power to propulsion, steering,
and related controls when the main
power source fails.
(l) Propulsion, steering, or related
controls that are directly reliant on
stored energy, such as compressed air,
battery power, or hydraulic pressure,
must have two independent stored
energy systems, such as compressed air
cylinders, battery banks, or hydraulic
cylinders, that are capable of
maintaining the vessel’s propulsion,
steering, and related controls.
(m) After a power failure, electrical
motors used to maintain propulsion and
steering must automatically restart
when power is restored, unless remote
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
control starting is provided at the
operating station.
§ 143.590 Propulsor redundancy on
vessels that move tank barges carrying oil
or hazardous material in bulk.
(a) A towing vessel must be provided
with at least two independent
propulsors unless the requirements of
§ 143.595 are met.
(b) There must be independent
controls for each propulsor at each
operating station.
(c) In the event of a failure of a single
propulsor, the remaining propulsor(s)
must have sufficient power to maneuver
the vessel to a safe location.
§ 143.595 Vessels with one propulsor that
move tank barges carrying oil or hazardous
material in bulk.
(a) A towing vessel must have
independent, duplicate vital auxiliaries.
For the purpose of this section, vital
auxiliaries are the equipment necessary
to operate the propulsion engine, and
include fuel pumps, lubricating oil
pumps, and cooling water pumps. In the
event of a failure or malfunction of any
single vital auxiliary, the propulsion
engine must continue to provide
propulsion adequate to maintain control
of the tow.
(b) In the event of a failure, the
corresponding independent duplicate
vital auxiliary, described in paragraph
(a) of this section, must be fully capable
of assuming the operation of the failed
unit.
§ 143.600 Alternative standards for
vessels that move tank barges carrying oil
or hazardous material in bulk.
In lieu of meeting §§ 143.585 through
143.595, a towing vessel may comply
with Sections 7–5 (class ABCU) and 3–
5 (class R2) of Part 4 of the ABS Rules
for Building and Classing Steel Vessels
Under 90 Meters (295 Feet) in Length
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112 of this subchapter), except
that a vessel that operates exclusively
on rivers or intracoastal waterways does
not need to comply with 4–7–4/3.9 and
the automatic day tank fill pump
requirement of 4–7–4/25.3.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 143.605 Demonstration of compliance on
vessels that move tank barges carrying oil
or hazardous material in bulk.
(a) The owner or managing operator of
each towing vessel must devise test
procedures that demonstrate
compliance with the design and
engineering requirements prescribed in
this subpart.
(b) The tests required in paragraph (a)
of this section must be satisfactorily
conducted and witnessed by the
cognizant OCMI or a TPO. A record of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
the tests must be retained by the owner
or managing operator and be available
upon request of the cognizant OCMI or
TPO.
PART 144—CONSTRUCTION AND
ARRANGEMENT
Crew rest consideration.
Subpart H—Rails and Guards
144.800
144.810
144.820
144.830
Handrails and bulwarks.
Storm rails.
Guards in dangerous places.
Protection against hot piping.
Subpart I—Visibility
Sec.
Subpart A—General
144.100 Purpose.
144.105 Applicability and delayed
implementation.
144.120 A classed vessel.
144.125 A vessel with a load line.
144.130 A vessel built to the International
Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea,
1974, as amended, requirements.
144.135 Verification of compliance with
design standards.
144.140 Qualifications.
144.145 Procedures for verification of
compliance with design standards.
144.155 Verification of compliance with
design standards for a sister vessel.
144.160 Marking.
Subpart B—Structure
144.200 Structural standards for an existing
vessel.
144.205 Structural standards for a new
vessel.
144.215 Special consideration.
Subpart C—Stability and Watertight
Integrity
144.300 Stability standards for an existing
vessel.
144.305 Stability standards for a new
vessel.
144.310 Lifting requirements for a new
vessel.
144.315 Weight and moment history
requirements for a vessel with approved
lightweight characteristics.
144.320 Watertight or weathertight
integrity.
144.330 Review of a vessel’s watertight and
weathertight integrity.
Subpart D—Fire Protection
144.400 Applicability.
144.405 Fire hazards to be minimized.
144.410 Separation of machinery and fuel
tank spaces from accommodation spaces.
144.415 Combustibles insulated from
heated surfaces.
144.425 Waste receptacles.
144.430 Mattresses.
Subpart E—Emergency Escape
144.500 Means of escape.
144.505 Location of escapes.
144.510 Window as a means of escape.
144.515 One means of escape required.
Subpart F—Ventilation
144.600 Ventilation for accommodations.
144.605 Means to stop fans and close
openings.
144.610 Ventilation in a vessel more than
65 feet in length.
Subpart G—Crew Spaces
144.700 General requirements.
144.710 Overnight accommodations.
PO 00000
144.720
40141
Frm 00139
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
144.905 Operating station visibility.
144.920 Window or portlight strength in a
new vessel.
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3301, 3306,
3308, 3316, 8104, 8904; 33 CFR 1.05; DHS
Delegation No. 0170.1.
Subpart A—General
§ 144.100
Purpose.
This part details the requirements for
design, construction and arrangement,
and verification of compliance with this
part, including document review.
§ 144.105 Applicability and delayed
implementation.
This part applies to each towing
vessel subject to this subchapter. Note
that §§ 144.200 and 144.300 only apply
to an existing vessel and that the
following sections only apply to a new
vessel: §§ 144.205, 144.305, 144.310,
144.405, 144.410, 144.420, 144.425,
144.430, 144.910, and 144.920.
(a) An existing towing vessel must
comply with § 144.320 starting July 20,
2016 and it must comply with the other
applicable requirements in this part no
later than either July 20, 2018 or the
date the vessel obtains a Certificate of
Inspection (COI), whichever date is
earlier.
(b) The delayed implementation
provisions in paragraph (a) of this
section do not apply to a new towing
vessel.
(c) Alterations or modifications made
to the structure or arrangements of an
existing vessel that are a major
conversion, made on or after the July 20,
2016, must comply with the regulations
applied to a new towing vessel of this
part insofar as is reasonable and
practicable. Repairs conducted on an
existing vessel, resulting in no
significant changes to the original
structure or arrangement of the vessel,
must comply with the standards
applicable to the vessel at the time of
construction or, as an alternative, with
the regulations in this part.
§ 144.120
A classed vessel.
A vessel currently classed by a
recognized classification society is
deemed to be in compliance with the
requirements of subparts B and C of this
part.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40142
§ 144.125
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
A vessel with a load line.
A vessel with a valid load line
certificate issued in accordance with
subchapter E of this chapter may be
deemed in compliance with the
requirements of subparts B and C of this
part.
§ 144.130 A vessel built to the
International Convention for the Safety of
Life at Sea, 1974, as amended,
requirements.
A vessel built to the International
Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea,
1974, as amended, is considered to be
in compliance with this part.
§ 144.135 Verification of compliance with
design standards.
Verification of compliance with the
construction and arrangement design
standards of this part must be performed
according to the following table:
TABLE 144.135—VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH DESIGN STANDARDS
If the vessel is—
Then the applicable requirements must be met—
(a) A new vessel, ......................................................................................
(b) A vessel to undergo a major conversion or alteration to the hull,
machinery, or equipment that may affect the vessel’s safety,
(c) A vessel on which a new installation that is not a ‘‘replacement in
kind’’ is to be made after July 20, 2016,
Before the COI is issued.
Before the major conversion or alteration is performed.
§ 144.140
Qualifications.
Use the following table to determine
the individual or entity that may
Before the new installation is performed.
conduct a verification of compliance
with design standards required by
§ 144.135.
TABLE 144.140
Verification of compliance with design standards may be performed
by—
Provided that—
(a) A registered professional engineer (P.E.) licensed by one of the
states of the United States or the District of Columbia;
(b) An authorized classification society that has been delegated the authority to issue the SOLAS Cargo Ship Safety Construction Certificate under 46 CFR 8.320;
(c) The Coast Guard ................................................................................
The PE ensures he or she does not exceed the scope of his or her
P.E. license.
The authorized classification society ensures that the employees that
perform the verification of compliance holds proper qualifications for
the type of verification performed.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 144.145 Procedures for verification of
compliance with design standards.
(a) Verification of compliance with
design standards, when required by
§ 144.135, must be performed by an
individual or entity who meets the
requirements of § 144.140.
(b) Verification of compliance with
design standards must be based on
objective evidence of compliance with
the applicable requirements and
include:
(1) A description of the vessel’s
intended service and route;
(2) The standards used for the vessel’s
design and construction;
(3) Deviations from the standards
used, if any;
(4) A statement that the vessel is
suitable for the intended service and
route; and
(5) The identification of the
individual or entity in Table 144.140 of
§ 144.140 who conducted the
verification of compliance.
(c) Verification of compliance with
design standards must include review
and analyses of sufficient plans,
drawings, schematics, calculations, and
other documents to ensure the vessel
complies with the standards used. The
plans must be stamped with the seal
authorized for use by the individual or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
entity performing the verification of
compliance, or otherwise indicate that
they have been reviewed and
determined to meet the applicable
standards by an individual or entity
who meets the requirements of
§ 144.140.
(d) A copy of the verified plan must
be provided to the cognizant Officer in
Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) and
the third-party organization (TPO)
conducting the surveys, if applicable,
except as provided in paragraph (e) of
this section.
(e) Plans verified by an authorized
classification society need only be
provided to the Coast Guard upon
request.
(f) If the vessel is a new vessel, a copy
of the verified plan must be available at
the construction site.
(g) As referred to in this section, the
term plan may include, but is not
limited to drawings, documents, or
diagrams of the following:
(1) Outboard profile.
(2) Inboard profile.
(3) Arrangement of decks.
(4) Midship section and scantling
plans.
(5) Survival craft embarkation
stations.
(6) Machinery installation, including,
but not limited to:
PO 00000
Frm 00140
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(i) Propulsion and propulsion control,
including shaft details;
(ii) Steering and steering control,
including rudder details;
(iii) Ventilation diagrams;
(iv) Fuel transfer and service system,
including tanks;
(v) Piping systems including: bilge,
ballast, hydraulic, combustible and
flammable liquids, vents, and overflows;
and
(vi) Hull penetrations and shell
connections;
(7) Electrical installation including,
but not limited to:
(i) Elementary one-line diagram of the
power system;
(ii) Cable lists;
(iii) Type and size of generators and
prime movers;
(iv) Type and size of generator cables,
bus-tie cables, feeders, and branch
circuit cables;
(v) Power and lighting panelboards
with number of circuits and rating of
energy consuming devices;
(vi) Capacity of storage batteries;
(vii) Rating of circuit breakers and
switches, interrupting capacity of circuit
breakers, and rating and setting of
overcurrent devices; and
(viii) Electrical plant load analysis as
required by § 143.555 of this subchapter.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(8) Lifesaving equipment locations
and installation;
(9) Fire protection equipment
installation including, but not limited
to:
(i) Fire main system plans and
calculations;
(ii) Fixed gas fire extinguishing
system plans and calculations;
(iii) Fire detecting system and smoke
detecting system plans;
(iv) Sprinkler system diagram and
calculations; and
(v) Portable fire extinguisher types,
sizes, and locations;
(10) Lines and offsets, curves of form,
cross curves of stability, tank capacities
including size and location on vessel,
and other stability documents needed to
show compliance; and
(11) Towing arrangements.
§ 144.155 Verification of compliance with
design standards for a sister vessel.
(a) Verification of compliance
required by § 144.135 is not required for
a sister vessel, provided that:
(1) The original vessel has been
verified as complying with this part;
(2) The owner authorizes the use of
the plans for the original vessels for the
new construction of the sister vessel;
(3) The standards used in the design
and construction of the original vessel
40143
have not changed since the original
verification of compliance;
(4) The sister vessel is built to the
same verified plans, drawings,
schematics, calculations, and other
documents and equipped with
machinery of the same make and model
as the original vessel, and has not been
subsequently modified;
(5) The sister vessel is built in the
same shipyard facility as the original
vessel; and
(6) For a sister vessel subject to a
stability standard, that the conditions in
Table 144.155 of this section are met:
TABLE 144.155
If—
Then—
(i) The delivery date of the sister vessel is not more than 2 years after
a previous stability test date of either the original vessel or an earlier
sister vessel,
(ii) Paragraph (a)(6)(i) of this section does not apply, and the lightweight characteristics determined from a deadweight survey of the
sister vessel are shown to meet both the following criteria:
(A) the lightweight displacement differs by not more than 3 percent of
the earlier vessel’s lightweight displacement, and
(B) the longitudinal center of gravity (LCG) differs by not more than 1
percent of the length between perpendiculars (LBP) of the earlier
vessel’s LCG,
(iii) Neither paragraph (a)(6)(i) nor (ii) of this section apply because
both the criteria in paragraphs (a)(6)(ii)(A) and (B) of this section are
not met and lightweight characteristics were determined from a stability test on either the original vessel or a sister vessel,
(iv) No vessel of the class of sister vessels previously underwent a stability test,
The approved lightweight characteristics of that earlier vessel are
adopted by the sister vessel;
(b) A statement that verifies sister
vessel status for each element of
paragraph (a) of this section from an
individual or entity meeting the
requirements of § 144.140 must be
retained and produced upon request.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 144.160
Marking.
(a) The hull of each documented
vessel must be marked as required by
part 67 of this chapter.
(b) The hull of each undocumented
vessel must be marked with its name
and hailing port.
(c) A vessel complying with either
§ 144.300(a) or § 144.305 must have
draft marks that meet the requirements
of § 97.40–10 of this chapter.
(d) Each vessel assigned a load line
must have the load line marks and the
deck line permanently scribed or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
The vertical center of gravity (VCG) of the earlier vessel is adopted by
the sister vessel and used with the lightweight displacement and
LCG determined from the deadweight survey of the sister vessel;
The vessel must undergo a stability test in accordance with 46 CFR
part 170, subpart F;
One vessel of the class must undergo a stability test in accordance
with 46 CFR part 170, subpart F, and each sister vessel to which a
stability standard applies must meet either paragraph (a)(6)(ii) or (iii)
of this section.
embossed as required by subchapter E of
this chapter.
(e) Each watertight door and
watertight hatch must be marked on
both sides in clearly legible letters at
least 25 millimeters (1 inch) high:
‘‘WATERTIGHT DOOR—KEEP
CLOSED’’ or ‘‘WATERTIGHT HATCH—
KEEP CLOSED’’.
(f) Each escape hatch and emergency
exit used as means of escape must be
marked on both sides in clearly legible
letters at least 50 millimeters (2 inches)
high: ‘‘EMERGENCY EXIT, KEEP
CLEAR’’.
Subpart B—Structure
§ 144.200 Structural standards for an
existing vessel.
An existing vessel may be deemed by
the OCMI, or TPO, to be in compliance
with this subpart provided that either:
PO 00000
Frm 00141
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(a) The vessel is built, equipped, and
maintained to conform to the rules of a
recognized classification society
appropriate for the intended service and
routes, but not classed; or
(b) The vessel has been both in
satisfactory service insofar as structural
adequacy is concerned and does not
cause the structure of the vessel to be
questioned by either the OCMI, or TPO
engaged to perform an audit or survey.
§ 144.205
vessel.
Structural standards for a new
(a) Except as provided in paragraphs
(b) and (c) of this section, a new vessels
must comply with the standards
established by the American Bureau of
Shipping (ABS) as provided in the
following table.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40144
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 144.205(a)—STRUCTURAL STANDARDS FOR A NEW VESSEL
For a new vessel to be certificated for service on—
ABS Rules for Building and Classing—
(1) Lakes, bays, and sounds, limited coastwise, coastwise, and oceans
routes;
(2) Rivers or intracoastal waterways routes .............................................
Steel Vessels Under 90 Meters (295 Feet) in Length (incorporated by
reference, see § 136.112 of this subchapter) apply; or
Steel Vessels for Service on Rivers and Intracoastal Waterways (incorporated by reference, see § 136.112 of this subchapter) apply.
(b) Alternate design standards to
comply with this subpart may be
approved in accordance with § 136.115
of this subchapter.
(c) The current standards of a
recognized classification society, other
than ABS, may be used provided they
are accepted by the Coast Guard as
providing an equivalent level of safety.
(d) The structural standard selected
must be applied throughout the vessel
including design, construction,
installation, maintenance, alteration,
and repair. Deviations are subject to
approval by the Commanding Officer,
Marine Safety Center.
§ 144.215
Special consideration.
The cognizant OCMI may give special
consideration to the structural
requirements for a vessel if that vessel
is:
(a) Not greater than 65 feet in length;
(b) Operating exclusively within a
limited geographic area; or
(c) Of an unusual design not
contemplated by the rules of the
American Bureau of Shipping or other
recognized classification society.
Subpart C—Stability and Watertight
Integrity
§ 144.300 Stability standards for an
existing vessel.
(a) The owner or managing operator of
an existing vessel operating under a
stability document must be able to
readily produce a copy of such
document.
(b) The owner or managing operator of
an existing vessel not operating under a
stability document must be able to show
at least one of the following:
(1) The vessel’s operation or a history
of satisfactory service does not cause the
stability of the vessel to be questioned
by either the Coast Guard or a TPO
engaged to perform an audit or survey.
(2) The vessel performs successfully
on operational tests to determine
whether the vessel has adequate
stability and handling characteristics.
(3) The vessel has a satisfactory
stability assessment by means of giving
due consideration to each item that
impacts a vessel’s stability
characteristics which include, but are
not limited to, the form, arrangement,
construction, number of decks, route,
and operating restrictions of the vessel.
§ 144.305
vessel.
Stability standards for a new
Each new vessel must meet the
applicable stability requirements of part
170 and, if applicable, of part 173,
subpart E, of this chapter in addition to
the requirements in the following table:
TABLE 144.305—STABILITY STANDARDS FOR A NEW VESSEL
Each new vessel certificated to operate on—
Must meet the requirements of—
(a) Protected waters .................................................................................
(b) Partially protected waters ...................................................................
(c) Exposed waters or that is assigned a load line ..................................
§ 170.173(e)(2) of this chapter.
§§ 170.170 and 170.173(e)(1) of this chapter.
§§ 170.170 and 174.145 of this chapter.
§ 144.310
vessel.
Lifting requirements for a new
Each new vessel equipped for lifting
must meet the requirements of part 173,
subpart B, of this chapter.
§ 144.315 Weight and moment history
requirements for a vessel with approved
lightweight characteristics.
(a) A weight and moment history of
changes to the vessel since approval of
its lightweight characteristics
(displacement, Longitudinal Center of
Gravity (LCG) and Vertical Center of
Gravity (VCG)) must be maintained. All
weight modifications to the vessel
(additions, removals, and relocations)
including a calculation of the aggregate
weight change (absolute total of all
additions, removals, and relocations)
must be recorded in the history, along
with a description of the change(s),
when and where accomplished, moment
arms, etc. After each modification, the
lightweight characteristics must be
recalculated.
(b) When the aggregate weight change
is more than 2 percent of the vessel’s
approved lightweight displacement, or
the recalculated change in the vessel’s
lightweight LCG is more than 1 percent
of the LBP, a deadweight survey must be
performed to determine the vessel’s
current lightweight displacement and
LCG. Use the following table to
determine when the deadweight survey
results or the vessel’s aggregate weight
change requires the vessel to undergo a
specified stability test:
TABLE 144.315
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
If—
Then—
(1) The deadweight survey results are both within 1 percent of the recalculated lightweight displacement and within 1 percent LBP of the
recalculated lightweight LCG,
(2) The deadweight survey results do not meet the criteria of paragraph
(b)(1) of this section,
(3) The aggregate weight change is more than 10 percent of the vessel’s approved lightweight displacement,
the recalculated lightweight VCG can be accepted as accurate;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00142
Fmt 4701
the vessel must undergo a stability test in accordance with 46 CFR
170, subpart F;
the vessel must undergo a stability test in accordance with 46 CFR
170, subpart F.
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
§ 144.320
integrity.
Watertight or weathertight
§ 144.430
(a) Each vessel fitted with installed
bulwarks around the exterior of the
main deck must have sufficient freeing
ports or scuppers or a combination of
freeing ports and scuppers to allow
water to run off the deck quickly
without adversely affecting the stability
of the vessel.
(b) Closure devices must be provided
for deckhouse or hull penetrations,
which open to the exterior of the vessel
and which may allow water to enter the
vessel. These devices must be suitable
for the expected route.
§ 144.330 Review of a vessel’s watertight
and weathertight integrity.
The cognizant OCMI may require
review of a vessel’s watertight and
weathertight integrity. This review may
be performed by an individual who
meets the requirements of § 144.140.
The review may include an examination
of a plan that shows the original
placement of decks and bulkheads.
Subpart D—Fire Protection
§ 144.400
Applicability.
Except for § 144.415, which applies to
each new and existing vessel, this
subpart applies to each new towing
vessel.
§ 144.405
Fire hazards to be minimized.
§ 144.410 Separation of machinery and
fuel tank spaces from accommodation
spaces.
Machinery and fuel tank spaces must
be separated from accommodation
spaces by bulkheads. Doors may be
installed provided they are the selfclosing type.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Internal combustion engine exhaust
ducts, galley exhaust ducts and similar
ignition sources must be insulated with
noncombustible insulation if less than
450 mm (18 inches) away from
combustible material. Installations in
accordance with ABYC P–1 or NFPA
302 (incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112 of this subchapter) will be
considered as meeting the requirements
of this section.
Waste receptacles.
Unless other means are provided to
ensure that a potential waste receptacle
fire would be limited to the receptacle,
waste receptacles must be constructed
of noncombustible materials with no
openings in the sides or bottom.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
§ 144.500
Means of escape.
Where practicable and except as
provided in § 144.515, each space where
crew may be quartered or normally
employed must have at least two means
of escape. Arrangements on an existing
vessel may be retained if it is
impracticable or unreasonable to
provide two means of escape.
§ 144.505
Location of escapes.
The two required means of escape
must be widely separated and, if
possible, at opposite ends or sides of the
space. Means may include normal and
emergency exits, passageways,
stairways, ladders, deck scuttles, doors,
and windows.
Window as a means of escape.
On a vessel of 65 feet (19.8 meters) or
less in length, a window or windshield
of sufficient size and proper
accessibility may be used as one of the
required means of escape from an
enclosed space, provided it:
(a) Does not lead directly overboard;
(b) Is suitably marked; and
(c) Has a means to open the window
or break the glass.
§ 144.515
§ 144.415 Combustibles insulated from
heated surfaces.
§ 144.425
Subpart E—Emergency Escape
§ 144.510
Each vessel must be designed and
constructed to minimize fire hazards
insofar as reasonable and practicable.
Mattresses.
Each mattress must comply with
either:
(a) The Consumer Product Safety
Commission Standard for Mattress
Flammability (FF 4–72, Amended), 16
CFR part 1632, subpart A, and not
contain polyurethane foam; or
(b) IMO Resolution A.688(17)
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 136.112 of this subchapter) in which
case the mattress may contain
polyurethane foam.
One means of escape required.
Only one means of escape is required
from a space where:
(a) The space has a deck area less than
30 square meters (322 square feet);
(b) There is no stove, heater, or other
source of fire in the space;
(c) The means of escape is located as
far as possible from a machinery space
or fuel tank; and
(d) If an accommodation space, the
single means of escape does not include
a deck scuttle or a ladder.
Subpart F—Ventilation
§ 144.600
Ventilation for accommodations.
Each accommodation space on a
vessel must be ventilated in a manner
suitable for the purpose of the space.
PO 00000
Frm 00143
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40145
§ 144.605 Means to stop fans and close
openings.
Means must be provided for stopping
each fan in a ventilation system serving
machinery spaces and for closing, in
case of fire, each doorway, ventilator,
and annular space around funnels and
other openings into such spaces.
§ 144.610 Ventilation in a vessel more than
65 feet in length.
A vessel of more than 65 feet (19.8
meters) in length with overnight
accommodations must have a
mechanical ventilation system unless a
natural system, such as opening
windows, portholes, or doors, will
provide adequate ventilation in ordinary
weather.
Subpart G—Crew Spaces
§ 144.700
General requirements.
(a) A crew accommodation space and
a work space must be of sufficient size,
adequate construction, and with
suitable equipment to provide for the
safe operation of the vessel and the
protection and accommodation of the
crew in a manner practicable for the
size, facilities, service, route, and modes
of operation of the vessel.
(b) The deck above a crew
accommodation space must be located
above the deepest load waterline.
§ 144.710
Overnight accommodations.
Overnight accommodations must be
provided for crewmembers if it is
operated more than 12 hours in a 24hour period, unless the crew is put
ashore and the vessel is provided with
a new crew.
§ 144.720
Crew rest consideration.
The condition of the crew
accommodations must consider the
importance of crew rest. Factors to
consider include vibrations, ambient
light, noise levels, and general comfort.
Every effort must be made to ensure that
quarters help provide a suitable
environment for sleep and off-duty rest.
Subpart H—Rails and Guards
§ 144.800
Handrails and bulwarks.
(a) Rails or equivalent protection must
be installed near the periphery of all
decks accessible to crew. Equivalent
protection may include lifelines, wire
rope, chains, and bulwarks that provide
strength and support equivalent to fixed
rails.
(b) In areas where space limitations
make deck rails impractical, such as at
narrow catwalks in way of deckhouse
sides, hand grabs may be substituted.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
40146
§ 144.810
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Storm rails.
On a vessel in oceans or coastwise
service, suitable storm rails or hand
grabs must be installed in all
passageways and at the deckhouse sides
where persons onboard might have
normal access.
§ 144.820
Guards in dangerous places.
An exposed hazard such as gears and
rotating machinery, must be protected
by a cover, guard or rail. This is not
meant to restrict access to towing
equipment such as winches, drums,
towing gear or steering compartment
equipment necessary for the operation
of the vessel.
§ 144.830
Protection against hot piping.
Each exhaust pipe from an internal
combustion engine which is within
reach of personnel must be insulated or
otherwise guarded to prevent burns. On
a new vessel, each pipe that contains
vapor, gas, or liquid that has a
temperature exceeding 150 °F (65.5 °C)
which is within reach of personnel must
be insulated where necessary or
otherwise guarded to prevent injury.
Subpart I—Visibility
§ 144.905
(b) Means must be provided to ensure
that windows immediately forward of
the operating station in the pilothouse
allow for adequate visibility to ensure
safe navigation regardless of weather
conditions. This may include
mechanical means such as windshield
wipers, defoggers, clear-view screens, or
other such means, taking into
consideration the intended route of the
vessel.
(c) The field of vision from the
operating station on a new vessel must
extend over an arc from dead ahead to
at least 60 degrees on either side of the
vessel.
(d) If a new vessel is towing astern,
the operating station must be provided
with a view aft.
(e) In a new vessel, glass or other
glazing material used in windows at the
operating station must have a light
transmission of not less than 70 percent
according to Test 2 of ANSI/SAE Z
26.1–1996 (incorporated by reference,
see § 136.112 of this subchapter) and
must comply with Test 15 of ANSI/SAE
Z 26.1–1996 for Class I Optical
Deviation.
§ 144.920 Window or portlight strength in
a new vessel.
(a) Each window or portlight, and its
means of attachment to the hull or the
deckhouse, must be capable of
withstanding the maximum expected
load from wind and waves, due to its
location on the vessel and the vessel’s
authorized route.
Operating station visibility.
(a) Windows and other openings at
the operating station must be of
sufficient size and properly located to
provide a clear field of vision for safe
operation in any condition.
(b) Any covering or protection placed
over a window or porthole that could be
used as a means of escape must be able
to be readily removed or opened from
within the space.
(c) Glass and other glazing materials
used in windows of a new towing vessel
must be materials that will not break
into dangerous fragments if fractured.
PART 199—LIFESAVING SYSTEMS
FOR CERTAIN INSPECTED VESSELS
14. The authority citation for part 199
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3306, 3703; Pub. L.
103–206, 107 Stat. 2439; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
15. In § 199.01, redesignate
paragraphs (a)(3) and (4) as paragraphs
(a)(4) and (5), respectively, and add new
paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows:
■
§ 199.01
Purpose.
(a) * * *
(3) Towing vessels, which are covered
by subchapter M of this chapter;
*
*
*
*
*
■ 16. Amend § 199.10 as follows:
■ a. Revise Table 199.10(a); and
■ b. In paragraph (b) after the words
‘‘small passenger vessels;’’ add the
words ‘‘towing vessels;’’.
The revision reads as follows:
§ 199.10
Applicability.
(a) * * *
TABLE 199.10(a)—LIFESAVING REQUIREMENTS FOR INSPECTED VESSELS
Subchapter W subparts applicable 1
46 CFR
subchapter
Vessel
type
Vessel
service
1 ..............
D ............................
Tank ≥500 tons ......
2 ..............
D ............................
Tank <500 tons ......
3 ..............
4 ..............
D ............................
H ............................
Tank .......................
Passenger ..............
5 ..............
H ............................
Passenger ..............
6 ..............
7 ..............
H ............................
I ..............................
Passenger ..............
Cargo ≥500 tons ....
8 ..............
I ..............................
Cargo <500 tons ....
9 ..............
10 ............
11 ............
I ..............................
I–A .........................
K ............................
Cargo .....................
MODU ....................
Small Passenger ....
12 ............
K ............................
Small Passenger ....
13 ............
14 ............
15 ............
K ............................
L .............................
M ............................
Small Passenger ....
Offshore Supply .....
Towing Vessels ......
16 ............
M ............................
Towing Vessels ......
International voyage 3.
International voyage 3.
All other services ...
International voyage 3.
Short Inter’l voyage 3.
All other services ...
International voyage 3.
International voyage 3.
All other services ...
All ...........................
International voyage 3.
Short Inter’l voyage 3.
All other services ...
All ...........................
International voyage 3.
All other .................
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Row
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00144
Fmt 4701
Other 2
A
B
C
D
E
F
X
X
........
X
........
........
X
X
........
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
........
X
X
........
X
........
X
........
X
X
X
........
........
........
X
X
X
X
X
........
........
X
X
........
X
........
X
X
........
X
X
X
X
........
X
X
........
X
........
........
X
X
........
........
X
........
........
X
........
........
X
X
X
........
........
........
........
........
X
........
........
X
........
........
........
........
........
X
........
........
........
........
........
........
46 CFR part 117.
46 CFR part 133.
........
........
........
........
........
........
46 CFR part 141.
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
46 CFR part 108.
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
40147
TABLE 199.10(a)—LIFESAVING REQUIREMENTS FOR INSPECTED VESSELS—Continued
46 CFR
subchapter
Vessel
type
17 ............
R—Part 167 ...........
18 ............
R—Part 167 ...........
19 ............
R—Part 168 ...........
20 ............
R—Part 168 ...........
21 ............
22 ............
R—Part 169 ...........
T .............................
Public Nautical
School.
Public Nautical
School.
Civilian Nautical
School.
Civilian Nautical
School.
Sailing School ........
Small Passenger ....
23 ............
24 ............
25 ............
T .............................
T .............................
U ............................
Small Passenger ....
Small Passenger ....
Oceanographic Res
26 ............
U ............................
Oceanographic Res
Subchapter W subparts applicable 1
Vessel
service
Row
Other 2
A
B
C
D
E
F
International voyage 3.
All other services ...
X
X
X4
X5
........
........
X
X
X4
X5
X
X
International voyage 3.
All other services ...
X
X
X4
X5
........
........
X
X
X4
X5
X
X
All services .............
International voyage 3.
Short Int’l voyage 3
All other services ...
International voyage 3.
All other services ...
........
X
........
X
........
X
........
........
........
........
........
........
X
........
X
X
........
X
X
........
X4
........
........
X5
........
........
........
........
........
........
X
X
X4
X5
X
X
46 CFR 169.500.
46 CFR part 180.
Notes:
1 Subchapter W of this chapter does not apply to inspected nonself-propelled vessels without accommodations or work stations on board.
2 Indicates section where primary lifesaving system requirements are located. Other regulations may also apply.
3 Not including vessels solely navigating the Great Lakes of North America and the Saint Lawrence River as far east as a straight line drawn
from Cap des Rosiers to West Point, Anticosti Island and, on the north side Anticosti Island, the 63rd meridian.
4 Applies to vessels carrying more than 50 special personnel, or vessels carrying not more than 50 special personnel if the vessels meet the
structural fire protection requirements in subchapter H of this chapter for passenger vessels of the same size.
5 Applies to vessels carrying not more than 50 special personnel that do not meet the structural fire protection requirements in subchapter H of
this chapter for passenger vessels of the same size.
*
*
*
*
Dated: May 25, 2016.
Paul F. Zukunft,
Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commandant.
*
[FR Doc. 2016–12857 Filed 6–10–16; 4:15 pm]
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:27 Jun 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00145
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\20JNR2.SGM
20JNR2
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 118 (Monday, June 20, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40003-40147]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-12857]
[[Page 40003]]
Vol. 81
Monday,
No. 118
June 20, 2016
Part II
Department of Homeland Security
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Coast Guard
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
46 CFR Parts 1, 2, 15, et al.
Inspection of Towing Vessels; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 81 , No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 40004]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
46 CFR Parts 1, 2, 15, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144,
and 199
[Docket No. USCG-2006-24412]
RIN 1625-AB06
Inspection of Towing Vessels
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing safety regulations governing
the inspection, standards, and safety management systems of towing
vessels. We are taking this action because the Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation Act of 2004 reclassified towing vessels as vessels
subject to inspection and authorized the Secretary of the Department of
Homeland Security to establish requirements for a safety management
system appropriate for the characteristics, methods of operation, and
nature of service of towing vessels. This rule, which includes
provisions covering specific electrical and machinery requirements for
new and existing towing vessels, the use and approval of third-party
organizations, and procedures for obtaining Certificates of Inspection,
will become effective July 20, 2016. However, certain existing towing
vessels subject to this rule will have an additional 2 years before
having to comply with most of its requirements.
DATES: This final rule is effective July 20, 2016. The incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the final rule is approved
by the Director of the Federal Register on July 20, 2016.
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-2006-24412 and are available on the Internet by
going to https://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2006-24412 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call LCDR William Nabach, Project Manager, CG-OES-2, Coast Guard,
telephone 202-372-1386.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents for Preamble
I. Abbreviations
II. Executive Summary
A. Purpose and Authority
B. Overview of Rule
C. Costs and Benefits
III. Regulatory History
A. Statutory Background
B. Regulatory Background
IV. Discussion of Comments and Changes
A. General Feedback on the NPRM
B. Background and Need for Regulation
C. Organization, General Course, and Methods Governing Marine
Safety Functions (Part 1)
D. User Fees and Inspection Table (Part 2)
E. Manning (Part 15)
F. Certification/Definitions/Applicability (Part 136)
G. Vessel Compliance (Part 137)
H. Towing Safety Management System (TSMS) (Part 138)
I. Third-Party Organizations (TPOs) (Part 139)
J. Operations (Part 140)
K. Lifesaving (Part 141)
L. Fire Protection (Part 142)
M. Machinery and Electrical (Part 143)
N. Construction and Arrangement (Part 144)
O. Miscellaneous Comments
P. Crew Endurance Management Systems (CEMS)
Q. Economic Analysis Comments
V. Regulatory Analyses
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Small Entities
C. Assistance for Small Entities
D. Collection of Information
E. Federalism
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
G. Taking of Private Property
H. Civil Justice Reform
I. Protection of Children
J. Indian Tribal Governments
K. Energy Effects
L. Technical Standards and 1 CFR Part 51
M. Environment
I. Abbreviations
2004 Act Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2004
2010 Act Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010
2012 Act Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2012
ABS American Bureau of Shipping
ABSG American Bureau of Shipping Group
ABYC American Boat and Yacht Council
AED Automatic External Defibrillator
ANSI American National Standards Institute
AWO American Waterways Operators
BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics
CEMS Crew Endurance Management System
COI Certificate of Inspection
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
EPIRB Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacon
FAST Fatigue Avoidance Scheduling Tool
FR Federal Register
FRFA Final regulatory flexibility assessment
gpm gallons per minute
GRT Gross register tons
HIPAA Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996
HOS Hours of Service
IMO International Maritime Organization
IRFA Initial regulatory flexibility analysis
ISM International Safety Management
ISO International Organization for Standardization
kPa Kilopascals
LBP Length Between Perpendiculars
LCG Longitudinal Center of Gravity
LORAN Long Range Aid to Navigation
lpm liters per minute
MISLE Marine Information for Safety and Law Enforcement
MMC Merchant Mariner Credential
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
MTSA Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002
NAMS National Association of Marine Surveyors
NARA National Archives and Records Administration
NEC National Electrical Code
NICET National Institute for Certification in Engineering
Technologies
NFPA National Fire Protection Association
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NRTL Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory
NTSB National Transportation Safety Board
NVIC Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular
OCMI Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection
OIRA Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
P.E. Professional Engineer
PFD Personal Flotation Device
PIC Person in charge
PPE Personal Protective Equipment
psi pounds per square inch
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
Sec. Section
SAE Society of Automotive Engineers
SAMS Society of Accredited Marine Surveyors
SMS Safety Management System
SBA Small Business Administration
SOLAS International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974,
as amended
STCW Implementation of the Amendments to the International
Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping
for Seafarers, 1978, and Changes to Domestic Endorsements
TPO Third-party organization
TSAC Towing Safety Advisory Committee
TSMS Towing Safety Management System
TVR Towing vessel record
U.S.C. United States Code
UWILD Underwater inspection in lieu of drydocking
VCG Vertical Center of Gravity
VHF Very High Frequency
VSL Value of a statistical life
VTS Vessel Traffic Service
II. Executive Summary
A. Purpose and Authority
In 2004, Congress reclassified towing vessels as vessels subject to
inspection under part B of subtitle II of title 46, United States Code
(U.S.C.), and authorized the Secretary of Homeland Security to
establish requirements for the inspection of towing vessels, their
possible use of safety management
[[Page 40005]]
systems (SMS) and hours of service requirements for them. The
legislative history, which pointed to the need for a ``full safety
inspection of towing vessels,'' references two towing vessel incidents
involving a total of 19 deaths. In September 2001, a towing vessel
struck a bridge at South Padre Island, TX. The bridge collapsed, and 5
people died when their cars or trucks went into the water. On May 26,
2002, a towing vessel struck the I-40 highway bridge over the Arkansas
River at Webber Falls, OK. The bridge collapsed, and 14 people died
when their cars or trucks went into the Arkansas River. 150 Cong. Rec.
H6469-01, 2004 WL 1630278; and H.R. Conf. Rep. 108-617, 2004
U.S.C.C.A.N. 936, 951.
This final rule implements most provisions of the Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)(76 FR 49976, Aug. 11, 2011) as proposed, but
makes changes to address concerns of the public and industry expressed
in comments, as is explained below. This rule is authorized and made
necessary by the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2004
(2004 Act), Public Law 108-293, 118 Stat. 1028 (Aug. 9, 2004), which
made towing vessels subject to inspection. Six years later, the Coast
Guard Authorization Act of 2010 (2010 Act), Public Law 111-281, 124
Stat. 2905 (Oct. 15, 2010), directed the Secretary to issue a notice of
proposed rulemaking and a final rule.
B. Overview of Rule
This rule creates a comprehensive safety system that includes
company compliance, vessel compliance, vessel standards, and oversight
in a new Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) subchapter dedicated to
towing vessels. This rule, which (with exceptions) generally applies to
all U.S.-flag towing vessels 26 feet or more, and those less than 26
feet moving a barge carrying oil or hazardous material in bulk, lays
out both inspection mechanisms as well as new equipment, construction,
and operational requirements for towing vessels.
To provide flexibility, vessel operators will have the choice of
two inspection regimes. Under the Towing Safety Management System
(TSMS) option, routine inspections of towing vessels will primarily be
performed by third-party organizations (TPOs), including certain
classification societies, and this rule creates a framework for
oversight and audits of such TPOs by the Coast Guard. The TSMS will
provide those operators with the flexibility to tailor their safety
management system to their own needs, while still ensuring an overall
level of safety acceptable to the Coast Guard. Alternatively, under the
Coast Guard inspection option, routine inspections would be conducted
by the Coast Guard, providing an option for those operators who choose
not to develop and implement their own TSMS.
The rule also creates many new requirements for design,
construction, equipment, and operation of towing vessels. Those
requirements are typically based on industry consensus standards or
existing Coast Guard requirements for similar vessels. To develop these
requirements for towing vessels, the Coast Guard started by publishing
a notice in 2004 (69 FR 78471) that asked questions and announced
public meetings to seek guidance in implementing the 2004 Act
provisions. We also worked with the Towing Safety Advisory Committee
(TSAC), industry groups, and a contractor (ABSG Consulting--tasked with
providing an industry analysis) to better gauge how to proceed with
this rulemaking. We evaluated existing requirements for towing vessels
(contained primarily in 46 CFR part 27 and subchapter I) to determine
whether they were adequate for towing vessels and meet the intent of
the 2004 Act. As discussed in greater detail below, the safety
requirements in this final rule align with industry consensus
standards, and we consider it very likely that most towing vessels
already comply with most of them.
We made several changes to our proposal in the NPRM. We have
clarified the system for Coast Guard oversight and inspection of towing
vessels that complements the TPO system the Coast Guard proposed. To
address concerns about the cost impact of the rule, we have added
``grandfathering'' provisions to several requirements, so the
requirements will not apply to existing vessels or vessels whose
construction began before the effective date of the rule. We also
reorganized several parts for greater clarity or to better align with
the existing text of other parts of the CFR. Finally, as we noted in
the NPRM (76 FR 49985), we still plan to promulgate a separate
rulemaking for an annual inspection fee for towing vessels that will
reflect the specific program costs associated with the TSMS and Coast
Guard inspection options. Until then we are establishing the existing
fee of $1,030 in 46 CFR 2.10-101 for any inspected vessel not listed in
Table 2.10-101 as the annual inspection fee for towing vessels subject
to subchapter M. As reflected in 46 CFR 2.10-1(b), this fee would not
be charged for a vessel being inspected for the initial issuance of a
COI, but the fee would be charged annually starting a year later.
C. Costs and Benefits
This rule will affect approximately 5,509 U.S. flag towing vessels
engaged in pushing, pulling, or hauling alongside, and the 1,096
companies that own or operate them. Towing vessels not covered by this
rule include towing vessels inspected under subchapter I, work boats,
and recreational vessel towing vessels.
The estimate for total industry and net government costs is $41.5
million annualized at a 7 percent discount rate over a 10-year period
of analysis. The estimate for monetized benefits is $46.4 million
annualized at a 7 percent discount rate, based on the mitigation of
risks from towing vessel accidents in terms of lives lost, injuries,
oil spilled, and property damage.
Subtracting the annualized monetized costs from the annualized
monetized benefits yields a net benefit of $4.9 million. We also
identified, but did not monetize, other benefits from reducing the risk
of accidents that have secondary consequences of delays and congestions
on waterways, highways, and railroads.
III. Regulatory History
A. Statutory Background
The Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2004 (2004 Act),
Public Law 108-293, 118 Stat. 1028 (Aug. 9, 2004), established new
authorities for towing vessels as follows:
The 2004 Act added ``towing vessels'' as a class of vessels that
are subject to safety inspections. See section 415 of the 2004 Act,
which amended section 3301 of title 46 of the U.S.C. (46 U.S.C. 3301).
The term ``towing vessel'' was already defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101, and
the scope and standards of safety inspections are laid out in 46 U.S.C.
3305.
The 2004 Act also authorized the Secretary of Homeland Security to
establish, by regulation, a safety management system appropriate for
the characteristics, methods of operation, and nature of service of
towing vessels.
See Section 415 of the 2004 Act, which amended 46 U.S.C. 3306(j).
B. Regulatory Background
On December 30, 2004, the Coast Guard published a request for
comments and notice of public meetings titled ``Inspection of Towing
Vessels'' in the Federal Register (69 FR 78471). The notice asked seven
questions regarding how the Coast Guard should move forward with the
rulemaking to implement the statutory provisions from
[[Page 40006]]
the 2004 Act, listed above in section III.A. ``Statutory background.''
The Coast Guard then held four public meetings, one each in Washington,
DC; Oakland, CA; New Orleans, LA; and St. Louis, MO. In addition to the
comments the Coast Guard received at the public meetings, there were
117 comments submitted to the docket, which can be found in docket
USCG-2004-19977 at https://www.regulations.gov. The Coast Guard used the
public input received to inform its development of the NPRM.
On August 11, 2011, the Coast Guard published an NPRM titled
``Inspection of Towing Vessels'' in the Federal Register (76 FR 49976).
The Coast Guard then held four public meetings, one each in Newport
News, VA; New Orleans, LA; St. Louis, MO; and Seattle, WA. The comment
period was open until December 9, 2011. We received and considered a
combined total of more than 3,000 comments from more than 265 written
submissions and oral statements from 105 persons at public meetings.
IV. Discussion of Comments and Changes
A. General Feedback on the NPRM
For clarity, the following discussion of comments is sorted by
topic, which primarily corresponds to parts of the CFR as noted in the
Table of Contents.
Parts 1 and 2 are in title 46 CFR subchapter A, part 15 is in
subchapter B, part 199 is in subchapter W, and all other parts are in
the newly created subchapter M. Where changes in response to a comment
led to changes outside the designated section or part, we have noted it
in the text. Within each topic of the rule, comments have been
addressed in order of the section they applied to. When public
submissions addressed multiple sections of the proposed rule or it
wasn't clear what specific sections they addressed, we responded to
their comments in the section that seemed most appropriate. In
addition, we have made numerous changes through the regulatory text
that are entirely non-substantive and editorial in nature; for example,
changing ``chapter'' to ``Chapter'' or ``onboard'' to ``on board'' in
certain contexts to better conform to standard usage.
We received several comments in general support of the proposed
inspection regime, design standards, and SMS requirements for towing
vessels. Individuals and maritime companies felt that the proposed
regulation would serve to improve the safety, security, and
environmental protection of towing vessel operations.
We also received several comments from individuals and maritime
companies that generally opposed the proposed regulation. Some
commenters expressed concern that the elements of the proposed rule
would impose added cost burdens on business, which might lead to
termination of positions.
The Coast Guard acknowledges these comments and concerns. However,
we do not expect towing companies and businesses to eliminate positions
or downsize as a result of this rulemaking. See the Regulatory Analysis
for our discussion of this issue.
One comment agreed with the American Bureau of Shipping Group's
(ABSG's) recommendation that a traditional, inspected vessel option be
offered as an alternative for those companies that did not maintain
documentation of policies and procedures, and for those smaller
companies who would not be able to implement a SMS. As we noted in the
NPRM (76 FR 49978), we contracted with ABSG Consulting in 2006 for
assistance with gathering data and categorizing the vessels that make
up the towing industry; see their report, which also contains
recommendations, in the docket, USCG-2006-24412-0017.
We concur with the commenter and the cited ABSG recommendation. As
an alternative to a TSMS, the proposed rule included the option of a
Coast Guard inspection regime. We have kept both of these options in
this final rule.
Citing an 80-page NPRM, more than 2,000 pages of supporting
documentation, and a short comment period, one commenter requested an
extension of the comment period so smaller operators can review how the
proposed requirements would impact their businesses. The Coast Guard
did not grant this request; we provided a 120-day comment period, which
is longer than our standard 90-day comment period, and also held four
public meetings in that time. We believe there was sufficient
opportunity to comment on the NPRM.
B. Background and Need for Regulation
We received one comment noting that the 2010 Act no longer exempted
towing vessels of less than 200 tons engaged in exploiting offshore
minerals or oil from 46 U.S.C. 8904 and regulations promulgated under
that authority, and therefore Sec. 15.535(b) should be revised. See
section 606 of that Act. We agree with the commenter that the exemption
is no longer valid and so we adopted the commenter's requested
amendment to Sec. 15.535.
We received comments from several commenters who supported the work
conducted by TSAC working groups. For NPRM discussion of work by these
groups, see 76 FR 49978. Other commenters commended the Coast Guard's
efforts in incorporating suggestions provided by TSAC. One commenter
explained that a quote in the preamble, regarding the devastating
impact that a TSMS can have on smaller companies, was incorrectly
attributed to the TSAC Economic Analysis Working Group.
The commenter, a trade association, went on to explain that
according to the experience of its members, TSMSs have had a positive
impact on the safety performance and success of many small companies.
As we have previously noted, we greatly appreciate TSAC's
contributions to the development of the NPRM. The quote we attributed
to the TSAC Economic Working Group regarding the devastating impact
that a TSMS requirement can have on smaller companies was taken from an
earlier version of the working group's report; the quote should have
read ``To conduct internal audits on a large fleet, this may mean
hiring a full-time staff, including salary, training and travel costs.
While large companies will spend more to implement and maintain a SMS,
however, the costs to a small company may be more difficult to
absorb.'' See page 4 of the TSAC Economic Analysis Working Group
Report, Dec. 16, 2008, document USCG-2006-24412-0007 in the docket. We
are not surprised by the statement that TSMSs have had a positive
impact on the safety performance and success of safety operators; we
included TSMS as an option because we believe TSMSs will provide a
positive impact on the safe operation of towing vessels. For data
supporting this assessment, see the Regulatory Analysis for this final
rule in the docket.
One commenter recommended that rather than writing a costly new set
of regulations, the Coast Guard should give consideration to
consolidating the rules already in place. The commenter recalled a
voluntary program from a 2009 ``United States Coast Guard Requirements
for Uninspected Towing Vessels'' document that issued stickers to
vessels that had been reviewed for compliance with current regulations.
The Coast Guard established the voluntary Towing Vessel Bridging
Program in 2009 to ease the transition of towing vessels going from a
status of uninspected to inspected, and to ensure that both the Coast
Guard and the towing vessel industry are informed and prepared to meet
requirements coming from this Inspection of Towing Vessels
[[Page 40007]]
rulemaking. As we noted in the NPRM, the Coast Guard considered
existing regulations but decided the standards or regulations found in
other vessel inspection subchapters were not appropriate and did not
fulfill the intent of the 2004 Act. (76 FR 49987, Aug. 11, 2011.) The
unique nature of the towing industry and towing operations warrants the
development of new standards and regulations that pertain exclusively
to towing vessels. In addition to the TSMS, this final rule contains
other towing vessel-specific provisions, including expansion of the use
of TPOs as part of the Coast Guard's TSMS-based, towing vessel
inspection for certification regime. The Towing Vessel Bridging Program
is a transition program based on voluntary compliance; it is not a
substitute for a comprehensive regulatory regime that addresses and
enforces safety requirements for towing vessels that Congress
envisioned when it added towing vessels to the list of vessels subject
to inspection.
We received comments from individuals and maritime companies who
disagreed with the need for the proposed regulations, either because
lack of vessel regulations were not the cause of the problem or the
proposed regulations were not risk-based. Three commenters noted that
some casualties occur because of human error, not from a lack of
regulation. One individual felt that the Mississippi River accident in
2008 was not a good example in support of additional regulation,
because the accident was caused by irresponsible behavior of the pilot.
The Coast Guard recognizes that human error is the cause of some
casualties and that no amount of regulations will eliminate human
error. To the extent we are able, however, we have attempted to adopt
regulations that help ensure the safe operation of towing vessels,
including some regulations intended to address factors related to human
error. A fully functional safety management system, such as a TSMS, is
continuously updated and evolving based on the non-conformities
observed and the lessons learned as a result of reviewing incidents--
including those related to human error. The TSMS option should help
ensure that towing vessels are operated more safely and in full
compliance with the TSMS and regulations in subchapter M. The Coast
Guard inspection option may provide less frequent feedback to vessel
operators and crew, but it too is intended to ensure compliance with
regulations in subchapter M.
Two commenters, an individual and a towing company, felt that the
regulations are not based on risk. A company asserted that a risk-based
approach supported by towing vessel casualty data should be the main
motivation behind the application and development of towing vessel
safety regulation.
As reflected in discussions below regarding specific requirements,
the Coast Guard has used a risk-based approach in this rulemaking. We
have reviewed comments on cost and other assumptions on which we based
our proposed rule and have made changes when appropriate to ensure that
this final rule is risk-based. For data supporting this assessment, see
the Regulatory Analysis for the final rule.
One commenter indicated that the Coast Guard's Marine Safety
Directorate has not sought to help working mariners. The commenter
praised Congress for amending 46 U.S.C. 2114 to protect a seaman
against discrimination if he or she testifies in a proceeding brought
to enforce a maritime safety law or regulation, or engages in certain
other actions involving the seaman's work, or participates in a safety
investigation by the Department of Homeland Security or National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). The commenter listed four areas
where mariners' safety, health, and welfare, in the commenter's view,
were largely unprotected: Workplace safety on uninspected dry cargo
barges, hearing protection and noise prevention, asbestos, and personal
protective equipment. The same commenter urged Congress to transfer
authority over workplace inspection, drafting safety regulations, and
requiring proper maintenance of barges from the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) to the Coast Guard. This commenter also
recommended areas in which the NPRM should be revised to promote
workplace safety and health regulations, including training of Coast
Guard inspectors in OSHA-workplace-safety regulations and the use of
personal protective equipment.
The Coast Guard notes the commenter's concern; the commenter's
specific suggested revisions to the regulations proposed in the NPRM
are addressed below where we discuss 46 CFR part 140, Operations, which
includes subparts on crew safety and safety and health, and other parts
addressed by this commenter.
C. Organization, General Course, and Methods Governing Marine Safety
Functions (Part 1)
In our NPRM, we did not propose to amend part 1, but in this final
rule we added Sec. 1.03-55 to address comments on the appeals process
for a company whose certificate is rescinded. See section IV.H below.
Our proposed Sec. 136.180 pointed to 46 CFR 1.03 for those seeking to
appeal, but we saw the need to identify the Coast Guard official or
entity that appeals should be directed to, including the appeal of
matters relating to action of a third party, such as when a TPO
rescinds a TSMS certificate.
D. User Fees and Inspection Table (Part 2)
Part 2 of 46 CFR is in subchapter A. We received two comments
regarding user fees. An association asked the Coast Guard to clarify
whether those choosing both the TSMS and the Coast Guard inspection
options will have to pay whatever user fee is assessed in the final
rule to recover the costs of the entire new towing vessel inspection
program. Another commenter asserted that charging user fees to finance
the implementation of regulation that is not risk-based will return
little value to the industry.
Under 46 U.S.C. 2110 and the Coast Guard's regulations in 46 CFR
subpart 2.10, the Coast Guard is required to charge a fee for services
provided for vessels required to have a Certificate of Inspection
(COI). Subpart 2.10 fees, however, do not apply to the initial issuance
of a COI.
This fee for services must meet the criteria of 31 U.S.C. 9701
(Fees and charges for Government services and things of value) to be
fair and based on the cost to the government, the value of the service
being provided, the public policy served, and other relevant facts. The
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Revised Circular A-25 explains
that full program costs should be recovered by fees charged.
In our NPRM, the Coast Guard stated its intent to establish a user
fee, as required by law, for those vessels required to comply with
subchapter M, and indicated that this user fee would be established
through a separate rulemaking process that would commence on or around
publication of this final rule. The Coast Guard also committed to not
inspecting towing vessels or issuing COIs to towing vessels until user
fees were established. (76 FR 49985, August 11, 2011.)
We still plan to promulgate a separate rulemaking for an annual
inspection fee specifically for towing vessels, under the authority in
46 U.S.C. 2110 and 31 U.S.C. 9701, that will consider the specific
program costs associated with the TSMS and Coast Guard inspection
options. However, until that time the
[[Page 40008]]
Coast Guard is establishing the existing fee of $1,030 stated in 46 CFR
2.10-101 as the annual inspection fee for towing vessels subject to
subchapter M, for any inspected vessel not listed in Table 2.10-101. As
reflected in 46 CFR 2.10-1(b), this annual inspection fee will not be
charged for an initial COI inspection, but the fee will be charged
annually starting a year later. Once this final rule becomes effective,
the Coast Guard will apply the existing annual fee listed in 46 CFR
2.10-101, Table 2.10-101 as ``Any inspected vessel not listed in this
table'' to subchapter M vessels other than those already separately
listed in the Table. Since all vessels subject to subchapter M will be
considered inspected vessels and required to obtain COIs, regardless of
whether the TSMS option is chosen, all subchapter M vessels receiving
COIs will be charged an annual inspection fee as outlined above.
User fees charged by the Coast Guard under 46 U.S.C. 2110 do not
directly finance Coast Guard operations and thus user fees do not
finance the implementation of the regulations. OMB's Revised Circular
A-25 explains that user fees are intended to offset the cost of
providing services to specific beneficiaries.
Regarding the comment about the lack of value of a user fee to
finance the implementation of a non-risk-based regulation, we have used
a risk-based approach in developing this rulemaking and have made
changes from the proposed rule taking into account commenters concerns
to ensure that this final rule continues to rely on risk-based
analysis.
Other Certification Changes
In the NPRM we stated we would amend the table in subchapter I--and
in other subchapters--that identified inspection and certification
regulations applicable to vessels. Our intended amendments to those
tables were to reflect changes for towing vessels introduced by
subchapter M (see discussion in 76 FR 49979, August 11, 2011). Since
the NPRM was published, however, in a separate rulemaking (79 FR 58270,
58272, September 29, 2014) the Coast Guard removed tables in 46 CFR
24.05-1, 70.05-1, 90.05-1, and 188.05-1. Those tables replicated a
table in 46 CFR part 2 dedicated to inspection regulations and thus
were not necessary.
Rather than add to the 7-column, 7-page table in 46 CFR 2.01-7(a),
we have amended the text before and after the table instead. These
amendments direct towing vessels to a new paragraph (b), which directs
those subject to this rule to subchapter M for inspection and
certification regulations, and other towing vessels to Table 2.01-7(a).
E. Manning (Part 15)
We received approximately 40 comments that addressed the issue of
manning. Part 15 of 46 CFR is in subchapter B.
We received several comments stating that the Coast Guard should
require minimum crew manning levels. One commenter said wheelhouse
manning is a concern due to the shortage of qualified individuals
holding the appropriate merchant mariner credential, especially with
the retirement age approaching for many currently qualified
individuals. A maritime company said the minimum manning level should
be included in the COI. Another commenter noted in response to COI
requirements proposed in part 136 that this regulation should clarify
the number of required crewmembers and allow the towing vessel to be
operated by a single crewmember in certain circumstances.
In accordance with 46 CFR 15.501, the Coast Guard will specify the
minimum manning for each towing vessel in all of the vessel's areas of
operation on the vessel's COI, including international and domestic
operations. We note that Officers in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMIs)
will review operational details of the vessel and work with companies
to make decisions on vessel manning which could indicate various levels
of manning based on specific routes and service of the towing vessel
when determining the number of required crewmembers for a towing
vessel. We do not envision an appreciable increase in the number of
qualified individuals needed to man inspected towing vessels. The
influence of market forces on the number of individuals seeking to
become credentialed operators is beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
Several commenters opposed any change to the current manning levels
required for towing vessels, and some commenters recommended specific
changes to several sections currently in the CFR, such as 33 CFR
155.710(e) and 46 CFR 15.810(b) and 15.820(a)(3), to avoid inadvertent
changes to the manning or credentialing requirements given the Coast
Guard's statement in the NPRM that ``we are not proposing to change any
of the current manning levels required for towing vessels'' (76 FR
49990, Aug. 11, 2011).
As previously stated, the Coast Guard will make a vessel-specific
assessment of the manning required for a given vessel's operations. The
minimum manning required for safe operations may differ from one
operation to another. As with other inspected vessels, this is a
vessel-specific determination made by the cognizant OCMI.
The Coast Guard believes the requested change to Sec. 15.820(a)(3)
is already addressed through existing regulations. For inspected
vessels 300 gross tons and above that operate on inland waters, 46 CFR
15.820(a)(3) requires the vessel to have an individual with a license
or the appropriate merchant mariner credential (MMC) officer
endorsement if the OCMI determines that such credentials are necessary
for the person responsible for the vessel's mechanical propulsion. For
purposes of towing vessels, however, the applicable subchapter B
definition of ``inland waters'' excludes the Western Rivers. See 46 CFR
10.107. Therefore, Sec. 15.820(a)(3) does not apply to a towing vessel
when it is operating on Western Rivers, a term also defined in Sec.
10.107. Based on a recent survey of the Coast Guard's Marine
Information for Safety and Law Enforcement (MISLE) database, we have
concluded that most inland towing vessels 300 gross tons or above
operate on the Western Rivers. Those towing vessels operating on inland
waters beyond the Western Rivers may be required to have a credentialed
individual responsible for the vessel's mechanical propulsion based on
a vessel-specific assessment conducted by the cognizant OCMI.
The Coast Guard believes changes to 33 CFR 155.710(e) that would
allow the use of a letter-of-designation for an inspected towing vessel
are not warranted. The requirements of 33 CFR 155.710(e)(1) apply to
all inspected vessels required by 46 CFR chapter I to have an officer
aboard, including towing vessels that become inspected vessels under
this rule. Congress made towing vessels a class of vessels subject to
inspection, and we have no evidence that towing vessels are less likely
to spill oil than the other inspected vessels already subject to Sec.
155.710(e)(1). We also see value in uniform requirments for inspected
vessels conducting the same activities. We note, however, that existing
Sec. 155.130 provides for exemptions from compliance with the
requirement if authorized by the COTP or OCMI for reasons such as
economic or physical impracticality. We therefore believe that adequate
flexibility already exists in Part 155 to accommodate any unexpected
consequences of towing vessels becoming subject Sec. 155.710(e)(1).
The Coast Guard believes changes to 46 CFR 15.810(b), in order to
exempt towing vessels subject to subchapter M
[[Page 40009]]
from the requirements for a minimum number of mariners holding a
license or MMC officer endorsement as mate required to be carried on
certain inspected vessels, are not warranted. Towing vessels are one of
the several classes of vessels that are authorized to use a two-watch
system and, as a result, additional mates are unnecessary to comply
with this level of manning.
Some commenters urged the Coast Guard to adopt TSAC's 2006
recommendations to amend proposed 46 CFR 15.535 to incorporate a
baseline requirement for a safe watch complement. This was intended to
avoid confusion about the minimum manning that will be required on
towing vessel COIs and the role of the TSMS in crewing decisions.
Consistent with our NPRM preamble statement that we were not
proposing to change any of the current manning levels required for
towing vessels, we modeled our proposed Sec. 15.535 after Sec.
15.610, which addresses towing vessel master and mate (pilot)
requirements on uninspected vessels. But as noted above in section
IV.B, we made a change in Sec. 15.535 from what we proposed in the
NPRM. To reflect the 2010 Act's amendment to 46 U.S.C. 8905, we made a
conforming amendment to Sec. 15.535(b) to remove an non-applicability
reference to certain towing vessels of less than 200 gross register
tons engaged in exploiting offshore minerals or oil. While reviewing
proposed Sec. 15.535 in response to a comment discussed above, we
noted the need to remove a reference to vessels engaged in assistance
towing because the applicability of Sec. 15.535 does not include
vessels engaged in assistance towing. Further, we revised paragraph (a)
to more clearly state which vessels are subject to Sec. 15.535, to
specify the vessels not subject to subchapter M that must meet
requirements Sec. 15.535(b), and to note that all towing vessels
subject to Sec. 15.535 must also meet requirements in Sec. 15.535(c).
Finally, we inserted clarifying edits and paragraph headings in Sec.
15.535 to make it easier to read and understand, and in both Sec. Sec.
15.535 and 15.610 we clarified that the officer in charge of the vessel
must provide the evidence to the Coast Guard.
Also, we made changes to Sec. 15.535 to ensure consistency in the
nomenclature introduced by the Consolidation of Merchant Mariner
Qualification Credentials final rule (74 FR 11196, Mar. 16, 2009), and
to Sec. 15.610 to ensure that this section refers to the remaining
uninspected towing vessels. Our changes also reflect the recent
amendments made by the final rule entitled Implementation of the
Amendments to the International Convention on Standards of Training,
Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, and Changes to
Domestic Endorsements (STCW) (78 FR 77796, Dec. 24, 2013).
As the authority issuing the vessel's COI, the cognizant OCMI is
required by law to stipulate the manning for an inspected vessel. See
46 U.S.C. 3309 and 8101, 33 CFR 1.01-20, and 46 CFR 2.01-5 and 15.501.
She or he can take a variety of factors into consideration when
determining the safe manning for a vessel, including recommendations
from the owner or managing operator. In some cases, existing law or
regulations specify the minimum manning for a particular voyage, area
of operation, or vessel service. See e.g., 46 U.S.C. 8301 and 46 CFR
15.610. In this final rule, 46 CFR 15.535 would set one such minimum.
An OCMI may specify a level of manning above those minimums specified
by law if such a level is warranted to safely operate the vessel. See
46 U.S.C. 8301(d)(2) and 46 CFR 15.501. A vessel's safety management
system can identify situations where additional manning may be
warranted (such as high water conditions) but it cannot specify a level
of manning below the minimum established by the OCMI at any time.
We received some comments stating that the language used in Sec.
15.535(c) concerning towing vessels in pilotage waters on the Lower
Mississippi River is not clear. One commenter said it would be useful
to define the geographical limits of the ``pilotage waters of the Lower
Mississippi River'' in Sec. 15.535(c). Another commenter said the
language should be the same as that used in Sec. 15.610(b).
The Coast Guard agrees with these comments and has changed the text
in Sec. 15.535(c) to match the current text of Sec. 15.610(b), except
for necessary organizational changes and to specify that the evidence
should be provided to the Coast Guard. The pilotage waters of the Lower
Mississippi River are described in a notice of designated areas
published December 26, 1996 (61 FR 68090).
Some commenters said crew size should be dictated by the size and
needs of the vessel. One commenter said the vessel master must have the
final say on the crew requirements. A towing company said it is
important that the minimum manning requirements account for different
vessel operations (e.g., crew of three for ship assist work in-harbor
versus crew of six for offshore trips).
While the master has a role in ensuring the proper manning of a
vessel, the master must observe applicable law and regulations, and the
manning specified by the Coast Guard on the vessel's COI when
performing that role. We note that under Sec. 140.210, the master must
ensure that adequate corrective action is taken when he or she
encounters unsafe conditions. The COI issued by the Coast Guard will
specify the minimum manning for the vessel under normal operating
conditions and the master must adhere to the provisions of the COI. See
Sec. 140.210(a)(1). The towing vessel master and the TSMS should
identify when, and if, additional personnel are needed on board the
towing vessel. During flood or low water conditions, for example, the
master may specify that additional crew members are needed.
We received some comments requesting that the Coast Guard clarify
and resolve differences in language between Sec. 15.535 and language
in the STCW Supplemental NPRM that proposed to amend Sec. 15.610.
As noted above, the STCW final rule has been published, and we have
amended the text in Sec. 15.535(c) to match the current Sec.
15.610(b). There was a slight variation in wording between Sec.
15.535(c) as originally proposed and Sec. 15.610(b).
Further, our proposed Sec. 15.535(c) specified that the towing
vessel ``be under the control of an officer who holds a first class
pilot's license or endorsement for that route, or who meets''
requirements related to the type of barge being towed. The current
Sec. 15.610(b) specifies that the towing vessel be under the control
of an officer meeting that section's requirements for a towing vessel
of 26 feet or more in length and that that officer hold ``a first-class
pilot's endorsement for that route or MMC officer endorsement for the
Western Rivers, or'' that the officer meets the requirements for a
towing vessel of 26 feet or more in length and the requirements based
on the type of barge being towed. Consistent with the commenters'
recommendations, we have amended Sec. 15.535 to conform to the current
version of Sec. 15.610.
Also, because we added Sec. 15.535 to address vessels subject to
subchapter M, we inserted a paragraph at the beginning of Sec. 15.610
to limit that section to towing vessels not subject to subchapter M.
Applicability exceptions in subchapter M explain that some towing
vessels at least 8 meters in length will still be subject to Sec.
15.610. We made necessary organizational changes to Sec. 15.610 to
reflect our insertion of this new paragraph.
An individual recommended that in addition to the towing vessel
being
[[Page 40010]]
operated by a properly licensed master, our rule should require at
least one crew member to be documented with preferably an ``Able
Bodied'' seaman's rating. The commenter noted his marine work
experience and seeing members of a construction crew assigned to handle
the lines when a towing evolution was needed. He stated that the skills
and knowledge of construction workers do not always overlap with those
required of seamen.
We did not propose the change suggested by this commenter and would
want to receive comments before making the suggested change. But we are
confident that the manning requirements in Sec. 15.535 and
requirements in Sec. 140.210 for reporting and addressing unsafe
conditions provide assurances that lines will be properly handled
during towing evolutions. We have not made a change from the proposed
rule based on this comment.
We received one comment saying that our rulemaking seeks to address
issues such as a ``man overboard'' situation, but such situations are
innately linked to minimum safe manning of a vessel. The commenter
asked how a licensed towing officer at the helm is expected to safely
and successfully recover a single deckhand from the water should the
deckhand go overboard during routine operations.
We have addressed requirements for lifesaving equipment,
arrangements, systems, and procedures on towing vessels in Section IV.K
of this preamble, ``Lifesaving,'' and lifesaving regulations are
located in part 141 of subchapter M. When specifying the minimum
complement of officers and crew necessary for the safe operation of the
vessel, the OCMI is called on to consider emergency situations such as
a person overboard. See 46 CFR 15.501.
One commenter pointed out that language used in Sec. 15.535 in the
NPRM regarding an exception for certain towing vessels was eliminated
by section 606 of the 2010 Act.
As noted above in response to a comment addressed in section IV.B,
section 606 of Public Law 111-281 did strike the paragraph in 46 U.S.C.
8905 that exempted vessels of less than 200 gross tons ``engaged in the
offshore mineral and oil industry if the vessel has offshore mineral
and oil industry sites or equipment as its ultimate destination or
place of departure'' from 46 U.S.C. 8904 requirements and regulations
promulgated under 46 U.S.C. 8904. This statutory change was not
reflected in our proposed rule. Accordingly, we made a conforming
amendment to Sec. 15.535(b), which excludes certain vessels from the
licensed-master-or-mate requirement, by deleting the reference to
vessels engaged in the offshore mineral and oil industry. This
amendment to Sec. 15.535(b), which now only exempts vessels engaged in
assistance towing from the licensed-master-or-mate requirement,
conforms this final rule to Public Law 111-281's amendment to 46 U.S.C.
8905.
One commenter expressed concern about the words ``not to include
over time'' in the definition of ``day'' in existing 46 CFR 10.107 and
that section's computation of service hours on vessels less than 100
gross register tons (GRT). The commenter stated that work-hour abuses
occur, especially on vessels of less than 100 GRT, because a day of
work is considered 8 hours. Also, overtime is not counted toward sea
service. The commenter recommends that this loophole be removed.
In the proposed regulatory text of the NPRM, we did touch on 46 CFR
chapter I, subchapter B, Merchant Marine Officers and Seamen, but we
did not propose any changes to 46 CFR part 10, Merchant Mariner
Credential, where 46 CFR 10.107 is located. Related to this comment, we
note that Section 607 of the 2010 Act, which amended 46 U.S.C. by
introducing additional logbook and entry requirements in 46 U.S.C.
11304, included entries for the ``number of hours in service to the
vessels of each seaman and each officer.'' We would need a separate
rulemaking to fully implement section 607 of the 2010 Act, which
involves hours of service; that rulemaking could apply to more than
just towing vessels.
We amended a regulation, 46 CFR 15.815(c), that requires a radar
observer endorsement for masters or mates onboard an uninspected towing
vessel 26 feet or longer by removing the word ``uninspected.'' When
that regulation was issued, most towing vessels were uninspected, and
Sec. 15.815(a) covered towing vessels 300 GRT or more that were
inspected. Because most towing vessels 26 feet or longer will become
inspected once this rule becomes effective, we are making this
conforming amendment to 46 CFR 15.815(c). This change is consistent
with our Sec. 15.815 towing-vessel specific enabling statute, 46
U.S.C. 8904(a), which distinguishes towing vessels purely on length,
not whether they are inspected or uninspected. Because Sec. 15.815(c)
already requires this radar observers' endorsement on uninspected
towing vessels, there is no anticipated cost associated with this
change.
F. Certification/Definitions/Applicability (Part 136)
Applicability
We received some comments supporting the Coast Guard's decision to
defer consideration to a subsequent rulemaking of requirements for
towing vessels less than 26 feet in length, towing vessels used solely
for assistance towing, and work boats operating exclusively within a
work site and performing intermittent towing within a work site.
Several commenters expressed support for the concept of excepted
vessels but felt that clarification is needed with regard to the range
of fleet and harbor service operations that fall under this term.
Others suggested that some aspects of the equipment requirements, like
distress flares and additional lifebuoys, could be removed from the
rule.
In our definition of ``excepted vessel'' in Sec. 136.110, we make
reference to harbor-assist, but we define that term in addition to
``limited geographic area'' and we believe those definitions are
sufficiently clear to identify the range of harbor service operations
that fall under these terms. We had included a reference to a fleeting
area as an example of a limited geographic area in our proposed
definition of ``excepted vessel,'' but, as discussed below in this
section (IV.F), we removed that and other examples for the separately
defined term ``limited geographic area.'' Also, we amended the
reference to vessels that may be included by the cognizant OCMI in this
definition by identifying the requirements and reasons the OCMI must
consider before treating a vessel as an excepted vessel for purposes of
some or all of the requirements listed.
The Coast Guard has not subjected excepted vessels to certain
requirements in part 142 for fire protection equipment, and certain
requirements for new vessels in part 143 for alarms and monitoring,
general alarms, communication, fuel shutoff, additional fuel system
requirements for existing vessels, and electrical power sources,
generators, and motors, and electrical overcurrent protection. We have
considered a commenter's request to also not require excepted vessels
to comply with distress flare and additional lifebuoy requirements but
decline to do so because the factors used to except these vessels do
not reduce the need for flare and lifebuoy requirements.
In Sec. 141.375, we have a more precise exception regarding
distress flares and do not require that they be carried on vessels
operating in a limited
[[Page 40011]]
geographic area on a short run limited to approximately 30 minutes away
from the dock. Also, we have reviewed our lifebuoy requirements in
Sec. 141.360 based on the request to not require additional lifebuoys
of excepted vessels, but have not adopted this suggested change because
some excepted vessels, for example, towing vessels used for response to
an emergency, need to have on board the lifebuoys required under Sec.
141.360. Also, we noted our use of the term ``excepted towing vessel,''
instead of ``excepted vessel,'' in part 143. We have clarified part 143
by making all proposed references to ``excepted towing vessel,''
consistent with the term we defined, ``excepted vessel.''
Some commenters did not agree with our exception of towing vessels
less than 26 feet for several reasons, including smaller vessels being
given an unfair competitive advantage, the fact that such vessels may
be engaging in commercial work, and a concern about regulatory
avoidance.
Our exemption for towing vessels less than 26 feet in length is
intended to provide for an incremental application of inspection status
to the towing vessel fleet and is consistent with the recommendations
of TSAC. We note here that we made edits in Sec. 136.105 to ensure
that the exemptions in that section are clearly stated. Specifically
regarding our meter approximation of 26 feet, we changed ``(8 meters)''
to the more precise approximation of ``(7.92 meters).'' Also we
corrected the threshold for vessels subject to subchapter I.
An individual noted that towing vessels should be measured end-to-
end at actual length, and another commenter suggested that the size of
tow should be used to determine exempt vessels. Another individual
recommended that the exemption should be based on a combination of
length, displacement, and shaft horsepower in order to remove the
incentive to use short, high-power tugs to circumvent Coast Guard
inspections. A commenter suggested a clarification that towing vessels
less than 26 feet in length are not exempt if they move barges carrying
oil.
For methods of measuring towing vessels, the Coast Guard sees no
reason to deviate from the statutory standard in 46 U.S.C. 8904(a)
which is reflected in 46 CFR 15.535 and 136.105: Length measured from
end to end over the deck (excluding the sheer). We considered the
suggestion of using size of tow or a combination of length,
displacement, and shaft horsepower as a way to determine applicability,
but we believe using the length of the towing vessels is a more
manageable approach which--while not as direct--provides a measure of
risk control.
We agree that a change from the proposed rule is necessary to
clarify that vessels less than 26 feet are not exempt from the
requirements of this rulemaking when towing a barge carrying oil. In
proposed Sec. 136.105, when identifying exceptions to applicability,
we made clear that towing vessels less than 26 feet that push, pull, or
haul a ``barge that is carrying dangerous or hazardous material'' would
not be excluded from subchapter M applicability. In the NPRM, we did
not define the term ``dangerous or hazardous material'' but in the
preamble we did describe our limitation on the less-than-26-feet
exemption by stating this rule does not apply to towing vessels less
than 26 feet in length ``unless towing a barge carrying oil or other
dangerous or combustible cargo in bulk.'' To make this intent clear in
the regulatory text of the final rule, we have adopted the defined term
``oil or hazardous material in bulk,'' to replace the term ``dangerous
or hazardous material'' in Sec. 136.105(a).
Also, to clarify that only one form of hazardous material needs be
carried to trigger applicability, we changed ``materials'' to the
singular, ``material,'' throughout the final rule. Also, we amended the
definition of ``oil or hazardous material in bulk'' by inserting ``to
carry cargoes'' in its reference to being certified under subchapters D
or O to better reflect the nature of the certifications.
Other companies supported the less-than-26-foot exception. One
commenter acknowledged that the Coast Guard could address smaller
towing vessels in a future rulemaking. An individual thought the
exception should apply to even longer vessels (up to 32 or 40 feet in
length) because such vessels are too small to do any serious towing,
and a company agreed and stated that all its shipyard and harbor
service vessels were 34 feet or longer.
As noted above, the Coast Guard approach in transitioning the
uninspected towing vessel fleet into an inspected status is to do so
incrementally over time. Based on our analysis of risk and a specific
recommendation provided by TSAC,\1\ we proposed that subchapter M apply
to vessels 26 feet and above. This length standard has been used in
various statutes to establish requirements for radiotelephones,
automatic identification systems, electronic charts, and manning for
towing vessels. See 33 U.S.C. 1203 and 1223a, and 46 U.S.C. 8904 and
70114. We find no perfect length for measuring risk, but we believe 26
feet is the best breakpoint to use at this time in our transitioning of
the uninspected towing vessel fleet into an inspected fleet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Report of the Working Group on Towing Vessel Inspection,''
p. 6, submitted to TSAC on September 29, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We received one comment supporting the exception for workboats that
do not engage in commercial towing for hire but perform intermittent
towing within a worksite. A contracting company agreed that increased
equipment requirements are not needed for job site boats. Two
individuals suggested that the exception should be simplified, such as
by including a mileage limitation. A company recommended a slight
expansion of the exception to cover workboats going to or from the
worksite.
The Coast Guard disagrees with the recommendation to include a
mileage limitation or expand the exception, and believes the terms
``worksite'' and ``workboat'' are adequately defined in Sec. 136.110.
The OCMI will make determinations of the boundaries and limitations of
worksites within the OCMI's zone. The OCMI will evaluate the unique
operating conditions and hazards of the area and determine the risks
and mitigating factors necessary to support such operations.
A commenter requested that we treat workboats engaged in oil spill
response activities as exempt, just as we exempt workboats operating in
a worksite.
The Coast Guard has already included an exception for towing
vessels engaged in emergency or pollution response in our definition of
``excepted vessels'' in Sec. 136.110. We do not intend to provide a
general exemption to oil spill response vessels from these rules.
Instead, the OCMI may designate a pollution response area as a worksite
which would afford a towing vessel the opportunity to be exempt from
subchapter M while it is operating exclusively in the worksite if it
qualifies as a workboat under Sec. 136.105(a)(3).
This is consistent with the Coast Guard's intent to provide
inspection standards to certain vessels based on risk and consistent
with the recommendations of TSAC. This rule exempts certain types of
vessels from subchapter M, and relieves other types of vessels,
excepted vessels, from certain equipment requirements due to the nature
of their service. We have made no changes from the proposed rule based
on this comment.
Two commenters suggested adding language to our worksite exception
in Sec. 136.105(a)(3) to include ``maneuvering a tank barge on and off
of a drydock or
[[Page 40012]]
cleaning dock'' to the ``intermittent towing'' covered in the worksite;
and others recommended that we amend our ``excepted vessel'' definition
in Sec. 136.110 to include moving vessels on and off drydocks and to
and from cleaning docks, or shifting vessels within a limited
geographic area, or including a full range of activities commonly
performed by towing vessels in a limited geographic area.
The Coast Guard sees no need for these recommended changes. Our
workboat exception in Sec. 136.105(a)(3) covers the activity the
commenter requests we add. Also, our definition of ``excepted vessel''
in Sec. 136.110 includes towing vessels operating ``within a limited
geographic area.'' Excepted vessels could include towing vessels moving
vessels on and off drydocks and to and from cleaning docks. But we have
left this determination to the discretion of the cognizant OCMI, to be
made on a case-by-case basis.
We received a very large number of comments, particularly from
commenters in the American Waterways Operators (AWO) Responsible
Carrier Program (RCP), that expressed the belief that the TSMS should
be required for all towing companies and should not be optional.
Proponents argued that the TSMS is flexible and scalable, would create
consistency, and addresses human error, the leading cause of towing
vessel accidents. Some of the commenters favored having a third-party
audit option and conservation of Coast Guard resources. A maritime
company stated that the savings accruing from a robust TSMS will far
outweigh any associated cost of development and implementation. One
company observed that a TSMS gives a company the ability to adjust its
system through lessons learned and continuous improvement, rather than
complying with a set of standards once a year. Commenters stated that
the Coast Guard should not make the TSMS optional because of concern
about costs; instead the Coast Guard should eliminate requirements that
are not justified by risk analysis. One commenter warned, however, that
a TSMS is not a substitute for an inspection.
We received many other comments that supported retaining the option
of inspection by the Coast Guard. Proponents favored the flexibility
provided by having the option, the reduced administrative burden of the
Coast Guard inspection, cost efficiency for small businesses, and the
fact that the Coast Guard already has a successful inspection program.
An association has favored a traditional Coast Guard inspection program
for the towing industry. An individual noted that small companies
cannot afford to create and implement a TSMS and would depend on the
Coast Guard to provide yearly inspections and guidance. Other
individuals and a State government recommended that the Coast Guard
should develop a model TSMS that would be easy for small companies to
adopt. Another individual opposed having optional provisions in a
regulation. A commenter pointed out that current form CG-3752,
Application for Inspection of U.S. Vessel, should be revised to add a
block for indicating which option is being used for the towing vessel.
As we noted in the NPRM (76 FR 49979), the NTSB and TSAC have
strongly supported a TSMS, and the approach is supported by the
International Safety Management (ISM) Code. The NTSB disagreed with our
applicability exception for seagoing towing vessels of 300 gross tons
or more subject to the provisions of subchapter I because currently
under 33 CFR part 96 only vessels measuring more than 500 gross tons
and operating on international voyages are required to have SMS and the
subchapter M regulation does not apply to the 22 seagoing towing
vessels of 300 gross tons or more already inspected in accordance with
regulations for cargo and miscellaneous vessels in 46 CFR subchapter I.
The NTSB encouraged the Coast Guard to extend the SMS requirement to
these seagoing vessels by requiring SMS on all seagoing towing vessels
of 300 gross tons or more.
The Coast Guard believes the traditional annual inspection regime
we offer as an option to all towing vessels subject to subchapter M
will provide necessary measures to ensure compliance with subchapter M
requirements and enable us to detect non-compliance.
The Coast Guard notes the NTSB concerns and acknowledges that not
all seagoing towing vessels subject to subchapter I are required to
comply with SMS requirements in 33 CFR part 96, subpart B, for vessels
on international voyages. That applicability threshold of the 500 gross
tons reflects an international standard from the International
Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, as amended (SOLAS) for
vessels subject to Chapter IX of SOLAS, Management of the Safe
Operation of Ships. In general, the Coast Guard supports all towing
vessels being subject to a robust and well-functioning safety
management system. Should the Coast Guard decide to extend SMS
requirements to all vessels subject to subchapter M, or to seagoing
towing vessels of 300 gross tons or more that are subject to subchapter
I, we would proceed with a separate rulemaking. We would look at
accident data after this rule becomes effective before proposing such a
rule.
We are considering the suggestion that we amend form CG-3752,
Application for Inspection of U.S. Vessel, to add a block to indicate
which option the towing vessel owner or managing operator is using. For
now, we recommend using the ``Other (Indicate)'' box--e.g., ``Towing
Vessel (TSMS option)'' or ``Towing Vessel (CG Inspection option).''
We received some comments from towing or dredging companies
suggesting exemption from the entire rule for certain vessels, such as
all existing vessels, vessels under 79 feet, vessels under 200 gross
tons, or vessels operating on inland and harbor routes. One company
argued that construction/dredge tugs on the Great Lakes should be
considered for exceptions. Another company requested an exception for
vessels that work as towing vessels less than 10 percent of the year. A
small company with an 18-foot tow vessel and a 33-foot barge that
carries less than 10,000 gallons of diesel requested an exception. Some
commenters suggested that vessels used to move passenger barges should
be specifically excluded. One company recommended that a committee
should be formed to examine which regulatory provisions are appropriate
for particular vessels.
The Coast Guard does not believe that broad exemptions from the
requirement of these rules would serve the intended goal of improving
safety in the towing vessel industry. The Coast Guard seeks a balance
between a tiered implementation of towing vessel safety rules to
vessels with the greatest risk and a prudent exemption of applicability
to towing vessels with less potential risk to life, property and the
environment.
One commenter suggested exemptions for towing vessels operating on
inland and harbor routes not engaged in transporting petroleum
products. In particular, they argued that the TSMS and towing vessel
record (TVR) requirements should only apply to vessels that tow oil and
hazardous material, or are over 79 feet and 2,000 HP.
The Coast Guard disagrees. As we note in our earlier discussion of
part 136 comments, the Coast Guard does not intend to create exemptions
for all types of inland towing operations, or to provide exemptions for
particular areas without cause. We note, however, that under Sec.
136.230 the OCMI may consider
[[Page 40013]]
route-specific requirements of subchapter M when designating a
permitted route.
Regarding the TSMS requirement, it is optional. In this final rule,
the only vessels required to maintain a TSMS are those that choose the
TSMS option. A TSMS, however, may benefit every type of towing vessel
regardless of its service routes, vessel length, or vessel horsepower.
For more details on this, see the discussion in section IV.B and the RA
for the final rule (in the docket). As for the TVR requirement, the
vessel owner or managing operator has the option of maintaining it
electronically or on paper, and for towing vessels with a TSMS, the
required records may be maintained in another record specified by the
TSMS. It is essential for maritime safety that data we require in Sec.
140.915 be recorded. We discuss the TVR requirement, and the various
forms it may take, in more detail in our discussion of part 140
comments.
We received one comment that favored applying the rule to vessels
towing oil and providing harbor assist to large ships, applying a less
costly system to other vessels, and clarifying exemptions. Many
commenters agreed that rules designed for offshore or ocean routes or
large rivers were not appropriate for vessels in canals, harbors, or
shallow rivers. The commenters opposed a one size fits all approach,
and noted that Congress intended different standards for various types
of towing vessels. One of the commenters favored grandfathering
existing vessels into compliance for as many of the requirements as
practicable. Another commenter, however, noted that risks are similar
for inland and harbor towing as for coastwise or ocean towing, and
solutions, such as planning and testing, should be similar. A towing
company opposed having more stringent rules for tank barge operators
than for companies that haul dry cargo barges.
The Coast Guard agrees that there are different characteristics,
methods of operation, and nature of service of towing vessels that
require unique application of requirements. The Coast Guard believes
that the utilization of a TSMS allows the operator to tailor safety
processes to the unique conditions in which the vessel and company
operate. A TSMS is scalable, dynamic, and customized by the operator
for the unique risks, challenges, and operating environments
anticipated. Some hazards are universal to all vessels regardless of
where they operate. Therefore, the Coast Guard believes that certain
minimum standards are necessary to mitigate these risks and seeks to
apply them to all towing vessels subject to this rule. The additional
variations necessitated by the type and area of operation can be
accommodated by a TSMS.
An association questioned whether ``Lugger Tugs,'' towing vessels
that carry cargo, would be inspected as towing vessels or as offshore
supply vessels. One individual urged the Coast Guard to ensure
consistency in regulatory enforcement and fairness for all vessels.
The Coast Guard notes that towing vessels that carry cargo for
hire, or conduct other regulated activities--such as carrying
passengers for hire, would likely be subject to regulations contained
in other subchapters. Vessels engaged in two (or more) separate
regulated activities are referred to as being in ``dual (or multiple)
service.'' Towing vessels that want to conduct activities other than
just towing need to seek approval from the OCMI issuing the COI. The
Coast Guard provides guidance to all OCMIs to help ensure consistency
in regulatory enforcement and fairness for all vessels. In the example
of a towing vessel carrying cargo, that vessel meets the definition for
two vessel types and would have to meet additional requirements to
carry cargo on the towing vessel. Numerous parameters, including vessel
characteristics and the operations conducted by the vessel, would
determine under which vessel type the vessel would be inspected.
For clarification, we amended our description of ``public vessel''
in Sec. 136.105 to match the term defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101. We also
point to the 46 U.S.C. 2101 definition for the meaning of the term in
Sec. Sec. 2.01-7, 15.535, and 15.610 of this chapter.
Definitions
We received several hundred comments suggesting edits, deletions,
or additions to our proposed definitions in Sec. 136.110. The
discussion of changes made to the individual terms is as follows:
``Accepted Safety Management System''
We deleted our proposed definition of ``Accepted Safety Management
System'' because we did not propose to use the term within the
regulatory text of the NPRM and do not use it in this final rule.
''Audit''
We received a suggested amendment of the first sentence in our
definition of ``audit'' that would replace ``planned arrangements'' and
``arrangements'' with ``TSMS.'' One commenter suggested deleting the
phrase ``observing persons performing required tasks'' in paragraph
(1)(iii) of the proposed definition of ``audit,'' because there is no
definition for ``required task.''
The Coast Guard partially agrees with the first comment. Not all
towing vessels will operate in accordance with a TSMS. Under Sec.
138.225, some vessels may meet TSMS requirements by complying with ISM
Code requirements of 33 CFR part 96 or some other SMS that the Coast
Guard has accepted and deemed to meet subchapter M TSMS requirements.
Rather than adopting the suggested edit, we deleted ``planned
arrangements'' in favor of ``requirements'' and have made clear what
requirements we intend to be covered by our Sec. 136.110 definition of
``audit'' by specifying ``TSMS or other applicable SMS planned
arrangements.''
In response to the ``required task'' comment, the Coast Guard has
edited the definition of ``audit'' in Sec. 136.110 by replacing the
term ``required tasks'' with ``specific tasks within their assigned
duties,'' in paragraph (1)(iii) and ``specific tasks'' with ``their
assigned duties'' in paragraph (1)(ii). We used the term ``duties''
which is used in Sec. 138.220(b)(2) to describe training for
operational duties and duties associated with the execution of the
TSMS.
''Authorized Classification Society''
We received a comment from a classification society requesting that
the Coast Guard delegate the inspection of towing vessels to authorized
classification societies. In response, as we discuss in more detail in
our TPO preamble section (IV.I), we have amended Sec. 139.110 to
clarify the distinction between audits and surveys. For the purpose of
audits, a recognized classification society meets the requirements of a
TPO and may work as a third-party auditor. For the purpose of surveys,
an authorized classification society meets the requirements of a TPO
and may work as a third-party surveyor. Further, we have amended Sec.
144.140 to include certain authorized classification societies as being
qualified to conduct a verification of compliance with design
standards. Therefore, we have incorporated the part 8 definition of
``authorized classification society'' into this final rule.
``Buoyant Apparatus'' or ``Inflatable Buoyant Apparatus''
We received five comments, primarily from maritime companies and
professional associations, suggesting the addition of a definition for
the terms ``buoyant apparatus'' and ``inflatable buoyant apparatus''
because the terms are not defined in the proposed part
[[Page 40014]]
141. One maritime company suggested the following text for the
definition of ``buoyant apparatus'': ``Buoyant apparatus is flotation
equipment (other than lifeboats, life rafts, and personal flotation
devices) designed to support a specified number of persons in the
water, and of such construction that it retains its shape and
properties and requires no adjustment or preparation for use.'' The
same commenter offered the following text for the definition of
``inflatable buoyant apparatus'': ``Inflatable buoyant apparatus is
flotation equipment that depends on inflated compartments for buoyancy
and is designed to support a specified number of persons completely out
of the water.''
The Coast Guard does not agree that it is necessary to include
definitions for commonly understood lifesaving apparatus in subchapter
M. These terms are already defined in 46 CFR, part 160--Lifesaving
Equipment, in Sec. 160.010-2. We did not make any changes from the
proposed rule based on these comments.
``Class II Piping Systems''
We deleted this definition as this term is no longer used within
this subchapter.
``Cold Water''
A maritime trade association had no objection to the proposed
definition of ``cold water,'' and understood its application in Table
141.305 regarding survival craft; however, the commenter was unaware of
any deficiency in the survival craft currently in use and requested
that only a single standard apply to the Great Lakes.
The Coast Guard notes that the definition of cold water is
consistent with other regulations and existing Coast Guard policy (NVIC
7-91) lists the areas designated as cold water. While the Great Lakes
are generally considered cold water, several lakes are not designated
as cold water during certain months of the year. The Coast Guard
believes that specifying all of the Great Lakes as all cold water, year
round, would impose an unnecessary burden on those towing vessels which
operate seasonally when certain lakes are not designated as cold water.
However, this does not prevent a vessel owner or managing operator from
voluntarily carrying the equipment required on cold water at all times.
``Consideration''
We deleted this term as the proposed definition was identical to 46
U.S.C. 2101 and the term was only used once in that context, so instead
we added a reference to 46 U.S.C. 2101 directly to our definition of
``assistance towing'' in Sec. 136.110.
``Crewmember''
Two commenters felt that the term ``crewmember'' should be defined
as an individual who is listed on Form CG 735(T): Master's Report of
Seamen Shipped or Discharged, so as to avoid any misunderstanding
related to vendors who are onboard for maintenance or repair.
The Coast Guard has revised the definition in Sec. 136.110 to
match an existing definition of ``crewmember'' in 46 CFR 16.105,
paragraph (2)(iv) of which would exclude vendors who are onboard to
conduct maintenance or repair work. Also, please note that the COI will
list crewmembers required to be onboard and persons in addition to the
crew that may be carried onboard the vessel.
``Disabled Vessel''
One commenter noted that some dead ships can range up to 900 feet
in length and suggested that we clarify our definition of ``disabled
vessel'' and set some limit on a dead ship's size for purposes of
assistance towing. We note that a dead ship is a ship without the
benefit of mechanical or sail propulsion. The commenter's concern
appears based on Sec. 136.105 excluding vessels used for assistance
towing from subchapter M applicability. We defined ``assistance
towing'' to mean ``towing a disabled vessel for consideration.''
The Coast Guard disagrees about the need to amend our proposed
definition of ``disabled vessel.'' We note that a dead ship would fit
our definition if the vessel regularly operated under its own power but
was temporarily disabled. The Coast Guard does not see a need to
include a specific length criterion for dead ships in its definition of
``disabled vessel'' because not all assistance towing vessels are the
same length or horsepower and the local COTP would assess the size and
number of towing vessels needed to assist a dead ship.
``Downstreaming''
A maritime company suggested we insert ``attempting to land'' in
place of ``landing'' in our proposed definition of ``downstreaming.''
The Coast Guard acknowledges that downstreaming includes unsuccessful
as well as successful attempts to align with a barge or other object,
but has replaced the word ``landing'' with the words ``in order to
approach and land squarely on'' instead of the commenter's suggested
words. Also, we amended the definition by replacing the limited
reference to the ``end of the barge'' with ``a fleet, a dock, or
another tow.'' Finally, we inserted the words ``with the current'' to
describe downstreaming and to reflect the nature of our concern in
Sec. 140.610(e) where we require all exterior openings at the main
deck level to be closed when a towing vessel is downstreaming.
''Engine Room''
In reviewing the definition of ``engine room'' in the NPRM, the
Coast Guard decided the word ``area'' was too broad; accordingly, we
have replaced ``area'' with ``space,'' which is commonly used and
understood in the maritime industry to refer to a specific room (also
see the definition for ``Accommodation space'' in Sec. 136.110).
``Element''
After reviewing this definition, which as proposed, only applied to
safety management systems, we decided to delete it as the term
``element'' is also used within the subchapter with regard to surveys
and audits. Additionally, whenever the term is used, its meaning is
clear.
``Essential System''
A company requested that we replace references to ``vessel'' with
``towing vessel'' in our definition of ``essential system.'' Another
commenter noted that the definition of ``essential systems'' is similar
to the term ``critical systems'' in the ISM code, suggesting that the
terms be aligned or at least cross-referenced for clarification. An
association whose members trade on all five of the Great Lakes noted
that the definition of ``essential system'' is very broad and needs to
be scaled back to systems that are truly essential so as to help ensure
consistent application, and that as written, it is difficult to
identify a shipboard system other than galley equipment that is not
essential.
Regarding the first comment, the Coast Guard disagrees with the
suggestion because this entire subchapter pertains to towing vessels,
and we believe references to ``vessel'' in our definition of
``essential system'' clearly refer to towing vessel. We agree it is
important to distinguish ``vessel'' from ``towing vessel'' in the few
contexts in subchapter M where it is necessary, but we do not view our
definition of ``essential system'' as one of them. We made no change
from the proposed rule based on this first comment. In response to the
second comment, to better align our definition with critical systems in
ISM code, we added language to include critical systems identified in a
part 96-compliant SMS. As for scaling back
[[Page 40015]]
systems included, the Coast Guard disagrees. We believe that the
definition of ``essential system'' accurately covers those systems that
are required in subchapter M to ensure a vessel's survivability,
maintain safe operation, control the vessel, or ensure safety of
onboard personnel.
``Excepted Vessel''
Many commenters, including an association and various towing
companies, supported the concept of ``excepted vessel,'' under which
towing vessels operating solely in fleeting and harbor services would
not be required to meet certain equipment requirements in part 143.
Several of the commenters suggested that the definition of ``excepted
vessel'' should be clarified or expanded to specify activities such as
moving vessels on and off drydocks or to and from cleaning docks. Also,
commenters stated the definitions should encompass the full range of
activities commonly performed by towing vessels in limited geographic
areas or harbor assist service and that failure to do so will
potentially endanger the economic viability of small to medium size
harbor/fleeting companies and consequently, the small to medium size
ports and industries they service. One towing company requested
clarification of the meaning of ``solely,'' because towing vessels
often engage in different types of towing operations throughout their
life-spans. An individual recommended that the term ``harbor assist''
in the definition of ``excepted vessel'' should be replaced by
``assistance towing'' to be consistent with the applicability exclusion
paragraph in Sec. 136.105(a)(2)(i) or with ``recreational assist.''
Also a company pointed to the need to improve our definition of
``excepted vessel'' in Sec. 136.110 specifically as it applies to
harbor assist vessels, a common term that it noted was used for vessels
that conduct ship assist activities helping larger vessels in and out
of port. One towing company opposed the concept of excepted vessels and
expressed the view that all towing vessels should meet the same
requirements. Another company also opposed exempting fleeting or
limited route vessels from the proposed provisions, because such
vessels may operate in close proximity to chemical plants and barge
fleets. The commenter warned that such vessels may have minimal safety
standards and operators may modify their vessels to benefit from the
proposed provisions. An individual provided examples of vessels that
work in fleeting areas but also travel many miles away from their base
of operations without proper equipment. One commenter pointed out that
the example of a limited geographic area (``a fleeting area for barges
or a commercial facility'') in the definition of ``excepted vessel''
conflicts with the proposed definition of ``limited geographic area.''
The Coast Guard views the excepted vessel category as a valuable
tool to more precisely tailor regulations. We have amended the
definition of ``excepted vessel'' by removing the examples of limited
geographic area activities. The term ``limited geographic area'' is
defined in Sec. 136.110 and allows local COTP discretion to determine
limited geographic areas for her or his zone. Further, we note that, in
addition to certain system and equipment requirements in part 143,
excepted vessels are also not subject to fire protection requirements
in Sec. Sec. 142.315 through 142.330. In terms of clarifying the
definition, we did change it to make it clear that excepted vessels are
subject to subchapter M, but not to certain requirements in the
subchapter. Accordingly, we changed ``exempted'' to ``excepted'' when
describing action by the OCMI that would make a towing vessel excepted.
As for the recommendation that we clarify or expand on the list of
specific activities within limited geographic area and harbor assist
service, the Coast Guard disagrees. Instead, we have removed the
examples of activities within a limited geographic area in favor of
leaving the discretion with the local COTP, as stated in the definition
of limited geographic area, and not have what some may read as an
exclusive list of examples in our definition of ``excepted vessel''
that references limited geographic area. However, additional guidance
beyond this rule may be developed to help the industry and public
understand how operating in a limited geographic area may impact the
equipment requirements if they are an ``excepted vessel''. The
definition of ``harbor-assist'' remains identical to the existing
definition in 46 CFR 10.107. Further, the definition of ``excepted
vessel'' also contains the provision for the cognizant OCMI to except
vessels based on reasons submitted by the vessel owner or managing
operator as to why the vessel does not need to meet certain system and
equipment requirements in parts 142 and 143 for the safe operation of
the vessel. We believe that the ability to except certain vessels from
specific equipment carriage requirements provides relief from the
potential economic burden on these vessel owners.
As for clarifying the meaning of ``solely'' in our definition of
``excepted vessel,'' in Sec. 136.110, the Coast Guard sees no need to
do so. The definition says ``[u]sed solely,'' for any one or a
combination of the services listed. Therefore, subchapter M provisions
not required of excepted vessels would be required of a towing vessel
subject to subchapter M whenever it is conducting towing operations not
listed in the definition of ``excepted vessels,'' unless it has been
excepted by the cognizant OCMI. When a vessel is exclusively used in
one or more of the excepted activities it is not subject to certain
provisions of Subchapter M. However, if the vessel engages in
activities that are not excepted, then it may be subject to those
provisions even if this activity only occurs intermittently.
In the NPRM, we proposed a definition for harbor-assist that is
identical to the existing definition in 46 CFR 10.107. To be excepted,
a vessel would need to be subject to subchapter M, and in the
applicability section, Sec. 136.105, we state that subchapter M is not
applicable to towing vessels ``used for assistance towing,'' so we
would not include ``assistance towing'' in activities for excepted
vessels. We also exclude towing vessels engaged in towing recreational
vessels for salvage, or transporting or assisting the navigation of
recreational vessels within and between marinas and marina facilities,
within a limited geographic area. Harbor assist and assistance towing
are two separate and distinct operations, both of which we have defined
in Sec. 136.110. We have made no changes from the proposed rule based
on these comments.
We have amended the definition of ``excepted vessel'' to remove the
reference to ``restricted service'' and, as noted above, to remove
examples from the limited geographic area sentence that may have been
too narrowly focused and conflicting with the definition of limited
geographic area.
``Excursion Party''
One commenter suggested that the term ``excursion party'' be
defined as ``a group visiting the vessel for no specific business
purpose.''
The Coast Guard added a definition for ``excursion party'' in this
final rule; however we do not agree with the commenter's proposed
definition. As addressed in Sec. 136.245, any personnel (business,
personal, etc.) not authorized to be carried by the COI would be
considered by the OCMI when issuing an excursion permit.
``Flammable Liquid''
One commenter suggested that we define ``flammable liquid'' and
``combustible liquid'' as they are
[[Page 40016]]
defined in 46 CFR 30.10-15 and 30.10-22.
The Coast Guard partially agrees. The definitions in 46 CFR part 30
apply specifically to equipment required on tankers. The Coast Guard
believes that adding these definitions would not provide any additional
clarification for these rather common terms used in our fire protection
and machinery and electrical systems and equipment regulations in 46
CFR parts 142 and 143. However, we did modify part 143 to reference
part 30.
``Fleeting Area''
We received comments from two maritime companies regarding our
proposed definition of ``fleeting area'' in Sec. 136.110. One
commenter suggested inserting the words ``or wait to load or unload
cargo'' after ``where individual barges are moored or assembled to make
a tow,'' and to insert ``towing'' before ``vessel'' when referencing
another vessel that will transport the barges in the tow to various
destinations.
The Coast Guard agrees with the second recommendation, but not the
first. The inclusion of the term ``towing'' to the description of
``vessels'' makes the definition clearer. We disagree with the first
recommendation to insert the words ``or wait to load or unload cargo''
because here we are defining ``fleeting area'' which is focused on
making a tow, as opposed to ``limited geographic area'' which may cover
more activities. Reflecting the definition of ``limited geographic
area,'' we also inserted, ``as determined by the local Captain of the
Port (COTP),'' after a reference to a limited geographic area in our
``fleeting area'' definition.
``Fully Attended''
We deleted the definition of ``fully attended'' because we did not
use the term in this final rule, nor did we use the term within the
regulatory text of the NPRM.
``Harbor-Assist''
A maritime company suggested that for our definition of ``harbor-
assist,'' we add ``shift'' to ``dock, undock, moor, or unmoor,'' and
tie the escort of a vessel with limited maneuverability to these
actions by removing the disjunctive ``or'' we have placed between those
activities, and to add two more activities at the end of the definition
``to shift or tow barges within a limited geographic area; or to
respond to an emergency situation or pollution event involving towing
vessels, vessels with limited maneuverability, or barges.'' Another
commenter agreed and also felt that the definition should include
inland harbor and fleet vessels.
The Coast Guard disagrees. Regarding the recommendation to delete
``or'' and restrict both ``dock, undock, moor, shift, or unmoor,'' and
``escorting'' to towing vessel actions involving a vessel with limited
maneuverability, we do not see a need for this change to this
definition, which we adopted word-for-word from 46 CFR 10.107. For a
vessel to be escorted, the vessel needs some independent maneuvering
capability, which is not be true of all vessels a towing vessel may
dock, undock, moor, or unmoor. We do not need to add ``shift'' to the
definition because we believe any shifting is already captured by the
words ``maneuvers to dock, undock, moor, or unmoor a vessel.'' Also,
there is no need to add shifting barges in a limited geographic area
nor do we wish to add towing barges in a limited geographic area to
this definition. While not self-propelled, a barge would be included in
the definition's reference of a vessel, and we do not view harbor-
assist as encompassing the full range of activities covered by
``towing.'' Finally, we do not see a need to add responding to an
emergency situation or pollution event involving towing vessels,
vessels with limited maneuverability, or barges to our definition of
``harbor-assist.'' Both of these activities are already included within
our ``excepted vessel'' definition. We have made no changes from the
proposed rule based on these comments; our subchapter M ``harbor-
assist'' definition remains consistent with the 46 CFR 10.107
definition.
``Horsepower''
A professional association and private citizen expressed support
for our proposed definition of ``horsepower'' which is that stated on
the COI which reflects ``the sum of the manufacturer's listed brake
horsepower for all installed propulsion engines.'' We made no changes
from the proposed rule based on these comments.
``Independent''
One commenter suggested revising or deleting the definition of
``independent'' because it appears only in Sec. Sec. 143.300 and
143.435.
Our proposed definition of ``independent'' in Sec. 136.110 is and
was intended to be focused on equipment. We agree that it is not the
appropriate definition for the use of ``independent'' outside of part
143, Machinery and Electrical Systems and Equipment. In response to
this comment, we have removed the definition from Sec. 136.110 where
it would have been applicable to all of subchapter M and have placed it
in part 143's definition section, Sec. 143.115, where it is only
applicable to that part. We believe the definition is useful as limited
to that part and therefore, we have only restricted, and not deleted,
the definition.
We use the word ``independent'' in a different context when we
describe TSMSs and TPOs, as in our definition of ``audit'' and ``TPO''
in Sec. 136.110, and Sec. Sec. 138.205(b)(4), 138.310(d)(4),
139.115(b)(1) and 139.120(p). In that context we will use the common
definition of the term--to be free from the influence, control, or
determination of another or others.
''Inland Waters''
One commenter suggested deleting the proposed definition for
``inland waters'' because it is not defined in other 46 CFR and would
be confusing when considering classes of vessels. The commenter felt
that the terms ``Inland waters, excluding Western Rivers'' can be used
instead.
The Coast Guard disagrees. ``Inland waters'' is defined in 46 CFR
10.107 and our subchapter M proposed definition aligns with that
existing definition. To address the reach of this and other Sec.
136.110 definitions, we have inserted the introductory text of ``As
used in this subchapter'' in Sec. 136.110, which reflects our initial
intent that definitions in that section have limited applicability.
Also, in subchapter M we only use the term ``inland waters'' once, in
the definition of ``Western Rivers,'' and do not view it as generating
confusion regarding classes of vessels. We have made no changes from
our proposed definition of ``inland waters'' based on this comment.
``International Voyage''
We received comments from two commenters requesting that the
proposed definition of ``international voyage'' not include Canadian
waters that are transit waters between Alaska and other States. The
commenters noted that towing vessels do not always make port calls in
Canada during passage and are not considered international voyages and
subject to SOLAS.
The Coast Guard does not see a need to amend our definition of
``international voyage.'' Under our definition, towing vessels
transiting directly from a U.S. port in the contiguous 48 states to the
state of Alaska or the state of Hawaii would not be considered on an
international voyage for purposes of subchapter M because they would
not be going to a port outside the United States.
[[Page 40017]]
''Lakes, Bays, and Sounds''
We received two comments suggesting the proposed definition of the
term ``lakes, bays, and sounds'' be clarified to state that the
operations on Kentucky Lake are not to be included in the current
definition of ``lakes, bays, and sounds.'' Another commenter suggested
that the definition is too broad to include lakes, bays, and sounds in
inland river systems, and should be revised to exempt lakes, bays, and
sounds that are part of the inland or Western River systems.
The Coast Guard uses the term ``lakes, bays, and sounds'' in Sec.
136.230 as one of a number of major headings under which each area of
operation--referred to as a route--is described on a towing vessel's
COI. With the exception of ``rivers,'' ``Lakes, bays, and sounds,'' is
the least severe of the routes. Our definition matches that used for
small passenger vessels in subchapter K (46 CFR 114.400) and small
passenger vessels in subchapter T (46 CFR 175.400). The Coast Guard
does not intend to create exemptions for all types of inland towing
operations, or to provide exemptions for particular areas without
cause. We note, however, that under Sec. 136.230 the OCMI may consider
route-specific requirements of subchapter M when designating a
permitted route. We have not made a change from the proposed rule based
on these comments.
``Limited Geographic Area''
One commenter asked for further definition of the term ``limited
geographic area.''
Our definition of ``limited geographic area''--``a local area of
operation, usually within a single harbor or port''--is intended to be
flexible enough to reflect the wide range of local operations. The
local COTP has the discretion to determine limited geographic areas for
his or her COTP zone. We do use the term ``limited geographic area'' as
a factor in our definition of ``excepted vessel,'' but we believe it is
appropriate to not impose certain requirements, such as for additional
fire-extinguishing equipment, on vessels we identify as excepted
vessels, or impose less rigid lifesaving equipment requirements on
vessels that operate in a limited geographic area. We assess excepted
vessels and certain vessels operating in a limited geographic area as
presenting a reduced risk with respect to certain subchapter M
requirements.
``Major Conversion''
One commenter requested that we change our definition of ``major
conversion.'' First, the commenter would establish a threshold up front
that all the factors discussed must meet--that changes result in
``essentially a new towing vessel''--while also leaving that same
standard in the last (``otherwise'') factor. Second, the commenter
would move our reference to a determination by the Coast Guard to the
end of the definition. And third, the commenter would limit the
``substantially prolonging the life of the towing vessel'' factor by
expressly excluding ``the replacement of propulsion engines'' from that
factor.
The Coast Guard agrees with the recommendation that we move our
reference to a determination to the end of our definition of ``major
conversion.'' This change makes our definition more consistent with the
statutory definition in 46 U.S.C. 2101 (14a) and our existing 46 CFR
28.50 definition in subchapter C for uninspected vessels. We also
clarified that reference from vaguely stating ``as determined by the
Coast Guard'' to ``as determined by the Commandant.'' This change
better aligns the definition with the phrasing used in existing text.
We received comments from professional associations, maritime
companies, and other companies who expressed concern over the phrase
``substantially prolongs the life of the vessel'' in the proposed
definition of major conversion. Commenters felt that the definition
should be clarified to explain that routine activities like maintenance
or part replacement are not considered major conversions, but only
those activities that would result in the converted vessel becoming a
new vessel. Two commenters, a private citizen and maritime company,
requested examples of what is considered a major conversion. Another
maritime company suggested that the term, as it is currently proposed,
would apply ``new vessel'' requirements to existing vessels, and
discourages the maintenance of or investment in existing towing
vessels.
We see no reason to adopt the commenter's two other suggested
changes that deviate from the statutory definition. The first change
would introduce an unexplained redundancy and the second would
expressly exclude the replacement of propulsion engines from
consideration of actions that substantially prolongs the life of the
vessel. As reflected above, based on these comments, we have revised
our definition to make it consistent with existing definitions in 46
U.S.C. 2101(14a) and 46 CFR 28.50 of subchapter C, and we did not adopt
the commenters' two other suggested changes. The Coast Guard believes a
replacement of propulsion engines is normally undertaken to prolong the
service life of a vessel, and therefore fits the definition of ``major
conversion.'' To match the wording in 46 CFR 28.50, we changed ``Coast
Guard'' to ``Commandant'' and added part 28's definition of
``Commandant'' to Sec. 136.110. Major Conversion determinations are
made by the Coast Guard Marine Safety Center on a case-by-case basis.
``Major Non-Conformity''
One commenter suggested the following text for the definition of
``major non-conformity'' which specifically identifies deviations as
being from the safety management system and replaces our reference to
the lack of effective and systematic implementation of the TSMS as
being included as a major non-conformity, to references to items that
would be considered a more significant breakdown or failure of the SMS:
``Major Non-Conformity means an identifiable deviation to the safety
management system which poses a serious threat to personnel, vessel
safety, or a serious risk to the environment; where a large number of
non-conformities exist in an area or where similar non-conformities
exist throughout the company or vessel then this demonstrates a more
significant breakdown or failure of the safety management system.''
The Coast Guard has simplified its definition of ``major non-
conformity'' to include the term ``non-conformity''; by referring to
``non-conformity'', we are including a failure to conform to the SMS.
Even though the definition in 33 CFR part 96, our regulations
implementing SOLAS and ISM Code provisions for safety management
systems, includes an example of a lack of effective and systematic
implementation, we have deleted that language from the definition in
Sec. 136.110. We did not agree with the suggested definition, which
could be read as creating an additional standard for a ``more
significant breakdown.''
``New Towing Vessel''
One commenter suggested that we remove the following factor in our
proposed definition of ``new towing vessel'': Towing vessels that
underwent a major conversion initiated on or after the effective date
of our final rule.
The Coast Guard disagrees with this recommended change to our
definition of ``new towing vessel.'' Standards for new vessels are
sometimes set higher than for existing vessels as a means of ensuring
improved safety standards over
[[Page 40018]]
time without imposing undue costs on existing vessels. If we left major
conversions out of the definition of new vessels, then we would provide
incentive for existing vessels to undergo major conversions to avoid
having to meet new vessel standards. Granting existing vessels the
status of being ``grandfathered'' is a valuable regulatory approach,
but factoring major conversions into our definition of ``new vessels''
provides a means of controlling a potential abuse of ``grandfathered''
status and is consistent with other 46 CFR subchapters. We have not
made any changes from the proposed rule based on this comment.
However, upon further review of the definition, we determined that
it should be amended for other reasons. As proposed, the definition was
based on the date the vessel was contracted for or the date the keel
was laid. More often than not, these will be two separate dates which
could lead to confusion as to whether or not a vessel is a ``new towing
vessel.'' We amended the definition to base the determination on the
date the keel was laid or the vessel is at a similar stage of
construction in order to account for those instances where a vessel
might be built in a modular mode of construction. We also removed
paragraph (3) of the definition regarding vessels built without a
contract because we viewed it as unnecessary given our removal of a
reference to a contract in paragraph (a).
The second reason for amending the definition is to ensure that
owners, designers, and builders have sufficient time to adapt and
incorporate the requirements applicable to new vessels into the design
and construction of a vessel. As proposed, the date for a new vessel
was 30 days after the regulation publication date. In reviewing a
commenter's request for more time to comply with the final rule, we
concluded that 30 days is too short a time period. It would be very
difficult and costly to make changes in line with the ``new vessel''
requirements in those instances where the design of a vessel is almost
complete. We have determined that for smooth transition and
implementation, an additional year is needed, and we amended the
definition accordingly.
``Objective Evidence''
One commenter recommended we add records of an approved third-party
organization as another example in our definition of ``objective
evidence'' in Sec. 136.110.
The Coast Guard agrees with this suggested change and has amended
the definition accordingly. We already list classification society
reports as an example, and would consider reports or records from a TPO
as a similarly appropriate example reflecting an independent
assessment.
``Pressure Vessel''
One commenter suggested we amend our definition of ``pressure
vessel'' to simply refer to closed containers designed to hold gases,
liquids or a combination at a pressure substantially different from
ambient pressure--instead of just ``under pressure.'' Another commenter
suggested adding the following text as a definition for ``heating
boiler'': ``An enclosed steel or cast iron container that uses an
energy source to heat water (or make steam) that is sent through heat
radiating devices in the machinery space to heat a towing vessel.''
The Coast Guard agrees with the comment regarding pressure being
substantially different from ambient pressure and in response inserted
the words ``greater than atmospheric pressure'' at the end of the
definition. We also agreed with the need to incorporate language to
include boilers so we broadened the definition of ``pressure vessel''
to include ``unfired'' and ``fired'' pressure vessels which incorporate
boilers.
``Random Selection of a Representative Sampling''
One commenter suggested the need for defining ``random selection of
a representative sampling'' for better consistency in the auditing
process.
We do not agree that a specific definition is needed for ``random
selection of a representative sampling.'' We feel that ``random
selection of a representative sampling'' is a common safety management
system and auditing term that should be recognized and understood by
any ISO-9001-trained internal or external auditor. In a related
external audit provision in Sec. 138.410(f), we removed a vague
reference to samples having to be statistically valid.
``Recognized Classification Society''
We shortened the definition of ``recognized classification
society'' by focusing on the core of the definition: A classification
society recognized by the Coast Guard in accordance with 46 CFR part 8.
``Recognized Hazardous Conditions''
We deleted the definition of ``recognized hazardous conditions''
because we do not use the term in this final rule, nor did we propose
to use it in the regulatory text of the NPRM.
``Rescue Boat''
One commenter noted that ``skiff'' is referenced in Sec.
140.420(d)(4), which contains a training requirement if the skiff is
``listed as an item of emergency equipment to abandon ship or man
overboard recovery'' and that ``rescue boat'' also appears in Sec.
140.420. The commenter recommends that if a rescue boat is a separate
craft from a skiff, as our use of the two terms in Sec. 140.420
suggests, then we should define ``rescue boat'' in Sec. 136.110 in
addition to having defined ``skiff'' there.
The Coast Guard agrees with the recommendation that we add a
definition of ``rescue boat'' to Sec. 136.110. We do consider a rescue
boat as a separate craft from a skiff. We have added the same
definition of ``rescue boat'' in Sec. 136.110 that appears in three
existing Coast Guard regulations. This definition distinguishes the
dedicated purpose of a rescue boat--to rescue persons in distress and
to marshal survival craft--from the general nature of a skiff, a small
auxiliary boat carried onboard a towing vessel that might be used in
emergency situations.
``Replacement in Kind''
We have added a new definition to Sec. 136.110 for the term
``Replacement in kind'' which was undefined in the NPRM but appeared
several times in part 143. ``Replacement in kind'' generally means
replacing a failed component with the same component, or a part with
the same technical specifications as the original design. Replacements
in kind may normally be accomplished by the crew, or a shipyard, as
part of routine maintenance or repairs, and may not require
notification to the OCMI.
``Safety Management System''
Two commenters recommended inserting the following 11 italicized
words in our proposed definition of ``Safety Management System'':
Safety Management System means a systematically structured and
documented system enabling the owner or managing operator and towing
vessel personnel to identify and manage interrelated process and
effectively implement the owner or managing operator's safety and
environmental protection policies and that is routinely exercised
and audited in a way that ensures the policies and procedures are
incorporated into the daily operation of the vessel and company.
In addition, one commenter recommended replacing the word
``audited'' with ``evaluated'' in the above definition.
The Coast Guard partially agrees with the proposals to change this
definition.
[[Page 40019]]
We have amended the definition by adopting a modified version of our 33
CFR part 96 definition that identifies those enabled by the SMS and the
purpose of the SMS with respect to subchapter M. We disagree with
changing the term from ``audited'' to ``evaluated'' as an audit is a
clearly defined and recognized activity with respect to safety
management systems.
``Survey''
One commenter suggested that the difference between ``audit'' and
``survey'' needs to be clarified in Sec. 136.110, as well as with
respect to the Coast Guard option under proposed Sec. 136.150 and the
TSMS option under proposed Sec. 136.205. Another commenter noted that
these two terms, in addition to ``inspection'' are used interchangeably
in the NPRM, as are the words ``auditor, inspector, and surveyor.''
There were also comments about the need to clarify the frequency of
audits, inspections, and surveys, and which ones may be conducted by
third parties.
The Coast Guard believes that our definitions of these two terms
are clearly distinguishable. Our definition of ``survey'' in Sec.
136.110 focuses on compliance with subchapter M and other authorities--
``an examination of the vessel, its systems and equipment to verify
compliance with applicable regulations, statutes, conventions, and
treaties.'' Our definition of ``audit'' in Sec. 136.110 is more
focused on systems set up to ensure that compliance. Neither proposed
Sec. 136.150, Annual and periodic inspections, nor proposed Sec.
136.205, which describes the COI, refer to audits or surveys.
Regarding the word ``inspection,'' we did not define that term
which applies to all vessels subject to subchapter M because they are
all ``subject to inspection'' under 46 U.S.C. 3301. In this rule, we
primarily use the word ``inspection'' to distinguish a towing vessel
that has selected the option of an annual inspection by the Coast Guard
instead of a TSMS option under which surveys and audits are conducted.
But regardless of the option selected, under proposed Sec. Sec.
136.140 and 136.145 the Coast Guard would conduct inspections for
certification on all vessels seeking to obtain or renew a COI. An
inspection is similar to a survey in that both involve an examination
of a vessel to determine whether it is in compliance with applicable
regulations or other legal authorities. In reviewing proposed
Sec. Sec. 136.140 and 136.145, however, we reorganized these
requirements and moved then into subpart B, Certificate of Inspection,
as Sec. Sec. 136.210 and 136.212.
We believe this response should clarify what we mean by the use of
these terms but knowing the frequency of these activities may also
help. Section 137.200 identifies the frequency of inspections
associated with the Coast Guard inspection option. For vessels under
the TSMS option, external and internal surveys and audits are required.
Sections 137.205 and 137.210, respectively, identify the frequency of
surveys under the external and internal survey programs. Finally,
Sec. Sec. 138.310 and 138.315, respectively, identify the frequency of
external and internal audits.
``Third-Party Organization''
We received comments suggesting the need to clarify or remove our
proposed definition of ``third-party organization.'' The commenter
suggested that the term is inconsistent with our repeated use of the
proposed term ``approved third-party organization'' in part 139 and
would be redundant if we adopted his recommendation to amend our
proposed definition of ``approved third party'' to make it clear it
only refers to TPOs. One commenter suggested converting our proposed
definition of ``approved third party'' in Sec. 136.110 to a definition
of ``approved third party organization'' and to add ``organization'' to
the definition so the term ``means a third party organization approved
by the Coast Guard in accordance with part 139 of this subchapter.''
The Coast Guard agrees that our proposed definitions of the terms
``approved third party'' (ATP) and ``third-party organization'' (TPO)
may cause confusion, so we deleted the term ATP and modified any
references to approved third-party surveyors or auditors to make clear
that such surveyors or auditors would be from a third-party
organization or TPO. Also, we deleted the word ``approved'' used in
front of TPO because by definition, TPOs are approved. Our definition
of third-party organization in this final rule makes it clear that the
organization is approved by the Coast Guard to conduct independent
verifications to assess whether TSMSs or towing vessels comply with
applicable requirements contained in this subchapter. Also, we have
amended Sec. 139.115(b) to make that approval process clearer and
replaced a reference to an organization having to meet subchapter M
requirements with one to expressly include the standard of meeting part
139 requirements for TPOs.
This comment also caused us to notice that our TPO definition needs
to be amended to better reflect the work being done by the TPO. We
added the words ``assess whether'' to the definition of ``TPO.''
``Tow''
One company recommended that we define ``tow'' as a vessel or
vessels being moved by a towing vessel in contrast to our proposed
definition that identifies the towing vessel as being part of the tow
which would also include one or more barges or a vessel not under its
own power.
The Coast Guard concurs with the need to clarify that tow refers to
what the towing vessel is moving--be it another vessel, barge, or some
other object. We have revised our definition to read ``Tow means the
barge(s), vessel(s), or object(s) being pulled, pushed or hauled
alongside a towing vessel.'' This is consistent with our use of the
term as a noun in our rule (e.g., in Sec. 140.625, ``the movement of a
towing vessel and its tow''). Reflecting this definition, in Sec.
140.805 we added ``or objects'' to barges and vessels when describing
what may make up a tow.
''Towing Safety Management System (TSMS)''
On reviewing the comments, the Coast Guard decided to add a
definition of TSMS in Sec. 136.110 rather than just rely on the
information contained in part 138 on TSMS compliance.
''Towing Safety Management System (TSMS) Certificate''
We received several comments suggesting two separate definitions of
the TSMS certificates be added: One for the owner or managing operator
and one for each of the towing vessels found to be in compliance with
the TSMS.
The Coast Guard has not defined ``TSMS certificate'' and does not
agree that two separate definitions should be added or that a separate
certificate for the company and the towing vessel needs to be issued.
TSMS certificates are issued to the owners or managing operators and a
list of vessels covered by the TSMS must be maintained, as described in
Sec. 138.305.
``Travel Time''
Four commenters, including maritime companies and a professional
association, suggested deleting the proposed term ``travel time''
because it does not appear anywhere else in the regulation. One
commenter suggested that the proposed term needs to be amended to
clarify the application to daytime operators who commute back and forth
to work, not travel to a large commercial tug/barge unit that operates
like a self-propelled vessel. Conversely, other commenters suggested
that the
[[Page 40020]]
definition should not include travel back and forth. One company
asserted that if the travel time is not included, crewmembers that do
not live in close proximity to work will use the majority of their
hours traveling.
The Coast Guard agrees that our definition of ``travel time''
should be deleted from the final rule because we do not use that term
in subchapter M.
''Unsafe Condition''
One commenter, citing Sec. 137.325(d), asked the Coast Guard to
create a good definition of an ``unsafe condition'' that can be
consistently applied by companies, auditors, and surveyors, as well as
the Coast Guard.
The Coast Guard agrees with the commenter's request and has added a
definition of ``unsafe condition'' to Sec. 136.110, which includes
observation of a major non-conformity on board a vessel.
``Unsafe Practice''
One commenter suggested that in the definition of ``unsafe
practice'' the list of items that may be subject to significant risk of
harm be supplemented by adding ``and the vessel'' after ``property.''
The Coast Guard disagrees. A vessel belongs to an organization or
person and, therefore, is included by the word ``property.'' We made no
changes from the proposed rule based on this comment, but recognizing
it can be bad practice to do something even once, we inserted reference
to a single action, in addition to a habitual or customary action.
``Western Rivers''
We received several comments, mostly from maritime companies,
regarding the proposed definition of ``Western Rivers.'' Several
maritime companies suggested that the definition should be consistent
with the one in 33 CFR 164.70, which is identical except for it adds
waters specified by 33 CFR 89.27 ``and such other, similar waters as
are designated by the COTP.'' Commenters also asked that waterways
mentioned in 33 CFR 89.27 be included. It was suggested that the
consistency in definitions will help avoid new regulations for those
vessels operating on the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. One commenter
noted that the proposed definition of ``Western Rivers'' is
inconsistent with the definition in the TSAC report and current
regulations. A trade association believed the change in the definition
for ``Western Rivers'' would increase the burden on mariners. A
maritime company noted that the NPRM lacks a definition, or a route
description in Sec. 136.230, that covers vessels operating in the
Inland areas of the waterway system within the Sea Buoy system, which
includes the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. The commenter suggested that
Western Rivers be defined to include those vessels operating within the
Sea Buoy system.
Based on these comments, the Coast Guard has decided to adopt the
existing 33 CFR 164.70 definition of ``Western Rivers'' which applies
to navigation safety regulations for towing vessels.
This is similar to the definition TSAC used in its September 7,
2006 report (USCG-2006-24412-0004). Their definition ended with ``and
waters connecting or tributary thereto'' instead of referencing waters
designated by the COTP. Waters specified by 33 CFR 89.25 and 89.27, for
inland navigation rule purposes, include all of the connecting and
tributary waters specified in TSAC's definition, and our addition of
the 33 CFR 89.27 reference includes the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway in
the definition. Also, making our definition consistent with the one in
33 CFR 164.70 allows COTPs to designate similar waters.
Multiple factors in 33 CFR 62.27 are considered in the positioning
of safe water marks, which are also called ``sea buoys.'' These factors
may cause them to be placed seaward or shoreward of demarcation lines.
And, while each safe water mark has a plotted position in the Light
List available via 33 CFR 72.05-10, unlike demarcation lines in 46 CFR
part 7, there are no lines associated with safe water marks. Therefore,
we have decided to use the term ``navigational demarcation lines''
currently used in 33 CFR 164.70.
``Workboat''
One commenter suggested we amend our definition of ``workboat'' to
include ``vessels undergoing cleaning or repair,'' besides equipment,
as things that the workboat pushes, pulls, or hauls alongside within a
worksite.
The Coast Guard disagrees with the proposed change. However, we
have amended the definition of ``workboat'' to remove the specific
listing of things being towed. We believe that the revised definition
of workboat and our definition of worksite--which already included a
list of certain activities which we amended to reflect the movement of
equipment but specifically excluded the movement of barges carrying oil
or hazardous material--provide sufficient flexibility to the OCMI to
cover operations not specifically listed.
``Worksite''
One commenter suggested that we amend the definition ``worksite''
so all areas within which workboats are operated over short distances
for dredging, construction, maintenance, or repair work, including
shipyards, owner's yards, and lay-down areas used by marine
construction projects, would not require OCMI designation as worksites.
Other worksites may be specified by the OCMI. Further, a maritime
company suggested adding the terms ``cleaning facilities, fleeting
areas'' to the definition of ``worksite.''
The Coast Guard disagrees with these recommendations. We believe it
is appropriate for the cognizant OCMI to designate worksites based on
the factors and activities listed and their possible impacts on other
waterway users. Therefore, we have decided not to adopt the expanded
definitions being suggested here. We have made no changes from the
proposed rule based on these comments.
Options for Obtaining a Certificate of Inspection
A commenter opposed the option of obtaining certification by annual
Coast Guard inspections and recommended deletions of provisions in
proposed Sec. Sec. 136.130, 136.140, 136.145, 136.150, 136.165, and
136.170.
The Coast Guard recognizes that some in the industry view the
option for Coast Guard traditional inspections as not having a role in
the future of the regulation of towing vessels. We believe that the
development of and adherence to a TSMS that is tailored to a company's
unique operations and that provides for an authoritative reference for
all members of the organization improves safety for the company's
vessels. As the TSAC Economic Analysis Working Group Report (USCG-2006-
24412-0007) stated, the costs to a small company to implement and
maintain an SMS may be more difficult to absorb than it is for a large
company. These regulations do not preclude any towing vessel company
from adopting a safety management system. However, the structure of
subchapter M provides towing vessel companies with flexibility in how
to comply with this subchapter.
With respect to the various sections mentioned by this commenter,
we have made changes in this final rule. Proposed Sec. 136.130 has
been revised and retitled to better depict the purpose of the options
it presents for documenting compliance with the requirements of this
subchapter and to specifically note that a Certificate of Inspection is
obtained following a Coast Guard inspection. We have moved proposed
Sec. Sec. 136.140 and 136.145 into subpart B of part 136--Certificate
of Inspection--as amended Sec. 136.210 and
[[Page 40021]]
new Sec. 136.212. Also, we merged proposed Sec. Sec. 136.150 and
136.165 into a new Sec. 137.200 to delineate the processes under the
Coast Guard inspection option from the TSMS option processes in part
137. The proposed part 137 had laid out the TSMS procedures but was
silent on the Coast Guard option. Further, we redesignated and amended
proposed Sec. 136.170 as new Sec. 136.202.
A commenter requested an appeal process to permit the immediate
review of an inspector's determinations.
The Coast Guard notes that, as we proposed, the appeals process is
described in Sec. 136.180. Further, this final rule contains
amendments to 46 CFR part 1 that institutes a process for appealing the
decisions of TPOs acting on behalf of the Coast Guard.
Requirements for Existing Vessels During Delayed Implementation
In response to comments regarding the cost of requirements in parts
140 through 144, and concern about being able to meet those
requirements soon after the rule is make effective, we delayed
implementation of nearly all requirements in parts 140 through 144
until July 20, 2018. We made the rule effective July 20, 2016 so that
the Coast Guard can begin to apply other subchapter M regulations to
review applications from those seeking to become TPOs and to impose
deadlines for towing vessels to decide which option to choose--TSMS or
Coast Guard annual inspections. We added Sec. 136.172 to ensure that
we do not leave a gap after the rule becomes effective but before most
requirements in parts 140 through 144 are implemented.
Section 136.172 requires existing towing vessels that will be
subject to subchapter M to remain subject to Coast Guard regulations
applicable to the vessel on July 19, 2016 until the earlier of two
dates: July 20, 2018 or the date the vessel obtains a COI.
Subpart B Certificate of Inspection
We received a comment on proposed Sec. 136.200(d) urging that
provisions from Marine Safety Manual Volume II, Section B, Chapter I,
referencing 46 U.S.C. 3314 and completing a foreign voyage, should be
added to the rule.
As reflected in Sec. 136.200(d), towing vessels issued a COI under
subchapter M are fully afforded the foreign-voyage-completion
provisions of 46 U.S.C. 3314, Expiration of Certificate of Inspection.
We made no changes from the proposed rule based on this comment, but on
reviewing Sec. 136.200, we decided to insert a reference to the COI
phase-in period in proposed Sec. 136.170 (now Sec. 136.202) in
paragraph (a). This insertion is intended to incorporate the date by
which the vessel must obtain a COI and thereby limit the statement that
the vessel may not operate without having a valid COI onboard to the
period after that date. Based on this review, we deleted proposed Sec.
136.225, because it was redundant with Sec. 136.200(c).
A commenter observed that companies choosing the Coast Guard
inspection option should not be given a longer period of time to obtain
a COI than companies choosing the TSMS option.
The Coast Guard agrees. We have amended, redesignated, and retitled
the proposed Sec. 136.170, Compliance for the Coast Guard option, as
Sec. 136.202, Certificate of Inspection phase-in period. This section
now specifies when COIs are required for towing vessels subject to
subchapter M regardless of the option selected. Also, we removed Sec.
136.203 because it is no longer needed given our amendment to what is
now Sec. 136.202.
We received several comments on the phase-in process in proposed
Sec. 136.203, Compliance for the TSMS option. Several commenters
suggested that the requirements for a TSMS and inspection requirement
be phased in to allow for the industry to understand the new
requirements and identify any specific waivers that may be needed. One
commenter favored making sure there is about the same amount of work to
be done in each of the 5 years that make up an inspection cycle.
Another commenter recommended a provision to extend the schedules in
the event of a shortage of approved auditors or inspectors. A
professional maritime association suggested that a phase-in approach
will assist in the transition for vessel operators and auditors and
reduce the strain on shipyards as they manage extensive drydocking that
will occur while vessels await their inspections.
The Coast Guard generally agrees with these concerns. As discussed
in response to an earlier comment, the Coast Guard has amended the
requirements in proposed Sec. 136.170 to set the same timetable for
obtaining a COI regardless of which option the vessel owner or managing
operator selects, and we have removed Sec. 136.203, which had a
separate timetable for those selecting the TSMS option. The phased
approach in Sec. 136.202 distributes the work load over a 6-year
period from the effective date of this final rule. The Coast Guard has
crafted this rule to phase in towing vessels over time for numerous
reasons including spreading costs and workload over time. Section
136.202 provides a broad phase-in period for companies that choose
either the Coast Guard or TSMS compliance option. As we stated in the
NPRM, it will be up to six years before some vessels subject to
subchapter M will need to obtain a COI. However, we do not agree that
we need to add a provision to extend the schedules more than we have
done already in this final rule. We believe that there will be
sufficient TPOs available within the new prescribed timeframes to
conduct subchapter M audits and surveys. Similarly, the Coast Guard is
preparing to have enough inspectors available to meet the demand for
Coast Guard inspections within the new prescribed time frames.
A maritime company offered a phase-in timeline that depends on
separate certificates for a company and their vessels. The commenter
suggested that within 2 years of the rule's effective date a third-
party would conduct an external management audit of a company and issue
a Towing Company Safety Management System Certificate. Then during the
following year, a third party would conduct external vessel audits of
25 percent of company's fleet and issue each vessel a Towing Vessel
Safety Management System Certificate. Similar steps would be taken in
subsequent years until in the sixth year, when all vessels would have
to obtain COIs.
As we noted in response to another comment, we disagree with the
suggestion that two certificates should be issued instead of one TSMS
certificate. We therefore decline to adopt a schedule based on the
issuance of separate certificates for a company and the company's
vessels.
In a submission to the docket, the National Transportation Safety
Board requested the prompt publication of the final rule to avoid any
further delay in regulating the safety of this largely unregulated
sector of the commercial maritime industry. The same commenter felt
that the proposed 6-year implementation period should be shortened.
We received a comment from a towing company suggesting that a
shorter compliance period be applied to those operators who have not
previously participated in the Uninspected Towing Vessel Bridging
Program. The same commenter expressed the importance of consistent
application of the final rule to all vessel operators. The commenter
explained that by allowing some operators to bypass the requirements
market rates will be affected, which will have a serious effect on
small operators.
The Coast Guard concurs with the desire to publish this rule
promptly and,
[[Page 40022]]
in general, to apply it consistently to all vessel operators subject to
subchapter M. We have explained why certain requirements are only
applicable to new towing vessels and why excepted vessels do not need
to comply with certain requirements. We disagree with shortening the
implementation period across the board or, specifically, for those
companies that did not participate in the Uninspected Towing Vessel
Bridging Program, because it was a voluntary program. We believe our
implementation period is appropriate for this rule, which establishes
both a safety management system option involving TPOs and new
requirements for more than 5,000 towing vessels.
We received a few comments on proposed Sec. 136.205, which
identifies what the COI will describe. One commenter noted that minimum
manning requirements in the COI, as required under this provision,
should be allowed to be different for different types of towing
vessels. Another commenter asked how ``minimum manning'' is to be
determined. Another commenter requested allowing for multiple minimum
manning standards depending on the route. A commenter suggested that
this rulemaking should clarify the number of required crewmembers and
allow the towing vessel to be operated by a single crewmember in
certain circumstances.
Existing laws and regulations specify minimum levels of manning for
towing vessels. As stated in Sec. 140.205, manning regulations are
contained in part 15 of this chapter and vessels must be manned in
accordance with the case specific requirements included in the COI. As
stated in 46 CFR 15.705, the minimum safe manning levels specified in a
vessel's COI take into consideration routine maintenance requirements
and the ability of the crew to perform all operational evolutions,
including emergencies, as well as those functions which may be assigned
to persons in watches. The OCMI is empowered to establish a level of
manning for a vessel above the minimum levels prescribed by law and
regulation, based on the vessel's nature of operations and other
parameters, including route.
One individual was unclear about whether proposed Sec. 136.140
applied to those who have an approved TSMS, as well as those who choose
the Coast Guard inspection option. One company asked for clarification
of the sequence of events for COI issuance.
As noted above, our proposed Sec. 136.140, Application for a
Certificate of Inspection (COI), is incorporated into amended Sec.
136.210 and applies to all vessels subject to subchapter M. Regardless
of the inspection option chosen, the owner or managing operator must
submit an application for inspection to the cognizant OCMI where the
inspection will take place. As specified in Sec. 136.130(d), the
application should indicate which option the owner or managing operator
is selecting.
We amended Sec. 136.210 to make it clear how and when to apply for
the initial COI. In our proposed Sec. 136.140, we specified deadlines
for renewing a COI, but not those for obtaining the initial COI. Our
amended Sec. 136.210 identifies the application and scheduling
deadlines for the initial COI and reflects the same application and
scheduling lead times for renewing a COI: Submit the application at
least 30 days before the vessel will undergo the initial inspection for
certification, and schedule an inspection for the initial certification
with the cognizant OCMI at least 3 months before the vessel is to
undergo the inspection for certification. Amended Sec. 136.212 sets
forth the process of receiving a Coast Guard inspection at least once
every 5 years and for receiving a new COI after being inspected by the
Coast Guard.
We received one comment recommending that the last line of proposed
Sec. 136.145(b), now redesignated as Sec. 136.212(b), which describes
the nature of inspections, should specify that inspection of the
vessel's pollution prevention systems and procedures should be in
accordance with any Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Coast
Guard and the Environmental Protection Agency.
The Coast Guard disagrees with this recommendation because we do
not view the proposed amendment as either necessary or desirable. We
believe that the current language that the ``inspector will also
examine the vessel's pollution prevention systems and procedures'' is
appropriate. An inspection involves an examination of a vessel to
determine whether it is in compliance with applicable regulations or
other legal authorities. There are existing pollution prevention
regulations that would pertain to inspected towing vessels that are not
covered by any Coast Guard MOU with the EPA. We have not made any
changes in this final rule based on this comment.
An individual and a company requested clarification of the
inspection frequency in proposed Sec. 136.145. Two companies suggested
that frequency and level of inspection should be accomplished on a risk
basis.
In this final rule, Sec. 136.145 was renamed Sec. 136.212 and
states that towing vessels subject to subchapter M will be inspected at
least once every 5 years. Towing vessels choosing the TSMS option would
be subject to annual surveys between those inspections, while towing
vessels choosing the Coast Guard Inspection option would be inspected
annually. See Sec. Sec. 137.200, 137.205, and 137.210.
A company expressed concern about whether the Coast Guard would
have resources to hire a sufficient number of competent vessel
inspectors for convenient scheduling for the company, including drydock
scheduling.
The Coast Guard is prepared for the estimated demand for annual
inspection from owners and managing operators selecting the Coast Guard
annual-inspection option. The Coast Guard will closely monitor the
demand for inspections and make resource adjustments as necessary.
However, based on our reassessment of Coast Guard resources, we have
removed the option in proposed Sec. 136.105(b) for vessels not covered
by subchapter M to request application of this part.
Another company requested that the Coast Guard do everything
possible to ensure that Coast Guard inspections and third-party audits
or load line surveys are coordinated to prevent an undue burden on
industry.
The Coast Guard agrees there are benefits to coordinating audits,
surveys, and inspections, and will attempt to do so. However, there may
be times when coordination is not possible due to scheduling and
operational constraints.
An association asked that the Streamlined Inspection Program be
added as an alternative inspection process.
The Streamlined Inspection Program, available under 46 CFR part 8,
is an available option to obtain a renewal of a COI. If using that
option, the owner or managing operator must comply with the procedures
identified in part 8. We do not need to add text to subchapter M for
this part 8 option to be available to vessels subject to subchapter M.
An individual suggested we eliminate the term ``uninspected towing
vessel,'' because towing vessels might not be inspected currently for
structural construction, but are regulated and are subject to Coast
Guard rules for daily operation.
The Coast Guard agrees that all towing vessels are regulated by the
Coast Guard to some extent but are not necessarily inspected. We have
chosen to continue to identify those towing vessels not subject to
subchapter M, and that are subject to subchapter C, as uninspected
towing vessels.
[[Page 40023]]
We received several comments on proposed Sec. 136.210(b)(3)(i),
which would require that an application for initial certification
include objective evidence that the towing vessel's structure and
stability comply with applicable requirements. Commenters recommended
that for existing towing vessels without a stability letter, an audit
report noting that the towing vessel is being maintained and operated
in a manner that does not compromise its watertight integrity or
stability should be sufficient to satisfy this requirement. Others
contended that stability is not an issue on inland waterways, and that
there should be no stability requirements for Western Rivers towing
vessels.
The Coast Guard has amended Sec. 136.210 to more clearly identify
what the owner or managing operator needs to provide the Coast Guard
for both the Coast Guard and TSMS options with the application for
inspection. Note that for the TSMS option the application must now
include objective evidence of having a TSMS compliant with part 138 and
that the vessel meets the requirements of this subchapter.
Structural requirements for existing vessels are addressed in Sec.
144.200. To satisfy that regulation, if a vessel is not built,
equipped, and maintained to conform to the rules of a recognized
classification society appropriate for the intended service and routes,
the applicant must provide evidence that the vessel has been both in
satisfactory service insofar as structural adequacy is concerned and
that the vessel does not cause its structure to be questioned by either
the OCMI or TPO. Stability requirements for existing vessels are
addressed in Sec. 144.300 and under this provision, for those vessels
without a stability document, documentation of operating history--for
example through audit reports--is one option to meet Sec. 144.300
requirements.
The Coast Guard believes that stability is a concern on any vessel,
regardless of service or operating area. Towing vessels must be
maintained and operated so the stability of the vessel is not
compromised.
Proposed Sec. 136.210(b)(5) (redesignated as Sec.
136.210(a)(2)(ii)) would require a description of any modification to
the vessel. Some commenters suggested that the provision should be
limited to major or substantial modifications to the design and
construction of the towing vessel.
The Coast Guard disagrees with these suggestions. The Coast Guard
needs to be aware of changes and modifications made to inspected
vessels. We will use this information to determine if a single change
or incremental changes made to a vessel over time will affect a
vessel's suitability for its route or service. However, replacements in
kind, as defined in this subchapter, are not considered modifications.
We have made no changes from the proposed rule based on these comments,
but we did clarify that a description of any modification is only
necessary when renewing the COI.
With respect to proposed Sec. 136.215, which describes the period
of validity of a COI, we received two comments urging the Coast Guard
to add language to the rule so that noncompliance with a TSMS would not
immediately result in the invalidation of the COI.
The Coast Guard acknowledges that Sec. 136.215 states that if the
TSMS certificate expires or is revoked, then the towing vessel's COI
becomes invalid. Non-conformities or major non-conformities found
during surveys or audits do not automatically invalidate the TSMS or
the COI. However, deficiencies or non-conformities that are egregious
could result in the OCMI removing the COI from the vessel. Ultimately,
the status of the COI is determined by the OCMI. Based on the extent of
the deficiencies or non-conformities found during an inspection,
survey, or audit, the OCMI has various opportunities to work with the
company to bring the vessel into compliance without suspending or
revoking the TSMS certificate as specified in Sec. 138.305.
Commenters noted that proposed Sec. 136.220 would require the
original COI to be framed under glass and posted onboard the towing
vessel. We received many comments noting that this requirement is
outdated in this electronic age. These commenters suggested that the
provision should simply state that a current copy of the COI must be on
the towing vessel and available for inspection. Some of them added that
the original COIs should be kept in a central location.
In paragraph (b) of Sec. 136.220 we provide the alternative of
keeping the COI readily available onboard in a weathertight container.
Our Sec. 136.220 implements 46 U.S.C. 3312, which requires that the
COI be displayed on the vessel but allows for alternatives as we have
provided in Sec. 136.220(b). We do consider an open boat as an example
of when it is impracticable to post a COI, but we removed this example
from the text of Sec. 136.220(b) to place more focus on the statutory
language. We require the original COI to be on board, rather than a
copy, because there is only one original and removal of the COI from
the vessel is one means the OCMI uses to prevent the vessel from
getting underway if it is unsafe for it to do so.
We received one comment on proposed Sec. 136.230(a) noting that
the route endorsements on COIs issued to towing vessels should be
consistent with the route designations on the COIs of the tank barges
being moved.
The Coast Guard notes that routes on barges and towing vessels are
not interdependent. The towing vessel and its tow is limited to the
most restrictive route of the towing vessel or any vessel in the tow.
The Coast Guard encourages the company to match route-appropriate
barges and towing vessels. However, we made no changes from the
proposed rule based on this comment.
In reviewing Sec. 136.235, which covers Certificate of Inspection
amendments, we saw the need to distinguish procedures for a vessel
seeking a COI amendment based on which option the vessel selected. We
amended Sec. 136.235 accordingly. We also added a provision stating
that the OCMI may need to conduct an inspection before issuing an
amended COI.
We received a comment on proposed Sec. 136.235, suggesting that
the term ``towing vessel'' should replace ``vessel'' in paragraphs (b)
and (c)(2) of that section. This commenter also noted the same edit and
other editorial changes for various sections throughout the proposed
rule language.
The Coast Guard disagrees that there is a need to change every use
of the word ``vessel'' to ``towing vessel'' when we mean towing vessel.
As with Sec. 136.235, where we initially use the term ``towing
vessel,'' and it is clear from the context that our use of the word
``vessel'' refers to towing vessel, we do not see a need to repeat
``towing vessel.'' We have been careful to always use ``towing vessel''
when referring to a towing vessel in sections where we also use the
term ``vessel'' to mean something other than the towing vessel--e.g.,
in our definition of ``bollard pull'' in Sec. 136.110.
Proposed Sec. 136.240 addresses permission to proceed to another
port for repairs. We received two comments expressing support for the
provision. Another commenter suggested that the vessel should be able
to proceed for repairs even if there is noncompliance with the COI.
The Coast Guard notes that under Sec. 136.240, an owner or
managing operator must notify the cognizant OCMI in whose zone the non-
compliance occurs or is discovered before the vessel proceeds and also
must notify any other OCMI zones through which the vessel will transit,
and that the cognizant OCMI may require
[[Page 40024]]
inspection of the vessel by a Coast Guard Marine Inspector or
examination by a surveyor from a TPO prior to the vessel proceeding. We
clarified Sec. 136.240(a), which we intended to apply only to vessels
with a TSMS, as the TSMS may address the necessary conditions under
which the vessel may safely proceed to another port for repair.
Accordingly, we amended paragraph (a), made corresponding amendments to
paragraph (b), and inserted headings for all three paragraphs in Sec.
136.240.
We received one comment that recommended changing ``another port''
to ``next port of call,'' in Sec. 136.240 and confining the conditions
requiring a Permit to Proceed to situations that affect safety or
seaworthiness. Other commenters noted that the master, not the owner or
managing operator, should be the person deciding if the trip for
repairs can be completed safely.
The Coast Guard disagrees with these recommendations. The term
``next port of call'' may be too restrictive and may undermine the
authority of the OCMI or the vessel's master in determining where the
vessel may safely proceed to be repaired. Regarding the last comment,
we do list ``owner, managing operator, or master'' when specifying who
must make a judgment that the trip can be completed safely. We believe
Sec. 140.210(b) addresses the commenter's concerns by specifying that
if the master believes it is unsafe for the vessel to proceed, he or
she must not proceed until it is safe to do so. We have made no changes
from the proposed rule based on these comments.
One commenter stated that in Sec. 136.240 it appears that a
company must notify the OCMI any time a vessel must be moved to
accomplish a repair not specifically addressed in the TSMS. The
commenter stated that to completely comply it seems that all
possibilities must be addressed in the TSMS or the OCMI will be
inundated with requests for a problem not involving seaworthiness. We
do not believe the commenter's characterization is accurate.
Companies using the TSMS have the opportunity to tailor their
system to address conditions the company anticipates may occur that
would cause the vessel not to be in compliance and the necessary
conditions under which the vessel may safely proceed to another port
for repair. Under Sec. 136.240(b), if the condition is not addressed
in the TSMS, the owner, managing operator, or master can request
permission to proceed from the cognizant OCMI in whose zone the non-
compliance occurs or is discovered. A Permit to Proceed would only be
needed when a repair is needed and the vessel is no longer in
compliance with its COI. Minor repairs that do not affect the safety of
the vessel (including seaworthiness) or its machinery would most likely
not be considered issues that would invalidate the COI, and therefore
would not necessitate a Permit to Proceed. We have made no changes from
the proposed rule based on this comment.
Proposed Sec. 136.245 addresses permits to engage in an excursion.
We received a comment pointing out that a permit to carry an excursion
party is required when the towing vessel carries more persons than
allowed by the COI, but under proposed Sec. 136.205, a COI indicates
that minimum number of persons, not the maximum.
The Coast Guard notes that Sec. 136.205 does not reflect all the
information contained on the COI. The COI is a document issued under 46
U.S.C. 3309 that is in a form prescribed by the Commandant. Currently,
it lists the minimum number of crew, those in addition to crew, and the
total persons allowed on board. We have amended our description of the
COI in Sec. 136.205 to include ``total persons allowed onboard.''
Separately, and upon reviewing proposed Sec. 136.205 and a similar
description in 46 CFR 2.01-5, we amended Sec. 136.205 to improve its
description of a COI's listing of safety equipment and appliances
required to be onboard. Also, in further reviewing Sec. 136.245 we saw
the need to amend it to include the case where a vessel chooses the
Coast Guard option or the TSMS does not address excursion parties.
Several commenters expressed the opinion that having guests such as
vessel owners, service technicians, auditors, trainers, or crew changes
for other vessels should not require a special permit. Other commenters
opposed the proposed requirement to give 48 hours' notice to the OCMI
because the need for an excursion party, such as customers or vendors
on a towing vessel to see a particular operation, will often arise
spontaneously. One commenter was unclear where to obtain a permit. We
received a comment requesting the addition of a provision to require
the COI to identify the number of crewmembers and persons in addition
to crewmembers allowed onboard, taking into account overnight
accommodations, lifesaving equipment, etc.
The Coast Guard has added definitions for ``excursion party'' and
``persons in addition to the crew'' in Sec. 136.110. Vendors/customers
carried onboard would not constitute an ``excursion party''; these
individuals would be carried as ``persons in addition to crew'' as
permitted by the COI. We also amended Sec. 136.210 so that it prompts
owners and managing operators applying for an initial COI to include
documentation on the number of persons in addition to the crew they
would like the OCMI to include in the COI.
We received one comment on the proposed requirement in Sec.
136.250 for load lines for vessels operating outside the boundary line.
The commenter questioned how the requirement applied to the Great
Lakes, in which there are no boundary lines.
The Coast Guard notes that boundary lines are identified in 46 CFR
part 7 and that load line requirements for the Great Lakes are provided
in 46 CFR part 45. We edited Sec. 136.250 to make it clearer that it
applies to all towing vessels on the Great Lakes, and also reorganized
Sec. 136.250 into a table for greater clarity.
G. Vessel Compliance (Part 137)
We received numerous comments on part 137, and we made several
changes to the overall structure and content of this part. In subpart A
we removed the definitions section, as we have removed similar
definition sections in other parts, because it simply noted that
subchapter M definitions in Sec. 136.110 apply to the part. We also
deleted proposed Sec. 137.115 because the substance of this provision
is contained in Sec. 136.210.
We received two comments on proposed Sec. 137.120, which describes
responsibilities for compliance. One commenter supported the provision
that the owner and managing operator are responsible for ensuring
compliance and suggested that when deficiencies and non-conformities
are identified during vessel inspections and TSMS audits and fines
imposed against a company, those action letters should be addressed to
the person described in Sec. 137.120, thereby ensuring the person at
the top is fully aware of the vessel's conditional status.
The Coast Guard concurs that Sec. 137.120 holds the owner and
managing operator responsible for compliance with subchapter M and
other applicable laws and regulations. It also specifies that non-
conformities and deficiencies must be corrected in a timely manner; we
have deleted the stated purpose for this corrective action requirement
because it was unnecessary regulatory text. We will consider the
commenter's suggestion for where to send notification of non-compliance
but see no need to change the regulations.
[[Page 40025]]
Under Sec. 137.130(c), we leave discretion with the owner and
operator to specify in the TSMS procedures for reporting and correcting
non-conformities and deficiencies. We have reorganized Sec. 137.130 to
make it easier to read and understand the requirements of the two
programs for compliance under the TSMS option.
Another commenter requested that standard forms be provided to
assist small companies with compliance, and that the Coast Guard should
provide guidelines to OCMIs for simple inspections of towing vessels
operated by companies too small to have staff dedicated to regulatory
compliance, and that the Coast Guard should provide standard forms
similar to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers usage reports which can be
submitted to the local sector OCMI.
Regarding the second commenter, the Coast Guard does not plan to
prepare a specific form, but we have prepared a Small Entities Guide
(available in the docket) for this final rule and we do plan to provide
guidance to OCMIs on implementing this rule. We will develop where
necessary and appropriate inspection and compliance checklists, job
aids, and guides for our OCMIs and make them available to the public.
We made no changes from the proposed rule based on these comments.
We removed Sec. 137.125 because it simply states that if a TSMS is
applicable to the vessel it must have provisions for compliance with
part 137. Section 137.125 is unnecessary because part 138 addresses
what the TSMS must cover regarding all subchapter M requirements.
The new structure of this part, specifically in subparts B and C,
presents together the discussion of inspections and surveys conducted
under the both Coast Guard and TSMS options. As mentioned in the
previous section of the preamble, we moved the discussion of
inspections under the Coast Guard option from proposed Sec. Sec.
136.150 and 136.165 into subpart B of this part. We also added a Coast
Guard option section in subpart C of this part. In subpart C, we
rearranged the order to place the discussion of drydock intervals first
and then describe the Coast Guard and TSMS options. In response to
comments we changed the term ``periodic survey'' to ``external survey
program'' and the term ``audit program'' to ``internal survey program''
throughout the rule, including in the headings for Sec. Sec. 137.205
and 137.210. We also defined these terms in Sec. 136.110 and added a
reference to them in Sec. 137.130.
An individual disagreed with the Coast Guard's proposed 5-year
inspection for vessels under TSMS. The commenter suggested that like
vessels under SOLAS, an annual verification examination should be
conducted.
In the NPRM, we did state that at the vessel level, towing vessels
operating under the TSMS option would receive audits and surveys by a
TPO, in addition to the Coast Guard conducting compliance examinations
at least once every 5 years, along with additional random compliance
checks based on risk (76 FR 49978, Aug. 11, 2011). While some vessels
operating under a TSMS may be inspected by the Coast Guard once a year,
we do not feel that annual Coast Guard inspections are necessary given
the audit and survey requirements for vessels with a TSMS, along with
our oversight of that system.
We received three comments objecting to the term ``seaworthiness''
proposed in Sec. 136.150(a)(4), which we have reorganized into Sec.
137.200. They noted that the appropriate term, especially for Western
River towing vessels that don't go to sea, is ``fit for the service for
which it was intended'' or ``suitable for its intended route.'' A
commenter noted that proposed Sec. 136.150(a)(2) (now Sec.
137.200(b)) would require a more detailed inspection if an inspector
finds deficiencies or determines a major change has occurred, and
recommended we set up boundaries on the open-ended term
``deficiencies,'' such as ``deficiencies of sufficient number or
severity,'' and that we delete the ``major change'' provision.
The Coast Guard partially agrees with these recommendations. We
consider ``seaworthiness'' to be an appropriate term for considering
the condition of the vessel and note that the term is used in the
Riverman's Lexicon (Lehman), a noted publication specific to the
Western Rivers. However, we have added a reference to fitness for route
and/or service to further clarify the intent in the paragraphs where we
use the term ``seaworthiness'': Sec. Sec. 137.200(d), 137.300(b), and
137.335(a)(1).
We define the term ``deficiency'' in Sec. 136.110 to mean ``a
failure to meet minimum requirements of the vessel inspection laws or
regulations,'' and we do consider it appropriate to call for a more
detailed inspection if deficiencies or a major change to the vessel are
found. A major change would include a major conversion but would also
capture other changes such as changes that may affect the operational
safety of the vessel or fitness for route or service.
A commenter asked us what constitutes a ``visit'' as opposed to an
``inspection'' or an ``audit.''
The Coast Guard may engage in visits to TPOs, as discussed in Sec.
139.160, to ensure compliance with this rule. The Coast Guard notes
that in the preamble of the NPRM we stated that, as part of our
oversight of those organizations, we would conduct random oversight
visits to the offices of TPOs that conduct TSMS audits and surveys. The
Coast Guard also clarifies the procedures for such visits. The Coast
Guard will provide notice to the employer 48 hours in advance of any
site visit, unless the visit is in response to a complaint or other
evidence of regulatory non-compliance (see Sec. 139.160). In response
to an earlier comment above, we have discussed the distinction between
inspections and audits. We have made no changes from the proposed rule
based on this comment.
One commenter expressed the opinion that annual and periodic Coast
Guard inspections under proposed Sec. 136.150 would overly tax the
system and not effectively utilize Coast Guard inspection talent.
On page 32 of our Preliminary Regulatory Analysis and Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (USCG-2006-24412-0002) we assumed that
1,340 towing vessels from small companies with fleets of five or fewer
vessels would select the Coast Guard annual-inspection option. Based on
the many comments submitted about the benefits of a TSMS, we still
anticipate that many owners and operators of towing vessels,
particularly those from companies with large fleets, will select the
TSMS option. The Coast Guard will closely monitor the demand for
inspections and will make resource adjustments as necessary.
With respect to the periodic survey provision in proposed Sec.
137.205, we received one comment favoring an audit by a third party
every 3 years rather than every year.
The Coast Guard disagrees with this recommendation. We believe that
3-year intervals would allow unsafe conditions and other problems to go
undetected for too long. The annual compliance activities are
consistent with other classes of inspected vessels including those that
implement other safety management systems. To clarify when the annual
survey under Sec. 137.205 must be conducted, we amended Sec. 136.110
by adding a definition of ``anniversary date'' tied to the expiration
date of the COI or TSMS certificate and we amended Sec. 137.205(a)(3)
by referring to the COI's anniversary date. We also amended other
sections that referenced
[[Page 40026]]
anniversary issuance date to read ``anniversary date.''
We received one comment asking whether participation in an ISM
program and issuance of a vessel's Safety Management certificate would
meet the requirements in proposed Sec. 137.210, which is now titled
Internal survey program. Section 138.225 clearly states that ISM Code
compliance meets the safety management requirements in this subchapter.
To clarify our reference in Sec. 138.225 to such vessels being deemed
in compliance with ``these'' requirements, we amended Sec. 138.225(a)
in this final rule to replace ``these requirements'' with ``TSMS-
related requirements in this subchapter.'' This clarifying edit is
consistent with our statement in the NPRM preamble that the Coast Guard
is proposing to accept compliance with the ISM Code, an internationally
mandated safety management system for vessels subject to the SOLAS, as
satisfying TSMS-related requirements. We implemented the ISM Code
through regulations in 33 CFR part 96 and view the processes and
procedures in place for compliance with the ISM Code as sufficient to
ensure that towing vessels comply with TSMS-related requirements in
subchapter M.
This commenter also stated that proposed paragraph (e) of Sec.
137.210 appeared to indicate the audit can be conducted by the
operating company since the OCMI may require the attendance of an
approved third party. He asks if our intent is to allow the operator to
conduct these audits in lieu of periodic (annual) audits by a third
party.
Yes, it was our intent, which is reflected in this final rule, to
allow operators to conduct some surveys and audits. We believe the
commenter meant to reference paragraph (e) of Sec. 137.215. Section
137.215 deals with conducting surveys and its paragraph (e) states that
the OCMI may require the attendance of an approved third party ``to
assist with verifying compliance with this part.'' We deleted Sec.
137.210(c) to remove the requirement that a towing vessel must
successfully complete an initial audit by a TPO before it may be placed
into an internal survey program. Section 137.210 contains the
provisions that allow for owners and managing operators to conduct
annual surveys under the internal survey program. For the purposes of
auditing under the TSMS option, there is also an internal audit program
described in part 138 that allows the owner or managing operator to
conduct annual internal management audits. We note that we have amended
Sec. 137.210 by adding paragraph (a)(8) requiring that the TSMS
contain procedures for assigning personnel to conduct surveys.
We received several additional comments on the provisions in
proposed Sec. 137.210. A few commenters suggested that ``audit
program'' should be changed to ``program of continuous assessment'' and
that the requirement in proposed paragraph (b) for timing of the
surveys should provide that surveys may be conducted within 3 months of
the anniversary date of the previous survey.
Section 137.210(b) specifies that the interval between successive
surveys of any item must not exceed 1 year. The words ``unless
otherwise prescribed'' at the end of that paragraph modify the
reference to not being required to survey items as one event. The
internal survey program allows the owner or managing operator to assess
the required items through a series of surveys, resulting in maximum
flexibility in conducting vessel operations while fulfilling regulatory
requirements. We want to preserve the flexibility afforded to the owner
or managing operator that was intended by the continuous survey aspect
of the internal survey program, and view the 1-year-from-successive-
survey requirement as the best means of assuring that required surveys
under this flexible system are conducted. Therefore, we did not adopt
the commenter's suggestion to amend Sec. 137.210 to require that
surveys be conducted within 3 months of the anniversary date of the
previous survey.
One commenter recommended that proposed Sec. 137.210(a)(3) on
identification of items that need repairs should allow for the issuance
of Form CG-835 deficiency tickets.
The Coast Guard agrees that the list of items for inspection and
repair should include any existing deficiencies listed by the Coast
Guard on Form CG-835, Notice of Merchant Marine Inspection
Requirements. We have amended Sec. 137.210(a)(3) accordingly, and also
added these related items: noted survey deficiencies, non-conformities,
and other corrective action reports.
Noting actions listed in proposed Sec. 137.210(d) (now Sec.
137.212), which explains the OCMI's authority to require audits,
surveys, and removal from the TSMS option, one commenter called for the
Coast Guard to establish and use an industry advisory committee for
each OCMI to advise him or her based on impartial industry knowledge.
Another commenter recommended peer review to verify the quality of work
performed by auditors.
The Coast Guard disagrees with the suggestion that we establish and
use an advisory committee for each OCMI. The Coast Guard has
established requirements for auditors to ensure the competency of
auditors in TPOs at 46 CFR 139.125 and 139.130. The Coast Guard retains
oversight and administrative control of TPOs and through them, their
auditors. See 46 CFR 139.135, 139.145, 139.150, and 139.160. We do not
see the need for an additional level of review of their work. We
developed these rules in coordination and consultation with TSAC, a
Federal Advisory Committee whose members are appointed by the Secretary
of Homeland Security to advise, consult with, and make recommendations
to the Secretary on matters relating to shallow-draft inland and
coastal waterway navigation and towing safety. Further, OCMIs work with
Harbor Operations Committees and conduct regular meetings with port
stakeholders and other industry representatives at the Sector level to
discuss maritime issues, including those related to towing vessels. We
made no changes from the proposed rule based on this comment, but we
did clarify the reference to a ``change in ownership'' in proposed
Sec. 139.125(c)(4) (now Sec. 139.125(d)(4)) that would cause an
approval for a TPO to expire by inserting the words ``as defined in
Sec. 136.110'' after the term.
One commenter expressed concern about a lack of qualification
requirements for the individual doing the surveys under the Sec.
137.210 internal survey program, beyond those written into the TSMS. He
recommended that the rule require the individual conducting surveys
under Sec. 137.210 to have comparable qualifications to the third-
party surveyor.
The Coast Guard has amended Sec. 137.210 by adding paragraph
(a)(8) requiring that the TSMS contain procedures for assigning
personnel to conduct surveys. As suggested by the commenter, under
Sec. 138.220(c)(1) survey requirements must be specified in the TSMS.
We have amended Sec. 138.220(c)(1) to make it clear that the TSMS must
list the minimum qualifications of a surveyor if the surveyor is not
from a TPO. We also removed Sec. 138.220(c)(3) and (e) because their
proposed requirements are covered in elsewhere in Sec. 138.220.
We received two comments on proposed Sec. 137.215, which describes
the general conduct of a survey. One commenter noted that proposed
paragraph (b)(3) would require observation of drills and training, but
periodic surveys are typically performed while the towing vessel is in
drydock or on a railway, and crews are generally not on board.
[[Page 40027]]
The Coast Guard disagrees with the commenter's premise that
periodic surveys under this subchapter will take place in a dry dock.
At least portions of surveys under Sec. 137.215 will require that the
vessel is dockside or underway to complete adequate operational
assessment of equipment contained in the scope of Sec. 137.220.
However, the Coast Guard agrees with the commenter that a surveyor
would not traditionally be expected to observe the performance of a
drill by the crew. We have amended Sec. 137.215 to reflect that the
surveyor would focus on the vessel's structural, electrical, and
mechanical systems, and equipment, including those used in drills--for
example, davits, cranes, pumps, and lifesaving equipment. These
functions could be performed while in drydock or without the crew
present. It is the auditor who will focus on the operational
performance of the crew to assess the competency in the performance of
the assigned roles. For such an audit, the crew must be present and the
vessel must be ready to demonstrate the performance upon request. The
Coast Guard has amended Sec. Sec. 138.405(d) and 138.410(c), conduct
of internal and external audits, assigning auditors the responsibility
to witness drills.
Another commenter requested a change to proposed paragraph Sec.
137.215(c) which he felt created an unnecessary loophole. He
recommended deleting it or revising it to read: ``While all the items
listed in Sec. 137.200 must be surveyed for all vessels regardless of
their condition, vessels and equipment found to be in poor condition
may be required to undergo more stringent examinations in order to
satisfy the attending surveyor.''
The Coast Guard agrees that Sec. 137.215(c) should be amended to
address this concern. We added language to Sec. 137.215(c) to ensure
that survey standards in Sec. 137.215 are met and to require an
expanded examination by the surveyor when he or she finds multiple
deficiencies indicative of systematic failures. Regarding the items to
be surveyed, Sec. 137.215(b) clearly states that the survey must
address all items in Sec. 137.220.
We received several comments on the scope of surveys in proposed
Sec. 137.220. Some of the commenters focused on three requested
changes: Clarification that gas-freeing prior to entry into confined
spaces, such as fuel tanks, is not required; allowing verification of
drills to be done using a review of documentation; and limiting the
inspection of watertight doors to those that were required to be
installed.
As discussed in Sec. 137.330(b), fuel tanks need not be cleaned
out and internally examined if the general condition of the tanks is
determined to be satisfactory by external examinations. While the Coast
Guard does not agree that crew competency can be verified by just
reviewing records of required training and drills, we have removed the
requirement for witnessing drills from the survey portion of the rule
and have moved it to the audit requirements in Sec. Sec. 138.405 and
138.410. Any watertight fittings that crews rely on for watertight
integrity and vessel safety should be operational and subject to
survey.
One commenter noted that Sec. 137.220 should be amended to clarify
that a topside exam can be conducted in segments and need not be done
as a discrete event.
Section 137.220 describes the scope of the survey which would apply
under either the Sec. 137.205 or Sec. 137.210 program. For those
choosing the Sec. 137.210 internal survey program to demonstrate
vessel compliance, the Coast Guard makes it clear in Sec. 137.210(b)
that the owner or managing operator is not required to survey the items
as described in Sec. 137.220 as one event, but may survey items on a
schedule over time, provided that the interval between successive
surveys of any item does not exceed 1 year, unless otherwise
prescribed. The Coast Guard believes that Sec. 137.210(b) provides
clear guidance that an owner or managing operator of a towing vessel
may select to have surveys done during multiple events. In contrast,
the Sec. 137.205 external survey program calls for one event, an
annual survey, and not successive surveys to survey the items described
in Sec. 137.220. The Coast Guard has not made any changes from the
proposed rule in response to this comment.
Another commenter recommended that we eliminate the term ``rescue
boat'' from the rule, which we used in proposed Sec. 137.220(g)(6)
when identifying the scope of items to be examined and also in crew
safety regulations in part 140 of the NPRM. He notes this change would
avoid confusion between the terms ``skiff,'' ``survival craft,'' and
``rescue boat.''
The Coast Guard agrees that the use of the term ``rescue boat'' in
this rule could cause confusion. We did not propose that subchapter M
require towing vessels to carry rescue boats, so to avoid confusion, we
have removed the references to rescue boats in Sec. Sec. 137.220 and
140.405. We did, however, leave instruction and drill requirements in
Sec. 140.420(d)(4) for launching and using a rescue boat if a towing
vessel has one installed, and have defined rescue boat as described
earlier in this preamble.
One commenter objected to a Sec. 137.220(g) requirement for towing
vessels to conduct a man-overboard drill, simulated under emergency
conditions. The commenter noted that towing vessels on the Great Lakes
should not have to comply with standards not applied to ``self-
propelled lakers'', that is, other self-propelled vessels, on the Great
Lakes.
The Coast Guard disagrees and did not make a change from the
proposed rule based on this comment. We seek to promote safe vessel
operations for all towing vessels and we have casualty data that
indicates that falls overboard is one of the main contributing factors
to crew member fatalities in this industry. As detailed in Sec.
136.105, the Coast Guard has provided a number of exceptions for towing
vessels based on the known risks involved in their specific operation.
The Coast Guard has declined to provide blanket exemptions for entire
operating areas such as lakes, bays and sounds, rivers, or as the
commenter suggests, the Great Lakes. The Coast Guard has evaluated the
hazards of towing vessel operations in each of these particular areas
and determined that the application of these regulations to certain
towing vessel operations in each of these areas would improve safety to
life, property and the environment.
In addition, noting the language currently in 33 CFR 164.01(b) and
the ``33 CFR part 164, if applicable'' language in proposed Sec.
137.220(j)(5), a commenter raised concerns about determining when and
whether a given towing vessel is subject to 33 CFR part 164 navigation
safety regulations.
We did not propose to amend 33 CFR part 164, and neither Sec.
164.01 nor other sections in that part use ``inspected'' or
``uninspected'' as criteria for applicability, so this rule does not
alter the applicability of 33 CFR part 164 for towing vessels. To see
what requirements in 33 CFR part 164 may apply to a given towing
vessel, one needs to review all of Sec. 164.01, not just paragraph (b)
which is focused on towing vessels. For example, Sec. 164.01(d) points
to automatic identification system requirements without reference to
type of vessel. We made no changes from the proposed rule based on this
comment.
We received two comments on proposed Sec. 137.300, a section on
documenting compliance with drydock and internal structural surveys
requirements. One of these commenters referenced Sec. 136.130(d) in
combination
[[Page 40028]]
with Sec. 137.300 when requesting clarification about the scope and
frequency of such surveys. Both Sec. 136.130(d) and redesignated Sec.
137.300(a) make it clear that the frequency does not change based on
which option is chosen to obtain a COI. Further, we amended Sec.
137.300(a) to clearly indicate that the drydock and internal structural
intervals start after the issuance of the initial COI. Paragraphs
(a)(1) and (2) of Sec. 137.300 clearly state the intervals for drydock
and internal structural surveys. Finally, we established separate
sections for vessels using the TSMS option (Sec. 137.305) and those
using the Coast Guard inspection option (Sec. 137.302) to document
compliance with drydock and internal structural survey requirements.
Regarding the scope of drydock and internal structural surveys,
whether a vessel provides objective evidence using the external survey
option under Sec. 137.310 or the internal survey option under Sec.
137.315 requirements (see these options referenced in redesignated
Sec. 137.305(a) and (b)), the scope of the survey is clearly laid out
in Sec. 137.330. Also, Sec. 137.325 contains a comprehensive
inventory of items to be reviewed during the examination. The Coast
Guard believes that the numerous items identified in Sec. 137.325, in
addition to the supporting Sec. 137.330, provide sufficient
information to address the commenter's concerns. As noted above,
redesignated Sec. 137.300 makes clear that regardless of the option
chosen to obtain a Certificate of Inspection, each towing vessel must
undergo a drydock and internal structural examination at the prescribed
intervals after the issuance of the initial COI. Accordingly, we have
amended the Sec. 137.325 heading so that it no longer references just
surveys for the TSMS option. Throughout amended subpart C of part 137
we have changed the term ``survey'' to ``examination'' when referring
to the drydock and internal structural examinations.
A person commenting on proposed Sec. 137.300(c), which called for
objective evidence of compliance with certain load line requirements in
subchapter E, noted that load lines are not applicable to inland towing
vessels. We agree that load lines are not applicable for situations
where the inland towing vessel never operates on the Great Lakes or
outside the Boundary Lines. But under Sec. 136.250, the load line
requirement in subchapter E would apply to certain towing vessels 79
feet or more in length that normally operate on inland waters but that
sometimes operate on the Great Lakes or outside the Boundary Lines. In
this final rule, we moved requirements for documenting compliance with
load line and other requirements in this subpart to Sec. 137.305 for
vessels choosing the TSMS option and to Sec. 137.302 for vessels
choosing the Coast Guard inspection option. We recognize that 46 CFR
42.03-5(b)(1)(v) in subchapter E excepts vessels that operate
exclusively on inland waters and that do not engage in coastwise or
Great Lakes voyages from load line requirements. However, Sec.
137.305(c) and amended Sec. 137.320 make clear that the load line
provision is only relevant for towing vessels subject to subchapter E
load line requirements. Similarly, the provisions in new Sec. 137.322
for vessels currently classed by a recognized classification society
whose applicable rules have been accepted by the Coast Guard, are only
relevant to vessels so classed.
Redesignated Sec. 137.305 clarifies that objective evidence is
needed to demonstrate that a vessel utilizing the TSMS option complies
with the drydock and internal structural examination requirements of
this subpart. Paragraph (c) points to Sec. Sec. 137.320 and 137.322.
We amended Sec. 137.320 to make clear that an examination performed to
maintain a valid load line certificate issued in accordance with
subchapter E would count as an examination required under Sec.
137.300. Also, new Sec. 137.322 allows for the same consideration in
the case of a drydock and internal structural examination performed to
maintain class by a recognized classification society whose applicable
rules the Coast Guard has accepted. In the case of those vessels
required to conduct two drydock and internal structural examinations in
accordance with Sec. 137.300(a)(1), the allowance under either Sec.
137.320 or Sec. 137.322 only counts for one of the required
examinations.
We received several diverse comments on proposed Sec. 137.305,
which specifies intervals for drydock and internal structural surveys.
One commenter observed that towing vessels operate in an environment
that requires them to be in contact with barges and vessels, and that
this contact puts unusual stresses to the hull. Based on this
observation the commenter suggested that the survey intervals called
for in proposed Sec. 137.305(a)(2), redesignated Sec. 137.300(a)(2),
for vessels not exposed to salt water often should be the same as those
with more saltwater exposure--at least twice every 5 years and not more
than 36 months between drydockings--instead of just once every 5 years.
The Coast Guard disagrees. The drydock and internal structural
examination requirements in this final rule are consistent with the
requirements for other vessels subject to inspection, and we see no
reason to believe this frequency of drydocking would need to be
increased for towing vessels. The Coast Guard will monitor the
inspected fleet to see if increased frequency is called for in the
future. As discussed earlier, proposed Sec. 137.305 has been
redesignated as Sec. 137.300 in this final rule.
Some commenters thought the provision of proposed Sec. 137.305
should be amended to ensure vessels operating on the Great Lakes may
receive a 1-year extension on the required interval for drydocking and
interval structural examinations as provided under load line provisions
in 46 CFR subpart 42.09 and current Coast Guard policy.
The Coast Guard disagrees that modification to our applicable text,
now found in Sec. 137.300, is needed. The extension of a Great Lakes
Load Line certificate by the Ninth District Commander is addressed in
46 CFR 42.07-45(d)(2). Existing Coast Guard policy, found in the Marine
Safety Manual, Volume II, provides additional guidance to the Coast
Guard and industry regarding extensions of drydock and internal
structural examinations for Great Lakes vessels. The Ninth District
Commander is also the approving authority for drydock extensions for
these vessels, including towing vessels operating on the Great Lakes.
While the same entity can issue both of these extensions, the load line
certificate and the vessel's Certificate of Inspection must both be
annotated with the new due date for the vessel's drydock and internal
structural examination. We made no changes from the proposed rule based
on this comment.
Some commenters noted that a definition for ``saltwater'' is needed
if the times of operation in ``saltwater'' is a factor in determining
intervals for inspections.
The Coast Guard did not add a definition for the term ``saltwater''
in the rule. The Marine Safety Manual, Volume II, places the
responsibility of determining salt water and fresh water dry-docking
and internal structural inspection intervals on the OCMI. If fresh
water intervals are determined appropriate for a specific vessel, the
OCMI will annotate the fresh water service intervals on the vessel's
COI and evaluate that determination periodically. OCMIs maintain lists
of boundary lines where fresh water ends, and salt water begins, within
their particular zones.
[[Page 40029]]
A commenter expressed concern about the cost of the requirements.
He wrote that proposed Sec. 137.305 would impose enormous cost on
small businesses, and that his company's vessels that operate in the
Southeast in a saltwater environment would have to be drydocked twice
every 5 years at an estimated cost of about $40,000 for each drydocking
evolution for one vessel, or $80,000 per vessel every 5 years. Another
commenter suggested that Sec. 137.305, requiring drydocking of
saltwater vessels twice every 5 years, would cost his company at least
$100,000 to $150,000 per vessel.
The drydock and internal structural examination requirements in
this final rule are consistent with the requirements for other vessels
subject to inspection and necessary to meet the statutory requirements
for vessel inspections. We have made no changes from the proposed rule
based on this comment.
With regard to the cost of drydocking, after publication of the
NPRM, the Coast Guard sponsored a study of standard marine engineering
services for use in regulatory analyses, titled ``Study of Marine
Engineering and Naval Architecture Costs for Use in Regulatory
Analyses'' by ABS Consulting, available on the docket. According to the
Engineering Cost Study, cost of drydocking can vary based on a variety
of factors, including vessel size, vessel weight, equipment, type of
work, operating environment and location of the drydock.\2\ The
Engineering Cost Study summarizes the minimum, average and maximum
costs of drydocking for various vessel types in Table 6-9, page 32. The
Engineering Cost Study does not report a separate cost category for
towing vessels. The Coast Guard uses the costs for smaller Freight
Ships and Industry Vessels as a proxy for towing vessels based on
similar size and operating characteristics. Based on the Engineering
Cost Study, the minimum cost for a drydocking of a towing or similar
vessel is $2,000, the maximum is $20,000 and the average is $9,250. We
consider the $9,250 as the best available estimate for the average cost
of drydocking. We acknowledge that the $40,000 estimate provided by the
commenter is feasible given the variability of factors, such as size
and location. To account for the variability, we assume that the
$40,000 cost is at the 90th percentile of the distribution of costs,
that is, 10 percent of vessels will incur this cost for drydocking. As
a result, we modify the average cost to reflect the upper 10th
percentile cost of $40,000, for a weighted average cost of $13,250. As
per the regulatory requirements, vessels that are not currently covered
by a safety management system are assumed to incur this cost once every
5 years for freshwater vessels and twice every 5 years for saltwater
vessels.\3\ For a more detailed discussion of the costs, see section
3.3 of the Regulatory Analysis which is available in the docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Source: ABS Consulting for the U.S. Coast Guard, Study of
Marine Engineering and Naval Architecture Costs for Use in
Regulatory Analyses, March 29, 2013, Contract GS-23F-0207L2714803,
page 30.
\3\ Vessels currently covered by an SMS already are required to
undergo drydocking at similar intervals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We received a few comments on proposed Sec. 137.315. Some
commenters were unclear whether the requirement of notification prior
to commencing work at the drydock refers to any drydock work or only
those drydock visits that are required by the TSMS.
In response, we amended Sec. 137.315(d) to clarify when to notify
the Coast Guard under paragraph (d) and TPOs under paragraph (b) of
activities related to credit drydocking or internal structural
examinations.
A few commenters asked that Sec. 137.315 be modified to clarify
that the items described in Sec. 137.330 need not be examined as one
event, but may be examined on a schedule over time.
Section 137.315(c) states that ``The interval between examinations
of each item may not exceed the applicable interval described in Sec.
137.300.'' The Coast Guard believes the words ``examinations of each
item'' provides clear guidance that an owner or managing operator of a
towing vessel may select to survey different items described in Sec.
137.330 during multiple events, and the remainder of Sec. 137.315(c)
makes clear that the interval for surveys of a given item must not
exceed the applicable interval described in Sec. 137.300.
Several commenters argued that proposed paragraph (a) of Sec.
137.325, requiring a surveyor to determine that the hull and related
structure and components are free of defects or deterioration, would be
too difficult to meet. One commenter suggested language we used in
proposed Sec. 137.335(c)(3) regarding underwater inspections--``free
from appreciable defects and deterioration''--stating that it does not
make sense to require a higher standard for a vessel on drydock than
one being inspected in the water.
The Coast Guard agrees with the commenters with respect to the term
``free of defects [and] deterioration.'' We have amended Sec.
137.325(a), to remove the term ``free of'' and have further rearranged
the paragraph so that the standard for evaluating the listed items
detected in the hull and related structure and components is whether
they ``adversely affect the vessel's seaworthiness or fitness or
suitability for its route or service'' instead of ``reducing
effectiveness.'' Also, in Sec. 137.325(a), we changed ``determine
that'' to ``determine whether'' to better reflect the purpose of the
survey: To determine if standards are met. In response to the second
comment, the Coast Guard amended Sec. 137.335 by removing the word
``appreciable'' to provide a more consistent standard with that of
Sec. 137.325(a), and by reorganizing the section to better clarify its
intent.
Two commenters expressed general opposition to the proposed
requirements and scope for regular mandatory drydock examinations. One
commenter stated that harbor service boats are already being retired on
a regular basis when their structural usefulness is at an end, and
therefore mandatory structural inspections are not warranted. The
commenter also noted the cost of additional boats to fill the service
void when these boats are in transit to a certified inspection drydock
and when undergoing a drydock inspection. Another commenter was
specifically concerned that proposed Sec. 137.330 was vague regarding
pulling the tail shafts for inspection.
Because of the nature of towing, the hulls of towing vessels are
exposed to the unique hazards that result in degradation and damage to
the towing vessel in the normal course of operation. For this reason,
regular drydocking of a towing vessel to inspect its underwater areas
is a necessary component of assessing and verifying fitness for
service. We note, however, that as proposed in the NPRM, Sec. 137.335
in this final rule identifies situations where it may be acceptable to
conduct an underwater survey in lieu of a drydocking.
The Coast Guard notes that scope of drydock examination required by
Sec. 137.330 is the same for both seagoing and inland service. The
Coast Guard believes Sec. 137.330 clearly lays out the scope of the
required drydock examination for all towing vessels subject to
subchapter M. Our proposed definition of ``drydock'' in Sec. 136.110
actually defines a drydock examination (as opposed to the physical
dock) and matches the definitions of that term in subchapters K and T,
so we amended the term being defined to ``drydock examination.''
Regarding examination of tail shafts, the Coast Guard proposed
[[Page 40030]]
Sec. 137.330(a)(2) to permit the surveyor or inspector to conduct the
required examinations using different means than pulling the tail
shaft, so long as the method used allows the surveyor or inspector to
properly evaluate the tail shaft for bends, cracks, and damage. These
methods may include technologies such as non-destructive testing and x-
ray. The Coast Guard has not made any changes from the proposed rule
based on these drydocking and tail shaft comments.
Regarding the cost of additional boats to fill the service void
when these boats are in transit to a certified inspection drydock and
when undergoing a drydock inspection, the Coast Guard has added an
estimate of lost revenues (rather than the cost of replacement) to
account for the potential impacts of vessels being out of service due
to drydock inspections. Further information is available in Section 2.5
of the Regulatory Analysis.
We received a few comments on Sec. 137.335, which sets out
provisions for an underwater survey in lieu of drydocking. One
commenter expressed support for the provision. One commenter suggested
that for purposes of determining whether an underwater survey is
appropriate, the age of the hull should be used rather than the age of
the towing vessel.
The Coast Guard does not agree that we should use the age of a
given vessel's hull as opposed to the vessel's age when considering
eligibility for enrollment in an underwater inspection in lieu of
drydocking (UWILD) program. For an existing vessel with no prior credit
drydock overseen by the Coast Guard, we have no criteria to make an
``age of hull'' determination. Once inspected, a completely new hull
will likely be considered as a major modification and reset the
vessel's age for purposes of UWILD enrollment.
While we did not make a change from the proposed Sec. 137.335
based on these comments, we did amend Sec. 137.335 to clarify the
process for the UWILD program by stating that it is the Coast Guard
that determines if the stated criteria for eligibility has been met.
One commenter opposed several vessel compliance provisions in part
137. He argued that requirements for training and recordkeeping will be
an excessive burden on small companies, a distraction to pilots, and
cause undue hardship for vessel owners; that vessel managing operators
should not have to get permission to put visitors, company
representatives, or additional personnel on the vessel; and that
restrictions in routes permitted on the COI would be a deterrent to his
ability to make a living and provide employment for his personnel.
Other commenters noted that the paperwork requirements would distract
pilots while they are steering their towing vessels.
The Coast Guard views the TSMS, and its requirements for records to
document compliance with regard to training, as the foundational
document itemizing the standards, processes and management systems
necessary to improve maritime safety aboard towing vessels. Towing
companies that lack the resources to develop and implement a TSMS may
choose the Coast Guard inspection option and will not have to maintain
the TSMS-required records and documents. We note, however, that
personnel record requirements in Sec. 140.400(a) and (b) apply to all
vessels subject to subchapter M; in response to this comment we have
made clarifying amendments to those paragraphs. With respect to
associated paperwork, many of the entries are short in duration and the
Coast Guard does not mandate when the paperwork is filled out.
Regarding crews and visitors, the Coast Guard will issue
certificates of inspection that establish the level of manning and
persons in addition to the crew that will be allowed to be on board the
vessels. Companies should work with OCMIs prior to issuance of the COI
to request any additional personnel above what the required manning
level would normally be. The Coast Guard does not agree with the
commenter's assertion that the OCMI does not need to be contacted to
carry additional personnel (visitors, company reps, etc.) beyond what
is stated on the COI. We note that Sec. 136.245 provides for the
issuance of an excursion permit by the OCMI as needed.
The application for inspection allows owners and managing operators
to request the routes necessary to accomplish their business. OCMIs
will evaluate that request to determine if the vessel meets the
standard for the routes being requested. Those standards are found in
parts 140 through 144. We made no changes from the proposed rule based
on these comments.
One maritime company expressed concerns regarding added operating
costs incurred that will stem from drydock inspection fees paid to
surveyors or the Coast Guard, and from audit exams and what the
maritime company considers unnecessary repairs brought upon the
industry by non-risk-based regulations.
The requirement to have a surveyor from a TPO conduct a drydock and
internal examination is predicated on the option chosen to obtain a
COI. The Coast Guard encourages the owner or managing operator of a
vessel using the TSMS option to discuss such costs with the company's
TPO, as appropriate.
One commenter predicted the cost of surveys would likely increase
for both small and large companies, citing the demand for Coast Guard-
approved surveyors from TPOs and the increased scope of surveys. He
noted many common repairs that can now be performed without requiring
independent surveys will require independent surveys under this rule.
The Coast Guard does not accept the premise that this rule imposes
a requirement that independent surveyors must be involved before common
repairs are performed. Regarding repairs, under Sec. 137.305, the OCMI
may require additional examination of a vessel whenever he or she
discovers or suspects damage or deterioration to hull plating or
structural members that may affect the seaworthiness of a vessel. We
believe the OCMI should be able to require additional examinations when
he or she discovers such conditions, and we note that such examinations
are typically reserved for those dry-docking and topside surveys
required by part 137. We note also that under Sec. Sec. 137.135(a)(12)
or 137.210(a)(3) there is a requirement to identify items that need to
be repaired or replaced before the vessel continues in service, but
this would not require a TPO survey before common repairs could be
made.
Regarding the need for surveyors from TPOs, under the Coast Guard
option, annual inspections are performed by Coast Guard personnel and
do not require participation of a surveyor from a TPO. Similarly, if a
company has a TSMS and chooses an internal survey program, the surveys
can be conducted by a qualified member of the company and would not
require a TPO. If a company with a TSMS uses the external survey
program, they would incur additional costs of using a surveyor from a
TPO.
H. Towing Safety Management System (TSMS) (Part 138)
We received many comments on our proposed part 138 TSMS
requirements. We received several comments with regard to the schedule
for the TSMS option. An individual suggested that the implementation of
a TSMS should occur immediately with the allowance of a 6-month interim
certificate. This commenter stated using an interim basis approach, as
is done with the ISM Code, will prevent reinventing the wheel and align
the system approach to existing requirements.
We have made a number of changes, as explained in this section to
provide
[[Page 40031]]
for a smooth implementation of the TSMS option while keeping in mind
the burden to owners and managing operators. In the NPRM, we proposed
that owners and managing operators who select the TSMS option would
have 2 years from the effective date of a final rule to create their
TSMS, have a TPO approve it and then issue a TSMS certificate. The
owners and managing operators would then have 4 years from the date of
that TSMS certificate to bring all vessels under their ownership or
management into the TSMS and obtain COIs for them.
In this final rule, we changed Sec. 138.115 so that owners or
managing operators of towing vessels need only to obtain a TSMS
certificate issued under Sec. 138.305 at least six months before being
able to have any of their vessels obtain a Certificate of Inspection
under the TSMS option. We made this change to better account for the
time needed for third parties to obtain approval from the Coast Guard
and for owners and managing operators to obtain approval of their TSMS
from these third parties before being required to have their vessels
obtain a COI. We also believe that six months of implementing a TSMS is
sufficient for obtaining a COI, and as required, the vessel would need
to have on board a copy of the owner or managing operator's TSMS
certificate. We amended Sec. 138.115 to more closely align the
deadline with the deadlines for vessels to obtain a COI, but this
change does not prevent a company from implementing a TSMS sooner and
we encourage owners and managing operators to obtain the TSMS
certificate and implement their TSMS as soon as possible. In making
this change, we do not believe there is a need for a 6-month temporary
certificate.
Two commenters expressed their view that utilizing internal and
follow-up audits would mean that there would be no need for a TSMS.
The Coast Guard does not agree that merely conducting audits and
surveys would negate the need for TSMS. The TSMS is the foundational
document itemizing the standards, processes, and management systems
that the auditor would review, assess, and validate. Without a TSMS, or
some other form of Safety Management System, there would be no
documentation to identify the processes and management system(s) put in
place for a vessel choosing the TSMS option. We made no changes from
the proposed rule based on these comments.
We received comments from maritime companies and a professional
association suggesting that proposed Sec. Sec. 138.205, 138.210,
138.215, and 138.220 pertaining to the purpose, functional
requirements, and elements of the TSMS be revised to be more simplistic
and to more clearly state the primary goals of a TSMS.
We believe the purpose, objectives, functional requirements, and
elements presented in these four sections in part 138, subpart B,
succinctly establish reasons for, and the requirements and goals of, a
safety management system. The Coast Guard incorporates these core
elements to provide consistency with the ISM Code and to identify the
elements that must be addressed when developing a TSMS. In response to
a previous comment, we did revise our definition of ``safety management
system,'' which identifies the nature of an SMS and who it enables to
effectively implement the safety and environmental protection
requirements of subchapter M. Additional guidance will be developed to
help the industry and public understand the goals of a TSMS and how to
develop and implement one.
Some commenters requested clarification regarding the proposed
functional requirements in Sec. 138.215(f) and TSMS elements in Sec.
138.220(e) related to the phrase ``procedures to manage contracted
(vendor safety) services.'' The commenters suggested that the
management of all hired (contracted) towing vessels to ensure they
comply with subchapter M would be a burden, and they suggested that
proof of the hired company's TSMS and vessel's COI should be sufficient
evidence to meet the intent of the rule. One of the commenters stated
that it is unclear what contracted services are covered by Sec.
138.220(e).
The Coast Guard agrees. When contracting their vessels to others
for towing services, the owner and operator remain responsible for for
verifying that their vessels are in compliance with the regulations. We
have removed the requirements proposed in Sec. Sec. 138.215(f) and
138.220(e).
We received several comments from maritime companies that conveyed
concern regarding the proposed requirement in Sec. 138.220(b)(1) for
employers to, ``ensure personnel are . . . mentally capable to perform
required tasks.'' The commenter's stated that although employers
conduct drug testing, safety training, and physical examinations, the
employers cannot be responsible for determining their mental health
status.
The Coast Guard agrees that it may be unreasonable for the company
to determine the mental health of a crewmember. It is reasonable,
however, for companies to identify if potential crew members are able
to perform required tasks. For this reason, we have edited the quoted
language in Sec. 138.220(b)(1) to require the TSMS to contain
employment procedures which ensure ``that personnel are able to perform
required tasks.''
We received a comment requesting more details regarding crew member
(master, mate, able seaman, pilot, etc.) responsibilities in the
operation, managing, and implementation of the TSMS and the vessel.
The Coast Guard does not agree that the regulations should contain
more details on crew responsibilities and believes that this should be
left to the discretion of the owner or managing operator to set in the
TSMS. Under Sec. 138.220(b), policies must be in place in the TSMS
that cover the owner or managing operator's approach to managing its
personnel, including the duties and responsibilities of the
crewmembers.
We received comments from individuals and a maritime company
recommending that the rule ensures that major non-conformities, non-
conformities, accidents, and hazardous situations are reported to the
owners, company, or managing operators; are investigated and analyzed
with the objective of improving safety and pollution prevention; and
that auditors notify the Coast Guard and the company immediately of any
serious, unsafe situation that threatens the vessel, its personnel, or
the environment. One commenter noted that TSMS requires a designated
person to whom crewmembers can report safety violations, but that
towing vessels opting for the Coast Guard inspection option would not
have this reporting system that would likely prevent accidents. Another
commenter recommended supplementing the text in Sec. 138.220(a)(1)(ii)
to ensure that the designated person monitors the safety and pollution
prevention aspects of the operation of each vessel and ensures that
adequate resources and shore-based support are applied.
With respect to reporting accidents and non-conformities, we note
that Sec. 138.215(c) requires TSMSs to include procedures for
reporting both. Section 138.220(a)(2)(ii) requires that the TSMS
include procedures to identify and correct non-conformities. The TSMS
must include how an initial report should be made and the actions taken
to follow up and ensure appropriate resolution.
For vessels choosing the Coast Guard option the corresponding
``designated person'' is the vessel's Master. In part 140 on
operations, Sec. 140.210(d)(6)
[[Page 40032]]
requires the crew to report unsafe conditions to the Master and take
the most effective action to prevent accidents.
The Coast Guard disagrees with adding specific regulatory text to
Sec. 138.220(a)(1)(ii) regarding the designated person. Section
138.220(c) requires the TSMS to have an element that addresses
verification of vessel compliance that covers the safety and pollution
prevention aspects that the commenter alluded to. Ultimately the
designated person is responsible for ensuring the TSMS is implemented
and continuously functions to address concerns identified by the
commenter.
On the issue of protecting the responsibilities and authority of
masters, we received comments suggesting that the TSMS specifically
states that the master has overriding authority to make decisions
regarding the company's safety and pollution prevention.
The Coast Guard agrees that the master of a towing vessel has
overriding responsibility and authority to ensure the safety of his or
her vessel. As stated in Sec. 138.220(a)(1)(iii), the Master's
authority, as defined by the owner or managing operator in the TSMS,
must provide for his or her ability to make final determinations on
safe operations of the towing vessel including the ability to cease
operations if an unsafe condition exists. This reflects provisions in
operational regulation Sec. 140.210 which specify that safety of the
towing vessel is the responsibility of the master and that if the
master believes it is unsafe for the vessel to proceed, he or she must
not proceed until it is safe to do so.
We received many comments from maritime companies that recommend
that the Coast Guard accept the AWO RCP as an approved TSMS. Commenters
wrote about the wide use of the RCP and attested to the success that
their company has experienced implementing that program. Several
commenters also suggested that because AWO RCP has been developed from
the ISM code, which we already noted as being accepted in the NPRM, the
AWO RCP should qualify as an approved TSMS.
The provisions of Sec. 138.225 state that an SMS that is fully
compliant with the ISM Code requirements of 33 CFR part 96 will be
deemed in compliance with TSMS requirements in part 138. It also states
that the Coast Guard may consider other existing safety management
systems as meeting part 138 requirements. The Coast Guard will examine
AWO's RCP to determine whether or not it meets the requirements of 46
CFR part 138 in order to determine if it qualifies under the provisions
of this section. We have not made a change from the proposed rule based
on these comments.
We received comments from several maritime companies that
recommended the sequence of events for the issuance of a COI for towing
vessels be provided.
The Coast Guard notes the following short sequence of events
associated with the various ways to obtain a COI:
Step 1: As specified in Sec. 136.210, Obtaining or renewing a
Certificate of Inspection (COI), the owner or operator must submit a
completed CG-3752, Application for Inspection of U.S. Vessel, to the
cognizant OCMI. As noted in Sec. 136.130(d), the applicant must
specify the option--TSMS or Coast Guard Inspections--when submitting
the Application for Inspection for a vessel.
Step 2: Under Sec. 136.212, the Coast Guard will inspect the
vessel at least once every 5 years for certification.
Step 3: As specified in Sec. 136.212(c) of this final rule, the
OCMI will issue a vessel a new Certificate of Inspection after the
vessel successfully completes the inspection for certification.
With respect to this process, and as noted previously, we amended
Sec. 138.115 so that owners or managing operators of towing vessels
selecting the TSMS option need to obtain a TSMS certificate at least
six months before being able to have any of their vessels certificated.
We believe this is more consistent with the required schedule of when
vessels must obtain a COI as shown in Sec. 136.202 when considering
the time needed for third parties to obtain Coast Guard approval and
for owners and managing operators to obtain approval of their TSMS from
the third parties.
Five maritime companies suggested that additional language be
provided in Sec. 138.305 to clarify how a third-party is to respond
when a non-conformity is discovered and what the appeals process will
be for a company whose certificate is rescinded.
The Coast Guard agrees and has added language to Sec. 138.505(a)
to specify that the results of any external audit of the owner or
managing operator's compliance with Sec. 138.315 of this part must be
submitted to the Towing Vessel National Center of Expertise within 30
days of audit completion by the TPO conducting the external audit.
Further, we amended our definition of ``non-conformity'' in Sec.
136.110 to clarify that it is referring the non-fulfillment of a safety
management system specified requirement. On reviewing proposed Sec.
138.215(j) procedures for evaluating recommendations, which has been
redesignated as Sec. 138.215(i), to be more consistent with other
quality control and safety management systems, we amended its reference
to the source of the recommendations to include more company personnel,
and made a similar edit in Sec. 138.220(a)(2)(ii) regarding reporting
non-conformities.
Regarding the appeal process, in proposed Sec. 136.180 we stated
that any person directly affected by a decision or action taken under
this subchapter by or on behalf of the Coast Guard, may appeal in
accordance with subpart 1.03 in subchapter A of this chapter. In
response to comments, the Coast Guard has added Sec. 1.03-55 to
identify the Coast Guard official or entity appeals should be directed
to, including the appeal of matters relating to action of a third
party, such as when a TPO rescinds a TSMS certificate.
A professional association noted that, as written, proposed Sec.
138.305 would require that all towing vessels in a fleet that are in
compliance with the TSMS be included on the company's TSMS certificate.
The commenter stated that this provision would render an entire fleet
invalid if a TSMS is revoked under proposed Sec. 138.305(d), and
therefore, a paragraph needs to be added to this section detailing the
appeals process for the rescinding of a TSMS, which mirrors the current
Coast Guard appeals process for rescinded COI's. One commenter
suggested that the proposed requirement in paragraph (c) to list
vessels on a TSMS certificate is cumbersome and unnecessary.
The Coast Guard understands the commenter's concern and has amended
Sec. 138.305, so that owners or managing operators need only maintain,
and produce on request, a list of vessels currently covered by each
TSMS certificate. This is a less burdensome means of requiring this
information.
Exceptional circumstances such as failure to complete a required
audit, major non-conformities discovered during an audit or survey, and
failure to fully implement their TSMS could render the TSMS certificate
invalid for a company's entire fleet. Based on the Coast Guard's
experience with other safety management systems, including ISM, these
circumstances have been rarely observed. It is more likely that an
infraction of the regulations would result in a less drastic response--
for example, in the form of non-conformities being reported for the one
or few vessels involved, or those vessels being removed from the list
of vessels found to be in compliance with the TSMS.
[[Page 40033]]
If the situation warrants, the TPO that issued the TSMS certificate
is able to rescind the certificate, which could impact the entire
fleet, or remove one or more vessels from the list of vessels on the
TSMS for non-compliance with the requirements of part 138. Such an
action that would render the certificate no longer valid would indeed
impact the entire fleet of vessels listed in that TSMS certificate.
Also, we note that the Coast Guard may suspend or revoke the TSMS
certificate at any time for non-compliance with the requirements of
part 138. As discussed above, we have added 46 CFR 1.03-55 to clearly
identify the Coast Guard official or entity appeals should be directed
to for those seeking to appeal a decision by a TPO under Sec.
138.305(e) to rescind, or a Coast Guard official under Sec. 138.305(d)
to suspend or revoke, a TSMS certificate.
In commenting on Sec. 138.305(f) requirements, an individual
suggested it is unnecessary for a copy of the TSMS certificate to
remain onboard the vessel because the certificate will be on file at
the Captain of the Port (COTP) and at the company's office.
The Coast Guard does not agree. Some towing vessels will frequent a
number of COTP zones. The TSMS certificate provides evidence that a
vessel covered by the TSMS was found to meet 46 CFR part 138
requirements, and a copy on board the vessel will be readily available
to Coast Guard officials wherever the vessel is operating.
A transportation company suggested that two certificates should be
issued instead of one: A Towing Company Safety Management System
Certificate to the office and a Towing Vessel Safety Management System
Certificate to each towing vessel. One commenter recommended and
provided text for a new section that would provide information on how
to obtain such certificates.
The Coast Guard does not agree. A TSMS is intended to be the
central document that directly links the towing vessel and the shore-
based management operation. The TSMS is not only for the vessel or only
for management. Rather, it is the documentation of processes,
responsibilities and required action defining the mutually supporting
actions between the vessel mariners and management. A TSMS certificate
should be the only document issued attesting to the acceptability of
the system. This should reduce the paperwork burden on industry and
TPOs.
We received comments suggesting the removal of the proposed
requirement for an internal auditor to be a person outside of the
organization. Commenters felt that this requirement could make it
difficult for small companies to comply. Others suggested that a person
who is involved in the development of the TSMS would be useful in
identifying areas where the system is not meeting standards. Several
comments from maritime companies felt that the requirements for
internal auditors should mirror ISM Code 12.4, which states that
``Personnel carrying out audits should be independent of the areas
being audited, unless this is impracticable due to the size and the
nature of the Company.''
The Coast Guard believes that some of these comments are based on a
misreading of Sec. 138.310. The section does not require an internal
auditor to be a person outside of the organization. However, to come
closer to the desired objectivity of a third-party organization, the
internal auditor may not be a person involved in the implementation of
the TSMS. In response to these comments on Sec. 138.310, the Coast
Guard has amended Sec. 138.310(d)(4) to include qualifying language
from ISM code 12.4: The auditor must be independent of the procedures
being audited, unless this is impracticable due to the size and the
nature of the organization. Thus, very small organizations may
potentially use someone from within their organization to perform the
audit.
Some commenters also recommended that the proposed requirement, in
Sec. 138.310(d)(2), for internal auditors to have completed ISO 9001-
2000 courses be deleted.
The Coast Guard does not agree. We believe that a robust auditing
system that includes both internal and external auditing processes
serves to enhance the effectiveness of a safety management system and
provides a venue for identification of deficiencies and a process for
corrective action. Requiring internal auditors to have completed an ISO
9001-2000 internal auditor/assessor training course, or a Coast Guard-
recognized equivalent course, is intended to ensure that the internal
auditor is familiar with basic auditing standards and procedures.
However, we want to accept those who have been trained under newer ISO
9001-2008, so we amended Sec. Sec. 138.310(d) and 139.130(b)(3) to
include that standard. In this final rule, both the ISO 9001-2000-based
training we referenced in the NPRM and the ISO 9001-2008-based training
meet our qualification requirement. The intended result of this
training is to ensure that the internal audit meets minimum standards.
One commenter requested more information regarding the accepted
course work for internal auditors. An individual offered suggestions
for the minimum education for internal auditors.
The Coast Guard disagrees. The Coast Guard has incorporated ISO
9001 standards for internal auditor competencies in Sec. 138.310 to
reflect the best practices found in industry. The Coast Guard does not
agree that standards either less than or in excess of these minimum
competencies enhance the credibility of the internal auditing process.
We made no changes from the proposed rule based on these comments.
We received comments that requested clarification of our
requirements for external audits in Sec. 138.315. One commenter
opposed the provision in Sec. 138.315(b)(2) that vessels must be
selected randomly for an external audit during the 5-year period of
validity of the TSMS certificate, which the commenter viewed as
subjecting a vessel to multiple external audits. He suggested that
satisfying Sec. 136.203 requirements for vessels with TSMS
certificates should be sufficient. Another was confused by Sec.
138.315(b)(2)'s requirement for an external audit prior to the issuance
of the TSMS certificate because he felt it was the initial audit that
leads to the TSMS certificate. One commenter questioned why we called
for random audits.
In response to these comments we have changed Sec. 138.315(b) to
clarify the requirements for external vessel audits. We removed the
requirement in proposed paragraph (b)(1) regarding the need for an
external audit on all vessels prior to an owner or managing operator
receiving the initial TSMS certificate. Upon reconsidering this
provision we determined it is not necessary and instead we considered
the need for vessel to undergo an external audit in relation to the
initial COI for the vessel. And in doing so we considered the two
different categories of vessels for which an owner or managing operator
would need to obtain an initial COI. First, there are the vessels that
have been owned or operated for more than six months which generally
will include all existing vessels that are now coming under this
subchapter. Secondly, there are newly constructed vessels as well as
existing vessels that an owner or managing operator may obtain, all of
which will need a COI to operate but which have been owned or operated
for less than 6 months. For the first category, Sec. 138.315(b)(1)
requires the vessel to undergo an external audit prior to obtaining the
initial COI. For the second category, Sec. 138.315(b)(2) requires that
the vessel undergo an external audit no
[[Page 40034]]
later than 6 months after receiving the initial COI. We note, that as
required by Sec. 138.505(b), the results of all external vessel audits
are required to be provided to the cognizant OCMI. We believe that 6
months of operation is sufficient for owners or managing operators to
fully implement their TSMS on their towing vessels and is also
consistent with other SMS provisions including the duration of interim
ISM vessel certificates.
Proposed Sec. 138.315(b)(2) has remained the same but is now Sec.
138.315(b)(3). The other change we made was to add Sec. 138.315(b)(4)
to clarify that not all information for an external audit necessarily
needs to come from the vessel examination as some may be obtained from
the owner or managing operator's office but that however, some of the
information must be obtained by visiting the vessel.
As noted, we made these changes to clarify when vessels need to
undergo an external audit as well as the relationship between the
external audit and a vessel's initial COI.
As for the comment regarding confusion caused by Sec.
138.315(b)(2), (now Sec. 138.315(b)(3)), we note that, as proposed,
paragraph (b)(1)'s requirement for an external audit of the vessel
before issuance of the initial TSMS certificate is separate from
paragraph (b)(2)'s requirement that an external audit of each vessel
must be conducted during the 5-year period of validity of the TSMS
certificate. We didn't view these requirements as confusing or
conflicting but as noted above, we have removed the requirement
proposed in Sec. 138.315(b)(1). Nor do we consider Sec. 138.315's
sequencing of external management audits and vessel audits as
confusing. As noted above, we removed proposed Sec. 138.315(b)(1) and
replaced it with provisions in (b)(1) and (b)(2) to specify when an
external vessel audit is required relative to a vessel receiving the
initial COI. Note that Sec. 138.315(a)(2) and new Sec. 138.315(b)(3)
continue to specify the external management and vessel audits required
during the validity period of the TSMS certificate. It is important
that all vessels undergo one external audit every five years along with
external management audits to verify that an owner or managing
operator's TSMS have been fully implemented and the TSMS certificate
can be renewed. In proposed Sec. 137.210(c), we did state that before
it could be placed in an audited program, a towing vessel must
successfully complete an initial audit by a third-party organization,
and then be audited as required by part 138. In this final rule we
removed any reference to an initial audit in part 137.
One commenter recommended replacing the random selection with a
requirement for at least one intermediate verification between the
second and third anniversary dates of the TSMS certificate. Another
commenter stated that Sec. 138.315's sequencing of external management
audits and vessel audits seems confusing.
The commenter's concern about proposed Sec. 138.315(b)(2)'s, now
Sec. 138.315(b)(3)'s, random-selection provision is unwarranted
because that paragraph specifically calls for only one (``an'')
external audit of vessels during the 5-year period. In addition, as
noted previously, we added Sec. 138.315(b)(4) to allow for the use of
objective evidence to verify compliance with some portions of the
audit; however, some portions require visiting each vessel during the
5-year period. We call for the vessels to be selected randomly to
provide a risk-based approach and maximum flexibility for ensuring
continual compliance with this subchapter. Therefore, we decline to
amend Sec. 138.315 to remove the random-selection provision.
We received comments from several companies noting that the
proposed requirement in Sec. 138.315(c), that audit documents to be
maintained for 5 years and submitted to Coast Guard upon request,
appears to conflict with the proposed Sec. 138.505 requirement that
the owner or managing operator submit each audit to the Coast Guard.
The Coast Guard agrees that these two sections contain different
record requirements, but we do not view them as conflicting
requirements. Paragraph (c) of Sec. 138.315 calls for the maintenance
of external audit results so that they are available when requested by
the Coast Guard inspectors or an external auditor. Coast Guard
inspectors may not have access to those audit reports submitted to the
TVNCOE and external auditors may not otherwise have access to results
from previous TPOs' management or vessel audits. The Coast Guard has
amended Sec. 138.505 to clarify who the submission is required to go
to and the submission timeframe for the external audit results.
Three commenters suggested that a provision be added to Sec.
138.315 that states the OCMI or COTP may be able to extend the external
audit time period due to the unavailability of an TPO.
The Coast Guard declines. Paragraphs (a) and (b) of Sec. 138.315
establish a range of time for companies and TPOs to schedule external
audits. A TPO that has been contracted to oversee the towing company's
TSMS program is responsible for maintaining the audit cycles required
by the regulations. The TPO has the ability to enter into contractual
agreements to conduct required audits. However, in response to these
comments, we added a paragraph (l) to Sec. 139.120 to clarify the
responsibilities of the TPO in regards to conducting required external
audits and surveys within the intervals established in this subchapter.
Some commenters recommended that text be added to Sec. 138.410 to
address the process an auditor must follow when he or she identifies a
non-conformity. These commenters recommended adding a requirement that
the TPO notify the owner or managing operator and the Coast Guard
immediately of any recognized hazardous condition that poses an
imminent hazard to personnel, the towing vessel, or the environment.
For less serious non-conformities, these commenters recommended that
the auditor only require the owner or managing operator to develop and
implement a corrective action plan.
The Coast Guard agrees with the commenters' suggested edits. First
of all, we amended Sec. 138.505 to make clear where external audit
result reports are to be submitted. Under Sec. 138.505, all detected
non-conformities would be reported to the Coast Guard because they
would be part of the results of any external audit. Section 138.505
contains requirements on what is to be submitted to the Coast Guard by
the external auditor and when it is to be submitted. In addition, we
also amended Sec. 138.410 to require the auditor to notify the Coast
Guard within 24 hours of discovering a major non-conformity which, as
defined in Sec. 136.110, would cover hazardous conditions that pose
imminent hazards. We also amended Sec. 138.410 in response to this
comment to ensure the auditor reports major non-conformities to the
owner or managing operator.
We received several comments, particularly from maritime companies,
requesting that we add language to proposed Sec. 138.500 to specify
which Coast Guard office or official the owner or managing operator
should notify prior to conducting a third-party audit and to clarify
that the Coast Guard's attendance at such audits--attendance that Sec.
138.500(b) allows the Coast Guard to require--would not or should not
cause delays in the audit.
The Coast Guard has amended Sec. 138.500(a) in response to these
comments to include a notification to the cognizant OCMI at least 72
hours prior to an external audit to mitigate potential delays in the
conduct of the audit from Coast Guard scheduling, if
[[Page 40035]]
attendance is required. In a related amendment, we deleted Sec.
139.170 in its entirety because those requirements are already stated
in parts 137 and 138.
A company suggested that Sec. 138.505 clarify that audit records
only be provided to the Coast Guard upon request. Also, a maritime
company requested to be able to submit documents required by Sec.
138.505 electronically.
The Coast Guard disagrees with the suggested change to Sec.
138.505 to only provide records upon request. Final reports from the
external management and vessel audits must be provided to the Coast
Guard within 30 days of an audit. For the Coast Guard to properly
oversee vessels using subchapter M's TSMS option, it is important that
it receives final reports soon after they are completed. As noted
above, we set the 30-day submission deadline in response to a previous
comment. We note that in addition to this submission requirement, Sec.
138.315(c) requires records of external audits to be maintained for 5
years and made available on request. These reports are valuable
historical records that must be available when needed by internal and
external auditors as well as by the Coast Guard.
As for submitting external audits records or results required by
Sec. 138.505 electronically, we noted earlier that we amended Sec.
140.915(b) to provide safeguards against false or late electronic
entries in towing vessel and TSMS records. If the submitter uses
equivalent safeguards for transmitting records, the Coast Guard will
accept electronically transmitted external audits records that Sec.
138.505 directs be submitted to the Towing Vessel National Center of
Expertise (managing operator's compliance audits) and the cognizant
OCMI (towing vessels external audits) so long as the means used allows
the Coast Guard to reliably verify the person making the submission and
the authenticity of the external audit records. For those seeking to
submit external audits records or results to the Coast Guard
electronically, the TSMS must address the means to be used to make
electronic submissions. We have amended Sec. 138.505 to reflect this
option.
We received comments from a maritime company and an individual
requesting more information regarding the address to which the results
of an external audit are to be submitted to the Coast Guard.
The Coast Guard agrees with these requests and has amended Sec.
138.505 so that it is clear to the TPO which Coast Guard office or
official external audit records must be submitted to. Also, we have
inserted the address for the Coast Guard Towing Vessel National Center
of Expertise.
We received six comments from maritime companies requesting more
information be provided regarding potential actions the Coast Guard may
take if an owner is found to be noncompliant with the TSMS or
requirements in subchapter M. Also, two commenters suggested that the
TSMS is ``unenforceable'' and that we do not have a sufficient penalty
process in place for violations.
The company and its vessels are subject to a broad range of actions
by the Coast Guard and the TPO depending on the conditions found on the
vessel. Companies and vessels operating under a TSMS that fail to meet
minimum requirements may be subject to enforcement, including Captain
of the Port orders restricting operations, suspension and withdrawal or
revocation of the COI, and suspension or revocation of the TSMS
certificate. Also, as we state in Sec. 140.1000, violations of the
provisions of this subchapter will subject the violator to the
applicable penalty provisions of Subtitle II of Title 46, and the
penalty provisions of Title 46, and Title 18, U.S.C.
A company expressed concern about whether the Coast Guard would
have resources to hire a sufficient number of competent vessel
inspectors for convenient scheduling for the company, including drydock
scheduling.
Regarding having a sufficient number of competent vessel
inspectors, as we indicated in response to comments above, the Coast
Guard is prepared for what it has estimated will be the demand for
annual inspection from owners and managing operators selecting the
Coast Guard inspection option. The Coast Guard will closely monitor the
demand for inspections and will make resource adjustments as necessary.
Two maritime companies felt that use of any Coast Guard inspection
resources should be based on risk and that those companies that have
had satisfactory safety records, and successful TSMS audits, should not
have the same level of Coast Guard oversight as companies with a
history of poor performance.
The Coast Guard agrees with the comment about its allocation of
resources and intends to use a risk-based approach based on safety,
survey, inspection and audit histories.
One commenter requested information regarding how the Coast Guard
will manage conflict of interest potentially created by future
employment opportunities in the towing vessel industry offered to those
conducting inspections. All Coast Guard personnel are bound by ethics
laws and regulations which govern their ability to seek and accept non-
federal positions following their government service.
One commenter urged the Coast Guard to obtain full jurisdiction
over regulated towing vessels, including areas that OSHA is currently
regulating.
This request is beyond the scope of this rulemaking. OSHA will
continue to enforce its requirements on shipyard employers that perform
shipyard employment subject to 29 CFR 1915 on inspected and uninspected
vessels. OSHA will also continue its current enforcement on uninspected
vessels.
A towing company suggested that a more ``streamlined'' TSMS be
offered to smaller companies so as to avoid burdensome administrative
requirements.
A safety management system in general, and the TSMS in particular,
is a flexible tool for management in that it is user-defined to address
the unique operations, equipment and hazards present in the vessel
operator's market. For the small business operator with a fleet of one
or two vessels the TSMS may not need to be an expansive document. The
requirements to identify the range of operations for a small towing
vessel serving a limited area and market is likely to be much less than
that of a larger towing vessel company consisting of dozens of vessels
and serving a large, diverse market over a large area.
The TSMS for small operators is scalable to their operation. Thus,
it can be ``streamlined'' to address a limited set of assets, process,
and personnel. As a towing vessel operation grows, so too would the
TSMS need to scale up to identify the growing inventory of operations
and accompanying safety concerns. We have not made any changes from the
proposed rule based on these comments.
One commenter suggested that the safety culture in the towing
vessel industry could be further developed by addressing the
communication barrier between managers and operation personnel.
We believe the safety culture the commenter refers to will be
greatly enhanced in companies with a TSMS in place. A TSMS is the
central document that directly links the towing vessel and the shore-
based management operation. For a TSMS to be effective, management and
operational personnel must continuously communicate. The TSMS documents
processes, responsibilities and required action that define the
[[Page 40036]]
mutually supporting actions between managers and operation personnel.
The Coast Guard believes that the integration of the TSMS will result
in enhanced safety as it promotes greater communication and also
defines corrective actions required when communications fail to produce
the intended result of improving safety.
One commenter suggested that for small companies that choose to
elect the Coast Guard inspection option, language should be added to
indicate that ``alternative compliance methodologies'' are acceptable.
As we noted above, the Streamlined Inspection Program in part 8,
subpart E, of this chapter, is an option that vessels subject to
subchapter M may seek to use to renew a COI. Also, in Sec. 136.115, we
proposed accepting certain alternative approaches to satisfying
subchapter M requirements. We did not propose, however, to allow
vessels subject to subchapter M to take advantage of part 8, subpart
D's, Alternative Compliance Program to obtain a COI. We have made no
changes from the proposed rule based on this comment.
Another commenter suggested updating the Streamlined Inspection
Program to include electronic, downloadable forms, and user-friendly
templates.
This suggestion is outside of the scope of this rulemaking. We made
no changes from the proposed rule based on this comment.
In the NPRM we discussed comments submitted in response to seven
questions we posed in a December 30, 2004, Inspection of Towing Vessels
notice. In response to that portion of the NPRM, one of these
commenters recommended that all vessels should comply with the proposed
SMS rules within 1 year. The same commenter suggested that using the
ISM Code from 2002 as a guideline in developing the SMS requirements
will allow for a number of operators using the AWO RCP to be compliant.
Neither our proposed rule nor this final rule would require towing
companies selecting the Coast Guard compliance option to establish a
safety management system. This rule provides an option for towing
companies to use the ISM systems currently published in 33 CFR part 96
or other safety management systems acceptable to the Coast Guard under
Sec. 138.225. The Coast Guard believes that we are providing
sufficient flexibility for towing companies that want to adopt the
safety management system option under subchapter M.
We also received two comments on the proposed rule that opposed the
TSMS. One stated that TSMS should not be the basis of any inspection
regime and that any governmental inspection program should be staffed
appropriately to provide for Coast Guard inspections, and asserted that
having third party or other industry inspectors opens the door to
profiteering or altered inspection requirements not originally intended
by the regulations.
The Coast Guard views subchapter M external and internal survey
programs, combined with Coast Guard oversight of vessels and
organizations choosing the TSMS option, as an effective means of
helping to ensure compliance with subchapter M requirements. In
addition, all vessels subject to subchapter M will be inspected by the
Coast Guard before obtaining a COI and at least once every 5 years. See
Sec. Sec. 136.210 and 136.212.
Another commenter stated that TSMS is not necessary as an option
because the Coast Guard can do the inspections as outlined in
subchapter T (Small Passenger Vessels) which incorporates everything
that is required in subchapter M. We disagree that subchapter T is
appropriate for the unique nature of towing vessel operations, which is
reflected in our authorization in 46 U.S.C. 3306(j) to establish an SMS
``appropriate for the characteristics, methods of operation, and nature
of service of towing vessels.'' We believe that a towing-vessel-
specific subchapter is appropriate, rather than imposing existing
inspected vessel regulations on towing vessels. Towing companies that
may lack the resources to develop and implement a TSMS, or choose not
to, must follow the Coast Guard inspection option.
I. Third-Party Organizations (TPOs) (Part 139)
We received several comments, mostly from maritime companies,
requesting that the list of approved TPOs be made available online.
The Coast Guard concurs with this recommendation and plans to
publish a list of TPOs for the towing vessel industry to refer to when
considering the selection of a TPO. The Towing Vessel National Center
of Expertise (TVNCOE) will update and maintain the list and make it
available at: www.uscg.mil/tvncoe.
Other commenters requested that Sec. 139.120 be changed to include
the name of the Coast Guard program office to which an organization
seeking to become a TPO should submit its request.
The Coast Guard agrees. We have amended Sec. 139.120 to identify
the office and address of the TVNCOE, where such requests should be
sent.
One commenter expressed concern regarding the option offered by the
wording of Sec. Sec. 139.115 and 139.120 for TPOs to create customized
audit guidelines and tools. The commenter pointed out that the variety
of audit reports could present inconsistencies during compliance
checks.
As proposed, part 138, subpart D, of this final rule requires that
audits must be of sufficient depth and breadth to ensure the owner or
managing operator meets the requirements outlined in Sec. 138.220. In
our NPRM, we noted that an elaborate TSMS designed for large operations
may be impractical for owners or managing operators with small
operations, and that a small company may seek to use a significantly
scaled down TSMS tailored to its operation. We acknowledge there will
be variations in TSMSs. Similarly, we acknowledge that Sec. Sec.
139.115 and 139.120 allows TPOs to develop customized audit guidelines
and tools. The Coast Guard intends to issue guidance that may include
sample checklists, job aids, and guides, but we have not changed
Sec. Sec. 139.115 and 139.120 based on this comment because the
requirements in part 138, subpart D, must still be met and we do not
favor more prescriptive, one-size-fits-all standards in part 139.
One commenter expressed confidence in the Coast Guard's ability to
oversee the inspection of towing vessels conducted by classification
societies. We received other comments expressing support for the use of
qualified or trained third-party auditors and surveyors. Also, several
maritime companies and a professional association supported Coast
Guard's proposal to allow smaller entities, other than recognized
classification societies, to apply for Coast Guard approval.
Under proposed Sec. 139.110 a recognized classification society
automatically would have met the requirements of a TPO for the purposes
of part 139. However, as noted above, we have amended Sec. 139.110 to
clarify the distinction between audits and surveys. A recognized
classification society meets the requirements of a TPO for the purpose
of performing audits. An authorized classification society meets the
requirements of a TPO for the purpose of performing surveys. We did
this to ensure the Coast Guard has evaluated the classification
society's ability to carry out vessel surveys. We added a definition in
Sec. 136.110 of ``authorized classification society'' for clarity.
Paragraph (c) of Sec. 139.110 has been amended to specify that
organizations qualifying as TPOs under paragraphs (a) or (b) of that
section must
[[Page 40037]]
ensure that employees providing services under part 139 hold proper
qualifications for the particular type of service being performed. We
also note that the criteria stated in our TPO application section,
Sec. 139.120, allow small entities to become TPOs. As we defined it,
the term ``third-party organization'' is used to describe an
organization approved by the Coast Guard to conduct independent
verifications to assess whether TSMSs and towing vessels comply with
applicable requirements contained in this subchapter.
All auditors and surveyors approved to conduct subchapter M
external surveys and audits would be part of a TPO. We set standards
for auditors and surveyors in Sec. 139.130, but these are used in
conjunction with Sec. 139.120 where we require TPO applicants to list
the organization's auditors and surveyors who meet the requirements of
Sec. 139.130. On further review of Sec. 139.130(a), the Coast Guard
realized it makes sense to include ``surveyor'' in this lead paragraph.
The specific qualifications for an auditor and a surveyor remain in
paragraphs (b) and (c), respectively. We have edited this section
accordingly.
One commenter expressed concern that the requirements for TPOs
would result in only classification societies qualifying to become
auditors. The commenter was concerned that class society personnel are
experienced in blue water shipping but not towing vessel operations.
The Coast Guard developed this rule to ensure that organizations,
including small entities, with the requisite knowledge, experience, and
qualifications would be eligible to become a TPO. The standards in part
139 allow organizations other than recognized classification societies
to become TPOs, and meeting these standards should be within the
capabilities of small entities seeking to provide such services to the
towing industry.
As qualified in our discussion above, Sec. 139.110 does not
subject recognized or authorized classification societies to additional
requirements for application as a TPO; however, as stated in Sec.
139.110(c), their employees providing services under this part must
have the proper qualifications in accordance with Sec. 139.130. The
Coast Guard established this requirement to ensure that employees of
recognized classification societies have the proper experience in
towing vessel operations in order for them to carry out TPO audits
under subchapter M.
To help readers better understand that relationship, in the
regulatory text of this final rule we have converted references to
``approved third-party auditor'' or ``approved third-party surveyor''
to show this relationship--e.g., ``surveyor or auditor from a third-
party organization.'' Also, although we have left some difficult-to-
change instances in place, we avoid using the word ``approved'' with
TPO because, as noted above, by definition a TPO is approved.
We received several comments, particularly from maritime companies,
supporting Coast Guard's oversight of third-party auditors and urging
the Coast Guard to implement the approval process for third parties
prior to the finalization of the rule. Commenters felt that the Coast
Guard would need to ensure that a sufficient pool of third-party
approvers is available prior to the increased demand created by
subchapter M compliance.
The Coast Guard is aware of the concern regarding the availability
of third-party organizations. Subchapter M regulations governing third-
party organizations need to become effective before the Coast Guard
will be able to evaluate requests from organizations seeking to become
a TPO under part 139. That effective date is July 20, 2016. Also, on
that date, in accordance with Sec. 139.110, recognized classification
societies and authorized classification societies may begin acting as
TPOs for the purpose of conducting subchapter M audits and surveys. As
we noted above, we used a phased approach in our Sec. 136.202
deadlines for obtaining a COI so as to distribute the work load over a
6-year period from the effective date of this final rule.
A commenter suggested that the Coast Guard publish a Navigation and
Vessel Inspection Circular (NVIC) that provides the qualification
process for TPOs.
The Coast Guard plans to issue a guide to assist small entities,
including those interested in becoming a third-party organization under
subchapter M. However, we believe that part 139 is sufficiently
specific. Section 139.120 identifies the information an organization
would need to submit to become a TPO for purposes of subchapter M. We
have amended Sec. 139.120 so it more precisely identifies where such
requests should be sent. Section 139.130 includes a list of the
qualifications of auditors and surveyors that those applying to become
a TPO need to use to identify that organization's auditors and
surveyors who meet these requirements. The Coast Guard will consider
issuing guidance if it identifies wide-spread confusion after this rule
is published.
Some commenters, including maritime companies and trade
associations, viewed the qualifications required for surveyors in Sec.
139.130 as inadequate and recommended that the qualifications include
sufficient background, training, and experience to qualify as a TPO.
One of these commenters suggested that training for both auditors and
surveyors should be provided by an independent accreditation
organization. A commenter provided text edits to the language in
proposed Sec. 139.130(b)(2) and recommended several minimum education
requirements for auditors and surveyors.
Section 139.130(c) already specifies a minimum level of education,
skills, and experience needed for surveyors from TPOs. The ISO standard
training requirement for auditors and the marine surveyor's
accreditation requirement, as stated in Sec. 139.130, incorporate a
role of independent accreditation organizations in the required
training for both surveyors and auditors from TPOs. The Coast Guard
feels that the criteria in Sec. 139.130, which lists qualifications of
auditors and surveyors, provides a sufficient minimum level of
education, skills and experience needed for third-party surveyors and
auditors, and that we cannot point to evidence that higher-level-
education requirements would be justified. Owners, managing operators,
and TPOs can establish additional requirements at their discretion.
Some commenters suggested that the Coast Guard require surveyors to
receive ISO 9000 series training.
In Sec. 139.130 we include successful completion of an ISO 9001-
2000 or 9001-2008 lead auditor/assessor course or Coast Guard
recognized equivalent qualification for auditors, but not surveyors.
The Coast Guard does not believe that we should add training in ISO
9001 standards as a required qualification for surveyors because
surveyors conduct direct inspections of vessel equipment and systems as
opposed to auditing SMS processes. In addition, the ISO does not have a
9001 equivalent for surveying at this time.
We received a comment requesting that existing qualified and
certified inspectors that participate in an auditing program be
``grandfathered'' as approved third-party inspectors.
The Coast Guard does not intend to allow grandfathering of existing
inspectors who may be participating in some form of an existing
program. The Coast Guard has no oversight of these personnel and has no
specified minimum qualifications for them to
[[Page 40038]]
conduct such work. If a person with qualifications required in Sec.
139.130 wishes to conduct subchapter M TSMS audits or survey, he or she
would need to start or become part of a TPO.
We received requests for more information regarding the monitoring
and removal process of auditors or third-party companies.
In Sec. 139.145, we describe the process for a suspension of
approval when the Coast Guard has determined that a TPO is not
complying with the provisions of part 139. Under that process the Coast
Guard will provide details to the TPO of the organization's failure to
comply and provide a time period for the organization to correct its
failure(s). In this final rule, we shorten Sec. 139.145 by replacing a
repeated list of procedures the Coast Guard must follow for a partial
suspension with a reference pointing back to the same procedures listed
in paragraph (a) for a suspension.
In Sec. 139.150, we make clear that the Coast Guard may revoke the
approval of a TPO if the organization has demonstrated a pattern or
history of failing to comply with part 139, substantially deviates from
the terms of the approval granted under part 139, or has failures that
indicate to the Coast Guard that the organization is no longer capable
of carrying out its duties as a TPO. We amended Sec. 139.150, to
provide provisions for Coast Guard notification to TPOs of actions
taken under Sec. 139.150. In terms of monitoring, we note that Sec.
139.160 lays out means for the Coast Guard to oversee TPOs.
Two commenters requested more information regarding the reference
to ``Required training courses for the auditing of a Towing Safety
Management System'' in Sec. 139.130(b)(4).
Paragraph (b)(4) of Sec. 139.130 in the proposed rule listed
``[s]uccessful completion of a required training course for the
auditing of a Towing Safety Management System'' as one of the
qualifications in paragraph (b) an auditor must meet. Because auditors
must meet all the qualifications listed in paragraph (b), we have
deleted the redundant word ``required'' from paragraph (b)(4). Also,
for added clarity and consistency we removed ``required'' from
paragraph (b)(5)(ii) for the previously stated reason.
Given the nature of the towing industry, the Coast Guard believes
that auditors should complete a TSMS-specific auditing course. At the
time of this writing, the Coast Guard is aware of at least one TSMS
Auditor course and the Coast Guard believes that additional courses
will be developed once this rule becomes effective, similar to the way
courses developed for auditors of ISM-based safety management systems.
We anticipate that market forces will meet the demand for TSMS-specific
auditing courses.
One commenter requested that the regulation be modified to only
accept auditors that are U.S. citizens.
The Coast Guard disagrees with this recommendation. This commenter
did not provide reasons why we should make the requested change and we
find no reason to base the eligibility for becoming an auditor in a TPO
on citizenship. There are towing vessels operating overseas or in U.S.
jurisdictions outside of the continental U.S. Requiring that an auditor
be a U.S. citizen might unnecessarily limit the availability of
auditors to these vessels. Also, a recognized classification society
may operate around the world and is not required to employ only U.S.
citizens.
A commenter suggested that both auditors and surveyors must be
accredited by an independent accreditation organization that is
accepted by the Coast Guard and is organized especially for the purpose
of accrediting auditors and surveyors to perform work in documenting
compliance with subchapter M requirements for towing vessels. The
commenter did not believe that the National Association of Marine
Surveyors (NAMS), the Society of Accredited Marine Surveyors (SAMS), or
another other organization should be allowed to accredit individual
surveyors for purposes of subchapter M until the Coast Guard has
approved the organization's accreditation processes. This commenter
suggested the possibility that this accreditation process could also be
done by an independent third-party auditor/surveyor accreditation
organization that is accepted by the Coast Guard.
We note that, that as with other organizations, NAMS and SAMS are
not required to apply for approval to the Coast Guard to accredit
individual surveyors. In Sec. 139.130, where we list qualifications
for auditors and surveyors, we have removed paragraph (c)(4), which
references accredited marine surveyors and NAMS and SAMS. Instead, we
added ``accredited marine surveyor'' to a list of other relevant marine
experience in paragraph (c)(2)(ii).
These edits eliminate names of specific accrediting organizations,
but still include work experience as an accredited marine surveyor as a
factor to be considered and identified in applications. The Coast Guard
believes that accreditation is a valuable factor to consider, but not
an essential one--as reflected in the proposed rule which only required
that qualifications from paragraph (c)(1) (education) and one of the
two remaining paragraphs, (c)(2)(i) or (ii), be met. At this time, the
Coast Guard does not see the need for it to accept an independent
accreditation organization for the purpose of accrediting subchapter M
auditors and surveyors.
Some commenters recommended that the Coast Guard require that all
TPOs provide and maintain a list of current and former auditors and
surveyors.
As we proposed in the NPRM, Sec. 139.135(a) of the final rule
specifically requires TPOs to ``maintain a list of current and former
auditors and surveyors.'' In Sec. 139.135(b), we remove the word ``for
approval,'' but retained the requirement that to add an auditor or
surveyor, the TPO must submit that person's experience, background and
qualifications to the Coast Guard. We note that it is the
responsibility of the TPO to ensure that auditors and surveyors
conducting work for their organization satisfy the qualifications
requirements in Sec. 139.130. The submissions required by Sec.
139.135(b) will assist the Coast Guard in its continual oversight of
TPOs.
A State government and a task force suggested that the Coast Guard
consider developing a TPO-rating criterion that is based on the
percentage of towing vessel companies (for which the TPO has issued a
TSMS certificate) that the Coast Guard independently finds to have
major non-conformities. If the number of companies in a given period
having major non-conformities exceeds that percentage, the TPO should
be automatically placed on the a ``grey list,'' and be required to
demonstrate to the Coast Guard that it is taking actions to improve its
oversight/auditing program. The commenters felt that this criterion
would help vessel owners and operators assess the qualification of its
oversight program.
The Coast Guard will consider this recommendation after it gains
experience with the implementation of these rules when developing
metrics for evaluating and overseeing TPOs.
Two commenters expressed concern that a company may switch TPOs to
find one that enforces compliance with subchapter M less rigorously.
These commenters suggested that the Coast Guard develop a criterion to
prevent towing vessel companies from ``third-party organization
hopping,'' such as a provision that if a towing vessel company changes
TPOs more than once in a 5-year period, an external Coast Guard
inspection of the company's
[[Page 40039]]
TSMS documents and vessels is automatically triggered.
The Coast Guard acknowledges that a company may seek to switch its
TPO for the reason suggested, but a company may also change its TPO for
reasons beyond its control or for reasons other than seeking to avoid
full compliance with subchapter M. Because switching TPOs is not
necessarily a reason to focus more attention on a given company, the
Coast Guard would be reluctant to adopt the more-than-once-in-5-years
metric suggested by the commenters, but it does acknowledge that
changing TPOs could be a signal that more scrutiny should be focused on
a company. We note that the monetary costs and the loss of time
associated with such changes will be factors a company would consider
before switching to a different TPO, and therefore we do not expect TPO
switching to be a common occurrence.
Referencing Sec. Sec. 139.120 and 139.155, a commenter noted that
the NPRM does not specify a process for a company to follow if it needs
to appeal a decision of its TPO to deny or revoke issuance of a TSMS
certificate. The commenter also noted that the Coast Guard must create
a specific appeals process because towing vessel companies with a TSMS
are dependent on third-party documentation to obtain a COI. The
commenter wrote that the proposed rule required third parties to
develop procedures for appeals, and allows a company to follow
existing, general appeals procedures, but that more detail is needed.
The Coast Guard has provided a specific appeal process in this
final rule. As reflected in above, in Sec. 136.180 we stated that any
person directly affected by a decision or action taken under this
subchapter by or on behalf of the Coast Guard, may appeal in accordance
with subpart 1.03 in subchapter A of this chapter. We have added Sec.
1.03-55 to identify the Coast Guard official or office appeals should
be directed to, including the appeal of matters relating to action of a
third party, such as when a third party rescinds a TSMS certificate.
A commenter expressed concern regarding a potential conflict of
interest for companies that develop TSMSs or provide TSMS-related
training sessions. The commenter said that such a company would not be
able to objectively inspect systems that they developed because finding
fault with the towing company would be a reflection on their own work.
Moreover, this commenter saw a related potential conflict of interest
resulting if the only companies that could be hired to conduct surveys
and audits were those that didn't develop the TSMS. In that situation,
the commenter noted, it may be the developer's direct competitor who is
hired as the TPO and that competitor would have a natural tendency to
be biased against programs that look different from the ones it
produces.
Section 139.120(o) requires TPO applicants to disclose any
potential conflicts of interest. Section 139.120(p) requires applicants
to submit a statement to the Coast Guard stating that their employees
who are engaged in audits and surveys will not engage in any activities
that could result in a conflict of interest, which we define in Sec.
136.110, or that could otherwise limit the independent judgment of the
auditor, surveyor, or organization. And under Sec. 139.150(a)(3),
conflicts of interest are a factor the Coast Guard may consider when
deciding whether to revoke the approval of a TPO. An organization does
not have to be a TPO to develop or help implement a TSMS, but a TPO is
the only entity that can verify compliance with a TSMS or issue a TSMS
certificate.
One company stated that an organization should be assigned to
oversee the third-party process in order to ensure consistency in the
use of resource materials and tools. Another commenter asked what
process would be in place to oversee TPO training and approvals.
As reflected in the NPRM and this final rule, the Coast Guard will
provide direct oversight of TPOs. A list of Coast Guard oversight
activities appears in Sec. 139.160. This oversight is intended to
ensure that TPOs that conduct audits and surveys for towing vessels
subject to this subchapter comply with part 139 requirements. To the
extent consistency in the use of resource materials and tools by TPOs
is required by part 139, the Coast Guard will provide the oversight
requested. To the extent it is not, we view the requested oversight as
an area best left to market forces. In reviewing proposed Sec.
139.160(g), which discussed the Coast Guard being able to require a
replacement for noncompliance or poor performance, we deleted that
paragraph because it is covered by suspension provisions in Sec.
139.145(b).
We received a comment from a towing company that felt that because
of limited Coast Guard resources, relying on third-party auditors would
be a solution to the increase in demand for inspections after
implementation of subchapter M.
We concur that the use of TPOs under the TSMS option may reduce the
number of Coast Guard inspections required to implement subchapter M.
We received comments from towing companies and professional
associations that suggested that TPO requirements in proposed Sec.
139.160(f) and (g) be moved to Sec. 138.510 because of the discussion
of owner and managing operator compliance oversight of TSMS. One
commenter suggested that Sec. 139.160(f) be moved under Sec. 138.400.
The Coast Guard disagrees with these recommendations. Section
139.160 lists discretionary oversight activities the Coast Guard
employs in its oversight of TPOs. These oversight activities should not
be moved under Sec. 138.510, which describes the Coast Guard's
authority to direct owners, managing operators, and third parties to
explain or demonstrate portions of the TSMS when there is evidence that
the TSMS is not in compliance with part 138 requirements, nor under
Sec. 138.400, which addresses audits of safety management systems. We
did remove Sec. 139.160(g), however, because it is covered by
suspension provisions in Sec. 139.145(b), and we also removed proposed
paragraph (c) because there was no need for us to refer to assigning
personnel to observe or participate in audits or surveys.
A commenter suggested that the Coast Guard open communications with
stakeholders to become better informed of options to ensure consistency
in the auditing process.
The Coast Guard established the TVNCOE in 2010 to help promote
consistency in the regulation of towing vessels and to promote
communications between the Coast Guard and industry as we moved towards
certification of towing vessels. The TVNCOE communicates routinely
through their national customer service representatives, list server,
and Web site (https://www.uscg.mil/tvncoe) with those who will be
subject to subchapter M requirements. As the Coast Guard approving
authority for TPOs, TVNCOE will have oversight responsibilities to
assure consistency with the auditing process.
One commenter said that the Coast Guard needs to ``assure the
integrity'' of the third-party approval system.
The Coast Guard expects that by using a single entity, the TVNCOE,
to review and approve TPOs, the Coast Guard will ensure consistency and
integrity in the subchapter M TPO system.
A commenter felt that in the context of part 139, it is not clear
if a third-party auditor needs to be associated with a TPO or if an
auditor can be approved as an independent operation.
The Coast Guard notes that to perform external audits under
subchapter M, the
[[Page 40040]]
auditor must be listed by a TPO as one of its auditors who meets the
requirements of Sec. 139.130. This individual need not be exclusively
employed by a single TPO. It would be possible for a single auditor--
who worked in a remote location, for example--to work for more than one
TPO. As previously mentioned, the Coast Guard has revised language in
this final rule to make it clear that under subchapter M, external
surveys and audits must be conducted by auditors and surveyors who are
part of--and subject to oversight by--a TPO.
An individual noted that part 139 does not contain procedures on
how to conduct a damage survey of a vessel.
Part 139 deals with TPOs and would not contain requirements
relating to a damage survey. Surveys are generally discussed in part
137. Section 137.300(b) discusses an OCMI's ability to require further
examination of the vessel in the event of damage. In addition, if the
vessel is damaged, Sec. 136.240 addresses how to obtain permission to
proceed for repairs. The extent of a given vessel's damage and other
circumstances may warrant specific survey requirements.
One towing company suggested the need for a peer auditing program
to assess consistency and competency among TPO auditors and surveyors.
TPOs will be required to adhere to ISO 9001 standards for operating
in accordance with a Quality Management System, and their auditors must
have completed training in ISO 9001 Quality Management Systems
Auditing. We list ``accredited marine surveyor'' in Sec. 139.130,
along with other-relevant-marine-experience, as a non-mandatory
qualification for surveyors.
We do not agree with the commenter that supplemental peer-review of
TPO auditors and surveyors is warranted or necessary. We note that the
work of surveyors will be subject to audits, and as noted above in our
discussion of Sec. 139.160, the Coast Guard will be overseeing the
work of TPOs.
An individual argued that the intent of the term ``third party'' is
to explain that the Coast Guard is a third party to towing vessels and
the term should not apply to the organizations to which the Coast Guard
is delegating authority.
The Coast Guard does not use the term ``third party'' in the way
suggested by this commenter. We use the term to refer to a TPO, which
we define as ``an organization approved by the Coast Guard to conduct
independent verifications to assess whether towing vessels or their
TSMSs comply with applicable requirements contained in this
subchapter.'' As previously noted, we have made changes to clarify our
third-party references in this rule, but we have made no changes from
the proposed rule based on this comment.
As noted above in our discussion of comments related to part 138,
we removed Sec. 139.170 because those attendance provisions are
already stated in parts 137 and 138.
J. Operations (Part 140)
We received many general comments from individuals, companies, and
associations concerning our operational requirements in part 140.
Two commenters noted that the purpose section of part 140 does not
explain how the Coast Guard will ensure that non-TSMS operating
companies comply with the regulations because these companies do not
have documented written procedures and are not subject to audits. One
commenter expressed concern that non-TSMS companies would have lower
operation costs and their services would be less safe.
In the NPRM, the Coast Guard offered the TSMS or Coast Guard annual
inspection option. For vessels that do not choose the TSMS option, we
will use Coast Guard inspections to verify compliance with the
requirements of this subchapter. We are confident that the Coast Guard
annual inspection option will help to ensure that towing vessels are
operated at an appropriate level of safety. The casualty reviews
presented in the benefits chapter of the Regulatory Analysis found many
instances in which the Coast Guard inspection and TSMS options were
rated the same in risk reduction benefits and other cases where the
TSMS options scored higher. If a company believes the Coast Guard
inspection option is more cost-effective than a TSMS, this rule
provides the flexibility for that choice. We have made no changes from
the proposed rule based on this comment.
In reviewing Sec. 140.200, and similar sections in parts 141
through 144 which state that if a TSMS is applicable to the vessel it
must have provisions for compliance with that part, we decided to
delete those sections. They are unnecessary because part 138 addresses
what the TSMS must cover regarding all subchapter M requirements.
A company noted that the list of mariners required to have a
Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) by Sec.
140.205(e)'s reference to 33 CFR 101.105 is too broad and should
instead be the same requirement as under 33 CFR 101.515. Further, an
individual noted that the rule did not have language explaining the
requirement for TWIC cards for individual employees on vessels moving
certain dangerous cargo.
In part 140, subpart B, which includes Sec. 140.205, we do require
that the vessel be operated in accordance with applicable laws and
regulations, but there is no explicitly stated requirement for
personnel to hold a TWIC. The Coast Guard understands the problem with
Sec. 140.205(e)'s reference to 33 CFR 101.105, and in the final rule
we removed that reference and replaced it with the personal
identification requirements of 33 CFR 101.515--which do not require
personnel to have a TWIC.
One commenter suggested that complete background checks for
employees should not be required for those crewmembers who are required
to obtain a TWIC.
The Coast Guard notes that in general a background check is
included as part of receiving a TWIC, and we also note that we are not
requiring background checks in these regulations.
Regarding a Master's authority on board, an individual suggested
that proposed Sec. 140.210 ensure that the TSMS contains a clear
statement emphasizing the master's authority.
The Coast Guard proposed in Sec. 140.210(b) that the master must
take adequate corrective action or cease operations when he or she
believes that an unsafe condition exists. Moreover, Sec. 140.210(c)
further states that the master has the authority to take steps deemed
necessary and prudent to assist vessels in distress or for other
emergency conditions. The Coast Guard believes that these requirements
are sufficient to provide the master of the vessel the appropriate
latitude and discretion to exercise his or her duties to ensure the
safety of the vessel. In reviewing Sec. 140.210, we have added the
officer in charge of a navigational watch as also having the
responsibility to cease operation or take adequate corrective action if
he or she believes it is unsafe for the vessel to proceed. Also, we
amended Sec. 140.210(d) to indicate that the crew must ensure that
either the master or the officer in charge of a navigational watch is
made aware of the vessel's condition. And in Sec. 140.605 we moved a
requirement into paragraph (a) that was covered by proposed paragraph
(c) and added ``or officer in charge of a navigational watch'' in the
discussion of determining if the vessel meets all stability
requirements before getting underway. We made similar revisions to the
requirements for master or officer in charge of a navigational watch in
Sec. Sec. 140.610(c) (hatches and openings) and 140.615(b) (tests and
examinations).
[[Page 40041]]
One commenter felt that if the language in Sec. 140.210(d) is
intended for crew members who are responsible for maintaining a
vessel's COI, then the Coast Guard should require that the vessel's
TSMS contain a provision requiring that crew members receive training
on how to complete the tasks assigned to them by the TSMS and how to
comply with the COI.
The Coast Guard proposed in Sec. 138.220(b)(2)(ii) that the TSMS
contain a policy relating to training personnel in ``duties associated
with the execution of the TSMS.'' The Coast Guard believes that this
requirement is sufficient to ensure that crew members are aware of
their duties under the TSMS. We have made no changes from the proposed
rule based on this comment.
A company suggested that the term ``pilot'' would be more
appropriate instead of ``mate'' in Sec. 140.210(c). Another commenter
suggested that ``mate (pilot)'' be deleted from Sec. 140.210(c)
because its current use suggested that the mate and master were equal,
rather than the master having the ultimate authority on the ship.
Alternatively, the commenter suggested that language be added to Sec.
140.210(c) stating that the mate must inform the master before
deviating from the COI if time and circumstances permit.
The Coast Guard recognizes that throughout the diverse towing
industry there are differences in terminology, including in the use of
``pilot'' or ``mate.'' For purposes of consistency with other sections,
the Coast Guard has chosen to use the terms ``master or mate (pilot)''
in this rule, or ``officer in charge of a (or the) navigational watch''
as appropriate, as they are the most common currently applied terms in
related regulations and policy, including manning regulations in 46 CFR
part 15. The Coast Guard does not agree with the comment about ``mate
(pilot)'' because we are simply referring to the responsibility of the
person in charge of the navigational watch. The Master retains overall
responsibility for the safety of the towing vessel as prescribed in
Sec. 140.210(a). We have made no changes from the proposed rule based
on this comment.
We received two comments suggesting the development of a policy to
restrict the use of cell phones and other non-essential electronic
devices by pilothouse watchstanders.
The Coast Guard has added language in Sec. 140.210(d) requiring
the crew to minimize distractions when performing duties. This
amendment is intended to prevent the non-essential use of cell phones
and other distractions that take away from a crewmember's situational
awareness. Given the commenters' focus on pilothouse watchstanders, we
have amended Sec. 140.640 to expressly require the officer in charge
of a navigational watch to maintain situational awareness and minimize
distractions.
We received two comments suggesting that either the word
``lookout'' be deleted from Sec. 140.400(c), or that the word be
changed to the phrase ``supplemental lookout.'' They argued that the
term ``lookout'' was superfluous because the master or mate serves as
his or her own lookout.
The Coast Guard is requiring in Sec. 140.400 that a record be
maintained for all watchstanders going on and off watch. Lookouts are
added by the master or mate (pilot) under the provisions of Sec.
140.630. This does not preclude the Master or Mate (Pilot) from acting
as a lookout, when appropriate. Section 140.400 requires that lookouts
and all other members of the navigation watchstanding team must have
times of service entered and recorded. Our addition of ``officer in
charge of a navigational watch'' to the list of watchstanders does not
change our need to include lookouts.
We received comments from an individual and an association who
recommended that the Coast Guard should require that any mariner,
engineer, or watchstander that works in the engine room, or near
machinery, be provided with initial safety training and additional
training on the operation and maintenance of installed machinery prior
to beginning work in these areas.
In Sec. Sec. 140.410(b)(10) and 140.515, the Coast Guard
specifically requires safety orientation training on the awareness of
and expected response to any hazards inherent to the operation of the
towing vessel which may pose a threat to life, property, or the
environment. Section 15.405 of 46 CFR requires that crewmembers be
familiar with the relevant characteristics of the vessel prior to
assuming their duties and responsibilities, including the main
propulsion and auxiliary machinery, such as steering gear systems and
controls. We have amended Sec. Sec. 140.405 and 140.410 to note that
personnel must meet the requirements in Sec. Sec. 15.405 and 15.1105
as appropriate. In Sec. 140.405, we also added threats to the
environment during an emergency as situations when the duties and duty
stations of each person onboard must be identified; this amendment is
consistent with general vessel operation objectives stated in Sec.
140.205(a).
Under Sec. Sec. 140.510 and 140.515, it is the responsibility of
the owner or managing operator to identify the unique training required
to mitigate the risk to the specific machinery and operating equipment
aboard each particular towing vessel.
Several commenters suggested that proposed Sec. 140.415 include
the following text in the ``reserved'' paragraph: ``A safety
orientation need not be provided to an individual that is not a
crewmember if that individual is accompanied while on board the towing
vessel by a crewmember who is familiar with the items specified in
Sec. 140.415(a).''
The Coast Guard does not agree. The Coast Guard believes it is
unreasonable to assume that during an emergency the escorting crewman
would have no other responsibilities or duties other than escorting the
individual at all times while aboard the vessel. The Coast Guard
believes that a safety orientation for individuals visiting the vessel
would not place an undue burden in terms of time or distraction. The
Coast Guard has made no changes from the proposed rule based on these
comments. However, note that for simplicity we have removed the
``reserved'' paragraph, made the previous paragraph (a) into
introductory text, and made the previous subparagraphs of (a) into
paragraphs (a) through (d), as appropriate.
One commenter asked for clarity regarding specific drills and
training that would be required in Sec. 140.420(a), and thought that
the requirement of drills to respond to ``other threats to life,
property, or the environment'' was too ambiguous. Another noted that
additional requirements for first-aid trainings should be included in
the regulation.
The Coast Guard in Sec. 140.420(a) provided specific emergency
drills that must be performed. This includes abandoning the vessel,
recovering persons from the water, responding to onboard fires and
flooding, or responding to other threats to life, property, or the
environment. The owner or managing operator is responsible for
identifying any other additional training and drills required in
addition to the above identified requirements based on the specific
intended service of their vessels. This may be covered by the required
risk assessment for TSMS vessels.
The Coast Guard has made no changes from the proposed rule based on
these comments.
We received a recommendation for text additions to proposed Sec.
140.420 that included the option for ``e-learning'' for emergency
drills and trainings. The commenters suggested that the Coast Guard not
require follow-
[[Page 40042]]
on discussions with a subject matter expert if the ``e-learning''
provides scoring at the completion of training and the individual
receives a score higher than the minimum required by the TSMS.
The Coast Guard in Sec. 140.420(e) specifically provides for
alternative forms of instruction for the training aspect of Sec.
140.420; however, the participation in emergency drills must take place
on board the vessel so far as practicable. This section permits
training required by this rule to be conducted by viewing
electronically or digitally formatted training materials followed by a
live discussion led by someone familiar with the subject matter. The
Coast Guard believes that follow-on discussions with members of the
crew and interactive discussions provide insights into the specific
functions of emergency procedures aboard a particular ship and allow
crew members to individually and collectively discuss specific actions
and expectations of each other during drills or actual emergencies.
Further, to ensure that the alternative form of instruction is
sufficient, we amended Sec. 140.420(e) by adding requirements that a
competent individual provide a demonstration using equipment that is
the subject of the training.
We received several comments on Sec. 140.420(d). An individual
noted that ``rescue boat'' was not defined in Sec. 136.110. The
commenter questioned whether the Coast Guard was using the terms
``skiff'' and ``rescue boat'' synonymously in Sec. 140.420(d) and
requested that the Coast Guard define ``rescue boat'' if ``rescue
boat'' and ``skiff'' were intended to be different vessels. Another
commenter felt that requiring a safety orientation for crewmembers to
be conducted annually as proposed in Sec. 140.420(d)(1) was
unnecessary and burdensome.
The Coast Guard recognizes ``skiffs'' and ``rescue boats'' as
different types of vessels and did not use them interchangeably in
Sec. 140.420(d). The Coast Guard agrees that ``rescue boat'' should be
defined and has amended Sec. 136.110 to provide a definition.
As for the second comment, the Coast Guard agrees and has removed
proposed Sec. 140.420(d)(1), which contains the requirement for an
annual safety orientation. The requirements for when a safety
orientation should be conducted can be found in Sec. 140.410(b). The
Coast Guard has amended that paragraph to clarify that a safety
orientation is required for a crewmember prior to that crewmember
getting underway for the first time on a particular towing vessel.
Also, in Sec. 140.410(c) we corrected a reference to ``new vessel,''
by switching it to ``other vessel'' regarding requirements for safety
orientation provided to crewmembers who received a safety orientation
on another vessel. Furthermore in Sec. 140.410(d) we amended paragraph
(d)(3) to require the signature in addition to name of those providing
training.
In reviewing Sec. 140.420(d), we added paragraph (d)(5) which
states that credentialed mariners holding an officer endorsement do not
require the instruction listed in paragraph (d) with the exception of
launching a skiff, if one is listed as an item of emergency equipment
to abandon ship or recover persons overboard. We added a similar
provision in Sec. 140.645(c) for credentialed mariners holding Able
Seaman or officer endorsements regarding navigation safety training
requirements in Sec. 140.645. These changes allow credentialed
mariners to use their previous training to meet specified subchapter M
training requirements.
One commenter suggested that the term ``work vests and anti-
exposure work suits'' be used instead of ``work vest'' in Sec. 140.430
because anti-exposure work suits are also approved under 46 CFR
160.053.
The Coast Guard does not agree with this suggestion. Vessel
personnel are afforded three choices of approved equipment that they
may use. In Sec. 140.430 the Coast Guard addresses the wearing of work
vests and states that life jackets, immersion suits, and work vests
must all meet applicable regulations. The term ``anti-exposure work
suit'' does not appear within 46 CFR subpart 160.053. The Coast Guard
has made no changes from the proposed rule based on these comments.
We received several comments requesting that Sec. 140.430 permit
type III Personal Flotation Devices (PFD) as an alternate to work
vests. One commenter requested that work vests worn at night not
require a light.
Section 140.430 provides the standard requirements for the wearing
of work vests; however, companies can require the use of approved
flotation devices that are of a higher type rating. The Coast Guard
does not agree with the comment requesting the removal of the lighting
requirement for work vests worn at night as this is an important safety
feature for night time operations. We note that we did amend a
reference in Sec. 140.430 to a paragraph in Sec. 141.340 based on
amendments we made in Sec. 141.340; we changed the paragraph reference
from ``(c)'' to ``(g)(1).''
We received several comments opposing the requirement in Sec.
140.435(b) and (c) for small crews and low-risk environments to
maintain automatic external defibrillators (AEDs) on board towing
vessels. Commenters, including maritime companies, felt the proposed
requirement should be removed because subchapter T, which applies to
vessels in higher risk environments, does not require AEDs. Others felt
that the cost of the equipment and training would be a burden on small
companies. A maritime company requested that harbor boats be exempted
from the requirement because of the emergency response personnel and
land-based assistance available. Also, we received several comments
that supported the requirement and need for AEDs on towing vessels. An
individual suggested clarifying that the intent of the requirement is
for vessels that are ``double crewed'' and not those containing
``overnight accommodations.'' Two commenters suggested that the
training for AED use should be left to the manufacturer's
recommendations.
Due to the comparatively high cost of the carriage (estimated by
the Coast Guard at $2,500 per unit for each vessel), maintenance, and
training of AEDs on board towing vessels, the Coast Guard has decided
to remove the AED requirements proposed in Sec. 140.435(b) and (c).
However, companies can elect to carry, maintain, and train crews on
equipment above and beyond the scope of subchapter M requirements.
Owners and managing operators can address AED carriage using a risk-
based approach through the requirement to implement procedures to
identify and mitigate health and safety hazards in Sec. 140.510.
We received some comments on safety concerns that were not included
in the NPRM. Two commenters noted that the NPRM does not include the
safe remediation of asbestos and suggested either referencing OSHA
regulations or other related code in the rulemaking or drafting our own
regulations and adding them to the rulemaking. A commenter also
expressed concerns regarding carbon monoxide exposure from exhaust
leaks in the towing vessels and suggested that the Coast Guard include
guidance on protection against carbon monoxide exposure.
Another commenter suggested that the Coast Guard implement a ``No
Smoking'' policy for mariners. The same commenter and an individual
requested that Coast Guard institute hearing protection programs as
well. Similarly, a commenter suggested that the Coast Guard implement
additional occupational safety and health
[[Page 40043]]
regulations to protect mariners from accidental injury or death.
Another commenter said that the regulations should incorporate
effective means of ``severing or releasing'' a chain or wire rope tow
connection in the case of emergencies, noting that a fire axe cannot
effectively cut such towline. Lastly, two commenters provided several
suggestions for additional workplace safety regulations such as
preventive maintenance programs, the incorporation of the OSHA personal
injury reporting system instead of CG-form 2632 for personal injury
reporting, and a hearing protection program for mariners comparable to
OSHA standards for shoreside workers.
With regard to mariner safety, the Coast Guard is committed to the
safe operation of vessels and the protection of mariners. Section
140.510 establishes the requirements for owners or managing operators
to implement procedures to identify and mitigate health and safety
hazards aboard towing vessels subject to inspection, which can include
exposure to asbestos, smoking, noise, carbon monoxide, and the ability
to sever or release wire or chain towlines. Regarding the comment on
the use of the CG-2692, this rule implements a casualty reporting
regime consistent with the requirements for other classes of inspected
vessels. Further, this final rule requires that the owners and
operators of these vessels develop and implement their own health and
safety processes and procedures--see subpart E of part 140. The OSHA
standards for shoreside workers could be used as a template for this
purpose. The Coast Guard has made no change from the proposed rule
based on these comments.
Finally, the Coast Guard disagrees with the comments regarding the
incorporation of OSHA standards. As we noted in the NPRM, OSHA's
jurisdiction on the workspace safety aspects for seamen on towing
vessels subject to subchapter M will cease. However, we have endeavored
to incorporate some of the OSHA requirements into the Health and Safety
Plan requirements in the final rule. A commenter's recommendation that
Congress transfer certain authority from OSHA to the Coast Guard is
beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
We received numerous comments that objected to proposed Sec.
140.520, which would require the owner or managing operator to maintain
and provide access to medical records. Several commenters suggested
that this section be deleted because medical recordkeeping is not
required in subchapter T. Other commenters also felt that Sec. 140.520
conflicted with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
of 1996 (HIPAA), Public Law 104-191, and should be deleted in its
entirety, because under HIPAA employers do not retain medical records
on employees containing diagnoses that those employees have not already
seen. One commenter suggested that Sec. 140.520(b) be deleted because
it conflicted with the patient's right to know and violated HIPAA.
Another commenter suggested that the section be revised to emphasize
medical records confidentiality requirements that currently exist in
Federal law. One commenter felt that the section should clarify what
information an employer can give out under HIPAA. One commenter
questioned which medical records need to be retained under Sec.
140.520(a). Finally, another commenter suggested we amend Sec.
140.520(a)(1) so as to require that only medical records related to
pre-employment physicals, injuries occurring in the course or scope of
employment, or medical procedures required by the employer be
maintained.
The Coast Guard agrees in principle with the comments and deleted
proposed Sec. 140.520 from the final rule. The intent of the
requirement was to ensure that owners or managing operators retain
records of injuries occurring in the course or scope of employment as a
result of a health and safety incident on board the vessel. However, we
believe the health and safety plan required under Sec. 140.500 already
includes recordkeeping procedures addressing this issue. Also, we have
amended Sec. 140.505(a) to make clear that the owner or managing
operator must maintain records of health and safety incidents that
occur on board the vessel, including any medical records associated
with the incidents, and that upon request, he or she must provide
crewmembers with incident reports and the crewmember's own associated
medical records.
One commenter suggested that the Coast Guard establish food
sanitation regulations in the final rule and felt that sanitation
regulations, including food sanitation, should be enforced with
recognized standards using an inspection checklist. The Canada Shipping
Act was cited as an example.
The Coast Guard does not agree that additional regulations are
required in the final rule to address the issues of food sanitation
aboard towing vessels. As we proposed, this rule requires that the
owner or managing operator of the towing vessel to establish policies
regarding sanitation and safe food handling. These requirements may be
found in Sec. 140.510(a)(13). Additionally, the Coast Guard has the
authority during normal inspection activities to issue corrective
action orders to a towing vessel to improve any unsafe condition,
including unsanitary food conditions, and under Sec. 137.220, the
owner or managing operator of a towing vessel that has selected the
TSMS option must examine or have examined systems, equipment, and
procedures to ensure that the vessel and its equipment are suitable for
the service for which the vessel is certificated, including being in
compliance with part 140 of this subchapter. The Coast Guard has made
no change from the proposed rule based on this comment.
A professional association noted that the potable water supply for
vessels should be maintained at the same quality as for the Coast
Guard's military and civilian employees. The commenter suggested that
the Coast Guard issue regulations in this rulemaking that are
reasonable and attainable by towing vessels. Two commenters suggested
that if the water supply aboard a vessel does not satisfy tests for
quality and purity the vessel owners must provide bottled water for the
crew members.
The Coast Guard agrees that the condition of water supply aboard
towing vessels should be of a sufficient quality that the members of
the crew are not endangered. Under 46 U.S.C. 3305(a)(1)(D), the
inspection process ensures that vessels subject to inspection have an
adequate supply of potable water for drinking and washing. In the NPRM,
the Coast Guard proposed a requirement in Sec. 140.510(a)(13) for the
owner or managing operator to implement procedures to identify and
mitigate health and safety hazards regarding sanitation and safe food
handling. Having an inadequate supply of safe water for sanitation
purposes and for food handling is to be addressed by the owner or
managing operator. To ensure that potable water is expressly addressed
in Sec. 140.510, and that there is an adequate supply of potable water
for drinking, we have added a potable water supply requirement as Sec.
140.510(a)(14).
One commenter felt that the proposed requirements in Sec.
140.515(b) for training for individuals, other than crew members,
should include more specifics on the information or training required,
such as fire training and abandon-ship training. Another commenter
suggested that the refresher training in Sec. 140.515(d) be repeated
every 5 years, rather than annually, because annually was excessive.
The Coast Guard does not agree that additional information on the
information and training required for
[[Page 40044]]
persons aboard towing vessels other than crew members is required in
this rule to address the commenter's concerns. In Sec. 140.415, the
Coast Guard requires that individuals who are not crewmembers on board
towing vessels must receive additional safety orientation prior to
getting underway or as soon as practical thereafter to include issues
of use of life-saving equipment, emergency procedures, emergency
communications with crewmembers in case of an emergency, and prevention
of falls overboard. Under Sec. 140.515(b), the Coast Guard requires
owners or managing operators to identify, specific to their towing
vessel's operations, what other information or training is needed to
limit the exposure of individuals to hazards onboard the vessel.
The Coast Guard believes that annual refresher training is
necessary but, as reflected in Sec. 140.515(d), the refresher training
does not need to be as in-depth as the initial training. These annual
training requirements parallel or mirror comparable OSHA requirements
which currently apply to uninspected towing vessels. Companies have the
ability to tailor this training to be less comprehensive based on the
risk. We made no changes from the proposed rule based on these
comments.
We received comments from individuals and companies who felt that
the proposed requirement in Sec. 140.610 to close all exterior
openings on the main deck is not feasible when vessels require
ventilation during hot weather, and not necessary in low water where
there is no current.
Others contended that stability is not an issue on inland
waterways, and that there should be no stability requirements for
Western Rivers towing vessels.
The Coast Guard believes that watertight integrity and stability is
a concern on any vessel, regardless of service or operating area.
Towing vessels must be maintained and operated so the watertight
integrity and stability of the vessel is not compromised. There is a
sufficient body of historical evidence regarding towing vessel
casualties in which the cause of the casualty was the lack of
watertight integrity of the towing vessel. Specifically, open hatches
have permitted the uncontrolled ingress of water into the towing
vessel, resulting in the vessel sinking.
Within their final report on ``Recommendations for the Enhancement
of Towing Vessel Stability'' dated September 9, 2013, TSAC provided a
safety recommendation to the Coast Guard, that towing vessel operators
should ``close and dog watertight hatches during towing operations'' to
minimize the risk of down-flooding and progressive flooding of the
towing vessel.
We have provided appropriate exceptions to the requirements in
Sec. 140.610(c)(1)-(3) to give sufficient flexibility to the vessel's
master for crew comfort and convenience. The Coast Guard has made no
changes from the proposed rule based on these comments. However, in
reviewing Sec. 140.610 on hatches and other openings, we added an
express requirement, previously implied in that section, that decks and
bulkheads designed to be watertight or weathertight must be maintained
in that condition.
Some commenters suggested that proposed Sec. 140.610(b) be revised
as follows, ``The master must ensure that all hatches, doors, and other
openings that were installed to be watertight and weathertight are
functioning properly.''
With one amendment, the Coast Guard agrees with the suggested
revision. The intent of proposed Sec. 140.610(b) was that any fittings
that crews rely on for watertight integrity and vessel safety should be
operational and subject to survey. Our revision of Sec. 140.610(b) is
intended to make two things clearer. First, this paragraph covers
hatches, doors, and other openings designed to be watertight or
weathertight, whether or not they are currently watertight or
weathertight. Second, the reference to ``other openings'' in this
section is also intended to be limited to those designed to be
watertight or weathertight.
One commenter recommended that proposed Sec. 140.615(a) apply to
all towing vessels. Another company suggested that this section only
apply to vessels that are not subject to 33 CFR 164.80 regulations.
Because it would be redundant to apply Sec. 140.615 to towing
vessels subject to 33 CFR 164.480, the Coast Guard agrees with the
second commenter and has not made any changes to the applicability of
Sec. 140.615 except that we replaced the term ``inspection'' with
``examination'' to avoid using different terms to describe the same
action.
An individual suggested that repairs, such as repairs to navigation
lights or whistles, need not be recorded as required in proposed Sec.
140.620(d).
The Coast Guard disagrees with the commenter's suggestion that the
repairs to navigational safety equipment need not be recorded. The
Coast Guard believes that a record of repairs made to navigational
safety equipment is a vital component of good management and
recordkeeping. Documentation of repairs made to such equipment is vital
to identifying systemic issues affecting the navigational safety
equipment.
Additionally, if the vessel is operating in accordance with the
safety management system, documentation of repairs made would serve to
provide an account of materials needed and requested as well as
corrective actions taken in order to address the observed deficiencies.
The Coast Guard has made no changes from the proposed rule based on
this comment.
We received comments from a State government and a task force
asserting that the Coast Guard should add language to Sec. 140.620
requiring that vessels carrying oil or hazardous material in bulk
immediately notify the COTP or OCMI when navigational safety equipment
fails and cannot be immediately repaired.
The Coast Guard does not agree with the commenters' suggestion that
additional requirements for reporting are necessary in this rulemaking.
In accordance with 33 CFR 164.53(a), a towing vessel may continue to
the next port of call should navigation safety equipment fail, subject
to the direction of the District Commander or the Captain of the Port
as provided by 33 CFR part 160. A towing vessel is required by 33 CFR
164.53(b) to report to the Coast Guard the loss of critical navigation
safety equipment to include radar, radio navigation receivers, Gyro
compass, echo-depth sounding devices, or primary steering gear. The
Coast Guard believes that these existing requirements are sufficient to
ensure safety for towing vessel operations, and we have made no changes
from the proposed rule based on these comments. We inserted examples of
navigation safety equipment in Sec. 140.620(c), but left the repair-
promptly requirements in that section clearly applicable to all
navigation safety equipment.
Similarly, after further review of Sec. 140.625, the Coast Guard
decided not to repeat the list (of topics for special attention)
already contained in 33 CFR 164.78; instead we refer to that CFR
section in a note, and point to the TSMS, where such a list is more
appropriately maintained.
We received several comments, from maritime companies and
individuals who felt that proposed Sec. 140.630 should be deleted from
the NPRM. Several companies felt that because lookouts are included in
Rule 5 of the Inland and International Navigation Rules (33 CFR 83.05),
the section is redundant for subchapter M. Two commenters suggested
that because lookouts for inspected crew boats are not required in
[[Page 40045]]
subchapter T, they should not be required in subchapter M. An
individual asserted that the words ``dedicated'' or ``designated''
should be included before the word ``lookout'' to make it clear that a
lookout position would be in addition to a watch-standing officer. A
State government and task force member supported a second person for
bridge watch for all towing vessel tank barges carrying oil or
hazardous material in bulk.
The Coast Guard does not agree that the requirements of proposed
Sec. 140.630 should be altered or removed from the rule. The Coast
Guard agrees that Rule 5 of the Navigation Rules clearly identifies the
need to maintain a lookout at all times while underway. The Coast Guard
believes that the additional language provided in Sec. 140.630 ensures
that owners and managing operators of towing vessels have greater
clarity on expectations and thresholds of performance for the placement
of additional lookouts to maintain a state of vigilance whenever
significant change in the operational environment occurs. This section
makes clear that responsibility for navigational safety rests with the
master and mate (pilot) of the towing vessel. Subchapter M establishes
requirements for a class of vessels that have different operational
risks than those covered by subchapter T. As for the requirement for a
second person for bridge watch for all towing vessel tank barges
carrying oil or hazardous material in bulk, the Coast Guard believes
that Sec. 140.630 gives the Master the proper authority to establish
an appropriate number of lookouts based on the conditions and other
factors. To clarify the interaction of Rule 5 and 46 CFR 140.630, the
Coast Guard has made changes from the proposed rule based on these
comments.
We received a comment suggesting that because navigation assessment
is covered in other regulations, it should be eliminated from Sec.
140.635. The commenter felt that because navigation watches are
included in Navigation Rules 6, 7(a) and 8(a), it would be redundant to
include them in subchapter M. Companies also stated that a navigation
assessment should not be required in subchapter M because it is not
required in subchapter T.
The Coast Guard does not agree with the commenter's suggestion to
remove Sec. 140.635. The requirements of Sec. 140.635 provide
additional guidance and requirements for the vessel's master or mate
(pilot) to ensure that the proper planning is conducted and that
sufficient resources, personnel and equipment are available to mitigate
the identified risks. In addition, subchapter M establishes
requirements for a class of vessels that have different operational
risks than those covered by subchapter T. The size of a towing vessel's
tow may be large and continually changing, and more challenging to
navigate than a small passenger vessel which has a consistent size.
Also, varying heights of the tow--the tow's air draft--must be
considered to determine if a tow is low enough to clear bridges along
the towing vessels intended route. In contrast, the height of small
passenger vessels normally remains constant. The Coast Guard has made
no changes from the proposed rule based on this comment.
Two commenters felt that a navigation assessment should be included
in a company's TSMS and not included in the final rule. We received
some comments that were in support of this provision. Three commenters
suggested that navigation watch assessment language should be revised
in accordance with the 2006 \4\ or 2008 \5\ TSAC recommendations on
navigation watch assessments. An individual suggested that only vessels
that transit in large areas should be required to have a navigation
watch assessment. Two commenters felt that it was too burdensome to
conduct and document a navigation assessment for each voyage the vessel
makes in a watch.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Report of the Towing Safety Advisory Committee Working Group
on Towing Vessel Inspection, Task #04-03, Inspection of Towing
Vessels, Sept. 7, 2006, docket ID no. USCG-2006-24412-0004.
\5\ Memorandum from the Towing Safety Advisory Committee
Economic Analysis Working Group, Dec. 16, 2008, docket ID. No. USCG-
2006-24412-0007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Coast Guard disagrees with the commenters' suggestion that the
requirement for a navigation assessment should not be included as part
of this rule but rather, be required in the company's TSMS. Not all
companies or vessels are required to have a TSMS. Therefore, we have
included these requirements here in part 140.
The Coast Guard disagrees that the navigation assessment
requirements will be overly burdensome. As noted by another commenter,
the activities in the navigation assessment are required by Navigation
Rules 6, 7(a) and 8(a), and the best practice of prudent seamanship. In
the cases where the navigation assessment is not being fully
implemented as current practice, we estimate that an additional 0.2
hours per operating day of effort would be needed to meet the
requirements in the final rule. We believe that subchapter M
requirements for conducting navigation assessments prior to getting
underway or while underway will ensure that officers in charge of the
navigation watch have the most up-to-date information in order to
assess operational risks as well as to anticipate and manage workload
demands during the voyage.
The Coast Guard believes that the requirements for the navigation
assessment have taken into account the safety recommendations and other
guidance received from TSAC. The TSAC recommendations were based on the
premise that the details of the navigational assessment requirements
would be contained in the TSMS. However, not all vessels will be under
the TSMS scheme. Therefore we are separately including the navigation
assesmment requirements here. The core elements of the recommendations,
to identify risk and to take into account the unique characteristics of
the tow, are included in this rule.
Finally, the Coast Guard does not agree with the commenter's
suggestion that only vessels that transit in ``large areas'' should be
required to meet this requirement for navigational assessment. The term
``large areas'' does not provide sufficient information to determine
the boundaries envisioned by the commenter. Furthermore, navigation
assessments have value not only for transits of large areas or of
prolonged duration but also for transits in smaller areas or of short
duration; shorter transits may also contain risks such as bridges, high
winds, or swift currents. This requirement reflects good seamanship and
best practices, and does not pose an undue burden to the mariner. The
Coast Guard has made no changes from the proposed rule based on this
comment.
A State government and task force suggested that the Coast Guard
require vessels towing tank barges that carry oil or hazardous material
in bulk to develop a coastal and inland checklist to determine if
weather conditions make it safe to proceed, and require personnel to
complete the checklist before departure and retain it for Coast Guard
inspection. These commenters also suggested we add language to proposed
Sec. 140.625 to require a qualified licensed officer to be in charge
of the navigation of the vessel, as stated in 33 CFR 164.11.
The Coast Guard does not agree that additional language is required
to address the commenters' concerns. Required tests, examinations, and
assessments for personnel operating towing vessels are provided in
Sec. Sec. 140.615 and 140.635. Section 140.635(a)(3) specifically
requires that the person in charge of the navigation watch assess the
``weather conditions and changes anticipated along the
[[Page 40046]]
intended route'' prior to getting underway. The Coast Guard believes
that Sec. 140.635(a)(3) and other required considerations of the
navigation assessment are sufficient to reduce operational risks and
enhance the safety of the towing vessel and its tows.
The Coast Guard notes that Sec. 140.625 clearly states that at all
times, the movement of a towing vessel must be under the command of a
credentialed mariner. The commenter correctly notes that existing
regulations require a credentialed master or mate (pilot) to be in
control of the vessel at all times while underway. The inclusion of
additional language would not enhance the safety of towing vessel
operations. The Coast Guard has made no changes from the proposed rule
based on these comments.
We received several comments from maritime companies that suggested
that because other rules address the pilothouse requirements in
proposed Sec. 140.640, it should be eliminated. Maritime companies and
a trade association felt that the section should be deleted because
sufficient coverage of this issue exists in Sec. Sec. 140.635 and
140.645. Three commenters stated that because Sec. 140.640 is not
required in subchapter T, it should not be required in subchapter M.
However, three commenters supported this provision. Two commenters felt
that Sec. 140.640 should incorporate the requirements in 33 CFR 164.80
instead of the listed requirements.
The Coast Guard does not agree with the commenters' suggestion that
the requirements of Sec. 140.640 should be removed from this rule, or
that navigation assessment requirements in Sec. 140.635, and Sec.
140.645 navigation safety training requirements, satisfy the objective
of requirements in Sec. 140.640 which are specific to pilothouse
resource management. Towing vessels have significantly different
performance capabilities from vessels regulated under subchapter T. As
such, these vessels require greater levels of coordinated action and
information transmission between members of the navigational watch
team. The TSAC reports and AWO Bridge Allision study as well as
casualty data all identify human factors as a causal factor in a large
percentage of casualties. The Coast Guard believes that pilothouse
resource management requirements will help reduce navigational risks.
While we amended Sec. 140.640 for clarity, and as noted above in this
discussion of part 140 comments to address distractions in Sec.
140.210(d), the Coast Guard has made no changes from the proposed rule
based on these comments.
We intend this rule to provide--as much as practicable--the
requirements for towing vessels in a single subchapter. Not all towing
vessels are subject to 33 CFR part 164. For those that are, Sec. Sec.
140.625 and 140.635 note the need for some vessels to comply with
requirements in 33 CFR 164.78 or 164.80.
We do view it as appropriate to tailor requirements in Sec.
140.640 for those vessels subject to subchapter M rather than rely on
existing requirements in 33 CFR 164.80. Also, we noted a tension
between our statement in Sec. 140.600 that subpart F, Vessel
Operational Safety, applies to all towing vessels unless otherwise
specified, and our selective repeating of this statement in certain
sections. To eliminate that tension, we deleted those unnecessary and
somewhat confusing references to applicability in Sec. Sec. 140.625,
140.635, and 140.640. Also, Sec. 140.600 noted that some vessels
subject to subpart F remain subject to the navigation safety
regulations in 33 CFR part 164. Sections 140.625, 140.635, and 140.640,
as well as Sec. 140.725, contained statements about 33 CFR part 164
applicability that we removed or moved to a note for the section
because this was more informational than regulatory in nature. As
discussed later in this preamble, however, we did delete Sec. Sec.
140.810 and 140.815 and amended Sec. 140.800 to retain and clarify the
statement about applicability.
We received several comments from maritime companies who stated
that because subchapter T does not require navigation training for
deckhands, this training should not be required in Sec. 140.645. A
professional association felt that obtaining a license is enough to
qualify for navigation.
The Coast Guard agrees in part with these comments. The Coast Guard
recognizes that the training requirements in 46 CFR parts 11 and 12,
for certain rating endorsements and all deck officer endorsements
include the knowledge requirements listed in Sec. 140.645. We included
a new paragraph (c) of this section to facilitate a link with the
training requirements in 46 CFR parts 11 and 12.
The Coast Guard, however, is also cognizant that not all mariners
performing lookout functions are credentialed mariners therefore, we
did not change the rest of Sec. 140.645. Lookout duties may be
assigned to crew members aboard towing vessels who do not have a
credential as master or mate. Additionally, a crew member may be
assigned temporary duties to assist the navigational watch team in the
pilothouse during underway operations. It is important that those crew
members serving in such capacity have a basic understanding and
elementary education in the skills necessary to perform any safety
duties assigned to them aboard towing vessel.
One commenter suggested that ``fuel'' also be included in the list
of materials in Sec. 140.655(c) that should not be intentionally
drained into bilges.
The Coast Guard agrees that the drainage of fuel into the bilge
poses a danger to the safety of towing vessel operations and the
environment. Section 140.655(c) prohibits a person from intentionally
draining oil or other hazardous material into the bilge of a towing
vessel from any source. The Coast Guard intended the reference to ``oil
or hazardous material'' in Sec. 140.655(c) to encompass ``fuel,'' but
to make this clear we have added a sentence adopting 33 U.S.C. 1321's
definition of ``oil'' which includes ``oil of any kind or in any form,
including, but not limited to, petroleum, fuel oil, sludge, oil refuse,
and oil mixed with wastes other than dredged spoil.'' With the adoption
of this definition for purposes of Sec. 140.655, we deleted ``and
fuel'' from Sec. 140.655(b) when referencing spills during transfers.
To avoid any conflicting requirements, we amended Sec. 140.655(b)(2)
regarding oil spill containment capacity to limit it to situations when
the requirements in 33 CFR 155.320 do not apply.
We received several comments about Sec. 140.655(c) from companies
suggesting that because the prevention of oil and garbage pollution is
already a requirement under other rules, such as 33 CFR 155.770, the
Oil Pollution Act of 1990, and the International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution from Ships, this section should be deleted.
The Coast Guard disagrees. By expressly stating the requirement in
Sec. 140.655(c), we make clear that all vessels subject to subchapter
M must comply with this requirement and the requirements stated in 33
CFR 155.770. As previously mentioned, to the extent practicable, the
Coast Guard is seeking to present in one subchapter nearly all the
regulations with which a towing vessel subject to this rule must
comply. This regulation prohibiting the intentional draining of oil or
hazardous material into the bilge is one in particular that we want to
ensure those subject to subchapter M are aware of. The Coast Guard has
made no changes from the proposed rule based on these comments.
A commenter stated that tests and inspections under provisions of
National Fire Protection Association
[[Page 40047]]
(NFPA) 306, Control of Gas Hazards on Vessels, during repairs including
welding, burning, or other hot work were easy to avoid on towing
vessels because these vessels were not subject to Coast Guard
inspection. Noting that the absence of prescriptive regulations
restricts legitimate Coast Guard safety investigations to uncover the
cause of accidents, the commenter recommended that the latest edition
of NFPA 306, Control of Gas Hazards on Vessels, be incorporated by
reference in this rule. Consistent with this recommendation, other
commenters urged the Coast Guard to include a requirement for hot work
operations and safety that is consistent with requirements for cargo
vessels (46 CFR 91.50-1). This commenter also requested that the Coast
Guard draft regulations for this rulemaking that govern the proper use
of any autopilot installed on a towing vessel similar to those that
apply to other classes of inspected vessels.
The Coast Guard agrees that towing vessels should have requirements
for hot work operations and safety, similar to cargo vessels, and that
the standard recommended is appropriate and known within the maritime
industry. In response to these comments, we added Sec. 140.665 which
incorporates by reference portions of NFPA 306 in order to address
Marine Chemist inspections required prior to making alterations,
repairs, or other such operations involving riveting, welding, burning
or like fire-producing actions.
We also added Sec. 140.670 to address the use of auto pilot on
towing vessels adopting regulations, as suggested. This regulation is
similar to auto pilot regulations that apply to other classes of
inspected vessels. We view these additions as needed to ensure the safe
operation of towing vessels and as consistent with our proposal for a
comprehensive subchapter M.
We received several comments regarding proposed Sec. 140.725.
Three maritime companies and a professional association felt that the
requirement for a fathometer on vessels along the Gulf Intracoastal
Waterway is not needed because the channel is ``static and marked,''
and because the depth of the water only changes by a couple feet. An
individual stated that magnetic compasses should be allowed on the Gulf
Intracoastal Waterway. Another commenter thought that ``electronic
position fixing device'' was a vague term, and suggested either that it
should be defined in Sec. 136.110 or that the definition in 33 CFR
164.41 should be incorporated in Sec. 140.725(b)(3). This commenter
also recommended that any devices installed 1 year after the effective
date of the rule be required to be approved under series 165.130.
The Coast Guard does not agree with the commenters' suggestion that
a fathometer is an unnecessary piece of equipment aboard towing vessels
operating in the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. The Coast Guard agrees
that towing vessels operating almost solely in marked channels
regularly maintained and commonly traversed have a high degree of
reliability with regard to water depth. However, these towing vessels
sometimes deviate from marked channels. A fathometer is a very useful
tool in order to ensure that a towing vessel does not run aground and
is not damaged.
The Coast Guard notes the commenter's suggestion that a magnetic
compass should be allowed on the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. There is
nothing in this rule that prohibits the use of the magnetic compass on
board a towing vessel when operating on the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway.
In reviewing this comment, we amended Sec. 140.725 by inserting
``illuminated'' before ``magnetic compass'' to match the illuminated
requirement in that section for that alternative swing-meter, and to
ensure the existing requirement that both must be readable is met.
While there is no specific definition of ``electronic position
fixing device'' found in 33 CFR 164.41, the term is generally now
understood to mean a satellite navigation receiver, since that was
allowed as a stand-alone means of satisfying the requirement in 1983
(47 FR 58243, December 30, 1982) and the requirement was subsequently
amended in 2011 once LORAN-based options were eliminated (76 FR 31831,
June 2, 2011).
The Coast Guard does not agree that 33 CFR 164.41 needs to be
incorporated in the requirements of proposed Sec. 140.725(b)(3), but
we have added a definition of ``electronic position fixing device'' in
Sec. 136.110 that defines the term to mean a navigation receiver that
meets the requirements of 33 CFR 164.41. Also, we view the
recommendation for approval under series 165.130 as being overly
prescriptive to include in this final rule without first seeking
comments on that specific proposal.
Note that we reorganized Sec. 140.725 for greater clarity. We
decided that paragraph (a) was unnecessary so we removed it, and we
made proposed paragraph (b) into introductory text, and paragraphs
(b)(1) through (4) became paragraphs (a) through (d).
One commenter suggested that the guidance in CG-543 Policy Letter
10-05 regarding carrying electronic navigation publications on U.S.
vessels should be adopted in subchapter M.
The Coast Guard declines to specifically add this language into the
final rule; however, on February 3, 2016, CG-NAV published NVIC 01-16,
which esblishes guidance on the use of electronic charting systems and
the carriage of electronic navigation pubs. NVIC 01-16 applies to
towing vessels and their requirement for the carriage of navigation
publications listed in Sec. 140.705. In examining our reference to
``information and equipment'' in Sec. 140.705(b), we replaced these
words with ``charts, maps, and nautical publications,'' to better
reflect the section heading and the existing references in the section.
Another commenter suggested that a note should be included in Sec.
140.705(b)(1) that in the event that only electronic charts are used,
the system must be approved by the Coast Guard.
The Coast Guard does not agree. Section 140.705 already requires
that if electronic charts are used, that they must be acceptable to the
Coast Guard. This allows the Coast Guard to consider the system on
which the charts will be displayed when determining if the charts will
make safe navigation possible. The broader issue of electronic chart
systems would be addressed in a separate rulemaking. The Coast Guard
has made no changes from the proposed rule based on this comment.
One commenter suggested that the final rule should require that
officers on watch listen to the Coast Guard Broadcast Notices to
Mariners (BNM) and National Weather Service regularly to avoid hazards.
The commenter also suggested that ``talk-back'' capabilities be
available for crew members that are out of sight of the watch officer.
The Coast Guard does not agree with the commenter's suggestion to
require navigational officers on watch to maintain the suggested radio
watch aboard the towing vessel. Existing 33 CFR part 26 regulations
address radio watch standing requirements. Moreover, whenever a vessel
is operating in a Vessel Traffic Service Area, 33 CFR part 161 provides
additional requirements for a towing vessel to maintain a radio watch.
Also, the Coast Guard does not agree with the commenter's
suggestion that a ``talk-back'' requirement be made applicable for crew
members that are out of sight of the watch officer. The requirements
contained in Sec. 140.640 on pilothouse resource management address
information sharing procedures. Further, if the condition of the vessel
or the construction of the vessel prohibits
[[Page 40048]]
direct communication between the members of the navigation watch team,
then it is the responsibility of the vessel owner or managing operator
to provide the necessary equipment to ensure that communication is
conducted in a manner that provides for safer operation of the vessel.
The Coast Guard has made no change from the proposed rule based on
these comments.
With respect to Sec. 140.715, one commenter suggested that at
least two Very High Frequency (VHF) radios capable of Digital Selective
Calling be maintained on board and also that towing vessels operating
outside of the VHF range have long-band medium frequency or high
frequency radio equipment or a satellite system. Further, the commenter
recommended that all towing vessels should be capable of receiving
Maritime Safety Information Broadcasts. The commenter warned against
provisions allowing cellular radios as an alternative means of required
communication function. The commenter also suggested that changes to
equipment be required immediately following a first inspection or no
later than 5 years from the effective date of the regulations.
The Coast Guard does not agree with the commenter's suggestion.
Section 140.715 reflects a performance standard from current
regulations. As required by 33 CFR 164.72, as long as a continuous
listening watch is maintained, the vessel is in compliance. It is the
responsibility of the master to meet this performance standard. These
requirements are identical to those contained 33 CFR 164.72 and 33 CFR
part 26. The Coast Guard has made no change from the proposed rule
based on this comment.
We received several comments from companies and individuals
regarding towing safety in subpart H of part 140. One commenter
suggested deleting the responsibilities listed in paragraphs (a)
through (c) in proposed Sec. 140.801 and replacing them with language
from 33 CFR 164.74.
The Coast Guard does not agree with the commenter's suggestion
because 33 CFR 164.74 only addresses towing astern. The Coast Guard has
made no changes from the proposed rule based on this comment. However,
we have added ``or officer in charge of a navigational watch'' to the
list of parties who may be responsible for meeting the requirements of
this section, for greater consistency with similar requirements
elsewhere. See discussion of Sec. 140.210 above for more.
With regard to towing vessel horsepower two commenters expressed
concern that the determination of horsepower or bollard pull of the
vessel in Sec. Sec. 140.801 and 140.805 needed to safely maneuver the
tow would be subjectively determined by the owner or managing operator
of the vessel. One commenter felt that companies were not determining
horsepower or bollard pull accurately, and suggested that the Coast
Guard require that companies provide a document from the engine
manufacturer and certified naval architect that rates the vessel's
horsepower using data provided by the maker, the vessel's gear
reductions ratio, and the diameter and pitch of the vessel's propeller.
The Coast Guard does not concur. We included a definition of
``horsepower'' in the definitions section of part 136, and we see no
compelling reason to require additional testing that would not be
appropriate for all towing vessels. The definition of horsepower
requires that the determination of a vessel's horsepower is made by the
Coast Guard or a third-party organization during the issuance of the
COI, and is made using objective information issued by the
manufacturer. The Coast Guard feels that the concerns regarding the
determination of adequate horsepower are addressed in other sections of
part 140 and are appropriately left to the master's assessment to the
specific aspects of the tow, towing vessel's capability, and the
prevailing conditions.
The Coast Guard has made no changes from the proposed rule based on
these comments.
One commenter suggested that a reference to guidelines from the AWO
RCP be included in Sec. 140.801 because the current language of the
section left too much discretion to the owners and managing operators
of towing vessels. One company suggested edits to Sec. 140.801 that
would have rendered it inapplicable to excepted vessels, harbor assist
vessels, vessels operating in a limited geographic area, or vessels
operating on short hauls.
The Coast Guard does not agree with the commenter's suggestion
concerning the inclusion of a reference to the AWO RCP. Section 140.801
requires that the owner, managing operator, or master of a towing
vessel ensures compliance with the performance standards in Sec.
140.801. Those with this responsibility may rely on a TSMS, guidance
documents, or other sources in deciding how best to meet these
requirements.
Also, the Coast Guard does not agree with the commenter's
suggestion of altering the applicability of Sec. 140.801. The towing
gear in Sec. 140.801 is just as important for those vessels the
commenter listed as for other vessels subject to subchapter M. The
Coast Guard has made no changes from the proposed rule based on these
comments.
We received several comments from companies and a trade association
that suggested the deletion of proposed Sec. Sec. 140.815 and 140.820
concerning the inspection of towing gear and related recordkeeping. The
comments suggested replacing these sections with requirements from 33
CFR 164.74 and towline and terminal gear requirements from 33 CFR
164.76. Commenters felt that this change will help reduce confusion
between the towing safety regulations and these subparts. Another
commenter suggested that we add text to proposed Sec. 140.820 to
augment the recordkeeping requirements.
The Coast Guard agrees with the first commenter's recommendations.
We have deleted Sec. 140.810 because Sec. 140.615 will require that
towing gear be examined before getting underway for all towing vessels
not subject to 33 CFR 164.80 already, and we deleted Sec. 140.815
because it was merely informational. We also amended Sec. 140.820 to
apply the recordkeeping to the inspections in 33 CFR 164.76 instead of
Sec. 140.815 as previously proposed.
The Coast Guard also agrees with the second comment, and we have
adopted an amended version of the commenter's proposed change to Sec.
140.820(b). We edited Sec. 140.820 to remove ``bridle'' from the
recordkeeping requirements for examination, because bridles are
normally either attached to or are part of the barge and it would be
too onerous for industry to complete this recordkeeping requirement on
towing gear not under the continuous control of the towing vessel.
One commenter suggested that the description of TSMS recordkeeping
should include the acceptance of electronic recordkeeping as an
alternative. Also, a commenter discussing the official log book
mentioned the possibility of making false or late entries. A third
commenter supported the TSMS and requested that a towing vessel record
as defined in Sec. 136.110 be the exclusive form of recordkeeping for
all records cited in Sec. Sec. 137.135, 137.210, and 138.215.
As stated in 46 CFR 140.910(c), TVRs may be maintained
electronically or on paper. For towing vessels with a TSMS, however,
Sec. 140.910(b) states that another record--other than the TVR, as
provided by the TSMS, must be maintained. We agree that this TSMS
record may also be in electronic or paper form. But to discourage false
electronic entries, we have amended Sec. 140.915(b) to add specific
entry requirements for electronic records to
[[Page 40049]]
include the date and time of entry and name of the person making the
entry. If an error is discovered in an entry, any entries to correct
the error must include the date and time of entry and name of the
person making the correction and must preserve a record of the original
entry being corrected.
With regard to making false or late entries, we note that under 18
U.S.C. 1001, whoever knowingly and willfully makes a materially false,
fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation with respect to
reports, records, or verifications required by subchapter M
regulations, may be subject to criminal penalties.
Regarding the third comment, the Coast Guard recognizes that a
towing vessel owner or managing operator is required to compile records
and reports in multiple formats and in separate logs and ledgers. Each
of these records have relevance to the TSMS aboard a vessel and are a
resource for the auditor and the surveyor to review in order to
determine proof of adherence to the requirements of the Safety
Management System. The Coast Guard does not wish to impose a regulatory
requirement that would result in unnecessary recordkeeping requirements
upon industry. Requiring all of these records to be kept in one central
record system for the purposes of this rulemaking would be impractical.
The owner or managing operator of the towing vessel has the latitude to
tailor their Safety Management System to define the method and location
of those records central to the safe operation, repair and maintenance
of the towing vessel. We have not made changes from the proposed rule
based on these comments.
Two commenters felt that the proposed recordkeeping requirements in
Sec. Sec. 140.905 and 140.910 are not consistent with the 46 U.S.C.
11304.
The Coast Guard acknowledges that while the 2010 Act was enacted in
October 2010, its requirement for an official logbook in 46 U.S.C.
11304 was not addressed in our proposed rule. We are not, however,
amending Sec. 140.905 or Sec. 140.910 in this final rule. We will
consider addressing 46 U.S.C. 11304 requirements in a separate
rulemaking that would apply to all vessels subject to inspection, and
not just those subject to subchapter M. Further, because 46 U.S.C.
11304 makes reference to hours of service, we would again need to
consider a separate rulemaking as we would want to seek comments on a
specific proposal before implementing those requirements for towing
vessels. We have made no changes from proposed Sec. 140.905 or Sec.
140.910 based on these comments.
One commenter expressed concern regarding potential inconsistencies
between the unofficial and official Coast Guard logbook forms. The
commenter suggested that vessels operating on the Great Lakes should be
exempt from the requirement to maintain an official logbook under Sec.
140.905.
The Coast Guard disagrees with changing Sec. 140.905 to exempt
vessels operating on the Great Lakes. The requirement to maintain an
official log comes from 46 U.S.C. 11301, and Sec. 140.905(a) reflects
the language of the statute, including the exception for vessels on a
voyage from a port in the United States to a port in Canada. We did
make minor changes to this subpart: In Sec. 140.910(d), we corrected a
logbook reference that should have pointed to Sec. 140.905, and in
Sec. 140.915 we added a note observing that for towing vessels subject
to 46 U.S.C. 11301, there are additional logbook requirements in
statute, and that Sec. 140.915 does not alter requirements outside
subchapter M to make entries in specific log books.
One commenter suggested that language from SOLAS V, regulation 28,
Records of navigational activities, be considered in place of the first
sentence of TVR requirements in proposed Sec. 140.910(c). The revision
would have replaced proposed language about a chronological record of
events with language about activities and incidents of importance to
safety of navigation of the vessel, sufficient to restore a complete
record of the voyage.
The Coast Guard disagrees. The requirements of SOLAS V are designed
to meet the needs of an international seagoing community and provide
for much greater depth and comprehensive guidance than that of Sec.
140.910(c). Additionally, the requirements of Sec. 140.910(c) have
been tailored for use by the domestic towing fleet and provide a
reduced burden upon vessel owners and operators. In proposed Sec.
140.915, however, we have added a reference to tests and examinations
that are required by Sec. 140.615. We believe the commenter's concern
is addressed by reading Sec. 140.910(c) in combination with the
specific reporting requirements of Sec. 140.915, as amended.
We received two comments from towing companies who felt that
compliance with subpart I of part 140 would be time consuming and a
burden on companies and the Coast Guard.
The Coast Guard acknowledges the documentation requirements of this
portion of the rule do require some time and familiarity on the part of
the crew. However, we believe the documentation will result in a higher
level of operational safety and effectiveness, which improves
operational performance. The time invested in complying with the
recordkeeping requirements of this portion of the rule is intended to
provide sufficient benefits to offset the time invested. The Coast
Guard has made no changes from the proposed rule based on these
comments.
Two companies requested that the definition of ``towing vessel
record or TVR'' as stated in Sec. 136.110 be a substitute for the
official logbook, CG-706B or CG-706C, required in Sec. 140.905.
The Coast Guard disagrees. Our definition of ``towing vessel record
or TVR'' allows that record to take a variety of forms, ``a book,
notebook, or electronic record.'' In Sec. 140.905 of this rule we
identify vessels that are required under 46 U.S.C. 11301 to use the
official logbook, and in Sec. 140.905(b) we specify the form of the
official logbook. We did not propose to alter the form of the official
logbook in the NPRM, nor do we wish to do so in this final rule. The
official logbook is standardized for all vessels required by statute to
have it. The Coast Guard has made no changes from the proposed rule
based on these comments.
We received several comments from maritime companies, an
individual, and a professional association suggesting that the language
in Sec. 140.915 be clarified to state that the items must be recorded
in accordance with the TSMS associated with the vessel and not recorded
in the TSMS itself. The Coast Guard agrees, and amended Sec. 140.915
to reflect this suggested change.
One commenter asserted that the language in proposed Sec.
140.1005, Suspension and revocation, is too broad and potentially could
lead to ``outright abuse,'' in the commenter's words, of mariners for
mistakes made without criminal intent. A towing company suggested the
deletion of Sec. 140.1005 because it is addressed in 46 U.S.C. 7703.
The Coast Guard disagrees. We believe it is appropriate and helpful
to identify penalties that those holding a license, certificate of
register, or merchant mariner credential may be subject to. Our
language in Sec. 140.1005 is similar, for example, to language in 46
CFR 185.910 in subchapter T. In reviewing Sec. 140.1005(b) in response
to this comment, we added a source reference of 46 U.S.C. 7704 in the
introductory text of Sec. 140.1005, and paragraph (d) to include a
security risk element listed in 46 U.S.C. 7703.
One commenter argued that the marine industry must understand that
the Coast Guard will take equal action against both mariners and
companies for
[[Page 40050]]
violations of regulations in subchapter M.
The Coast Guard has a broad range of options to enforce regulations
against mariners, companies, or both. The OCMI will conduct an
investigation and make determinations as to appropriate course of
action, which may include civil penalties or criminal actions. The
Coast Guard has made no changes from the proposed rule based on this
comment.
Lastly, a towing company pointed out that the regulations are
currently written to assume a male captain and suggested that revisions
should be made throughout the regulations to replace gender-specific
text with him or her, or his or her.
The Coast Guard agrees. We have amended the text in the final rule
to ensure we consistently use gender-neutral language throughout the
rule.
K. Lifesaving (Part 141)
We received several comments from maritime companies, individuals,
and an association regarding lifesaving requirements in part 141.
Several comments revealed misinterpretations of the proposed rule, so
we have made editorial revisions throughout this part, including some
rearranging, restructuring, and renumbering of the text, to improve
clarity and readability.
Three maritime companies recommended deleting or revising part 141
because of lack of demonstrable risk justifying additional costs to
regulated entities.
The Coast Guard analyzed the casualty data balanced against the
costs associated with implementing this rule. The details of this
analysis can be found below in the Regulatory Analysis section of this
final rule. As is discussed in more detail there, we found that the
benefit of risk reduction was commensurate to the cost or, in some
cases, we revised the rule to avoid costs that exceeded the benefit.
For the lifesaving requirements in part 141, the Coast Guard estimates
the annualized cost to be $3.2 million, with annualized benefits of
$4.4 million, resulting in a net benefit of $1.2 million per year. The
positive net benefits estimate indicates that the potential risk
reduction justifies the additional cost of the part.
The carriage, operation, and maintenance of certain approved
lifesaving equipment is a fundamental aspect of being an inspected
vessel. The Coast Guard analyzed the costs associated with implementing
lifesaving provisions of this rule and concluded that the largest costs
associated with the proposed rule arise from the carriage of survival
craft, particularly for inland towing vessels. Noting that the
operating conditions may mitigate the need for survival craft, the
Coast Guard has modified the proposed requirements for survival craft
as described below to reduce the impact on the towing vessel industry.
The Coast Guard believes that provisions of this final rule represent
the minimum requirement for safe operation of an inspected towing
vessel and notes that nothing in this rule would preclude a towing
vessel operator from optionally carrying survival craft as excess
equipment.
In a comment on part 141, a commenter suggested that all our
references to limited geographical areas should be expanded to include
vessels operating in harbor services.
In part 141 we proposed that, unless required by the OCMI under
Sec. 141.305(c)(5), a towing vessel in a limited geographic area need
not carry a survival craft. In this final rule, that provision is
reflected in the first area-of-operation column in Table 141.305 of
Sec. 141.305 and in footnote 1 of that table. Our definition of
``limited geographic areas'' in Sec. 136.110 gives the COTP the
discretion to determine limited geographic areas in her or his COTP
zone. We don't see a need to change that definition based on this
comment, which seems more focused on ensuring that vessels engaged in
harbor services share the same exceptions as those operating in a
limited geographic area. A vessel that engages in harbor services may
do so in multiple locations and may not always be operating in a
limited geographic area, and is not necessarily exempted from carrying
survival craft. A vessel that engages in harbor services within a
limited geographic area as determined by the COTP, however, need not
carry survival craft unless required to do so by the OCMI.
In response to general comments about having time to comply with
equipment-related requirements in subchapter M, we amended Sec.
141.105 to give existing towing vessels until the earlier of either 2
years from the effective date of this rule or the date the vessel
obtains a subchapter M COI to comply with part 141 requirements. We
added Sec. 141.105(a)(2) to clarify that the delayed implementation
provisions for existing vessels do not apply to new towing vessels. We
also revised Sec. 141.105(c) to include a reference to SOLAS Chapter
III as this is where specific lifesaving requirements are contained in
SOLAS.
Because the reference to functional requirements in proposed Sec.
141.110 only applies to survival craft, we relocated that text to Sec.
141.305. An individual suggested we edit proposed Sec. 141.110 (now
Sec. 141.305) by adding ``company'' to those we identified (``owner or
managing operator'') who may choose to meet the functional requirements
in this part instead of the part's prescriptive standards.
We do not agree. We do not see a need to do so because our Sec.
136.110 definition of ``managing operator'' includes organizations and
if a company owns the vessel, it would be covered by our definition of
``owner.''
The same commenter also suggested that the designated approved
third party provide written recommendations to the cognizant OCMI
regarding the OCMI's acceptance of functional requirements, instead of
the third party directly accepting them.
We do not agree. A TPO may consult with the OCMI, but under
proposed Sec. 141.110(c) (now Sec. 141.305(c)(2)) the TPO is free to
accept a managing operator or owner's chosen means to meet the survival
craft requirements of Sec. 141.305, so long as the means are
documented in the TSMS applicable to the vessel. We believe these
documentation procedures are sufficient and do not see a need for the
TPO to provide written recommendations to the cognizant OCMI regarding
acceptance of arrangements that satisfy the functional requirements.
We did not receive comments on Sec. 141.115, Definitions, but
noted that no new definitions were proposed for this part, and removed
this section. Additionally, as discussed elsewhere in this preamble, in
response to requests for clarification on the appropriate approvals for
lifesaving equipment, we imported the definition of ``approval series''
from 46 CFR 199.30 to the definition section for subchapter M and used
that term in part 141 to identify the applicable approval series for
each piece of equipment
We did not receive comments on the incorporation by reference
section, Sec. 141.120, but we did move the contents of that section
into Sec. 136.112 and made Sec. 136.112 the centralized incorporation
by reference section for all of subchapter M. In addition, to better
organize the various technical standards used throughout subchapter M,
we also consolidate central incorporation by reference sections for
other parts into Sec. 136.112.
An individual recommended that in Sec. 141.205(a) we add
``guidelines, instructions, and define level of authority'' to what the
TSMS must include in addition to policies and procedures. The same
commenter also recommended that in paragraph (b) of that section we
require the TSMS to
[[Page 40051]]
``include procedures ensuring that non-conformities, accidents and
hazardous situations are reported to the company, owner, or managing
operator, investigated and analyzed with the objective of improving
safety and pollution prevention,'' instead of simply ensuring objective
evidence of compliance with the TSMS.
The Coast Guard disagrees. We have deleted Sec. 141.205 entirely
because we felt that it was redundant with part 138 in general. As for
the commenter's concern, Sec. 138.220, Towing Safety Management System
(TSMS) Elements, requires that the TSMS include documentation of the
management organization in detail, personnel management policies, and
compliance with other requirements of this subchapter.
We did not receive comments on the general provisions section for
part 141, proposed Sec. 141.220 (now Sec. 141.200), but the Coast
Guard standardized our approval phraseology both here and throughout
this subchapter and also clarified the specific approval required for
each equipment type. These edits are consistent with requests discussed
below regarding Sec. 141.305 to clarify the appropriate approvals for
lifesaving equipment. At the time of their inspection, every towing
vessel must be properly outfitted in accordance with the route for
which they are certificated. However, we further clarified in new Sec.
141.200(c) that requirements in part 141 are based solely on the areas
where a vessel operates.
We did not receive comments on Sec. 141.225, but we found that the
provisions of Sec. 136.115 were more applicable to this part and cited
this section in new Sec. 141.225(a) to reflect Sec. 136.115's
provision that all towing vessels, not just those with a TSMS, may seek
equivalencies. Similarly, we redesignated Sec. 136.115(c) as Sec.
141.225(c) to better align the provisions concerning equivalencies of
novel lifesaving appliances or arrangements within part 141. In
addition, we restructured 141.225 by replacing proposed paragraph (a)
with new paragraphs (a) and (b) to clarify the intent allowing towing
vessels to use alternate arrangements or equipment to meet this part.
We also amended the heading of Sec. 141.225 to better reflect this
section's paragraph (d), which specifies that the cognizant OCMI may
require a towing vessel to carry specialized or additional lifesaving
equipment.
An individual recommended text edits to Sec. 141.230 that would
require the master to ensure that lifesaving equipment is correctly
installed in addition to being properly maintained and ready for use at
all times.
The Coast Guard does not agree. To the extent improperly installed
lifesaving equipment would not be ready for use, the wording of Sec.
141.230 addresses the commenter's concern. We made no changes in
response to this comment.
Regarding Sec. 141.235 and the inspection, testing, and
maintenance of lifesaving equipment, we received a comment from an
association suggesting that the content of 46 CFR 199.190, which we
reference in Sec. 141.235, be added as a stand-alone section in
subchapter M with modifications to apply to towing vessel lifesaving
equipment and to clearly specify when any necessary factory maintenance
is required.
The Coast Guard does not agree. The full text of Sec. 199.190
contains maintenance requirements for various types of lifesaving
equipment, including weekly, monthly, and annual inspections and tests
for lifeboats, rescue boats, and launching appliances. The majority of
towing vessels will not carry this equipment. Therefore, the inclusion
of the complete text of Sec. 199.190 in subchapter M would add little
value. However, Sec. 141.235 points the operator to Sec. 199.190
where he or she can search for the relevant testing and maintenance
requirements for vessels that carry this equipment. In Sec. 141.235,
we replaced the word ``examination'' with ``inspection'' to be
consistent with other related Coast Guard regulations. Also, seeking
consistency with a similar provision in Sec. 142.240, we set the
records retention period to at least 1 year after the expiration of the
Certificate of Inspection.
We received several comments regarding Table 141.305--Survival
Craft. One commenter requested that all towing vessels be equipped with
an out-of-water survival craft, like an inflatable buoyant apparatus.
An individual felt that life floats and buoyant apparatus references
should be deleted from the table, with the exception of references in
footnotes. A trade association and individual noted two terms that
should be changed; ``life floats'' because it was ordered removed by
Congress by January 1, 2015, and the term ``buoyant apparatus,'' which
was suggested to be replaced with ``approved buoyant apparatus'' in
order to comply with proposed Sec. 141.305(c)(6). Another commenter
suggested that we edit proposed Sec. 141.305(b)(6) and (c)(6) by
replacing ``By 2015,'' with ``After December 31, 2014,'' when
specifying when survival craft may no longer be carried on board unless
the craft ensures that no part of the individual is immersed in water.
On February 8, 2016, section 301 of the Coast Guard Authorization
Act of 2015 (2015 Act), Public Law 114-120, 130 Stat. 27, revised 46
U.S.C. 3104. The deadline in our proposed Sec. 141.305(b)(6) and
(c)(6), and Sec. 141.330(g), for a new standard for survival craft to
meet to be eligible for approval--``must ensure that no part of an
individual is immersed in water''--was based on provisions previously
specified in 46 U.S.C. 3104. The 2015 Act limited those standards for
survival craft to passenger vessels. We have therefore removed
references to the deadline and those standards in Sec. 141.305(b) and
(c), and Sec. 141.330, and made edits to align the language with the
remaining functional requirements for survival craft.
We developed the cost estimates for part 141 under the requirements
of 46 U.S.C. 3104 before it was amended by the 2015 Act. Specifically,
we posited that owners and operators of the affected vessel population
would only use inflatable buoyant apparatuses to comply with the out-
of-water mandate. To the extent that affected owners and operators take
advantage of the relaxation of equipment requirements provided by the
2015 Act, this will result in an over-estimate of the cost of survival
craft in this rule's regulatory analysis.
As recommended, we deleted the terms ``buoyant apparatus'' and
``life float'' from the Cold Water Operation portion of Table 141.305
because neither of these items satisfied the minimum requirements for a
vessel operating in cold water. In the Warm Water Operation portion of
the table we removed the rows for life float and inflatable buoyant
apparatus because they are not specifically called out to meet the
minimum carriage requirements although they can be used as a substitute
for a lower safety precedence survival craft as described in Sec.
141.305(d). To avoid possible confusion with ``inflatable buoyant
apparatus,'' we changed ``buoyant apparatus'' to ``rigid buoyant
apparatus'' throughout the final rule. Also, to accurately reflect the
safety precedence hierarchy of survival craft, we moved Inflatable
Liferaft with SOLAS A pack to the bottom of each list.
Also, we have revised the requirements for carriage of survival
craft to exclude vessels operating in protected waters, which we have
defined in Sec. 136.110, unless survival craft are deemed necessary by
the OCMI, and we have revised Sec. 141.305(d) to allow for non-
approved survival craft
[[Page 40052]]
to be carried as excess equipment where no survival craft are required
by this part, provided that the equipment is in good condition and
maintained according to manufacturer's instructions.
In order to further clarify the options for complying with the
functional requirements for survival craft, we have added a new
paragraph to Sec. 141.305, which includes text relocated from proposed
Sec. 141.110. Under the new Sec. 141.305(c), the two options for
complying with the functional requirements for survival craft are
meeting the prescriptive requirements in Sec. 141.305(d) or employing
alternative means, acceptable to the OCMI or TPO, and documented in the
TSMS, if applicable.
A towing company suggested that the table include ``Rivers and
Canals'' as an area of operation.
The Coast Guard does not see a need for this suggested change.
Table 141.305 currently lists ``Rivers'' as an area of operation and
the definition of ``rivers'' in Sec. 136.110 includes canals.
Another commenter suggested removing all rows from the table where
equipment is not required. The same commenter suggested that operations
that are exempt from specific equipment requirements be indicated by
the word ``none'' in the appropriate field in the table. The Coast
Guard agrees, and has revised Table 141.305 accordingly.
We received several comments regarding the footnotes in Table
141.305. Several commenters, including towing companies and
associations, suggested deleting proposed footnote 1 that referenced
survival craft determinations by the cognizant OCMI or as a requirement
deemed necessary in the applicable TSMS. Alternatively, an individual
suggested that a towing vessel operating in ``limited geographic
areas'' be permitted to operate without survival craft.
According to footnote 1 of Table 141.305 in the final rule,
survival craft are not required on towing vessels operating in limited
geographical areas, ``unless survival craft requirements are determined
to be necessary by the cognizant OCMI or TSMS applicable to the towing
vessel.'' Though the Coast Guard does not support requiring survival
craft on towing vessels operating in limited geographic areas, unless
the OCMI or TSMS deems them necessary under Sec. 141.225, operators of
these vessels are welcome to carry properly maintained survival craft
as excess equipment. A towing company recommended that towing vessels
operating within 1 mile of the shore should not be required to have
survival craft, unless determined necessary or if it is required in the
TSMS for that particular towing vessel. A maritime company suggested
deleting the text, ``unless determined to be necessary by the cognizant
OCMI or a TSMS applicable to the towing vessel,'' from proposed
footnote 6, but didn't provide any reasoning for this suggestion.
The Coast Guard does not agree with the proposed amendment to
footnote 6. We believe this provision in proposed footnote 6 is
appropriate because the OCMI (or author of the TSMS) should be able to
evaluate any extenuating circumstances associated with the towing
vessel's operation that would require a survival craft when in general
they are not needed when the towing vessel is operating within 1 mile
of shore. As noted below, however, based on another comment we did move
the text of this footnote to Sec. 141.305(d)(3)(iii).
Several commenters suggested that footnotes 5 and 6 in the table be
moved into the regulatory text, and one commenter recommended deleting
the reference to OCMI approval when moving the text of footnote 6.
We agree that the content of proposed footnotes 5 and 6, as well as
footnote 4, should be moved into paragraph form in the regulatory text
to aid the reader. Therefore, we have inserted the provisions of these
footnotes into paragraphs (d)(3)(i)-(iii) of Sec. 141.305. We
disagree, however, with deleting the reference to an OCMI
determination. When moving the content of proposed footnote 6, we did
insert the source of the OCMI's authority to make such a determination.
One company suggested that because of fast currents in some
waterways, life floats should be permitted to be retained as
supplemental approved survival craft for limited applications as
approved by the Coast Guard. Because of downriver flow, the time that
the crew is in the water, and the time for life raft deployment, the
commenter states it would be difficult for crew to swim against the
Lower Mississippi River's current to catch the life raft that released
and inflated a period of time after the crew member went into the water
as would happen with an automatic deployment. This commenter notes that
crew members in the water would have a much better chance of reaching a
life float as they and it are swept downriver with the current at the
same relative speed.
The Coast Guard acknowledges the commenter's concerns, and in Sec.
141.305(d)(2)(iv) we have permitted a life float approved under
approval series 160.027 to be substituted for a rigid buoyant
apparatus. Also, proposed Sec. 141.220 would have required lifesaving
equipment to be of an approved type, unless otherwise specified. We
amended that section, now Sec. 141.200, to specify that lifesaving
equipment for personal use need not be approved by the Commandant if it
is not required by part 141. We also amended Sec. 141.305(d) to allow
the carriage of non-approved survival craft as excess equipment,
provided that the equipment is maintained in good working condition
according to the manufacturer's instructions.
We edited Sec. Sec. 141.310 and 141.315 to make it clear that they
are applicable to vessels that do not have an applicable TSMS.
As noted in our discussion of comments on Sec. 141.305, the Coast
Guard does not agree with the assumption that the vessel and its tow
operating more than 1 mile from shore could make it to shore in the
event of an accident. Section 141.330 does not impose a separate
requirement that ``other survival craft'' be carried: Instead it simply
sets out the requirements for a skiff if the skiff is intended to be
used as a substitute for approved survival craft required by Table
141.305. Table 141.305 prescribes the operating areas where an approved
inflatable liferaft is required. As noted above, the Coast Guard has
included additional text in Sec. 141.305 prescribing the hierarchy of
approved survival craft, and giving owners and operators the right to
substitute a survival craft of higher precedence. For example, Sec.
141.305(d)(3)(ii) allows an inflatable liferaft approved under approval
series 160.051 or 160.151 to be substituted for an inflatable buoyant
apparatus or rigid buoyant apparatus. Similarly, an inflatable buoyant
apparatus approved under approval series 160.010 or life float under
approval series 160.027 may be substituted for a rigid buoyant
apparatus (Sec. 141.305(d)(3)(iii) and (iv), respectively). If the
operator would prefer to use a non-approved raft as a survival craft,
the functional requirements listed in Sec. 141.305(b) would apply to
the raft.
We received several comments concerning the use of skiffs. One
individual noted that the proposed rule contained no requirement that a
skiff comply with any requirements for safe loading or buoyancy. The
commenter recommended that we amend Sec. 141.330(a) to require
compliance with 33 CFR part 183.
The Coast Guard acknowledges that, for practical purposes,
recreational boats complying with 33 CFR part 183 will commonly be used
as skiffs, but we
[[Page 40053]]
share the commenters' concern regarding the potential for confusion
regarding the requirements for skiffs that are used as survival craft.
The Coast Guard has revised Sec. 141.330 to--
Clarify that skiffs may only be used as survival craft by
towing vessels that do not operate more than 3 miles from shore,
Include the source of the requirements for safe loading
and capacity information (33 CFR 183.23), and
Correct a source reference for marking requirements in
paragraph (f) to match the same source we listed in Sec. 141.315 for
survival craft.
The same commenter noted that equipment referred to in proposed
Sec. 141.330(g) would be approved under 46 CFR part 159, not part 141,
suggested that we edit proposed Sec. 141.330(g) to prohibit the
carriage of skiffs after December 31, 2014, unless the craft ensures
that no part of the individual is immersed in water.
The Coast Guard agrees that reference to the approval of survival
craft is inappropriate in part 141, and has removed proposed paragraph
(g). Additionally, we have revised the title of Sec. 141.330 from
``Other survival craft'' to ``Skiffs as survival craft.''
A commenter also suggested that we not impose size requirements on
a skiff because the entire tow or the towing vessel could usually make
it to shore for evacuation purposes in any type of catastrophic event,
or alternatively we should include an inflatable raft as an ``other
survival craft.''
As already discussed in the context of Sec. 141.305, towing
vessels operating in limited geographical areas or on rivers within 1
mile of shore are only required to carry survival craft if the
cognizant OCMI determines that they are necessary. However, in other
operating areas where we cannot assume that the vessel can make it to
shore, a skiff used as a substitute for a survival craft must be
capable of carrying all personnel onboard. As reflected in both Sec.
141.330 and footnote 2 of table 141.305, vessels that operate more than
3 miles from shore may not use a skiff as a substitute for a survival
craft except for those operating in warm water on the Great Lakes or
Lakes, Bays and Sounds.
One commenter listed several factors that should be considered when
approving existing and new ``skiffs.''
However, the Coast Guard does not intend to ``approve'' skiffs.
Provided that the skiff meets the requirements of Sec. 141.330, it may
be used as a substitute for approved survival craft, as reflected in
Table 141.305.
The same commenter cautioned against using the terms ``skiff'' and
``rescue boat'' interchangeably for fear of confusion between the
functions of these boats.
As discussed earlier in this preamble, the Coast Guard acknowledges
the commenter's concerns and has added a definition for rescue boat in
Sec. 136.110. To further reduce confusion, we have removed the
proposed references to rescue boat in Sec. Sec. 137.220 and 140.405,
but retained them in Sec. 140.420 to leave training or drill
requirements in place for towing vessels that use a rescue boat.
Regarding the sections for lifejackets, immersion suits, and
lifebuoys (Sec. Sec. 141.340, 141.350, and 141.360, respectively), an
individual noted that these sections do not contain provisions for
vessels electing the Coast Guard inspection option.
We disagree. Sections 141.340, 141.350, and 141.360 do contain the
requirements for all towing vessels, whether they elect the Coast Guard
inspection option or the TSMS option.
We received several comments concerning lifejackets. Four
commenters requested clarification of the requirements for lifejackets
at watch stations. Three maritime companies and an association
suggested that one lifejacket per watchstander be required and made
accessible. Commenters felt that the requirement to store lifejackets
at ``watch stations'' is difficult to define for deckhands because they
are mobile; one commenter stated that the term ``watch station'' needs
to be defined.
The Coast Guard does not believe that we need to define ``watch
station,'' but we make clear that lifejackets must be immediately
available to those standing watch as well as to other crew. The bridge
and the engine control room are examples of watch stations. As
specified in Sec. 141.340(b), for towing vessels with berthing aboard,
lifejackets would need to be immediately available for watchstanders
there as well as at other manned watch stations.
Two commenters asserted that the COI should list the total number
of persons allowed on a vessel and state the same number of lifejackets
and space in a survival craft be available.
An inspected vessel's COI will state the total number of persons
allowed on the vessel as well as applicable lifesaving equipment that
is required onboard the vessel. These numbers are based on
determinations made by the OCMI issuing the COI.
One commenter suggested that crew on manned barges in the Great
Lakes, over 3,000 GRT, should not be required to have work vests
because the personnel mostly remain on the barge, which is more stable
than a tug. One commenter suggested that the requirement to provide
both life jackets and work vests is redundant.
The Coast Guard agrees that the proposed Table 141.335 may have
been misinterpreted to mean that work vests were required to be carried
as personal lifesaving equipment. Under Sec. 140.430, work vests are
not required, but are one of three options for use by personnel
dispatched from the vessel or working in an area without rails or
guards. We clarified Sec. 140.430 and removed Table 141.335, as
discussed above, and we have clarified Sec. 140.430 to indicate the
appropriate use of work vests.
Another towing company recommended that proposed Sec. 141.335
should clarify that immersion suits are not required on towing vessels
that travel along inland or Western Rivers. The commenter noted that
proposed Table 141.335 indicated that immersion suits are not required
on vessels travelling on limited geographic areas or rivers, but it
does require immersion suits on vessels travelling on lakes, bays, and
sounds and that there are many lakes that fit subchapter M's definition
of lakes, bays, and sounds along the inland and Western Rivers that are
simply part of a vessel's route, or an area to drop off barges.
The Coast Guard disagrees with this recommendation. In our
immersion suit requirements in Sec. 141.350, the allowance for towing
vessels operating on rivers or in limited geographical areas to not
carry immersion suits assumes that rescue or emergency assistance would
be close at hand, thus limiting the duration that a person would be
immersed in cold water. We cannot make this same assumption on lakes,
bays, and sounds. We have not made changes from the proposed rule based
on this comment.
The Coast Guard removed proposed Sec. 141.335 and Table 141.335
because they contained the same information as Sec. 141.340 and Sec.
141.350.
We revised proposed Sec. 141.340(d), now Sec. 141.340(c), to
clarify that the option to use alternative means to comply with the
lifejacket requirements also applies to non-TSMS vessels, and to cross
reference back to Sec. 141.225.
Several commenters, including maritime companies, suggested that a
paragraph be added to note that lifejackets that are stored on open
racks, where the jackets are clearly seen, do not need labels.
The Coast Guard agrees that clarification was necessary, so we have
revised and consolidated proposed Sec. 141.340(e) and (f) into new
Sec. 141.340(h) to make clear that the
[[Page 40054]]
stowage location marking requirements only apply to lifejackets stowed
in a berthing space, stateroom, or lifejacket container, including
those stored in racks in these types of interior spaces. The Coast
Guard has made additional editorial revisions to this section to remove
redundancies and to locate all lifejacket requirements in this section,
rather than cross-referencing 46 CFR subchapter W, and we have made
amendments to Sec. Sec. 199.01 and 199.10 of subchapter W, to clarify
that subchapter W does not apply to towing vessels. We also numbered
the rows of Table 199.10(a), to aid any possible future edits.
A towing company suggested amending proposed Sec. 141.340(d) to be
consistent with TSAC recommendations for stowing lifejackets. This
particular TSAC recommendation refers to the TSMS option which allows
alternative means to meet the requirements of this section, and also
outlines language requiring the approved TSMS to specify the number and
location of lifejackets to facilitate immediate accessibility at
normally occupied spaces.
The Coast Guard has reviewed the TSAC recommendations and its
proposed edits to draft regulatory text related to lifesaving
requirements in their entirety and confirm that our revisions to
proposed Sec. 141.340(d) (now Sec. 141.340(c)) are consistent with
those recommendations.
We received comments from maritime companies and an association
that recommended that the requirement for posting of placards with
information regarding use of lifejackets be deleted, and that
information in another format be provided on the vessel instead.
While the Coast Guard believes that proper donning and use of the
PFD plays a large part in survival, we note that this information is
covered by the safety orientation required by Sec. 140.410(b).
Accordingly, Sec. 141.345 has been removed from this rulemaking.
One commenter recommended that, at a minimum, each towing vessel
should be required to furnish a throwable flotation lifesaving device
on the end of each barge or tow available and ready for use at all
times to rapidly retrieve a person who falls overboard. The commenter
noted that without a ``lifebuoy'' or equivalent, if a person falls
overboard from a single barge tow, the nearest throwable lifesaving
device may be on the towboat itself and may be 100 to more than 1,000
feet and minutes away.
The Coast Guard recognizes the commenter's concern, but the comment
is outside the scope of this rulemaking. We note that on September 10,
2014, the Coast Guard published a final rule entitled, ``Lifesaving
Devices--Uninspected Commercial Barges and Sailing Vessels'' (79 FR
53621). In the course of that rulemaking, we discussed and evaluated
the feasibility of requiring lifebuoys on barges, and found the costs
to outweigh the benefits. However, vessel owners or managing operators
may opt to carry additional approved lifebuoys for this purpose.
A mariner's association and an individual believed that efforts
towards the protection of personnel from cold weather should include
the requirement of anti-exposure work suits for water temperatures
below 59 degrees Fahrenheit, as cited in the NVIC 7-91. One commenter
suggested that NVIC 7-91 be rewritten to include ``cold water'' areas
found on navigable rivers in addition to its present coastwise
coverage.
Consistent with recommendations in NVIC 7-91, we proposed in Sec.
141.350 to require immersion suits for towing vessels that operate
north of latitude 32[deg] N. or south of latitude 32[deg] S. if the
vessel does not operate exclusively on rivers or in a limited
geographic area. At these latitudes water temperatures drop below 59
degrees Fahrenheit during a typical year. While the Coast Guard agrees
that anti-exposure work suits of the type approved by the Coast Guard
under approval series 160.053 or 160.153 provide valuable thermal
protection to workers on deck, they are not intended to get wet.
Immersion suits are specially tested and approved for thermal
protection during prolonged immersion in cold water. As in Sec.
141.340(c) above, we revised the text in paragraph (a)(3) to clarify
that the option to use alternative means to comply with the immersion
suit requirements also applies to non-TSMS vessels and to cross
reference back to Sec. 141.225.
We received several comments, from maritime companies and others,
requesting proposed Sec. 141.360(a)(1) be deleted because subchapter M
does not apply to vessels less than 26-feet long.
The Coast Guard does not agree. Section 136.105 makes subchapter M
applicable to towing vessels of less than 26 feet if the towing vessel
is pushing, pulling, or hauling a barge that is carrying oil or
hazardous material in bulk, and the requirement in Sec.
141.360(a)(1)--to carry a minimum of one lifebuoy of not less than 510
millimeters (20 inches) in diameter--applies to those towing vessels.
We received several comments from maritime companies and
associations suggesting that the required number of lifebuoys on towing
vessels be consistent with industry practice. On towing vessels of less
than 79 feet, they suggested reducing the required number of lifebuoys
to two from the proposed number of three. On towing vessels of more
than 79 feet, they suggested requiring four, in lieu of what we had
proposed, which was four, plus one on each side of the primary
operating station and one at each alternative operating station if the
vessel is so equipped.
The Coast Guard agrees that two lifebuoys are appropriate for a
towing vessel between 26 and 79 feet in length, and has reduced the
required number accordingly in amended Sec. 141.360(a)(2), consistent
with lifesaving regulations for inspected vessels of similar size.
Similarly, the Coast Guard agrees that the proposed text appears to
require more lifebuoys than is practical on a towing vessel of more
than 79 feet in length, and has amended Sec. 141.360(a)(3) to clarify
the requirement by stating the minimum number of lifebuoys and their
placement independently. Also, we removed reference to primary and
alternative operating stations. Vessels with more than one operating
station will now be required to carry lifebuoys on each side of any
operating station, as practicable. We are aware that some of the
operating stations may have limited space available or may not have a
way to access the sides. In these cases, owners and operators need to
work with the local OCMI to determine an acceptable equivalent for the
operating station concerned.
As above in Sec. Sec. 141.340(c) and 141.350(a)(3), we revised the
text in Sec. 141.360(a)(4) to clarify that the option to use
alternative means to comply with the lifebuoy requirements also applies
to non-TSMS vessels and to cross reference back to Sec. 141.225.
Other commenters, including an association and an individual,
recommended that Sec. 141.360 require a specific commercially
available throwable PFD, instead of the traditional ``lifebuoy''
because lifebuoys can only be thrown a relatively short distance.
The Coast Guard has revised Sec. 141.360 to allow for throwable
devices approved under approval series 160.050 or 160.150 to satisfy
the prescriptive requirements of this section, provided that the vessel
is not subject to SOLAS. An approved lifebuoy, or another throwable PFD
approved under approval series 160.050 or 160.150 as equivalent to a
lifebuoy, would satisfy this requirement. Consistent with specifying
performance objectives when possible, rather than specifying the
behavior or manner of compliance that
[[Page 40055]]
regulated entities must adopt, we did not adopt the commenter's
suggestion that we require a specific commercially available throwable
PFD.
Regarding proposed Sec. 141.360(b), a company suggested that the
reference to release of lifebuoys in Sec. 199.70(a)(1)(v) would not be
necessary for most towing vessels, particularly those operating on
inland waters. Some commenters also felt that the wording for Sec.
141.360(b)(2) should be rewritten but did not provide suggestions.
The Coast Guard agrees that the requirements of Sec.
199.70(a)(1)(v) is not the most appropriate for towing vessels, and
further notes that the cross reference to Sec. 199.70 in Sec.
141.360(b) creates unnecessary confusion as to which requirements
apply. The Coast Guard has revised Sec. 141.360 to remove the
reference to Sec. 199.70(a) and to include only those requirements
that are intended to apply to lifebuoys on towing vessels.
Three commenters felt that Sec. 141.360(b)(2) should be amended to
clarify that floating electric water lights are not required for towing
vessels operating solely on Western Rivers.
The Coast Guard does not agree. The fitting of lights to lifebuoys
increases the likelihood that the person in the water will be located
and retrieved, irrespective of the operating area. However, under
revised Sec. 141.360(c)(2) and (3), the floating electric water light
is not required for towing vessels limited to daytime operations.
An individual indicated that the proposed rule did not clearly
state the floating electronic water light should not be attached to the
lifeline.
As noted in Sec. 141.360(c)(4), the floating electric water light
is to be secured around the body of the lifebuoy, which is consistent
with language applicable to other inspected vessels. The Coast Guard
feels that this language in Sec. 141.360(c)(4) is clear.
One commenter felt that using millimeters in proposed Sec.
141.360(b)(3) was unnecessary and could result in an inspector
rejecting a lifeline if he or she determined it is only 908 mm in
length instead of the required 910 mm. The commenter suggested that we
use meters instead of millimeters.
The Coast Guard does not agree. The millimeter equivalents to the 3
and 6 foot standards in the corresponding paragraph of this final rule,
Sec. 141.360(c)(3), are consistent with similar regulations for other
inspected vessels. See, for example, 46 CFR 117.70 and 180.70. The more
precise metric equivalent leaves less of a gap between it and the
English units. The Coast Guard does not see a compelling reason to use
a different standard for similar requirements on other types of
inspected vessels.
One commenter suggested that the number of alternative lifebuoys be
left to the OCMI to decide.
As noted above, we have reduced the number of lifebuoys below what
we proposed in the NPRM. We do not believe an appropriate level of
safety is met by further reducing that number. Under Sec. 141.225,
however, the OCMI may require additional lifebuoys as deemed necessary
based on the operating area.
Lastly, an individual asserted that in order to quickly identify
lifebuoys as safety equipment, all lifebuoys should be colored orange.
The Coast Guard believes that lifebuoys are readily recognized as
lifesaving equipment, regardless of color. However, in Sec.
141.360(b)(5) we require that lifebuoys must be orange on vessels on an
oceans or coastwise route, where visibility could be obscured by white
caps.
One commenter pointed out that proposed Sec. 141.365 includes
procedures in the TSMS for the prompt recovery of a person from the
water, and for the training of crewmembers responsible for recovery in
effectively implementing such procedures, applies only to towing
vessels under a TSMS and not to vessels that elect Coast Guard
inspection. This commenter recommends that the rule also address this
issue for towing vessel choosing the Coast Guard inspection option.
The Coast Guard does not agree with requiring these written
procedures for those vessels choosing the Coast Guard option. Vessels
choosing the Coast Guard option will be required to get underway to
conduct drills for a Coast Guard inspector and the retrieval of a man-
overboard may be required as part of these drills. Therefore, the
procedures and training will be examined through practice rather than
through audit of the SMS. However, we did find that proposed Sec.
141.365 was redundant with Sec. 138.215 and removed it from the final
rule.
We received two submissions from commenters requesting we add a
requirement for specific commercially available person-overboard
recovering equipment. One commenter said that recovery equipment to
receive unconscious personnel from water should be required.
The Coast Guard is not in the position to require carriage of a
specific commercial product. Based on these comments, however, we have
added text to Sec. 141.200 to allow a towing vessel to carry
additional lifesaving equipment in addition to that required under
subchapter M and that this excess equipment need not be Coast Guard
approved. We do not see a need to require the person-overboard
recovering equipment, in addition to the lifesaving equipment required
in this rule.
One commenter recommended a public hearing to discuss the
lifesaving equipment approval process within the Marine Safety
Directorate, and to agree on what changes can encourage innovative
lifesaving devices for commercial vessels.
This recommendation is outside of the scope of this rulemaking, as
this rule applies only to the carriage of approved lifesaving
appliances on towing vessels, and does not address the process by which
that equipment is approved. We have made no changes from the proposed
rule based on this comment.
We received several comments suggesting edits to the Miscellaneous
Lifesaving Requirements table, Table 141.370. We received two comments
from maritime companies, suggesting amendments to the table clarifying
which vessels require six flares and which require 12. One association
suggested that in order to be consistent with other table styles,
instead of the three columns for Emergency Position Indicating Radio
Beacon (EPIRB) stating ``Yes'', the columns should just indicate ``1''.
The Coast Guard agrees that our proposed Table 141.370 is
confusing. We have made appropriate revisions to the table and the
regulatory text of the first section it references, Sec. 141.375.
One commenter recommended that the table in this section include
``Rivers and Canals'' as an area of operation.
As we said in response to the same comment regarding Table 141.305,
the definition of ``rivers'' in Sec. 136.110, which applies to the
term used throughout subchapter M, includes canals. We have made no
changes from the proposed rule based on this comment.
Several commenters suggested that ``excepted towing vessels''
operating solely on Rivers or Western Rivers be exempt from carrying
distress signals. We received several comments, mainly from individuals
and maritime companies, who felt that the visual distress signals
should not apply to Western Rivers or inland river systems. Another
commenter felt that flares and smoke signals required in proposed Sec.
141.375(b) were not needed for vessels operating on rivers one mile
wide. A maritime company disagreed with the requirement for single
flares on harbor and fleeting tugs.
[[Page 40056]]
The Coast Guard does not agree. The carriage, proper stowage,
training, and use of visual distress signals influence survivability of
the crew in the event of an emergency that would require evacuation. As
we noted above, time to rescue is influenced by the ability to detect
persons in distress. If there is insufficient evidence that crewmembers
are in trouble, it is less likely they will receive the assistance they
need.
One commenter felt that phrases such as, ``approved under 46 CFR
subpart 160.021 or other standard specified by the Coast Guard'' is
vague and should instead reference approval series found in 46 CFR
199.30.
The Coast Guard agrees and has revised the regulatory text in part
141 to specify the approval series applicable to all lifesaving
equipment required to be approved. The Coast Guard believes that
specifying the appropriate approval series assists the vessel owners
and managing operators in determining whether specific equipment is
approved for a particular application.
We received several comments, particularly from maritime companies,
suggesting the deletion of Sec. 141.380(c), which requires
identification markings on each EPIRB.
The Coast Guard does not agree. When we find an unattended EPIRB,
it is important that we know what vessel it came from, so that we can
mount a more focused and effective rescue response.
One company requested an exception from the EPIRB requirement for
vessels operating within coastal bays or sounds that may occasionally
operate at greater than 3 miles from shore.
In Sec. 141.380, we did propose to require EPIRBs on vessels
operating upon the Great Lakes beyond 3 nautical miles from shore but
not on vessels operating on lakes, bays, and sounds. The Coast Guard
acknowledges the conflict between Sec. 141.380 and Table 141.370, and
has made the appropriate revisions to the table to exclude vessels on
lakes, bays, and sounds from the EPIRB requirement.
One commenter stated that the requirement for EPIRBs does not
mention requirements for hydrostatic release.
We note that Sec. 141.380(b) requires that the EPIRB be mounted
such that it will float free if the vessel sinks. Hydrostatic release
is one of several methods for meeting this requirement. We made no
changes from the proposed rule based on this comment.
One commenter suggested that Sec. 141.380(a) be consistent with
NTSB Recommendations M-10-1 and suggested that each EPIRB installed
after the effective date of these rules should be a type which includes
a satellite position in its distress alert.
The Coast Guard recognizes the merit of enhanced locating devices,
but the benefit of adding enhanced GPS locating functionality to an
EPIRB does not outweigh the costs associated with making it mandatory
for all towing vessels, particularly before it is mandatory for other
types of inspected vessels. Though the Coast Guard may consider this
matter holistically in the future, we have not made changes to the
proposed rule based on this comment. However, this does not preclude a
vessel operator from optionally carrying such equipment.
We received comments from three maritime companies that felt that
because a tug is able to retrieve a barge without boarding, and because
boarding a drifting barge is dangerous, the line throwing requirement
in Sec. 141.385 is not needed.
The Coast Guard notes that the line-throwing appliance was only
proposed to be carried on towing vessels operating on ocean routes, and
is not necessarily intended for boarding a drifting barge. The line-
throwing appliance can be used to pass a line to another vessel if the
towing vessel is incapacitated and needs to be towed.
One association suggested broadening the line throwing apparatus
requirement to include towing vessels in coastwise service that operate
beyond the boundary line.
The Coast Guard agrees that vessels in coastwise service will be
subject to similar conditions, and have expanded this requirement to
include them, consistent with other inspected vessels (see 46 CFR
199.170 and 199.610). We have amended Sec. 141.385 accordingly.
L. Fire Protection (Part 142)
The fire protection standards proposed in Part 142 retained most of
the fire protection regulations that currently apply to towing vessels
and are contained in 46 CFR parts 25 and 27. The public comments
received in response to proposed part 142 provided a number of
suggestions aimed at improving the clarity of the requirements based on
several years of operating experience with the current regulations. We
have incorporated many of these suggestions in an effort to make part
142 more user-friendly, and made additional editorial revisions to
improve clarity and readability. We also received some comments
critical of specific provisions in the NPRM. Most notable are
objections to the requirements for flammable liquid storage cabinets on
inland towing vessels, the use of portable fire pumps, the requirements
for a professional engineer (P.E.) to certify fire detection systems,
and any requirements relating to onboard fire-fighting. Each of these
comments is discussed in greater detail in the following item-by-item
responses.
In general, the nature of the public comments made it clear to us
that the organization of part 142 was confusing and could be greatly
improved by placing in subpart B all of the general requirements that
are applicable to all towing vessels--such as equipment approvals, fire
hazards to be minimized, storage of flammable liquids, portable fire
extinguishers, firefighter's outfits, fire axes, and maintenance and
training--and placing in subpart C the specific requirements for fire-
extinguishing and fire detection systems applicable only to certain
vessels. Accordingly, we reorganized part 142 by deleting redundant
requirements for fixed fire-extinguishing systems in proposed Sec.
142.235, and moving the requirements for portable fire extinguishers
from proposed Sec. 142.305 to Sec. 142.230(d), the requirements for
firefighter's outfits from proposed Sec. 142.350 to a new Sec.
142.226, and the requirements for fire axes from proposed Sec. 142.350
to a new Sec. 142.227, but we did not change any requirements, except
in response to public comments as discussed in the following
paragraphs. Section 142.235 in this final rule now contains
requirements for vessels contracted for prior to November 19, 1952.
With respect to proposed Sec. 142.105 on applicability, one
commenter requested that we add text to indicate that vessels exempted
from 46 CFR part 27--which currently applies to most towing vessels
that will become subject to subchapter M requirements--need not comply
with part 142. We partially agree with this commenter. In Sec.
142.300, we have established that excepted vessels need not comply with
the provisions of subpart C regarding fixed fire-extinguishing
equipment; our definition of ``excepted vessels'' in Sec. 136.110
includes many of the vessels excluded from part 27 applicability by
Sec. 27.100(b).
But, we do not agree that these vessels should be exempt from the
general fire safety provisions in subparts A and B. These requirements
implement minimum standards for portable fire extinguishers and control
of combustible materials, which we believe are essential on board all
vessels. Accordingly, we did not adopt the broad exemption recommended
by the commenter.
[[Page 40057]]
We revised Sec. 141.205(a) to include a reference to SOLAS Chapter
II-2 as this is where specific fire protection requirements are
contained.
With respect to Sec. 142.215, one commenter suggested that the
installation of excess fire-fighting and fire detection equipment on a
vessel must be designed, constructed, installed and maintained in
accordance with recognized industry standards acceptable to the Coast
Guard. We agree with this comment and have added a paragraph (c) to
this section to address equipment that is installed but not required by
this subpart. Because there may be existing vessels affected by this,
we have included provisions that allow the local OCMI to accept
existing equipment of any design as long as it is determined to be in
serviceable condition. Additionally, we have clarified the wording
regarding approved equipment in order to standardize this language
throughout the subchapter.
Several commenters expressed concern that the proposed requirements
in Sec. 142.220 appeared to prohibit the presence of any combustible
and flammable liquids in the bilges at any time. They noted that the
accumulation of some amounts of combustible and flammable liquids in
the bilges is unavoidable during normal operations, and requested
changes to this section. We agree that small amounts of such liquids
are likely to be present; however, we also want to clearly express our
concerns over the accumulation of considerable quantities of liquids
that could be a fire hazard. We therefore modified the text of Sec.
142.220(a) to indicate that the bilges should be kept as clear as
practical.
Another commenter felt that the proposed requirements in proposed
Sec. 142.220(c) (now Sec. 144.415) for the insulation of exhaust
pipes and galley cooking equipment exhaust ducts should apply only to
new vessels because it would be difficult to retrofit existing vessels,
and the risk does not warrant added protection. We do not agree with
this commenter, and have not changed the requirement. There have been
recent exhaust system fires (discussed in our Safety Alert 05-08, dated
September 17, 2008) in which the cause was attributed to the
installation of new diesel engines that run at hotter temperatures than
previous models. We believe that the potential fire risk is the same on
both new and existing vessels. However, to alleviate concerns about
installing insulation on the exhaust systems of existing vessels, we
have added to Sec. 144.415 two alternate methods of demonstrating
compliance. The revised requirement would accept exhaust systems
designed to either Standard P-1 of the American Boat and Yacht Council
(ABYC) or Standard 302 of the National Fire Protection Association
(NFPA) as equivalent forms of protection. These additional means of
protection will provide operators of existing vessels a wider range of
choices to comply with the rule. As noted above, proposed Sec.
142.220(c) was moved to Sec. 144.415 as this requirement is more
closely related to part 144.
We received several comments objecting to requirements in Sec.
142.225 for approved flammable liquids storage cabinets on boats
operating on the Western rivers. These commenters appear to have
misinterpreted the proposed rule. We proposed that combustible and
flammable liquids be stored in a controlled area, either a specific
room or a dedicated storage cabinet. An approved storage cabinet is an
option and not a required piece of equipment. Related to this, one
commenter recommended that we also accept flammable liquid storage
cabinets that are Factory Mutual approved. We agree with the commenter
that Factory Mutual cabinets provide an equivalent level of safety as
those approved to UL 1275, a voluntary consensus standard used in the
NPRM and this final rule, and have added a new Sec. 142.225(c)(2) to
accept their use. Another commenter felt that securing the cabinets to
the vessel should not be required on the Western Rivers, but offered no
justification for the comment. We acknowledge that vessels operating on
the river system are subject to less significant wind and wave motions
than are experienced by ocean-going vessels, but do not agree with the
commenter that flammable liquid storage cabinets should be unsecured.
Any sudden acceleration or movement of the vessel could dislodge the
cabinet, causing a flammable liquid spill potentially leading to a
fire. We have not made any changes as a result of this comment.
Finally, we received one comment suggesting that Sec. 142.225
should contain information on the storage of hazardous material in
ships' stores. We believe these materials are adequately covered by
regulations in 46 CFR part 147, which apply to towing and other vessels
subject to inspection under 46 U.S.C. 3301, and need not be repeated
here.
In Sec. 142.226 (proposed Sec. 142.345), and throughout this
part, we changed all references from fireman to firefighter. We also
removed the reference to the Mine Safety and Health Administration
because this agency no longer approves self-contained breathing
apparatus for normal use. A variety of comments were submitted
regarding the proposed requirements for the carriage of firefighter's
outfits covered by proposed Sec. 142.345 (now Sec. 142.226 as noted
above). One commenter recommended that the proposed standards should be
enhanced by listing the specific equipment required for each
firefighter's outfit. Others recommended that the requirements for the
carriage of firefighter's outfits should be deleted in their entirety,
since in their opinion it is too dangerous for crewmembers to enter a
burning engine room, and would be better advised to abandon ship in the
event of a serious fire.
We have not removed the requirements for firefighter's outfits. We
proposed firefighter's outfits for a limited class of vessels. Only
vessels of 79 feet or more, operating on ocean or coastwise routes,
that do not have a fixed fire suppression system in the engine room are
required to carry firefighter's outfits. These vessels are primarily
existing vessels that were contracted for prior to August 27, 2003. The
Coast Guard believes that these vessels, which operate on the open
ocean should have enhanced fire-fighting equipment because timely
outside assistance is unlikely, and in the event of an engine room fire
the crew must be able to provide onboard response. Vessel operators
that believe that fire-fighting poses an unacceptable risk to the crew
have the option of installing a fixed fire-extinguishing system in the
engine room.
One commenter requested changes to Sec. 142.230 that would allow
two size B-III semi-portable fire extinguishers on smaller vessels to
substitute for the required B-V extinguisher, which in their opinion,
is difficult to handle due to its size. We do not agree with this
comment. As noted in the 2004 Fire-Suppression Systems and Voyage
Planning for Towing Vessels final rule (69 FR 34064, June 18, 2004),
the severity of an engine-room fire is not related to the length of the
vessel, but to the fire hazard present in the engine room. The use of
marine diesel fuel oil poses a sufficient hazard to warrant the higher
fire-suppression capability of a size B-V extinguisher. However, we are
concerned that some operators may be installing semi-portable
extinguishers that are fitted with wheels. These types of extinguishers
are intended for use in shore-side applications and, if used on board
vessels, they need to be secured to prevent possible injury to the
crew. We have consequently added a supplemental provision to Sec.
142.230(e) that requires that any extinguishers fitted with wheels must
be welded or otherwise secured to the vessel.
[[Page 40058]]
Another commenter noted that because the NPRM splits discussion of
the fire extinguisher requirements between Sec. 142.230 and proposed
Sec. 142.305, it was difficult to determine what is actually required;
the commenter requested a single chart with all of the fire
extinguisher requirements in one location. We agree with this commenter
and have relocated all of the portable hand-held fire extinguisher
requirements to Sec. 142.230(d) and deleted proposed Sec. 142.305.
The proposed text in Sec. 142.230(d) relating to extinguisher labeling
and nameplates has also been deleted, since this is an approval
requirement covered by 46 CFR 162.028-3(f) and 162.028-4, and is not
appropriate for inclusion here. Requirements for semi-portable B-V fire
extinguishers remain in Sec. 142.315.
As previously noted in the general discussion of Part 142, we have
deleted the content of proposed Sec. 142.235 because it contained a
superfluous requirement that fixed fire-extinguishing systems must be
approved by the Commandant, which is already required by Sec.
142.215(a). We also deleted the requirement that carbon dioxide systems
must be designed in accordance with 46 CFR part 76, subpart 76.15,
because this is covered in the definition of ``fixed fire-extinguishing
system'' in Sec. 136.110.
One commenter suggested that all new installations of fixed fire-
extinguishing systems should be required to undergo plan approval by
the Coast Guard prior to installation. We do not agree with this
comment and have not changed the proposed rule to require plan approval
by the Coast Guard. We believe requirements in Sec. 144.135 are
sufficient. That section requires verification of compliance with
construction and design standards before a new installation that is not
a replacement in kind may be installed. We changed the inspection and
testing criteria in Table 142.240 to harmonize this regulation with the
Carbon Dioxide Fire Suppression Systems on Commercial Vessels final
rule (77 FR 33860, June 7, 2012), a separate rule related to fire
suppression systems on commercial vessels that was published after we
published our NPRM. We made reference to that ongoing rulemaking and
its potential impact on this rule in our NPRM. See 76 FR 49985, Aug.
11, 2011. The Carbon Dioxide Fire Suppression rule revised the vessel
regulations to require lock-out valves and odorizing units on all new
carbon dioxide extinguishing systems installed or materially altered
after July 9, 2013. That rulemaking also changed each of the vessel
subchapters to allow the use of clean agent fire-extinguishing systems
as an alternative to carbon dioxide systems. Because of this, it was
necessary to change the inspection and testing requirements for fire-
extinguishing systems in Table 142.240 to include criteria for the
inspection and testing of the new clean agents. We have also slightly
modified the definition of ``fixed fire-extinguishing system'' in Sec.
136.110 to comport with the revised definition in new 46 CFR 27.101.
Additionally, we changed ``maintain'' to ``test and inspect'' in
the water mist ``test'' field in Table 142.240, to more accurately
reflect the intent of this requirement.
Several comments related to the proposed regulatory text in Sec.
142.240 revealed that this section was confusing and did not clearly
convey our intended requirements. During our further review of proposed
Sec. 142.240 we noted that the NPRM used inconsistent wording and
tended to use the terms ``examination,'' ``test,'' and ``maintenance''
interchangeably, which contributed to the confusion. We have,
therefore, revised the text and format of this section to improve its
clarity and consistency. All testing and inspection requirements are
stated in paragraph (a), all maintenance requirements are in paragraph
(b), and requirements for recordkeeping are in paragraph (c). We have
also replaced the word ``examination'' with ``inspection'' to be
consistent with other Coast Guard regulations.
We received numerous comments requesting that the proposed text of
this section be modified to require fire suppression and fire detection
systems be inspected or tested annually or in accordance with the TSMS
applicable to the vessel. We agree with this view and have changed
Sec. 142.240(a) to require inspection or testing at least every 12
months--as we proposed in Sec. 142.240(c)--or more frequently, if
required by the vessel's TSMS.
Several comments also proposed that the TSMS should be the
exclusive form of recordkeeping for test and inspection results. We do
not agree with this comment. For flexibility, we have proposed that the
records may be kept in accordance with an applicable TSMS, the TVR, or
the vessel's logbook, whichever applies. We have also added new
provisions in Sec. 142.240(c)(2) to accept service tags attached to
portable and semi-portable extinguishers by a qualified servicing
organization as an acceptable record that demonstrates the required
tests and inspections have been completed.
One commenter requested that we replace the phrase ``dampers'' in
proposed Sec. 142.240(c), now Sec. 142.240(a), with ``fire dampers.''
It was not our intent to require the testing of fusible-link fire
dampers. The proposed requirement was directed at pressure-operated
dampers installed in engine room ventilation ducts. These dampers are
automatically operated by the engine room fire-extinguishing system,
and must close prior to system discharge to prevent the leakage and
dilution of the fire-extinguishing agent. To clarify what dampers we
intended to be tested, we have changed ``dampers'' to ``fixed fire-
extinguishing system pressure-operated dampers.'' We have also added
this phrase to Sec. 142.240(a)(5) to clarify that these dampers must
be tested as part of the fire-extinguishing system inspection
procedures.
One commenter requested a modification to the carbon dioxide
cylinder tests required by Table 142.240 that would remove the
requirement to weigh the cylinders, and in its place permit the use of
liquid level indicators. We do not agree with this requested
modification. The Coast Guard has historically required that carbon
dioxide cylinders must be weighed to determine the amount of
extinguishing agent (see, e.g., 46 CFR 91.25-20(a)(2) and related
table), because weighing is the only reliable method to check the
quantity of carbon dioxide in the cylinders that the Coast Guard
recognizes. Liquid level measuring systems use various types of sensing
elements that show the location of the liquid/gas interface within the
cylinder. With that knowledge, a technician is able to calculate the
quantity of agent. We have no objection to the use of liquid level
indicators for checking the quantity of halocarbon clean agents,
because a liquid/gas interface can be easily determined. This is not
the case with carbon dioxide, however, which has a critical temperature
of 87.8 degrees Fahrenheit. Below the critical temperature, carbon
dioxide in a closed container may be part liquid and part gas. Above
the critical temperature it is entirely gas, making the use of such
measuring devices impractical.
One commenter requested that we change Sec. 142.245 to require all
records of training and drills to be kept in the TVR. We do not agree
and have made no changes from the proposed rule based on this comment.
For flexibility, we have permitted several acceptable recordkeeping
methods, in accordance with part 140 of this subchapter.
One commenter questioned the intended extent of the fire detection
and alarm system testing during drills required by proposed Sec.
142.245(c)(3). As proposed, the commenter noted, each
[[Page 40059]]
drill could be understood to require a complete test of the system.
This is not our intent. We anticipate that during drills, only the test
switch or a single detector needs to be activated to familiarize the
crew with the system's operation, and have changed the text of Sec.
142.245(c)(3) to require that only one device needs to be tested.
One commenter requested that the proposed requirements in this
section for training crews to respond to fires should be removed from
the rule, as the limited scope of the training would not afford crew
members with the necessary skills and knowledge to safely engage in
fire-fighting activities. The commenter anticipated that this may
result in a false sense of security, leading to injuries for
crewmembers attempting to fight engine room fires. Further supporting
this argument, it was suggested that the typical practice on inland
towing vessels in response to a fire is to attempt ``first-aid''
firefighting using portable extinguishers or fire hoses. If this fails
to contain the fire, the crew would abandon ship to the tow or the
riverbank.
Another commenter requested that we strengthen the training
requirements by mandating that all licensed officers, apprentice mates,
steersmen, and engineers complete formal fire-fighting training
courses.
We considered comments on these same issues in a previous
rulemaking, the Fire-Suppression Systems and Voyage Planning for Towing
Vessels interim rule (68 FR 22607, April 29, 2003), and believed at
that time that the level of training proposed in our Inspection of
Towing Vessels NPRM would provide crew members with adequate knowledge
of the procedures and equipment on board their vessels needed to
respond to fires; we have not changed our opinion on this issue based
on these comments on Sec. 142.245. In support of our previous
rulemaking, TSAC had performed an independent analysis of our casualty
data, which showed that over 80 percent of the reported fires on inland
vessels had been extinguished by the crewmembers with only seven
reported injuries. (See USCG-2000-6931-0046, available on
www.regulations.gov). Further review of the Coast Guard casualty
reports on the vessels where injuries were reported revealed that most
of the seven injuries were the result of conditions in the engine room
(e.g., burns from the fire outbreak) and were not attributable to fire-
fighting efforts.
As previously discussed, in order to make this regulation more
user-friendly, we have made various editorial changes here such as
moving the portable fire extinguisher requirements previously proposed
in Sec. 142.305 to Sec. 142.230(d). We also revised the section
heading of Sec. 142.315 to ``Additional fire-extinguishing equipment
requirements,'' and amended that entire section to make clear which
provisions did not apply to certain towing vessels. In order to account
for those vessels operating within 3 nautical miles from shore on the
Great Lakes, we revised paragraph (a)(1) of Sec. 142.315. These
revisions did not change any substantive requirements proposed in the
NPRM.
We received numerous comments requesting that we modify proposed
Sec. 142.325(c) to clarify that sufficient hydrants and hoses must be
provided to allow ``a stream of water from'' a single length of hose to
reach any part of the machinery space. We concur with these comments
and have changed the text accordingly. Associated with this were
several comments that the requirement for a single length of hose
should be deleted. We do not concur with this, because the single, 15-
meter-length-of-hose requirement ensures that a sufficient number of
fire hydrants with attached hoses are installed in or close to the
engine room. If the fire-fighting water could be provided by multiple
sections of hose linked together, (i.e., a segmented hose of unlimited
length) a single remote hydrant might satisfy the rule, but the length
of hose required would either be too cumbersome to handle in an
emergency, not provide the necessary amount of firefighting water due
to friction loss, or both.
One commenter urged us to add a new Sec. 142.325(g) requiring a
minimum fuel supply stowed onboard to enable 4 hours of operation of
the portable fire pump. We do not agree with this suggestion. Paragraph
(b) of 46 CFR 27.211 prohibits the carriage of portable fuel tanks and
related hardware except when used for outboard engines or when
permanently attached to portable equipment such as fire pumps. Most
commercially available portable fire pumps have a fuel tank capable of
operating the pump for at least 1 hour. The carriage of supplemental
fuel supplies to allow 4 hours of operation would conflict with the
provisions of 46 CFR 27.211(b).
Another commenter requested that we remove the requirement for a
``self-priming'' portable fire pump and require, as an alternative,
that a minimum time period be specified during which the crew must be
able to demonstrate that their portable pump can be deployed. We do not
agree with this comment and have not removed the requirement for self-
priming pumps, as non-self-priming pumps are extremely difficult to
successfully operate under emergency conditions.
A third commenter noted that in his experience, many crews have
difficulties getting the self-priming feature of portable fire pumps to
function. We believe this commenter raises a valid point, and have
added a new paragraph (c)(5) to Sec. 142.245 to require regular
training on the self-priming feature during fire drills to ensure crew
familiarity its operation, on vessels equipped with portable pumps.
Another commenter requested that we not accept the use of portable
pumps at all, as they are not comparable to fixed fire main systems,
and the amount of time it takes to assemble and deploy the pump in
darkness or rough weather could compromise mariner safety. We do not
concur with this comment because portable pumps were previously allowed
for uninspected towing vessels and we do not have data supporting the
removal of the option of using cost-effective portable fire pumps.
Operators with vessels on routes or in services where the ability to
deploy and operate portable pumps could be difficult may choose to
install a fixed fire main system as an option.
One commenter recommended that we specify the type of fire hoses
required by this section, and urged that we adopt UL 19 as the required
standard. We believe that the existing requirement for lined commercial
fire hose provides suitable fire-fighting equipment for this purpose.
Firehose meeting UL 19 is constructed to a higher standard that would
impose unnecessary costs on the industry.
One commenter suggested that Sec. 142.325 require a dedicated sea-
chest for the installed fire main. We do not agree with this comment,
because a dedicated sea-chest would likely be used only during drills
and in emergencies. If the fire main system is connected to a sea-chest
that is regularly used for shipboard services, there is a greater
chance that it will be clear of debris or fouling when needed.
During our review of the public comments on Sec. 142.330, we noted
that the proposed introductory paragraph of this section was confusing
in regard to the fire detection system requirements for towing vessels
constructed on or after January 18, 2000. We have clarified and
improved the structure of this section by addressing vessels whose
construction was contracted for prior to January 18, 2000, separately
in paragraph Sec. 142.330(a)(8).
One commenter requested clarification as to whether the audible and
visual alarms at the operating station required by proposed
[[Page 40060]]
Sec. 142.330(c) must be integral to the fire alarm control panel. The
Coast Guard's response is that the operating station must have a fire
detection control panel installed within the space. However, in the
years since the Fire-Suppression Systems and Voyage Planning for Towing
Vessels final rule was published (69 FR 34064, June 18, 2004) and
incorporated into existing 46 CFR subchapter C regulations, we have
become aware that there may be cases where this is a problem on towing
vessels with more than one operating station because the fire detection
system control panel is not installed at each operating station. We did
not intend to impose an undue economic burden on vessels of this design
type by requiring fire detection control panels at each operating
station. Rather, one operating station must be outfitted with the fire
detection control panel while any others could be outfitted with either
fire detection control panels or a remote indicator with audible and
visual alarms. We amended the regulatory text of this section to
reflect this intent (see new Sec. 142.330(a)(3)).
Another commenter requested that we remove reference to a circuit-
fault detector test-switch in Sec. 142.330(a)(4)(v) because currently
available fire alarm control panels use internal supervision instead of
a test switch to verify circuit integrity. We agree with this comment
and have changed this paragraph to accept control panels with internal
circuit supervision as equivalent to those having a test switch. We
have elected to retain a reference to panels with a test switch to
allow flexibility in meeting this provision.
Various commenters suggested that proposed Sec. 142.330(g), which
we redesignated as Sec. 142.330(a)(7) in the final rule, should be
amended to allow certification of fire detection systems by the
National Institute for Certification in Engineering Technologies
(NICET) Level IV technicians in addition to registered P.E.s. We concur
with this view and have changed the text of Sec. 142.330(a)(7)
accordingly. Level IV technicians are required to have at least 10
years' experience in fire alarm installation and testing and must pass
a comprehensive written exam to demonstrate their knowledge. Other
commenters requested that we add a qualifying statement to the
requirement for a P.E., to ensure that the engineer is qualified to
review and certify fire detection systems. We agree and have changed
Sec. 142.330(a)(7) to require that any P.E.s or authorized
classification society reviewing the system have experience in fire
detection system design. It is important to note that all required fire
detection systems must be certified and inspected by a P.E., a NICET
Level IV Technician, or an authorized classification society including
those on vessels that elect or are subject to the Coast Guard
traditional inspection scheme under Sec. 137.200. When the Coast Guard
inspects the vessel, it will look for evidence that the vessel owner or
managing operator has had all required fire detection systems on the
vessel certified and inspected by a P.E., a NICET Level IV Technician,
or an authorized classification society. We also edited Sec.
142.330(a)(7) to clearly require the system and its installation to be
both certified and inspected.
One commenter requested clarification of proposed Sec. 142.330(g),
specifically, whether the certifying engineer or technician must review
only the detection system equipment and layout drawings, or whether it
is necessary to inspect the installation of the fire detection system
on board the vessel. We clarified the language in Sec. 142.330, and
specify that the fire detection system must be both: Certified by a
P.E., NICET technician, or an authorized classification society
surveyor to comply with paragraphs (a)(1) through (7) of Sec. 142.330;
and inspected by a Coast Guard marine inspector or a TPO surveyor,
depending upon which inspection regime applies to the vessel, to comply
with Sec. 142.330(a)(2). This last reference requires the system to be
installed, tested and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's
design manual.
We have substituted the term independent testing laboratory in
Sec. 142.330(a)(1) and (8) with Nationally Recognized Testing
Laboratory (NRTL) as defined in 29 CFR 1910.7. The proposed term
independent testing laboratory is ambiguous and will be replaced with
NRTL throughout title 46 CFR upon the finalization of a concurrent
regulatory project (see the Harmonization of Standards for Fire
Protection, Detection, and Extinguishing Equipment notice of proposed
rulemaking (79 FR 2254, January 13, 2014)).
Please note that we have redesignated Sec. 142.335, Smoke alarms
in berthing spaces, and Sec. 142.340, Heat detector in galley as Sec.
142.330(b) and (c), respectively, in the final rule. Multiple
commenters urged us to remove from proposed Sec. 142.335 (now Sec.
142.330(b)) any requirements for battery operated smoke detectors in
berthing spaces, and instead require smoke detectors that are part of
an installed fixed fire-detection system. We do not concur with this
suggestion. Battery-operated smoke detectors are not required, but
detectors that meet UL 217 may be used as an alternative to satisfy the
requirements in new Sec. 142.330(b). We have retained this option in
the final rule because it offers a low cost alternative to installing a
fixed detection system in these areas.
A commenter requested changing proposed Sec. 142.340 regarding a
heat detector in the galley to require only heat detectors that comply
with UL 521. We have not specified a specific performance standard for
the required heat detectors; however, we agree with the commenter that
only restorable heat sensing type detectors may be used (i.e.,
detectors that automatically reset to operating condition when the heat
source is removed), and have changed the requirements in redesignated
Sec. 142.330(c) accordingly.
In the NPRM we discussed comments submitted in response to seven
questions we posed in a December 30, 2004, Inspection of Towing Vessels
notice. In response to that portion of the NPRM, one of these
commenters recommended applying grandfathering to structural fire-
protection requirements. The commenter also felt that existing vessels
should be treated differently from newly constructed vessels because of
the likelihood that fire standards will make it difficult to retrofit
existing vessels. We have made no changes to the final rule in response
to this comment. The fire protection standards proposed in this part
retain most of the fire protection regulations that currently apply to
existing towing vessels and are contained in Title 46 CFR parts 25 and
27. Only three new requirements have been added. Section 142.227
requires all vessels to have a fire axe, Sec. 142.330(b) (proposed
Sec. 142.335) requires smoke detectors in berthing areas, and Sec.
142.226 (proposed Sec. 142.345) requires firefighter's outfits on
certain ocean-going vessels. Battery-operated smoke detectors will be
permitted, and the addition of fire axes and firefighter's outfits does
not require any modifications to the vessel; therefore, we do not agree
that either requirement would be difficult to implement onboard
existing vessels.
M. Machinery and Electrical (Part 143)
In this final rule, we made substantive changes in response to
specific comments on the NPRM, and we also made significant
organizational changes. Because of the organizational changes, subpart
headings and section numbers in this part no longer correspond to those
used in the NPRM. Much of the content of proposed part 143 has been
removed or reordered, and several provisions have been changed to apply
to new vessels only. The requirements
[[Page 40061]]
of proposed subpart C, deferred requirements for existing vessels, and
proposed subpart D, for oil and hazardous material in bulk, have been
divided among the other subparts. This derivation table lists part 143
section numbers in this final rule and the corresponding part 143
section from the NPRM:
Table 1--Derivation of Sections of Part 143 From the NPRM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final rule section No. NPRM section No.(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
143.100................................... 143.110.
143.105................................... 143.105.
143.115................................... 143.115.
143.200................................... 143.200, 143.325, 143.330,
143.335.
143.205................................... 143.220.
143.210................................... 143.110, 143.215.
143.215................................... 143.210.
143.220................................... 143.235.
143.225................................... 143.240.
143.230................................... 143.245.
143.235................................... 143.250.
143.240................................... 143.330.
143.245................................... 143.260.
143.250................................... 143.270.
143.255................................... 143.275.
143.260................................... 143.280.
143.265................................... 143.285.
143.270................................... 143.290.
143.275................................... 143.295.
143.300................................... 143.320, 143.520, 143.525.
143.400................................... 143.300.
143.410................................... 143.310.
143.415................................... 143.315.
143.450................................... 143.210, 143.325, 143.515,
143.520.
143.460................................... 143.330.
143.500................................... 143.500, 143.505.
143.505................................... 143.505.
143.510................................... 143.510.
143.515................................... 143.515.
143.520................................... 143.520.
143.540................................... 143.535.
143.545................................... 143.540.
143.550................................... 143.545.
143.555................................... 143.340.
143.560................................... 143.345.
143.565................................... 143.350.
143.570................................... 143.355.
143.575................................... 143.360.
143.580................................... 143.550.
143.585................................... 143.405.
143.590................................... 143.410.
143.595................................... 143.420.
143.600................................... 143.430.
143.605................................... 143.435.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In several provisions in the NPRM, we offered two different options
for complying with design or operational standards in certain areas.
These sections were divided up into ``functional requirements'' and
``prescriptive options'' for complying with the functional
requirements. The prescriptive options represented one way to comply
with the functional requirements, but an owner or managing operator
could choose another way to comply so long as the alternative method
was approved by the OCMI or an approved third party. On further
consideration, we have consolidated the functional requirements with
other language about when and how exceptions from the baseline standard
may be granted (see Sec. 143.210).
Changes to Subpart A, ``General''
The applicability of the subparts within this part has changed. The
specific changes are discussed elsewhere in this preamble, but we have
revised the discussion of applicability in subpart A to provide an
overview of the entire part for readers. Most notably, subpart A now
specifies that existing vessels (which includes those vessels already
under construction that do not meet our definition of ``new towing
vessel''), have 2 years to comply with the rule; for certain listed
provisions, the delay is longer. Additionally, because the structure of
part 143 has changed, new vessels must comply with subparts B and C of
part 143 except as noted in specific sections in subpart C instead of
the proposed subpart E. Under our ``new towing vessel'' definition, no
vessel would be subject to new vessel requirements until at least July
20, 2017.
Because of the additional discussion of the applicability of each
subpart and the changes to the discussion of functional requirements
with prescriptive options for compliance, we removed proposed Sec.
143.110. The content specific to OCMI or third-party acceptance of
alternative methods is relocated to Sec. 143.210 and consolidated.
However, we will address here the comments received on proposed Sec.
143.110. One commenter suggested adding the word ``company'' to the
entities named in Sec. 143.110(c) on alternatives to the prescriptive
option. The Coast Guard declines to make this change, because an
``owner or managing operator'' may be a company. Another commenter
suggested replacing OCMI or third-party acceptance with a TSMS accepted
by the third party. This change would remove the option of OCMI
acceptance and would not be appropriate for vessels not covered by a
TSMS, so the Coast Guard declines to make the change.
As previously discussed in this preamble, we relocated the
definition of ``independent'' to part 143 in response to a comment
pointing out that the definition was specific to vessel arrangements
described in this part.
Several commenters noted that that the phrase ``replacement in
kind'' should not be construed too narrowly, so as to avoid subjecting
existing towing vessels to unnecessary additional requirements. One
commenter suggested that where a piece of equipment such as a generator
is replaced with another that has the same function and similar
characteristics but is not the exact same model, such replacement
should be considered ``replacement in kind.'' Another commenter
suggested that proposed Sec. 143.220 (now incorporated into Sec.
143.205) would prevent vessels from upgrading to more efficient
equipment.
We added a definition of ``replacement in kind'' to Sec. 136.110
in response to numerous comments requesting clarification of this term,
which is used in parts 143 and 144. When equipment needs to be
replaced, it may be replaced by the same or similar equipment, or it
may be upgraded. It is certainly acceptable to upgrade, but an upgrade
is not considered a replacement in kind because the maintenance and
operation of the new equipment may require operator training, new
maintenance schedules, OCMI approval of equipment arrangement, and an
update to the vessel's TSMS.
Finally, the Coast Guard removed the list of material incorporated
by reference specifically for part 143 (proposed Sec. 143.120) and
moved that content to a consolidated list for the entire subchapter at
Sec. 136.112. The Coast Guard received one comment on the
incorporation of standards by reference in part 143; the comment
appeared to indicate that new incorporations are not necessary because
there are existing, currently applicable standards elsewhere in title
46. The standards incorporated in part 143 are necessary because towing
vessels represent a unique class of vessel design, and other standards
incorporated in various CFR sections are not currently applicable to
towing vessels. The engineering standards incorporated in subchapters
F, J, and Q, for instance, are generally applicable to much larger
ships with different risk profiles, such as passenger ships or large
tank vessels.
Changes to Subpart B, ``Requirements for All Towing Vessels''
The organization of subpart B remains largely the same as in the
NPRM, although the section numbers have changed. We removed proposed
Sec. 143.230, ``Guards for exposed hazards,'' as it was duplicative of
proposed Sec. 144.345. For more on this, see discussion of changes to
part 144 below. We also added two sections from proposed subpart C--
pilothouse alerter
[[Page 40062]]
systems and towing machinery--which have delayed application dates for
existing vessels. An existing vessel must comply not later than 5 years
after the issuance of the first COI for the vessel. This delayed
compliance date is reflected in Sec. 143.200(c) and is the same length
of time as was proposed in the NPRM at proposed Sec. 143.320. The
details of these requirements, and other changes to proposed subpart C,
are discussed later in this preamble.
General
We redesignated proposed Sec. 143.220 as Sec. 143.205. The Coast
Guard received a suggestion that we insert the phrase ``in accordance
with their responsibilities'' in proposed Sec. 143.220(b). The Coast
Guard agrees with the general approach and has revised the paragraph to
clarify that crewmembers must demonstrate ability to operate the
machinery and electrical systems for which they are responsible.
Another commenter suggested changing the requirements in proposed
Sec. 143.220(c)(3) to apply to all control stations (operating
stations) instead of just the primary one. The Coast Guard agrees and
has removed the word ``primary'' from this requirement. The Coast Guard
understands that certain vessels have more than one operating station;
in such cases, each operating station would need to comply with revised
and redesignated Sec. 143.205(c)(3).
One commenter suggested that the Coast Guard insert the phrase
``with respect to the installation in question'' in the sentence in
proposed Sec. 143.220(d) that requires installations to comply with
subpart C for new vessels if the installation is made after this rule
becomes effective and is not a replacement in kind on an existing
towing vessel. The Coast Guard declines to make that change because the
original language was unambiguous and the addition unnecessary.
Another commenter asked the Coast Guard to change proposed Sec.
143.220 to ``clarify that replacements mandated by regulation will not
trigger the referenced follow-on regulations . . . .'' The Coast Guard
disagrees. If equipment requires replacement and the owner or managing
operator chooses not to make a replacement in kind, it is considered an
upgrade and subpart C may apply. Depending on the significance of the
replacement (whole system versus one particular piece), newer standards
may be applicable. Applying subpart C to replacement equipment will not
result in the same cost as applying subpart C to existing equipment,
and is appropriate because the maintenance and operation of the new
equipment may differ.
Alternate Design
We combined proposed Sec. 143.215 on alternate design
considerations with the functional requirements provisions of proposed
Sec. 143.110 that called for OCMI or third-party acceptance; these are
now located in Sec. 143.210, and have been further condensed to refer
to similar provisions in Sec. 136.115. As noted earlier in this
preamble, these changes do not alter the availability of approval for
alternate designs.
The Coast Guard received several comments requesting that we add
``company'' after ``owner'' in proposed Sec. 143.215. The Coast Guard
partially agrees. In Sec. 143.210(a), we inserted ``or managing
operator'' after ``owner'' to be consistent with other sections where
we list both. The definition of ``managing operator'' in Sec. 136.110
includes organizations, and if a company owns the vessel, it would be
covered by the definition of ``owner.''
TSMS
We removed proposed Sec. 143.205, as it was duplicative of part
138. With respect to the content of that proposed section, one
commenter had suggested the Coast Guard include ``guidelines'' in
paragraph (a), along with policies and procedures to ensure compliance.
The Coast Guard declines to make such a change in the provisions
discussing TSMSs, because the purpose of the TSMS is to help ensure
compliance with all parts of this subchapter, and the inclusion of
guidelines is not necessary to that minimum standard. Nothing prohibits
the inclusion of guidelines in individual TSMSs, however.
Existing Vessels Built to Class
We redesignated proposed Sec. 143.210 as Sec. 143.215. Proposed
Sec. 143.210 had provided that vessels classed by the American Bureau
of Shipping (ABS), or built to ABS rules, would be considered in
compliance with part 143 if they met certain additional requirements.
However, we determined that the requirements for existing and new
vessels need to be further distinguished.
This final rule creates flexibility for existing vessels: Existing
towing vessels currently classed by any recognized classification
society, or determined compliant with any recognized classification
society's appropriate rules, are equivalent to nearly all of the
requirements of subpart B. We have reduced the list of additional
requirements originally proposed in Sec. 143.210(b), so that existing
vessels that are classed or built to class rules only need to meet the
pilothouse alerter requirement (by the delayed effective date, 5 years
after the issuance of the first COI for the vessel) and readiness and
testing requirements. These fundamental safety provisions replace the
longer list that we had proposed. In particular, proposed paragraph
(b)(2) on potable water was removed because, as a number of commenters
noted, proposed Sec. 143.225 was ``reserved'' and listed no
requirements. The Coast Guard agrees with the suggestion to remove this
reference to potable water requirements; we note that Food and Drug
Administration requirements in 21 CFR 1250.82 already apply to potable
water systems for most towing vessels engaged in interstate commerce.
In addition, in Sec. 140.510(a)(14) an owner or managing operator must
identify and mitigate health and safety hazards related to the towing
vessel's potable water supply.
Also, with regard to proposed Sec. 143.210(a), the Coast Guard
received several comments suggesting we change the phrase ``mechanical
standards'' to ``machinery standards.'' The Coast Guard agrees that
``machinery standards'' is the industry accepted term, and amended the
section accordingly. In what is now paragraph (b), the Coast Guard
clarified that the OCMI or a third party would deem the vessel to be in
compliance.
As is discussed later in this preamble, new towing vessels meeting
ABS rules in accordance with Sec. 143.515, or classed by ABS, are
considered to be in compliance with part 143 except for the pilothouse
alerter and readiness and testing sections that are described below.
New towing vessels classed by other recognized classification societies
may also be compliant with part 143 if approved by the Coast Guard.
This final rule offers more flexibility than the proposed rule, in that
it provides for Coast Guard approval of other class standards, but does
not automatically accept all classed vessels as compliant with part
143. In light of the wide range of possible class standards in the
future, we believe this is the correct balance between safety and
feasibility.
Machinery Space Fire Prevention
We redesignated proposed Sec. 143.235 as Sec. 143.220. One
commenter suggested the Coast Guard change ``flammable liquid'' to
``flammable or combustible liquid'' in proposed paragraphs (a) and (c),
to cover diesel fuel. The Coast Guard agrees that most grades of diesel
fuel are considered ``combustible liquids'' as opposed to more volatile
``flammable liquids'' such as gasoline, and amended the section
accordingly to indicate the
[[Page 40063]]
intent of preventing fires. We also refer to 46 CFR subpart 30.10 for
definitions of those terms. Similarly, one commenter suggested we add
``and other flammable liquids'' to the restriction on oil in proposed
paragraph (b). The Coast Guard agrees with the underlying concern, but
has removed proposed paragraph (b) because it was duplicative of the
fire hazards provision in part 142.
With respect to proposed Sec. 143.235(c), several commenters said
that the temperature threshold required, 65.5 [deg]C
(150[emsp14][deg]F), is too low to be practical. The Coast Guard agrees
that the temperature specified in the NPRM was impractical, and amended
what is now Sec. 143.220(b) to adopt the SOLAS requirements for
insulation of hot surfaces: 220 [deg]C (428[emsp14][deg]F) as was
suggested by several commenters. SOLAS is an established,
internationally recognized set of rules developed and ratified by
maritime nations worldwide, and the Coast Guard determined that this
was the most appropriate reference.
With respect to proposed Sec. 143.235(d), one commenter suggested
the Coast Guard change ``materials'' to ``products.'' The Coast Guard
agrees that the suggested change is necessary to achieve uniformity
between parts 142 and 143, and amended Sec. 143.220(c) accordingly. In
the same section, one commenter suggested that the Coast Guard include
the amounts of flammable and combustible materials that can be safely
stored in machinery spaces under this section. The Coast Guard declines
to do so because, under the original proposed language, the limits
would be determined by the size of the designated areas defined in
Sec. 142.225 or the size of the flammable storage cabinet that
satisfies UL 1275. In addition, because available storage areas will be
limited by prohibitions on ignition sources in those areas, we believe
that operators will carry only the amounts of products necessary for
the vessel mission.
The Coast Guard received several comments recommending adding the
language from proposed Sec. 144.360(c) to proposed Sec. 143.235,
because it pertains to machinery space fire prevention. The Coast Guard
declines to add the language to part 143 because the provisions of
Sec. 144.605 address this topic for all towing vessels.
Control and Monitoring Requirements
We redesignated proposed Sec. 143.240 as Sec. 143.225. The Coast
Guard received several comments requesting that we change ``thrust'' to
``RPMs'' in proposed paragraph (a).
The Coast Guard does not agree with these comments because the use
of the word ``thrust'' is intended to cover other propulsion systems in
use today, including varying propulsion and steering control designs,
as well as indicators. An example would be a shaft tachometer as an
acceptable means of monitoring the vessel's propulsion thrust.
The Coast Guard received several comments asking if the position of
the rudder joystick is sufficient to meet the requirements of proposed
paragraph (b). The position of the rudder joystick does not provide a
positive position of the rudder and is not acceptable. The rudder
joystick simply provides an indication of the commanded position of the
rudder.
Alarms and Monitoring
We redesignated proposed Sec. 143.245 as Sec. 143.230. The Coast
Guard received several comments suggesting that the panel in the
wheelhouse needs only to alarm and should not be required to identify
the piece of equipment that has tripped the alarm. The Coast Guard
agrees that specifying the exact piece of equipment that is in an alarm
condition is not necessary in the wheelhouse. Rather, a summary alarm
in the wheelhouse is considered sufficient. We amended Sec. 143.230
accordingly. The Coast Guard also received comments concerning the
intent of requiring alarms to function when primary power is lost. We
agree that it is impractical that alarms on existing vessels have a
backup source of power in addition to the primary power supply, because
the primary concern on a loss of main electrical power is restoring the
main power source.
The Coast Guard received several comments requesting whether
certain alarms should signal high or low levels; the Coast Guard agrees
that clarification is needed, and amended the section to specify which
alarm settings are based on high or low conditions. Several commenters
suggested that the requirement for a ``main engine fuel oil pressure''
alarm should be removed. One commenter indicated that requiring fuel
oil pressure alarms was unnecessarily rigorous and would have a
disproportionate effect on small businesses. We agree that a wide range
of diesel engine fuel pressures may be acceptable depending on the
manufacturer, and that fuel oil pressure is not normally considered a
mandatory parameter to be monitored; these levels may be checked each
watch. We therefore removed proposed Sec. 143.245(a)(3) and (6) when
drafting the final version of Sec. 143.230.
One commenter requested a high level alarm requirement on day
tanks, stating that a number of spills have occurred as the result of
day tanks being overfilled. The Coast Guard agrees that a high level
alarm could be beneficial. However, we do not have spill data to
justify such a requirement and there are other acceptable means to
ensure the day tank is not overfilled (for example, routing the
overfill line to a storage tank, physically observing the level of the
tank during filling operations, monitoring quantity of fuel transferred
so it does not exceed available capacity). In the future, we may
propose requiring this alarm if spill data suggests overfilling of the
day tank could have been avoided by such an alarm.
The Coast Guard also received several comments stating that
proposed Sec. 143.245(a)(9) (now designated Sec. 143.230(a)(6))
addressing low fuel level alarms repeats proposed Sec. 143.275(d) and
that one of the two sections should be removed. The Coast Guard agrees,
and removed proposed Sec. 143.275(d).
One commenter suggested removing the requirement for hydraulic
level alarms.
The Coast Guard disagrees. There is a need to monitor the hydraulic
fluid in the steering hydraulic tank in the event of leaks or pipe/hose
rupture, because it is essential for maneuvering.
With respect to proposed Sec. 143.245(b)(3), the Coast Guard
received several comments in favor of a self-monitoring alarm system.
The Coast Guard agrees that a self-monitoring alarm system is a
practical alternative to manual testing of the alarm system, and
amended Sec. 143.230(b)(2) accordingly.
The Coast Guard received several comments suggesting deletion of
the requirement at proposed Sec. 143.245(c) that gauges be visible at
the operating station. The Coast Guard agrees that gauges are not
required at the operating station, provided that there are alarms or a
summary of alarms at each operating station. We amended this section
for clarification.
One commenter suggested that several provisions of the NPRM,
including gauges for engines at proposed Sec. 143.245(c), should not
be required because they are not required of passenger vessels in
subchapter T.
The Coast Guard disagrees with the suggestion that that no gauges
should be provided, although we agree that subchapter T vessels and
subchapter M vessels could have similar systems. The gauges required by
proposed Sec. 143.245(c) are considered minimum requirements for
monitoring engine
[[Page 40064]]
performance. However, in the final rule, the number of gauges required
has been reduced to only those considered essential to engine
monitoring, and which normally are provided by the manufacturer with
all engine installations regardless of the vessel type.
With respect to paragraphs (c)(1) and (3) one commenter suggested
that the Coast Guard add the engine RPMs to these sections. The Coast
Guard agrees that the main engine(s) and auxiliary generator engines
should be equipped with RPM indicators, and amended the sections
accordingly.
We deleted proposed paragraph (d) because summary alarms are
already allowed under revised Sec. 143.230(b)(1), so there is no need
for a separate section allowing this on excepted vessels. With respect
to proposed paragraph (d) one commenter suggested that the Coast Guard
add ``crewmembers responding to the alarm(s).'' The Coast Guard agrees
with the comment in that the proposed text could have been more
specific regarding communications between crewmembers. However,
proposed paragraph (d) was applicable only to excepted vessels, and
given the traditional size and service of excepted vessels, we
ultimately determined that a separate paragraph was not necessary.
General Alarms
We redesignated proposed Sec. 143.250 as Sec. 143.235. One
commenter suggested that the Coast Guard clarify the applicability of
this section. That commenter also recommended requiring the public
address system on towing vessels be equipped with ``talk-back''
capability.
The Coast Guard has modified the applicability section to be
clearer, and has made similar clarifying changes to Sec. 143.240(a).
As for adding a requirement for ``talk-back'' capability, we disagree.
This capability is not required on any commercial vessel and would be
unnecessary for the usual purposes of a public address system.
Readiness and Testing
We redesignated proposed Sec. 143.260 as Sec. 143.245 and, as
described earlier in this preamble, removed the functional and
prescriptive designators in favor of a unified section on alternatives
at the beginning of the part. One commenter suggested that the Coast
Guard remove ``(if available)'' from proposed Sec. 143.260(a).
The Coast Guard agrees that manufacturer's instructions are
normally available, and removed the phrase ``if available.''
With respect to proposed Sec. 143.260(b), the Coast Guard received
several comments to amend parts of the table to clarify that the intent
is for a crew change and not a watch or shift change. The Coast Guard
agrees that testing the propulsion and steering controls is not
necessary with every shift change, and amended the section to clarify
that the test is only necessary prior to getting underway, but not more
often than once every 24 hours. In the same section, one commenter
suggested changing the required testing frequency of alarm setpoints
and pressure safety valves from annually to every 2 years or longer.
The Coast Guard agrees and has amended Table 143.245(b) to make
these requirements more consistent with similar requirements in
subchapter F. Finally, one commenter suggested the Coast Guard change
``pressure vessel safety valves'' to ``pressure vessel relief valves.''
The Coast Guard agrees that relief valve is the more common terminology
and amended the section accordingly.
System Isolation and Markings
We have redesignated proposed Sec. 143.270 as Sec. 143.250. The
Coast Guard received a number of comments suggesting that ``graywater
lines need not be fitted with isolation valves or marked if all piping
is contained inside a fuel tank or void.'' The Coast Guard disagrees.
It is not possible for ``all piping'' to be contained in a tank, and it
is important for the piping system to be identified. However, the
intent of the requirement is for crew members to be able to identify
piping systems used in normal, everyday operations, and therefore it is
not essential that systems in normally inaccessible spaces be
identified.
One commenter suggested that the Coast Guard add a new paragraph
(e) to proposed Sec. 143.270 to cover sanitary discharges, and add
``Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section'' to the
beginning of this section. The Coast Guard declines to do so because
the requirements in this section would apply to any system piping
penetrating the hull beneath the waterline. However, variations could
be accommodated through the provision for alternate design approvals
that has already been discussed in this preamble.
With regard to proposed Sec. 143.270(e), one commenter stated that
the use of ``either'' ISO Standard 14276 or marking in accordance with
the TSMS applicable to the vessel would lead to a lack of uniformity
between towing vessels and is counterproductive. The Coast Guard agrees
that one standard for industry color-coding of piping is preferred, but
lacks the casualty data to support a mandate for one particular
standard. Another commenter suggested that the Coast Guard identify the
basic colors used to mark piping.
The Coast Guard declines to do so because the international
standard referenced in this section already identifies basic piping
colors.
Fuel System Requirements
We redesignated proposed Sec. 143.275 as Sec. 143.255. The Coast
Guard received several comments suggesting that the requirement at
proposed Sec. 143.275(c) to replace fuel filters be based more on
``performance requirements'' as opposed to manufacturer
recommendations. The Coast Guard partially agrees and amended the
section, but considers manufacturer recommendations to be based already
in part on performance requirements, such as differential pressure and
time in service. We also amended proposed Sec. 143.275(a) to clarify
that the term ``be maintained'' used in the proposed rule means a
documented maintenance plan. We also made nonsubstantive changes to
proposed Sec. 143.275(b) for brevity and clarity.
As previously discussed, we removed proposed Sec. 143.275(d) in
response to comments stating it was duplicative of proposed Sec.
143.240(a)(9). We then added a new paragraph (d) that requires the use
of diesel fuel unless approval for another fuel is obtained pursuant to
Sec. 143.210 or Sec. 143.520. We did this because diesel fuel is
considered the standard for marine fuels, and the use of more volatile
fuels such as liquefied natural gas or propane requires approval by the
MSC.
Fuel Shutoff Requirements
We redesignated proposed Sec. 143.280 as Sec. 143.260. The Coast
Guard received a comment suggesting that we define ``near the source of
supply'' as used in proposed Sec. 143.280(c). The Coast Guard agrees
with this commenter. To clarify the section, we drafted Sec.
143.260(c) to require that the valve be installed in the fuel piping
directly outside of the fuel oil supply tank. We also received a
comment suggesting that the use of extra heavy piping should be
explicitly allowed as an alternative to situating the valve near the
source.
The Coast Guard disagrees. While such arrangements may be
acceptable with proper piping materials or other design choices,
locating the valve directly after the fuel supply source is the most
effective way to stop a leak.
The Coast Guard received one comment suggesting that we remove the
words ``outside the space where the
[[Page 40065]]
valve is installed'' from proposed Sec. 143.280(d) and instead
specifically require that the valve be located on the weather deck.
The Coast Guard disagrees because a safe place outside the
machinery may not always be located on the weather deck.
The Coast Guard also received one comment stating, in part, that
the ``requirement for remote shutdown of each engine outside the
machinery space is unworkable'' and suggesting the requirement should
be removed.
The Coast Guard does not agree: The remote shutdown outside the
machinery space is necessary in the event that the engine space is not
accessible due to fire.
Additional Fuel System Requirements for Towing Vessels Built After
January 18, 2000
We redesignated proposed Sec. 143.285 as Sec. 143.265. With
respect to proposed Sec. 143.285(b), the Coast Guard received several
comments requesting clarification on the proposed regulations regarding
``portable bilge pumps.'' A ``portable bilge pump'' as specified in
paragraph (b) is a dewatering pump. We received a comment suggesting
that the proposed rule would limit an operator's ability to dewater a
damaged tow. We disagree. The regulation allows for proper stowage and
use of portable tanks or cans for portable bilge pumps. The rules for
the barge itself are beyond the scope of this rulemaking, but
``portability'' of fuel is allowed in the circumstances specified by
this section. If an operator is safely able to reach a towed unit,
there is no prohibition on using portable equipment to dewater or fight
a fire on that unit.
The Coast Guard received a comment suggesting that the proposed
regulations did not consider a ``closed loop'' ventilation system
option for venting. The Coast Guard does not agree with this
characterization of the proposed rule, because proposed Sec.
142.285(c)(1), now designated Sec. 143.265(c), allows tank vents to be
combined, as long as there is ultimately a vent to the outside. We
received a comment suggesting revisions to the required size of the
vent piping. We partially agree, and the paragraph (c) has been amended
for clarity on this issue.
One commenter expressed concern with the use of flexible fuel
lines, noting that the use of flexible hose in the industry was
``rampant,'' and also suggested requiring containment systems beneath
oil purification equipment. This rule allows for flexible hose that
meets certain incorporated standards, meaning the hose has passed
pressure and fire testing. The rule also addresses the containment
concern by requiring that gaskets and seals be maintained, and bilges
kept free of accumulated oil.
Bilge Pumps or Other Dewatering Capability
We redesignated proposed Sec. 143.295 as Sec. 143.275. The Coast
Guard received several comments suggesting ``prescriptive''
regulations, such as those for larger ships in 46 CFR 56.50, be applied
to proposed Sec. 143.295. The Coast Guard decided not to impose a
prescriptive requirement for bilge pumping systems in this regulation
because of the extremely large number of different configurations
possible for towing vessels. A commenter said that proposed Sec.
143.295 was not specific enough with regard to dewatering capability,
noting that potentially ineffective dewatering methods such as
``buckets'' could be acceptable under the proposed text. We agree and
have amended the section to emphasize that an installed or portable
bilge pump must be available.
One commenter suggested that only ``installed'' (not portable)
bilge piping should be required to have a check/foot valve to prevent
unintended flooding. The Coast Guard agrees because a permanently
installed, power-operated bilge pump is not the equivalent of a
portable pump. We amended the text accordingly, as the use of a
portable pump implies constant operator monitoring, which would
normally prevent improper flow (backflooding).
Pressure Vessels on Existing Vessels
With respect to proposed Sec. 143.300, the Coast Guard received
several comments suggesting the application of existing pressure vessel
requirements in 46 CFR subchapter F and the ASME Code. Although these
are certainly acceptable for pressure vessel installations on all
vessels, the Coast Guard does not have casualty data to support the
mandatory use of the rigorous requirements of subchapter F by existing
towing vessels. Similarly, one commenter suggested the incorporation of
the ASME Code Section IV for heating boilers. The Coast Guard agrees
that the ASME Code is a preferable design standard for heating boilers,
and considers it acceptable for power or heating boilers on any vessel.
However, the Coast Guard has no significant reportable casualty data
with a root cause of boiler or pressure vessel design that justifies
the increased cost of requiring all towing vessels to use the ASME Code
for towing vessel boilers.
The Coast Guard received several comments suggesting that proposed
Sec. 143.300(b) be clarified with regard to examination requirements.
The Coast Guard agrees and amended paragraph (b) so that pressure
vessels are externally examined annually, along with relief valve
testing twice every 5 years. These changes make inspection requirements
for pressure vessels and relief valves more consistent with the
inspection requirements in subchapter F for pressure vessels on larger
ships. Because of these changes we added a new paragraph (c) to require
the maximum allowable working pressure be indicated on all pressure
vessels.
The Coast Guard received a question concerning the pressure vessel
requirements of proposed Sec. Sec. 143.300 and 143.540: ``Could a
towing vessel also meet the requirements of 46 CFR 61.10 in lieu of the
ABS Rules as prescribed in 143.540?'' The Coast Guard agrees that
compliance with 46 CFR 61.10 is acceptable and equivalent to (or
exceeds) the requirements in this rule. However, Sec. 61.10 generally
is applicable to large ships and the Coast Guard does not require
towing vessels to meet subchapter F engineering requirements.
Electrical Systems
We redesignated proposed Sec. 143.305 as Sec. 143.400. The Coast
Guard received several comments suggesting the Coast Guard remove the
requirement at proposed Sec. 143.305(d) that switchboards and
distribution panels be labeled with a description of the loads they
serve. The Coast Guard partially disagrees. For proper circuit
identification during operations and maintenance, labels must be
provided for the equipment served. However, the Coast Guard has removed
the requirement that equipment be marked with the location of the
isolating switch of circuit breaker, because the panel should indicate
that information.
The Coast Guard received several comments on proposed Sec.
143.305(i) expressing confusion on the use of male receptacle outlets
when transmitting power between two receptacles. The requested changes
were in line with the Coast Guard's original intent, but we decided the
clearest revision would be to remove the provision about male outlets.
As long as the plugs, cables, and receptacles are compatible and
designed for the power to be transmitted, specifying a particular
configuration is not necessary.
Shipboard Lighting
We redesignated proposed Sec. 143.310 as Sec. 143.410. One
commenter argued
[[Page 40066]]
that the requirement for emergency lighting in proposed Sec. 143.310
would be prohibitively expensive for small businesses and is neither
necessary nor of any value on smaller towing vessels where the crew
typically knows the vessel intimately.
The Coast Guard disagrees. With respect to the cost, there are
three different options for compliance, some as inexpensive as
phosphorescent lighting strips. With respect to the utility this
requirement in Sec. 143.410 for internal crew working and living
areas, we consider this lighting essential--even on smaller vessels--to
facilitate egress in emergency situations when normal lighting is not
working and dense smoke may be present.
The Coast Guard received several comments asking whether berthing
spaces were required to have emergency lighting under proposed Sec.
143.310(a). Specific berthing spaces are not required to have emergency
lights. However, in the event of power loss there must be sufficient
illumination in living areas to enable personnel egress from the living
space. One commenter suggested adding a requirement for one flashlight
per bunk. The suggestion is a good practice for mariners but the Coast
Guard declines to make it mandatory.
With respect to proposed Sec. 143.310(b)(2), the Coast Guard
received several comments suggesting we lower the required automatic
battery-operated emergency lighting capability from 3 hours to 30
minutes. The Coast Guard partially agrees with these comments, and has
modified the requirement in Sec. 143.410(b)(1) to 2 hours, consistent
with subchapter T. The requirement of 2 hours will ensure the
availability of battery-powered lights when needed, along with ample
battery capacity. Emergencies that require egress from a space, such as
a living space, do not necessarily mean abandoning the vessel: The crew
may need to assemble on deck to fight a fire or flooding, or restart
the main electrical plant. We confirmed that, for the second option,
phosphorescent strips are available that provide illumination for more
than 2 hours.
In addition, the Coast Guard removed proposed Sec. 143.310(b)(1)
because it was redundant with a related subparagraph in proposed Sec.
143.340(b)(9).
Pilothouse Alerter System
The pilothouse alerter requirements are now located in Sec.
143.450. In the NPRM, we proposed a pilothouse alerter system
requirement for all vessels (see proposed Sec. 143.210, as well as
Sec. Sec. 143.325, 143.515, and 143.520), with a deferred compliance
date for existing vessels. We proposed this requirement in response to
the NTSB report on the Robert Y Love allision with the I-40 Bridge, as
well as eight incidents where the operator died while navigating the
vessel and other cases that indicated probable incapacitation of the
operator. The Coast Guard received comments supporting and opposing the
inclusion of the deferred requirements proposed in Sec. 143.325.
After considering public comments, as well as the traditional
service and limited manning of towing vessels 65 feet or less in
length, we determined that a pilothouse alerter system is not necessary
for towing vessels 65 feet or less and have eliminated the alerter
requirement for this category of vessels. This is accomplished in Sec.
143.450(e).
We received a comment suggesting the alerter could become a
distraction for harbor assist vessels. We disagree, because a compliant
system could be set up to reset, for instance, each time the throttle
or steering was changed. We also received comments that the alerter
should not be required when a vessel had overnight accommodations but
those accommodations were not in use. We decline to make a regulatory
exception for this scenario, but this subchapter allows the OCMI the
discretion to waive certain requirements on a case-by-case basis when
appropriate.
We received a comment suggesting that requirements for systems such
as pilothouse alerters should be performance-based, and flexible with
regard to rapid developments in technology. The Coast Guard agrees. We
have not specified a particular design for an alerter system, only that
such system must meet certain performance requirements with regard to
time limits and adjustability of the alarm time to suit the vessel
mission.
With respect to proposed Sec. 143.325(a)(3), imposing a 10-minute
maximum acknowledgment time for the alerter, the Coast Guard received
several comments suggesting that the acknowledgment time for the
pilothouse alerted should be less than 10 minutes. The Coast Guard
partially agrees. New paragraph (b) of Sec. 143.450 provides that the
time may be reduced by the owner or managing operator in the TSMS but
must not be in excess of 10 minutes. We received a comment suggesting
that the Robert Y Love incident would not have been prevented by an
alerter set at 10 minutes. We acknowledge that it is possible that an
alerter set at 10 minutes may not have prevented the incident. It is
also possible that an operator could become incapacitated at any time
within a 10-minute alerter reset period. In the Robert Y Love incident,
had the pilot become incapacitated 1 minute before the alarm was
scheduled to sound, it is possible another crew member could have made
it to the pilothouse and averted the allision. As a reference point, we
note that SOLAS requirements for larger vessels (MSC.128(75)) require a
bridge watchstander alarm with an elapsed time between resets of 3-12
minutes.
We received a comment stating that ``fans with paper streamers
effectively fool motion detector systems.'' The Coast Guard notes that
a motion detector-type system is but one of many options to comply with
the alerter requirement. An attempt to interfere with any system
installed to meet the requirements of Sec. 143.450 would be
investigated. And as stated in Sec. 140.1000, there are statutory
penalties for violating the provisions of this subchapter.
The Coast Guard received several comments suggesting that a second,
adequately rested crewmember should be required in the pilothouse at
all times, as well as comments suggesting a second crewmember is an
unnecessary expense. The Coast Guard partially agrees with both
comments. A second adequately rested crewmember in the pilothouse of a
towing vessel, while not required by this section, is an acceptable
alternative to the pilothouse alerter system as stated in Sec.
143.450(d). We chose not to require that a second crewmember be in the
pilothouse because, in light of the thousands of vessels of all sizes
that safely operate with a single crew member on the bridge or
operating station, depending on maneuvering circumstances, we could not
justify the significant cost of requiring an additional watchstander on
all towing vessels. However, under 46 U.S.C. 8104 and 46 CFR 15.705, it
remains the master's responsibility to provide an adequate watch.
The Coast Guard received a comment requesting clarification of the
pilothouse alerter requirements for vessels with more than one
operating station. Because the alerter is required to detect
incapacitation of the vessel pilot, the system must be arranged to
alarm at each operating station. There may be various system
configurations that meet the intent of this requirement.
Towing Machinery
The towing machinery requirements are now located at Sec. 143.460
and apply to all vessels, with a deferred compliance date for existing
vessels. In connection with proposed Sec. 143.330(b) the Coast Guard
received several comments requesting an example of an
[[Page 40067]]
acceptable safeguard against the towing machinery becoming disabled if
the tow gets out of line. The Coast Guard agrees, and added an example
of a common safeguard to this section. We also received a comment
suggesting that the ``winch slippage alarm'' sound in the pilothouse.
The Coast Guard agrees such an alarm would be beneficial to operations,
but we do not have the casualty data to support the mandate of such a
system.
Deferred Requirements for Existing Vessels (Proposed Subpart C)
As discussed earlier in this preamble, we removed proposed subpart
C. We relocated to subpart B the requirements for pilothouse alerter
systems and towing machinery, and retained the deferred compliance date
for existing vessels: These requirements are discussed earlier in this
preamble. We removed proposed Sec. 143.335 on remote shutdowns because
a similar effect is accomplished through proposed Sec. 143.280 (now
Sec. 143.260) on fuel oil shutoff, and because remote fuel shutoff is
already required by 46 CFR subchapter C.
The remaining deferred provisions of proposed subpart C--Sec. Sec.
143.340 through 143.360 on specific electrical arrangements for
existing towing vessels--have been moved to subpart C for new vessels.
They do not apply to existing vessels. We made this change in response
to comments indicating these provisions were not appropriate for
existing vessels. Specifically, the Coast Guard received many comments
recommending the deletion of the prescriptive requirements in proposed
Sec. Sec. 143.340 through 143.360. Commenters characterized the
proposed requirements as burdensome, costly, requiring extensive
modifications, and not justified by risk.
The Coast Guard does not agree that the proposed requirements were
unjustified. Part 143 was developed in response to the recommendations
in Sections 6.1 and 6.2 of the ABSG Consulting report, which were based
on the risk analysis results in Section 4.3 of the report. See
Uninspected Towing Vessel Industry Analysis Project Final Report,
issued August 2006 and prepared by ABSG Consulting Inc., and Section
III.C of the NPRM (76 FR 49978). An industry analysis project team
performed a detailed analysis of the towing industry data from a number
of data sources, such as MISLE and site visits. The team also used
industry data provided by AWO as part of the Coast Guard-AWO Safety
Partnership. Two previous examinations of towing vessel accident
studies were also considered: The TSAC Towing Vessel Inspection Working
Group report (TSAC 2005) and a report by the Coast Guard Allision
Working Group (BAWG 2003). These risk analyses support characterizing
the proposed requirements as risk-based.
However, several comments asserted that the functional requirements
in proposed subpart B, ``Requirements for All Towing Vessels,'' are
sufficient for all existing towing vessels. These commenters
recommended the removal of proposed subpart C, ``Deferred Requirements
for Existing Towing Vessels.'' Further, the Coast Guard believes that
many existing towing vessels were originally built to acceptable
national or marine standards. Those would already be in substantial
compliance with many of the requirements of subpart B of part 143 of
the final rule.
The machinery and electrical requirements in subpart B will provide
the owners or managing operators of existing towing vessels with the
standards that existing equipment and installations must meet or should
have met during the construction of towing vessels. Third-party
inspections and eventual certification of electrical and machinery
systems of existing towing vessels that are in marginal condition or
poorly maintained may require some upgrades but may not necessarily
need extensive modifications of the vessel's systems. Commenters
provided estimates of the cost of extensive retrofits to existing
vessels in the range of $75,000 to $300,000 per vessel, considerably
higher than the cost estimated in the NPRM Regulatory Analysis ($5,000
to $20,000 per individual requirement). Further, comments indicated
that the need for retrofits to comply with the regulatory requirements
in proposed Sec. Sec. 143.340-143.360 would impact more than the
generally less than 5 percent of vessels per requirement estimated in
the NPRM Regulatory Analysis. The net result in total costs could
exceed $300 million (10-year, undiscounted). For these reasons, the
requirements in proposed Sec. Sec. 143.340-143.360 that were proposed
to apply to all towing vessels will now apply only to newly built
towing vessels, which includes vessels undergoing a major conversion.
Comments pertaining to the substance of those standards are discussed
later in this preamble.
Requirements for Oil or Hazardous Material in Bulk (Proposed Subpart D)
The proposed rule included deferred requirements for vessels that
tow oil or hazardous material in bulk. In response to comments
indicating these provisions were not appropriate for existing vessels,
we removed these requirements from existing vessels and relocated the
provisions to subpart C on new towing vessels. Comments pertaining to
the substance of those standards are discussed later in this preamble.
Subpart C, ``Requirements for New Towing Vessels''
Because of the organizational changes discussed earlier in this
preamble, proposed subpart E for new towing vessels is now designated
subpart C. We revised the applicability section in line with the
organizational changes described in our discussion of subpart A, and
made nonsubstantive editorial changes. We also removed proposed Sec.
143.505, as its content is now covered by the applicability section at
Sec. 143.500. In Sec. 143.510, we replaced the phrase ``plan
approval'' with the more accurate language ``verification of compliance
with design standards.'' We removed Sec. 143.530 as unnecessary in
light of other revisions to the part.
The ``classification option'' has changed little between the NPRM
and the final rule. For a new towing vessel, the same three options
apply in the final rule as in the proposed rule: New vessels may be
built to recognized classification society standards (Sec. 143.515);
to ABYC standards (Sec. 143.520) for smaller towing vessels; or to
neither standard, but instead be subject to the requirements set out in
subparts B and C of part 143. As an alternative to complying with the
electrical system requirements that are now listed in subpart C, the
vessel may instead comply with certain ABS rules as set out in Sec.
143.580; this alternative is substantively the same as was proposed in
the NPRM.
As was the case in proposed Sec. 143.515, even vessels built to
ABS rules or classed by ABS must comply with specific provisions of
part 143. In this final rule, those provisions are the requirements for
vessels that move tank barges carrying oil or hazardous material in
bulk (Sec. Sec. 143.585 through 143.595), the readiness and testing
requirements of Sec. 143.245, and the pilothouse alerter requirements
of Sec. 143.450. The readiness and testing requirements of Sec.
143.245 help verify proper in-service operation and safety of main and
emergency systems, above and beyond the initial design requirements of
part 143. As discussed above, the proposed potable water requirements
have been removed, but they remain a health and safety requirement
under Sec. 140.510(a)(14). Also, in this final rule we created
flexibility by providing for approval of towing vessels built to
[[Page 40068]]
recognized classification society rules other than ABS's.
Section 143.520(a) remains substantially as proposed, but paragraph
(b) has been revised to remove several requirements. New towing vessels
of 65 feet or less in length that are built to the ABYC standards
listed in paragraph (a) need only comply with the readiness and testing
requirements of Sec. 143.245, and with the requirements for vessels
that move tank barges carrying oil or hazardous material in bulk
(Sec. Sec. 143.585 through 143.595) if applicable. Other requirements
have been removed for these vessels, including the pilothouse alerter
requirements.
Pressure Vessels on New Vessels
We redesignated Sec. 143.540 as Sec. 143.545. With respect to
proposed Sec. 143.540(b), the Coast Guard received several comments
requesting alternate standards to the ABS rule referenced for pressure
vessels. While the ABS rules referenced are an industry standard for
pressure vessels, the Coast Guard may determine other design standards,
such as the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, to be equivalent as
described in Sec. 143.210. Therefore, we made no changes to this
paragraph in response to this comment.
Electrical Engineering Systems
Several comments also recommended the proposed prescriptive
requirements in proposed Sec. Sec. 143.340-143.360 should not apply to
new towing vessels. The Coast Guard does not agree. The proposed
requirements of these sections are based on the present acceptable
national or marine electrical engineering standards. As explained in
Section IV of the preamble to the proposed rule, the Coast Guard
developed part 143 after considering the reports provided by ABSG
Consulting and TSAC, which were generated from marine casualty cases
and risks. Also, as stated in the preamble to the proposed rule, the
Coast Guard conducted its own in-depth analysis of the cases reviewed
for the ABSG report, along with deficiency reports from examinations of
towing vessels during compliance exams conducted pursuant to 33 CFR
part 104 as part of the implementation of the Maritime Transportation
Security Act of 2002 (MTSA) (46 U.S.C. Chapter 701). These reports
provided evidence that substandard machinery installation and
maintenance is a concern on towing vessels. For example, from January
2006 through August 2008, the Coast Guard conducted 768 of these MTSA
compliance examinations of towing vessels and issued 2,949
deficiencies. Electrical deficiencies involving installation and
maintenance accounted for 8 percent (226) of the deficiencies. This 8
percent deficiency rate highlights the need to establish more specific
standards for electrical installations on towing vessels. The current
regulations in subchapter C for electrical installations on uninspected
vessels are minimal and not adequate for towing vessels. In addition,
the incremental cost to incorporate the new standards into the design
and construction of a new vessel are low in comparison of the total
construction costs of the vessel and the potential reduction in risk of
fire.
Several commenters provided cost estimates to retrofit an existing
vessel to comply with the proposed requirements in Sec. Sec. 143.340-
143.360 that range from $75,000 to $300,000. These estimates are higher
than the cost estimated by Coast Guard in the NPRM Regulatory Analysis
(which ranged from $5,000 to $20,000 per requirement ($60,000 per
vessel if all of the requirements are incurred). The comments also
indicated that far more vessels would require the retrofits than was
estimated in the NPRM Regulatory Analysis. The NPRM estimated
annualized costs of part 143 at $3.2 million and the benefits at $5.7
million. If the high end of the costs per vessel of $300,000 were used,
the annualized costs could as much as triple. Increasing the affected
population for the retrofits as per the comment would increase the
costs even more. Given the new information on the potential range of
costs and affected population, the Coast Guard has determined that the
benefits of the NPRM's proposed deferred requirements for existing
vessels will not outweigh the costs. Given the potential cost burden of
retrofitting existing vessels, the baseline electrical requirements for
existing towing vessels in the final rule, coupled with a robust
inspection regime, will establish an adequate safety environment for
towing vessels.
The electrical requirements in this final rule will provide the
owners or managing operators the design and engineering standards for
equipment and installations for new construction. The prescribed
electrical power and distribution system designs are based on proven
electrical recommendations, practices, and consensus-based standards.
Electrical Power Sources, Generators, and Motors
We redesignated proposed Sec. 143.340 as Sec. 143.555, and made
nonsubstantive changes to simplify and shorten the section. The Coast
Guard received several comments suggesting that proposed Sec. 143.340
be clarified so that a backup generator could be used as a secondary
power source. The Coast Guard agrees, and amended the text in paragraph
(a)(3) to better explain the requirements for backup power source.
We also received a comment suggesting the proposed Sec. 143.340
may be interpreted as requiring duplicate essential systems such as
radar or emergency lighting. We did not intend the original language to
be read that way, and have amended the corresponding section of the
final rule to clarify that emergency communications and navigation
equipment must be provided with a backup power source.
We received a comment stating that the electrical load analysis
requirements of proposed Sec. 143.340 were ``excessive and
unnecessary''. Although the Coast Guard believes that a load analysis
is required for nearly all vessels with generators, we presume that
load analysis has already been done for existing vessels and is
therefore applicable only to new towing vessels. This change is
reflected in this final rule. We also simplified the analysis
requirement by removing proposed paragraph (b)(2).
The Coast Guard received several comments suggesting we include the
specific NEC reference in article 430 in this section. The Coast Guard
agrees and amended the section by specifying that Parts I through VII
of article 430 are required. These Parts of Article 430 further define
the scope of motor overcurrent protections required. We also received
comments suggesting that the proposed requirements in Sec. 143.340
will require ``complete rewiring'' of inland towing vessels. This
comment is addressed by our decision to apply these requirements only
to new vessels.
The Coast Guard received several comments suggesting we lower the
ambient temperature rating at paragraph (b)(7) of this section from 50
[deg]C to 40 [deg]C, similar to ABS rules. The Coast Guard partially
agrees. The Coast Guard amended the section so that the generator does
not need to be certified to operate in an ambient temperature of 50
[deg]C if it can be shown that the space the generator is in does not
exceed 40 [deg]C. This reduction in minimum ambient temperature rating
reflects an established normal ambient temperature allowance, even for
large vessels currently regulated by the Coast Guard.
With respect to proposed Sec. 143.340(b)(9) (now designated Sec.
143.555(b)(8)) the Coast Guard received several comments suggesting
clarification on what the Coast Guard meant by ``two independent
sources of
[[Page 40069]]
electricity'' in this section. To clarify, the prescriptive requirement
in what is now paragraph (b)(8) requires a minimum of two sources of
power. For example, if a generator provides the normal source of power
for navigation lights, there must be another generator or a battery
bank arranged as a secondary power source. One commenter suggested
adding the word ``essential'' to paragraph (b)(8) this section. The
Coast Guard agrees, and has modified the text accordingly. We have also
amended the section to specify the radios and navigation equipment
required in Sec. Sec. 140.715 and 140.725. This change is in line with
other comments suggesting that we include the distress alerting
communications equipment listed in Sec. Sec. 140.715 and 140.725.
These comments also suggested that the backup power source for the
distress alerting communication equipment have a means of monitoring
the voltage available, and the source of supply selected either by an
automatic switchover or a simple switch in the vicinity of the
emergency distress alerting communications equipment. The Coast Guard
agrees that distress alerting equipment should be added to this
section, and also that a means must be provided to monitor the battery
condition, and amended the section accordingly.
We received a comment suggesting that, if a battery were to serve
as the required secondary power source, it would need to be
unnecessarily oversized for the loads specified. We mostly disagree;
there is no requirement that the secondary power source be a battery
(e.g., the secondary source could be a generator). The electrical loads
specified in this section are not necessarily large consumers, and any
battery sized for these loads needs to be sized proportionally, not
oversized. Also, this requirement in proposed Sec. 143.340 has been
amended to apply only to new towing vessels.
However, we agree with the commenter that some alarms may not
require a secondary power source, and have amended this section to be
specific as to which alarms require secondary power.
We received comments suggesting removal of the requirement in
proposed Sec. 143.350 to separate overcurrent protection for essential
and non-essential systems. We disagree, because the intention is to
prevent opening the circuit on essential loads because of a fault in a
non-essential system. This requirement has been amended to apply only
to new towing vessels.
We received a comment suggesting that ``essential systems'' be
defined to avoid confusion in the inspection process. The Coast Guard
agrees, and notes that a proposed definition of essential system was
included in proposed Sec. 136.110. However, we have amended the
requirements of Sec. 143.555 of the final rule to provide clarity on
this issue.
Electrical Grounding and Ground Detection
We redesignated Sec. 143.355 as Sec. 143.570. With regard to
proposed Sec. 143.355 the Coast Guard received several comments
stating that most towing vessels are ungrounded, and that the section
should specifically adopt the ground detection requirements of 46 CFR
183.378. Proposed Sec. 143.355 did not prohibit the use of ungrounded
systems. The Coast Guard recognizes that towing vessels can have either
grounded or ungrounded electrical distribution systems. We agree with
the comment, however, and therefore added detection requirements
similar to 46 CFR 183.378. This requirement applies only to new towing
vessels, and the requirements are based on vessels regulated under
subchapter T, which have similar electrical systems. While revising
this section, we modified paragraph (e) to consolidate paragraphs
(e)(1) and (3).
The Coast Guard also received several comments stating that this
section does not allow the use of common two-prong appliances less than
50 volts or two-prong double-insulated tools. The Coast Guard considers
the use of two-prong double-insulated tools to be an acceptable
industry practice, and amended the section to allow the use of double-
insulated tools, or two-prong appliances of less than 50 volts.
Electrical Conductors, Connections, and Equipment
We redesignated proposed Sec. 143.360 as Sec. 143.575. As
discussed elsewhere in this preamble, we received comments stating that
existing vessel compliance with this section and other electrical
sections in the NPRM would involve substantial costs and retrofitting.
The bulk of these comments are addressed by making these electrical
requirements applicable only to new vessels.
With respect to proposed Sec. 143.360, the Coast Guard received
several comments suggesting we clarify paragraph (a)(2) with respect to
overhead wiring. The Coast Guard agrees, and amended the section to
specify that this requirement is applicable to overhead and vertical
cable runs supported by cable hangers.
We received a comment suggesting the use of a performance standard
rather than a specific cable hanging method. The Coast Guard partially
agrees with the concern, but could not find an acceptable performance
standard, so we have amended the section to allow a 48-inch spacing,
rather than the proposed 24 inches, to be consistent with recognized
electrical-contracting standards.
In paragraph (a)(3) of that section, one commenter suggested that
wiring be allowed within 24 inches of moving machinery if the wiring is
protected. The Coast Guard agrees, and amended this section to be
applicable to cable and wire runs. We also clarified that cable and
wire runs within 24 inches of moving machinery must be adequately
protected to prevent damage, and added text to clarify what ``moveable
machinery'' means.
In paragraph (b), one commenter suggested replacing the phrase
``may not'' with ``must not''; the Coast Guard agrees that this
language is clearer. This requirement is consistent with the permitted
use of flexible cords or extension cords in Section 400.7 of the
National Electrical Code (NEC), and Section 24.6.1 of IEEE 45-2002.
In paragraph (c), the Coast Guard received several comments stating
that this section prohibits the use of power strips. The intent of this
section is not to prohibit the use of multi-outlet adapters (power
strips), but to prevent ``daisy-chaining'' of power strips, which may
overload the circuit. We have amended this section to clarify the
requirement to prevent circuit overload when using power strips.
Towing Vessels That Tow Oil or Hazardous Material in Bulk
Because of the reorganization discussed earlier, a separate subpart
for towing vessels that tow oil or hazardous material is no longer
required. Proposed Sec. Sec. 143.405 through 143.435 have been
incorporated into the final rule's subpart C for new vessels. The
requirements of proposed subpart D will not apply to existing towing
vessels. This change responds to many comments arguing that proposed
subpart D should not apply to existing vessels.
Commenters who opposed the application of proposed subpart D to
existing vessels argued that the proposed requirements were not based
on risk; would require unjustified or wholesale retrofitting; would
cause severe economic penalty, disproportionate financial hardship for
small towing companies, and might eliminate certain classes of towing
vessels. Also, several comments asserted
[[Page 40070]]
that the Coast Guard ignored the decline in the frequency and amount of
oil spills from tank barges over the last twenty years. Other comments
mentioned that the proposed requirements in subpart D will have little
impact on the prevention of oil spills in the tank barge sector
because, as noted by TSAC, ``Current industry best practices have
produced a dramatic reduction in oil spills from tank barges over the
last decade and a half, with a record low 919 gallons spilled (out of
nearly 65 billion gallons transported) in 2010, the last year for which
complete Coast Guard statistics are available.'' Also, industry
comments mentioned that the preamble cites S. 1892, a bill introduced
into the 110th Congress, as a reason for including the proposed subpart
D in part 143, and note that this bill never became law.
We proposed subpart D based on the statistics from the ABSG report,
which included high and low consequence incidents. Given the casualty
history presented in the ABSG report, the Coast Guard determined that
the proposed requirements could reduce the ongoing risk of oil spills
and the resulting consequences. Data on oil spills through 2014 shows a
continual pattern of a few major spills contributing to the majority of
the volume spilled each year. Even though a recent TSAC report notes a
dramatic reduction in oil spills from tank barges over the last decade
and a half, the casualty data through 2014 indicates that minimum
safety standards for engineering system design, coupled with a robust
inspection regime, would maintain or even further reduce the risk of
spills.
Several commenters provided information on the cost to retrofit
existing vessels to comply with the Subpart D requirements. The
estimates range for all of the deferred requirements from $75,000 to
$300,000 per vessel, higher than the Coast Guard estimates in the NPRM
Regulatory Analysis. Existing vessels are already designed and
constructed, so requiring a complete replacement of some vital
engineering systems is neither practical nor justified by the safety
benefit achieved.
In light of the new information on the costs for retrofitting
existing vessels, the requirements of the proposed Sec. Sec. 143.340
through 143.435 have been removed for existing vessels. The
requirements are retained in the final rule for new towing vessels, as
there is a smaller incremental cost to incorporate the design features
in a new vessel.
Several commenters misinterpreted the proposed requirements in
proposed Sec. Sec. 143.405, 143.410, and 143.420 (now Sec. Sec.
143.585, 143.590, and 143.595) regarding the installation of a second
main engine. The intention of the proposed rule was to require
redundancy of necessary auxiliaries, allowing a sustained or restored
propulsion capability of the towing vessel--not to require redundant
engines. The proposed requirements did not prohibit a towing vessel
with single propulsor, but only placed requirements for support
equipment (auxiliaries) on vessels with one propulsor. The requirements
differentiate between independent and/or redundant control systems and
the propulsion systems under remote control. For example, on a vessel
with two propulsion engines, the proposed rule requires the remote
control of one engine to be independent of the remote control of the
other engine. For risk reduction, the proposed requirements would
ensure that when one engine remote control fails, remote control of the
other engine would remain operable. We have also modified what is now
Sec. 143.595 for vessels with one propulsor, to clarify which
equipment is considered a vital auxiliary, and eliminated the
requirement that this equipment ``automatically'' assume the function
of the failed unit. Although it is acceptable for vessels to have
equipment that automatically starts when other equipment fails, it is
not absolutely necessary, and in fact it may be preferred for crew
members to visually assess a failure or impending failure of the
primary equipment before deciding to manually start the redundant
equipment.
In proposed Sec. 143.405 (now Sec. 143.585), one commenter
suggested preventative maintenance schedules and additional required
training in lieu of some of the requirements in this section. The Coast
Guard disagrees. While an attentive operator may notice problems before
the associated alarms and redundancy requirements are triggered, the
alarms (with appropriate delays) are required as a means to alert the
operator. We received a comment suggesting separation of the propulsion
and steering requirements in this section. The Coast Guard acknowledges
that propulsion and steering are two separate and vital systems, but
the requirements for alternate arrangements and independence for these
systems as specified apply to both propulsion and steering. Additional
propulsion requirements are also specified in Sec. Sec. 143.590 and
143.595.
We also received a comment suggesting the use of a ``bow steering
module,'' which is essentially an assist vessel attached to a barge
propelled by a traditional towboat. Although the Coast Guard agrees
that a bow steering module may be considered equivalent to the
requirements of an alternate means of propulsion and/or steering, this
type of arrangement would need to be determined in particular cases by
the OCMI or the Commandant for equivalency.
With respect to proposed Sec. 143.405 (now Sec. 143.585), one
commenter asked whether paragraph (k) requires automatic starting of a
standby generator or if the loads referenced should be on battery
backup. The Coast Guard agrees that the proposed section was unclear
and amended the section by specifying a second source of supply that is
capable of automatically starting, and of helping to restore or
maintain power to propulsion, steering and related controls when the
main power source fails. This requirement will provide continued or
restored operation of a towing vessel that moves tank barges carrying
oil and hazardous material in bulk, even if the primary systems fail.
One commenter was confused about what the Coast Guard meant by ``stored
energy'' in paragraph (l). The Coast Guard clarified this section by
providing examples of ``stored energy systems'' that are generally used
onboard towing vessels. We also simplified this section by removing
paragraph (l)(2) as not necessary for towing vessels.
With respect to proposed Sec. 143.420 (now Sec. 143.595), we
added a clarifying description of ``vital auxiliaries'' in paragraph
(a).
One commenter asked if proposed paragraph (d)(2) required two
hydraulic tanks for steering. In response to the commenter, an
acceptable arrangement would consist of two independent hydraulic
tanks, or one hydraulic tank separated by a solid baffle, which is
considered equivalent to two tanks. However, the Coast Guard has
determined that the steering system requirements of Sec. 143.550 are
sufficient, that the requirements of Sec. 143.595 are intended only
for vital auxiliaries for propulsion, and so we have eliminated the
steering system paragraphs from this section. Also, the fuel system
requirements of proposed Sec. 143.420(c) were redundant to current
Sec. 143.265, so we removed that paragraph.
We received a comment suggesting elimination of proposed
redundancies in systems for vessels towing oil or hazardous material,
and leaving those types of decisions for a case by case determination
in the vessel's TSMS. We disagree, because it is important for vessels
with one propulsor to have redundancies in the vital auxiliaries--such
as fuel, lube oil, and cooling
[[Page 40071]]
water--supporting the engine. However, this section has been amended to
apply only to new towing vessels.
We received a comment suggesting ``grandfathering'' proposed
deferred requirements because of prohibitive costs, and have addressed
this comment by applying these requirements to new vessels only.
Another commenter requested clarification of ``independent'' as opposed
to ``redundant.'' Those terms have distinct meanings, but we agree that
the proposed text could be clearer, and have amended Sec. Sec.
143.115, 143.590, and 143.595 to define and use the term
``independent.'' In this subpart, ``independent'' means the ability to
perform a function regardless of the status of another system, and
``redundant'' is not used in subchapter M.
N. Construction and Arrangement (Part 144)
We received general comments suggesting the requirements proposed
in part 144 were not justified by risk-based decisions and should
therefore be removed. A commenter felt that some proposed regulations
in this part are too stringent: For example, the commenter felt that
the stability requirements in subparts A, B, and C of part 144 are not
reflective of the loss history for inland vessels.
We disagree with the characterization of proposed part 144 as not
risk-based and, further, we believe they represent the minimum safety
standard of construction and arrangement that is common to all
inspected vessels. While there are some requirements applicable only to
new towing vessels, these requirements do not exceed the requirements
imposed on other types of small inspected vessels and, for this reason,
we do not agree that they can be considered to be too stringent. As for
existing towing vessels, we find no requirements in this rule that
would require costly modifications to a properly maintained and
satisfactorily functioning existing towing vessel.
Three commenters suggested that organizing vessels into two
subparts, existing vessels and new vessels, instead of three subparts,
would be easier for issues related to grandfathering. We generally
agree that the proposed regulations would benefit from reorganization,
and we have modified this part to delete requirements repeated in other
parts of the subchapter or that were too vague. Further, we agree with
the commenters with respect to organizing requirements into a format
that is more aligned with other inspection subchapters.
A majority of the requirements are either the same or very similar
to requirements contained in the Construction and Arrangement part in
subchapter T, Small Passenger Vessels (46 CFR part 177). We aligned
part 144 with the organization, and subpart and section titles, of part
177. This organizational choice also better reflects the relatively
large number of part 144 requirements that apply to both existing and
new vessels, and the relatively small number that apply to new vessels
only. As a result of these changes, we use the term ``vessel'' when
discussing requirements that apply to both new and existing vessels,
and use the specific terms ``new'' or ``existing'' vessel to describe
those that apply only to one or the other. At the end of this
discussion of comments on part 144 and structures and stability, we
have provided a derivation table that lists part 144 section numbers in
this final rule and the proposed sections from which they derived.
Also, where appropriate, we have noted the corresponding part 177
section number or an explanation of an edit.
We received several comments, mainly from maritime companies
suggesting revisions to Sec. 144.215. Commenters suggested that
special consideration be given to structural requirements for towing
vessels ``operating exclusively within [limited geographic areas], and
towing vessels under 65 feet in length, in addition to towing vessels
of an unusual design.''
We agree with these commenters that the types of vessels for which
special consideration may be given in proposed Sec. 144.215 should be
clarified, and we have adopted the suggested under-65-feet-in-length
measure to define what we had described as ``small vessels'' in the
proposed rule. This rule also provides that special consideration may
be given to vessels operating exclusively within a limited geographic
area, because the OCMI is familiar with the specific hazards of the
limited geographic areas within his or zone.
Commenters felt that proposed Sec. 144.220(a) should be edited to
ensure that routine upgrades to equipment, such as engine repowering,
would not require compliance verification. Further, towing companies
felt that proposed Sec. 144.220(a) and (b) should be revised to
clarify the intention of the terms ``major conversion or alteration''
and ``replacements in kind.''
The Coast Guard believes that compliance verification with design
standards for upgrades to equipment, such as engine repowering, as in
proposed Sec. 144.220(a), should be retained because of possible
changes to stability and other vessel characteristics related directly
to safety. We have done so in this final rule in our redesignated
verification of compliance section, Sec. 144.135.
With respect to the request to clarify the terms ``major conversion
or alteration'' and ``replacement in kind'' in proposed Sec.
144.220(a) and (b), in Sec. 136.110 we have clarified our proposed
definition of ``major conversion'' and added a definition of
``replacement in kind.'' We note that Sec. 144.135 uses the phrase
``major conversion or alteration'': Although ``alteration'' is not
defined in this rule, we use the term as it currently used in 46 CFR
91.55-10 to mean an alteration that involves the safety of the vessel.
Separately, we have reformatted the text of Sec. 144.135 in tabular
form to make this section easier to read.
The term ``verification of compliance'' in part 144 addresses
verifying that the design of a vessel meets the standards used. To
distinguish this activity from the compliance verification required in
part 137 under the TSMS option, we have added the words ``with design
standards'' to this term. We also removed from this section the
provision that a verification of compliance be performed upon request
of the Coast Guard because this is covered by part 136.
To provide more options for the qualifications in proposed Sec.
144.225, now re-designated Sec. 144.140, we have extended the group of
entities able to verify compliance with design standards to include the
Coast Guard and certain authorized classification societies, not just
ABS. For the purposes of this verification, the authorized
classification society must have been delegated the authority to issue
a SOLAS Cargo Ship Safety Construction Certificate and the employee who
performs the verification must have the proper qualifications. Similar
references to ABS with respect to a verification of compliance with
design standards have been revised accordingly. Regardless of the
inspection option chosen, the verification of compliance with design
standards can be performed by any one of the persons or entities
identified in Sec. 144.140.
Some commenters discussed the costs of developing plans for review.
Two maritime companies suggested that proposed Sec. 144.230,
Procedures for verification of compliance with construction and
arrangement standards, would be costly for companies with older vessels
that were constructed without plans produced by a naval architect. A
maritime company suggested alternatives for hull structure
[[Page 40072]]
and piping, electrical, machinery systems and stability reviews that it
viewed as more cost-effective.
Proposed Sec. 144.230, now re-designated Sec. 144.145, was
intended for vessels undergoing a major conversion or alteration to the
hull, machinery, or equipment--as described in proposed Sec. 144.135.
A major conversion often results in an extension of the vessel's
service life. Therefore, the procedures in Sec. 144.145, would not be
invoked unless required by Sec. 144.135. Because Sec. 144.135 does
not require a verification of compliance with design standards for an
existing vessel, we do not envision that an owner or operator would
need to provide plans to ensure the existing vessel complies with the
standards used. A new towing vessel will need to undergo a verification
of compliance with design standards.
We have clarified procedures for verification of compliance with
design standards to require copies of verified plans be provided to the
third-party organization that conducts a survey, if applicable, in
addition to the OCMI.
Two commenters suggested that because naval architects are well
qualified, a P.E.'s signature is not needed for vessel construction.
While many naval architects are also licensed P.E.s in the jurisdiction
in which they reside or conduct their business, not all are. The
benefits of P.E. licensure are well documented and accepted in the
United States. The requirement for a P.E.'s seal on vessel construction
plans may be considered commensurate with that required for buildings
within a municipality. Accordingly, we clarified in Sec. 144.145 that
the documents must be stamped with the seal authorized for use by the
individual performing the verification, whether that is the P.E. or a
representative of the recognized classification society or the Coast
Guard. We acknowledge that there may be gaps in documentation of
smaller vessels, so we have clarified that the term ``plan'' means
drawings, calculations, schematics, diagrams or other documents and
provide a list of what those plans may include, based mostly on 46 CFR
177.202.
We have clarified and revised the provisions for sister vessels in
proposed Sec. 144.235, now re-designated Sec. 144.155, to be
consistent with Sec. Sec. 144.135, 144.140, and 144.145.
Two commenters said that the marking requirements in proposed Sec.
144.240 should include the same basic colors used to mark piping for
flammable liquid, seawater cooling, and firefighting systems proposed
in Sec. 143.270(c). We do not agree that piping marking requirements
in part 143 need to be repeated in part 144. We made no changes from
the proposed rule based on these comments.
Both proposed Sec. 144.310(a) for existing vessels and proposed
Sec. 144.405 for new vessels specified that a vessel classed by ABS
would meet the structural standards of part 144, because ABS rules
include stability standards that generally meet those contained in
Coast Guard regulations. We have consolidated those sections into Sec.
144.120, stating that a vessel that is classed by a recognized
classification society is in compliance with subparts B and C of part
144. In accordance with proposed Sec. 136.210(c), as well as similar
changes in this rule, we have acknowledged that structural and
stability standards contained in the rules of other recognized
classification societies are commensurate with ABS rules, and have
extended this provision to class by a recognized classification
society.
In a similar way, we recognized that proposed Sec. 136.210(d)
deemed a vessel with a valid load line certificate to be in compliance
with structural and stability standards, among others, and since
proposed Sec. 144.310(b) repeated this, Sec. 144.125 contains this
text.
In proposed Sec. Sec. 144.305 and 144.310, we proposed structural
standards for an existing vessel. These are now contained in Sec.
144.200, which has been aligned with Sec. Sec. 144.120 and 144.125 to
avoid repetition. As provided in proposed Sec. 144.305(a), an existing
vessel to which no construction standard was applicable would need only
show that it has been in satisfactory service and its service history
does not cause the structure of the vessel to be questioned. Similarly,
structural standards for new vessels that we proposed in Sec. 144.410
are now contained in Sec. 144.205. The use of alternate design
standards is covered by Sec. 136.115 as discussed elsewhere in this
preamble.
Because the requirements of proposed Sec. Sec. 142.220(c) and
144.350(a) were so similar, we have merged them into Sec. 144.415.
A commenter said that proposed Sec. 144.315 and Sec. 144.415
regarding stability standards would not apply to all vessels and was
concerned about grandfathering a number of vessels that may be unstable
and remain uninspected. As discussed in more detail elsewhere in this
preamble, this final rule focuses on the towing vessels presenting the
greatest risk. Further, several commenters stated that stability is not
a problem on inland towing vessels. The Coast Guard notes that casualty
records generally support this view. For an existing vessel that will
be inspected, the stability standards for an existing vessel in Sec.
144.300 will require the vessel to show it has a history of
satisfactory service that does not cause its stability to be
questioned, or meet a similar standard that ensures adequate stability.
Stability standards for a new vessel in Sec. 144.305 will require the
vessel to show it complies with minimum standards that are applied to
other inspected vessels. One commenter suggested that a minimum
freeboard of ``like 24 inches'' for all vessels would improve stability
standards. While the Coast Guard agrees that a requirement for such a
freeboard may improve stability, both the degree of the stability
improvement and its benefit are unknown and, for this reason, a
freeboard requirement of this amount was not included in this final
rule.
An association commented that that the proposed regulation (Sec.
144.355) does not contain size requirements and specifications for
accommodation spaces for the crew. The commenter recommended several
specifications to be included in the regulations.
The Coast Guard declines to adopt the suggested specifications. Our
proposed requirements for accommodation spaces for the crew on towing
vessels subject to inspection under this subchapter were contained in
proposed Sec. 144.355 and were generally taken from subchapter T--
small passenger vessels. In response to comments, we have amended
proposed part 144 to include a subpart dedicated to crew spaces. Crew
space requirements in this final rule, as we proposed in the NPRM, are
based on performance standards rather than prescriptive size
requirements.
With respect to proposed storm rail requirements in proposed Sec.
144.340, now re-designated Sec. 144.810, we added the option of hand
grabs but removed the requirement for storm rails on both sides of a
passageway more than 6 feet wide because there are no towing vessels to
which this subchapter would apply that would have such a wide
passageway.
An individual suggested the removal of proposed Sec. 144.345,
Guards in dangerous places, because of its similarity to proposed Sec.
143.230. We decided to keep this requirement, now designated Sec.
144.820, in part 144 and delete the similar requirement in part 143.
With respect to insulation of hot piping, we retain the requirement
for existing vessels in proposed Sec. 144.350(b), now redesignated
Sec. 144.830, and for new vessels we provide a similar but more
specific requirement that aligns with an existing requirement in 46 CFR
177.970.
[[Page 40073]]
In reference to a collision event involving the tug Caribbean Sea
and a ``Duck'' tour boat in Philadelphia in 2010, a commenter
recommended that the NPRM include ``height of eye'' guidelines for
towing vessels. The commenter also suggested that the Coast Guard
consider including the ``transmissivity of light'' through glazing
materials on towing vessels in proposed Sec. 144.325 or Sec. 144.425.
The Coast Guard notes that while ``height of eye'' requirements are
not specifically addressed in this rule, the regulations in subpart I
require windows and other openings at the operating station to be
properly located to provide a clear field of vision. As proposed in
both Sec. Sec. 144.325 and 144.425, the visibility of the windows
immediately forward of the operating station in the pilothouse must
allow for adequate visibility regardless of weather conditions. In
response to the idea to include a ``transmissivity of light''
requirement, the Coast Guard notes that 46 CFR 177.1030(b) includes
such a standard for operating station visibility for small passenger
vessels and we decided to include this same requirement at what is now
Sec. 144.905(e).
Table 2--Derivation of Sections of Part 144 From the NPRM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM Section
Final rule section No. No.(s) Notes (if necessary)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
144.100.................. 144.100 Revised text referring to
``plan review and approval''
to ``verification of
compliance'' for clarity.
144.105.................. 144.200, Created general applicability
144.300, section, Sec. 144.105,
144.305, after removing definition
144.400 section. Our revisions to
part 144 eliminated subparts
specifically for all
vessels, existing vessels,
and new vessels, so we
combined applicability
sections for those subparts
into Sec. 144.105. In
paragraph (b) that refers to
alterations or
modifications, text similar
to that contained in SOLAS
Chapter II-1/1.3, ``. . .
insofar as is deemed
reasonable and practicable''
is added to reflect actual
process that will be
addressed in the
verification of compliance
with design standards.
144.105 Removed Sec. 144.105,
144.110 Definitions; added
definition of ``length
between perpendiculars or
LBP'' to Sec. 136.110.
Derived definition for LBP
term, used in final rule
Sec. Sec. 144.155 and
144.315, from Sec.
170.055. We moved the
content of the former Sec.
144.110 to a consolidated
central incorporation by
reference section for the
entire subchapter, Sec.
136.112.
144.120.................. 144.310(a), While proposed Sec.
144.405, 144.310(a) addressed only
136.210(c) structural adequacy,
proposed Sec. 136.210(c)
was broader and referred to
compliance with the entire
subchapter. This section
reflects the general
satisfaction of subparts B
and C of part 144 by vessels
currently classed by a
recognized classification
society.
144.125.................. 144.310(b), While proposed Sec.
136.210(d) 144.310(b) addressed only
structural adequacy,
proposed Sec. 136.210(d)
was broader and referred to
compliance with the
structural, drydocking, and
stability requirements of
the subchapter. This section
reflects the satisfaction of
structural, stability, and
watertight integrity
requirements by a vessel
holding a valid load line
certificate.
144.130.................. 136.115(b) Vessel in compliance with
SOLAS is considered to be in
compliance with part 144.
144.135.................. 144.220 Verification of compliance
requirements are placed into
a table for clarity.
144.140.................. 144.225 Qualifications revised into a
table for clarity.
144.145.................. 144.230 Procedures for verification
are clarified with minor
revisions that include a
clarification that
``stamped'' means the
imprint of the seal of the
P.E. and that ``plans''
include a list of drawings,
diagrams, calculations,
schematics and other similar
documents.
144.155.................. 144.235 Sister vessel verification
clarified with general
revisions. Among these is a
change of ``same plans'' to
``verified plans'' and
``equipped with same
machinery as the first
vessel'' to ``equipped with
machinery of the same make
and model as the original
vessel.''
144.160.................. 144.240 General marking requirements
clarified with general
revisions including a more
appropriate reference to
draft mark required in
subchapter I at 46 CFR 97.40-
10.
144.205 Proposed section on TSMS
deleted because the proposed
TSMS requirements are
contained in parts 137 and
138.
144.210 Proposed section with general
requirements deleted because
the general requirement is
repeated from parts 136 and
137.
144.200.................. 144.310 Structural standards for
existing vessels are
contained in this section.
144.205.................. 144.410 Structural standards included
for new vessels including
rules and alternatives.
144.215.................. 144.215 This section is revised to
clarify conditions under
which OCMIs may act on
special consideration.
144.300.................. 144.315 Retains proposed stability
requirements for an existing
vessel with a stability
document and added
satisfactory service,
operational tests, or a
satisfactory stability
assessment as standards for
an existing vessel without a
stability document; weight
and moment history moved to
Sec. 144.315.
144.305.................. 144.415 Contains stability
requirements for new
vessels; lifting
requirements moved to Sec.
144.310; weight and moment
history moved to Sec.
144.315
144.310.................. 144.415(d) New section for lifting
requirements.
144.315.................. 144.315(c), Weight and moment history
144.415(e) requirements consolidated
into one section.
144.320.................. 144.320(a) Revised to refer to both new
and existing vessels;
section title changed to
also refer to weathertight
integrity.
144.330.................. 144.320 Revised section to provide
OCMI authority to require
review of a vessel's
watertight or weathertight
integrity. Proposed
paragraphs (a)(1), (2), and
(3) are deleted as
repetitions of requirements
in Sec. Sec. 140.610(a)
and (f) and Sec. 143.270,
respectively.
144.400.................. 144.435(a) Fire protection requirements
applied to a new vessel,
except Sec. 144.415 which
applies to each new and
existing vessel.
144.405.................. 144.435(a) Section title taken from Sec.
177.405(a) with the
requirements unchanged from
the proposed rule.
144.410.................. 144.435(b) Section title taken from Sec.
177.405(c) with the
requirements unchanged from
the proposed rule.
144.415.................. 144.350(a), Section title taken from Sec.
144.435(c), 177.405(b) with the
142.220(c) requirements in three
proposed sections merged.
144.435(d) The provisions in proposed
Sec. 144.435(d) are
covered in Sec. 142.225,
Storage of flammable or
combustible products.
144.425.................. 144.435(e) Section title taken from Sec.
177.405(f) with the
requirements unchanged from
the proposed rule.
[[Page 40074]]
144.430.................. 144.435(f) Section title taken from Sec.
177.405(g) with the
requirements unchanged from
the proposed rule.
144.500.................. 144.330(a), Requirements similar to Sec.
144.330(e) 177.500(a)
144.505.................. 144.330(b) Requirements similar to Sec.
177.500(b) and (c)
144.510.................. 144.330(c) Requirements similar to Sec.
177.500(n)
144.515.................. 144.330(d) Requirements similar to Sec.
177.500(o)
144.600.................. 144.360(a) .............................
144.605.................. 144.360(c) .............................
144.610.................. 144.360(b) .............................
144.700.................. 144.355(b),(c) .............................
144.710.................. 144.355(a) .............................
144.720.................. 144.355(d) .............................
144.800.................. 144.335 .............................
144.810.................. 144.340 Added hand grabs as an option
to storm rails and removed
requirement for storm rails
on both sides of a
passageway more than 6 feet
wide.
144.820.................. 144.345, Proposed requirements for
143.230 guards for exposed hazards
in part 143 is merged with
part 144 proposed
requirement.
144.830.................. 144.350(b) Hot piping insulation
requirement for an existing
vessel is retained and a
more specific requirement
for a new vessel is based on
Sec. 177.970.
144.905.................. 144.325, Proposed requirements for
144.425 operating station visibility
for both existing and new
vessels are merged.
144.920.................. 144.430 Changed ``porthole'' to
``portlight'' to match our
intent for this requirement.
In practice, this change is
a nonsubstantive
clarification because the
requirement is only relevant
to portholes with
portlights.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
O. Miscellaneous Comments
In the NPRM we discussed comments submitted in response to seven
questions we posed in a December 30, 2004, Inspection of Towing Vessels
notice. Some commenters commented on those questions and that
discussion. One person stated that uninspected towing vessels have been
running efficiently for more than a century and that they have no
problems that need to be addressed by a TSMS. In response to a
discussion of grandfathering, another commenter stated that many
existing towing vessels have operated in excess of 40 to 60 years
without a major accident.
While towing vessels may be running efficiently, and many may not
be involved in a major casualty, as we noted in the NPRM, towing vessel
casualties continue to occur. Each year,\6\ there is an average of 18
fatalities, 35 injuries, $66 million in property damages, and 446,000
gallons of oil spilled. Additional damages occur after towing vessel
casualties in the form of delays from lock and waterway closures. A
primary objective of this rulemaking is to reduce fatalities, injuries,
property damaged, and oil spilled, by reducing the risk of towing
vessel casualties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Casualty consequences are from MISLE for accidents from
2002-2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Others who commented on our discussion of these questions from 2004
focused on specific subject areas intended to be addressed by our
proposed regulatory text and the reasoning we provided in the preamble
of the NPRM for that proposed text:
Machinery and Electrical: A commenter noted that space
constraints and crew abilities should be considered before requiring
new equipment on small vessels.
Applicability: Three commenters suggested that existing
vessels should be ``grandfathered'' to minimize the expense and
potential closing of businesses that will not be able to comply with
new regulations. One commenter felt that few vessels other than those
under 26 feet, or those used for commercial recreational vessel towing
assistance, should be exempted from the regulation, and that fleeters
should be exempted on a case-by-case basis.
Construction & Arrangement, Fire Protection, and TSMS: One
of those commenters would only apply grandfathering to equipment, hull
construction and structural fire-protection requirements, but
recommended that all vessels should comply with the proposed SMS rules
within one year.
TSMS: The same commenter suggested that using the ISM Code
from 2002 as a guideline in developing the SMS requirements will allow
for a number of operators using the AWO RCP to be compliant.
Fire Protection: The commenter also felt that existing
vessels should be treated differently from newly constructed vessels
because of the likelihood that fire standards will make it difficult to
retrofit existing vessels.
While these comments are not in direct response to the regulatory
text we proposed, we have addressed these comments in the same section
of the preamble where we discuss comments on the corresponding proposed
regulatory text. For example, for a response to the comment regarding
whether existing and new vessels should be treated differently
(``grandfathered'') with respect to fire protection standards, see the
Fire Protection discussion of comments section.
A towing company requested that the Coast Guard consider issuing a
supplemental NPRM so the public and industry will be able to review the
revisions to the rule before it is final. A maritime company suggested
that the Coast Guard urge towing companies to become familiar with
tried and tested engineering guides and standards. The commenter also
suggested that the Bridging Program remain functioning until all towing
vessels are found to be compliant with the rule.
We disagree with this commenter about issuing a supplemental NPRM.
This final rule reflects consideration of the thousands of comments we
received on the NPRM we published in 2011.
Regarding urging towing companies to become familiar with tried and
tested engineering guides and standards, we encourage towing companies
to obtain knowledge from such guides and standards, but the purpose of
this final rule is to establish specific requirements. This rule
provides some flexibility (e.g., the option to choose a
[[Page 40075]]
TSMS or Coast Guard inspection regime) but it is not a guidance
document: it imposes requirements for which penalties may be applied if
the requirements are not met. We have not made changes from the
proposed rule based on this comment.
As for the Bridging Program, we are currently in Phase 2 of that
program. During Phase 1, we conducted Industry Initiated Examinations
for companies taking advantage of the opportunity to participate in
this Coast Guard program. Phase 2 is focused on Risk-Based Targeted
Examinations and is scheduled to continue until this final rule becomes
effective. Phase 3 will commence with the implementation of the new
subchapter M towing vessel inspection regulations and issuance of
Certificates of Inspection (COIs).
A commenter suggested that towing vessel officers and officer
candidates be tested on the new towing vessel inspections that appear
in the final rule. The commenter said the Coast Guard provides only one
opportunity to test the ``professional knowledge'' of candidates for
Apprentice Mate/Steersman, Mate/Pilot, and Master of Towing Vessels,
and that for years, it tolerated insufficient knowledge of existing
regulations throughout the towing industry by licensed officers,
management, and even Coast Guard personnel assigned to boarding
parties. He noted that the Coast Guard's Towing Vessel ``Bridging''
program has done a commendable job trying to reverse this trend.
Before imposing training requirements on those credentialed under
46 CFR subchapter B, we would want to receive comments in a separate
rulemaking on such proposed requirements. As for Coast Guard personnel
conducting inspections under subchapter M, it is our normal process to
draft a specific Performance Qualification Standard to ensure that
inspectors are properly trained and fully capable of performing such
inspections. Also in our oversight of TPOs, we will be sure to assess
the TPO personnel's comprehension of subchapter M requirements.
One commenter felt that there is a lack of adequately trained
lookouts and that providing the Master and Pilot with a trained, well-
rested lookout can avoid many significant and costly towing accidents.
We agree that a trained, well-rested lookout would be more likely
to help avoid towing accidents than a tired lookout who is not
adequately trained. The rule does not contain specific training or
hours of work requirements for lookouts, although such training and
fatigue management may be part of a TSMS. We are considering developing
a separate rulemaking for hours of service and crew endurance
management based on our authority under 46 U.S.C. 8904(c). If we do so,
we will publish a separate document in the Federal Register. We have
made no changes from the proposed rule based on these comments.
Two commenters urged the Coast Guard to include a regulation that
requires companies to provide mariners with a ``letter of sea service''
when the mariner is renewing their credentials.
We believe this suggestion is outside the scope of this rulemaking.
We would want to receive comments on this suggestion in a separate
rulemaking before imposing such a requirement.
An individual and an association felt that the ``Bridging'' book,
updated with regulations from this final rule and other related
regulations, should be provided in electronic format to provide a clear
regulatory and policy statement to the towing industry and thereafter
the Coast Guard should require the book or an updated electronic copy
be carried aboard each towing vessel. One of these commenters noted
that when the Coast Guard promulgated new oil pollution regulations in
1973, they provided an explanatory pamphlet and a required completion
of an ''open-book'' test on the new regulations.
The Coast Guard notes that the Coast Guard's Bridging Program will
cease to be applicable to towing vessels once this final rule becomes
effective. We have prepared a Small Entities Guide which is available
in the docket. With respect to an electronic form of subchapter M and
other related regulations, we note that this final rule and subchapter
M regulations that will become part of the CFR will be available
through www.gpo.gov/fdsys.
An association commented on the need for vessel route restrictions
on a COI to be done on a vessel-by-vessel basis based upon reasonable
safety considerations, and the need for adequate sea anchors and ground
tackle for towing vessels that service oceans and coastwise routes.
A Coast Guard OCMI will make vessel-specific determinations
regarding a vessel's route and other operating conditions which will be
identified in the vessel's COI. Towing vessels come in a variety of
shapes, sizes, and services, some of which could utilize anchors and
other ground tackle as appropriate. An anchor that is appropriate for
the towing vessel would not necessarily be adequate to accommodate the
tow. It is incumbent upon the towing vessel owner or managing operator
to examine their operating conditions and decide if having an anchor
and other ground tackle is appropriate.
Two commenters suggested that doubler plating is not acceptable as
a longstanding repair policy and recommended that the use of doubler
plating be prohibited in regulation for vessels that have been
inspected, unless it is approved by a Commandant.
The Coast Guard has not adopted this recommendation. Second, since
this comment was submitted, ASTM has issued a national consensus
standard for the use of doubler plates as a permanent repair for
vessels in all services. We have made no changes from the proposed rule
based on these comments.
A commenter suggested that the NFPA standards referenced in the
NPRM be updated to the current editions. This commenter also requested
that we correct our references to NFPA 70, the National Electrical Code
(NEC), which are listed incorrectly as ``National Electric Code'' in
proposed Sec. Sec. 136.110, 136.112, 143.120; 143.340(b)(6);
143.350(b); and Section II, Abbreviations.
The Coast Guard believes it is not necessary to update to the
current editions of the NFPA standards at this time; in this final rule
we have maintained the NFPA editions that we proposed in our NPRM. We
have, however, corrected the error in our citations to NFPA 70,
National Electrical Code (NEC).
A maritime company felt that the terminology used in the proposed
rule is broad and could be interpreted differently depending on the
reader. The commenter gave ``major defects'' and ``substantial'' as
examples of items totally left up to the opinion of the individual
auditor, and suggested that more precise terms be included to ensure
consistency in the application of the regulations.
The Coast Guard notes that we did not use the term ``major
defects'' in the NPRM. We did, however, use the term ``major non-
conformity,'' which we also defined. We also note that we have added or
amended definitions based on many comments on our proposed rule.
In this final rule we do use the word ``substantial,'' or a version
of it, in our definition of ``major conversion'' in Sec. 136.110 and
in our revocation of TPO approval section, Sec. 139.150. We agree that
using more precise terms is appropriate when one is available, but
sometimes a more flexible term is the only appropriate term to use. We
believe this is true of our uses of the term ``substantial'' in this
final rule and that the common understanding and
[[Page 40076]]
definition of that term, combined with Coast Guard interpretation of
that term in other regulations, does place restrictions on how
individual auditors may interpret it. We have made no changes from the
proposed rule based on this comment.
Lastly, a commenter suggested that the Coast Guard implement a
notification system to remind vessel owners of deadlines that are
approaching for their fleets.
The Coast Guard notes that it has a system that is currently used
for other inspected vessels to provide owner and managing operators
with notification of impending compliance deadlines and plans to use
this same system for towing vessels inspected under this subchapter.
However, owners and managing operators are still ultimately responsible
for meeting these deadlines and the associated inspection requirements
including notification of the cognizant OCMI as required in part 136.
P. Crew Endurance Management Systems (CEMS)
We thank those who commented in response to our Hours of Service
(HOS) and CEMS preamble discussion in the NPRM (76 FR 49991-49997, Aug.
11, 2011). These comments have helped to inform our consideration of
HOS and CEMS issues confronting the maritime community.
As we stated in the NPRM, the Coast Guard would later request
public comment on specific hours-of-service or crew-endurance-
management regulatory text if it seeks to implement such requirements.
We are considering developing a separate rulemaking for HOS and CEM
based on our authority under 46 U.S.C. 8904(c). If we do so, we will
publish a separate document in the Federal Register.
We have summarized HOS and CEM comments below as a means of sharing
the valuable input we received on this topic we discussed in the NPRM,
but we have limited our responses because we are not proposing HOS or
CEM requirements in this document. In general, we have only responded
to these comments when we want to refer to what we said in the NPRM or
point to currently available guidance or resources to address an issue
raised. We have attempted to sort these comment summaries based on the
questions we asked in the NPRM.
Some commenters wondered why, despite assembling sufficient data,
the Coast Guard seeks additional information on potential requirements
to increase uninterrupted sleep duration, while others described the
Coast Guard's efforts to address hours of service as minimal and in
need of revision. Another commenter said mariners resent the Coast
Guard's failure to take a stand on maximum work hours and safe minimum
manning requirements.
In the NPRM, the Coast Guard shared its views on potential HOS and
CEMS program standards and requirements, and sought additional data and
other information that we solicited through specific questions because,
as we stated, we are ``considering establishing hours of service
standards and requirements for managing crew endurance, the ability for
a crewmember to maintain performance within safety limits while
enduring job-related physiological and psychological challenges.'' (76
FR 49991, Aug. 11, 2011.)
We received several comments suggesting that the traditional 2-
watch system be replaced by a 3-watch system that provides more
opportunity for increased uninterrupted sleep. One commenter said work
durations should be reduced to a maximum of 21 days, with a phase-in of
the 3-watch system within 10 years. Another commenter recommended that
the Coast Guard develop a NVIC to provide one or more specific 2-watch
rotation models that would meet the work hour limitations and minimum
rest hour standards.
Several commenters noted that a ``6-on, 6-off'' schedule is unsafe
or insufficient for allowing adequate rest. One commenter said an ``8-
hour on, 4-hour off; then 4-hour on, 8-hour off'' schedule would
achieve the maximum hours of rest while maintaining the current amount
of crew. However, another commenter said an ``8:8:4:4'' schedule may
allow for less total sleep over 24 hours than a ``6:6:6:6'' schedule.
We received several comments referencing crew manning with respect
to potential work hour requirements. Some commenters said any towing
vessel operating over 12 hours in any 24-hour period should be manned
with two full crews, not just with two licensed officers. One commenter
recommended a safe manning level that would support a 3-watch system
for vessels towing laden tank barges containing oil or hazardous
material in bulk. Another commenter stated that the Coast Guard should
require a relief pilot or three pilots onboard vessels (captain, after
watch pilot, and swing pilot). Several commenters noted that crews are
increasingly undertaking administrative duties, which can impact
appropriate manning and mariners' opportunity for rest.
An element of a CEMS that might improve the awareness of the lack
of opportunity for crew members to obtain adequate sleep would be to
keep a record of each crew members' work and rest schedule. We note
that NVIC 02-08, Enclosure (4), provides a CEM program evaluator
checklist to capture areas that need improvement and ways to go about
addressing those areas. Page 4 of Enclosure (4) provides an example of
how a crew member might analyze their current work/rest schedule to
identify any associated risks involving fatigue.
Several commenters suggested regulations that limit the workday to
12 hours in a 24-hour period for all mariners. One commenter said the
NPRM should mandate maximum work-hour limitation for unlicensed
personnel and maximum allowable work days and rotations.
We received numerous other comments. One commenter said that
without clear and enforced work-hour regulations and independent third-
party inspections, towing boat companies will continue to exploit crews
who are eager to remain employed.
One commenter urged the Coast Guard to promulgate HOS regulations
consistent with NTSB Safety Recommendation M-99-1. A maritime company
recommended minimum hours of rest similar to those set forth in the
latest STCW (Manila) amendments (STCW 2010, Chapter VIII, Section A-
VIII/1).
One association noted that the Coast Guard should have decided this
issue ever since that association first presented it in May 2000 in
National Mariners Association Report #R-201 titled ``Mariners Speak Out
on Violations of the 12-Hour Work Day.''
We received several comments supporting the implementation of an
HOS rule that would allow for sufficient time off to obtain at least 8
uninterrupted hours of sleep, or at least 7 hours of uninterrupted
sleep and an additional sleep period in every 24 hour period. However,
some commenters said the current statutory requirements in 46 U.S.C.
8104(g) are sufficient.
Several commenters opposed a requirement for a minimum of 7 to 8
hours of uninterrupted sleep for personnel on towing vessels. A
maritime company responded that requirements should consist of a
minimum of one 6-hour period of uninterrupted rest within a 24-hour
period and a minimum of 10 hours per day of total rest. Two commenters
stated that the NPRM's focus on a minimum of 8 hours of uninterrupted
sleep fails to acknowledge that a long sleep period in conjunction with
a nap of shorter duration during a 24-hour period do not result in a
compromised mental and physical state. Similarly, a commenter
[[Page 40077]]
said it is not the number of uninterrupted hours of sleep per day that
is important for performance and maintenance of alertness, but rather
the total hours of sleep per 24 hours. Also, the commenter said data
indicates that shift workers who work 8 hours and have 16 hours off to
sleep only obtain 5 to 6 hours of sleep when sleep occurs at the
``wrong'' circadian time.
We received one comment saying the best method is to allow for
anchor sleep to occur during one sleep opportunity and a nap sleep to
occur during the second sleep opportunity. A maritime company responded
that a Safe Manning Document, with prescribed watch requirements taking
into account the vessels route and service requirements, would be the
best way to ensure that sufficient qualified personnel are available
for 12 hours of work per day.
A maritime company responded that the direct financial impact on
its company would be minimal, as most of its vessels are already manned
to allow for 7 or 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep (three in each
department). However, the commenter noted that the company would lose
some level of oversight and daily productivity in performing, for
example, inspections and maintenance.
One commenter stated that sufficient uninterrupted sleep for vessel
crew is the best insurance a vessel owner or managing operator can have
against casualties. A maritime company stated that there would be a
benefit to managing work periods in relation to safety, but setting a
minimum number of consecutive hours without changing the 12-hour work
period may make it difficult to manage vessel operations in a 24-hour
period.
One commenter responded that allowing crews a 7- to 8-hour sleep
opportunity does not mean crewmembers will routinely obtain 7 to 8
hours of uninterrupted sleep because it is impossible to mandate sleep.
We agree that a mandate to provide an opportunity for a sufficient
number of hours of uninterrupted sleep will not guarantee that
crewmembers sleep for the desired number of hours. But as we suggested
in the NPRM, providing the opportunity ``to increase uninterrupted
sleep duration to a threshold of at least 7 consecutive hours in one of
the two available off periods in the two-watch system [would] increase
the probability that crewmembers will have the opportunity to restore
the cognitive abilities necessary to maintain situational awareness,
even if the sleep environment is not optimal.'' 76 FR 49996, Aug. 11,
2011. As noted above, log-keeping could be an effective way to gauge
work and rest schedules throughout daily onboard operations.
A maritime company responded that while 7 hours of sleep is ideal,
this does not work well in a 12-hour work schedule, and is still
controversial even within the pioneering companies that initially
implemented and tested the CEMS practices. The commenter concluded that
the CEM training teaches that this--getting 7 hours of sleep--is the
last and one of the least important facets of the program.
Another maritime company responded that, when given a 7- to 8-hour
sleep opportunity, mariners cannot obtain 7-8 hours of uninterrupted
sleep. Thus, it is common in the towing vessel industry to allow for
two sleep opportunities where each opportunity allows for significant
sleep such as on a ``6:6:6:6'' square watch schedule.
We received many comments, mostly from maritime companies, opposing
a potential requirement for a minimum of 7 to 8 hours of uninterrupted
sleep for personnel on towing vessels because no current watchstanding
system meets this standard. Several commenters, including maritime
companies, said the ``6 on/6 off'' watch schedule has worked for many
years and should not be altered. A maritime company responded that the
traditional ``6 on/6 off'' watch schedules would have to be changed to
a ``5/7/7/5,'' or'' 4/8/8/4,'' and a ``12/12'' schedule may even need
to be worked depending on vessel operations. Another commenter
expressed concern about the difficulty that operators would have in
finding experienced personnel to meet the proposed watch standing
standards.
One commenter responded that it is impossible to mandate that
mariners ``obtain a required number of hours of uninterrupted sleep,
such as 7-8 hours.'' Instead, what is needed is to change mariner
culture such that sufficient sleep is understood to be important for
optimal performance, safety, and health.
A maritime company said a mandate would undoubtedly change the
entire operation onboard, including meal hours, voyage planning, etc.
Another maritime company responded that a mandate that required
mariners to obtain 7 to 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep would require
the use of pharmacological agents or behavioral therapies (e.g.,
exercise, sleep hygiene, cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia)
that would enable mariners to achieve the mandated hours of
uninterrupted sleep.
One commenter noted that many factors, including electronic
gadgets, noise in the berthing spaces, and dietary considerations can
have an adverse impact on a mariner's ability to obtain adequate sleep.
We received one comment that said requiring 7 to 8 hours of
uninterrupted sleep would require one-third more crewmembers than the
company presently can accommodate on board.
One commenter stated that recent data on sleep make it unlikely
that crews on a ``7:7:5:5'' or an ``8:8:4:4'' watch schedule could
obtain close to 7 or 8 hours of sleep, even when the endogenous drive
to sleep coincided with a 7- or 8-hour rest period.
Two commenters said focus on nutrition and hydration has helped
employees, but the companies have not changed watch schedules. Two
other commenters responded that they have implemented CEMS, but one
noted that it does not require that mariners receive 7 to 8 hours of
uninterrupted sleep.
An association and another commenter said a CEMS program alone
cannot account for the fatigue caused by the existing 2-watch system on
vessels in 24-hour service. The commenters stated that many mariners
are unwilling to adjust their lives to fulfill the requirements of the
system, and employers who force the program upon their mariners will
encounter resentment and retention problems.
A maritime company responded that if a CEMS program enabled crews
to obtain 7 to 8 hours of total sleep over a 24-hour period, such a
program could be effective in combating fatigue. Another maritime
company responded that any operation can benefit from CEM practices
absent of work/rest changes. Diet, exercise, and environmental factors
are all critical to improving operations and reducing fatigue.
Another maritime company responded that there is no evidence HOS
restrictions reduce casualties and injuries, although this may be
possible if crews can achieve 7 to 8 hours of total sleep on a day-to-
day basis.
A maritime company commented that no existing programs could be
considered equivalent to the Coast Guard CEMS program. The alternative
would be a traditional ship ``4/8'' watch schedule, which would require
manning increases for most companies.
One commenter responded that, yes, a mandate would cause burden to
smaller companies with limited resources. Another commenter said
requiring a crew management program would increase the already large
financial burden of implementing these proposed regulations on mid-
sized and smaller companies, as well as an increased cost to the end
consumer due to the necessity of larger crews.
[[Page 40078]]
A maritime company responded that for a full CEMS program, a 4- to
5-year period would be appropriate to allow for training,
implementation, and auditing. Another maritime company responded that
there is no appropriate phase-in period or method until evidence is
provided that implementation of a new HOS requirement is effective.
In their comment to the docket (USCG-2006-24412-0187), the National
Transportation Safety Board indicated they were pleased with the
comprehensiveness, relevance, and timeliness of the literature that the
Coast Guard cited in the NPRM, and believes that this literature aptly
summarizes the state-of-the-art of human factors and physiological
research on the effects of fatigue on human performance. The commenter
went on to cite several maritime and transportation accidents in which
operator fatigue was identified as a contributing factor.
A maritime company noted that Coast Guard cites the Fatigue
Avoidance Scheduling Tool (FAST) algorithm and produces nine figures
(Figs 2-10) for assessing the effects of work and rest schedules on
human health and performance, but there is no evidence in the FAST
model that mariners will be able to obtain 7 to 8 hours of
uninterrupted sleep on a ``7:7:5:5'' or ``8:8:4:4'' rectangular watch.
Another maritime company disagreed with scientific studies that have
indicated that uninterrupted sleep of less than 8 hours gives a worker
a response time equivalent to someone with blood alcohol content of
0.05-0.08. Other commenters recommended a study on sleep requirements
strictly related to inland waterways vessels.
We received a few comments supporting the structure of a CEMS
program, and stating that before work hours or watchstanding practices
are changed, a program including crew physical wellness and fatigue
education and training must be put into place. One commenter supported
additional training for crew members in the area of crew member fatigue
and work and rest periods.
There are currently several opportunities to learn more about CEMS
and mariner fatigue. We recommend talking with your company safety
officer for training options, or visit https://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/cg5211/cems.asp for more information on CEM.
One commenter said the concept of crew endurance is in effect a
``Band-Aid'' for a system that is broken, and that the Coast Guard has
objective scientific evidence to take clear and definitive actions for
establishing maximum work-hour limitations.
We received several comments stating that the Coast Guard's
emphasis on uninterrupted sleep differs from the description of CEMS in
NVIC 02-08, Criteria for Evaluating the Effectiveness of Crew Endurance
Management System Implementation. Further, the commenters said NPRM's
emphasis on 7 to 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep is troubling not only
because of its inconsistency with prior Coast Guard publications
describing the purpose of CEMS, but more importantly because it
reflects an incomplete and selective treatment of the science behind
sleep and watchstanding.
As discussed in NVIC 02-08, components of a CEMS that improve the
safety culture and sleep quality include education, environmental
changes, light management, trained coaches, and schedule changes. As
indicated in Enclosure (4) of NVIC 02-08, a crew's watch schedule
should be evaluated based on the opportunity for each member to achieve
a sufficient amount of uninterrupted sleep.
A maritime company stated that the CEMS demonstration project did
not provide any data to support any changes in HOS or any endurance
management standards.
We received several comments complaining about the Coast Guard's
inaction regarding HOS and crew endurance. However, many commenters,
mostly maritime companies, said the towing vessel inspection rule is
not the proper place for requirements regarding fatigue management,
which has implications for the entire maritime industry and that it
would be more appropriate to address the issues raised in the NPRM
relating to periods of rest and watchstanding in a separate rulemaking
project particularly as it pertains to the marine industry as a whole.
One commenter said any additional CEMS requirements should be
identified in a company's TSMS and not in regulation.
Several commenters said emphasis on minimum required hours of sleep
is not justified by science or data. One commenter said the NPRM is
confusing and lead a reader and, more importantly, an inspector to draw
the wrong conclusions about how a vessel watch should be set up. A
maritime company said there is a need for literature that explores
anchor sleep/nap sleep strategies; compares sleep times on different
watch schedules where the total amount of sleep and work opportunities
are equivalent; evaluates the effectiveness of educational programs to
change the culture of crews on board towing vessels; documents why
mariners do not obtain 7 to 8 hours of sleep per 24 hours; and
evaluates effective strategies for the treatment of sleep disorders.
One commenter said any requirement for hours of service standards
and crew endurance management requirements should apply to double-
crewed overnight boats and should not apply to ``dinner bucket'' or
harbor boats.
We received two comments stating that the Coast Guard should
withdraw its proposal until the following issues are addressed: current
abuses of existing hours-of-service regulations for towing vessel
officers; the lack of any hours-of service regulations for deckhands,
engineers and unlicensed crewmembers; fatigue resulting from these
abuses; and the undermanning of towing vessels as previously
documented.
Another commenter said the NPRM included no mention of previous
recommendations made by the Towing Safety Advisory Committee (TSAC) on
CEMS and seeks comment on a different approach that was not previously
brought to TSAC's attention.
We received several comments stating that the CEMS research being
conducted by Northwestern University on inland towing vessels should
influence the Coast Guard's direction on watchstanding and CEMS.
Q. Economic Analysis Comments
The Coast Guard received numerous comments from organizations and
individuals regarding the costs and benefits associated with our
proposed subchapter M regulations.
When we published the NPRM in 2011, we were particularly interested
in the economic impact of implementing a TSMS, and whether there were
alternatives to the TSMS and Coast Guard inspection options that could
provide similar benefits at a lower cost.
Many commenters provided details and opinions regarding the costs
and benefits of implementing the new subchapter M requirements. The
comments involved the overall and specific costs and benefits of the
requirements, the economic impact on small entities, and the requests
for flexibilities that could provide relief to towing vessel owners and
operators. We appreciate these comments and have attempted to integrate
them into our Regulatory Analysis (RA). We address the specific topics
in the sections of this preamble below.
1. Costs
We received numerous comments from towing vessel industry
stakeholders regarding the specific costs
[[Page 40079]]
of subchapter M parts as well as general remarks on overall costs of
the new requirements. Many commenters expressed concern over subchapter
M requirements imposing undue costs on vessel owners and operators
without providing any information or further discussion.
One commenter stated the cost of hiring a naval architect for
stability calculations would be in the tens of thousands of dollars per
vessel to comply with construction and arrangement standards, and
verification of compliance with those requirements.
As noted above in section IVI.N, the Coast Guard has added
additional options for verification of compliance with part 144.
Section 144.300(b) now offers three options for an existing vessel
without a stability document to meet part 144 requirements: findings
based on the vessel's operation or a history of satisfactory service,
successful performance on operational tests, or a satisfactory
stability assessment. None of these options would cost this operator
tens of thousands of dollars. For example, the findings based on the
vessel's operation or history of satisfactory service is a
documentation activity that the Coast Guard estimates will require 4
hours of time to compile at a cost of approximately $200. Operational
tests are undertaken as part of a standard inspection if needed at no
additional cost to the operator.
The commenter also believed that additional equipment and
redundancy systems--specifically propulsion, steering and related
controls, electrical installations, pilothouse alerter system and
towing machinery--required by part 143 are unnecessary.
As discussed earlier, part 143 no longer requires redundancy
propulsion or steering for existing vessels, and has eliminated
deferred electrical requirements in proposed Sec. Sec. 143.340 through
143.360 for existing vessels. This final rule does retain a pilothouse
alerter system requirement for towing vessels with overnight
accommodations and alternating watches (shift work), but we have
limited this requirement to towing vessels more than 65 feet in length.
We also retained a requirement for towing machinery (e.g., capstans and
winches) to be designed and installed to maximize control of the tow.
Both the pilothouse alerter system and towing machinery requirements
have a delayed implementation period for existing vessels: 5 years
after the issuance of the first COI for the vessel. For a more detailed
discussion of these two requirements, please see section IV.M above.
One commenter stated that the Coast Guard estimated that bringing a
single towing vessel into compliance with general requirements for
propulsion, steering, and related controls, which appeared in Sec.
143.405 in the NPRM, would cost $20,000 and said that his company spent
$200,000 to replace steering and propulsion systems of a single vessel.
The commenter estimated that to bring his company's 130 vessels into
compliance under subchapter M, they would need to spend millions of
dollars. The commenter also said that several thousand towing vessels
would be affected, as opposed to the Coast Guard estimate of 26 towing
vessels being affected by the Sec. 143.405 requirements.
As discussed earlier, the Coast Guard acknowledges the potential
for higher costs to retrofit existing vessels. In this final rule, the
relevant requirements have been moved to Sec. 143.585 and the
applicability of these requirements has been reduced to only apply to
new vessels (estimated at 88 per year) or those undergoing a major
conversion (estimated at 13 per year) that move tank barges carrying
oil or hazardous materials in bulk. We estimate the incremental cost to
comply with Sec. 143.585 during the design and construction stage for
new vessels or those undergoing major conversion to be $10,000 per
vessel.
Another commenter, referencing the previous commenter's remarks,
estimated that company would incur a cost of $40 million to comply with
subchapter M. This commenter also suggested that subchapter M costs
will be passed along to all the consumers in the U.S. economy thereby
putting the U.S. economy at a disadvantage compared to other world
economies.
The Coast Guard has considered the potential cost impact on
individual companies and the economy in formulating the final rule. We
balanced costs against the beneficial impacts of the rule in reducing
the risk of towing vessel accidents and the resulting consequences,
including fatalities, injuries, and oil spills. Based on information
provided in the comments from the public on the costs of some
requirements, we have revised the applicability of some those
requirements to only newly constructed or refurbished vessels to
mitigate the need for costly retrofits of existing vessels. We have
also added alternative compliance options, such as allowing service
history in lieu of stability tests for some vessels. We believe the
resulting final rule fulfills Congress' mandate to bring towing vessels
under an inspection system to ensure and improve safety, while
minimizing costs and potential impacts on the U.S. economy.
Another commenter expressed concern about the cost of the rule to
vessel owners and operators and stated that the annual user fee could
be ``in the $1,000 to $2,000 range'' for each vessel. The annual fee
for towing vessels inspected under subchapter M will be $1,030. As we
note in section IV.D above, this is the existing annual inspection fee
in 46 CFR 2.10-101 for any inspected vessel not listed in Table 2.10-
101. This will be charged starting a year after the initial COI is
issued and will remain the annual inspection fee until a specific
annual inspection fee for towing vessels is promulgated through a
separate rulemaking.
The same commenter also estimated that the negative impact on the
economy, of (river-canal) lock delays due to towing vessel accidents,
is only $13.89 million of annual economic impact and 0.13 percent of
total downtime, compared to an estimated total negative economic impact
of $10.8 trillion for all downtime on the lock.
The Coast Guard acknowledges that lock delays from towing accidents
may only make up a small fraction of total lock delays. However, that
does not negate the benefit that could be realized through the rule by
improving towing vessel safety, and reducing accidents and the
resulting delays. Analyzing all causes of lock delays and methods for
mitigating those delays not related to towing vessel accidents is
outside the scope of this rulemaking.
One commenter submitted a number of comments on the additional
operational costs due to subchapter M requirements that included the
impact of periodic drydocking which may leave the work force idle,
additional recordkeeping-staff requirements, the limited supply of
shipyards which may increase the amount of time needed for repairs and
drydocking, and increases in lending rates for marine loans from
financial institutions due to actual or perceived risks.
With respect the impact of drydocking, according to a 2013 report,
``For smaller vessels, routine drydocking can be done in the course of
a single day.'' \7\ The Coast Guard assumes 2 days of for each drydock
inspection and has added an estimate of potential lost revenues during
that period. Drydocking can be scheduled in advance with shipyards to
coincide with rest requirements of crew, minimizing the
[[Page 40080]]
potential for workforce idleness or longer waits times.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ ``Study of Engineering and Naval Architecture Costs for Use
in Regulatory Analysis'', 17 April 2013 by ABS Consulting, page 30.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The provisions of the rule are intended to improve safety of towing
vessel operations, which over time should reduce actual risks.
One commenter asked for more detail on how the Coast Guard
estimated the annual government costs at $1.4 million. He interpreted
this figure as a need to hire 14 new full time employees.
Coast Guard man-hours are calculated based on assuming only a few
hours per vessel, although it might amount to a large number of hours
considering that the affected population is more than 5,500 towing
vessels. The Coast Guard is flexible with respect to meeting resource
needs and may not hire new full time employees to implement the new
subchapter M program.
Several commenters stated that the preliminary RA underestimated
the various costs of subchapter M. In particular, one commenter
believed that for existing vessels cost in man-hours needed to develop
vessel plans is much higher than the estimate presented in the RA. The
commenter estimated that cost of plan development alone will be as high
as $80,000, as opposed to the Coast Guard estimate of $20,000. In
addition to these costs, the commenter included an estimate of up to
$30,000 for stability review, and $100,000 to verify vessel compliance
with requirements in parts 140 through 144.
The Coast Guard acknowledges the potential for higher costs for
plan development and stability review. As a result, this final rule
does not require an existing vessel to undergo a verification of
compliance with design standards, so there is no plan development cost
for an existing vessel unless that vessel either undergoes a major
conversion or involves a new installation that is not a replacement-in-
kind. In the case of a major conversion, the plans and documentation
needed would be directly related to the scope of the conversion. In the
case of an installation that is not a replacement-in-kind, the plans
needed would be limited to the scope of the installation and to prove
that the vessel meets stability standards. Moreover, the documentation
required is not restricted to traditional drawings; sketches,
schematics, diagrams, specifications, and photographs can be used to
the degree needed to ensure the vessel complies with the standards
used.
The same commenter suggested an alternative approach to these plans
that they estimated would cost no more than $30,000 per vessel: Having
a P.E. conduct a ship check to approve hull structure, piping,
electrical machinery systems and stability test by using in-house
sketches and reviewing vessel structure and systems. The total costs of
the program suggested by this commenter ranged from $150,000 to
$180,000 when added to the other vessel plan costs. The Coast Guard
views the suggested alternative approach to be similar to the surveys
required under the TSMS option and, therefore, to be redundant.
Further, the alternative approach suggested is not really an
alternative since sketches, photographs, and similar documents are
included in the group of sufficient documents needed for review in the
case of either a major conversion or a new installation that is not a
replacement-in-kind on an existing vessel.
Another commenter estimated that the cost of retrofitting an
existing towing vessel to comply with subchapter M ranges from $180,000
to $300,000. This commenter also pointed out the additional cost of a
TSMS, which he noted we estimated to be from $61,000 to $150,000 per
company. The commenter added that none of these estimates accounts for
the economic impact of time spent out of service while a vessel is
being retrofitted.
The Coast Guard acknowledges that the costs to retrofit vessels to
meet certain proposed requirement may have been higher than estimated
in the NPRM. As a result of these higher costs, the Coast Guard has
removed those requirements for existing vessels, although the
requirements are retained for new vessels as the incremental costs for
a new vessel are lower. Removing certain requirements for existing
vessels in Part 143 has the potential to reduce most, or perhaps all,
of the $180,000 to $300,000 costs noted in the comment. With regards to
the TSMS costs, the rule provides the Coast Guard inspection option as
an alternative if developing and implementing a TSMS is deemed too
costly by a vessel owner. In response to this and other comments, the
Coast Guard has included an estimate of lost revenue in the Regulatory
Analysis for the final rule for drydock inspections and activities to
correct deficiencies that exceed 1 day in duration. We have made
certain requirements no longer apply to existing vessels and has made
many other changes to address that concern, as discussed in previous
sections.
One commenter stated that subchapter M would require his company to
change electrical systems on existing vessels at a cost of more than
$75,000 per vessel, and would potentially cost the company $2,700,000
to comply.
While the Coast Guard finds it unlikely that it would cost over
$75,000 to bring a vessel in active service under normal engineering
practice into compliance with subchapter M, the Coast Guard
acknowledges that some of the requirements proposed for electrical
systems that required retrofitting of existing towing vessels could
result in higher costs. In this final rule, we have made many of those
requirements only applicable to new vessels. For more details, see
discussion of electrical systems in section IV.M above.
One commenter estimated his company's average compliance cost to be
$225,000 per vessel or $3.375 million for his entire fleet. A second
commenter, relying on an AWO figure, estimates the cost of the proposed
requirements to be as much as $100,000 per towing vessel. A third
commenter, representing a group of offshore towing vessel owners and
operators, quoted previous comments on compliance costs and provided an
average cost of $180,000 to $300,000 per vessel.
The Coast Guard appreciates the information from commenters on the
potential costs of the proposed requirements in the NPRM. Given the
potential for higher cost impacts, we have re-evaluated the
requirements in the proposal to identify opportunities to minimize
costs while still achieving risk reduction. As described previously, we
have provided opportunities for lower-cost compliance options for some
requirements and changed the applicability of some requirements so that
existing vessels would not have to undergo costly retrofits. The Coast
Guard estimates that the average cost of compliance per vessel during
the phase-in period is $16,267 with an additional $5,045 cost per
company. The deficiency data from the Bridging Program and towing
vessel boardings, which represents over 99 percent of the towing vessel
fleet, indicates that many deficiencies are relatively rare (5 percent
or less of vessels), making it unlikely that a vessel would incur the
cost of every regulatory requirement.
Finally, other commenters stated that there are many hidden or
unaccounted-for costs that the Coast Guard did not incorporate into its
preliminary RA. These hidden costs are the same costs mentioned by a
previous commenter: Lost revenues and wages due to periodic inspections
and repairs (including travel to inspection locations), crew costs to
prepare for the inspection and undergo the questioning during the audit
or survey, and management costs to oversee the TSMS and inspection
scheduling.
[[Page 40081]]
Based on these and other comments, the Coast Guard acknowledges
that potential for lost revenue and has added an estimate of lost
revenues for drydocking and certain repairs (please see Section 2.5 of
the Regulatory Analysis for details).
With respect to costs to prepare for and undergo inspections, the
Coast Guard estimates 40 hours of time to prepare for and undergo an
inspection, which could be accomplished by the owner, operator, crew,
or a combination. We have used the owner or operator wage rate to value
the opportunity cost, which would be a slight over-estimate if crew
instead performed the activities, which includes scheduling the
inspections.
With regard to management costs to oversee a TSMS, the NPRM
regulatory analysis provided an overall cost estimate for a TSMS that
included management costs. For the final rule, the Coast Guard does not
expect management costs for a TSMS to be incrementally different than
management costs for an existing Safety Management System.
Additionally, one commenter believed that the preliminary RA did
not account for increased shipping rates and transportation costs for
industries dependent on river transportation.
The Coast Guard has added an evaluation of the potential for
increased shipping rates and transportation costs in Appendix J of the
Regulatory Analysis. The average cost per vessel of the final rule on a
daily basis represents an increase of 0.7 percent to 2.75% of barge
daily operating costs, exclusive of fuel costs. The ability of towing
vessel owners to pass along these cost increases to shippers will
depend on many factors that make up the elasticity of demand, which
will vary depending on the cargo, route, and transportation
alternatives available. Towing vessels and barges typically carry
commodities in bulk, including coal, petroleum, crude materials (such
as forest products, sand, gravel, ores, scrap, and salt), and food and
farm products (Figure J-1). The analysis of the impact of the increase
in towing vessel daily operating costs on the shippers will be
different for each commodity and route. An analysis of shipping rates
for grain indicates that barge shipping rates are volatile, sometimes
doubling from one year to the next, reacting quickly to sudden changes
in export demand, weather constraints on the rivers, or larger-than-
expected crops. The final rule requirements are expected to represent
average increases in operating costs of 0.7 to 2.75 percent, only a
small fraction of normal variability in rate. The market and shippers
have adapted to fluctuations in shipping rates, so that increases of
the size that may result from the final rule are within normal
variations.
Further, the amount of increase in costs will vary from company to
company. For example, many companies already have a TSMS, so this
regulation would have a lesser impact on those companies cost structure
than those companies that don't have one. The final rule brings all
towing companies up to a minimum standard of safety and erodes the
competitive advantages of those companies underinvesting in safety
measures. By reducing accidents, incidents and casualties and resulting
impacts including delays, the final rule may also increase the
dependability and timeliness of shipping by barge and perhaps mitigate
some limited aspects of the volatility of rates.
2. Benefits
We received many comments in support of the proposed rule. Many
commenters said that SMSs are cost-beneficial and might lead to
quantifiable benefits. Commenters suggested that SMSs might lead to
benefits such as fewer vessel accidents and personal injuries, which
would mean cost savings from reduced insurance premiums and avoidance
of expenses such as vessel repairs and time out of service. However, no
commenter provided any data or analysis that would directly quantify or
monetize such benefits.
Numerous commenters, while agreeing with the proposed requirements
in principle, expressed a concern that the costs of complying with
subchapter M would exceed the benefits and should be either avoided
altogether or mitigated by following a risk-based approach. The
majority of these commenters felt that benefits should be justified by
each towing vessel's individual casualty history and risk. For example,
a vessel that has not been involved in any accident but is not
compliant with some or all of the requirements of subchapter M should
not be considered a risk to the maritime industry and should be granted
exemption or grandfathered from some or all of subchapter M
requirements.
The Coast Guard agrees in part. The regulatory impact analysis we
provide in the docket discusses at length why and how owners and
operators of regulated entities will benefit from the requirements of
the final rule. The fact that no incident has occurred yet on a
particular vessel, especially one that does not comply with the
requirements of the final rule, does not mean that the vessel does not
present any risk to the maritime industry. In the next comment section,
we addressed requests to obtain relief from certain costs commenters
deemed unnecessary and will point to accomodations and flexibilities
this final rule provides.
3. Flexibilities To Provide Relief to Towing Vessel Owners and
Operators
We received numerous comments from the towing vessel owners and
operators requesting greater flexibility in the rule to reduce its
costs to them. They varied from full exemption from all subchapter M
regulations to grandfathering on specific requirements. These comments
are addressed in this section.
One commenter requested that the Coast Guard grant his company
either an exemption from all requirements of subchapter M or an
extension of 20 years of grandfathering on existing equipment on board
his towing vessels. Another commenter requested some form of
grandfather clause for existing fleets from proposed Sec. Sec. 143.340
through 143.360 electrical system requirements citing complete rewiring
costs at $150,000 to $210,000 for each vessel. Similarly, one
commenter, without being specific, suggested that many requirements
relating to mechanical and electrical equipment and structural
standards for small operators should be relaxed or eliminated. Also,
the AWO recommended that the Coast Guard delete sections on electrical
system requirements in the final rule. Another commenter argued that
subchapter M regulations are unnecessary and asked for an exemption or
extension for longtime existing companies that have always operated in
full compliance with existing regulations because these new regulations
may force them out of business.
The Coast Guard believes it inappropriate to grant an exemption
from all new requirements under subchapter M or grandfathering of 20
years for existing equipment. However, the Coast Guard agrees that some
of the requirements for machinery and electrical systems in part 143
may have been too burdensome and were unnecessary for existing vessels,
so they have been removed from this final rule.
One commenter suggested that coal and grain barge handlers, which
are generally small businesses, should not have the same TSMS
requirements as larger companies. Another commenter asked Coast Guard
to provide a template for a scaled-down version of a TSMS that might be
less overwhelming for small towing vessel operations. A third
[[Page 40082]]
commenter suggested that small operators should not be required to
implement and maintain certain parts of the TSMS, such as the
Behavioral-Based Safety program.
In the final rule, TSMS requirements are neither modified for
different classes of towing vessels nor scaled down or exempted for
small towing vessel operators. However, as previously noted, the TSMS
is scalable. It can be tailored to the operation of a small company and
simplified to address a limited set of assets, process, and personnel.
For a small business operator with a fleet of one or two vessels the
TSMS may be a short document. Further, owners and operators can choose
the Coast Guard inspection option.
Behavior-based safety has been described as an approach that
focuses on what people do, analyzes why people take these actions, and
then applies a research-supported intervention strategy to obtain a
more desired outcome. (Geller, E. Scott, 2004). Subchapter M does not
specifically prescribe the use of behavior-based safety to address
specific elements of the TSMS, however some companies have chosen to
use this approach to help modify employees behaviors to enhance safety
within their organization.
We do not believe a template is needed to comply with TSMS
requirements. As discussed in previous sections, we have clarified TSMS
requirements in this rule and we intend to issue guidance documents
related to TSMSs and TPOs as necessary, and these guides may contain
examples of such documents.
One commenter stated that the TSMS should be the only approved
method (to obtain a Certificate of Inspection) under the final rule and
recommended that the Coast Guard option be removed because a TSMS is
scalable and can be developed in a cost-effective manner that many
small companies can adapt to.
The Coast Guard disagrees that the TSMS should be mandatory.
Although we recognize that the TSMS is scalable and can be developed in
a cost-conducive manner, some towing companies may lack the resources
or expertise to develop and implement a TSMS. The Coast Guard
inspection option is intended to provide greater regulatory flexibility
to such companies, or any that may not want to use a TSMS for other
reasons. As noted above in section IV.B, offering this option is
consistent with one of ABSG Consulting's recommendations in its 2006
final report to the Coast Guard. See docket submission USCG-2006-24412-
0017.
4. Small Business Impacts
We received several comments from small business owners and
operators on the economic impact of subchapter M requirements. Some
were opposed to the new requirements, but did not provide specific
information or data about how they would be impacted. Others requested
either an exemption or grandfathering from some or all of the
requirements, so that they could avoid or mitigate the economic impacts
and continue to serve the towing vessel industry. A discussion of
comments received on small business impacts follows.
Many commenters felt that subchapter M requirements would hurt
small business owners and their employees and could put many small
entities out of business. However, they did not provide specific data
as to how much of an economic burden they expected the new requirements
to place on their operational costs. The most specific comment was that
new recordkeeping requirements alone would mean that the owner or
operator would have to hire one or more new full time workers. Other
commenters estimated the overall costs of subchapter M requirements in
a range of $100,000 to $250,000 per vessel and several million dollars
per company.
Other commenters expressed concern that their companies would not
be able to pay for these unspecified subchapter M requirements, and
therefore, either be forced out of business or be acquired by larger
entities in the towing vessel industry. One commenter argued that
lenders will delay lending and review existing ship mortgages to
reassess their collateral positions, because many owners and operators
of small towing vessel fleets will not be able to afford the costs to
comply with subchapter M requirements. Another commenter stated that
his company would lose the ability to borrow against their boats if
they cannot comply with the new regulations. One commenter estimated
that no less than 20 percent of the aggregate U.S. towing fleet would
be put out of business if the NPRM, as written, is published as a final
rule. However, these commenters did not provide specific data or
information to support their concerns.
The Coast Guard appreciates these comments on the potential
economic impact of the proposed rule on small businesses. Based on
these comments and other comments on the range of compliance costs, we
have re-evaluated the requirements in the proposal to identify
opportunities to minimize impacts on small businesses while still
achieving risk reduction. As described previously, we have provided
opportunities for lower-cost compliance options for some requirements
and changed the applicability of some requirements so that existing
vessels would not have to undergo costly retrofits. The Coast Guard
estimates that the average cost of compliance per vessel during the
phase-in period is $16,267, with an additional $5,045 cost per company.
The deficiency data from the Bridging Program and towing vessel
boardings (which represents over 99 percent of the towing vessel fleet)
indicates that many deficiencies are relatively rare (5 percent or less
of vessels), making it unlikely that a vessel would incur the cost of
every regulatory requirement.
V. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this final rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below, we summarize our
analyses based on these statutes or executive orders.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
E.O.s 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review'') and 13563
(``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'') direct agencies to
assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and,
if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that
maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental,
public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity).
E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility.
This final rule is a significant regulatory action under section
3(f) of E.O. 12866. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
reviewed it under that Order. It requires an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of E.O. 12866. A final
assessment is available in the docket, and a summary follows.
A Final Regulatory Analysis (RA) is available in the docket where
indicated under the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments''
section of this preamble. A summary of the RA follows:
This rulemaking implements section 415 of the Coast Guard and
Maritime Transportation Act of 2004. The intent of the final rule is to
promote safer work practices and reduce casualties on towing vessels by
ensuring that
[[Page 40083]]
inspected towing vessels adhere to prescribed safety standards and
adopted safety management systems. The Coast Guard recognizes that
establishing minimum standards for the towing vessel industry is
necessary. Vessel operation, maintenance, and design must ensure the
safe conduct of towing vessels. The final rule improves the safety and
efficiency of the towing vessel industry.
In this final rule, the Coast Guard requires towing vessels subject
to this rulemaking to undergo annual Coast Guard inspections or, in the
alternative, be part of a safety management system. If the safety
management system option is chosen, the rule requires companies that
operate inspected towing vessels to create a TSMS, continue with
existing systems that comply with the provisions of the International
Safety Management (ISM) Code, or continue under another system the
Coast Guard determines to be equivalent to the TSMS.
This final rule would allow each towing vessel organization to
customize its approach to meeting the requirements of the regulations,
while it provides continuous oversight using audits, surveys,
inspections, and reviews of safety data. This would improve the safety
of towing vessels and provide greater flexibility and efficiency for
towing vessel operators. As a result of this rulemaking, operators
would be able to call upon third parties or the Coast Guard to conduct
compliance activities when and where they are needed.
Although the 2004 Act added towing vessels to the list of vessels
subject to Coast Guard inspection and the 2010 Act directed the
Secretary to issue a final rule on the inspection of towing vessels
containing towing safety management system provisions, they did not
prescribe how this inspection program must be designed, developed and
implemented. Therefore, we consider all the new parts under the new
subchapter M as discretionary, but integral to the safe operations of
towing vessels and necessary to fulfill Congress' intent in the 2004
and 2010 Acts.
Additionally, when towing vessels receive their Certificates of
Inspection this will trigger the following requirements outside of
subchapter M for inspected vessels:
Part 136, Certification will require the assessment of
user fees, per 46 U.S.C. 2110 and 46 CFR 2.10-101, Table 2.10-101;
(requiring user fee for vessel inspection services and certifications).
46 CFR 15.820(a) requires a Chief Engineer on certain
inland towing vessels.
33 CFR 155.710(e)(1) requires a Person-in-Charge (PIC) for
certain fuel transfers on towing vessels to be credentialed officer or
to hold an MMC with a Tankerman-PIC endorsement.
See the ``Discussion of Final Rule'' section for a detailed
discussion of this final rule and see the RA for a detailed discussion
of costs, benefits and alternatives considered. Table 3 summarizes the
impacts of this rulemaking.
Table 3--Summary of Affected Population, Costs and Benefits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Final rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Populations:
Applicability................. All U.S. flag towing vessels engaged
in pushing, pulling, or hauling
alongside, with exceptions for work
boats and limited service towing
vessels.
Affected Population........... 5,509 vessels.
1,086 companies.
Costs:
Total Costs ($ millions, 7% $41.5 (annualized).
discount rate). $291.2 (10-year).
Industry Costs ($ millions, 7% $32.7 (annualized).
discount rate). $229.6 (10-year).
Net Government Costs ($ $8.8 (annualized).
millions, 7% discount rate). $61.6 (10-year).
Benefits:
Benefits ($ millions, 7% $46.4 (annualized, millions).
discount rate). $325.6 (10-year).
Unquantified Benefits......... Reduced congestion and delays from
lock, bridge and waterway closures.
Reduced risk of low and medium
severity towing vessel accidents
and accidents with limited
information in the case report.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4 summarizes the changes in the final rule as we moved from
the NPRM to this final rule, and Table 5 below summarizes the changes
in the RA. These changes to the RA came from either policy changes,
public comments received after the publication of the NPRM, or simply
from updating the data and information that informed our regulatory
analysis.
Table 4--Summary of Notable Changes from NPRM to Final Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact on regulatory
NPRM Section No. FR Section No. Summary analysis
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.03-55 Added section: ``Appeals from decisions Added costs for appeals.
or actions under subchapter M of this
chapter''.
15.535..................... 15.535 Clarified that the requirements of Sec. Included cost of
15.515 apply in addition to those of compliance with Sec.
this section, and that the requirements 15.515.
of this section apply regardless of
assistance towing or being under 200
GRT.
136.172 Maintains current requirements for Maintains existing costs
existing towing vessels for 2 years or for existing vessels.
until the vessel obtains a COI,
whichever period is shorter.
138.310.................... 138.310 Added ISO 9001-2008 as an option for No change--adds
auditor/assessor compliance. compliance flexibility.
[[Page 40084]]
138.505.................... 138.505 Edited section to specify where in the No change--clarifies who
Coast Guard audits should be sent. receives reports.
139.110.................... 139.110 Introduced delineation that recognized No change--adds
classification societies qualify to do compliance flexibility.
TPO audits and authorized
classification societies to do as TPO
surveys.
139.120.................... 139.120 Changed address to which applications No change--clarifies who
should be sent, added paragraph receives reports and
requiring applications to include assures availability of
information about the organization's personnel.
means of assuring the availability of
its personnel.
139.130.................... 139.130 For auditors, added ``licensed mariner'' No change--adds
to a list of types of relevant marine compliance flexibility.
experience, and added ISO 9001-2008 as
an option in addition to ISO 9001-2000.
139.160.................... 139.160 Removed paragraph saying that the Coast No change--adds
Guard may require a replacement of a compliance flexibility.
third-party auditor.
140.435.................... 140.435 Deleted requirements for certain vessels Removed costs of AEDs.
to carry automatic external
defibrillators and train crewmembers in
their use.
140.505 and 140.520........ 140.505 Eliminated Sec. 140.520 requirements Greatly reduced costs for
for maintaining personnel hazard keeping records on
exposure and medical records and crewmember health by
revised Sec. 140.505 requirement to limiting them to those
keep records of health and safety associated with
incidents, including any medical incidents, added costs
records associated with the incidents. for records of safety
incidents.
140.605.................... 140.605 Clarified requirements associated with Revised costs to include
stability letter are only applicable to alternative methods of
vessels that already have a stability compliance.
letter, added paragraph requiring all
owners or operators to maintain
watertight integrity and stability.
140.645.................... 140.645 Added paragraph accepting credentialed No change--adds
mariners as meeting the requirements of compliance flexibility.
this section.
140.915.................... 140.915 Added examinations and tests, and fire- Revised costs for TVR.
detection and fixed fire-extinguishing
systems to the list of items that must
be recorded in the TVR, and specified
requirements for items recorded
electronically.
141.305.................... 141.305 Changes to Table 141.305: Removed No change--improves
buoyant apparatus and life float readability and
references in cold water operation; referencing;
removed life float and inflatable substitution allowance
buoyant apparatus references in warm provides compliance
water operation; moved inflatable flexibility.
liferaft with SOLAS A pack to bottom of
both cold and warm water operation to
delineate increasing level of safety
hierarchy; and inserted the term
``rigid'' in front of buoyant apparatus
so as not to confuse with inflatable
buoyant apparatus. Added additional
substitution options for survival craft
in Sec. 141.305(d)(2)(ii)-(iv) based
on increasing level of safety hierarchy
of same.
141.330.................... 141.330 Removed reference to Table 141.305 and No change--adds
limitations on approval of survival compliance flexibility.
craft starting in 2015, added the
option of using a skiff for towing
vessels that only operate within 3
miles of shore, rephrased section.
141.340.................... 141.340 Replaced reference to 46 CFR 199.620(c) No change--adds
with a reference to several approval compliance flexibility.
series, specified and rephrased
requirements for lifejackets in TSMS.
141.360.................... 141.360 Replaced reference to 46 CFR 199.70 with No change--adds
a reference to several approval series, compliance flexibility.
specified and rephrased requirements
for lifebuoys in TSMS.
142.215.................... 142.215 Rephrased for clarity, added paragraph No change--adds
allowing approval by the Coast Guard, compliance flexibility.
OCMI, TPO, or a NRTL of new
installations of fire-extinguishing or
fire-detection equipment.
142.225.................... 142.225 Rephrased for clarity, added FM 6050 as No change--adds
an acceptable standard for storage compliance flexibility.
cabinet design.
143.200.................... 143.200 Delayed implementation of part 143 Removed certain costs for
requirements for existing vessels, existing vessels, delays
consolidated applicability and other costs.
grandfathering requirements from other
subparts into one section.
143.245.................... 143.230 Rephrased for clarity, added Added costs for alarms at
requirements for alarms at operating additional operating
stations, removed language describing stations.
possible exceptions.
143.420.................... 143.595 Renamed, deleted requirements for Removed costs for
propulsion engine fuel lines and existing vessels.
independent auxiliary steering systems.
144.315.................... 144.300, Added possible standards for an existing Revised costs to include
144.315 vessel without a stability document to alternative methods of
meet. compliance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 5--Changes in Regulatory Analysis From NPRM to Final Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Element of regulatory analysis Reason changed Explanation of change
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Credentialing requirements Public comment... Added cost estimate
under part 15. for requirements in
part 15 that are
triggered when
vessel becomes
``inspected''. 10-
year undiscounted
estimated at $2.8
million.
[[Page 40085]]
Parts 141 Lifesaving and 142 Public comment... Added cost estimates
Fire Protection. for requirements in
Parts. 10-year
undiscounted
estimated at $27.8
million for Part 141
and $7.0 million for
Part 142.
Part 136 Certification and Policy change.... Added cost estimates
Part 137 Vessel Compliance. for appeals.
Part 140 Operations........... Public comment... Added costs for
certain operational
requirements,
including navigation
assessments.
Machinery and electrical Policy change.... Grandfathering of
systems equipment under part existing vessels or
143. vessels whose
construction began
before the effective
date of the final
rule for Sec. Sec.
143.555, 143.560,
143.565, 143.570,
143.575, 143.585,
143.605. 10-year
undiscounted
estimated cost is
$41.4 million in the
final rule and could
exceed $300 million
if not grandfathered
(see Alternative 3).
Construction and arrangement Policy change.... Grandfathering of
under part 144. existing vessels or
vessels whose
construction began
before the effective
date of the final
rule for Sec. Sec.
144.135 and
144.145(b). 10-year
undiscounted
estimated cost is
$5.4 million in the
final rule.
Affected population........... Update to reflect Reviewed current data
current fleet sources on towing
composition and vessel fleet and
more ownership and
comprehensive increased affected
data sources. population estimate
to 5,509 (from 5,208
in the NPRM).
Costs of equipment or Update to reflect Collected current
activities. current prices. price data or
updated prices used
in NPRM by CPI.
Public comment... Incorporated public
estimates for
drydock inspections
in the range of
costs. Added
estimate for lost
revenues during
certain activities.
Wages......................... Updated BLS data. Revised labor cost by
using May 2013 BLS
data.
Benefit valuation............. Updated value of Updated VSL and
a statistical injury valuation to
life (VSL) and reflect current
injuries values. guidance.
Accident analysis............. Updated data from Reflected most recent
recent years. 12 years of accident
history (2002 to
2013).
Impacts of Rule Requirements Public comment... Added assessment of
on Cost to Shippers. cost to shippers in
Appendix J.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Affected Population
We estimate that 1,086 owners and managing operators (companies)
would incur additional costs from this rulemaking. The rulemaking would
affect a total of 5,509 vessels owned and operated by these companies.
Our cost assessment includes existing and new vessels.
Costs
We estimated costs resulting from the addition of subchapter M and
costs in other subchapters that result from the inclusion of towing
vessels as inspected vessels, to industry and government. During the
initial phase-in period (years 1 and 2), we estimate the annual cost to
industry from subchapter M requirements of the rulemaking to range from
$15.8 million to $26.5 million (non-discounted). After the initial
phase-in, the annual costs to industry from subchapter M requirements
range from $19.2 million to $56.4 million (non-discounted). We estimate
the total present value cost to industry from subchapter M requirements
over the 10-year period of analysis is $227.7 million, discounted at 7
percent, and $286.8 million, discounted at 3 percent. Over the period
of analysis, we estimate the annualized costs to be $32.4 million at 7
percent and $33.6 million at 3 percent. Table 6 summarizes the costs of
this final rule to industry for subchapter M requirements.
Table 6--Summary of Subchapter M Costs to Industry
[$ Millions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discounted
Year Undiscounted -------------------------------
7% 3%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................................... $26.5 $24.8 $25.7
2............................................................... 15.8 13.8 14.9
3............................................................... 19.2 15.7 17.6
4............................................................... 22.6 17.2 20.1
5............................................................... 33.0 23.6 28.5
6............................................................... 35.7 23.8 29.9
7............................................................... 44.5 27.7 36.2
8............................................................... 56.4 32.8 44.5
9............................................................... 46.0 25.0 35.3
10.............................................................. 45.8 23.3 34.1
-----------------------------------------------
Total *..................................................... 345.6 227.7 286.8
Annualized...................................................... 32.4 33.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Values may not total due to rounding.
[[Page 40086]]
Additional costs to industry for requirements outside of subchapter
M will result from the triggering of certification for persons in
charge during oil transfer requirements by designating towing vessels
as ``inspected''. We estimate the total present value cost of the
industry non-subchapter M requirements over the 10-year period of
analysis to be $1.9 million, discounted at 7 percent, and $2.4 million,
discounted at 3 percent. Over the period of analysis, we estimate the
annualized industry costs for requirements outside of subchapter M to
be $0.3 million at 7 percent and 3 percent. Table 7 summarizes the
costs of this final rule to industry.
Table 7--Summary of Cost to Industry for Requirements Outside of Subchapter M
[$ Millions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discounted
Year Undiscounted -------------------------------
7% 3%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................................... $0.0 $0.0 $0.0
2............................................................... 0.0 0.0 0.0
3............................................................... 0.4 0.4 0.4
4............................................................... 0.4 0.3 0.4
5............................................................... 0.4 0.3 0.3
6............................................................... 0.4 0.3 0.3
7............................................................... 0.0 0.0 0.0
8............................................................... 0.4 0.3 0.3
9............................................................... 0.4 0.2 0.3
10.............................................................. 0.4 0.2 0.3
-----------------------------------------------
Total *..................................................... 2.8 1.9 2.4
Annualized...................................................... .............. 0.3 0.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Values may not total due to rounding
We estimate the total cost to industry over the 10-year period of
analysis to be $229.6 million, discounted at 7 percent, and $289.1
million, discounted at 3 percent. Over the period of analysis, we
estimate the annualized costs to industry to be $32.7 million at 7
percent and $33.9 million at 3 percent. Table 8 shows these estimates.
Table 8--Summary of Total Cost to Industry
[$ Millions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discounted
Year Undiscounted -------------------------------
7% 3%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................................... $26.5 $24.8 $25.7
2............................................................... 15.8 13.8 14.9
3............................................................... 19.7 16.1 18.0
4............................................................... 23.0 17.5 20.4
5............................................................... 33.4 23.8 28.8
6............................................................... 36.1 24.0 30.2
7............................................................... 44.5 27.7 36.2
8............................................................... 56.8 33.1 44.8
9............................................................... 46.4 25.3 35.6
10.............................................................. 46.2 23.5 34.4
-----------------------------------------------
Total *..................................................... 348.4 229.6 289.1
Annualized...................................................... .............. 32.7 33.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Values may not total due to rounding
We anticipate that the government will incur costs. For towing
vessels that choose to comply with annual Coast Guard inspections, the
government will incur costs to conduct those inspections. For other
vessels choosing the TSMS option to comply, the government will incur
costs to review applications for a TSMS, conduct random boardings and
compliance examinations, and oversee third parties.
Table 9A displays the full cost to the government. We estimate the
total present value full cost to government over the 10-year period of
analysis to be $85.6 million discounted at 7 percent and $110.6 million
discounted at 3 percent. Annualized full costs to government are about
$12.2 million at 7 percent and $13.0 million at 3 percent discount
rates.
[[Page 40087]]
Table 9A--Summary of Full Cost to Government
[$ Millions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discounted
Year Undiscounted -------------------------------
7% 3%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................................... $0.1 $0.1 $0.1
2............................................................... 0.1 0.1 0.1
3............................................................... 9.5 7.7 8.7
4............................................................... 12.5 9.5 11.1
5............................................................... 15.4 11.0 13.3
6............................................................... 17.2 11.4 14.4
7............................................................... 20.7 12.9 16.8
8............................................................... 20.5 11.9 16.1
9............................................................... 20.0 10.9 15.3
10.............................................................. 19.7 10.0 14.7
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 135.6 85.6 110.6
Annualized...................................................... .............. 12.2 13.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The user fee paid by towing vessel owners and operators for
obtaining the COI is a transfer from industry to the government. To
avoid double-counting of costs, we account for this transfer by
subtracting the amount of the user fee to be collected from the
government costs to calculate government costs net of the transfer.
Table 9B shows the amount of the user fees to be collected over the 10-
year analysis period.
Table 9B--Transfer: Undiscounted User Fees to be Collected by the
Government in Part 136 by Year
[$ million]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total annual
Total number user fees
Year of user fees transferred
collected to govt. * ($
million)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1....................................... 0 $0.000
2....................................... 0 0.000
3....................................... 1,604 1.652
4....................................... 3,150 3.245
5....................................... 4,352 4.483
6....................................... 5,509 5.674
7....................................... 5,509 5.674
8....................................... 5,509 5.674
9....................................... 5,509 5.674
10...................................... 5,509 5.674
Total............................... .............. 37.751
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The total annual user fees are calculated by multiplying the total
number of user fees collected by the user fee, $1,030.
We estimate the total present value cost to government net of the
transfer via user fee over the 10-year period of analysis to be $61.6
million discounted at 7 percent and $79.5 million discounted at 3
percent. Annualized net government costs are about $8.8 million at 7
percent and $9.3 million at 3 percent discount rates. Table 9C
summarizes the net costs of this rule to government after deducting the
user fee transfer.
Table 9C--Summary of Government Cost Net of Transfer Payment
[$ Millions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discounted
Year Undiscounted -------------------------------
7% 3%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................................... $0.1 $0.1 $0.1
2............................................................... 0.1 0.1 0.1
3............................................................... 7.8 6.3 7.1
4............................................................... 9.2 7.0 8.2
5............................................................... 10.9 7.8 9.4
6............................................................... 11.4 7.6 9.6
7............................................................... 14.9 9.3 12.1
8............................................................... 14.7 8.6 11.6
9............................................................... 14.2 7.7 10.9
10.............................................................. 14.0 7.1 10.4
-----------------------------------------------
[[Page 40088]]
Total *..................................................... 97.3 61.6 79.5
Annualized...................................................... .............. 8.8 9.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Values may not total due to rounding
We estimate the combined total 10-year present value cost of the
rulemaking to industry and government is $291.2 million discounted at 7
percent, and $368.6 million discounted at 3 percent. The annualized
costs are $41.5 million at 7 percent and $43.2 million at 3 percent.
Table 10 summarizes the total combined costs of this rule.
Table 10--Summary of Total Cost (Subchapter M and Non-Subchapter M Industry Costs, Net Government Costs)
[$ Millions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discounted
Year Undiscounted -------------------------------
7% 3%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................................... $26.6 $24.9 $25.8
2............................................................... 15.9 13.8 14.9
3............................................................... 27.5 22.4 25.1
4............................................................... 32.2 24.5 28.6
5............................................................... 44.3 31.6 38.2
6............................................................... 47.5 31.7 39.8
7............................................................... 59.5 37.0 48.4
8............................................................... 71.5 41.6 56.4
9............................................................... 60.6 33.0 46.5
10.............................................................. 60.2 30.6 44.8
Total *..................................................... 445.8 291.2 368.6
Annualized...................................................... .............. 41.5 43.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Values may not total due to rounding
Table 11 summarizes the total combined costs of this rule by part.
Table 11--Summary of Total Annualized Cost by Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized costs
Part (7%, millions)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Costs to Industry
136: Certification.................................. $3.4
137: Compliance..................................... 10.8
138: Towing Safety Management System................ 2.0
139: Third-Party Organizations...................... 0.04
140: Operations..................................... 7.3
141: Lifesaving..................................... 3.2
142: Firefighting................................... 0.8
143: Mechanical and Electrical...................... 4.0
144: Construction and Arrangement................... 0.6
-----------------
Total Subchapter M Costs *.......................... 32.4
Non-Subchapter M Costs.............................. 0.3
Total to Industry *................................. 32.7
Net Government Costs................................ 8.8
Total Rule Cost *................................... 41.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Values may not total due to rounding
The total, 10-year undiscounted costs of statutory mandate
requirements are as follows:
$38.1 million for the annual vessel inspection fees under
46 CFR 2.10-101, Table 2.10-101 for vessels requiring a certification
of inspection.
$2.8 million for credentialing requirements outside of
subchapter M that are triggered when a vessel becomes ``inspected''.
Economic Impacts of Towing Vessel Casualties
Towing vessel casualties are incidents (i.e., accidents) that
involve the towing vessel and possibly other vessels such as barges,
other commercial vessels, and recreational vessels. Towing vessel
accidents can cause a variety of negative economic impacts, including
loss of life, injuries, property damage, delays on transportation
infrastructure, and damage to the environment.
Based on Coast Guard Marine Information for Safety and Law
Enforcement (MISLE) data for the recent period of 2002-2013, towing
vessel accidents are associated with 18 fatalities per year. Towing
vessel accidents also result in an average of 37 reportable injuries
per year (for the period of 2002-2013). Table 12 summarizes some of the
negative impacts resulting from towing vessel accidents.
[[Page 40089]]
Table 12--Negative Impacts From Towing Vessel Accidents
[2002-2013]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average
monetary
Impact Total effects Total monetary Average per damage per
damages (in millions) year year (in
millions)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fatalities (See Note 1)........... 217.................. $1,974.700........... 18 $164.558
Injuries.......................... 443.................. $300.145............. 37 25.012
Property Damage (See Note 2)...... 603 incidents with $600.055............. 50 50.005
property damage.
Gallons of Oil Spilled............ 5,192,937 gallons of $408.251 (See Note 3) 432,745 34.021
oil spilled.
------------------------------------------------------
Total Damage.................. ..................... $3,283.151........... .............. 273.596
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: (1) Fatality values are based on a $9.1 million value of a statistical life referenced in Guidance on
Treatment of the Economic Value of a Statistical Life in U.S. Department of Transportation Analyses, US DOT,
2013, available at https://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.dev/files/docs/VSL%20Guidance%202013.pdf.
(2) Property damage includes property and cargo damages as reported in MISLE.
(3) Oil spilled damages are based on a $254 damage per gallon of oil spilled as indicated by Inspection of
Towing Vessels, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Preliminary Regulatory Analysis and Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis, USCG-2006-24412, July 2011, available at https://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=USCG-2006-24412-0002 adjusted for actual costs for certain high volume gallons of oil
spilled gallons of oil spilled spills reported to the National Pollution Funds Center.
Benefits of the Towing Vessel Final Rule
The Coast Guard developed the requirements in the rule by
researching both the human factors and equipment failures that
contribute to the risk of towing vessel accidents. We believe that the
rule would comprehensively address a wide range of risks of towing
vessel accidents and supports the main goal of improving safety in the
towing industry. The primary benefit of the final rule is an increase
in vessel safety and a resulting decrease in the risk of towing vessel
accidents and their consequences.
Based on Coast Guard investigation findings for towing vessel
accident cases from 2002-2013, we estimate that the final rule would
lead to significant reductions in fatalities, injuries, property
damaged, and oil spilled. These improvements in safety are expected to
occur over a 10-year period as the various provisions of the final rule
are phased-in. Accounting for this phase-in of requirements and
resulting benefits, we estimate total 10-year discounted benefits at
$325.6 million discounted at 7 percent and $403.8 million discounted at
3 percent. Over the same period of analysis, we estimate annualized
benefits of the final rule to be $46.4 million at a 7 percent discount
rate and about $47.3 million at a 3 percent discount rate,
respectively. Table 13 displays the monetized benefits of this final
rule associated with reducing fatalities, injuries, property damage,
and oil spilled, resulting from towing vessel accidents.
Table 13--Total Benefits
[$ Millions] *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total
-----------------------------------------------
Year Discounted benefits
Undiscounted -------------------------------
benefits 7% 3%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................................... $26.2 $24.5 $25.4
2............................................................... 26.2 22.9 24.7
3............................................................... 50.8 41.4 46.5
4............................................................... 52.0 39.7 46.2
5............................................................... 53.2 37.9 45.9
6............................................................... 54.4 36.3 45.6
7............................................................... 54.4 33.9 44.3
8............................................................... 54.4 31.7 43.0
9............................................................... 54.4 29.6 41.7
10.............................................................. 54.4 27.7 40.5
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 480.6 325.6 403.8
Annualized...................................................... .............. 46.4 47.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Values may not total due to rounding.
[[Page 40090]]
Table 14 displays the annualized benefits broken out by Part. Part
140 accounts for the largest share of the benefits at $17.1 million
annualized at a 7 percent discount rate.
Table 14--Total Annualized Benefits by Part
[$ millions] *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized
quantified
Part benefits
---------------
7%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
136-138................................................. $3.1
139..................................................... 1.1
140..................................................... 17.1
141..................................................... 4.4
142..................................................... 1.2
143..................................................... 11.1
144..................................................... 8.3
---------------
Total Rule Benefits................................. 46.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Values may not total due to rounding.
Unquantified Benefits
These estimates do not include the value of benefits that we have
not quantified, including preventing delays and congestion due to
towing vessel accidents. We are unable to monetize the value of
preventing other consequences of towing vessel accidents, including
delays and congestion, due to a lack of data and information. However,
as discussed in the Regulatory Analysis available in the docket, the
potential value of other benefits could be substantial if towing vessel
accidents cause long waterway, bridge, or road closures. For large
accidents that result in long delays, the economic consequences may
include the following:
Productivity losses and operating costs for stalled barge
and other traffic;
Delays in the acquisition of production inputs that can
impact timely operation of manufacturing or other processes;
Blockages of U.S. exports that can result in decreased
revenue from importing foreign companies;
Loss of quality for industries dealing with time sensitive
products or products with a limited shelf life, such as commercial
fishing seafood processors, seafood dealers, or other food processors
and manufacturers; and
Reduced recreational opportunities, resulting in social
welfare losses.
To estimate the amount of delay caused by towing vessel incidents,
we examined the 20 most severe recorded towing vessel incidents from
MISLE and sample cases for these other consequences and quantified
their effects. Of the 20 incidents we were able to use archived journal
sources and Coast Guard incident reports to estimate number of vessels
subject to a delay and total hours of delay for 13 incidents. Based on
our analysis detailed in the Regulatory Analysis, these 13 incidents
resulted in 28,883 vessel hours of delay. If we apply a low end
estimate of the costs to operate a towing vessel per hour, the delay
costs for these 13 incidents at least exceeded $10 million. However, we
do not have sufficient information to scale up these examples to a
nationwide estimate.
In addition, the evaluation of potential benefits from reducing the
risk of accidents is dependent upon the amount of information and
findings in the report of the incident found in MISLE. The benefit
estimates do not include accidents for which there was a lack of
detailed information in the case report to make a risk reduction
determination, resulting in an underestimation of benefits. Lack of
data in the cases of the low and medium severity incidents, implies
that our benefits are underestimated.
Comparison of Costs to Benefits
The estimate for the total costs of the rule is $41.5 million
(annualized at a 7 percent discount rate). The estimate for monetized
benefits is $46.4 million (annualized at a 7 percent discount rate),
based on the mitigation of risks from towing vessel accidents in terms
of lives lost, injuries, oil spilled, and property damage. Subtracting
the monetized costs from the monetized benefits yields a net benefit of
$4.9 million. We also identified, but did not monetize, other benefits
from reducing the risk of accidents that have secondary consequences of
delays and congestions on waterways, highways, and railroads.
As shown in Table 15 below, by part, the operational requirements
in part 140 have the highest net benefits at $9.8 million. Parts 139
and 141 through 144 also have positive net benefits. Parts 136 through
138 have negative net benefits of -$13.2 million. Parts 136 through 138
contain the requirements for inspection, obtaining COIs, and TSMSs.
These activities facilitate the enforcement of the requirements in the
other parts, so it is difficult to separate benefits solely for the
activities in Parts 136 through 138.
Table 15--Comparison of Benefits and Costs by Part Annualized, 7 Percent
[$ millions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part Description Costs Benefits Net benefits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Costs to Industry
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
136-138............................ Certification, Inspection, $16.3 $3.1 ($13.2)
TSMS.
139................................ TPOs....................... 0.04 1.1 1.1
140................................ Operations................. 7.3 17.1 9.8
141................................ Lifesaving................. 3.2 4.4 1.2
142................................ Fire Prevention............ 0.8 1.2 0.4
143................................ Mechanical and Electrical.. 4.0 11.1 7.1
144................................ Construction and 0.6 8.3 7.7
Arrangements.
Non-subchapter M Costs............. ........................... 0.3 * NQ * NQ
Government Cost.................... ........................... 8.8 * NQ * NQ
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Combined Cost of Final ........................... 41.5 46.4 4.9
Rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* NQ = Not quantified
Totals may not add due to rounding.
Overall, the regulatory analysis indicates that the preferred
alternative provides owners and managing operators of towing vessels
the ability to customize compliance to their individual business
models, move the industry into inspected status, and improve safety.
[[Page 40091]]
Alternatives
At all stages of this rulemaking, including the development of the
NPRM, review of public comments, and the preparation of this final
rule, we considered numerous alternatives to the rule requirements.
During this process, we weighed the burden posed by a requirement or
group of requirements against baseline risk and potential risk
reduction with the goal of improving safety of crew and public, and
enhancing environmental protection, while minimizing the cost burden on
industry and government. We have quantified the costs and benefits for
three alternatives that are illustrative of the types and range of the
many alternatives that considered throughout the rulemaking process.
The alternatives explored include the following:
Alternative 1: Limits the regulatory requirements to only
the minimum required to meet the statutory requirements of inspecting
towing vessels. Parts 136 to 139 are retained, related to conducting
inspections, issuing COIs, using TSMS's and overseeing third parties.
All operational, fire and safety, equipment and design requirements are
removed.
Alternative 2: Delays the operational requirements (Part
140) from becoming effective in Year 3 of the rule (after the 2-year
implementation period) to after the first round of initial inspections
and issuance of COIs is complete (Year 6).
Alternative 3: Does not ``grandfather'' existing vessels
for certain requirements in part 143 (i.e., these requirements would
apply to both new and existing vessels).
Alternatives 1-3 have net costs, compared to net benefits under the
preferred alternative. A summary of the costs and benefits of the
alternatives are presented in Table 16.
Table 16--Summary of Alternatives
[$ millions, 7% discount rate]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized Annualized
Alternative Summary cost benefits Net benefits or net costs *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Preferred Alternative: Final rule........ Full implementation of parts 136-144. $41.5 $46.4 $4.9 net benefits.
Alternative 1: Parts 136-139: Inspection/ Full implementation of parts 136-139. $25.4 $4.2 ($21.2) net costs.
TSMS only. Removes all other requirements.
Alternative 2: Delayed Implementation of Full implementation of parts 136-139, $38.2 $21.1 ($17.1) net costs.
part 140. parts 141-144. Delayed
implementation of part 140.
Alternative 3: No grandfathering of Full implementation of parts 136-142. $82.3 $55.9 ($26.5) net costs.
certain equipment and design No grandfathering of certain
requirements in part 143. requirements in Part 143.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Net benefits do not include unquantified congestion and delay benefits.
Totals may not add due to rounding.
The RA available in the docket includes an analysis of the costs of
this rulemaking by requirement and provides an assessment of potential
monetized, quantified and non-quantified benefits of this rulemaking.
The RA also contains details and analysis of other alternatives
considered for this rulemaking.
B. Small Entities
Overview of the Final Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-354)(RFA) establishes
``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor,
consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable statutes,
to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale of the
businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to
regulation. To achieve this principle, agencies are required to solicit
and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the rationale
for their actions to assure that such proposals are given serious
consideration.''
The RFA and Executive Order 13272 require a review of proposed and
final rules to assess their impacts on small entities. An agency must
prepare an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) unless it
determines and certifies that a rule, if promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
During the NPRM stage, the Coast Guard published an IRFA to aid the
public in commenting on the potential small entity impacts of the
provisions in the NPRM. All interested parties were invited to submit
data and information regarding the potential economic impact that would
result from adoption of the proposals in the NPRM.
When an agency promulgates a final rule under 5 U.S.C. 553, after
being required by that section or any other law to publish a general
NPRM, or promulgates a final interpretative rule involving the internal
revenue laws of the United States as described in 5 U.S.C. 603(a), the
agency must prepare a final regulatory flexibility assessment (FRFA) or
have the head of the agency certify pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that
the rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The RFA also requires an
agency to conduct a FRFA unless it determines and certifies that a rule
is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
The Coast Guard did not certify that the final rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
We received comments and data from several commenters on the IRFA, and
that information was considered for the FRFA. The RFA prescribes the
content of the FRFA in section 604(a), which we discuss below.
In accordance with the RFA (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Coast Guard
prepared the FRFA in the Regulatory Analysis document that examines the
impacts of the final rule on small entities (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.). A
small entity may be:
A small independent business, defined as any independently
owned and operated business not dominant in its field that qualifies as
a small business per the Small Business Act (5 U.S.C. 632);
A small not-for-profit organization; and;
A small governmental jurisdiction (locality with fewer
than 50,000 people).
This FRFA addresses the following:
(1) A statement of the need for, and objectives of, the rule;
(2) A statement of the significant issues raised by the public
comments in response to the IRFA, a statement of the assessment of the
agency of such issues, and a statement of any changes made in
[[Page 40092]]
the proposed rule as a result of such comments;
(3) The response of the agency to any comments filed by the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA) in
response to the proposed rule, and a detailed statement of any change
made to the proposed rule in the final rule as a result of the
comments;
(4) A description of and an estimate of the number of small
entities to which the rule will apply or an explanation of why no such
estimate is available;
(5) A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping and
other compliance requirements of the rule, including an estimate of the
classes of small entities which will be subject to the requirement and
the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report
or record;
(6) A description of the steps the agency has taken to minimize the
significant economic impact on small entities consistent with the
stated objectives of applicable statutes, including a statement of the
factual, policy, and legal reasons for selecting the alternative
adopted in the final rule and why each one of the other significant
alternatives to the rule considered by the agency which affect the
impact on small entities was rejected.
Below is a discussion of the FRFA for each of these six elements:
(1) A statement of the need for, and objectives of, the rule
The need for Federal regulatory action is due to the risk of
potential accidents caused by towing vessels on the nation's maritime
system. The consequences of towing vessel accidents can be severe,
including fatalities; injuries; damage to property, infrastructure and
the environment; and closure of transportation assets and subsequent
delays. There is also a public demand for improvements in the
management of the nation's waterways.
The casualties resulting from towing vessel accidents are examples
of negative externalities that are relevant to this final rule. The
cost of a higher safety standard is borne by the towing vessel owner or
operator, while the cost of an accident could be distributed across
various entities, including the vessel owner or operator, crew, other
vessel owners or operators, federal, state, and local public service
providers, businesses, and private citizens. The material failure of
the private market in reaching the socially optimal outcome increases
the risk to the public. An uncompensated increase in risk currently
exists due to inconsistent safety practices in the marine towing
industry. Regulatory action is required to take steps to reduce risk
industry-wide and thereby obtain the socially optimal outcome.
This final rule is authorized and made necessary by the 2004 Act,
which made towing vessels subject to inspection. Further, the 2010 Act
authorized the Secretary to issue a rule containing towing safety
management system provisions promulgated under 46 U.S.C. 3306(j).
The objective of this regulatory action is to enhance the safe
operations of towing vessels on our nation's waterways. The final rule
seeks to fulfill this objective by including towing vessels on the list
of vessels that Coast Guard must inspect, improving the working
environment of towing vessel crews, and placing responsibility for the
safe operation of towing vessels on the owners or operators of the
vessels. The requirements of the final rule are designed to encourage
companies to engage at every level to improve safe operations,
maintenance and design and adhere to prescribed safety standards.
(2) A statement of the significant issues raised by the public
comments in response to the initial regulatory flexibility analysis, a
statement of the assessment of the agency of such issues, and a
statement of any changes made in the proposed rule as a result of such
comments
On August 11, 2011, the Coast Guard published an NPRM titled
``Inspection of Towing Vessels'' in the Federal Register (76 FR 49976).
The Coast Guard then held four public meetings, one each in Newport
News, VA; New Orleans, LA; St. Louis, MO; and Seattle, WA. We received
and considered a combined total of more than 3,000 comments, from more
than 265 written submissions and oral statements from 105 persons at
public meetings, in developing this final rule. We summarized these
comments in the ``Discussion of Comments and Changes'' section of the
preamble for the final rule.
We received several comments from small business owners and
operators on the economic impact of subchapter M regulations. Some
commenters were opposed to new regulations and did not provide specific
information or data on how they will be impacted by its requirements.
Many other commenters requested either exemption or grandfathering from
all or some of these regulations. These commenters wanted to completely
avoid or mitigate the impact of the regulations so they could continue
to serve the towing vessel industry. Below is a discussion of comments
received on small business impacts.
Some commenters felt that subchapter M requirements would hurt
small business owners and their employees, and could put many small
entities out of business. However, they did not provide specific data
on how much of a burden the requirements might be on their operational
costs. The most specific comment received noted that recordkeeping
proposals alone would require him to hire one or more new full time
workers. Some other commenters pointed to the overall costs of
subchapter M regulations that were previously put in a range of
$100,000 to $250,000, per vessel, and potentially several million
dollars per company for business entities that owned multiple towing
vessels.
Several other commenters, similar to the previous group of
commenters also expressed concern that their company would not be able
to pay for these requirements, and therefore, either be forced out of
business or be acquired by larger entities in the towing vessel
industry. Due to these costly subchapter M regulations one commenter
argued that lenders would delay lending and review existing ship
mortgages to reassess their collateral positions. This commenter noted
that this is because many small towing vessel owners and operators
could not afford to comply with the requirements of the regulations.
Another commenter stated that his company would lose the ability to
borrow against their boats if they can't comply with the proposed
regulations. One commenter estimated that no less than 20 percent of
the aggregate U.S. towing fleet would be put out of service, if the
final rule goes into effect as written in the NPRM.
The Coast Guard appreciates these comments on the economic impact
of the final rule on small entities. Cognizant of regulatory impacts on
small entities, the Coast Guard sought to minimize these impacts and
has structured the final rule with this end in mind. The Coast Guard's
efforts to minimize the cost impacts on small entities in the final
rule include the following.
Inspection compliance options: The Coast Guard has
retained from the proposed rule flexibility in the method for complying
with inspections, either through Coast Guard inspections or a TSMS.
Some commenters suggested that a TSMS be mandatory for all towing
owners and operators and their vessels. However, the Coast Guard has
instead continued to allow either option, so that small entities can
chose the approach
[[Page 40093]]
that minimizes impacts on their particular business operations.
Automatic External Defibrillator (AED): The Coast Guard
has removed the requirement for towing vessels to have AEDs to reduce
the cost impact of the final rule. The savings resulting from this
change would be estimated at $2,500 per unit for each vessel.
Pilothouse alerters: The Coast Guard has retained the
requirement for pilothouse alerters, but has limited applicability to
larger towing vessels (in excess of 65 ft) with potentially higher risk
profiles. To reduce the burden of this requirement, the Coast Guard has
also allowed for a longer implementation period. For vessels less than
65 feet, the savings are the $5,410 cost of the alerter per vessel.
Equivalence of existing SMSs: For owners and operators
that choose the TSMS option, the Coast Guard has sought to minimize
additional effort to develop and implement a TSMS by establishing a
process for granting equivalency between an existing SMS and a TSMS.
Also, under the final rule, compliance with ISM is equivalent to a
TSMS. This change has the potential to minimize efforts for the 51
percent of the affected population covered by an existing SMS, but the
amount of the savings has not been quantified.
Removing certain requirements for existing vessels: In
response to comments received on the NPRM, the Coast Guard has removed
certain requirements in parts 143 and 144 for existing vessels to
decrease the cost. In the NPRM, the Coast Guard estimated that certain
requirements could cost in the range of $5,000 to $20,000 per
requirement per vessel, at a total of approximately $60,000 per vessel.
Commenters provided estimates at or exceeding $100,000 to $150,000 to
retrofit vessels to meet these requirements.
Stability documents: The Coast Guard has changed certain
requirements in part 144 to offer additional methods for compliance.
One commenter estimated that it could cost tens of thousands of dollars
to have a naval architect generate stability calculations under the
NPRM proposal. Section 144.300(b) now offers three options for an
existing vessel without a stability document to meet part 144
requirements: Findings based on the vessel's operation or a history of
satisfactory service, successful performance on operational tests, or a
satisfactory stability assessment. In particular, allowing for a
vessel's history of satisfactory service in the final rule provides a
lower cost method for compliance, which should serve to reduce the cost
on small entities.
(3) The response of the agency to any comments filed by the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration in response
to the proposed rule, and a detailed statement of any change made to
the proposed rule in the final rule as a result of the comments
The Coast Guard did not receive any comments from the SBA's Office
of Advocacy regarding the impact that the proposed rule would have on
small entities.
(4) A description of and an estimate of the number of small
entities to which the rule will apply or an explanation of why no such
estimate is available
The final rule will affect the owners and operators of certain
towing vessels. We constructed a towing vessel fleet database based on
data from the Waterborne Transportation Lines of the U.S., U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers; the Inland River Record, Waterways Journal; the
Coast Guard's MISLE system; Web sites and other public sources. From
this database we identified 5,509 vessels affected by this rule. There
are 1,096 companies that own or operate these vessels.
We used available operator name and address information to research
public and proprietary databases for entity type (subsidiary or parent
company), primary line of business, employee size, revenue, and other
information. We found 20 vessels owned by 17 governments and 6 owned by
non-profits. The remainder are business entities. For governmental
jurisdictions, we determined whether the jurisdiction had populations
of less than 50,000 as per the criteria in the RFA. For nonprofits, we
qualitatively evaluated whether the nonprofit was independently owned
and operated and is not dominant in its field. For the businesses, we
matched the owner information to the SBA's ``Table of Small Business
Size Standards'' to determine if an entity is small in its primary line
of business as classified in the North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS). Of the 20 vessels owned by 13 governments, 5 are owned
by small government jurisdictions (with fewer than 50,000 people). Of
the 6 vessels owned by 3 non-profits, all are owned by non-profits that
are independently operated and not dominant in their field.
There are a total of 26 NAICS-coded industries in the final rule's
affected population and we show below the 11 industries that appeared
most frequently in the affected population of owners or operators of
towing vessels.
Table 17--Eleven Most Frequent Industries Affected by the Final Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Count of Percent of
towing vessel total number
NAICS Code Description Small entity definition entities in of towing
each NAICS vessel
code entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
483211............... Inland Water Freight <500 Employees........... 71 31.8
Transportation.
488330............... Navigational Services To <$38,500,000............. 48 21.5
Shipping.
483113............... Coastal and Great Lakes <500 Employees........... 42 18.8
Freight Transportation.
238910............... Site Preparation Contractors.. <$14,000,000............. 13 5.8
483111............... Deep Sea Freight <500 Employees........... 10 4.5
Transportation.
213112............... Support Activities For Oil & <$35,500,000............. 5 2.2
Gas Operations.
237310............... Highway Street & Bridge <$33,500,000............. 4 1.8
Construction.
336611............... Ship Building & Repairing..... <1,000 Employees......... 4 1.8
423320............... Brick, Stone/Related <100 Employees........... 4 1.8
Construction Material
Merchant Wholesalers.
444190............... Other Building Material <$19,000,000............. 3 1.3
Dealers.
488320............... Marine Cargo Handling......... <$38,500,000............. 3 1.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 40094]]
We randomly selected a sample size of the 5,509 towing vessels to
reach the 95 percent confidence level. This sample produced a set of
223 businesses that own and operate the towing vessels. No governments
or non-profits were in our sample. Of the 223 businesses, there were 43
companies that exceeded SBA small business size standards, 113
companies considered small by the SBA, and 67 companies for which no
information was available. For the purposes of this analysis, we
consider all entities for which information was not available to be
small. Thus, there are 180 businesses in our sample we consider to be
small entities.
Cost Methodology--Analysis Periods, Variable Costs, and Fixed Costs
The cost incurred by a particular small entity over the 10-year
period of analysis varies based on the period of years in question. For
the purposes of this FRFA, we analyzed the cost impacts on small
entities for a representative year within two periods, as the phase-in
period of the initial two years and the full implementation period from
Years 3 through 10 have unique costs. During the phase-in period,
companies will face initial implementation costs, such as the TSMS and
conducting initial vessel surveys. Over the following full
implementation period, companies will face ongoing costs associated
with periodic surveys, vessels will operate under their COIs and
companies will face ongoing costs associated with obtaining and
renewing COIs, periodic surveys and audits, drydock inspections, and
Coast Guard inspections. The scheduling of all these activities are
dependent on a number of factors, such as the following:
A vessel operating under the TSMS option will be subject
to management and vessel audits and the operating company will need to
obtain a TSMS Certificate.
Many of the requirements are based on when a vessel
obtains its first COI, which lasts for five years. The rule states that
vessel owners/operators must spread out the initial COI over two-to-
four years, depending on the size of the fleet.
A vessel operating in salt water must have two drydock
inspections in every 5-year period, while one operating in fresh water
only needs one.
We anticipate that the entities will manage the compliance
activities so that costs are efficiently managed. For example, an owner
with vessels operating under the TSMS options having a fleet of vessels
in the upper Mississippi River may want to have the Coast Guard inspect
all vessels at one time during the winter when that stretch of the
River is closed and the vessels are idle. As a counter example, and
entity with a fleet in constant operation may want to spread the Coast
Guard inspections over the five-year period to minimize disruptions to
service. Thus, there is no one year in the full implementation period
that contains all the cost elements for all vessels. To provide a
single reference year we constructed a hypothetical ``heavy load'' year
that contains all the requirements for a vessel and an entity. This
year includes a COI renewal for a TSMS vessel, the Coast Guard
inspection, and a drydock inspection and other costs that apply
throughout this period. As described below, the construct of the
``heavy load year'' enabled the comparison of the costs for one year to
revenue for one year.
To conduct the small entity revenue impact analysis we divided the
total annual costs of an entity for the two periods into these three
components: vessel annual variable costs, vessel annual fixed costs,
and unit annual entity costs. Vessel annual variable costs are those
that are dependent upon the characteristics or condition of the vessel.
Vessel annual fixed costs are those that apply to all vessels, such as
the requirement to post the COI. Unit annual entity costs are those
that accrue at the management level of the entity. The annual costs for
an entity are calculated for the phase-in and full implementation
periods using the following equations:
Equation 1: Vessel Annual Unit Cost = Vessel Annual Variable Cost +
Vessel Annual Fixed Cost
Equation 2: Total Annual Vessel Costs = Vessel Annual Unit Cost
(eq. 1) * number of vessels
Equation 3: Total Entity Costs = Total Annual Vessel Costs (eq. 2)
+ Unit Annual Entity Costs
Vessel annual fixed costs and unit annual entity costs are derived
for the phase-in and full-implementation periods from data in the cost
model from the regulatory analysis. The fixed costs for the phase-in
period are the same in both years. For the full-implementation period
we used the costs associated with the hypothetical ``heavy load'' year,
described above. Table 18 shows these costs for the two periods.
Table 18--Annual Vessel Fixed Costs and Unit Entity Costs for Phase-In
and Full-Implementation Periods
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual Annual
vessel entity
Period fixed unit
cost cost
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase-In.......................................... $11,480 $23,737
Full Implementation............................... 5,045 5,250
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the regulatory analysis, we used MISLE deficiency data to
estimate the number of vessels that would need to make changes to
comply with various system or equipment standards. This generated
population based estimates, but did not identify the specific vessels
that would incur these compliance costs.
To estimate vessel variable costs, we adopted the Monte Carlo
methodology used in the IRFA. We used the Monte Carlo as a tool to
resolve the uncertainties related to which vessels will need to comply
with which requirements, each with their own unit costs and affected
populations. The Monte Carlo model we developed accounts for the ranges
of unit costs and affected populations across the requirements by
taking as inputs the specific unit costs and affected populations for
each requirement. The output of the model is a distribution of total
variable costs.
The Monte Carlo model simulated a one-year variable costs for the
phase-in and full-implementation periods separately. The inputs are
from the cost estimates of each requirement: The affected population
recast as a percentage of the total vessel population, and the unit
costs. Each simulation was run 10,000 times to produce a distribution
of costs. For a point estimate of the vessel annual variable costs we
took the average value of each distribution, which yielded $4,787 for
the phase-in period and $9,866 for the full implementation period.
To summarize from the presentations above, the parameters for the
phase-in period are the following:
Vessel Annual Variable Cost = $4,787
Vessel Annual Fixed Cost = $11,480
Entity Annual UnitCost = $5,045.
Applying Equation 1 from above, Vessel Annual Unit Cost = $16,267
(Vessel Annual Variable Cost, $4,787, + Vessel Annual Fixed Cost,
$11,480).
The variable inputs are the number of vessels operated by each
entity, which is found in the Affected Population Database, and the
entity's revenue.
[[Page 40095]]
We developed an annual revenue impact analysis for the average
company in our sample. The average number of vessels per company in our
sample is 1.7, so the two-vessel example is representative of an
average company. We estimate this average two-vessel owning small
entity will incur an annual cost of $37,579 during the two-year phase-
in period of this rule. Consequently, the total two-year implementation
cost for the average small entity is estimated at $75,158. The average
annual revenue across the sample is $10,058,187. With these inputs we
derived an estimate of the annual revenue impact for the average entity
in the sample. The results of this analysis are shown as Example 1 in
Table 19. Examples 2 through 4 show the calculations for examples of
applying Equations 2 and 3 for three hypothetical companies, with one-,
three-, and four-vessel fleets, respectively.
Table 19--Examples of Annual Revenue Impact Calculations During the Phase-In Period for the Average-Size Fleet (2 Vessels) and Hypothetical Examples for
1-, 3-, and 4-Vessel Fleets
[Revenue for example 2 is sample average, others are hypothetical]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(C) Vessel (D) Vessel (E) Entity (F) Total (H) Annual
(A) Entity name (B) Fleet annual unit annual cost (B annual unit annual cost (D (G) Annual revenue
size cost * C) cost + E) revenue impact (F/G) %
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Example 1 (Average Entity).............. 2 $16,267 $32,534 $5,045 $37,579 $10,058,187 0.40
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypothetical Examples
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Example 2............................... 1 16,267 16,267 5,045 21,312 5,000,000 0.43
Example 3............................... 3 16,267 48,801 5,045 53,846 15,000,000 0.36
Example 4............................... 4 16,267 65,068 5,045 70,113 20,000,000 0.35
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the 92 businesses with revenue data, we calculated the total
costs for each small entity and a revenue impact as a percentage of
revenue. Table 21 presents the annual revenue impact on small entities
for the phase-in and full implementation periods.
Table 21--Percentage of Estimated Annual Revenue Impact on Affected Small Entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual impacts from phase-in Annual impacts from
------------------------------------------------- costs (average of Years 1-2) implementation costs
-------------------------------- (``heavy load'' year)
-------------------------------
Revenue impact range Number of Percent of Number of Percent of
entities entities entities entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0% <= 1%........................................ 60 65.2 44 47.8
1% <= 3%........................................ 19 20.7 27 29.3
3% <= 5%........................................ 2 2.2 8 8.7
5% <= 10%....................................... 5 5.4 2 2.2
Above 10%....................................... 6 6.5 11 12.0
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... 92 100.0 92 100.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the phase-in period, for the average cost per year, our
analysis indicates that nearly 65 percent of the small entities will
have an annual revenue impact of 1% or less. Approximately 28.3 percent
of the small entities will have an annual revenue impact of between 3
percent and 10 percent. The remaining 6.5 percent of the small entities
will have an annual revenue impact of over 10 percent.
After full implementation of inspections and COIs, we estimate that
47.8 percent of the small entities will have an annual revenue impact
of 1% or less. Approximately 40.2 percent of the small entities will
have an annual revenue impact of between 3 percent and 10 percent. The
remaining 12.0 percent of the small entities will have an annual
revenue impact of over 10 percent.
(5) A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping and
other compliance requirements of the rule, including an estimate of the
classes of small entities which will be subject to the requirement and
the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report
or record
Under the provisions of the final rule, 5,509 towing vessels owned
by 1,096 towing vessel companies will be required to conduct a variety
of reporting and recordkeeping activities, related to obtaining and
renewing a COI, which will involve compiling information, submission,
and third part review. Additionally, information will be collected at
the vessel and company level regarding safety, operations, drills,
record keeping, and general compliance. These requirements will be
added as a new collection of information with the OMB control number
1625-0117 with the title ``Towing Vessels--Title 46 CFR Subchapter M.
Please refer to Chapter 11, ``Paperwork Reduction Act'', the Regulatory
Analysis for further detail.
(6) A description of the steps the agency has taken to minimize the
significant economic impact on small entities consistent with the
stated objectives of applicable statutes,
[[Page 40096]]
including a statement of the factual, policy, and legal reasons for
selecting the alternative adopted in the final rule and why each one of
the other significant alternatives to the rule considered by the agency
which affect the impact on small entities was rejected
Prior to this rulemaking, the Coast Guard participated in the TSAC
meetings that helped formulate our proposals in the NPRM. Small
entities had the opportunity to participate in this Committee and the
Economic Analysis Working Group.
The Coast Guard has made a number of changes from the proposals in
the NPRM after consideration of public comments. A full discussion of
comments and Coast Guard responses is found in the ``Discussion of
Comments and Changes'' section above. In developing both the original
proposal and the final rule, the following are examples of the Coast
Guard's efforts to minimize the economic impact on small entities.
Inspection compliance options: The Coast Guard has retained from
the proposal the choice of method for complying with inspections,
either through Coast Guard inspections or a TSMS. Some commenters
suggested that a TSMS be mandatory for all towing owners and operators
and their vessels. However, the Coast Guard has instead continued to
allow either option, so that small entities can choose the approach
that minimizes impacts on their particular business operations.
AED: The Coast Guard has removed the requirement for towing vessels
to have AEDs to reduce the cost impact of the final rule.
Pilothouse alerters: The Coast Guard has retained the requirement
for pilothouse alerters, but has limited applicability to larger towing
vessels (in excess of 65 ft) with potentially higher risk profiles. To
reduce burden of this requirement the Coast Guard has also allowed for
a longer implementation period.
Equivalence of existing SMSs: For owners and operators that chose
the TSMS option, Coast Guard has sought to minimize effort to develop
and implement a TSMS by establishing a process for granting equivalency
between an existing SMS and a TSMS. Also, under the final rule,
compliance with ISM is equivalent to a TSMS.
Removing certain requirements for existing vessels: In response to
comments received on the NPRM, the Coast Guard has removed certain
requirements in parts 143 and 144 for existing vessels to decrease the
cost.
Stability documents: The Coast Guard has changed certain
requirements in part 144 to offer additional methods for compliance.
Section 144.300(b) now offers three options for an existing vessel
without a stability document to meet part 144 requirements: Findings
based on the vessel's operation or a history of satisfactory service,
successful performance on operational tests, or a satisfactory
stability assessment. In particular, allowing for a vessel's history of
satisfactory service in the final rule provides a lower cost method for
compliance, which should serve of compliance to reduce the cost on
small entities.
The Coast Guard discusses the full range of alternatives considered
in Section 6 of the RA. We monetized the impacts of three alternatives.
Table 13 above summarizes the costs, benefits and net benefits of the
alternatives considered and the preferred alternative adopted in the
final rule.
Alternative 1 estimates impacts of only implementing the inspection
requirements of the final rule, without the operational, lifesaving,
fire protection, machinery and electrical, and construction and
arrangement requirements. Although this approach reduces the cost
impacts of the final rule, the benefits fall by almost 85 percent. The
annualized net impact of the rule (benefits minus costs) falls from
$4.5 million in net benefits for the preferred alternative to a net
cost of $21.2 million. Requiring only the inspection requirements
without also increasing the standards in the other CFR parts fails to
meet the objective of improving towing vessel safety and decreasing the
risk of towing vessel accidents to a substantive degree. The Coast
Guard developed and chose the comprehensive approach that combines an
inspection regime with improved standards as it results in the greater
societal outcomes, as demonstrated by the net benefits.
Similarly, Alternative 2, which estimates the impact of delaying
implementation of the operational standards found in Part 140, also
results in lower annualized net impacts: $4.5 million net benefits for
the preferred alternative and $17.1 million net costs for Alternative
2. The Coast Guard chose not to delay implementation of the operational
standards in part 140 as it results in the greater societal outcomes,
as demonstrated by the net benefits.
Alternative 3 analyzes the impacts of not removing certain
requirements in parts 143 and 144 (as discussed above). Alternative 3
has a greater cost burden, including greater impact on small entities,
than the preferred alternative and results in net costs of $26.4
million. For these reasons, the Coast Guard has applied the certain
requirements in parts 143 and 144 to only new vessels and reduced the
burden on small entities.
We are interested in the potential impacts from this final rule on
small businesses and we request public comment on these potential
impacts.
C. Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this final rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. As
noted, we have prepared a Small Entities Guide for this rule and have
placed in it the docket for this rulemaking. If the final rule would
affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction
and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please consult LCDR Will Nabach, Project Manager, CG-OES-2,
Coast Guard, telephone 202-372-1386. 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 final rule would call for a collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). As defined
in 5 CFR 1320.3(c), ``Collection of Information'' comprises reporting,
recordkeeping, monitoring, posting, labeling, and other, similar
actions. The title and description of the information collections, a
description of those who must collect the information, and an estimate
of the total annual burden follow. The estimate covers the time for
reviewing instructions, searching existing sources of data, gathering
and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection.
Title: Towing Vessels--Title 46 CFR Subchapter M.
[[Page 40097]]
Summary of the Collection of Information: Owners and managing
operators of inspected towing vessels would be required to either
develop and maintain documentation for their safety management system
and arrange periodic audits and surveys through third-party
organizations, or to demonstrate compliance with the subchapter M to
Coast Guard inspectors. Additional documentation would be required to
obtain a Certificate of Inspection for each vessel, comply with crew
and vessel operational safety standards, vessel equipment and system
standards, procedures and schedules for routine tests and inspections
of towing vessels and their onboard equipment and systems. The new
requirements for third-party auditors and surveyors include obtaining
Coast Guard approval and renewing it periodically. The Coast Guard
would be burdened by reviewing required reports, conducting compliance
examinations of towing vessels and overseeing third-party auditors and
surveyors through approval and observation.
Need for Information: The information is necessary for the proper
administration and enforcement of the towing vessel inspection program.
Proposed use of Information: The Coast Guard would use this
information to document that towing vessels meet inspection
requirements of subchapter M.
Description of the Respondents: The respondents are the owners and
managing operators of towing vessels and third-party auditors and
surveyors that would be required to complete various forms, reports and
keep reports.
Number of Respondents: The 5,694 respondents are the owners and
operators of 5,509 affected towing vessels and 185 entities that employ
the third-party auditors and surveyors.
Frequency of Response: The average responses per year are
7,660,257.
Estimate of Total Annual Burden: The total annual burden is 181,669
hours.
As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3507(d)), we have submitted a copy of this rule to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for its review of the collection of
information.
You need not respond to a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid control number from OMB. Before the Coast
Guard could enforce the collection of information requirements in this
rule, OMB would need to approve the Coast Guard's request to collect
this information.
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 is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in E.O. 13132. Our
analysis is explained below.
It is well settled that States may not regulate in categories
reserved for regulation by the Coast Guard. It is also well settled
that all of the categories covered in 46 U.S.C. 3306, 3703, 7101, and
8101 (design, construction, alteration, repair, maintenance, operation,
equipping, personnel qualification, and manning of vessels), as well as
the reporting of casualties and any other category in which Congress
intended the Coast Guard to be the sole source of a vessel's
obligations, are within the field foreclosed from regulation by the
States. (See the decision of the Supreme Court in the consolidated
cases of United States v. Locke and Intertanko v. Locke, 529 U.S. 89,
120 S.Ct. 1135 (March 6, 2000)). This rule covers all of the foreclosed
categories, as it establishes regulations covering a new category of
inspected vessels, as mandated by Congress. Because the States are now
foreclosed from regulating towing vessels in these categories, the rule
is consistent with the principles of federalism and preemption
requirements in Executive Order 13132.
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538,
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
G. Taking of Private Property
This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under E.O. 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 E.O. 12988 (``Civil Justice Reform''), to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
I. Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under E.O. 13045 (``Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks''). This rule
is not an economically significant rule and would not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.
J. Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal implications under E.O. 13175
(``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments''),
because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
K. Energy Effects
We have analyzed this rule under E.O. 13211 (``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use''). We have determined that it is not a ``significant energy
action'' under E.O. 13211, because although it is a ``significant
regulatory action'' under E.O. 12866, it is not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy, and the Administrator of OMB's Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action.
L. Technical Standards and 1 CFR Part 51
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act, codified as a
note to 15 U.S.C. 272, directs agencies to use voluntary consensus
standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides
Congress, through OMB, with an explanation of why using these standards
would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g.,
specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test
methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices)
that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies.
This final rule uses the following voluntary consensus standards
from:
[[Page 40098]]
The American Boat and Yacht Council (ABYC)--
ABYC E-11 (2003), AC and DC Electrical Systems on Boats.
This standard covers the design, construction, and installation of
direct current (DC) electrical systems on boats and of alternating
current (AC) electrical systems on boats. ABYC H-2 (2000), Ventilation
of Boats Using Gasoline. This standard covers the design, construction,
and installation of ventilation systems of engine and fuel tank
compartments of boats using gasoline for mechanical power, propulsion,
or auxiliary generators. ABYC H-22 (2005), Electric Bilge Pump Systems.
This standard covers the design, construction, installation, operation,
and control of electric bilge pump systems on boats.
ABYC H-24 (2007), Gasoline Fuel Systems. This standard
covers the design, choice of materials for, construction, installation,
repair, and maintenance of permanently installed gasoline fuel systems
on boats.''
ABYC H-25 (2003), Portable Gasoline Fuel Systems. This
standard covers the design, construction and stowage of portable tanks
with related fuel lines and accessories comprising a portable gas fuel
system for boats.
ABYC H-32 (2004), Ventilation of Boats Using Diesel Fuel.
This standard covers the design, construction, and installation of
ventilation systems of boats using diesel fuel only for electrical
generation, mechanical power, and propulsion.
ABYC H-33 (2005), Diesel Fuel Systems. This standard
covers the design, choice of materials, construction, installation,
repair, and maintenance of permanently installed diesel fuel systems on
boats.
ABYC P-1 (2002), Installation of Exhaust Systems for
Propulsion and Auxiliary Engines. This standard covers the design,
installation and selection of materials for exhaust systems for marine
engines of boats.
ABYC P-4 (2004), Marine Inboard Engines and Transmissions.
This standard covers the design, construction, installation, and
selection of materials for inboard engines and transmissions on boats.
The American Bureau of Shipping (ABS)--
ABS Rules for Building and Classing Steel Vessels for
Service on Rivers and Intracoastal Waterways, 2007. These standards are
for barges, towboats, cargo vessels and passenger vessels in service on
major rivers and on connecting intracoastal waterways. They are
applicable to those features that are permanent in nature and can be
verified by plan review, calculation, physical survey or other
appropriate means.
ABS Rules for Building and Classing Steel Vessels Under 90
Meters (295 Feet) in Length, 2006. These standards are applicable to
self-propelled steel vessels under 90 meters (295 feet) in length
intended for unrestricted ocean service, except where specifically
mentioned otherwise.
The American Society for Quality (ASQ), Quality Press--
ANSI/ISO/ASQ Q9001-2000, American National Standard:
Quality management systems--Requirements. This standard specifies
requirements for an organization's quality management system.
FM Approvals--
FM 6050-1996, Approval Standard for Storage Cabinets
(Flammable and Combustible Liquids). This standard contains performance
and construction requirements for cabinets designed to provide safe and
secure storage for flammable and combustible liquids.
The International Maritime Organization (IMO)--
Resolution A.520(13), Code of Practice for the Evaluation,
Testing and Acceptance of Prototype Novel Life-saving Appliances and
Arrangements, November 17, 1983. This code prescribes the appliance and
arrangement criteria which should be taken into account and prototype
tests which should be carried out for the evaluation of novel designs
for international acceptance. Resolution A.658(16), Use and Fitting of
Retro-Reflective Materials on Life-saving Appliances, October 19, 1989.
This resolution details the requirements for use, fitting, and size/
type of retro-reflective materials on life-saving appliances.
Resolution A.688(17), Fire Test Procedures For
Ignitability of Bedding Components, 1991. This resolution details the
fire test procedures to determine the ignitability of bedding
components.
Resolution A.760(18), Symbols Related to Life-Saving
Appliances and Arrangements, November 4, 1993. This resolution details
the requirements for symbols related to life-saving appliances and
arrangements.
International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea
(SOLAS), 1974, as amended. This international convention is designed to
improve the safety of shipping.
The International Organization for Standardization (ISO)--
ISO 9001-2008(E), International Standard: Quality
management systems--Requirements, Fourth edition, dated November 15,
2008. This international standard details the requirements for quality
management systems.
ISO 14726-2008(E), International Standard: Ships and
marine technology-Identification colours for the content of piping
systems, First edition, dated May 1, 2008. This international standard
specifies main colors and additional colors for identifying piping
systems in accordance with the content or function on board ships and
marine structures.
The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)--
NFPA 10, Standard for Portable Fire Extinguishers, 2007
Edition, effective August 17, 2006. The provisions of this standard
apply to the selection, installation, inspection, maintenance, and
testing of portable extinguishing equipment.
NFPA 70, National Electrical Code (NEC), 2002 Edition,
effective August 2, 2001. The provisions of this standard apply to the
design, modification, construction, inspection, maintenance, and
testing of electrical systems/installations and equipment.
NFPA 302, Fire Protection Standard for Pleasure and
Commercial Motor Craft, 1998 Edition. This standard specifies
provisions for fire protection on pleasure and commercial motor craft.
NFPA 306, Standard for the Control of Gas Hazards on
Vessels, 2014 Edition, effective June 17, 2013. This standard describes
the conditions required before a space can be entered or work can be
started, continued, or started and continued on any vessel under
construction, alteration, or repair, or on any vessel awaiting
shipbreaking.
NFPA 750, Standard on Water Mist Fire Protection Systems,
2006 Edition, effective February 16, 2006. This standard contains the
minimum requirements for the design, installation, maintenance, and
testing of water mist fire
[[Page 40099]]
protection systems.
NFPA 1971, Standard on Protective Ensembles for Structural
Fire Fighting and Proximity Fire Fighting, 2007 Edition, effective
August 17, 2006. This standard specifies the minimum design,
performance, testing, and certification requirements for certain types
of fire fighting protective ensembles and ensemble elements that
include coats, trousers, coveralls, helmets, gloves, footwear, and
interface components.
The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)--
ANSI/SAE Z 26.1-1996, American National Standard for
Safety Glazing Materials for Glazing Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle
Equipment Operating on Land Highways--Safety Standard. This standard
provides specifications and methods of testing for safety glazing
material used for windshields, windows, and partitions of land and
marine vehicles and aircraft.
SAE J1475-Revised JUN96--Hydraulic Hose Fitting for Marine
Applications, revised June 1996. This standard covers general and
performance specifications for certain hydraulic hose fittings used in
conjunction with nonmetallic flexible hoses for marine applications.
SAE J1942-Revised APR2007--Hose and Hose Assemblies for
Marine Applications, revised April 2007. This standard covers specific
requirements for several styles of hose and/or hose assemblies in
systems on board commercial vessels inspected and certificated by the
U.S. Coast Guard.
UL (formerly Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.)--
UL 217, Standard for Safety for Single and Multiple
Station Smoke Alarms, Sixth Edition, dated August 25, 2006. Along with
other types of smoke alarms used in different settings, this standard
specifies requirements for smoke alarms intended for use in
recreational boats.
UL 1104, Standard for Safety for Marine Navigation Lights,
Second Edition, dated October 29, 1998. These requirements cover marine
navigation light fixtures intended for use in accordance with the
applicable U. S. Coast Guard regulations.
UL 1275, Standard for Safety for Flammable Liquid Storage
Cabinets, Third Edition, dated June 30, 2005. These requirements cover
cabinets intended to be used to provide an indoor storage area for
limited quantities of flammable and combustible liquids in containers
in compliance with specified standards.
Consistent with 1 CFR part 51 incorporation-by-reference
provisions, this material is reasonably available. Interested persons
have access to it through their normal course of business, may purchase
it from sources listed in 46 CFR 136.112, or may view a copy by the
means we have identified in the ADDRESSES section. Section 136.112 also
identifies the sections that reference these standards.
M. Environment
We have analyzed this final rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f, and have
concluded that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. A final environmental analysis checklist and categorical
exclusion determination supporting this determination are available in
the docket where indicated under the ADDRESSES section of this
preamble. This final rule involves regulations that are procedural;
regulations concerning the training of maritime personnel; regulations
concerning manning, documentation, inspection and equipping of vessels;
regulations concerning equipment approval and carriage requirements;
regulations concerning vessel operation safety standards; and
Congressionally mandated regulations designed to improve or protect the
environment. This action falls under section 2.B.2, figure 2-1,
paragraphs (34)(a), (c), (d), and (e) of the Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, and under section 6(a) and (b) of the ``Appendix to National
Environmental Policy Act: Coast Guard Procedures for Categorical
Exclusions, Notice of Final Agency Policy'' (67 FR 48243, July 23,
2002).
List of Subjects
46 CFR Part 1
Administrative practice and procedure, Organization and functions
(Government agencies), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
46 CFR Part 2
Marine safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels.
46 CFR Part 15
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seamen, Vessels.
46 CFR Part 136
Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Towing vessels.
46 CFR Part 137
Marine safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Towing
vessels.
46 CFR Part 138
Incorporation by reference, Marine safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Towing vessels.
46 CFR Part 139
Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Towing vessels.
46 CFR Part 140
Incorporation by reference, Marine safety, Occupational health and
safety, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Towing
vessels.
46 CFR Part 141
Incorporation by reference, Marine safety, Occupational health and
safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Towing vessels.
46 CFR Part 142
Fire prevention, Incorporation by reference, Marine safety,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Towing vessels.
46 CFR Part 143
Hazardous materials transportation, Incorporation by reference,
Marine safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Towing
vessels.
46 CFR Part 144
Cargo vessels, Incorporation by reference, Marine safety, Oil and
gas exploration, Passenger vessels, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Towing vessels.
46 CFR Part 199
Cargo vessels, Marine safety, Oil and gas exploration, Passenger
vessels, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
46 CFR parts 1, 2, 15, and 199 and adds 46 CFR subchapter M, consisting
of parts 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, and 144 as follows:
[[Page 40100]]
46 CFR CHAPTER I
PART 1--ORGANIZATION, GENERAL COURSE AND METHODS GOVERNING MARINE
SAFETY FUNCTIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 1 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552; 14 U.S.C. 633; 46 U.S.C. 7701; 46
U.S.C. Chapter 93; Secs. 101, 888, and 1512, Pub. L. 107-296, 116
Stat. 2135; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1;
Sec. 1.01-35 also issued under the authority of 44 U.S.C. 3507; and
Sec. 1.03-55 also issued under the authority of 46 U.S.C. 3306(j).
0
2. Add Sec. 1.03-55 to read as follows:
Sec. 1.03-55 Appeals from decisions or actions under subchapter M of
this chapter.
(a) Any person directly affected by a decision or action by a
classification society or a third-party organization performing a
survey under subchapter M of this chapter may, after requesting
reconsideration of the decision or action by the classification society
or third-party organization, make a formal appeal to the cognizant
OCMI.
(b) Any person directly affected by a decision or action by a
classification society or a third-party organization performing an
audit under subchapter M of this chapter may, after requesting
reconsideration of the decision or action by the classification society
or third-party organization, make a formal appeal to the District
Commander of the district in which the audit was performed.
(c) Any third-party organization or person from a third-party
organization directly affected by a decision or action of the Coast
Guard Towing Vessel National Center of Expertise (TVNCOE) may submit a
formal appeal to Commandant (CG-CVC) for appeals of decisions by the
TVNCOE related to subchapter M of this chapter.
(d) Any person directly affected by a decision or action by an OCMI
or District Commander may make a formal appeal pursuant to Sec. 1.03-
20 or Sec. 1.03-25, respectively.
PART 2--VESSEL INSPECTIONS
0
3. The authority citation for part 2 continues 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. 2103, 2110, 3306, 3703; E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3
CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277, sec. 1-105; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1(II)(77), (90), (92)(a), (92)(b).
0
4. Amend Sec. 2.01-7 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a) introductory text, before the word ``as'', add the
word ``either''; and remove the colon, and add, in its place, the words
``or, if the vessel is a towing vessel, as provided in paragraph (b) of
this section.'';
0
b. Redesignate paragraph (b) as paragraph (c);
0
c. Add new paragraph (b) and paragraph (c)(7) to newly redesignated
paragraph (c).
The addition reads as follows:
Sec. 2.01-7 Classes of vessels (including motorboats) examined or
inspected and certificated.
* * * * *
(b)(1) A U.S.-flag towing vessel is subject to inspection and
certifying regulations in subchapter M of this chapter except:
(i) A vessel less than 26 feet (7.92 meters) in length measured
from end to end over the deck (excluding the sheer), unless that vessel
is pushing, pulling, or hauling a barge that is carrying oil or
hazardous material in bulk;
(ii) A vessel engaged in one or more of the following:
(A) Assistance towing as defined in Sec. 136.110 of this chapter;
(B) Towing recreational vessels for salvage; or
(C) Transporting or assisting the navigation of recreational
vessels within and between marinas and marina facilities, within a
limited geographic area, as determined by the local Captain of the
Port;
(iii) A workboat operating exclusively within a worksite and
performing intermittent towing within the worksite;
(iv) A seagoing towing vessel of 300 gross tons or more subject to
the provisions of subchapter I of this chapter;
(v) A vessel inspected under other subchapters of this chapter that
may perform occasional towing;
(vi) A public vessel as defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101;
(vii) A vessel which has surrendered its Certificate of Inspection
and is laid up, dismantled, or otherwise out of service; and
(viii) A propulsion unit used for the purpose of propelling or
controlling the direction of a barge where the unit is controlled from
the barge, is not normally manned, and is not utilized as an
independent vessel.
(2) A towing vessel not subject to subchapter M of this chapter
should refer to table 2.01-7 of this section.
(c) * * *
(7) For towing vessels, see part 136 of subchapter M of this
chapter.
Sec. 2.10-25 [Amended]
0
5. In Sec. 2.10-25, in the definition of ``Sea-going towing vessel'',
after the second occurrence of the word ``alongside'', add the phrase
``, that has been issued a Certificate of Inspection under the
provisions of subchapter I of this chapter''.
PART 15--MANNING REQUIREMENTS
0
6. The authority citation for part 15 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 2101, 2103, 3306, 3703, 8101, 8102, 8103,
8104, 8105, 8301, 8304, 8502, 8503, 8701, 8702, 8901, 8902, 8903,
8904, 8905(b), 8906 and 9102; sec. 617, Pub. L. 111-281, 124 Stat.
2905; and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
Sec. 15.501 [Amended]
0
7. Amend Sec. 15.501(b) by removing the word ``Emergency'' and adding,
in its place, the lower case word ``emergency''.
0
8. Revise Sec. 15.505 to read as follows:
Sec. 15.505 Changes in the certificate of inspection.
All requests for changes in manning as indicated on the COI must be
sent to--
(a) The Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) who last issued
the COI; or
(b) The OCMI conducting the inspection, if the request is made in
conjunction with an inspection for certification.
Sec. 15.510 [Amended]
0
9. Amend Sec. 15.510 by removing the word ``therefrom''.
0
10. Add Sec. 15.535 to read as follows:
Sec. 15.535 Towing vessels.
(a) Applicability. Except as provided in this paragraph (a), the
requirements in this section apply to a towing vessel subject to
subchapter M of this chapter. Vessels subject to this section must also
meet the requirements in Sec. 15.515(c). A towing vessel at least 8
meters (26 feet) in length, measured from end to end over the deck
(excluding sheer), that is not subject to subchapter M must meet the
requirements in paragraph (b) of this section if it is--
(1) A seagoing towing vessel of 300 gross tons or more subject to
the provisions of subchapter I of this chapter;
(2) A vessel inspected under other subchapters of this chapter that
may perform occasional towing; or
(3) A public vessel as defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101.
(b) Towing vessels 8 meters or more in length. Every towing vessel
of at least 8 meters (26 feet) in length, measured from end to end over
the deck (excluding sheer), must be under the direction and control of
a person
[[Page 40101]]
holding a MMC endorsed as master or mate (pilot) of towing vessels or
as master or mate of vessels of greater than 200 gross register tons,
holding a completed Towing Officer Assessment Record signed by a
designated examiner indicating that the officer is proficient in the
operation of towing vessels upon the appropriate route.
(c) Towing Vessels of Any Length on the Lower Mississippi River. In
addition to the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section, any
towing vessel operating in the pilotage waters of the Lower Mississippi
River must be under the control of an officer who holds either a first-
class pilot's endorsement for that route, or MMC officer endorsement
for the Western Rivers, or who meets the requirements of either
paragraph (c)(1) or (2) of this section, as applicable.
(1) Moving tank or hazardous material barges. To operate a towing
vessel with tank barges or a tow of barges carrying hazardous material
regulated under subchapter N or O of this chapter, the officer in
charge of the towing vessel must have completed at least 12 round trips
over this route as an observer, with at least 3 of those trips during
hours of darkness, and must provide evidence to the Coast Guard upon
request that at least 1 of the 12 round trips occurred within the last
5 years.
(2) Moving uninspected barges or no barges. To operate a towing
vessel without barges or a tow of uninspected barges, the officer in
charge of the towing vessel must have completed at least 4 round trips
over this route as an observer, with at least 1 of those trips during
hours of darkness, and must provide evidence to the Coast Guard upon
request that at least 1 of the 4 round trips occurred within the last 5
years.
0
11. Amend Sec. 15.610 as follows:
0
a. Revise the section heading;
0
b. Redesignate paragraphs (a) and (b) as paragraphs (b) and (c),
respectively;
0
c. Add new paragraph (a); and
0
d. In newly redesignated paragraph (c):
0
i. Remove the reference ``paragraph (a)'' wherever it appears, and add,
in each place, the reference ``paragraph (b)'';
0
ii. Remove the reference ``paragraphs (b)(1) or (b)(2)'' and add, in
its place, the reference ``paragraph (c)(1) or (2)''; and
0
iii. In paragraphs (c)(1) and (2), add the words ``to the Coast Guard''
immediately after the word ``evidence''.
The revision and additions read as follows:
Sec. 15.610 Master and mate (pilot) of uninspected towing vessels.
(a) The requirements in this section apply to towing vessels,
except for--
(1) Towing vessels that are subject to subchapter M in accordance
with Sec. 136.105 of this chapter;
(2) Towing vessels that are seagoing and 300 gross or more tons
subject to the provisions of subchapter I of this chapter;
(3) Towing vessels that are inspected under other subchapters of
this chapter that may perform occasional towing; and
(4) Towing vessels that are public vessels as defined in 46 U.S.C.
2101.
* * * * *
Sec. 15.815 [Amended]
0
12. In Sec. 15.815(c), remove the word ``uninspected''.
0
13. Add 46 CFR subchapter M, comprised of parts 136, 137, 138, 139,
140, 141, 142, 143, and 144, to read as follows:
SUBCHAPTER M--Towing Vessels
PART 136--CERTIFICATION
PART 137--VESSEL COMPLIANCE
PART 138--TOWING SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (TSMS)
PART 139--THIRD-PARTY ORGANIZATIONS
PART 140--OPERATIONS
PART 141--LIFESAVING
PART 142--FIRE PROTECTION
PART 143--MACHINERY AND ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS AND EQUIPMENT
PART 144--CONSTRUCTION AND ARRANGEMENT
PART 136--CERTIFICATION
Sec.
Subpart A--General
136.100 Purpose.
136.105 Applicability.
136.110 Definitions.
136.112 Incorporation by reference.
136.115 Equivalents.
136.120 Special consideration.
136.130 Options for documenting compliance to obtain a Certificate
of Inspection.
136.172 Temporary compliance for existing towing vessels.
136.175 Approved equipment.
136.180 Appeals.
Subpart B--Certificate of Inspection
136.200 Certificate required.
136.202 Certificate of Inspection phase-in period.
136.205 Description.
136.210 Obtaining or renewing a COI.
136.212 Inspection for certification.
136.215 Period of validity.
136.220 Posting.
136.230 Routes permitted.
136.235 Certificate of Inspection amendment.
136.240 Permit to proceed.
136.245 Permit to carry an excursion party or temporary extension or
alteration of route.
136.250 Load lines.
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3301, 3306, 3308, 3316, 8104, 8904;
33 CFR 1.05; DHS Delegation 0170.1.
Subpart A--General
Sec. 136.100 Purpose.
This part sets out the applicability for this subchapter and
describes the requirements for obtaining and renewing a Certificate of
Inspection (COI).
Sec. 136.105 Applicability.
(a) This subchapter is applicable to all U.S.-flag towing vessels
as defined in Sec. 136.110 engaged in pushing, pulling, or hauling
alongside, except--
(1) A vessel less than 26 feet (7.92 meters) in length measured
from end to end over the deck (excluding the sheer), unless that vessel
is pushing, pulling, or hauling a barge that is carrying oil or
hazardous material in bulk;
(2) A vessel engaged in one or more of the following:
(i) Assistance towing as defined in Sec. 136.110;
(ii) Towing recreational vessels for salvage; or
(iii) Transporting or assisting the navigation of recreational
vessels within and between marinas and marina facilities, within a
limited geographic area, as determined by the local Captain of the Port
(COTP);
(3) A workboat operating exclusively within a worksite and
performing intermittent towing within the worksite;
(4) A seagoing towing vessel of 300 gross tons or more subject to
the provisions of subchapter I of this chapter;
(5) A vessel inspected under other subchapters of this chapter that
may perform occasional towing;
(6) A public vessel as defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101;
(7) A vessel that has surrendered its COI and is laid up,
dismantled, or otherwise out of service; and
(8) A propulsion unit used for the purpose of propelling or
controlling the direction of a barge where the unit is
[[Page 40102]]
controlled from the barge, is not normally manned, and is not utilized
as an independent vessel.
(b) [Reserved]
Sec. 136.110 Definitions.
As used in this subchapter:
ABS Rules means the standards developed and published by the
American Bureau of Shipping regarding the design, construction and
certification of commercial vessels.
Accommodation space means any:
(1) Messroom;
(2) Lounge;
(3) Sitting area;
(4) Recreation room;
(5) Quarters;
(6) Toilet space;
(7) Shower room;
(8) Galley;
(9) Berthing space;
(10) Clothing-changing room; or
(11) A similar space open to individuals.
Anniversary date means the day and the month of each year that
corresponds to the date of expiration on the COI or Towing Safety
Management System (TSMS) Certificate.
Approval series means the first six digits of a number assigned by
the Coast Guard to approved equipment. Where approval is based on a
subpart of 46 CFR chapter I, subchapter Q, the approval series
corresponds to the number of the subpart. A list of approved equipment,
including all of the approval series, is available at https://cgmix.uscg.mil/Equipment/EquipmentSearch.aspx.
Assistance towing means towing a disabled vessel for consideration
as defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101.
Audit means a systematic, independent, and documented examination
to determine whether activities and related results comply with a
vessel's TSMS, or with another applicable Safety Management System
(SMS), and whether these planned arrangements are implemented suitably
to achieve stated objectives. This examination includes a thorough
review of appropriate reports, documents, records, and other objective
evidence to verify compliance with applicable requirements.
(1) The audit may include, but is not limited to:
(i) Examining records;
(ii) Asking responsible persons how they accomplish their assigned
duties;
(iii) Observing persons performing specific tasks within their
assigned duties;
(iv) Examining equipment to ensure proper maintenance and
operation; and
(v) Checking training records and work environments.
(2) The audit may be limited to the random selection of a
representative sampling throughout the system that presents the auditor
with sufficient, objective evidence of system compliance.
Authorized classification society means a recognized classification
society that has been delegated the authority to conduct certain
functions and certifications on behalf of the Coast Guard.
Berthing space means a space that is intended to be used for
sleeping, and is provided with installed bunks and bedding.
Bollard pull means the maximum static pulling force that a towing
vessel can exert on another vessel or on an object when its propulsion
engines are applying thrust at maximum horsepower.
Change in ownership means any change resulting in a change in the
day-to-day operational control of a third-party organization (TPO) that
conducts audits and surveys, or a change that results in a new entity
holding more than 50 percent of the ownership of the TPO.
Class Rules means the standards developed and published by a
classification society regarding the design, construction, and
certification of commercial vessels.
Coastwise means a route that is not more than 20 nautical miles
offshore on:
(1) Any ocean;
(2) The Gulf of Mexico;
(3) The Caribbean Sea;
(4) The Bering Sea;
(5) The Gulf of Alaska; or
(6) Such other similar waters as may be designated by a Coast Guard
District Commander.
Cold water means water where the monthly mean low water temperature
is normally 15 degrees Celsius (59 degrees Fahrenheit) or less.
Commandant means the Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard or an
authorized representative of the Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard.
Conflict of interest means a conflict between an individual's or an
organization's private interests and the interests of another party
they are providing a service to or for, including when acting in a
capacity which serves the public good.
Crewmember means crewmember as defined in 46 CFR 16.105.
Deficiency means a failure to meet the minimum requirements of the
vessel inspection laws or regulations.
Disabled vessel means a vessel that needs assistance, whether
docked, moored, anchored, aground, adrift, or under way, but does not
mean a barge or any other vessel not regularly operated under its own
power.
Downstreaming means a procedure in which a towing vessel moves
downstream with the current in order to approach and land squarely on
another object, such as a fleet, a dock, or another tow.
Drydock examination means hauling out a vessel or placing a vessel
in a drydock or slipway for an examination of all accessible parts of
the vessel's underwater body and of all through-hull fittings and
appurtenances.
Electronic position fixing device means a navigation receiver that
meets the requirements of 33 CFR 164.41.
Engine room means the enclosed space where any main-propulsion
engine is located. It comprises all deck levels within that space.
Essential system means a system that is required to ensure a
vessel's survivability, maintain safe operation, control the vessel, or
to ensure safety of onboard personnel, including:
(1) Systems for:
(i) Detection or suppression of fire;
(ii) Emergency dewatering or ballast management;
(iii) Navigation;
(iv) Internal and external communication;
(v) Vessel control, including propulsion, steering, maneuverability
and their vital auxiliaries;
(vi) Emergency evacuation and abandonment;
(vii) Lifesaving; and
(viii) Control of a tow;
(2) Any critical system identified in a SMS compliant with the
International Safety Management (ISM) Code requirements of 33 CFR part
96; and
(3) Any other marine engineering system identified in an approved
TSMS or identified by the cognizant Officer in Charge, Marine
Inspection (OCMI) as essential to the vessel's survival, ability to
maintain safe operation, ability to control the vessel, or to ensure
the safety of onboard personnel.
Excepted vessel means a towing vessel that is subject to this
subchapter but is excepted from certain provisions contained within
this subchapter. An excepted vessel is:
(1) Used solely:
(i) Within a limited geographic area, as defined in this section;
(ii) For harbor-assist, as defined in this section; or
(iii) For response to an emergency or a pollution event; or
(2) Excepted by the cognizant OCMI for purposes of some or all of
the requirements in Sec. Sec. 142.315 through 142.330, 143.235,
143.265, and subpart C of part 143 of this subchapter, based
[[Page 40103]]
on consideration of those requirements and on reasons submitted by the
vessel owner or managing operator as to why the vessel does not need to
meet these requirements for the safe operation of the vessel.
Excursion party means a temporary operation not permitted by the
vessel's COI. It is typically recreational in nature and 1 day or less
in duration.
Existing towing vessel means a towing vessel, subject to inspection
under this subchapter, that is not a new towing vessel, as defined in
this section.
External audit means an audit conducted by a party with no direct
affiliation to the vessel, owner, or managing operator being audited.
External survey program means a survey program conducted by a party
with no direct affiliation to the vessel, owner, or managing operator
being surveyed.
Fixed fire-extinguishing system means:
(1) A carbon dioxide system that meets the requirements of 46 CFR
subpart 76.15 and 46 CFR 78.47-9 and 78.47-11, and that is approved by
the Commandant;
(2) A clean agent system that satisfies the requirements in 46 CFR
subpart 95.16 and in 46 CFR 97.37-9, and is approved by the Commandant;
or
(3) A manually operated, water mist system that satisfies NFPA 750
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112) and is approved by the
Commandant.
Fleeting area means a limited geographic area, as determined by the
local COTP, where individual barges are moored or assembled to make a
tow. These barges are not in transport, but are temporarily marshaled
and waiting for pickup by different towing vessels that will transport
them to various destinations.
Galley means a space containing appliances with cooking surfaces
that may exceed 121 degrees Celsius (250 degrees Fahrenheit) such as
ovens, griddles, and deep fat fryers.
Great Lakes means a route on the waters of any of the Great Lakes
and of the St. Lawrence River as far east as a straight line drawn from
Cap de Rosiers to West Point, Anticosti Island, and west of a line
along the 63rd meridian from Anticosti Island to the north shore of the
St. Lawrence River.
Gross tons means the gross ton measurement of the vessel under 46
U.S.C. Chapter 145, Regulatory Measurement. For a vessel measured under
only 46 U.S.C. Chapter 143, Convention Measurement, the vessel's gross
tonnage measured under 46 U.S.C. Chapter 143 is used to apply all
thresholds expressed in terms of gross tons.
Harbor of safe refuge means a port, inlet, or other body of water
normally sheltered from heavy seas by land, and in which a vessel can
navigate and safely moor. The suitability of a location as a harbor of
safe refuge will be determined by the cognizant OCMI, and varies for
each vessel, dependent on the vessel's size, maneuverability, and
mooring gear.
Harbor-assist means the use of a towing vessel during maneuvers to
dock, undock, moor, or unmoor a vessel, or to escort a vessel with
limited maneuverability.
Horsepower means the horsepower stated on the vessel's COI, which
is the sum of the manufacturer's listed brake horsepower for all
installed propulsion engines.
Inland waters means the navigable waters of the United States
shoreward of the Boundary Lines as described in 46 CFR part 7,
excluding the Great Lakes and, for towing vessels, excluding the
Western Rivers.
Internal Audit means an audit that is conducted by a party that has
a direct affiliation to the vessel, owner, or managing operator being
audited.
Internal survey program means a survey program that is conducted by
a party which has a direct affiliation to the vessel, owner, or
managing operator being surveyed.
International voyage means a voyage between a country to which the
International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, as amended
(SOLAS) applies and a port outside that country. A country, as used in
this definition, includes every territory for the international
relations of which a contracting government to the Convention is
responsible or for which the United Nations is the administering
authority. For the United States, the term ``territory'' includes the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, all possessions of the United States, and
all lands held by the United States under a protectorate or mandate.
For the purposes of this subchapter, vessels are not considered as
being on an ``international voyage'' when solely navigating the Great
Lakes and the St. Lawrence River as far east as a straight line drawn
from Cap des Rosiers to West Point, Anticosti Island and, on the north
side of Anticosti Island, the 63rd meridian.
Lakes, bays, and sounds means a route on any of the following
waters:
(1) A lake other than the Great Lakes.
(2) A bay.
(3) A sound.
(4) Such other similar waters as may be designated by the cognizant
Coast Guard District Commander.
Length means the horizontal distance measured from end to end over
the deck, excluding the sheer. Fittings and attachments are not
included in the length measurement.
Length between perpendiculars or LBP means the horizontal distance
measured between perpendiculars taken at the forward-most and after-
most points on the waterline corresponding to the deepest operating
draft. For a vessel that has underwater projections extending forward
of the forward-most point or aft of the after-most point on the deepest
waterline of the vessel, the Commanding Officer, U.S. Coast Guard
Marine Safety Center, may include the length or a portion of the length
of the underwater projections in the value used in the LBP for the
purposes of this subchapter. The length, or a portion of the length, of
projections that contribute more than 2 percent of the underwater
volume of the vessel is normally added to the actual LBP.
Limited coastwise means a route that is not more than 20 nautical
miles from a harbor of safe refuge, as defined in this section.
Limited geographic area means a local area of operation as
determined by the local COTP. This area is usually within a single
harbor or port.
Machinery space means any enclosed space that either contains an
installed internal combustion engine, machinery, or systems that would
raise the ambient temperature above 45 degrees Celsius (113 degrees
Fahrenheit) in all environments the vessel operates in.
Major conversion means a conversion of a vessel that:
(1) Substantially changes the dimensions or carrying capacity of
the vessel;
(2) Changes the type of the vessel;
(3) Substantially prolongs the life of the vessel; or
(4) Otherwise so changes the vessel that it is essentially a new
vessel, as determined by the Commandant.
Major non-conformity means a non-conformity that poses a serious
threat to personnel, vessel safety, or the environment, and requires
immediate corrective action.
Managing operator means an organization or person, such as the
manager or the bareboat charterer of a vessel, who has assumed the
responsibility for operation of the vessel from the vessel owner and
who, on assuming responsibility, has agreed to take over all the duties
and responsibilities imposed by this subchapter.
[[Page 40104]]
Nationally recognized testing laboratory or NRTL means an
organization that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) has recognized as meeting the requirements in 29 CFR 1910.7.
These requirements are for the capability, control programs, complete
independence, and reporting and complaint-handling procedures to test
and certify specific types of products for workplace safety. This
means, in part, that an organization must have the necessary capability
both as a product safety testing laboratory and as a product
certification body to receive OSHA recognition as an NRTL.
New towing vessel means a towing vessel, subject to inspection
under this subchapter, that:
(1) Had its keel laid or was at a similar stage of construction on
or after July 20, 2017; or
(2) Underwent a major conversion that was initiated on or after
July 20, 2017.
Non-conformity means a situation where objective evidence indicates
that a specified SMS requirement is not fulfilled.
Objective evidence means quantitative or qualitative information,
records, or statements of fact pertaining to safety or to the existence
and implementation of an SMS element, which is based on observation,
measurement, or testing that can be verified. This may include, but is
not limited to, towing gear equipment certificates and maintenance
documents, training records, repair records, Coast Guard documents and
certificates, surveys, classification society reports, or TPO records.
Oceans means a route that is more than 20 nautical miles offshore
on any of the following waters:
(1) Any ocean.
(2) The Gulf of Mexico.
(3) The Caribbean Sea.
(4) The Bering Sea.
(5) The Gulf of Alaska.
(6) Such other similar waters as may be designated by the cognizant
Coast Guard District Commander.
Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection or OCMI means an officer of
the Coast Guard designated as such by the Coast Guard and who, under
the direction of the Coast Guard District Commander, is in charge of a
marine inspection zone, described in 33 CFR part 3, for the performance
of duties with respect to the inspection, enforcement, and
administration of vessel safety and navigation laws and regulations.
The ``cognizant OCMI'' is the OCMI who has immediate jurisdiction over
a vessel for the purpose of performing these duties.
Officer in charge of a (or the) navigational watch means the same
as in 46 CFR 10.107.
Oil or hazardous material in bulk, as used in this subchapter,
means that the towing vessel tows, pushes, or hauls alongside a tank
barge or barges certificated to carry cargoes under subchapters D or O
of this chapter.
Operating station means a steering station on the vessel, or the
barge being towed or pushed, from which the vessel is normally
navigated.
Owner means the owner of a vessel, as identified on the vessel's
certificate of documentation or state registration.
Persons in addition to the crew mean any people onboard the vessel,
including passengers, who are not a crewmember.
Policy means a specific statement of principles or a guiding
philosophy that demonstrates a clear commitment by management, or a
statement of values or intentions that provide a basis for consistent
decision making.
Power and lighting circuit means a branch circuit as defined in
Article 100 of NFPA's National Electrical Code (NEC) (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 136.112) that serves any essential system,
distribution panel, lighting, motor or motor group, or group of
receptacles. Where multiple loads are served, the circuit is considered
to be the conductor run that will carry the current common to all the
loads. ``Power limited circuit'' conductors under Article 725 of the
NEC and ``instrumentation'' conductors under Article 727 of the NEC are
not considered to be power and lighting circuits.
Pressure vessel, fired or unfired, means a closed tank or cylinder
containing gas, vapor, or liquid, or a combination thereof, under
pressure greater than atmospheric pressure.
Procedure means a specification of a series of actions or
operations that must be executed in the same manner in order to
uniformly comply with applicable policies.
Protected waters means sheltered waters presenting no special
hazards, such as most rivers, harbors, and lakes, and that is not
determined to be exposed waters or partially protected waters by the
cognizant OCMI.
Propulsor means a device (e.g., propeller or water jet) that
imparts force to a column of water in order to propel a vessel,
together with any equipment necessary to transmit the power from the
propulsion machinery to the device (shafting, gearing, etc.).
Recognized classification society means a classification society
recognized by the Coast Guard in accordance with part 8 of this
chapter.
Replacement in kind means replacement of equipment or components
that have the same technical specifications as the original item and
provide the same service. If the replacement item upgrades the system
in any way, the change is not a replacement in kind.
Rescue boat means a boat designed to rescue persons in distress and
to marshal survival craft.
Rivers means a route on any river, canal, or other similar body of
water designated by the cognizant OCMI.
Safety Management System or SMS means a structured and documented
system that enables personnel involved in vessel operations or
management, as identified in the SMS, to effectively implement the
safety and environmental protection requirements of this subchapter,
and is routinely exercised and audited.
Skiff means a small auxiliary boat carried on board a towing
vessel.
Survey means an examination of the vessel, including its systems
and equipment, to verify compliance with applicable regulations,
statutes, conventions, and treaties.
Terminal gear means the additional equipment or appurtenances at
either end of the hawser or tow cable that connects the towing vessel
and its tow together. Terminal gear may include such items as winches,
thimbles, chafing gear, shackles, pendants, or bridles.
Third-party organization or TPO means an organization approved by
the Coast Guard to conduct independent verifications to assess whether
towing vessels or their TSMSs comply with applicable requirements
contained in this subchapter.
Tow means the barge(s), vessel(s), or object(s) being pulled,
pushed, or hauled alongside a towing vessel.
Towing vessel means a commercial vessel engaged in or intending to
engage in the service of pulling, pushing, or hauling alongside, or any
combination of pulling, pushing, or hauling alongside.
Towing Safety Management System or TSMS means an SMS for a towing
vessel as described in part 138 of this subchapter.
Towing vessel record or TVR means a book, notebook, or electronic
record used to document events as required by this subchapter.
Unsafe condition means a major non-conformity observed on board a
vessel, or an incident that would cause the owner or managing operator
to request
[[Page 40105]]
a permit to proceed from the Coast Guard.
Unsafe practice means a habitual or customary action or method, or
a single action, that creates a significant risk of harm to life,
property, or the marine environment, or that contravenes a recognized
standard of care contained in law; regulation; applicable international
convention; or international, national, or industry consensus standard.
Warm water means water where the monthly mean low water temperature
is normally more than 15 degrees Celsius (59 degrees Fahrenheit).
Western Rivers means the Mississippi River, its tributaries, South
Pass, and Southwest Pass, to the navigational demarcation lines
dividing the high seas from harbors, rivers, and other inland waters of
the United States, and the Port Allen-Morgan City Alternate Route, and
that part of the Atchafalaya River above its junction with the Port
Allen-Morgan City Alternate Route including the Old River and the Red
River, and those waters specified in 33 CFR 89.25 and 89.27, and such
other, similar waters as are designated by the COTP.
Workboat means a vessel that pushes, pulls, or hauls alongside
within a worksite.
Worksite means an area specified by the cognizant OCMI within which
workboats are operated over short distances for moving equipment in
support of dredging, construction, maintenance, or repair work. A
worksite may include shipyards, owner's yards, or lay-down areas used
by marine construction projects. This definition does not include the
movement of barges carrying oil or hazardous material in bulk.
Work space means any area on the vessel where the crew may be
present while on duty and performing their assigned tasks.
Sec. 136.112 Incorporation by reference.
(a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this
subchapter 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 a
document in the Federal Register and the material must be available to
the public. All approved material is available for inspection at the
U.S. Coast Guard, Office of Design and Engineering Standards (CG-ENG),
2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE., Stop 7509, Washington, DC
20593-7509, and is available from the sources listed below. It is also
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_federalregulations/ibr_locations.html.
(b) American Boat and Yacht Council (ABYC), 613 Third Street, Suite
10, Annapolis, MD 21403, 410-990-4460, https://www.abycinc.org/.
(1) E-11 (2003)--AC and DC Electrical Systems on Boats, dated July
2003, IBR approved for Sec. 143.520(a) of this subchapter.
(2) H-2 (2000)--Ventilation of Boats Using Gasoline, dated July
2000, IBR approved for Sec. 143.520(a) of this subchapter.
(3) H-22 (2005)--Electric Bilge Pump Systems, dated July 2005, IBR
approved for Sec. 143.520(a) of this subchapter.
(4) H-24 (2007)--Gasoline Fuel Systems, dated July 2007, IBR
approved for Sec. 143.520(a) of this subchapter.
(5) H-25 (2003)--Portable Gasoline Fuel Systems, reaffirmed July
2003, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 143.265(b) and 143.520(a) of this
subchapter.
(6) H-32 (2004)--Ventilation of Boats Using Diesel Fuel, dated July
2004, IBR approved for Sec. 143.520(a) of this subchapter.
(7) H-33 (2005)--Diesel Fuel Systems, dated July 2005, IBR approved
for Sec. Sec. 143.265(e) and 143.520(a) of this subchapter.
(8) P-1 (2002)--Installation of Exhaust Systems for Propulsion and
Auxiliary Engines, dated July 2002, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.
143.520(a) and 144.415 of this subchapter.
(9) P-4 (2004)--Marine Inboard Engines and Transmissions, dated
July 2004, IBR approved for Sec. 143.520(a) of this subchapter.
(c) American Bureau of Shipping (ABS), ABS Plaza, 16855 Northchase
Drive, Houston, TX 77060, 281-877-5800, https://www.eagle.org.
(1) Rules for Building and Classing Steel Vessels for Service on
Rivers and Intracoastal Waterways, 2007, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.
143.515(a), 143.540(b), 143.550(a), 143.580(b), and 144.205(a) of this
subchapter.
(2) Rules for Building and Classing Steel Vessels Under 90 Meters
(295 Feet) in Length, 2006, including Supplement to Part 1 (dated
January 1, 2008) and Corrigenda Notices 1 to 13 (in effect as of July
1, 2010), IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 143.515(a), 143.540(a),
143.545(b), 143.550(a), 143.555(b), 143.580(a), 143.600, and 144.205(a)
of this subchapter.
(d) American Society for Quality (ASQ), Quality Press, P.O. Box
3005, Milwaukee, WI 53201-3005, 800-248-1946, https://asq.org/.
(1) ANSI/ISO/ASQ Q9001-2000, Quality management systems--
Requirements, approved December 13, 2000, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.
138.310(d), 139.120(d) and 139.130(b) of this subchapter.
(2) [Reserved]
(e) FM Approvals, P.O. Box 9102, Norwood, MA 02062, 781-440-8000,
https://www.fmglobal.com/.
(1) Approval Standard for Storage Cabinets (Flammable and
Combustible liquids), Class Number 6050 (Standard 6050), dated December
1996, IBR approved for Sec. 142.225(c) of this subchapter.
(2) [Reserved]
(f) International Maritime Organization (IMO), Publications
Section, 4 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7SR, United Kingdom, +44 (0)20
7735 7611, https://www.imo.org/.
(1) Resolution A.520(13)--Code of Practice for the Evaluation,
Testing and Acceptance of Prototype Novel Life-saving Appliances and
Arrangements, adopted November 17, 1983, IBR approved for Sec.
141.225(c) of this subchapter.
(2) Resolution A.658(16)--Use and Fitting of Retro-Reflective
Materials on Life-saving Appliances, adopted October 19, 1989, IBR
approved for Sec. 141.340(f) of this subchapter.
(3) Resolution A.688(17)--Fire Test Procedures For Ignitability of
Bedding Components, adopted November 6, 1991, IBR approved for Sec.
144.430(b) of this subchapter.
(4) Resolution A.760(18)--Symbols Related to Life-Saving Appliances
and Arrangements, adopted November 4, 1993, IBR approved for Sec.
141.340(h) of this subchapter.
(5) International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974,
as amended (SOLAS), Consolidated Edition (including Erratum), 2009, IBR
approved for Sec. Sec. 136.115(b), 141.105(b) and (c), and 142.205(a)
of this subchapter.
(g) International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Case
Postal 56, CH-1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland, +41 22 749 01 11, https://www.iso.org/.
(1) ISO 9001:2008(E)--International Standard: Quality management
systems--Requirements, Fourth edition, dated November 15, 2008
(corrected version dated July 15, 2009), IBR approved for Sec. Sec.
138.310(d) and 139.130(b) of this subchapter.
(2) ISO 14726:2008(E)--International Standard: Ships and marine
technology-Identification colours for the content of piping systems,
First edition, dated May 1, 2008, IBR approved for Sec. 143.250(e) of
this subchapter.
[[Page 40106]]
(h) National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), 1 Batterymarch
Park, Quincy, MA 02169, 800-344-3555, https://www.nfpa.org/.
(1) NFPA 10--Standard for Portable Fire Extinguishers, 2007
Edition, effective August 17, 2006, IBR approved for Sec. 142.240(a)
of this subchapter.
(2) NFPA 70--National Electrical Code (NEC), 2002 Edition,
effective August 2, 2001, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 136.110,
143.555(b), and 143.565(b) of this subchapter.
(3) NFPA 302--Fire Protection Standard for Pleasure and Commercial
Motor Craft, 1998 Edition, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 143.265(e) and
144.415 of this subchapter.
(4) NFPA 306--Standard for the Control of Gas Hazards on Vessels,
2014 Edition, effective June 17, 2013, IBR approved for Sec.
140.665(a) of this subchapter.
(5) NFPA 750--Standard on Water Mist Fire Protection Systems, 2006
Edition, effective February 16, 2006, IBR approved for Sec. 136.110.
(6) NFPA 1971--Standard on Protective Ensembles for Structural
Fire-Fighting and Proximity Fire-Fighting, 2007 Edition, effective
August 17, 2006, IBR approved for Sec. 142.226(a) of this subchapter.
(i) Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), 400 Commonwealth Drive,
Warrendale, PA 15096, 724-776-4841, https://www.sae.org/.
(1) ANSI/SAE Z 26.1-1996, American National Standard for Safety
Glazing Materials for Glazing Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle
Equipment Operating on Land Highways--Safety Standard, approved August
11, 1997, IBR approved for Sec. 144.905(e) of this subchapter.
(2) SAE J1475 Revised JUN96--Hydraulic Hose Fitting for Marine
Applications, revised June 1996, IBR approved for Sec. 143.265(d) of
this subchapter.
(3) SAE J1942 Revised APR2007--Hose and Hose Assemblies for Marine
Applications, revised April 2007, IBR approved for Sec. 143.265(d) of
this subchapter.
(j) UL (formerly Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.), 12 Laboratory
Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, 919-549-1400, https://www.ul.com/.
(1) UL 217--Standard for Safety for Single and Multiple Station
Smoke Alarms, Sixth Edition, dated August 25, 2006 (including revisions
through November 20, 2012), IBR approved for Sec. 142.330(b) of this
subchapter.
(2) UL 1104--Standards for Safety for Marine Navigation Lights,
Second Edition, dated October 29, 1998, IBR approved for Sec.
143.415(a) of this subchapter.
(3) UL 1275--Standard for Safety for Flammable Liquid Storage
Cabinets, Third Edition, dated June 30, 2005 (including revisions
through February 26, 2010), IBR approved for Sec. 142.225(c) of this
subchapter.
Sec. 136.115 Equivalents.
(a) The Coast Guard may approve any arrangement, fitting,
appliance, apparatus, equipment, calculation, information, or test that
provides a level of safety equivalent to that established by any
specific provision of this subchapter. Submit requests for approval to
the Coast Guard via the cognizant OCMI. The Marine Safety Center may
require engineering evaluations and tests to verify the equivalence.
(b) The Coast Guard may accept compliance with the provisions of
SOLAS applicable to the vessel's size and route (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 136.112), as an equivalent to specific
requirements of this subchapter. Submit requests for a determination of
equivalency for a particular vessel to the Coast Guard via the
cognizant OCMI.
(c) Alternative compliance arrangement provisions related to SMSs
are contained in Sec. 138.225 of this subchapter.
(d) Alternate compliance arrangements must be documented within the
TSMS applicable to the vessel.
Sec. 136.120 Special consideration.
Based on a review of relevant information and on the TSMS
applicable to the vessel, the cognizant OCMI who issues the COI may
give special consideration to authorizing departures from specific
requirements, when unusual circumstances or arrangements warrant such
departures and when an equivalent level of safety is provided.
Sec. 136.130 Options for documenting compliance to obtain a
Certificate of Inspection.
(a) There are two options for documenting compliance with the
requirements in this subchapter to obtain a COI:
(1) The Coast Guard option, in which all inspections of the towing
vessel are conducted by the Coast Guard, as discussed in Sec. 136.210
and parts 137 and 140 through 144 of this subchapter; or
(2) The TSMS option, as discussed in Sec. 136.210, and in parts
137 through 144 of this subchapter.
(b) Regardless of the option chosen, the Coast Guard is responsible
for issuing a towing vessel COI, and may board a vessel at any time to
verify compliance and take appropriate action.
(c) An owner or managing operator choosing the Coast Guard option
may use a management system, vessel operations manual, towing vessel
record (TVR), or logbook to meet this subchapter's recordkeeping
requirements.
(d) When submitting an application for inspection, the owner or
managing operator must specify on the application which option he or
she chooses for each particular towing vessel. Owners or managing
operators may choose different options for the individual vessels
within their fleets.
(e) Requests to change options during the period of validity of an
existing COI must be accompanied by an application to the OCMI for a
new COI. If the requirements for the new option are met, the OCMI will
issue the vessel a new COI.
Sec. 136.172 Temporary compliance for existing towing vessels.
An existing towing vessel subject to this subchapter will remain
subject to Coast Guard regulations applicable to the vessel on July 19,
2016 until either July 20, 2018 or the date the vessel obtains a COI,
whichever date is earlier.
Sec. 136.175 Approved equipment.
Where equipment in this subchapter is required to be of an approved
type, such equipment requires the specific approval of the Coast Guard.
A list of approved equipment and materials may be found online at
https://cgmix.uscg.mil/Equipment/EquipmentSearch.aspx. Any OCMI may be
contacted for information concerning approved equipment and materials.
Sec. 136.180 Appeals.
Any person directly affected by a decision or action taken under
this subchapter, by or on behalf of the Coast Guard, may appeal in
accordance with 46 CFR 1.03.
Subpart B--Certificate of Inspection
Sec. 136.200 Certificate required.
(a) A towing vessel may not be operated without having onboard a
valid COI issued by the Coast Guard as required by Sec. 136.202.
(b) Each towing vessel certificated under the provisions of this
subchapter must be in full compliance with the terms of the COI.
(c) If necessary to prevent the delay of the vessel, the Coast
Guard may issue a temporary COI to a towing vessel, pending the
issuance and delivery of the permanent COI. The temporary COI
[[Page 40107]]
must be carried in the same manner as the regular COI and is equivalent
to the permanent COI that it represents.
(d) A towing vessel on a foreign voyage between a port in the
United States and a port in a foreign country whose COI expires during
the voyage may lawfully complete the voyage without a valid COI,
provided the voyage is completed within 30 days of expiration, and
provided that the COI did not expire within 15 days of sailing on the
foreign voyage from a U.S. port.
Sec. 136.202 Certificate of Inspection phase-in period.
(a) All owners or managing operators of more than one existing
towing vessel required to have a COI by this subchapter must ensure
that each existing towing vessel under their ownership or control is
issued a valid COI according to the following schedule:
(1) By July 22, 2019, at least 25 percent of the towing vessels
must have valid COIs on board;
(2) By July 20, 2020, at least 50 percent of the towing vessels
must have valid COIs on board;
(3) By July 19, 2021, at least 75 percent of the towing vessels
must have valid COIs on board; and
(4) By July 19, 2022, 100 percent of the towing vessels must have
valid COIs on board.
(b) All owners or managing operators of only one existing towing
vessel required to have a COI by this subchapter must ensure the vessel
has an onboard, valid COI by July 20, 2020.
(c) A new towing vessel must obtain a COI before it enters into
service.
Sec. 136.205 Description.
A towing vessel's COI describes the vessel, routes that it may
travel, minimum manning requirements and total persons allowed onboard,
safety equipment and appliances required to be onboard, horsepower, and
other information pertinent to the vessel's operations as determined by
the OCMI.
Sec. 136.210 Obtaining or renewing a COI.
Owners and managing operators must submit Form CG-3752,
``Application for Inspection of U.S. Vessel,'' to the cognizant OCMI
where the inspection will take place. The owner or managing operator
must submit the application at least 30 days before the vessel will
undergo the initial inspection for certification. The owner or managing
operator must schedule an inspection for this initial certification
with the cognizant OCMI at least 3 months before the vessel is to
undergo the inspection for certification.
(a) In addition to Form CG-3752, the owner or managing operator
must submit:
(1) For initial certification:
(i) Vessel particular information; and
(ii) Number of persons in addition to the crew, if requested; or
(2) For a renewal of certification:
(i) Any changes to the information in paragraph (a)(1) of this
section; and
(ii) A description of any modifications to the vessel.
(b) In addition to Form CG-3752 and the requirements of paragraph
(a) of this section, the owner or managing operator of vessels
utilizing the TSMS option must submit:
(1) Objective evidence that the owner or managing operator and the
vessel are in compliance with the TSMS requirements in part 138 of this
subchapter; and
(2) Objective evidence that the vessel's structure, stability, and
essential systems comply with the applicable requirements of this
subchapter for the intended route and service. This objective evidence
may be in the form of a survey report issued by a TPO or another form
acceptable to the Coast Guard.
Sec. 136.212 Inspection for certification.
(a) Frequency of inspections. After a towing vessel receives its
initial COI, the OCMI will inspect a towing vessel subject to this
subchapter located in his or her jurisdiction at least once every 5
years. The OCMI must ensure that every towing vessel is of a structure
suitable for its intended route. If the OCMI deems it necessary, he or
she may direct the vessel to get underway, and may adopt any other
suitable means to test the towing vessel and its equipment.
(b) Nature of inspection. The inspection will ensure that the
vessel is in satisfactory condition and fit for the service for which
it is intended, and that it complies with the applicable statutes and
regulations for such vessels. The inspection will include inspections
of the structure, pressure vessels and their appurtenances, piping,
main and auxiliary machinery, electrical installations, lifesaving
appliances, fire detecting and extinguishing equipment, pilot boarding
equipment, and other equipment. The inspection will also determine that
the vessel is in possession of any valid certificates or licenses
issued by the Federal Communications Commission, if required. The
inspection will also include an examination of the vessel's lights,
means of making sound signals and distress signals, and pollution
prevention systems and procedures.
(c) Time of issuance of COI. The OCMI will issue a vessel a new COI
after the vessel successfully completes the inspection for
certification.
Sec. 136.215 Period of validity.
(a) A COI for a towing vessel is valid for 5 years from the date of
issue.
(b) For a towing vessel utilizing the TSMS option, the COI is
invalid upon the expiration or revocation of the owner or managing
operator TSMS certificate or the ISM Code Certificate.
(c) A COI may be suspended and withdrawn or revoked by the
cognizant Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection at any time for
noncompliance with the requirements of this subchapter.
Sec. 136.220 Posting.
(a) The original COI must be framed under glass or other
transparent material and posted in a conspicuous place onboard the
towing vessel.
(b) If posting is impracticable, the COI must be kept on board in a
weathertight container and must be readily available.
Sec. 136.230 Routes permitted.
(a) The area of operation for each towing vessel and any necessary
operational limits are determined by the cognizant OCMI and recorded on
the vessel's COI. Each area of operation, referred to as a route, is
described on the COI under the major headings ``Oceans,''
``Coastwise,'' ``Limited Coastwise,'' ``Great Lakes,'' ``Lakes, Bays,
and Sounds,'' or ``Rivers,'' as applicable. Additional limitations
imposed or extensions granted are described by reference to bodies of
waters, geographical points, distances from geographical points,
distances from land, depths of channel, seasonal limitations, and
similar factors.
(b) Operation of a towing vessel on a route of lesser severity than
those specifically described or designated on the COI is permitted,
unless the route is expressly prohibited on the COI. The general order
of decreasing severity of routes is: Oceans; coastwise; limited
coastwise; Great Lakes; lakes, bays, and sounds; and rivers. The
cognizant OCMI may prohibit a vessel from operating on a route of
lesser severity than the primary route on which a vessel is authorized
to operate, if local conditions necessitate such a restriction.
(c) When designating a permitted route or imposing any operational
limits on a towing vessel, the cognizant OCMI may consider:
(1) The route-specific requirements of this subchapter;
(2) The performance capabilities of the vessel based on design,
scantlings, stability, subdivision, propulsion,
[[Page 40108]]
speed, operating modes, maneuverability, and other characteristics;
(3) The suitability of the vessel for nighttime operations and use
in all weather conditions;
(4) Vessel operations in globally remote areas or severe
environments not covered by this subchapter. Such areas may include,
but are not limited to, polar regions, remote islands, areas of extreme
weather, or other remote areas where timely emergency assistance cannot
be anticipated; and
(5) The TSMS applicable to the vessel, if the vessel has one.
Sec. 136.235 Certificate of Inspection amendment.
(a) An amended COI may be issued at any time by the cognizant OCMI.
The amended COI replaces the original, but the expiration date remains
the same as that of the original. An amended COI may be issued to
authorize and record a change in the dimensions, gross tonnage, owner,
managing operator, manning, persons permitted, route permitted,
conditions of operations, or equipment of a towing vessel, from that
specified in the current COI.
(b) The owner or managing operator of the towing vessel must make a
request for an amended COI to the cognizant OCMI any time there is a
change in the character of the vessel or in its route, equipment,
ownership, operation, or similar factors specified in its current COI.
The OCMI may need to conduct an inspection before issuing an amended
COI.
(c) For those vessels selecting the TSMS option, the owner or
managing operator of the towing vessel must provide to the OCMI
objective evidence of compliance with the requirements in this
subchapter prior to the issuance of an amended COI. The evidence must:
(1) Be from a TPO and prepared in accordance with parts 138 and 139
of this subchapter; and
(2) Consider the change in the character of a vessel or in its
route, equipment, ownership, operation, or similar factors specified in
the vessel's current COI.
Sec. 136.240 Permit to proceed.
Permission to proceed to another port for repairs (Form CG-948) may
be required for a towing vessel that is no longer in compliance with
its COI. This permission may be necessary in certain situations,
including damage to the vessel, failure of an essential system, or
failure to comply with a regulation, including failure to comply with
the TSMS requirements, if appropriate.
(a) What a vessel with a TSMS must do before proceeding to another
port for repairs. A vessel with a TSMS may proceed to another port for
repair, if:
(1) In the judgment of the owner, managing operator, or master, the
trip can be completed safely;
(2) The TSMS addresses the condition of the vessel that has
resulted in non-compliance and the necessary conditions under which the
vessel may safely proceed to another port for repair;
(3) The vessel proceeds as provided in the TSMS and does not tow
while proceeding, unless the owner or managing operator determines that
it is safe to do so; and
(4) The owner or managing operator notifies the cognizant OCMI in
whose zone the non-compliance occurred or is discovered, before the
vessel proceeds. The owner or operator must also notify the cognizant
OCMI in any other OCMI zones through which the vessel will transit.
(b) What another vessel must do before proceeding to another port
for repairs. If a vessel does not have a TSMS, or a vessel has one but
it does not address the condition of the vessel that has resulted in
non-compliance or the necessary conditions under which the vessel may
safely proceed to another port for repair, the owner, managing
operator, or master must request permission to proceed from the
cognizant OCMI in whose zone the non-compliance occurs or is
discovered. This permission operates as follows:
(1) The request for permission to proceed may be made
electronically, in writing, or orally. The cognizant OCMI may require a
written description, a damage survey, or other documentation to assist
in determining the nature and seriousness of the non-compliance.
(2) The vessel will not engage in towing, unless the cognizant OCMI
determines it is safe to do so.
(3) The Coast Guard may issue the permit either on Form CG-948,
``Permit to Proceed to Another Port for Repairs,'' or in letter form,
and will state the conditions under which the vessel may proceed to
another port for repair.
(c) Inspection or examination. The cognizant OCMI may require an
inspection of the vessel by a Coast Guard Marine Inspector or an
examination by a surveyor from a TPO prior to the vessel proceeding.
Sec. 136.245 Permit to carry excursion party or temporary extension
or alteration of route.
(a) A towing vessel must obtain approval to engage in an excursion
prior to carrying a greater number of persons than permitted by the
COI, or to temporarily extend or alter its area of operation.
(b) For a vessel utilizing the TSMS option, the vessel may engage
in an excursion, if:
(1) In the opinion of the owner, managing operator, or master the
operation can be undertaken safely;
(2) The TSMS addresses the temporary excursion operation
contemplated; the necessary conditions under which the vessel may
safely conduct the operation, including the number of persons the
vessel may carry; the crew required; and any additional lifesaving or
safety equipment required;
(3) The vessel proceeds as provided in the TSMS; and
(4) The owner, managing operator, or master notifies the cognizant
OCMI at least 48 hours prior to the temporary excursion operation. The
cognizant OCMI may require submission of pertinent provisions of the
TSMS applicable to the vessel for review and onboard verification of
compliance. If the cognizant OCMI has reasonable cause to believe that
the TSMS applicable to the vessel is insufficient for the intended
excursion, additional information may be requested and/or additional
requirements may be imposed.
(c) If the towing vessel is not under a TSMS, or the TSMS
applicable to the vessel does not address the temporary excursion
operation:
(1) The owner or managing operator must submit an application to
the cognizant OCMI. The application must state the intended route,
number of passengers or guests, and any other conditions applicable to
the excursion that exceed those specified in its COI.
(2) The cognizant OCMI may issue the permit either on Form CG-949,
``Permit To Carry Excursion Party,'' or in letter form. The cognizant
OCMI will indicate on the permit the conditions under which it is
issued, the number of persons the vessel may carry, the crew required,
any additional lifesaving or safety equipment required, the route for
which the permit is granted, and the dates on which the permit is
valid. The application may be made electronically, in writing, or
orally.
(3) The vessel may not engage in towing during the excursion,
unless the cognizant OCMI determines it is safe to do so.
(d) The cognizant OCMI may require an inspection of the vessel by a
Coast Guard Marine Inspector or an examination by a surveyor from a TPO
prior to the vessel proceeding.
Sec. 136.250 Load lines.
Vessels described in Table 136.250 of this section that operate on
the Great Lakes or outside the Boundary Lines, as
[[Page 40109]]
set forth in 46 CFR part 7, are subject to load line requirements in
subchapter E of this chapter in the following circumstances:
Table 136.250
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is subject to load line requirements
A vessel that-- in subchapter E of this chapter if
it is--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Is on an international voyage-- (1) Seventy nine (79) feet (24
. meters) or more in length and built
on or after July 21, 1968; or
(2) One hundred and fifty (150)
gross tons or more if built before
July 21, 1968.
(b) Is on a domestic voyage--..... (1) Seventy nine (79) feet (24
meters) or more in length and built
on or after January 1, 1986; or
(2) One hundred and fifty (150)
gross tons or more if built before
January 1, 1986.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART 137--VESSEL COMPLIANCE
Sec.
Subpart A--General
137.100 Purpose.
137.120 Responsibility for compliance.
137.130 Program for vessel compliance for the Towing Safety
Management System (TSMS) option.
137.135 Reports and documentation required for the TSMS option.
Subpart B--Inspections and Surveys for Certification
137.200 Documenting compliance for the Coast Guard inspection
option.
137.202 Documenting compliance for the TSMS option.
137.205 External survey program.
137.210 Internal survey program.
137.212 Coast Guard oversight of vessel survey program for vessels
under the TSMS option.
137.215 General conduct of survey.
137.220 Scope.
Subpart C--Drydock and Internal Structural Surveys
137.300 Intervals for drydock and internal structural examinations.
137.302 Documenting compliance for the Coast Guard inspection
option.
137.305 Documenting compliance for the TSMS option.
137.310 External survey program.
137.315 Internal survey program.
137.317 Coast Guard oversight of drydock and internal structural
examination program for vessels under the TSMS option.
137.320 Vessels holding a valid load line certificate.
137.322 Classed vessels.
137.325 General conduct of examination.
137.330 Scope of the drydock examination.
137.335 Underwater survey in lieu of drydocking.
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3301, 3306, 3308, 3316, 8104, 8904;
33 CFR 1.05; DHS Delegation 0170.1.
Subpart A--General
Sec. 137.100 Purpose.
This part describes the procedures owners or managing operators of
towing vessels must use to demonstrate compliance with the requirements
of this subchapter.
Sec. 137.120 Responsibility for compliance.
(a) The owner and managing operator must ensure that the towing
vessel is in compliance with this subchapter and other applicable laws
and regulations at all times.
(b) Non-conformities and deficiencies must be corrected in a timely
manner.
Sec. 137.130 Program for vessel compliance for the Towing Safety
Management System (TSMS) option.
The owner or managing operator of a towing vessel choosing to use
the TSMS option must implement an external or internal survey program
for vessel compliance. The program for vessel compliance can be either:
(a) An external survey program, in which the owner or managing
operator would have a third-party organization (TPO) conduct either the
surveys required by Sec. 137.205, the examinations required by Sec.
137.310, or both; or
(b) An internal survey program, in which the owner or managing
operator would conduct either the surveys required by Sec. 137.210,
the examinations required by Sec. 137.315, or both, using internal
resources or contracted surveyors. The internal survey program would be
conducted with the oversight of a TPO.
(c) Each program of either type must include:
(1) Owner or managing operator policy regarding the surveying and
examination of towing vessels;
(2) Procedures for conducting towing vessel surveys and
examinations, as described in this part;
(3) Procedures for reporting and correcting non-conformities and
deficiencies;
(4) Identification of the individual or individuals responsible for
the management of the program, and their qualifications; and
(5) Documentation of compliance activities.
Sec. 137.135 Reports and documentation required for the TSMS option.
(a) The TSMS option requires a report detailing each internal
survey of a towing vessel. Each report must include:
(1) Vessel name;
(2) Other vessel identifier, such as an official number or State
number;
(3) Name and business address of owner or managing operator;
(4) Date and location of the survey;
(5) Date the report of the survey was issued, if different than the
date the survey was concluded;
(6) Name of the surveyors;
(7) Name and business address of the TPO the surveyors represent,
if applicable;
(8) Signatures of surveyors;
(9) A descriptive list of the items examined or witnessed during
each survey;
(10) A descriptive list of all non-conformities identified during
each survey, including those that were corrected during the course of
the survey;
(11) A descriptive list of:
(i) All non-conformities remaining at the end of each survey;
(ii) The required corrective actions;
(iii) The latest date of required corrective action; and
(iv) A description of the means by which the corrective actions
were verified;
(12) A descriptive list of items that need to be repaired or
replaced before the vessel continues service; and
(13) A statement that the vessel complies with the applicable
requirements of this subchapter and is fit for its route and service,
subject to the correction of non-conformities.
(b) The owner or managing operator must provide objective evidence
of compliance with this part in accordance with the TSMS applicable to
the vessel.
Subpart B--Inspections and Surveys for Certification
Sec. 137.200 Documenting compliance for the Coast Guard inspection
option.
A towing vessel subject to this subchapter and choosing the Coast
Guard inspection option, or required to have the Coast Guard inspection
option, must undergo an annual inspection within 3 months before or
after the COI anniversary date.
(a) Owners and managing operators must contact the cognizant
Officer in
[[Page 40110]]
Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) to schedule an inspection at a time
and place the OCMI approves. No written application is required.
(b) Annual inspections will be similar to the inspection for
certification but will cover less detail unless the marine inspector
finds deficiencies or determines that a major change has occurred since
the last inspection. If the marine inspector finds deficiencies or
finds that a major change to the vessel has occurred, he or she will
conduct a more detailed inspection to ensure that the vessel is in
satisfactory condition and fit for the service for which it is
intended. If the vessel passes the annual inspection, the Coast Guard
will endorse the vessel's current Certificate of Inspection (COI).
(c) If the annual inspection reveals the need, the owner or
managing operator must make any or all repairs or improvements within
the time period specified by the OCMI. The OCMI may use Form CG-835,
``Notice of Merchant Marine Inspection Requirements,'' to record
deficiencies discovered during the inspection. The OCMI will then give
a copy of the completed form to the master of the vessel.
(d) Nothing in this subpart limits the marine inspector from
conducting any tests or inspections he or she deems necessary to be
assured of the vessel's seaworthiness or fitness for its route and
service.
Sec. 137.202 Documenting compliance for the TSMS option.
The owner or managing operator of a towing vessel that chooses the
TSMS option for a towing vessel must document compliance with this
subpart as follows:
(a) Prior to obtaining the vessel's initial COI, the owner or
managing operator must provide a report to the Coast Guard of a survey
as described in Sec. 137.215 that demonstrates that the vessel
complies the requirements of this part.
(b) For the re-issuance of the vessel's COI, the owner or managing
operator must:
(1) Provide objective evidence of an external survey program as
described in Sec. 137.205; or
(2) Provide objective evidence of an internal survey program as
described in Sec. 137.210.
Sec. 137.205 External survey program.
(a) The owner or managing operator of a towing vessel that has
selected the TSMS option and who has chosen to demonstrate compliance
through an external survey program must:
(1) Have the vessel surveyed annually by a surveyor from a TPO;
(2) Ensure the survey is conducted in accordance with Sec.
137.215;
(3) Ensure the survey is conducted within 3 months of the
anniversary date of the COI;
(4) Ensure the TSMS applicable to the vessel includes policies and
procedures for complying with this section; and
(5) Make the applicable sections of the TSMS available to the
surveyor.
(b) The TPO must issue a report that meets the requirements in
Sec. 137.135.
Sec. 137.210 Internal survey program.
(a) The owner or managing operator of a towing vessel that has
selected the TSMS option and who has chosen to demonstrate vessel
compliance through an internal survey program must ensure that the TSMS
applicable to the vessel includes:
(1) Procedures for surveying and testing described in Sec.
137.215;
(2) Equipment, systems, and onboard procedures to be surveyed;
(3) Identification of items that would need repair or replacement
before the vessel could continue in service, such as deficiencies
identified on Form CG-835, ``Notice of Merchant Marine Inspection
Requirements,'' noted survey deficiencies, non-conformities, or other
corrective action reports;
(4) Procedures for documenting and reporting non-conformities and
deficiencies;
(5) Procedures for reporting and correcting major non-conformities;
(6) The responsible person or persons in management who have the
authority to:
(i) Stop all vessel operations pending the correction of non-
conformities and deficiencies;
(ii) Oversee vessel compliance activities; and
(iii) Track and verify that non-conformities and deficiencies were
corrected;
(7) Procedures for recordkeeping; and
(8) Procedures for assigning personnel with requisite experience
and expertise to carry out the elements of the survey.
(b) The owner or managing operator is not required to survey the
items as described in Sec. 137.220 as one event, but may survey items
on a schedule over time, provided that the interval between successive
surveys of any item does not exceed 1 year, unless otherwise
prescribed.
Sec. 137.212 Coast Guard oversight of vessel survey program for
vessels under the TSMS option.
If the cognizant OCMI has reasonable cause to believe that a
vessel's survey program is deficient, that OCMI may:
(a) Require an audit or survey of the vessel in the presence of a
representative of the cognizant OCMI;
(b) Increase the frequency of the audits;
(c) For vessels under the internal survey program, require that the
vessel comply with the external survey program requirements of Sec.
137.205;
(d) Require any other specific action within his or her authority
that he or she considers appropriate; or
(e) For repeatedly deficient surveys, remove the vessel and or
owner or managing operator from using the TSMS option.
Sec. 137.215 General conduct of survey.
(a) When conducting a survey of a towing vessel as required by this
subpart, the surveyor must determine that the item or system functions
as designed, is free of defects or modifications that reduce its
effectiveness, is suitable for the service intended, and functions
safely in a manner consistent for vessel type, service and route.
(b) The survey must address the items in Sec. 137.220 as
applicable, and must include:
(1) A review of certificates and documentation held on the vessel;
(2) A visual examination and tests of the vessel and its equipment
and systems in order to confirm that their condition is properly
maintained and that proper quantities are onboard;
(3) A visual examination of the systems used in support of drills
or training to determine that the equipment utilized during a drill
operates as intended; and
(4) A visual examination to confirm that unapproved modifications
were not made to the vessel or its equipment.
(c) Beyond the minimum standards required by this section, the
thoroughness and stringency of the survey will depend upon the
condition of the vessel and its equipment. If a surveyor finds a vessel
to have multiple deficiencies indicative of systematic failures to
maintain the installed equipment, he or she will conduct an expanded
examination to ensure all deficiencies are identified and corrective
action is promptly taken.
(d) The owner or managing operator must notify the cognizant OCMI
when the condition of the vessel, its equipment, systems, or
operations, create an unsafe condition.
(e) The cognizant OCMI may require that the owner or managing
operator provide for the attendance of a surveyor or auditor from a TPO
to assist with verifying compliance with this part.
[[Page 40111]]
Sec. 137.220 Scope.
The owner or managing operator of a towing vessel that has selected
the TSMS option must examine or must have examined the following
systems, equipment, and procedures to ensure that the vessel and its
equipment are suitable for the service for which the vessel is
certificated:
(a) TSMS. (1) Verify that the vessel is enrolled in a TSMS that
complies with part 138 of this subchapter.
(2) Verify that the policies and procedures applicable to the
vessel are available to the crew.
(3) Verify that internal and external audits are conducted in
accordance with the approved TSMS.
(4) Verify that recordkeeping requirements are met.
(b) Hull structure and appurtenances. Verify that the vessel
complies with part 144 of this subchapter, examine the condition of,
and where appropriate, witness the operation of the following:
(1) All accessible parts of the exterior and interior of the hull,
the watertight bulkheads, and weather decks.
(2) All watertight closures in the hull, decks, and bulkheads,
including through hull fittings and sea valves.
(3) Superstructure, masts, and similar arrangements constructed on
the hull.
(4) Railings and bulwarks and their attachments to the hull
structure.
(5) The presence of appropriate guards or rails.
(6) All weathertight closures above the weather deck and the
provisions for drainage of sea water from the exposed decks.
(7) Watertight doors, verifying local and remote operation and
proper fit.
(8) All accessible interior spaces to ensure that they are
adequately ventilated and drained, and that means of escape are
maintained and operate as intended.
(9) Vessel markings.
(c) Machinery, fuel, and piping systems. Verify that the vessel
complies with applicable requirements contained in part 143 of this
subchapter, examine the condition of, and where appropriate, witness
the operation of:
(1) Engine control mechanisms, including primary and alternate
means, if the vessel is equipped with alternate means, of starting
machinery, directional controls, and emergency shutdowns;
(2) All machinery essential to the routine operation of the vessel,
including generators and cooling systems;
(3) All fuel systems, including fuel tanks, tank vents, piping, and
pipe fittings;
(4) All valves in fuel lines, including local and remote operation;
(5) All overboard discharge and intake valves and watertight
bulkhead pipe penetration valves;
(6) Means provided for pumping bilges; and
(7) Machinery shut-downs and alarms.
(d) Steering systems. Examine the condition of, and where
appropriate, witness the operation of:
(1) Steering systems and equipment ensuring smooth operation;
(2) Auxiliary means of steering, if installed; and
(3) Alarms.
(e) Pressure vessels and boilers. Verify that the vessel complies
with applicable requirements in part 143 of this subchapter.
(f) Electrical. Verify that the vessel complies with applicable
requirements in part 143 of this subchapter, examine the condition of,
and where appropriate, witness the operation of:
(1) All cables, as far as practicable, without undue disturbance of
the cable or electrical apparatus;
(2) Circuit breakers, including testing by manual operation;
(3) Fuses, including ensuring the ratings of fuses are suitable for
the service intended;
(4) All generators, motors, lighting fixtures, and circuit
interrupting devices;
(5) Batteries including security of stowage;
(6) Electrical equipment, which operates as part of or in
conjunction with a fire detection or alarm system installed onboard, to
ensure operation in case of fire; and
(7) All emergency electrical systems, including any automatic
systems if installed.
(g) Lifesaving. Verify that the vessel complies with applicable
requirements contained in part 141 of this subchapter and examine the
condition of lifesaving equipment and systems as follows:
(1) Verify that the vessel is equipped with the required number of
lifejackets, work vests, and immersion suits.
(2) Verify the serviceable condition of each lifejacket, work vest,
and marine buoyant device.
(3) Verify that each item of lifesaving equipment found to be
defective has been repaired or replaced.
(4) Verify that each lifejacket, other personal floatation device,
or other lifesaving device found to be defective and incapable of
repair was destroyed or removed.
(5) Verify that each piece of expired lifesaving equipment has been
replaced.
(6) Examine each survival craft and launching appliance in
accordance with subchapter W of this chapter.
(7) Verify the servicing of each inflatable liferaft, inflatable
buoyant apparatus, and inflatable lifejacket as required by subchapter
W of this chapter.
(8) Verify the proper servicing of each hydrostatic release unit,
other than a disposable hydrostatic release unit, as required under
subchapter W of this chapter.
(9) Verify that the vessel's crew conducted abandon ship and man
overboard drills under simulated emergency conditions.
(h) Fire protection. Verify that the vessel complies with
applicable requirements contained in part 142 of this subchapter, and
examine or verify the fire protection equipment and systems as follows:
(1) Verify that the vessel is equipped with the required fire
protection equipment for the vessel's route and service.
(2) Verify that the inspection, testing, and maintenance as
required by Sec. 142.240 of this subchapter are performed.
(3) Verify that the training requirements of Sec. 142.245 of this
subchapter are carried out.
(i) Towing gear. Verify that the vessel complies with the
applicable requirements in parts 140 of this subchapter, and examine or
verify the condition of, and where appropriate, the operation of the
following:
(1) Deck machinery including controls, guards, alarms and safety
features.
(2) Hawsers, wires, bridles, push gear, and related vessel fittings
for damage or wear.
(3) Verify that the vessel complies with 33 CFR part 164, if
applicable.
(j) Navigation equipment. Verify that the vessel complies with the
applicable requirements in part 140 of this subchapter, and examine or
verify the condition of and, where appropriate, the operation of the
following:
(1) Navigation systems and equipment.
(2) Navigation lights.
(3) Navigation charts or maps appropriate to the area of operation
and corrected up to date.
(4) Examine the operation of equipment and systems necessary to
maintain visibility through the pilothouse windows.
(5) Verify that the vessel complies with 33 CFR part 164, if
applicable.
(k) Sanitary examination. Examine the quarters, toilet and washing
spaces, galleys, serving pantries, lockers, and similar spaces to
ensure that they are clean and decently habitable.
(l) Unsafe practices. (1) Verify that all observed unsafe
practices, fire hazards,
[[Page 40112]]
and other hazardous situations are corrected, and that all required
guards and protective devices are in satisfactory condition.
(2) Verify that bilges and other spaces are free of excessive
accumulation of oil, trash, debris, or other matter that might create a
fire hazard, clog bilge pumping systems, or block emergency escapes.
(m) Vessel personnel. Verify that the:
(1) Vessel is manned in accordance with the vessel's COI;
(2) Crew is maintaining vessel logs and records in accordance with
applicable regulations and the TSMS appropriate to the vessel;
(3) Crew is complying with the crew safety and personnel health
requirements of part 140 of this subchapter; and
(4) Crew has received training required by parts 140, 141, and 142
of this subchapter.
(n) Prevention of oil pollution. Examine the vessel to ensure
compliance with the oil pollution prevention requirements in Sec.
140.655 of this subchapter.
(o) Miscellaneous systems and equipment. Examine all items in the
vessel's outfit, such as ground tackle, markings, and placards that are
required to be carried in accordance with the regulations in this
subchapter.
Subpart C--Drydock and Internal Structural Surveys
Sec. 137.300 Intervals for drydock and internal structural
examinations.
(a) Regardless of the option chosen to obtain a COI, upon obtaining
a COI each towing vessel must then undergo a drydock and internal
structural examination at the following intervals:
(1) A vessel that is exposed to salt water more than 6 months in
any 12-month period since the last examination or initial certification
must undergo a drydock and internal structural examination at least
twice every 5 years, with not more than 36 months between examinations.
(2) A vessel that is exposed to salt water not more than 6 months
in any 12-month period since the last examination or initial
certification must undergo a drydock and internal structural
examination at least once every 5 years.
(b) The cognizant OCMI may require additional examinations of the
vessel whenever he or she discovers or suspects damage or deterioration
to hull plating or structural members that may affect the seaworthiness
or fitness for the route or service of a vessel. These examinations may
include a drydock examination, including:
(1) An internal structural examination of any affected space of a
vessel, including its fuel tanks;
(2) A removal of the vessel from service to assess the extent of
the damage and to affect permanent repairs; or
(3) An adjustment of the drydock examination intervals to monitor
the vessel's structural condition.
Sec. 137.302 Documenting compliance for the Coast Guard inspection
option.
The managing owner or managing operator of a towing vessel, who has
selected the Coast Guard inspection option, must make their vessel
available for the Coast Guard to conduct the examinations required by
this subpart in accordance with the intervals prescribed in Sec.
137.300.
Sec. 137.305 Documenting compliance for the TSMS option.
The owner or managing operator of a towing vessel, who has selected
the TSMS option, must document compliance with this subpart as follows:
(a) For vessels under the external survey program, provide
objective evidence of compliance with Sec. 137.310.
(b) For vessels under the internal survey program, provide
objective evidence of compliance with Sec. 137.315.
(c) Provide objective evidence that the vessel has undergone a
drydock and internal structural examination, including options
permitted in Sec. 137.320 or Sec. 137.322.
Sec. 137.310 External survey program.
(a) The owner or managing operator of a towing vessel that has
selected the TSMS option and who has chosen to demonstrates compliance
through an external survey program must:
(1) Have the vessel examined by a surveyor from a TPO at the
intervals prescribed in Sec. 137.300;
(2) Ensure the examination is conducted in accordance with Sec.
137.325;
(3) Ensure the TSMS applicable to the vessel includes policies and
procedures for complying with this section; and
(4) Make the applicable sections of the TSMS available to the
surveyor.
(b) The drydock examination and internal structural examination
must be documented in a report that contains the information required
in Sec. 137.135.
Sec. 137.315 Internal survey program.
(a) The owner or managing operator of a towing vessel that has
selected the TSMS option and who has chosen to demonstrate vessel
compliance with this subpart through an internal survey program must
ensure that the TSMS applicable to the vessel includes:
(1) A survey program that meets the requirements contained in Sec.
137.325;
(2) Qualifications of the personnel authorized to carry out a
survey program that are comparable to the requirements of a surveyor
from a TPO as described in Sec. 139.130 of this subchapter;
(3) Procedures for documenting and reporting non-conformities and
deficiencies;
(4) Procedures for reporting and correcting major non-conformities;
(5) The identification of a responsible person in management who
has the authority to stop all vessel operations pending corrections, to
oversee vessel compliance activities, and to track and verify the
corrections of non-conformities and deficiencies; and
(6) Objective evidence that supports the completion of all elements
of a vessel's drydock and internal structural examinations.
(b) The owner or managing operator must notify the TPO responsible
for auditing the TSMS whenever activities related to credit drydocking
or internal structural examinations are to be carried out prior to
commencing the activities.
(c) The interval between examinations of each item may not exceed
the applicable interval described in Sec. 137.300.
(d) The owner or managing operator must notify the cognizant OCMI
of the zone within which activities related to credit drydocking or
internal structural examinations are to be carried out prior to
commencing the activities.
Sec. 137.317 Coast Guard oversight of drydock and internal structural
examination program for vessels under the TSMS option.
If the cognizant OCMI has reasonable cause to believe the program
for the drydock examination and internal structural examination is
deficient, he or she may:
(a) Require an audit of ongoing drydocking procedures and of
documentation applicable to the vessel, in the presence of a
representative of the cognizant OCMI;
(b) Increase the frequency of the audits;
(c) For vessels under the internal survey program, require an
examination by a TPO;
(d) Require any other action within his or her authority that he or
she considers appropriate; or
(e) For continued deficiencies, remove the vessel, owner, managing
operator, or all three, from the TSMS option.
[[Page 40113]]
Sec. 137.320 Vessels holding a valid load line certificate.
A drydock and internal structural examination performed for a
towing vessel to maintain a valid load line certificate issued in
accordance with subchapter E of this chapter would count as an
examination required under Sec. 137.300.
Sec. 137.322 Classed vessels.
(a) A drydock and internal structural examination performed for a
towing vessel to maintain class by the American Bureau of Shipping in
accordance with their rules, as appropriate for the intended service
and routes, would count as an examination required under Sec. 137.300.
(b) A drydock and internal structural examination performed for a
towing vessel to maintain class by a recognized classification society
in accordance with their rules, as appropriate for the intended service
and routes, would count as an examination required under Sec. 137.300,
provided the Coast Guard has accepted their applicable rules.
Sec. 137.325 General conduct of examination.
(a) When conducting an examination of a towing vessel as required
by this subpart, the surveyor must determine whether any defect,
deterioration, damage, or modifications of the hull and related
structure and components may adversely affect the vessel's
seaworthiness or fitness or suitability for its route or service.
(b) The examination must address the items in Sec. 137.330 as
applicable, and must include:
(1) Access to internal spaces as appropriate;
(2) A visual examination of the external structure of the vessel to
confirm that the condition is properly maintained; and
(3) A visual examination to confirm that unapproved modifications
were not made to the vessel.
(c) The thoroughness and stringency of the examination will depend
upon the condition of the vessel.
(d) The owner or managing operator must notify the cognizant OCMI
when the condition of the vessel may create an unsafe condition.
(e) The cognizant OCMI may require the owner or managing operator
to provide for the attendance of a surveyor or auditor from a TPO to
assist with verifying the vessel's compliance with the requirements in
this subpart.
Sec. 137.330 Scope of the drydock examination.
(a) This regulation applies to all towing vessels covered by this
subchapter. The drydock examination must be conducted while the vessel
is hauled out of the water or placed in a drydock or slipway. The Coast
Guard inspector or surveyor conducting this examination must:
(1) Examine the exterior of the hull, including bottom, sides,
headlog, and stern, and examine all appendages for damage, fractures,
wastage, pitting, or improper repairs;
(2) Examine each tail shaft for bends, cracks, and damage,
including the sleeves or other bearing contact surfaces on the tail
shaft for wear. The tail shaft need not be removed for examination if
these items can otherwise be properly evaluated;
(3) Examine the rudders for damage, the upper and lower bearings
for wear, and the rudder stock for damage or wear. Rudders need not be
removed for examination if these items can be otherwise properly
evaluated. This also includes other underwater components of steering
and propulsion mechanisms;
(4) Examine the propellers for cracks and damage;
(5) Examine the exterior components of the machinery cooling system
for leaks, damage, or deterioration;
(6) Open and examine all sea chests, through-hull fittings, and
strainers for damage, deterioration, or fouling; and
(7) On wooden vessels, pull fastenings as required for examination.
(b) An internal structural examination required by this part may be
conducted while the vessel is afloat or while it is out of the water.
It consists of a complete examination of the vessel's main strength
members, including the major internal framing, the hull plating and
planking; voids; and ballast, cargo, and fuel oil tanks. Where the
internal framing, plating, or planking of the vessel is concealed,
sections of the lining, ceiling, or insulation may be removed or the
parts otherwise probed or exposed to determine the condition of the
hull structure. Fuel oil tanks need not be cleaned out and internally
examined if the general condition of the tanks is determined to be
satisfactory by an external examination.
Sec. 137.335 Underwater survey in lieu of drydocking.
(a) This section applies to all towing vessels subject to this
subchapter. If a TSMS is applicable to the vessel, the TSMS may include
policies and procedures for employing and documenting an underwater
survey in lieu of drydocking (UWILD). A vessel is eligible for UWILD if
the Coast Guard determines that:
(1) There is no obvious damage or defect in the hull adversely
affecting the seaworthiness or fitness for the vessel's route or
service;
(2) The vessel has been operated satisfactorily since the last
drydocking;
(3) The vessel is less than 15 years of age;
(4) The vessel has a steel or aluminum hull; and
(5) The vessel is fitted with a hull protection system.
(b) The owner or managing operator must submit an application to
the cognizant OCMI at least 90 days before the vessel's next required
drydock examination. The application must include:
(1) The procedure for carrying out the underwater survey;
(2) The time and place of the underwater survey;
(3) The method used to accurately determine the diver's or the
remotely operated vehicle's location relative to the hull;
(4) The means for examining all through-hull fittings and
appurtenances;
(5) The condition of the vessel, including the anticipated draft of
the vessel at the time of the survey;
(6) A description of the hull protection system; and
(7) The names and qualifications of all personnel involved in
conducting the UWILD.
(c) If a vessel is 15 years of age or older, the Commandant may
approve a UWILD at alternating intervals provided that:
(1) All provisions of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section are
complied with, except that the vessel does not need to be less than 15
years of age; and
(2) During the vessel's drydock examination preceding the
underwater survey, a complete set of hull gauging was taken which
indicated that the vessel was free from hull deterioration.
PART 138--TOWING SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (TSMS)
Sec.
Subpart A--General
138.100 Purpose.
138.115 Compliance.
Subpart B--Towing Safety Management System (TSMS)
138.205 Purpose of a TSMS.
138.210 Objectives of a TSMS.
138.215 Functional requirements of a TSMS.
138.220 TSMS elements.
138.225 Existing safety management systems (SMSs).
Subpart C--Documenting Compliance
138.305 TSMS certificate.
138.310 Internal audits for a TSMS certificate.
[[Page 40114]]
138.315 External audits for a TSMS certificate.
Subpart D--Audits
138.400 General.
138.405 Conduct of internal audits.
138.410 Conduct of external audits.
Subpart E--Coast Guard or Organizational Oversight and Review
138.500 Notification prior to audit.
138.505 Submittal of external audit results.
138.510 Required attendance.
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3301, 3306, 3308, 3316, 8104, 8904;
33 CFR 1.05; DHS Delegation 0170.1.
Subpart A--General
Sec. 138.100 Purpose.
The purpose of this part is to prescribe requirements for owners or
managing operators of towing vessels who adopt a Towing Safety
Management System (TSMS) under this subchapter.
Sec. 138.115 Compliance.
Owners or managing operators selecting the TSMS option must obtain
a TSMS certificate issued under Sec. 138.305 at least 6 months before
obtaining a Certificate of Inspection (COI) for any of their vessels
covered by the TSMS certificate.
Subpart B--Towing Safety Management System (TSMS)
Sec. 138.205 Purpose of a TSMS.
(a) The purpose of a TSMS is to establish policies, procedures, and
required documentation to ensure the owner or managing operator meets
its established goals while ensuring continuous compliance with all
regulatory requirements. The TSMS must contain a method to ensure all
levels of the organization are working within the framework.
(b) A TSMS establishes and maintains:
(1) Management policies and procedures that serve as an operational
protocol for all levels within management;
(2) Procedures to produce objective evidence that demonstrates
compliance with the requirements of this subchapter;
(3) Procedures for an owner or managing operator to evaluate that
they are following their own policies and procedures and complying with
the requirements of this subchapter;
(4) Arrangements for a periodic evaluation by an independent third-
party organization (TPO) to determine how well an owner or managing
operator and their towing vessels are complying with their stated
policies and procedures, and to verify that those policies and
procedures comply with the requirements of this subchapter; and
(5) Procedures for correcting problems identified by management
personnel and TPOs and facilitating continuous improvement.
Sec. 138.210 Objectives of a TSMS.
The TSMS, through policies, procedures, and documentation, must:
(a) Demonstrate management responsibility. The management must
demonstrate that they implemented the policies and procedures as
contained in the TSMS and the entire organization is adhering to their
safety management program.
(b) Document management procedures. A TSMS must describe and
document the owner or managing operator's organizational structure,
responsibilities, procedures, and resources which ensure quality
monitoring.
(c) Ensure document and data control. There must be clear
identification of what types of documents and data are to be
controlled, and who is responsible for controlling activities,
including approval, issue, distribution, modification, removal of
obsolete materials, and other related administrative functions.
(d) Provide a process and criteria for selection of third parties.
Procedures for selection of TPOs must exist that include how third
parties are evaluated, including selection criteria.
(e) Establish a system of recordkeeping. Records must be maintained
to demonstrate effective implementation of the TSMS. This must include
audit records, non-conformity reports and corrective actions, auditor
qualifications, auditor training, and other records as considered
necessary.
(f) Identify and meet training needs. The owner or operator must
establish and maintain documented procedures for identifying training
needs and providing training.
(g) Ensure adequate resources. Identify adequate resources and
procedures necessary to comply with the TSMS.
Sec. 138.215 Functional requirements of a TSMS.
The functional requirements of a TSMS include:
(a) Policies and procedures to provide direction for the safe
operation of towing vessels and protection of the marine environment in
compliance with applicable U.S. law, including the Code of Federal
Regulations, and, if on an international voyage, applicable
international conventions to which the United States is a party;
(b) Defined levels of authority and lines of communication between
shoreside and vessel personnel;
(c) Procedures for reporting accidents and non-conformities;
(d) Procedures to prepare for and respond to emergency situations
by shoreside and vessel personnel;
(e) Procedures for verification of vessel compliance with this
subchapter;
(f) Procedures for internal auditing of the TSMS, including
shoreside and vessel operations;
(g) Procedures for external audits;
(h) Procedures for management review of internal and external audit
reports and correction of non-conformities; and
(i) Procedures to evaluate recommendations made by management and
other personnel.
Sec. 138.220 TSMS elements.
The TSMS must include the elements listed in paragrahs (a) through
(d) of this section. If an element listed is not applicable to an owner
or managing operator, appropriate justification must be documented and
is subject to acceptance by the TPO.
(a) Administration and management organization. A policy must be in
place that outlines the TSMS culture and how management intends to
ensure compliance with this subpart. Supporting this policy, the
following procedures and documentation must be included:
(1) Management organization--(i) Responsibilities. The management
organization, authority, and responsibilities of individuals must be
documented.
(ii) Designated person. Each owner or managing operator must
designate in writing the shoreside person(s) responsible for ensuring
the TSMS is implemented and continuously functions throughout
management and the fleet. They must also designate the shoreside
person(s) responsible for ensuring that the vessels are properly
maintained and in operable condition, including those responsible for
emergency assistance to each towing vessel.
(iii) Master authority. Each owner or managing operator must define
the scope of the master's authority. The master's authority must
provide for the ability to make final determinations on safe operations
of the towing vessel. Specifically, it must provide the authority for
the master to cease operation if an unsafe condition exists.
(2) Audits--(i) Procedures for conducting internal and external
audits.
[[Page 40115]]
The TSMS must contain procedures for audits in accordance with
Sec. Sec. 138.310 and 138.315.
(ii) Procedures for identifying and correcting non-conformities.
The TSMS must contain procedures for any person to report non-
conformities. The procedures must describe how an initial report should
be made and the actions taken to follow-up and ensure appropriate
resolution.
(b) Personnel. Policies must be in place that cover the owner or
managing operator's approach to managing personnel, including, but not
limited to, employment, training, and health and safety of personnel.
Supporting these polices, the following procedures and documentation
must be included:
(1) Employment procedures. The TSMS must contain procedures related
to the employment of individuals. Procedures must be in place to ensure
adequate qualifications of personnel, to include background checks,
compliance with drug and alcohol standards, and that personnel are able
to perform required tasks.
(2) Training of personnel. The TSMS must contain a policy related
to the training of personnel, including:
(i) New-hire orientation;
(ii) Duties associated with the execution of the TSMS;
(iii) Execution of operational duties;
(iv) Execution of emergency procedures;
(v) Occupational health;
(vi) Crew safety; and
(vii) Training required by this Subchapter.
(c) Verification of vessel compliance. Policies must be in place
that cover the owner or managing operator's approach for ensuring
vessel compliance, including, but not limited to, policies on
maintenance and survey, safety, the environment, security, and
emergency preparedness. Supporting these policies, the following
procedures and documentation must be included:
(1) Maintenance and survey. Procedures outlining the owner or
managing operator's survey regime must specify all maintenance,
examination, and survey requirements, including the minimum
qualifications of persons assigned to carry out required surveys the
owner or managing operator is using the internal examination program.
Applicable documentation must be maintained for all activities for a
period of 5 years.
(2) Safety, environment, and security. Procedures must be in place
to ensure safety of property, the environment, and personnel. This must
include procedures to ensure the selection of the appropriate vessel,
including adequate maneuverability and horsepower, appropriate rigging
and towing gear, proper management of the navigational watch, and
compliance with applicable security measures.
(d) Compliance with this subchapter. Procedures and documentation
must be in place to ensure that each towing vessel complies with the
operational, equipment, and personnel requirements of this subchapter.
Sec. 138.225 Existing safety management systems (SMSs).
(a) A safety management system (SMS) which is fully compliant with
the International Safety Management (ISM) Code requirements,
implemented in 33 CFR part 96, will be deemed in compliance with TSMS-
related requirements in this subchapter.
(b) Other existing SMSs may be considered for acceptance as meeting
the TSMS requirements of this part. The Coast Guard may:
(1) Accept such system in full;
(2) Require modifications to the system as a condition of
acceptance; or
(3) Reject the system.
(c) An owner or managing operator who seeks to meet TSMS
requirements using provisions in paragraph (a) or (b) of this section
must submit documentation to the Coast Guard based on the initial audit
and one full audit cycle of at least 3 years.
(d) The Coast Guard may elect to inspect equipment and records,
including:
(1) Contents of the SMS;
(2) Objective evidence of internal and external audits;
(3) Objective evidence that non-conformities were identified and
corrected; and
(4) Objective evidence of vessel compliance with applicable
regulations.
Subpart C--Documenting Compliance
Sec. 138.305 TSMS certificate.
(a) The owner or managing operator will be issued a TSMS
certificate by a TPO when his or her organization is deemed in
compliance with the TSMS requirements. It should be kept on file at the
owner or managing operator's shoreside office and available for review,
at the request of the Coast Guard.
(b) A TSMS certificate is valid for 5 years from the date of issue,
unless suspended, revoked or rescinded as provided in paragraphs (d)
and (e) of this section.
(c) The vessel owner or managing operator must maintain a list of
vessels currently covered by each TSMS certificate and must provide it
to the Coast Guard upon request.
(d) A TSMS certificate may be suspended or revoked by the Coast
Guard at any time for non-compliance with the requirements of this
part.
(e) The TPO that issued the TSMS certificate may rescind the
certificate for non-compliance with the requirements of this part.
(f) A copy of the TSMS certificate must be maintained on each
towing vessel that is covered by the TSMS certificate and on file at
the owner or managing operator's shoreside office.
Sec. 138.310 Internal audits for a TSMS certificate.
(a) Internal management audits must be conducted annually, within 3
months of the anniversary date of the TSMS certificate, to ensure the
owner or managing operator is effectively implementing all elements of
their TSMS.
(b) The internal management audit must ensure that management has
implemented the TSMS throughout all levels of the organization,
including audits of all the owner or managing operator's towing vessels
to which a TSMS applies to ensure implementation at the operational
level.
(c) The results of internal audits must be documented and
maintained for a period of 5 years and made available to the Coast
Guard upon request.
(d) Internal auditors:
(1) Must have knowledge of the management, its SMS, and the
standards contained in this subchapter;
(2) Must have completed an ANSI/ISO/ASQ Q9001-2000 or ISO
9001:2008(E) (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this
subchapter) internal auditor/assessor course or Coast Guard-recognized
equivalent;
(3) May not be the designated person, or any other person, within
the organization that is responsible for development or implementation
of the TSMS; and
(4) Must be independent of the procedures being audited, unless
this is impracticable due to the size and the nature of the
organization.
Sec. 138.315 External audits for a TSMS certificate.
External audits for obtaining and renewing a TSMS certificate are
conducted through a TPO and must include both management and vessels as
follows:
(a) Management audits. (1) Prior to the issuance of an owner or
managing operator's initial TSMS certificate, or subsequent renewals,
an external management audit must be conducted by an auditor from a
TPO.
(2) A mid-period external management audit must be conducted
[[Page 40116]]
between the 27th and 33rd month of the certificate's period of
validity.
(b) Vessel audits. (1) An external audit must be conducted prior to
the issuance of the initial COI for vessels subject to an owner or
managing operator's TSMS that have been owned or operated for 6 or more
months prior to receiving the initial COI.
(2) An external audit must be conducted no later than 6 months
after the issuance of the initial COI for vessels subject to the owner
or managing operator's TSMS that have been owned or operated for fewer
than 6 months prior to receiving the initial COI.
(3) An external audit of all vessels covered by a TSMS certificate
must be conducted during the 5-year period of validity of the TSMS
certificate. The vessels must be selected randomly and distributed as
evenly as possible.
(4) External audits may include the use of objective evidence which
may be available at the owner or managing operator's corporate office.
Some portions of this audit require visiting each vessel at some point
during the 5-year period of validity of the TSMS certificate.
(c) Documentation. The results of the external audit must be
documented and maintained for a period of 5 years and made available to
the Coast Guard or the external auditor upon request.
Subpart D--Audits
Sec. 138.400 General.
Management and vessels are subject to internal and external audits
to assess compliance with TSMS and the vessel standards requirements of
this subchapter.
Sec. 138.405 Conduct of internal audits.
(a) Internal audits are conducted by, or on behalf of, the
management and may be performed by a designated employee or by
contracted individual(s) who conduct the audit as if an employee of the
owner or managing operator.
(b) Internal audits are not necessarily conducted as one event;
they can be taken in segments over time.
(c) Internal audits must be of sufficient depth and breadth to
ensure the owner or managing operator established adequate procedures
and documentation to comply with the TSMS requirements of this part,
that the TSMS was implemented throughout all levels of the
organization, and that the owner or managing operator's vessels comply
with this subchapter and the TSMS.
(d) The auditor must have the authority to examine documentation,
question personnel, examine vessel equipment, witness system testing,
and observe personnel training, including drills, as necessary to
verify TSMS effectiveness.
Sec. 138.410 Conduct of external audits.
(a) External audits must be conducted by an auditor from a TPO and
cover all elements of the TSMS requirements of this subchapter, but may
be conducted on a sampling basis of each of those TSMS elements.
(b) External audits must be of sufficient depth and breadth to
ensure the owner or operating manager effectively implemented its TSMS
throughout all levels of the organization, including onboard its
vessels.
(c) The auditor must be provided access to examine any requested
documentation, question personnel, examine vessel equipment, witness
system testing, and observe personnel training, including drills, as
necessary to verify TSMS effectiveness.
(d) The auditor may broaden the scope of the audit if:
(1) The TSMS is incomplete or not effectively implemented;
(2) Conditions found are not consistent with the records; or
(3) Unsafe conditions are identified.
(e) The auditor may verify compliance with vessel standards and
TSMS requirements through a review of objective evidence such as
checklists, invoices, and reports, and may conduct a visual sampling
onboard the vessels to determine whether or not the conditions onboard
the vessel are consistent with the records reviewed.
(f) If an auditor identifies a major non-conformity during the
course of the external audit, then the auditor must notify the local
Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) within 24 hours and the
owner or managing operator's designated representative in accordance
with the TSMS applicable to the vessel.
Subpart E--Coast Guard or Organizational Oversight and Review
Sec. 138.500 Notification prior to audit.
(a) The owner or managing operator of a towing vessel must notify
the local OCMI at least 72 hours prior to an external audit being
conducted under this part.
(b) The Coast Guard may require that a Coast Guard representative
accompany the auditor during part, or all, of an external audit.
(c) The Coast Guard may conduct a separate audit of the owner or
managing operator or its towing vessels, at its discretion.
Sec. 138.505 Submittal of external audit results.
(a) Submission of external management audits. The results of an
external management audit as required by Sec. 138.315 must be
submitted to the Towing Vessel National Center of Expertise within 30
days of audit completion by the TPO conducting the external audit. The
mailing address for the Coast Guard Towing Vessel National Center of
Expertise is 504 Broadway Street, Suite 101, Paducah, Kentucky 42001.
(b) Submission of external vessel audits. The results of any
external vessel audits required by Sec. 138.315 must be submitted to
the cognizant OCMI within 30 days of audit completion by the TPO
conducting the external audit.
(c) Electronic submissions. The results of external audits required
by this section may be submitted electronically so long as the means
used allows the Coast Guard to reliably verify the person making the
submission and the authenticity of the records submitted. For those
seeking to submit external audit records to the Coast Guard
electronically, the TSMS must address the means to be used to make
these electronic submissions.
Sec. 138.510 Required attendance.
(a) The TPO and the owner or managing operator may be required to
explain or otherwise demonstrate areas of the TSMS to the Coast Guard
if there is evidence that a TSMS, for which a TSMS certificate was
issued, is not in compliance with the provisions of this part. The
Coast Guard may require a third party's attendance at the vessel or the
office of the owner or managing operator for this purpose.
(b) The Coast Guard will not bear any of the costs for a third
party's attendance at the vessel or the office of the owner or managing
operator when complying with this provision.
PART 139--THIRD-PARTY ORGANIZATIONS
Sec.
139.100 Purpose.
139.110 Organizations not subject to further approval.
139.115 General.
139.120 Application for approval as a TPO.
139.125 Approval of TPO.
139.130 Qualifications of auditors and surveyors.
139.135 Addition and removal of auditors and surveyors.
139.140 Renewal of TPO approval.
139.145 Suspension of approval.
139.150 Revocation of approval.
139.155 Appeals of suspension or revocation of approval.
139.160 Coast Guard oversight activities.
[[Page 40117]]
139.165 Documentation.
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3301, 3306, 3308, 3316, 8104, 8904;
33 CFR 1.05; DHS Delegation 0170.1.
Sec. 139.100 Purpose.
(a) This part states the requirements applicable to third-party
organizations (TPOs) that conduct audits and surveys for towing vessels
as required by this subchapter.
(b) The Commandant delegates to the Towing Vessel National Center
of Expertise (TVNCOE) the authority to carry out the functions of this
part associated with approval of TPOs, including revocation and
suspension of approval.
Sec. 139.110 Organizations not subject to further approval.
(a) A recognized classification society, which has satisfied the
requirements in 46 CFR 8.230, meets the requirements of a TPO for the
purposes of this part and may perform the work as a third-party
auditor.
(b) An authorized classification society, which has been authorized
under 46 CFR part 8, subpart C or D, meets the requirements of a TPO
for the purposes of this part and may perform the work as a third-party
surveyor.
(c) The organizations qualifying as TPOs under paragraph (a) or (b)
of this section must ensure that employees providing services under
this part hold proper qualifications for the particular type of service
being performed.
Sec. 139.115 General.
(a) The Coast Guard approves TPOs to carry out functions related to
ensuring that towing vessels comply with provisions of this subchapter.
Organizations may be approved to:
(1) Conduct audits of a Towing Safety Management System (TSMS), and
the vessels to which the TSMS applies, to verify compliance with the
applicable provisions of this subchapter;
(2) Issue TSMS certificates to the owner or managing operator who
is in compliance with part 138 of this subchapter;
(3) Conduct surveys of towing vessels to verify compliance with the
applicable provisions of this subchapter; and
(4) Issue survey reports detailing the results of surveys, carried
out in compliance with part 137 of this subchapter.
(b) An organization seeking approval under this part must provide
objective evidence to the Coast Guard that its program:
(1) Is independent of the owner or managing operator and vessels
that it audits or surveys;
(2) Operates within a quality management system acceptable to the
Coast Guard;
(3) Ensures its auditors and surveyors are qualified and maintain
continued competence;
(4) Demonstrates the ability to carry out the responsibilities of
approval; and
(5) Meets all other requirements of this part.
(c) A list of TPOs will be maintained by the Coast Guard, and made
available upon request.
Sec. 139.120 Application for approval as a TPO.
An organization, which may include a business entity or an
association, desiring to be approved as a TPO under this part must
submit a written request to the Towing Vessel National Center of
Expertise, 504 Broadway St Suite 101, Paducah, KY 42001. The
organization must provide the following information:
(a) A description of the organization, including the ownership,
structure, and organizational components.
(b) A general description of the clients being served or intended
to be served.
(c) A description of the types of work performed by the
organization or by the principals of the organization in the past,
noting the amount and extent of such work performed within the previous
3 years.
(d) Objective evidence of an internal quality system based on ANSI/
ISO/ASQ Q9001-2000 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of
this subchapter) or an equivalent quality standard.
(e) Organization procedures and supporting documentation that
describe processes used to perform an audit and records to show system
effectiveness.
(f) Copies of checklists, forms, or other tools to be used as
guides or for recording the results of audits and/or surveys.
(g) Organization procedures for appeals and grievances.
(h) The organization's code of ethics applicable to the
organization and its auditors and/or surveyors.
(i) A list of the organization's auditors and/or surveyors who meet
the requirements of Sec. 139.130. This list must include the
experience, background, and qualifications for each auditor and/or
surveyor.
(j) A description of the organization's means of assuring continued
competence of its personnel.
(k) The organization's procedures for terminating or removing
auditors and/or surveyors.
(l) A description of the organization's means of assuring the
availability of its personnel to meet the needs of the towing companies
for conducting audits and surveys within the intervals established in
this subchapter.
(m) A description of the organization's apprentice or associate
program for auditors and/or surveyors.
(n) A statement that the Coast Guard may inspect the organization's
facilities and records and may accompany auditors and/or surveyors in
the performance of duties related to the requested approval.
(o) Disclosure of any potential conflicts of interest.
(p) A statement that the organization, its managers, and employees
engaged in audits and/or surveys are not, and will not be involved in
any activities which could result in a conflict of interest or
otherwise limit the independent judgment of the auditor and/or surveyor
or organization.
(q) Any additional information that the applicant deems pertinent.
Sec. 139.125 Approval of TPOs.
(a) The Commandant delegates to the Towing Vessel National Center
of Expertise (TVNCOE) the authority to carry out the review and
approval described in this section, and the related authority to
suspend and revoke approval.
(b) The Coast Guard will review the request and notify the
organization in writing whether their request is granted.
(c) If a request for approval is denied, the Coast Guard will
inform the organization of the reasons for the denial and will describe
what corrections are required for an approval to be granted.
(d) An approval for a TPO that meets the requirements of this part
will expire:
(1) Five years after the last day of the month in which it is
granted;
(2) When the TPO gives notice that it will no longer offer towing
vessel audit and/or survey services;
(3) When revoked by the Coast Guard in accordance with Sec.
139.150; or
(4) On the date of a change in ownership, as defined in Sec.
136.110, of the TPO for which approval was granted.
Sec. 139.130 Qualifications of auditors and surveyors.
(a) A prospective auditor or surveyor must have the skills and
experience necessary to assess compliance with all requirements of this
subchapter.
(b) Auditors must meet the following qualifications:
(1) High school diploma or equivalent.
(2) Four years of working on towing vessels or other relevant
marine experience such as Coast Guard marine inspector, licensed
mariner, military
[[Page 40118]]
personnel with relevant maritime experience, or marine surveyor.
(3) Successful completion of an ANSI/ISO/ASQ Q9001-2000 or ISO
9001:2008(E) (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this
subchapter) lead auditor/assessor course or Coast Guard recognized
equivalent.
(4) Successful completion of a training course for the auditing of
a TSMS.
(5) Audit experience, as demonstrated by:
(i) Documented experience in auditing the ISM Code or the American
Waterways Operators Responsible Carrier Program, consisting of at least
two management audits and six vessel audits within the past 5 years; or
(ii) Successful completion of an auditor apprenticeship, consisting
of at least one management audit and three vessel audits under the
direction of a lead auditor.
(c) Surveyors must meet the following qualifications:
(1) High school diploma or equivalent.
(2) At least one of the following:
(i) Four years of experience working on towing vessels as master,
mate (pilot), or engineer; or
(ii) Other relevant marine experience such as Coast Guard marine
inspector, military personnel with relevant maritime experience, marine
surveyor, accredited marine surveyor, experience on vessels of similar
operating and physical characteristics.
Sec. 139.135 Addition and removal of auditors and surveyors.
(a) A TPO must maintain a list of current and former auditors and
surveyors.
(b) To add an auditor or surveyor, the TPO must submit that
person's experience, background, and qualifications to the TVNCOE.
(c) The TVNCOE must be notified when an auditor or surveyor is
removed from employment.
Sec. 139.140 Renewal of TPO approval.
(a) To renew an approval, a TPO must submit a written request to
the TVNCOE at the address listed in Sec. 139.120.
(b) For the request to be approved, the Coast Guard must be
satisfied that the applicant continues to fully meet approval criteria.
(c) The Coast Guard may request any additional information
necessary to properly evaluate the request.
Sec. 139.145 Suspension of approval.
(a) The Coast Guard may suspend the approval of a TPO approved
under this part whenever the Coast Guard determines that the TPO does
not comply with the provisions of this part. The Coast Guard must:
(1) Notify the TPO in writing of the intention to suspend the
approval;
(2) Provide the details of the TPO's failure to comply with this
part; and
(3) Advise the TPO of the time period, not to exceed 60 days,
within which the TPO must correct its failure to comply with this part.
If the TPO fails to correct its failure to comply with this part within
the time period allowed, the approval will be suspended.
(b) The Coast Guard may also partially suspend the approval of a
TPO, using the process described in paragraph (a) of this section. This
may include suspension of an individual auditor or surveyor or
suspension of the authority of the TPO to carry out specific duties
whenever the Coast Guard determines that the provisions of this part
are not complied with.
Sec. 139.150 Revocation of approval.
(a) The Coast Guard may revoke the approval of a TPO if the
organization has demonstrated a pattern or history of:
(1) Failure to comply with this part;
(2) Substantial deviations from the terms of the approval granted
under this part; or
(3) Failures, including ethical violations, conflicts of interest,
or inadequate performance, that indicate to the Coast Guard that the
TPO is no longer capable of carrying out its duties as a TPO.
(b) If the Coast Guard seeks to revoke the approval of a TPO, it
must:
(1) Notify the TPO in writing of the intention to revoke the
approval;
(2) Provide the details of the TPO's demonstrated pattern or
history of actions described in paragraph (a) of this section; and
(3) Advise the TPO that it may appeal this decision to the Coast
Guard in accordance with the provisions of 46 CFR subpart 1.03.
Sec. 139.155 Appeals of suspension or revocation of approval.
Anyone directly affected by a decision to suspend or revoke an
approval granted under this part may appeal the decision to the Coast
Guard in accordance with the provisions of 46 CFR subpart 1.03.
Sec. 139.160 Coast Guard oversight activities.
(a) The Coast Guard will provide notice to the TPO 48 hours in
advance of any site visit, unless the visit is in response to a
complaint or other evidence of regulatory non-compliance. During the
visit, the Coast Guard may:
(1) Inspect a TPO's records;
(2) Conduct interviews of auditors or surveyors to aid in the
evaluation of the organization; and
(3) Observe audits or surveys.
(b) The Coast Guard may require that the owner or managing operator
make available a copy of the TSMS upon request.
(c) The Coast Guard may require a revision of a previously approved
TSMS if it is determined that requirements of this subchapter are not
met.
Sec. 139.165 Documentation.
(a) Each TPO must retain the results of each survey or audit
conducted under its approval, including:
(1) The names of the auditors and/or surveyors;
(2) The results of each audit or survey conducted; and
(3) Documentation showing continuing actions relative to an audit
or survey, such as resolution of deficiencies and non-conformities.
(b) Each TPO must also retain the results of audits of their
organization conducted by the Coast Guard.
(c) Records required by this part must be retained for a period of
5 years.
PART 140--OPERATIONS
Sec.
Subpart A--General
140.100 Purpose.
140.105 Applicability and delayed implementation for existing
vessels.
Subpart B--General Operational Safety
140.205 General vessel operation.
140.210 Responsibilities of the master and crew.
Subpart C--[Reserved]
Subpart D--Crew Safety
140.400 Personnel records.
140.405 Emergency duties and duty stations.
140.410 Safety orientation.
140.415 Orientation for individuals that are not crewmembers.
140.420 Emergency drills and instruction.
140.425 Fall overboard prevention.
140.430 Wearing of work vests.
140.435 First aid equipment.
Subpart E--Safety and Health
140.500 General.
140.505 General health and safety requirements.
140.510 Identification and mitigation of health and safety hazards.
140.515 Training requirements.
Subpart F--Vessel Operational Safety
140.600 Applicability.
140.605 Vessel stability.
140.610 Hatches and other openings.
140.615 Examinations and tests.
140.620 Navigational safety equipment.
140.625 Navigation underway.
[[Page 40119]]
140.630 Lookout.
140.635 Navigation assessment.
140.640 Pilothouse resource management.
140.645 Navigation safety training.
140.650 Operational readiness of lifesaving and fire suppression and
detection equipment.
140.655 Prevention of oil and garbage pollution.
140.660 Vessel security.
140.665 Inspection and testing required when making alterations,
repairs, or other such operations involving riveting, welding,
burning, or like fire-producing actions.
140.670 Use of auto pilot.
Subpart G--Navigation and Communication Equipment
140.700 Applicability.
140.705 Charts and nautical publications.
140.710 Marine radar.
140.715 Communications equipment.
140.720 Navigation lights, shapes, and sound signals.
140.725 Additional navigation equipment.
Subpart H--Towing Safety
140.800 Applicability.
140.801 Towing gear.
140.805 Towing safety.
140.820 Recordkeeping for towing gear.
Subpart I--Vessel Records
140.900 Marine casualty reporting.
140.905 Official logbooks.
140.910 Towing vessel record or record specified by TSMS.
140.915 Items to be recorded.
Subpart J--Penalties
140.1000 Statutory penalties.
140.1005 Suspension and revocation.
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3301, 3306, 3308, 3316, 8104, 8904;
33 CFR 1.05; DHS Delegation 0170.1.
Subpart A--General
Sec. 140.100 Purpose.
This part contains the health, safety, and operational requirements
for towing vessels and the crewmembers serving onboard them.
Sec. 140.105 Applicability and delayed implementation for existing
vessels.
This part applies to all towing vessels subject to this subchapter.
(a) With the exception Sec. 140.500, which has a later
implementation date, an existing towing vessel must comply with the
requirements in this part no later than either July 20, 2018 or the
date the vessel obtains a Certificate of Inspection (COI), whichever
date is earlier.
(b) The delayed implementation provisions in paragraph (a) of this
section do not apply to a new towing vessel.
Subpart B--General Operational Safety
Sec. 140.205 General vessel operation.
(a) A vessel must be operated in accordance with applicable laws
and regulations and in such a manner as to afford protection against
hazards to life, property, and the environment.
(b) Towing vessels with a Towing Safety Management System (TSMS)
must be operated in accordance with the TSMS applicable to the vessel.
(c) Vessels must be manned in accordance with the COI. Manning
requirements are contained in part 15 of this chapter.
(d) Each crewmember that is required to hold a Merchant Mariner
Credential (MMC) must have the credential on board and available for
examination at all times when the vessel is operating.
(e) All individuals who are not required to hold an MMC permitted
onboard the vessel must have and present on request a valid personal
identification that meets the requirements set forth in 33 CFR 101.515.
Sec. 140.210 Responsibilities of the master and crew.
(a) The safety of the towing vessel is the responsibility of the
master and includes:
(1) Adherence to the provisions of the COI;
(2) Compliance with the applicable provisions of this subchapter;
(3) Compliance with the TSMS, if one is applicable to the vessel;
and
(4) Supervision of all persons onboard in carrying out their
assigned duties.
(b) If the master or officer in charge of a navigational watch
believes it is unsafe for the vessel to proceed, that an operation
endangers the vessel or crew, or that an unsafe condition exists, he or
she must ensure that adequate corrective action is taken and must not
proceed until it is safe to do so.
(c) Nothing in this subpart may be construed in a manner which
limits the master or officer in charge of a navigational watch, at his
or her own responsibility, from diverting from the route prescribed in
the COI or taking such steps as deemed necessary and prudent to assist
vessels in distress or for other emergency conditions.
(d) It is the responsibility of the crew to:
(1) Adhere to the provisions of the COI;
(2) Comply with the applicable provisions of this subchapter;
(3) Comply with the TSMS, if one is applicable to the vessel;
(4) Ensure that the master or officer in charge of a navigational
watch is made aware of all known aspects of the condition of the
vessel, including:
(i) Those vessels being pushed, pulled, or hauled alongside; and
(ii) Equipment and other accessories used for pushing, pulling, or
hauling alongside other vessels.
(5) Minimize any distraction from the operation of the vessel or
performance of duty; and
(6) Report unsafe conditions to the master or officer in charge of
a navigational watch and take effective action to prevent accidents.
Subpart C--[Reserved]
Subpart D--Crew Safety
Sec. 140.400 Personnel records.
(a) The master of each towing vessel must keep an accurate list of
crewmembers and their assigned positions and responsibilities aboard
the vessel.
(b) The master must keep an accurate list of individuals to be
carried as persons in addition to the crew and any passengers.
(c) The date and time that a navigation watchstander, including
master, officer in charge of a navigational watch, and lookout assumes
a watch and is relieved of a watch must be recorded in the towing
vessel record (TVR), official logbook, or in accordance with the TSMS
applicable to the vessel. If an engineering watch is maintained,
comparable records documenting the engineering watch are required.
Sec. 140.405 Emergency duties and duty stations.
(a) Crewmembers must meet the requirements in Sec. Sec. 15.405 and
15.1105 of this chapter, as appropriate.
(b) Any towing vessel with alternating watches (shift work) or
overnight accommodations must identify the duties and duty stations of
each person onboard during an emergency, including:
(1) Responding to fires and flooding;
(2) Responding to emergencies that necessitate abandoning the
vessel;
(3) Launching survival craft;
(4) Taking action during heavy weather;
(5) Taking action in the event of a person overboard;
(6) Taking action relative to the tow;
(7) Taking action in the event of failure of propulsion, steering,
or control system;
(8) Managing individuals onboard who are not crewmembers;
(9) Managing any other event or condition which poses a threat to
life, property, or the environment; and
[[Page 40120]]
(10) Responding to other special duties essential to addressing
emergencies as determined by the TSMS applicable to the vessel, if a
TSMS is used.
(c) The emergency duties and duty stations required by this section
must be posted at each operating station and in a conspicuous location
in a space commonly visited by crewmembers. If posting is impractical,
such as in an open boat, they may be kept onboard in a location readily
available to the crew.
Sec. 140.410 Safety orientation.
(a) Personnel must meet the requirements in Sec. Sec. 15.405 and
15.1105 of this chapter, as appropriate.
(b) Prior to getting underway for the first time on a particular
towing vessel, each crewmember must receive a safety orientation on:
(1) His or her duties in an emergency;
(2) The location, operation, and use of lifesaving equipment;
(3) Prevention of falls overboard;
(4) Personal safety measures;
(5) The location, operation, and use of Personal Protective
Equipment;
(6) Emergency egress procedures;
(7) The use and operation of watertight and weathertight closures;
(8) Responsibilities to provide assistance to individuals that are
not crewmembers;
(9) How to respond to emergencies relative to the tow; and
(10) Awareness of, and expected response to, any other hazards
inherent to the operation of the towing vessel which may pose a threat
to life, property, or the environment.
(c) The safety orientation provided to crewmembers who received a
safety orientation on another vessel may be modified to cover only
those areas unique to the other vessel on which service will occur.
(d) Safety orientations and other crew training must be documented
in the TVR, official logbook, or in accordance with the TSMS applicable
to the vessel. The entry must include:
(1) The date of the safety orientation or training;
(2) A general description of the safety orientation or training
topics;
(3) The name(s) and signature(s) of individual(s) providing the
orientation or training; and
(4) The name(s) of the individual(s) receiving the safety
orientation or training.
Sec. 140.415 Orientation for individuals that are not crewmembers.
Individuals, who are not crewmembers, on board a towing vessel must
receive a safety orientation prior to getting underway or as soon as
practicable thereafter, to include:
(a) The location, operation, and use of lifesaving equipment;
(b) Emergency procedures;
(c) Methods to notify crewmembers in the event of an emergency; and
(d) Prevention of falls overboard.
Sec. 140.420 Emergency drills and instruction.
(a) Master's responsibilities. The master of a towing vessel must
ensure that drills are conducted and instructions are given to ensure
that all crewmembers are capable of performing the duties expected of
them during emergencies. This includes abandoning the vessel,
recovering persons from the water, responding to onboard fires and
flooding, or responding to other threats to life, property, or the
environment.
(b) Nature of drills. Each drill must, as far as practicable, be
conducted as if there was an actual emergency.
(c) Annual instruction for each crew member. Unless otherwise
stated, each crewmember must receive the instruction required by this
section annually.
(d) Instructions and drills required. The following instruction and
drills are required:
(1) Response to fires, as required by Sec. 142.245 of this
subchapter;
(2) Launching of a skiff, if listed as an item of emergency
equipment to abandon ship or recover a person-overboard;
(3) Instruction on the use of davit-launched liferafts, if
installed.
(4) If a rescue boat is installed, instruction on how it must be
launched, with its assigned crew aboard, and maneuvered in the water as
if during an actual man-overboard situation.
(5) Credentialed mariners holding an officer endorsement do not
require instruction in accordance with paragraphs (d)(1), (3), and (4)
of this section.
(e) Alternative forms of instruction. (1) Instruction as required
by this section may be conducted via an electronic format followed by a
discussion and demonstration by a competent individual. This
instruction may occur either on board or off the vessel but must
include the equipment that is the subject of the instruction.
(2) Instruction as required by this section may be performed in
accordance with the TSMS applicable to the vessel, provided that it
meets the minimum requirements of this section.
(f) Location of drills, full crew participation, and use of
equipment. As far as practicable, drills must take place on board the
vessel. They must include:
(1) Participation by all crewmembers; and
(2) Actual use of, or realistic simulation of the use of, emergency
equipment.
(g) Recordkeeping. Records of drills and instruction must be
maintained in the TVR, official logbook, or in accordance with the TSMS
applicable to the vessel. The record must include:
(1) The date of the drill and instruction;
(2) A description of the drill scenario and instruction topics;
(3) The personnel involved.
Sec. 140.425 Fall overboard prevention.
(a) The owner or managing operator of a towing vessel must
establish procedures to address fall overboard prevention and recovery
of persons in the water, including, but not limited to:
(1) Personal protective equipment;
(2) Safely working on the tow;
(3) Safety while line handling;
(4) Safely moving between the vessel and a tow, pier, structure, or
other vessel; and
(5) Use of retrieval equipment.
(b) The owner, managing operator, or master must ensure that all
persons on board comply with the policies and procedures in this
section.
Sec. 140.430 Wearing of work vests.
(a) Personnel dispatched from the vessel or that are working in an
area on the exterior of the vessel without rails and guards must wear a
lifejacket meeting requirements in 46 CFR 141.340, an immersion suit
meeting requirements in 46 CFR 141.350, or a work vest approved by the
Commandant under 46 CFR subpart 160.053. When worn at night, the work
vest must be equipped with a light that meets the requirements of 46
CFR 141.340(g)(1). Work vests may not be substituted for the
lifejackets required by 46 CFR part 141.
(b) Each storage container containing a work vest must be marked
``WORK VEST''.
Sec. 140.435 First aid equipment.
Each towing vessel must be equipped with an industrial type first
aid cabinet or kit, appropriate to the size of the crew and operating
conditions. Each towing vessel operating on oceans, coastwise, or Great
Lakes routes must have a means to take blood pressure readings, splint
broken bones, and apply large bandages for serious wounds.
Subpart E--Safety and Health
Sec. 140.500 General.
(a) No later than July 22, 2019, the owner or managing operator
must
[[Page 40121]]
implement a health and safety plan. The health and safety plan must
document compliance with this part and include recordkeeping
procedures.
(b) The owner, managing operator, or master must ensure that all
persons on board a towing vessel comply with the health and safety
plan.
Sec. 140.505 General health and safety requirements.
(a) The owner or managing operator must implement procedures for
reporting unsafe conditions and must have records of the activities
conducted under this section. The owner or managing operator must
maintain records of health and safety incidents that occur on board the
vessel, including any medical records associated with the incidents.
Upon request, the owner or managing operator must provide crewmembers
with incident reports and the crewmember's own associated medical
records.
(b) All vessel equipment must be used in accordance with the
manufacturer's recommended practice and in a manner that minimizes risk
of injury or death. This includes machinery, deck machinery, towing
gear, ladders, embarkation devices, cranes, portable tools, and safety
equipment.
(c) All machinery and equipment that is not in proper working order
(including missing or malfunctioning guards or safety devices) must be
removed; made safe through marking, tagging, or covering; or otherwise
made unusable.
(d) Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). (1) Appropriate Personal
Protective Equipment (PPE) must be made available and on hand for all
personnel engaged in an activity that requires the use of PPE.
(2) PPE must be suitable for the vessel's intended service; meet
the standards of 29 CFR part 1910, subpart I; and be used, cleaned,
maintained, and repaired in accordance with manufacturer's
requirements.
(3) All individuals must wear PPE appropriate to the activity being
performed;
(4) All personnel engaged in an activity must be trained in the
proper use, limitations, and care of the PPE specified by this subpart;
(e) The vessel, including crew's quarters and the galley, must be
kept in a sanitary condition.
Sec. 140.510 Identification and mitigation of health and safety
hazards.
(a) The owner or managing operator must implement procedures to
identify and mitigate health and safety hazards, including but not
limited to:
(1) Tools and equipment, including deck machinery, rigging, welding
and cutting, hand tools, ladders, and abrasive wheel machinery found on
board the vessel;
(2) Slips, trips, and falls;
(3) Working aloft;
(4) Hazardous materials;
(5) Confined space entry;
(6) Blood-borne pathogens and other biological hazards;
(7) Electrical;
(8) Noise;
(9) Falls overboard;
(10) Vessel embarkation and disembarkation (including pilot
transfers);
(11) Towing gear, including winches, capstans, wires, hawsers and
other related equipment;
(12) Personal hygiene;
(13) Sanitation and safe food handling; and
(14) Potable water supply.
(b) As far as practicable, the owner or managing operator must
implement other types of safety control measures before relying on
Personal Protective Equipment. These controls may include
administrative, engineering, source modification, substitution, process
change or controls, isolation, ventilation, or other controls.
Sec. 140.515 Training requirements.
(a) All crewmembers must be provided with health and safety
information and training that includes:
(1) Content and procedures of the owner or managing operator's
health and safety plan;
(2) Procedures for reporting unsafe conditions;
(3) Proper selection and use of PPE appropriate to the vessel
operation;
(4) Safe use of equipment including deck machinery, rigging,
welding and cutting, hand tools, ladders, and abrasive wheel machinery
found onboard the vessel;
(5) Hazard communication and cargo knowledge;
(6) Safe use and storage of hazardous materials and chemicals;
(7) Confined space entry;
(8) Respiratory protection; and
(9) Lockout/Tagout procedures.
(b) Individuals, other than crewmembers, must be provided with
sufficient information or training on hazards relevant to their
potential exposure on or around the vessel.
(c) Crewmember training required by this section must be conducted
as soon as practicable, but not later than 5 days after employment.
(d) Refresher training must be repeated annually and may be
conducted over time in modules covering specific topics. Refresher
training may be less comprehensive, provided that the information
presented is sufficient to provide employees with continued
understanding of workplace hazards. The refresher training of persons
subject to this subpart must include the information and training
prescribed in this section.
(e) The owner, managing operator, or master must determine the
appropriate training and information to provide to each individual
permitted on the vessel who is not a crewmember, relative to the
expected risk exposure of the individual.
(f) All training required in this section must be documented in
owner or managing operator's records.
Subpart F--Vessel Operational Safety
Sec. 140.600 Applicability.
This subpart applies to all towing vessels unless otherwise
specified. Certain vessels remain subject to the navigation safety
regulations in 33 CFR part 164.
Sec. 140.605 Vessel stability.
(a) Prior to getting underway, and at all other times necessary to
ensure the safety of the vessel, the master or officer in charge of a
navigational watch must determine whether the vessel complies with all
stability requirements in the vessel's trim and stability book,
stability letter, COI, and Load Line Certificate, as applicable.
(b) A towing vessel must be maintained and operated so the
watertight integrity and stability of the vessel are not compromised.
Sec. 140.610 Hatches and other openings.
(a) All towing vessels must be operated in a manner that minimizes
the risk of down-flooding and progressive flooding.
(b) The master must ensure that all hatches, doors, and other
openings designed to be watertight or weather-tight function properly.
(c) The master or officer in charge of a navigational watch must
ensure all hatches and openings of the hull and deck are kept tightly
closed except:
(1) When access is needed through the opening for transit;
(2) When operating on rivers with a tow, if the master determines
the safety of the vessel is not compromised; or
(3) When operating on lakes, bays, and sounds, without a tow during
calm weather, and only if the master determines that the safety of the
vessel is not compromised.
(d) Where installed, all watertight doors in watertight bulkheads
must be
[[Page 40122]]
closed during the operation of the vessel, unless they are being used
for transit between compartments; and
(e) When downstreaming, all exterior openings at the main deck
level must be closed.
(f) Decks and bulkheads designed to be watertight or weathertight
must be maintained in that condition.
Sec. 140.615 Examinations and tests.
(a) This section applies to a towing vessel not subject to 33 CFR
164.80.
(b) Prior to getting underway, the master or officer in charge of a
navigational watch of the vessel must examine and test the steering
gear, signaling whistle, propulsion control, towing gear, navigation
lights, navigation equipment, and communication systems of the vessel.
This examination and testing does not need to be conducted more than
once in any 24-hour period.
(c) The results of the examination and testing must be recorded in
the TVR, official logbook, or in accordance with the TSMS applicable to
the vessel.
Sec. 140.620 Navigational safety equipment.
(a) This section applies to a towing vessel not subject to the
requirements of 33 CFR 164.82.
(b) The owner, managing operator, or master of each towing vessel
must maintain the required navigational-safety equipment in a fully-
functioning, operational condition.
(c) Navigational safety equipment such as radar, gyrocompass, echo
depth-sounding or other sounding device, automatic dependent
surveillance equipment, or navigational lighting that fails during a
voyage must be repaired at the earliest practicable time. The owner,
managing operator, or master must consider the state of the equipment
(along with such factors as weather, visibility, traffic, and the
dictates of good seamanship) when deciding whether it is safe for the
vessel to proceed.
(d) The failure and subsequent repair or replacement of
navigational safety equipment must be recorded. The record must be made
in the TVR, official logbook, or in accordance with the TSMS applicable
to the vessel.
Sec. 140.625 Navigation underway.
(a) At all times, the movement of a towing vessel and its tow must
be under the direction and control of a master or mate (pilot) properly
licensed under subchapter B of this chapter.
(b) The master or officer in charge of a navigational watch must
operate the vessel in accordance with the conditions and restrictions
stated on the COI and the TSMS applicable to the vessel.
Note to Sec. 140.625. Certain towing vessels subject to Sec.
140.625 are also subject to the requirements of 33 CFR 164.78.
Sec. 140.630 Lookout.
(a) Throughout the trip or voyage the master and officer in charge
of the navigational watch must assess the requirement for a lookout,
consistent with 33 CFR 83.05. A lookout in addition to the master or
mate (pilot) should be added when necessary to:
(1) Maintain a state of vigilance with regard to any significant
change in the operational environment;
(2) Assess the situation and the risk of collision/allision;
(3) Anticipate stranding and other dangers to navigation; and
(4) Detect any other potential hazards to safe navigation.
(b) In determining the requirement for a lookout, the officer in
charge of the navigational watch must take full account of relevant
factors including, but not limited to: state of weather, visibility,
traffic density, proximity of dangers to navigation, and the attention
necessary when navigating in areas of increased vessel traffic.
Sec. 140.635 Navigation assessment.
(a) The officer in charge of a navigational watch must conduct a
navigation assessment for the intended route and operations prior to
getting underway. The navigation assessment must incorporate the
requirements of pilothouse resource management of Sec. 140.640, assess
operational risks, and anticipate and manage workload demands. At a
minimum, this assessment must consider:
(1) The velocity and direction of currents in the area being
transited;
(2) Water depth, river stage, and tidal state along the route and
at mooring location;
(3) Prevailing visibility and weather conditions and changes
anticipated along the intended route;
(4) Density (actual and anticipated) of marine traffic;
(5) The operational status of pilothouse instrumentation and
controls, to include alarms, communication systems, variation and
deviation errors of the compass, and any known nonconformities or
deficiencies;
(6) Air draft relative to bridges and overhead obstructions taking
tide and river stage into consideration;
(7) Horizontal clearance, to include bridge transits;
(8) Lock transits;
(9) Navigation hazards such as logs, wrecks or other obstructions
in the water;
(10) Any broadcast notice to mariners, safety or security zones or
special navigation areas;
(11) Configuration of the vessel and tow, including handling
characteristics, field of vision from the pilothouse, and activities
taking place onboard;
(12) The knowledge, qualifications, and limitations of crewmembers
who are assigned as members on watch and the experience and familiarity
of crewmembers with the towing vessels particulars and equipment; and
(13) Any special conditions not covered above that impact the
safety of navigation.
(b) The officer in charge of a navigational watch must keep the
navigation assessment up-to-date to reflect changes in conditions and
circumstances. This includes updates during the voyage or trip as
necessary. At each change of the navigational watch, the oncoming
officer in charge of the navigational watch must review the current
navigation assessment for necessary changes.
(c) The officer in charge of a navigational watch must ensure that
the navigation assessment and any updates are communicated to other
members of the navigational watch.
(d) A navigation assessment entry must be recorded in the TVR,
official log, or in accordance with the TSMS applicable to the vessel.
The entry must include the date and time of the assessment, the name of
the individual making the assessment, and the starting and ending
points of the voyage or trip that the assessment covers.
Note to Sec. 140.635. Certain towing vessels subject to Sec.
140.635 are also subject to the voyage planning requirements of 33 CFR
164.80.
Sec. 140.640 Pilothouse resource management.
(a) The officer in charge of a navigational watch must:
(1) Ensure that other members of the navigational watch have a
working knowledge of the navigation assessment required by Sec.
140.635, and understand the chain of command, the decision-making
process, and the fact that information sharing is critical to the
safety of the vessel.
(2) Ensure that the navigation assessment required by Sec. 140.635
is complete, updated, communicated and available throughout the trip.
(3) Ensure that watch change procedures incorporate all items
listed in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
(4) Take actions (to include delaying watch change or pausing the
voyage) if
[[Page 40123]]
there is reasonable cause to believe that an oncoming watchstander is
not immediately capable of carrying out his or her duties effectively.
(5) Maintain situational awareness and minimize distractions.
(b) Prior to assuming duties as officer in charge of a navigational
watch, a person must:
(1) Complete the navigation assessment required by Sec. 140.635;
(2) Verify the operational condition of the towing vessel; and
(3) Verify that there are adequate personnel available to assume
the watch.
(c) If at any time the officer in charge of a navigational watch is
to be relieved when a maneuver or other action to avoid any hazard is
taking place, the relief of that officer in charge of a navigational
watch must be deferred until such action has been completed.
Sec. 140.645 Navigation safety training.
(a) Prior to assuming duties related to the safe operation of a
towing vessel, each crewmember must receive training to ensure that
they are familiar with:
(1) Watchstanding terms and definitions;
(2) Duties of a lookout;
(3) Communication with other watchstanders;
(4) Change of watch procedures;
(5) Procedures for reporting other vessels or objects; and
(6) Watchstanding safety.
(b) Crewmember training must be recorded in the TVR, official
logbook, or in accordance with the TSMS applicable to the vessel.
(c) Credentialed mariners holding Able Seaman or officer
endorsements will be deemed to have met the training requirements in
this section.
Sec. 140.650 Operational readiness of lifesaving and fire suppression
and detection equipment.
The owner, managing operator, or master of a towing vessel must
ensure that the vessel's lifesaving and fire suppression and detection
equipment complies with the applicable requirements of parts 141 and
142 of this subchapter and is in good working order.
Sec. 140.655 Prevention of oil and garbage pollution.
(a) Each towing vessel must be operated in compliance with:
(1) Applicable sections of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
including section 311 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended (33 U.S.C. 1321);
(2) Applicable sections of the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships
(33 U.S.C. 1901 et seq.); and
(3) Parts 151, 155, and 156, of 33 CFR, as applicable.
(b) Each towing vessel must be capable of preventing all oil spills
from reaching the water during transfers by:
(1) Pre-closing the scuppers/freeing ports, if the towing vessel is
so equipped;
(2) Using fixed or portable containment of sufficient capacity to
contain the most likely spill, if 33 CFR 155.320 does not apply; or
(3) Pre-deploying sorbent material on the deck around vents and
fills.
(c) No person may intentionally drain oil or hazardous material
into the bilge of a towing vessel from any source. For purposes of this
section, ``oil'' has the same meaning as ``oil'' defined in 33 U.S.C.
1321.
Sec. 140.660 Vessel security.
Each towing vessel must be operated in compliance with:
(a) The Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 (46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701); and
(b) 33 CFR parts 101 and 104, as applicable.
Sec. 140.665 Inspection and testing required when making alterations,
repairs, or other such operations involving riveting, welding, burning,
or like fire-producing actions.
(a) The inspections and issuance of certificates required by this
section must be conducted in accordance with the provisions of NFPA 306
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter)
before alterations, repairs, or other operations involving riveting,
welding, burning, or other fire producing actions may be made aboard a
vessel.
(b) Until an inspection has been made to determine that such
operation can be undertaken with safety, no alterations, repairs, or
other such operations involving riveting, welding, burning, or like
fire-producing actions must be made:
(1) Within or on the boundaries of cargo tanks which have been used
to carry combustible liquid or chemicals in bulk;
(2) Within or on the boundaries of fuel tanks; or,
(3) To pipe lines, heating coils, pumps, fittings, or other
appurtenances connected to such cargo or fuel tanks.
(c) Such inspections must be made and evidenced as follows:
(1) In ports or places in the United States or its territories and
possessions the inspection must be made by a marine chemist
certificated by the National Fire Protection Association. However, if
the services of such certified marine chemist are not reasonably
available, the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI), upon the
recommendation of the vessel owner and his or her contractor or their
representative, must select a person who, in the case of an individual
vessel, must be authorized to make such inspection. If the inspection
indicated that such operations can be undertaken with safety, a
certificate setting forth the fact in writing and qualified as may be
required, must be issued by the certified marine chemist or the
authorized person before the work is started. Such qualifications must
include any requirements as may be deemed necessary to maintain the
safe conditions in the spaces certified throughout the operation and
must include such additional tests and certifications as considered
required. Such qualifications and requirements must include precautions
necessary to eliminate or minimize hazards that may be present from
protective coatings or residues from cargoes.
(2) When not in such a port or place, and a marine chemist or such
person authorized by the OCMI, is not reasonably available, the
inspection must be made by the master or person in charge and a proper
entry must be made in the vessel's logbook.
(d) The master or person in charge must secure copies of
certificates issued by the certified marine chemist or such person
authorized by the OCMI. The master or person in charge must maintain a
safe condition on the vessel by full observance of all qualifications
and requirements listed by the marine chemist or person authorized by
the OCMI in the certificate.
Sec. 140.670 Use of auto pilot.
Except for towing vessels in compliance with requirements in 33 CFR
164.13(d), when an automatic pilot is used in areas of high traffic
density, conditions of restricted visibility, or any other hazardous
navigational situations, the master must ensure that:
(a) It is possible to immediately establish manual control of the
ship's steering;
(b) A competent person is ready at all times to take over steering
control; and
(c) The changeover from automatic to manual steering and vice versa
is made by, or under, the supervision of the officer in charge of the
navigational watch.
Subpart G--Navigation and Communication Equipment
Sec. 140.700 Applicability.
This subpart applies to all towing vessels unless otherwise
specified.
[[Page 40124]]
Certain towing vessels are also subject to the navigation safety
regulations in 33 CFR part 164.
Sec. 140.705 Charts and nautical publications.
(a) This section applies to a towing vessel not subject to the
requirements of 33 CFR 164.72.
(b) A towing vessel must carry adequate and up-to-date charts,
maps, and nautical publications for the intended voyage, including:
(1) Charts, including electronic charts acceptable to the Coast
Guard, of appropriate scale to make safe navigation possible. Towing
vessels operating on the Western Rivers must have maps of appropriate
scale issued by the Army Corps of Engineers or a river authority;
(2) ``U.S. Coast Pilot'' or similar publication;
(3) Coast Guard light list; and
(4) Towing vessels that operate the Western Rivers must have river
stage(s) or Water Surface Elevations as appropriate to the trip or
route, as published by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or a river
authority, must be available to the person in charge of the navigation
watch.
(c) Extracts or copies from the publications listed in paragraph
(b) of this section may be carried, so long as they are applicable to
the route.
Sec. 140.710 Marine radar.
Requirements for marine radar are set forth in 33 CFR 164.72.
Sec. 140.715 Communications equipment.
(a) Towing vessels must meet the communications requirements of 33
CFR part 26 and 33 CFR 164.72, as applicable.
(b) Towing vessels not subject to the provisions of 33 CFR part 26
or 33 CFR 164.72 must have a Very High Frequency-Frequency Modulated
(VHF-FM) radio installed and capable of monitoring VHF-FM Channels 13
and 16, except when transmitting or receiving traffic on other VHF-FM
channels, when participating in a Vessel Traffic Service (VTS), or when
monitoring a channel of a VTS. The VHF-FM radio must be installed at
each operating station and connected to a functioning battery backup.
(c) All towing vessels must have at least one properly operating
handheld VHF-FM radio in addition to the radios otherwise required.
Sec. 140.720 Navigation lights, shapes, and sound signals.
Each towing vessel must be equipped with navigation lights, shapes,
and sound signals in accordance with the International Regulations for
Prevention of Collisions at Sea (COLREGS) or 33 CFR part 84 as
appropriate to its area of operation.
Sec. 140.725 Additional navigation equipment.
Towing vessels must be equipped with the following equipment, as
applicable to the area of operation:
(a) Fathometer (except Western Rivers).
(b) Search light, controllable from the vessel's operating station
and capable of illuminating objects at a distance of at least two times
the length of the tow.
(c) Electronic position-fixing device, satisfactory for the area in
which the vessel operates, if the towing vessel engages in towing
seaward of the navigable waters of the U.S. or more than 3 nautical
miles from shore on the Great Lakes.
(d) Illuminated magnetic compass or an illuminated swing-meter
(Western Rivers vessels only). The compass or swing-meter must be
readable from each operating station.
Note to Sec. 140.725. Certain towing vessels subject to Sec.
140.725 are also subject to the requirements of 33 CFR 164.72 and
Automatic Identification System requirements of 33 CFR 164.46.
Subpart H--Towing Safety
Sec. 140.800 Applicability.
This subpart applies to all towing vessels unless otherwise
specified. Certain vessels are also subject to the navigation safety
regulations in 33 CFR parts 163 and 164.
Sec. 140.801 Towing gear.
The owner, managing operator, master or officer in charge of a
navigational watch of a towing vessel must ensure the following:
(a) The strength of each component used for securing the towing
vessel to the tow and for making up the tow is adequate for its
intended service.
(b) The size, material, and condition of towlines, lines, wires,
push gear, cables, and other rigging used for making up a tow or
securing the towing vessel to a tow must be appropriate for:
(1) The horsepower or bollard pull of the vessel;
(2) The static loads and dynamic loads expected during the intended
service;
(3) The environmental conditions expected during the intended
service; and
(4) The likelihood of mechanical damage.
(c) Emergency procedures related to the tow have been developed and
appropriate training provided to the crew for carrying out their
emergency duties.
Sec. 140.805 Towing safety.
Prior to getting underway, and giving due consideration to the
prevailing and expected conditions of the trip or voyage, the officer
in charge of the navigational watch for a towing vessel must ensure
that:
(a) The barges, vessels, or objects making up the tow are properly
configured and secured;
(b) Equipment, cargo, and industrial components on board the tow
are properly secured and made ready for transit;
(c) The towing vessel is safely and securely made up to the tow;
and
(d) The towing vessel has appropriate horsepower or bollard pull
and is capable of safely maneuvering the tow.
Sec. 140.820 Recordkeeping for towing gear.
(a) The results of the inspections required by 33 CFR 164.76 must
be documented in the TVR, official logbook, or in accordance with the
TSMS applicable to the vessel.
(b) A record of the type, size, and service of each towline, face
wire, and spring line, used to make the towing vessel fast to her tow,
must be available to the Coast Guard or third-party auditor for review.
The following minimum information is required in the record: The dates
when examinations were performed, the identification of each item of
towing gear examined, and the name(s) of the person(s) conducting the
examinations.
Subpart I--Vessel Records
Sec. 140.900 Marine casualty reporting.
Each towing vessel must comply with the requirements of part 4 of
this chapter for reporting marine casualties and retaining voyage
records.
Sec. 140.905 Official logbooks.
(a) A towing vessel of the United States, except one on a voyage
from a port in the United States to a port in Canada, is required by 46
U.S.C. 11301 to have an official logbook if the vessel is:
(1) On a voyage from a port in the United States to a foreign port;
or
(2) Of at least 100 gross tons and on a voyage between a port in
the United States on the Atlantic Ocean and one on the Pacific Ocean.
(b) The Coast Guard furnishes, without fee, to masters of vessels
of the United States, the official logbook as Form CG-706B or CG-706C,
depending on the number of persons employed as crew. The first several
pages of this logbook list various acts of Congress
[[Page 40125]]
governing logbooks and the entries required in them.
(c) When a voyage is completed, or after a specified time has
elapsed, the master must file the official logbook containing required
entries with the cognizant OCMI at or nearest the port where the vessel
may be.
Sec. 140.910 Towing vessel record or record specified by TSMS.
(a) This section applies to a towing vessel other than a vessel
operating only in a limited geographic area or a vessel required by
Sec. 140.905 to maintain an official logbook.
(b) A towing vessel subject to this section must maintain a TVR or
in accordance with the TSMS applicable to the towing vessel.
(c) The TVR must include a chronological record of events as
required by this subchapter. The TVR may be electronic or paper.
(d) Except as required by Sec. Sec. 140.900 and 140.905, records
do not need to be filed with the Coast Guard, but must be kept
available for review by the Coast Guard upon request. Records, unless
required to be maintained for a longer period by statute or other
federal regulation, must be retained for at least 1 year after the date
of the latest entry.
Sec. 140.915 Items to be recorded.
(a) The following list of items must be recorded in the TVR,
official logbook, or in accordance with the TSMS applicable to the
vessel:
(1) Personnel records, in accordance with Sec. 140.400;
(2) Safety orientation, in accordance with Sec. 140.410;
(3) Record of drills and instruction, in accordance with Sec.
140.420;
(4) Examinations and tests, in accordance with Sec. 140.615;
(5) Operative navigational safety equipment, in accordance with
Sec. 140.620;
(6) Navigation assessment, in accordance with Sec. 140.635;
(7) Navigation safety training, in accordance with Sec. 140.645;
(8) Oil residue discharges and disposals, in accordance with Sec.
140.655;
(9) Record of inspection of towing gear, in accordance with Sec.
140.820; and
(10) Fire-detection and fixed fire-extinguishing, in accordance
with Sec. 142.240.
(b) For the purposes of this subchapter, if items are recorded
electronically in a TVR or other record as specified by the TSMS
applicable to the towing vessel, these electronic entries must include
the date and time of entry and name of the person making the entry. If
after an entry has been made, someone responsible for entries
determines there is an error in an entry, any entries to correct the
error must include the date and time of entry and name of the person
making the correction and must preserve a record of the original entry
being corrected.
Note to Sec. 140.915. For towing vessels subject to 46 U.S.C.
11301, there are statutory requirements in that U.S. Code section for
additional items that must be entered in the official logbook.
Regarding requirements outside this subchapter, such as requirements in
33 CFR 151.25 to make entries in an oil record book, Sec. 140.915 does
not change those requirements.
Subpart J--Penalties
Sec. 140.1000 Statutory penalties.
Violations of the provisions of this subchapter will subject the
violator to the applicable penalty provisions of Subtitle II of Title
46, and Title 18, United States Code.
Sec. 140.1005 Suspension and revocation.
An individual is subject to proceedings under the provisions of 46
U.S.C. 7703 and 7704, and part 5 of this chapter with respect to
suspension or revocation of a license, certificate, document, or
credential if the individual holds a license, certificate of registry,
merchant mariner document, or merchant mariner credential and:
(a) Commits an act of misconduct, negligence or incompetence;
(b) Uses or is addicted to a dangerous drug; or
(c) Violates or fails to comply with this subchapter or any other
law or regulation intended to promote marine safety; or
(d) Becomes a security risk, as described in 46 U.S.C. 7703.
PART 141--LIFESAVING
Sec.
Subpart A--General
141.100 Purpose.
141.105 Applicability and delayed implementation for existing
vessels.
Subpart B--General Requirements for Towing Vessels
141.200 General provisions.
141.225 Alternate arrangements or equipment.
141.230 Readiness.
141.235 Inspection, testing, and maintenance.
141.240 Requirements for training crews.
Subpart C--Lifesaving Requirements for Towing Vessels
141.305 Survival craft requirements for towing vessels.
141.310 Stowage of survival craft.
141.315 Marking of survival craft and stowage locations.
141.320 Inflatable survival craft placards.
141.325 Survival craft equipment.
141.330 Skiffs as survival craft.
141.340 Lifejackets.
141.350 Immersion suits.
141.360 Lifebuoys.
141.370 Miscellaneous lifesaving requirements for towing vessels.
141.375 Visual distress signals.
141.380 Emergency position indicating radio beacon (EPIRB).
141.385 Line throwing appliance.
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3301, 3306, 3308, 3316, 8104, 8904;
33 CFR 1.05; DHS Delegation 0170.1.
Subpart A--General
Sec. 141.100 Purpose.
This part contains requirements for lifesaving equipment,
arrangements, systems, and procedures on towing vessels.
Sec. 141.105 Applicability and delayed implementation for existing
vessels.
(a) This part applies to all towing vessels subject to this
subchapter.
(1) An existing towing vessel must comply with the requirements in
this part no later than either July 20, 2018 or the date the vessel
obtains a Certificate of Inspection (COI), whichever date is earlier.
(2) The delayed implementation provisions in paragraph (a)(1) of
this section do not apply to a new towing vessel.
(b) A towing vessel on an international voyage, subject to SOLAS
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter), must
meet the applicable requirements in subchapter W of this chapter.
(c) Towing vessels in compliance with SOLAS Chapter III will be
deemed in compliance with this part.
Subpart B--General Requirements for Towing Vessels
Sec. 141.200 General provisions.
(a) Unless otherwise specified, all lifesaving equipment must be
approved by the Commandant under the approval series specified in each
section. Lifesaving equipment for personal use which is not required by
this part need not be approved by the Commandant.
(b) A listing of approved equipment and materials may be found at
https://cgmix.uscg.mil/equipment. Each cognizant Officer in Charge,
Marine Inspection (OCMI) may be contacted for information concerning
approved equipment and materials.
(c) Equipment requirements are based on the area in which a towing
vessel is operating, not the route for which it is
[[Page 40126]]
certificated. However, the towing vessel must be equipped per the
requirements of its certificated route at the time of certification.
Sec. 141.225 Alternate arrangements or equipment.
(a) Alternate arrangements or equipment to comply with this part
may be approved in accordance with Sec. 136.115 of this subchapter.
(b) If a Towing Safety Management System (TSMS) is applicable to
the towing vessel, alternative means for complying with Sec. Sec.
141.340, 141.350, and 141.360 may be approved by a third-party
organization (TPO) and documented in the TSMS applicable to the vessel.
(c) The Coast Guard may approve a novel lifesaving appliance or
arrangement as an equivalent if it has performance characteristics at
least equivalent to the appliance or arrangement required under this
subchapter, and if it has been evaluated and tested under IMO
Resolution A.520(13) (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of
this subchapter). Requests for evaluation of novel lifesaving
appliances must be sent to the Commandant (CG-ENG).
(d) The cognizant OCMI may require a towing vessel to carry
specialized or additional lifesaving equipment if:
(1) He or she determines that the conditions of the voyage render
the requirements of this part inadequate; or
(2) The towing vessel is operated in globally remote areas or
severe environments not covered under this part. Such areas may
include, but are not limited to, polar regions, remote islands, areas
of extreme weather, and other remote areas where timely emergency
assistance cannot be anticipated.
Sec. 141.230 Readiness.
The master must ensure that all lifesaving equipment is properly
maintained and ready for use at all times.
Sec. 141.235 Inspection, testing, and maintenance.
(a) All lifesaving equipment must be tested and maintained in
accordance with the minimum requirements of Sec. 199.190 of this
chapter, as applicable, and the vessel's TSMS, if the vessel has a
TSMS.
(b) Inspections and tests of lifesaving equipment must be recorded
in the TVR, official logbook, or in accordance with any TSMS applicable
to the vessel. The following minimum information is required:
(1) The dates when inspections and tests were performed, the number
or other identification of each unit inspected and tested, the results
of the inspections and tests, and the name of the crewmember, surveyor
or auditor and any others conducting the inspections and tests; and
(2) Receipts and other records documenting these inspections and
tests must be retained for at least 1 year after the expiration of the
COI and made available upon request.
Sec. 141.240 Requirements for training crews.
Training requirements are contained in part 140 of this subchapter.
Subpart C--Lifesaving Requirements for Towing Vessels
Sec. 141.305 Survival craft requirements for towing vessels.
(a) General purpose. Survival craft provide a means for survival
when evacuation from the towing vessel is necessary. The craft and
related equipment should be selected so as to provide for the basic
needs of the crew, such as shelter from life threatening elements,
until rescue resources are expected to arrive, taking into account the
scope and nature of the towing vessel's operations.
(b) Functional requirements. A towing vessel's survival craft must
meet the functional requirements of paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of
this section. Functional requirements describe the objectives of the
regulation. Survival craft must:
(1) Be readily accessible;
(2) Have an aggregate capacity sufficient to accommodate the total
number of individuals onboard, as specified in paragraph (c) of this
section;
(3) Provide a means for sheltering its complement appropriate to
the route;
(4) Provide minimum equipment for survival if recovery time is
expected to be greater than 24 hours; and
(5) Be marked so that an individual not familiar with the operation
of the specific survival craft has sufficient guidance to utilize the
craft for its intended use.
(c) Compliance options. A towing vessel must meet the applicable
functional requirements. Compliance with the functional requirements of
paragraph (b) of this section may be met by one of these two options:
(1) A towing vessel that meets the prescriptive requirements of
paragraph (d) of this section will have complied with the functional
requirements; or
(2) If an owner or managing operator chooses to meet the functional
requirement through means other than as specified in paragraph (c)(1)
of this section, the means must be accepted by the cognizant OCMI or,
if the vessel has a TSMS, then by a TPO and, in the latter case,
documented in the TSMS applicable to the vessel. The design, testing,
and examination scheme for meeting these functional requirements must
be included as part of the TSMS applicable to the vessel.
(d) Prescriptive requirements. (1) Except as provided in paragraphs
(d)(2) through (4) of this section, each towing vessel must carry the
survival craft specified in Table 141.305 of this section, as
appropriate for the towing vessel, in an aggregate capacity to
accommodate the total number of individuals onboard.
Table 141.305--Survival Craft
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Area of operation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Great Lakes and lakes, Coastwise and ltd.
bays, and sounds as coastwise
Equipment (approval series) Limited geographic area or defined in Sec. 136.110 ----------------------------
protected waters Rivers ---------------------------- Oceans
<=3 miles >3 miles <= 3 miles > 3 miles
from shore from shore from shore from shore
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cold Water Operation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inflatable Buoyant Apparatus (160.010). None \1\................... \2\ 100% \2\ 100% ............ \2\ 100%
Inflatable Liferaft with SOLAS B Pack None \1\................... ............ ............ 100% ............ 100%
(160.151).
[[Page 40127]]
Inflatable Liferaft with SOLAS A Pack None \1\................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ 100%
(160.151).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Warm Water Operation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rigid Buoyant Apparatus (160.010)...... None \1\................... \2\ 100% \2\ 100% \2\ 100% \2\ 100%
Inflatable Liferaft with SOLAS B Pack None \1\................... ............ ............ ............ ............ \3\ 100%
(160.151).
Inflatable Liferaft with SOLAS A Pack None \1\................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ 100%
(160.151).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ No survival craft are required unless deemed necessary by the cognizant OCMI or a TSMS applicable to the towing vessel.
\2\ A skiff that meets requirements in Sec. 141.330(a) through (f) may be substituted for all or part of required equipment.
\3\ Inflatable buoyant apparatus (approval series 160.010) may be accepted or substituted if the vessel carries a 406 MHz Cat 1 emergency position
indicating radio beacon (EPIRB) meeting 47 CFR part 80.
(2) The following approved survival craft may be substituted for
survival craft required by Table 141.305 of this section:
(i) A lifeboat approved under approval series 160.135 may be
substituted for any survival craft required by this section, provided
it is arranged and equipped in accordance with part 199 of this
chapter.
(ii) An inflatable liferaft approved under approval series 160.051
or 160.151, may be substituted for an inflatable buoyant apparatus or
rigid buoyant apparatus.
(iii) An inflatable buoyant apparatus approved under approval
series 160.010 may be substituted for a rigid buoyant apparatus.
(iv) A life float approved under approval series 160.027 may be
substituted for a rigid buoyant apparatus.
(3) Unless it is determined to be necessary by the cognizant OCMI
under Sec. 141.225, or a TSMS applicable to the towing vessel, each
towing vessel that operates solely on rivers need not carry survival
craft if:
(i) It carries a 406 MHz Cat 1 EPIRB meeting 47 CFR part 80;
(ii) It is designed for pushing ahead and has a TSMS that contains
procedures for evacuating crewmembers onto the tow or other safe
location; or
(iii) It operates within 1 mile of shore.
(4) A towing vessel which is not required by this part to carry
survival craft may carry a non-approved survival craft as excess
equipment, provided that it is maintained in good working condition and
maintained according to the manufacturer's instructions.
Sec. 141.310 Stowage of survival craft.
Survival craft must be stowed in accordance with the requirements
of Sec. 199.130 of this chapter, as far as is practicable on existing
towing vessels.
Sec. 141.315 Marking of survival craft and stowage locations.
Survival craft and stowage locations must be marked in accordance
with the requirements of Sec. Sec. 199.176 and 199.178 of this
chapter.
Sec. 141.320 Inflatable survival craft placards.
Every towing vessel equipped with an inflatable survival craft must
have, in conspicuous places near each inflatable survival craft,
approved placards or other posted instructions for launching and
inflating inflatable survival craft.
Sec. 141.325 Survival craft equipment.
(a) Each item of survival craft equipment must be of good quality,
effective for the purpose it is intended to serve, and secured to the
craft.
(b) Each towing vessel carrying a lifeboat must carry equipment in
accordance with Sec. 199.175 of this chapter.
(c) Each life float and rigid buoyant apparatus must be fitted with
a lifeline, pendants, a painter, and floating electric water light
approved under approval series 161.010.
Sec. 141.330 Skiffs as survival craft.
A skiff may be substituted for all or part of the approved survival
craft for towing vessels that do not operate more than 3 miles from
shore. A skiff used as a survival craft does not require Coast Guard
approval but must:
(a) Be capable of being launched within 5 minutes under all
circumstances;
(b) Be of suitable size for all persons on board the towing vessel;
(c) Not exceed the loading specified on the capacity plate required
by 33 CFR 183.23;
(d) Not contain modifications affecting the buoyancy or structure
of the skiff;
(e) Be of suitable design for the vessel's intended service; and
(f) Be marked in accordance with Sec. Sec. 199.176 and 199.178 of
this chapter.
Sec. 141.340 Lifejackets.
(a) Each towing vessel must carry at least one appropriately-sized
lifejacket, approved under approval series 160.002, 160.005, 160.055,
160.155, or 160.176, for each person on board.
(b) For towing vessels with berthing aboard, a sufficient number of
additional lifejackets must be carried so that a lifejacket is
immediately available for persons at each normally manned watch
station.
(c) Where alternative means are used to meet the requirements of
this section, as permitted by Sec. 141.225, there must be at least one
lifejacket for each person onboard. Any TSMS applicable to the towing
vessel must specify the number and location of lifejackets in such a
manner as to facilitate immediate accessibility at normally occupied
spaces including, but not limited to, accommodation spaces and watch
stations.
(d) Lifejackets must be readily accessible.
(e) If the towing vessel carries inflatable lifejackets they must
be of
[[Page 40128]]
similar design to each other and have the same mode of operation.
(f) Each lifejacket must be marked:
(1) In block capital letters with the name of the vessel; and
(2) With Type I retro-reflective material approved under approval
series 164.018. The arrangement of the retro-reflective material must
meet IMO Resolution A.658(16) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
136.112 of this subchapter).
(g) Lifejackets must have the following attachments and fittings:
(1) Each lifejacket must have a lifejacket light approved under
approval series 161.012 or 161.112 securely attached to the front
shoulder area of the lifejacket.
(2) Each lifejacket must have a whistle firmly secured by a cord to
the lifejacket.
(h) Stowage positions for lifejackets stowed in a berthing space or
stateroom and all lifejacket containers must be marked in block capital
letters and numbers with the minimum quantity, identity, and, if sizes
other than adult or universal sizes are used on the vessel, the size of
the lifejackets stowed inside the container. The equipment may be
identified in words or with the appropriate symbol from IMO Resolution
A.760(18) (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this
subchapter).
Sec. 141.350 Immersion suits.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(4) of this section, each
towing vessel operating north of lat. 32[deg] N. or south of lat.
32[deg] S. must carry the number of immersion suits as prescribed in
this paragraph (a):
(1) Each towing vessel operating in those regions must carry at
least one appropriate-size immersion suit, approved under approval
series 160.171, for each person onboard.
(2) In addition to the immersion suits required under paragraph
(a)(1) of this section, each watch station, work station, and
industrial work site must have enough immersion suits to equal the
number of persons normally on watch in, or assigned to, the station or
site at one time. However, an immersion suit is not required at a
station or site for a person whose cabin or berthing area (and the
immersion suits stowed in that location) is readily accessible to the
station or site.
(3) Where alternative means are used to meet the requirements of
this section, as permitted by Sec. 141.225, there must be at least one
immersion suit of the appropriate size for each person onboard. Any
TSMS applicable to the towing vessel must specify the number and
location of immersion suits in such a manner as to facilitate immediate
accessibility at normally occupied spaces including, but not limited
to, accommodation spaces and watch stations.
(4) A towing vessel operating on rivers or in a limited geographic
area is not required to carry immersion suits.
(b) Immersion suits carried on towing vessels must meet the
requirements of Sec. 199.70(c) and (d) of this chapter.
Sec. 141.360 Lifebuoys.
(a) A towing vessel must carry lifebuoys as follows:
(1) A towing vessel less than 26 feet length must carry a minimum
of one lifebuoy of not less than 510 millimeters (20 inches) in
diameter.
(2) A towing vessel of at least 26 feet, but less than 79 feet, in
length must carry a minimum of two lifebuoys located on opposite sides
of the vessel where personnel are normally present. Lifebuoys must be
at least 610 millimeters (24 inches) in diameter.
(3) A towing vessel 79 feet or more in length must carry four
lifebuoys, with one lifebuoy located on each side of the operating
station. Lifebuoys must be at least 610 millimeters (24 inches) in
diameter.
(4) Where alternative means are used to meet the requirements of
this section, as permitted by Sec. 141.225, any TSMS applicable to the
towing vessel must specify the number and location of lifebuoys in such
a manner as to facilitate rapid deployment of lifebuoys from exposed
decks, including the pilot house.
(b) Each lifebuoy on a towing vessel must:
(1) Be approved under approval series 160.050 or 160.150;
(2) Be capable of being rapidly cast loose;
(3) Not be permanently secured to the vessel in any way;
(4) Be marked in block capital letters with the name of the vessel;
and
(5) Be orange in color, if on a vessel on an oceans or coastwise
route.
(c) Lifebuoys must have the following attachments and fittings:
(1) At least one lifebuoy must have a lifeline, secured around the
body of the lifebuoy. If more than one lifebuoy is carried, at least
one must not have a lifeline attached. Each lifeline on a lifebuoy
must:
(i) Be buoyant;
(ii) Be of at least 18.3 meters (60 feet) in length;
(iii) Be non-kinking;
(iv) Have a diameter of at least 7.9 millimeters (\5/16\ inch);
(v) Have a breaking strength of at least 5 kilonewtons (1,124
pounds); and
(vi) Be of a dark color if synthetic, or of a type certified to be
resistant to deterioration from ultraviolet light.
(2) At least two lifebuoys on a towing vessel greater than 26 feet
must be fitted with a floating electric water light approved under
approval series 161.010 or 161.110, unless the towing vessel is limited
to daytime operation, in which case no floating electric water light is
required.
(3) If a towing vessel carries only one lifebuoy, the lifebuoy must
be fitted with a floating electric water light approved under approval
series 161.010 or 160.110, unless the towing vessel is limited to
daytime operation, in which case no floating electric water light is
required. The water light must be attached by the lanyard with a
corrosion-resistant clip to allow the water light to be quickly
disconnected from the lifebuoy. The clip must have a strength of at
least 22.7 kilograms (50 pounds).
(4) Each lifebuoy with a floating electric water light must have a
lanyard of at least 910 millimeters (3 feet) in length, but not more
than 1,830 millimeters (6 feet), securing the water light around the
body of the lifebuoy.
Sec. 141.370 Miscellaneous life saving requirements for towing
vessels.
Miscellaneous lifesaving requirements are summarized in Table
141.370 of this section. Equipment requirements are based on the area
in which a towing vessel is operating, not the route for which it is
certificated.
[[Page 40129]]
Table 141.370--Miscellaneous Lifesaving Equipment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Area of operation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Great Lakes and lakes, bays, and Coastwise and ltd. coastwise
Equipment (46 CFR section) sounds as defined in Sec. ----------------------------------
Limited Rivers ---------------136.110-------------- Oceans
geographic area <= 3 miles from <= 3 miles from <= 3 miles from > 3 miles from
shore shore shore shore
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visual Distress Signals (Sec. 3 day and 3 3 day and 3 3 day and 3 6 day and 6 3 day and 3 6 day and 6 6 day and 6
141.375). night. night. night. night. night. night. night.
EPIRBs (Sec. 141.380)...... ................ ................ ................ 1 \1\........... 1-............. 1.............. 1
Line Throwing Appliances ................ ................ ................ ................ ............... 1-............. 1
(Sec. 141.385).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Great Lakes service only.
Sec. 141.375 Visual distress signals.
(a) Carriage requirement. A towing vessel must carry a combination
of day and night visual distress signals indicated in Table 141.370 of
Sec. 141.370 for specified areas where the vessel operates.
(b) Day and night visual distress signals. Hand-held red flare
distress signals, approved under approval series 160.021 or 160.121,
and hand-held rocket-propelled parachute red flares, approved under
approval series 160.036 or 160.136, are acceptable as both day and
night signals.
(c) Signals for day visual distress only. Floating orange smoke
signals, approved under approval series 160.022, 160.122, or 160.157,
and hand-held orange smoke distress signals, approved under approval
series 160.037, are only acceptable as day signals.
(d) Limited geographic area. A vessel operating in a limited
geographic area on a short run limited to approximately 30 minutes away
from the dock is not required to carry visual distress signals under
this section.
(e) Stowage. Each pyrotechnic distress signal carried to meet this
section must be stowed in either:
(1) A portable watertight container carried at the operating
station. Portable watertight containers for pyrotechnic distress
signals must be of a bright color and must be clearly marked in legible
contrasting letters at least 12.7 millimeters (0.5 inches) high with
``DISTRESS SIGNALS''; or
(2) A pyrotechnic locker secured above the freeboard deck, away
from heat, in the vicinity of the operating station.
Sec. 141.380 Emergency position indicating radio beacon (EPIRB).
(a) Each towing vessel operating on oceans, coastwise, limited
coastwise, or beyond 3 nautical miles from shore upon the Great Lakes
must carry a Category 1, 406 MHz satellite Emergency Position
Indicating Radio Beacon (EPIRB) that meets the requirements of 47 CFR
part 80.
(b) When the towing vessel is underway, the EPIRB must be stowed in
its float-free bracket with the controls set for automatic activation
and be mounted in a manner so that it will float free if the towing
vessel sinks.
(c) The name of the towing vessel must be marked or painted in
clearly legible letters on each EPIRB, except on an EPIRB in an
inflatable liferaft.
(d) The owner or managing operator must maintain valid proof of
registration.
Note to paragraph (d). Registration information can be found at
www.beaconregistration.noaa.gov/.
Sec. 141.385 Line throwing appliance.
Each towing vessel operating in oceans and coastwise service must
have a line throwing appliance approved under approval series 160.040.
(a) Stowage. The line throwing appliance and its equipment must be
readily accessible for use.
(b) Additional equipment. The line throwing appliance must have:
(1) The equipment on the list provided by the manufacturer with the
approved appliance; and
(2) An auxiliary line that:
(i) Is at least 450 meters (1,500 feet) long;
(ii) Has a breaking strength of at least 40 kilonewtons (9,000
pounds-force); and
(iii) Is, if synthetic, of a dark color or certified by the
manufacturer to be resistant to deterioration from ultraviolet light.
PART 142--FIRE PROTECTION
Sec.
Subpart A --General
142.100 Purpose.
142.105 Applicability and delayed implementation for existing
vessels.
Subpart B--General Requirements for Towing Vessels
142.205 Alternate standards.
142.210 Alternate arrangements or equipment.
142.215 Approved equipment.
142.220 Fire hazards to be minimized.
142.225 Storage of flammable or combustible products.
142.226 Firefighter's outfit.
142.227 Fire axe.
142.230 Hand-portable fire extinguishers and semi-portable fire-
extinguishing systems.
142.235 Vessels contracted for prior to November 19, 1952.
142.240 Inspection, testing, maintenance, and records.
142.245 Requirements for training crews to respond to fires.
Subpart C--Fire Extinguishing and Detection Requirements
142.300 Excepted vessels.
142.315 Additional fire-extinguishing equipment requirements.
142.325 Fire pumps, fire mains, and fire hoses.
142.330 Fire-detection system requirements.
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3301, 3306, 3308, 3316, 8104, 8904;
33 CFR 1.05; DHS Delegation 0170.1.
Subpart A--General
Sec. 142.100 Purpose.
This part contains requirements for fire suppression and detection
equipment and arrangements on towing vessels.
Sec. 142.105 Applicability and delayed implementation for existing
vessels.
This part applies to all towing vessels subject to this subchapter.
(a) An existing towing vessel must comply with the requirements in
this part no later than either July 20, 2018 or the date the vessel
obtains a Certificate of Inspection (COI), whichever date is earlier.
(b) The delayed implementation provisions in paragraph (a) of this
[[Page 40130]]
section do not apply to a new towing vessel.
Subpart B--General Requirements for Towing Vessels
Sec. 142.205 Alternate standards.
(a) Towing vessels in compliance with Chapter II-2 of SOLAS
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter) will
be deemed to be in compliance with this part.
(b) Towing vessels that comply with other alternate standards,
deemed by the Commandant to provide an equivalent level of safety and
performance, will be in compliance with this part.
Sec. 142.210 Alternate arrangements or equipment.
(a) Alternate arrangements or equipment to comply with this part
may be approved in accordance with Sec. 136.115 of this subchapter.
(b) All owners or operators of towing vessels with a Towing Safety
Management System (TSMS) may comply with the requirements of subpart B
of this part by outfitting their vessels with appropriate alternate
arrangements or equipment so long as these variations provide an
equivalent level of safety and performance and are properly documented
in the TSMS.
(c) The cognizant Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) may
require a towing vessel to carry specialized or additional fire
protection, suppression, or detection equipment if:
(1) He or she determines that the conditions of the voyage render
the requirements of this part inadequate; or
(2) The towing vessel is operated in globally remote areas or
severe environments not covered under this part. These areas may
include, but are not limited to, polar regions, remote islands, areas
of extreme weather, and other remote areas where timely emergency
assistance cannot be anticipated.
Sec. 142.215 Approved equipment.
(a) All hand-portable fire extinguishers, semi-portable fire-
extinguishing systems, and fixed fire-extinguishing systems required by
this part must be approved by the Commandant (CG-ENG). Where other
equipment in this part is required to be approved, such equipment
requires the specific approval of the Commandant.
(b) A listing of approved equipment and materials may be found
online at https://cgmix.uscg.mil/equipment. Each cognizant OCMI may be
contacted for information concerning approved equipment and materials.
(c) New installations of fire-extinguishing and fire-detection
equipment of a type not required, or in excess of that required by this
part, may be permitted if Coast Guard approved, or if accepted by the
local OCMI, a TPO, or a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory
(NRTL). Existing equipment and installations not meeting the applicable
requirements of this part may be continued in service so long as they
are in good condition and accepted by the local OCMI or TPO.
Sec. 142.220 Fire hazards to be minimized.
Each towing vessel must be maintained and operated so as to
minimize fire hazards and to ensure the following:
(a) All bilges and void spaces are kept free from accumulation of
combustible and flammable materials and liquids insofar as practicable.
(b) Storage areas are kept free from accumulation of combustible
and flammable materials insofar as practicable.
Sec. 142.225 Storage of flammable or combustible products.
(a) Paints, coatings, or other flammable or combustible products
onboard a towing vessel must be stored in a designated storage room or
cabinet when not in use.
(b) If a storage room is provided, it may be any room or
compartment that is free of ignition sources.
(c) If a dedicated storage cabinet is provided it must be secured
to the vessel so that it does not move and must be either:
(1) A flammable liquid storage cabinet that satisfies UL 1275
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter); or
(2) A flammable liquid storage cabinet that satisfies FM Approvals
Standard 6050 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this
subchapter); or
(3) Another suitable steel container that provides an equivalent
level of protection.
(d) A B-II portable fire extinguisher must be located near the
storage room or cabinet. This is in addition to the portable fire
extinguishers required by Tables 142.230(d)(1) and 142.230(d)(2) of
Sec. 142.230.
Sec. 142.226 Firefighter's outfit.
Each towing vessel 79 feet or more in length operating on oceans
and coastwise routes that does not have an installed fixed fire-
extinguishing system must have the following:
(a) At least two firefighter's outfits that meet NFPA 1971
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter); and
(b) Two self-contained breathing apparatus of the pressure demand,
open circuit type, approved by the National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health (NIOSH), under 42 CFR part 84. The breathing
apparatus must have a minimum 30-minute air supply and full facepiece.
Sec. 142.227 Fire axe.
Each towing vessel must be equipped with at least one fire axe that
is readily accessible for use from the exterior of the vessel.
Sec. 142.230 Hand-portable fire extinguishers and semi-portable fire-
extinguishing systems.
(a) Hand-portable fire extinguishers and semi-portable fire-
extinguishing systems are classified by a combination letter and Roman
numeral. The letter indicates the type of fire which the unit could be
expected to extinguish, and the Roman numeral indicates the relative
size of the unit.
(b) For the purpose of this subchapter, all required hand-portable
fire extinguishers and semi-portable fire-extinguishing systems must
include Type B classification, suitable for extinguishing fires
involving flammable liquids, grease, etc.
(c) The number designations for size run from ``I'' for the
smallest to ``V'' for the largest. Sizes I and II are hand-portable
fire extinguishers; sizes III, IV, and V are semi-portable fire-
extinguishing systems, which must be fitted with hose and nozzle or
other practical means to cover all portions of the space involved.
Examples of the sizes for some of the typical hand-portable fire
extinguishers and semi-portable fire-extinguishing systems appear in
Table 142.230(c) of this section.
Table 142.230(c)--Portable and Semi-Portable Extinguishers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carbon dioxide, Dry chemical,
Classification Foam, liters kilograms kilograms
(gallons) (pounds) (pounds)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B-I.................................................... 4.75 (1.25) 2 (4) 1 (2)
[[Page 40131]]
B-II................................................... 9.5 (2.5) 7 (15) 4.5 (10)
B-III.................................................. 45 (12) 16 (35) 9 (20)
B-IV................................................... 75 (20) 23 (50) 13.5 (30)
B-V.................................................... 125 (33) 45 (100) 23 (50)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(d)(1) Towing vessels of 65 feet or less in length must carry at
least the minimum number of hand-portable fire extinguishers set forth
in Table 142.230(d)(1) of this section.
Table 142.230(d)(1)--B-I Hand-Portable Fire Extinguishers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum number of B-I hand-portable fire
extinguishers required \1\
---------------------------------------------
Length, feet No fixed fire- Fixed fire-
extinguishing system extinguishing system
in machinery space in machinery space
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under 26 \2\...................................................... 1 0
26 and over, but under 40......................................... 2 1
40 and over, but not over 65...................................... 3 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ One B-II hand-portable fire extinguisher may be substituted for two B-I hand-portable fire extinguishers.
\2\ See Sec. 136.105 of this subchapter concerning vessels under 26 feet.
(2) Towing vessels of more than 65 feet in length must carry at
least the minimum number of hand-portable fire extinguishers set forth
in Table 142.230(d)(2) of this section.
Table 142.230(d)(2)--B-II Hand-Portable Fire Extinguishers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gross tonnage-- Minimum number of
------------------------------------------------------ B-II hand-
portable fire
Over Not over extinguishers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
50................. 1
50.............................. 100................ 2
100............................. 500................ 3
500............................. 1,000.............. 6
1,000........................... ................... 8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) In addition to the hand-portable extinguishers required by
paragraph (d)(2) of this section, one Type B-II hand-portable fire
extinguisher must be fitted in the engine room for each 1,000 brake
horsepower of the main engines or fraction thereof. A towing vessel is
not required to carry more than six additional B-II extinguishers in
the engine room for this purpose, irrespective of horsepower.
(ii) [Reserved]
(e) The frame or support of any size III, IV, or V semi-portable
extinguisher fitted with wheels must be welded or otherwise permanently
attached to a steel bulkhead or deck to prevent it from rolling under
heavy sea conditions.
Sec. 142.235 Vessels contracted for prior to November 19, 1952.
(a) Towing vessels contracted for construction prior to November
19, 1952, must meet the applicable provisions of this part concerning
the number and general type of equipment required.
(b) Existing equipment and installations previously approved, but
not meeting the applicable requirements for approval by the Commandant,
may be continued in service so long as they are in good condition.
(c) All new installations and replacements must meet the
requirements of this part.
Sec. 142.240 Inspection, testing, maintenance, and records.
(a) Inspection and testing. All hand-portable fire extinguishers,
semi-portable fire-extinguishing systems, fire-detection systems, and
fixed fire-extinguishing systems, including ventilation, machinery
shutdowns, and fixed fire-extinguishing system pressure-operated
dampers onboard the vessel, must be inspected or tested at least once
every 12 months, as prescribed in paragraphs (a)(1) through (8) of this
section, or more frequently if otherwise required by the TSMS
applicable to the vessel.
(1) Portable fire extinguishers must be tested in accordance with
the inspection, maintenance procedures and hydrostatic pressure tests
required by Chapters 7 and 8 of NFPA 10, Portable
[[Page 40132]]
Fire Extinguishers (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of
this subchapter), with the frequency as specified by NFPA 10. In
addition, carbon dioxide and Halocarbon portable fire extinguishers
must be refilled when the net content weight loss exceeds that
specified for fixed systems in Table 142.240 of this section.
(2) Semi-portable and fixed fire-extinguishing systems must be
inspected and tested, as required by Table 142.240 of this section, in
addition to the tests required by Sec. Sec. 147.60 and 147.65 of this
chapter.
(3) Flexible connections and discharge hoses on all semi-portable
extinguishers and fixed extinguishing systems must be inspected and
tested in accordance with Sec. 147.65 of this chapter.
(4) All cylinders containing compressed gas must be tested and
marked in accordance with Sec. 147.60 of this chapter.
(5) All piping, controls, valves, and alarms must be inspected; and
the operation of controls, alarms, ventilation shutdowns, and pressure-
operated dampers for each fixed fire-extinguishing system and detecting
system must be tested, to determine that the system is operating
properly.
(6) The fire main system must be charged, and sufficient pressure
must be verified at the most remote and highest outlets.
(7) All fire hoses must be inspected for excessive wear, and
subjected to a test pressure equivalent to the maximum service
pressure. All fire hoses which are defective and incapable of repair
must be destroyed.
(8) All smoke- and fire-detection systems, including detectors and
alarms, must be tested.
Table 142.240--Semi-Portable and Fixed Fire-Extinguishing Systems
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type system Test
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carbon dioxide.................... Weigh cylinders. Recharge if weight
loss exceeds 10 percent of weight
of the charge. Test time delays,
alarms, and ventilation shutdowns
with carbon dioxide, nitrogen, or
other nonflammable gas as stated in
the system manufacturer's
instruction manual. Inspect hoses
for damage or decay. Ensure that
nozzles are unobstructed. Cylinders
must be tested and marked, and all
flexible connections on fixed
carbon dioxide systems must be
tested or renewed, as required by
Sec. Sec. 147.60 and 147.65 of
this chapter.
Halon and Halocarbon.............. Recharge or replace if weight loss
exceeds 5 percent of the weight of
the charge or if cylinder has a
pressure gauge, recharge cylinder
if pressure loss exceeds 10 percent
adjusted for temperature. Test time
delays, alarms, and ventilation
shutdowns with carbon dioxide,
nitrogen, or other nonflammable gas
as stated in the system
manufacturer's instruction manual.
Inspect hoses for damage or decay.
Ensure that nozzles are
unobstructed. Cylinders must be
tested and marked, and all flexible
connections to Halon 1301 and
halocarbon cylinders must be tested
or renewed, as required by Sec.
Sec. 147.60 and 147.65 or Sec.
147.67 of this chapter.
NOTE: Halon 1301 system approvals
have expired, but existing systems
may be retained if they are in good
and serviceable condition to the
satisfaction of the Coast Guard
inspector.
Dry Chemical (cartridge operated). Inspect pressure cartridge and
replace if end is punctured or if
determined to have leaked or is in
an unsuitable condition. Inspect
hose and nozzle to see if they are
clear. Insert charged cartridge.
Ensure dry chemical is free flowing
(not caked) and extinguisher
contains full charge.
Dry chemical (stored pressure).... See that pressure gauge is within
operating range. If not, or if the
seal is broken, weigh or otherwise
determine that extinguisher is
fully charged with dry chemical.
Recharge if pressure is low or dry
chemical is needed.
Foam (stored pressure)............ See that pressure gauge, if so
equipped, is within the operating
range. If not, or if the seal is
broken, weigh or otherwise
determine that extinguisher is
fully charged with foam. Recharge
if pressure is low or foam is
needed. Replace premixed agent
every 3 years.
Inert gas......................... Recharge or replace if cylinder
pressure loss exceeds 5 percent,
adjusted for temperature. Test time
delays, alarms, and ventilation
shutdowns with carbon dioxide,
nitrogen, or other nonflammable gas
as stated in the system
manufacturer's instruction manual.
Inspect hoses and nozzles to ensure
they are clear.
Water mist........................ Test and inspect system in
accordance with the maintenance
instructions in the system
manufacturer's design,
installation, operation, and
maintenance manual.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Maintenance. In addition to the requirements in paragraph (a)
of this section, all fire-suppression and detection equipment and
systems on board a towing vessel must be maintained in accordance with
the attached nameplate, manufacturer's approved design manual, or as
otherwise provided in any TSMS applicable to the vessel.
(c) Records. (1) The records of inspections and tests of fire-
detection systems and fixed fire-extinguishing systems must be recorded
in the TVR, official logbook, or in accordance with any TSMS applicable
to the vessel. The following minimum information is required:
(i) The dates when inspections and tests were performed, the number
and any other identification of each unit inspected and tested, the
results of the inspections and tests, and the name of the crewmember,
surveyor or auditor and any others conducting the inspections and
tests, must be included.
(ii) Receipts and other records generated by these inspections and
tests must be retained for at least 1 year and made available upon
request.
(2) The records of inspections and tests of hand-portable fire
extinguishers and semi-portable fire-extinguishing systems may be
recorded in accordance with paragraph (c)(1) of this section, or on a
tag attached to each unit by a qualified servicing organization.
Sec. 142.245 Requirements for training crews to respond to fires.
(a) Drills and instruction. The master of a towing vessel must
ensure that each crewmember participates in fire-fighting drills and
receives instruction at least once each month. The instruction may
coincide with the drills, but is not required to do so. All crewmembers
must be familiar with their fire-fighting duties, and, specifically how
to:
(1) Fight a fire in the engine room and elsewhere onboard the
towing vessel, including how to:
(i) Operate all of the fire-extinguishing equipment onboard the
towing vessel;
(ii) Stop any mechanical ventilation system for the engine room and
effectively seal all natural openings to
[[Page 40133]]
the space to prevent leakage of the extinguishing agent; and
(iii) Operate the fuel shut-off(s) for the engine room.
(2) Activate the general alarm;
(3) Report inoperative alarm systems and fire-detection systems;
and
(4) Don a firefighter's outfit and a self-contained breathing
apparatus, if the vessel is so equipped.
(b) Alternative form of instruction. Video training, followed by a
discussion led by someone familiar with the contingencies listed in
paragraph (a) of this section, is an acceptable, alternative form of
instruction. This instruction may occur either onboard or off the
towing vessel.
(c) Participation in drills. Drills must take place onboard the
towing vessel as if there were an actual emergency. They must include:
(1) Participation by all crewmembers;
(2) Breaking out and using, or simulating the use of, emergency
equipment;
(3) Testing of all alarm and detection systems by operation of the
test switch or by activation of one or more devices;
(4) Putting on protective clothing by at least one person, if the
towing vessel is so equipped; and
(5) Functionally testing the self-priming capability of the
portable fire pump, if the towing vessel is so equipped.
(d) Safety orientation. The master must ensure that each crewmember
who has not participated in the drills required by paragraph (a) of
this section and received the instruction required by that paragraph
(a) receives a safety orientation within 24 hours of reporting for
duty. The safety orientation must cover the particular contingencies
listed in paragraph (a) of this section.
Note to Sec. 142.245. See Sec. 140.915 for requirements for
keeping records of training.
Subpart C--Fire Extinguishing and Detection Equipment Requirements
Sec. 142.300 Excepted vessels.
Excepted vessels, as defined in Sec. 136.110 of this subchapter,
need not comply with the provisions of Sec. Sec. 142.315 through
142.330.
Sec. 142.315 Additional fire-extinguishing equipment requirements.
(a) A towing vessel that is:
(1) Certificated for rivers, lakes, bays, and sounds, less than 3
nautical miles from shore on the Great Lakes; or
(2) Certificated for limited coastwise, coastwise, oceans or waters
beyond 3 nautical miles from shore on the Great Lakes, whose contract
for construction was executed prior to August 27, 2003; or
(3) Pushing a barge ahead or hauling a barge alongside, when the
barge's coastwise, limited coastwise, or Great Lakes route is
restricted, as indicated on its COI, so that the barge may operate ``in
fair weather only, within 12 miles of shore'' or with words to that
effect, must be equipped with either:
(i) An approved B-V semi-portable fire-extinguishing system to
protect the engine room; or
(ii) A fixed fire-extinguishing system installed to protect the
engine room.
(b) A towing vessel that is certificated for limited coastwise,
coastwise, oceans, or beyond 3 nautical miles from shore on the Great
Lakes whose contract for construction was executed on or after August
27, 2003, except for those specified in paragraph (a)(3) of this
section, must be equipped with both:
(1) An approved B-V semi-portable fire-extinguishing system to
protect the engine room; and
(2) A fixed fire-extinguishing system installed to protect the
engine room.
Sec. 142.325 Fire pumps, fire mains, and fire hoses.
Each towing vessel must have either a self-priming, power-driven,
fixed fire pump, a fire main, and hoses and nozzles in accordance with
paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section; or a portable pump, and
hoses and nozzles, in accordance with paragraphs (e) and (f) of this
section.
(a) A fixed fire pump must be capable of:
(1) Delivering water simultaneously from the two highest hydrants,
or from both branches of the fitting if the highest hydrant has a
Siamese fitting, at a pitot-tube pressure of at least 344 kilopascals
(kPa) (50 pounds per square inch (psi)), and a flow rate of at least
300 liters per minute (lpm) (80 gallons per minute (gpm)); and
(2) Being energized remotely from a safe place outside the engine
room and at the pump.
(b) All suction valves necessary for the operation of the fire main
must be kept in the open position or capable of operation from the same
place where the remote fire pump control is located.
(c) The fire main must have a sufficient number of fire hydrants
with attached hose to allow a stream of water to reach any part of the
machinery space using a single length of fire hose.
(d) The hose must be a lined commercial fire hose 15 meters (50
feet) in length, at least 40 millimeters (1.5 inches) in diameter, and
fitted with a nozzle made of corrosion-resistant material capable of
providing a solid stream and a spray pattern.
(e) The portable fire pump must be self-priming and power-driven,
with:
(1) A minimum capacity of at least 300 LPM (80 gpm) at a discharge
gauge pressure of not less than 414 kPa (60 psi), measured at the pump
discharge;
(2) A sufficient amount of lined commercial fire hose 15 meters (50
feet) in length, at least 40 mm (1.5 inches) in diameter and
immediately available to attach to it so that a stream of water will
reach any part of the vessel; and
(3) A nozzle made of corrosion-resistant material capable of
providing a solid stream and a spray pattern.
(f) The pump must be stowed with its hose and nozzle outside of the
machinery space.
Sec. 142.330 Fire-detection system requirements.
(a) Fire-detection systems. Except as provided in paragraph (a)(8)
of this section, each towing vessel must have a fire-detection system
installed to detect engine room fires. The owner or managing operator
must ensure the following:
(1) Each detector, control panel, remote indicator panel, and fire
alarm are approved by the Commandant under approval series 161.002 or
listed by a NRTL as set forth in 29 CFR 1910.7;
(2) The system is installed, tested, and maintained in accordance
with the manufacturer's design manual;
(3) The system is arranged and installed so a fire in the engine
room automatically sets off alarms on a fire detection control panel at
the operating station. On vessels with more than one operating station,
only one of them must be outfitted with a fire detection control panel.
Any other operating station must be outfitted with either a fire
detection control panel or a remote indicator panel;
(4) The control panel includes:
(i) A power available light;
(ii) An audible to notify crew of a fire;
(iii) Visual alarm alarms to identify the zone or zones of origin
of the fire;
(iv) A means to silence the audible alarm while maintaining
indication by the visual alarms;
(v) A circuit-fault detector test-switch, or internal supervision
of circuit integrity; and
(vi) Labels for all switches and indicator lights, identifying
their functions.
(5) The system draws power from two sources. Switchover from the
primary source to the secondary source may be either manual or
automatic;
(6) The system serves no other purpose, unless it is an engine room
monitoring system complying with paragraph (a)(8) of this section; and
[[Page 40134]]
(7) The design of the system and its installation on the towing
vessel is certified and inspected by a registered professional engineer
with experience in fire-detection system design, by a technician with
qualifications as a National Institute for Certification in Engineering
Technologies (NICET) level IV fire alarm engineering technician, or by
an authorized classification society with equivalent experience, to
comply with paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) of this section.
(8) A towing vessel whose construction was contracted for prior to
January 18, 2000, may use an existing engine room monitoring system
(with fire-detection capability) instead of a fire-detection system, if
the monitoring system is operable and complies with paragraphs (a)(2)
through (7) of this section, and uses detectors listed by an NRTL.
(b) Smoke detection in berthing spaces. Each towing vessel must be
equipped with a means to detect smoke in the berthing spaces and
lounges that alerts individuals in those spaces. This may be
accomplished by an installed detection system, or by using individual
battery-operated detectors meeting UL 217 (incorporated by reference,
see Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter). Detection systems or individual
detectors must be kept operational at all times when the crew is
onboard the towing vessel.
(c) Heat-detection system in galley. Each new towing vessel
equipped with a galley must have a heat-detection system with one or
more restorable heat-sensing detectors to detect fires in the galley.
The system must be arranged to sound an audible alarm at each operating
station. This may be a separate zone in the detection system required
by paragraph (a) of this section, or a separate detection system
complying with paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section.
PART 143--MACHINERY AND ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS AND EQUIPMENT
Sec.
Subpart A--General
143.100 Purpose.
143.105 Applicability.
143.115 Definitions.
Subpart B--Requirements for All Towing Vessels
143.200 Applicability.
143.205 General.
143.210 Alternate design or operational considerations.
143.215 Existing vessels built to class.
143.220 Machinery space fire prevention.
143.225 Control and monitoring requirements.
143.230 Alarms and monitoring.
143.235 General alarms.
143.240 Communication requirements.
143.245 Readiness and testing.
143.250 System isolation and markings.
143.255 Fuel system requirements.
143.260 Fuel shutoff requirements.
143.265 Additional fuel system requirements for towing vessels built
after January 18, 2000.
143.270 Piping systems and tanks.
143.275 Bilge pumps or other dewatering capability.
143.300 Pressure vessels.
143.400 Electrical systems, general.
143.410 Shipboard lighting.
143.415 Navigation lights.
143.450 Pilothouse alerter system.
143.460 Towing machinery.
Subpart C--Requirements for New Towing Vessels
143.500 Applicability.
143.510 Verification of compliance with design standards.
143.515 Towing vessels built to recognized classification society
rules.
143.520 Towing vessels built to American Boat and Yacht Council
standards.
143.540 Pumps, pipes, valves, and fittings for essential systems.
143.545 Pressure vessels.
143.550 Steering systems.
143.555 Electrical power sources, generators, and motors.
143.560 Electrical distribution panels and switchboards.
143.565 Electrical overcurrent protection other than generators and
motors.
143.570 Electrical grounding and ground detection.
143.575 Electrical conductors, connections, and equipment.
143.580 Alternative electrical installations.
143.585 General requirements for propulsion, steering, and related
controls on vessels that move tank barges carrying oil or hazardous
material in bulk.
143.590 Propulsor redundancy on vessels that move tank barges
carrying oil or hazardous material in bulk.
143.595 Vessels with one propulsor that move tank barges carrying
oil or hazardous material in bulk.
143.600 Alternative standards for vessels that move tank barges
carrying oil or hazardous material in bulk.
143.605 Demonstration of compliance on vessels that move tank barges
carrying oil or hazardous material in bulk.
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3301, 3306, 3308, 3316, 8104, 8904;
33 CFR 1.05; DHS Delegation No. 0170.1.
Subpart A--General
Sec. 143.100 Purpose.
This part contains requirements for the design, installation, and
operation of primary and auxiliary machinery and electrical systems and
equipment on towing vessels.
Sec. 143.105 Applicability.
This part applies to all towing vessels subject to this subchapter.
The specific applicability of requirements in each subpart is set forth
in that subpart.
Sec. 143.115 Definitions.
The definitions provided in Sec. 136.110 of this subchapter apply
to this part. In addition, the following definition applies exclusively
to this part:
Independent means the equipment is arranged to perform its required
function regardless of the state of operation, or failure, of other
equipment.
Subpart B--Requirements for All Towing Vessels
Sec. 143.200 Applicability.
(a) This subpart applies to all towing vessels subject to this
subchapter.
(b) Except as noted paragraph (c) of this section, which lists
later implementation dates for requirements in Sec. Sec. 143.450 and
143.460, an existing towing vessel must comply with the applicable
requirements in this part no later than either July 20, 2018 or the
date the vessel obtains a Certificate of Inspection (COI), whichever
date is earlier. The delayed implementation provisions in this section
do not apply to a new towing vessel.
(c) Existing vessels must meet the pilothouse alerter and towing
machinery requirements of Sec. Sec. 143.450 and 143.460 no later than
5 years after the issuance of the first COI for the vessel.
Sec. 143.205 General.
(a) Machinery and electrical systems must be designed and
maintained to provide for safe operation of the towing vessel and
safety of persons onboard under normal and emergency conditions.
(b) The crew of each towing vessel must demonstrate the ability to
operate the primary and auxiliary machinery and electrical systems for
which they are responsible, and to do so under normal and emergency
conditions. This includes, but is not limited to, responses to alarms
and restoration of propulsion and steering in the event of failure.
(c) Propulsion machinery, including main engines, reduction gears,
shafting, bearings, and electrical equipment and systems, must:
(1) Be maintained to ensure proper operation;
(2) Be suitable for route and service; and
(3) Have suitable propulsion controls to provide the operator full
control at each operating station.
(d) Repairs and minor alterations to existing towing vessels must
be made in accordance with this part. New
[[Page 40135]]
installations that are not replacements in kind must comply with the
requirements of subpart C of this part, if applicable.
Sec. 143.210 Alternate design or operational considerations.
(a) Machinery or electrical systems of a novel design, unusual
form, or special material that cannot be reviewed or approved in
accordance with this part, may be approved by the Commanding Officer,
Marine Safety Center. It must be shown by systematic analysis, based on
engineering principles, that the machinery or electrical equipment or
system provides an equivalent level of safety. The owner or managing
operator must submit detailed plans, material component specifications,
and design criteria, including the expected towing vessel service and
operating environment, to the Marine Safety Center. Examples of novel
design include use of liquefied natural gas, compressed natural gas, or
propane fuel for propulsion, and hybrid, fuel cell, or battery
propulsion.
(b) Alternate arrangements or equipment to comply with this part
may be approved in accordance with Sec. 136.115 of this subchapter.
Sec. 143.215 Existing vessels built to class.
(a) An existing towing vessel classed by a recognized
classification society, as appropriate for the intended service and
routes, is considered in compliance with the machinery and electrical
standards of this subpart.
(b) An existing vessel built and equipped to conform to a
recognized classification society's rules, appropriate for the intended
service and routes, but not currently classed, may be deemed by the
Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI), or third-party
organization (TPO), to be in compliance with this part, provided that
the towing vessel conforms to the class rules.
(c) Existing vessels meeting either paragraph (a) or (b) of this
section must also meet the requirements of Sec. Sec. 143.245 and
143.450.
Sec. 143.220 Machinery space fire prevention.
(a) All seals and gaskets must be properly maintained to prevent
leaks of flammable or combustible liquid, as those terms are defined in
46 CFR subpart 30.10, into the machinery space.
(b) Piping and machinery components that exceed 220 [deg]C (428
[deg]F), including fittings, flanges, valves, exhaust manifolds, and
turbochargers, must be insulated. Measures must be in place to prevent
flammable or combustible liquid piping leaks from coming into contact
with these components.
(c) Flammable and combustible products must not be stored in
machinery spaces, unless they are stored in a suitable container that
meets the requirements of Sec. 142.225 of this subchapter.
Sec. 143.225 Control and monitoring requirements.
(a) Each towing vessel must have a means to monitor and control the
amount of thrust, rudder angle, and (if applicable) direction of
thrust, at each operating station.
(b) Each towing vessel equipped with rudder(s) must have a means to
monitor and control the position of the rudder(s) at each operating
station.
Sec. 143.230 Alarms and monitoring.
(a) Each towing vessel must have a reliable means to provide
notification when an emergency condition exists or an essential system
develops problems that require attention. The following alarms must be
provided:
(1) Main engine low lubricating oil pressure;
(2) Main engine high cooling water temperature;
(3) Auxiliary generator engine low lubricating oil pressure;
(4) Auxiliary generator engine high cooling water temperature;
(5) High bilge levels;
(6) Low hydraulic steering fluid levels, if applicable; and
(7) Low fuel level, if fitted with a day tank.
(b) Alarms must:
(1) Be visible and audible at each operating station. The alarm
located at the operating station may be a summary alarm; if the alarm
at the operating station is a summary alarm, the specific alarm
condition must be indicated at the machinery or bilge location;
(2) Have a means to test actuation at each operating station or
have a continuous self-monitoring alarm system which actuates if an
alarm point fails or becomes disabled;
(3) Continue until they are acknowledged; and
(4) Not interfere with night vision at the operating station.
(c) The following systems must be equipped with gauges at the
machinery location:
(1) Main engine lubricating oil pressure and main engine RPM;
(2) Main engine cooling water temperature;
(3) Auxiliary generator engine lubricating oil pressure and
auxiliary generator engine RPM;
(4) Auxiliary generator engine cooling water temperature; and
(5) Hydraulic steering fluid pressure, if the vessel is equipped
with hydraulic steering systems.
Sec. 143.235 General alarms.
(a) This section does not apply to an excepted vessel as defined in
Sec. 136.110 of this subchapter.
(b) Each towing vessel must be fitted with a general alarm that:
(1) Is activated at each operating station and can notify persons
onboard in the event of an emergency;
(2) Is capable of notifying persons in any accommodation, work
space, and the engine room;
(3) Has installed, in the engine room and any other area where
background noise makes a general alarm hard to hear, a supplemental
flashing red light that is identified with a sign that reads:
``Attention General Alarm--When Alarm Sounds or Flashes Go to Your
Station''; and
(4) A public-address (PA) system or other means of alerting all
persons on the towing vessel may be used in lieu of the general alarm
in paragraph (b) of this section if the system meets the requirements
of paragrahs (b)(2) and (3) of this section.
Sec. 143.240 Communication requirements.
(a) This section does not apply to an excepted towing vessel as
defined in Sec. 136.110 of this subchapter.
(b) Each towing vessel must be fitted with a communication system
between the pilothouse and the engine room that:
(1) Consists of either fixed or portable equipment, such as a
sound-powered telephone, portable radios, or other reliable method of
voice communication, with a main or reserve power supply that is
independent of the towing vessel's electrical system; and
(2) Provides two-way voice communication and calling between the
pilothouse and either the engine room or a location immediately
adjacent to an exit from the engine room.
(c) Towing vessels with more than one propulsion unit and
independent pilothouse control for all engines are not required to have
internal communication systems.
(d) When the pilothouse engine controls and the access to the
engine room are within 3 meters (10 feet) of each other and allow
unobstructed visible contact between them, direct voice communication
is acceptable instead of a communication system.
Sec. 143.245 Readiness and testing.
(a) Essential systems or equipment must be regularly tested and
examined. Tests and examinations must verify that the system or
equipment functions as
[[Page 40136]]
designed. If a component is found unsatisfactory, it must be repaired
or replaced. Test and examination procedures must be in accordance with
manufacturer's instructions or the Towing Safety Management System
(TSMS) applicable to the vessel, if the vessel has a TSMS.
(b) Each towing vessel must perform the applicable tests in Table
143.245(b) of this section. The tests required by this section must be
recorded in accordance with part 140 of this subchapter.
Table 143.245(b)--Required Tests and Frequency
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tests of: Frequency:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Propulsion controls; ahead and astern Before the vessel gets
at the operating station. underway, but no more than
once in any 24 hour period.
Steering controls at the operating Before the vessel gets
station. underway, but no more than
once in any 24 hour period.
Pilothouse alerter system.............. Weekly.
All alternate steering and propulsion At least once every 3 months.
controls.
Power supply for alarm actuation At least once every 3 months.
circuits for alarms required by Sec.
143.230.
Communications required by Sec. Weekly.
143.240.
General alarm if the vessel is so Weekly.
equipped.
Emergency lighting and power if the At least once every 3 months.
vessel is so equipped.
Charge of storage batteries if the At least once every 3 months.
vessel is so equipped, for emergency
lighting and power.
Alarm setpoints........................ Twice every 5 years, with no
more than 3 years elapsing
since last test.
Pressure vessel relief valves.......... Twice every 5 years, with no
more than 3 years elapsing
since last test.
All other essential systems............ At least once every 3 months.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 143.250 System isolation and markings.
Electrical equipment, piping for flammable or combustible liquid,
seawater cooling, or fire-fighting systems must be provided with
isolation devices and markings as follows:
(a) Electrical equipment must be provided with circuit isolation
and must be marked as described in Sec. 143.400.
(b) Electrical panels or other enclosures containing more than one
source of power must be fitted with a sign warning persons of this
condition and identifying where to secure all sources.
(c) Piping for flammable or combustible liquid, seawater cooling,
or firefighting systems must be fitted with isolation valves that are
clearly marked by labeling or color coding that enables the crew to
identify its function.
(d) Any piping system that penetrates the hull below the waterline
must be fitted with an accessible valve, located as close to the hull
penetration as is practicable, for preventing the accidental admission
of water into the vessel either through such pipes or in the event of a
fracture of such pipe. The valve must be clearly marked by labeling or
color coding that enables the crew to identify its function.
(e) Color coding required by this section may be met by complying
with coding standards contained in the ISO 14726:2008(E) (incorporated
by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter), or in accordance
with the TSMS applicable to the vessel.
Sec. 143.255 Fuel system requirements.
(a) Fuel systems for towing vessel main engines and generators must
have a documented maintenance plan to ensure proper operation of the
system.
(b) A continuous supply of clean fuel must be provided to main
propulsion engines and generators.
(c) The fuel system must include filters and/or purifiers. Where
filters are used:
(1) A supply of spare fuel filters must be provided onboard; and
(2) Fuel filters must be replaced in accordance with manufacturer's
requirements or the vessel's TSMS, if applicable.
(d) Except as otherwise permitted under Sec. 143.210 or Sec.
143.520, no fuel other than diesel fuel may be used.
Sec. 143.260 Fuel shutoff requirements.
(a) This section does not apply to an excepted towing vessel as
defined in Sec. 136.110 of this subchapter.
(b) To stop the flow of fuel in the event of a fire or break in the
fuel line, a remote fuel shutoff valve must be fitted on any fuel line
that supplies fuel directly to a propulsion engine or generator prime
mover.
(c) The valve must be installed in the fuel piping directly outside
of the fuel oil supply tank.
(d) The valve must be operable from a safe place outside the space
where the valve is installed.
(e) Each remote valve control must be marked in clearly legible
letters, at least 25 millimeters (1 inch) high, indicating the purpose
of the valve and the way to operate it.
Sec. 143.265 Additional fuel system requirements for towing vessels
built after January 18, 2000.
(a) Applicability. This section applies to towing vessels that are
not excepted vessels, as defined in Sec. 136.110 of this subchapter,
and that were built after January 18, 2000. Except for outboard engines
or portable bilge or fire pumps, each fuel system must comply with this
section.
(b) Portable fuel systems. The vessel must not incorporate or carry
portable fuel systems, including portable tanks and related fuel lines
and accessories, except when used for outboard engines or portable
bilge or fire pumps. The design, construction, and stowage of portable
tanks and related fuel lines and accessories must comply with the ABYC
H-25 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter).
(c) Vent pipes for integral fuel tanks. Each integral fuel tank
must have a vent that connects to the highest point of the tank,
discharges on a weather deck through a bend of 180 degrees, and is
fitted with a 30-by-30-mesh corrosion-resistant flame screen. Vents
from two or more fuel tanks may combine in a system that discharges on
a weather deck. The net cross-sectional area of the vent pipe for the
tank must be not less than 312.3 square millimeters (0.484 square
inches), for any tank filled by gravity. The cross-sectional area of
the vent pipe, or the sum of the vent areas when multiple vents are
used, must not
[[Page 40137]]
be less than that of the fill pipe cross-sectional area for any tank
filled by pump pressure.
(d) Fuel piping. Except as permitted in paragraphs (d)(1) through
(3) of this section, each fuel line must be seamless and made of steel,
annealed copper, nickel-copper, or copper-nickel. Each fuel line must
have a wall thickness no less than 0.9 millimeters (0.035 inches)
except for the following:
(1) Aluminum piping is acceptable on an aluminum-hull towing vessel
if it is at least Schedule 80 in thickness.
(2) Nonmetallic flexible hose is acceptable if it:
(i) Is used in lengths of not more than 0.76 meters (30 inches);
(ii) Is visible and easily accessible;
(iii) Does not penetrate a watertight bulkhead;
(iv) Is fabricated with an inner tube and a cover of synthetic
rubber or other suitable material reinforced with wire braid; and
(v) Either:
(A) If designed for use with compression fittings, is fitted with
suitable, corrosion-resistant, compression fittings, or fittings
compliant with the SAE J1475 Revised JUN96 (incorporated by reference,
see Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter); or
(B) If designed for use with clamps, is installed with two clamps
at each end of the hose. Clamps must not rely on spring tension and
must be installed beyond the bead or flare or over the serrations of
the mating spud, pipe, or hose fitting.
(3) Nonmetallic flexible hose complying with SAE J1942 Revised
APR2007 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this
subchapter), is also acceptable.
(e) Alternative standards. A towing vessel of less than 79 feet in
length may comply with any of the following standards for fuel systems
instead of those of paragraph (d) in this section:
(1) ABYC H-33 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this
subchapter);
(2) Chapter 5 of NFPA 302 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
136.112 of this subchapter); or
(3) 33 CFR chapter I, subchapter S (Boating Safety).
Sec. 143.270 Piping systems and tanks.
Piping and tanks exposed to the outside of the hull must be made of
metal and maintained in a leak free condition.
Sec. 143.275 Bilge pumps or other dewatering capability.
There must be an installed or portable bilge pump for emergency
dewatering. Any portable pump must have sufficient hose length and
pumping capability. All installed bilge piping must have a check/foot
valve in each bilge suction that prevents unintended backflooding
through bilge piping.
Sec. 143.300 Pressure vessels.
(a) Pressure vessels over 5 cubic feet in volume and over 15 pounds
per square inch maximum allowable working pressure (MAWP) must be
equipped with an indicating pressure gauge (in a readily visible
location) and with one or more spring-loaded relief valves. The total
relieving capacity of such relief valves must prevent pressure from
exceeding the MAWP, as established by the manufacturer, by more than 10
percent.
(b) Pressure vessels must be externally examined annually. Relief
valves must be tested in accordance with Sec. 143.245.
(c) All pressure vessels must have the MAWP indicated by a stamp,
nameplate, or other means visible to the crew.
(d) Pressure vessels installed after July 20, 2016 must meet the
requirements of Sec. 143.545.
Sec. 143.400 Electrical systems, general.
(a) Electrical systems and equipment must function properly and
minimize system failures and fire and shock hazards.
(b) Installed electrical power source(s) must be capable of
carrying the electrical load of the towing vessel under normal
operating conditions.
(c) Electrical equipment must be marked with its respective current
and voltage ratings.
(d) Individual circuit breakers on switchboards and distribution
panels must be labeled with a description of the loads they serve.
(e) Electrical connections must be suitably installed to prevent
them from coming loose through vibration or accidental contact.
(f) Electrical equipment and electrical cables must be suitably
protected from wet and corrosive environments.
(g) Electrical components that pose an electrical hazard must be in
an enclosure.
(h) Electrical conductors passing though watertight bulkheads must
be installed so that the bulkhead remains watertight.
(i) The connections of flexible cable plugs and socket outlets must
be designed to prevent unintended separation.
Sec. 143.410 Shipboard lighting.
(a) Sufficient lighting suitable for the marine environment must be
provided within crew working and living areas.
(b) Emergency lighting must be provided for all internal crew
working and living areas. Emergency lighting sources must provide for
sufficient illumination under emergency conditions to facilitate egress
from each space and must be either:
(1) Automatic, battery-operated with a duration of no less than 2
hours; or
(2) Non-electric, phosphorescent adhesive lighting strips that are
installed along escape routes and sufficiently visible to enable egress
with no power.
(c) Each towing vessel must be equipped with at least two portable,
battery-powered lights. One must be located in the pilothouse and the
other at the access to the engine room.
Sec. 143.415 Navigation lights.
(a) Towing vessels more than 65 feet in length must use navigation
lights that meet UL 1104 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112
of this subchapter) or other standards accepted by the Coast Guard.
(b) Towing vessels 65 feet or less in length may meet the
requirements listed in 33 CFR 183.810 or paragraph (a) of this section.
Sec. 143.450 Pilothouse alerter system.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (d) or (e) of this section, a
towing vessel with overnight accommodations and alternating watches
(shift work), when pulling, pushing or hauling alongside one or more
barges, must have a system to detect when its master or mate (pilot)
becomes incapacitated. The system must:
(1) Have an alarm in the pilothouse distinct from any other alarm;
(2) Require action from the master or officer in charge of a
navigational watch, during an interval not to exceed 10 minutes, in
order to reset the alarm timer; and
(3) Immediately (within 30 seconds) notify another crewmember if
the pilothouse alarm is not acknowledged.
(b) The time interval for the system alarm must be adjustable. The
time may be adjusted by the owner or managing operator but must not be
in excess of 10 minutes. This time interval, and information on alerter
operation, must be provided on board and specified in the vessel's TSMS
if applicable.
(c) The system alarm may be reset physically (e.g. a push button),
or the reset may be accomplished by a link to other pilothouse action
such as rudder or throttle control movement, or motion detection of
personnel.
(d) A towing vessel need not comply with this section if a second
person is provided in the pilothouse.
[[Page 40138]]
(e) Towing vessels 65 feet or less in length are not required to
have a pilothouse alerter system.
Sec. 143.460 Towing machinery.
(a) Towing machinery such as capstans, winches, and other
mechanical devices used to connect the towing vessel to the tow must be
designed and installed to maximize control of the tow.
(b) Towing machinery for towing astern must have sufficient
safeguards, e.g., towing bitt with crossbar, to prevent the machinery
from becoming disabled in the event the tow becomes out of line.
(c) Towing machinery used to connect the towing vessel to the tow
must be suitable for its intended service. It must be capable of
withstanding exposure to the marine environment, likely mechanical
damage, static and dynamic loads expected during intended service, the
towing vessel's horsepower, and arrangement of the tow.
(d) When a winch that has the potential for uncontrolled release
under tension is used, a warning must be in place at the winch controls
that indicates this. When safeguards designed to prevent uncontrolled
release are utilized, they must not be disabled.
(e) Each owner or managing operator must develop procedures to
routinely examine, maintain, and replace capstans, winches, and other
machinery used to connect the towing vessel to the tow.
Subpart C--Requirements for New Towing Vessels
Sec. 143.500 Applicability.
(a) This subpart applies to a new towing vessel, as defined in
Sec. 136.110 of this subchapter, unless it is an excepted vessel.
(b) Machinery or electrical systems of a novel design, unusual
form, or special material must meet section Sec. 143.210.
(c) Unless otherwise noted in Sec. Sec. 143.515 and 143.520, new
towing vessels must also meet the requirements of subpart B of this
part.
Sec. 143.510 Verification of compliance with design standards.
Verification of compliance with the machinery and electrical design
standards in this subpart is obtained by following the provisions in
Sec. Sec. 144.135 through 144.145 of this subchapter.
Sec. 143.515 Towing vessels built to recognized classification
society rules.
(a) Except as noted in paragraph (c) of this section, a towing
vessel classed by the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS), in accordance
with the ABS Rules for Building and Classing Steel Vessels Under 90
Meters (295 Feet) in Length, or the ABS Rules for Building and Classing
Steel Vessels for Service on Rivers and Intracoastal Waterways
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter), as
appropriate for the intended service and routes, complies with this
subpart.
(b) Except as noted in paragraph (c) of this section, a towing
vessel built and equipped to conform to the ABS rules specified in
paragraph (a) of this section and appropriate for the intended service
and routes, but not currently classed, may be deemed by the OCMI or a
TPO to be in compliance with this subpart if it can be shown that the
vessel continues to conform to the ABS rules.
(c) A vessel that complies with this subpart as described in
paragraph (a) or (b) must also meet the requirements described in
Sec. Sec. 143.585 through 143.595 or the requirements of Sec. 143.600
if it moves tank barges carrying oil or hazardous material in bulk.
(d) Vessels meeting either paragraph (a) or (b) of this section are
considered as being in compliance with subpart B of this part except
for the readiness and testing requirements of Sec. 143.245, and
pilothouse alerter requirements of Sec. 143.450.
(e) Towing vessels built to other recognized classification society
rules, appropriate for the intended route and service, may be
considered compliant with provisions in this subpart upon approval by
the Coast Guard.
Sec. 143.520 Towing vessels built to American Boat and Yacht Council
standards.
(a) Except as noted in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, a
new towing vessel 65 feet (19.8 meters) or less in length built to
conform with the American Boat and Yacht Council (ABYC) standards
listed in this paragraph (a) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
136.112 of this subchapter), complies with this subpart:
(1) E-11 (2003)--AC & DC Electrical Systems on Boats;
(2) H-2 (2002)--Ventilation of Boats Using Gasoline;
(2) H-22 (2005)--Electric Bilge Pump Systems;
(3) H-24 (2007)--Gasoline Fuel Systems;
(4) H-25 (2003)--Portable Gasoline Fuel Systems;
(5) H-32 (2004)--Ventilation of Boats Using Diesel Fuel;
(6) H-33 (2005)--Diesel Fuel Systems;
(7) P-1 (2002)--Installation of Exhaust Systems for Propulsion and
Auxiliary Engines; and
(8) P-4 (2004)--Marine Inboard Engines and Transmissions.
(b) New towing vessels, 65 feet or less in length, built to the
ABYC standards specified in this section are considered compliant with
subpart B of this part except for the readiness and testing
requirements of Sec. 143.245.
(c) If the vessel moves tank barges carrying oil or hazardous
material in bulk, it must meet either the requirements described in
Sec. Sec. 143.585 through 143.595 or the requirements described in
Sec. 143.600.
Sec. 143.540 Pumps, pipes, valves, and fittings for essential
systems.
(a) Pumps, pipes, valves, and fittings in essential systems on
vessels must meet ABS Rules for Building and Classing Steel Vessels
Under 90 Meters (295 Feet) in Length (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter), Part 4, Chapter 4.
(b) Pumps, pipes, valves, and fittings in essential systems on
towing vessels operating exclusively on rivers or intracoastal
waterways may meet ABS Rules for Building and Classing Steel Vessels
for Service on Rivers and Intracoastal Waterways (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter), Part 4, Chapter 3.
Sec. 143.545 Pressure vessels.
(a) In lieu of meeting the requirements of Sec. 143.300, pressure
vessels installed on new towing vessels must meet the requirements of
this section.
(b) Pressure vessels over 5 cubic feet in volume and more than 15
psi maximum allowable working pressure must meet ABS Rules for Building
and Classing Steel Vessels under 90 Meters (295 Feet) in Length
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter), Part
4, Chapter 1, Section 1.
Sec. 143.550 Steering systems.
(a) Steering systems must meet ABS Rules for Building and Classing
Steel Vessels under 90 Meters (295 Feet) in Length (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter), Part 4, Chapter 3,
Section 3.
(b) Steering systems on new towing vessels operating exclusively on
rivers or intracoastal waterways may meet ABS Rules for Building and
Classing Steel Vessels for Service on Rivers and Intracoastal Waterways
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter), Part
4, Chapter 2, Section 3.
[[Page 40139]]
Sec. 143.555 Electrical power sources, generators, and motors.
(a) General requirements. (1) There must be a source of electrical
power sufficient for:
(i) All essential systems as defined by Sec. 136.110 of this
subchapter;
(ii) Minimum conditions of habitability; and
(iii) Other installed or portable systems and equipment.
(2) Generators and motors must be suitably rated for the
environment where they operate, marked with their respective ratings,
and suitably protected against overcurrent.
(3) A towing vessel, other than an excepted vessel, must have a
backup or a second power source that has adequate capacity to supply
power to essential alarms, lighting, radios, navigation equipment, and
any other essential system identified by the cognizant OCMI or a TPO.
(b) Specific requirements. (1) The owner or managing operator must
complete a load analysis that shows that the electrical power source is
sufficient to power the sum of connected loads described in paragraph
(a)(1) of this section utilizing an appropriate load factor for each
load. A record of the analysis must be retained by the owner or
managing operator.
(2) Installed generators and motors must have a data plate listing
rated kilowatts and power factor (or current), voltage, and rated
ambient temperature.
(3) Generators must be provided with overcurrent protection no
greater than 115 percent of their rated current and utilize a
switchboard or distribution panel.
(4) Motors must be provided with overcurrent protection that meets
Parts I through VII, Article 430 of NFPA's National Electrical Code
(NEC) (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this
subchapter). Steering motor circuits must be protected as per Part 4
Chapter 6 Section 2, Regulation 11 (except 11.7) ofABS Rules for
Building and Classing Steel Vessels Under 90 Meters (295 feet) in
Length (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this
subchapter).
(5) Generators and motors installed in machinery spaces must be
certified to operate in an ambient temperature of 50 [deg]C or be
derated, or it can be shown that 40 [deg]C ambient temperature will not
be exceeded in these spaces.
(6) Each generator and motor, except a submersible-pump motor, must
be in an accessible space which is adequately ventilated and as dry as
practicable, and must be mounted above the bilges.
(7) A generator driven by a main propulsion unit (such as a shaft
generator) may be considered one of the power sources required by
paragraph (a) of this section.
(8) Other than excepted vessels, each towing vessel must be
arranged so that the following essential loads can be energized from
two independent sources of electricity:
(i) High bilge level alarm required by Sec. 143.230;
(ii) Emergency egress lighting, unless the requirements of Sec.
143.410(b)(1) or (2) are met;
(iii) Navigation lights;
(iv) Pilothouse lighting;
(v) Engine room lighting;
(vi) Any installed radios and navigation equipment as required by
Sec. Sec. 140.715 and 140.725;
(vii) All distress alerting communications equipment listed in
Sec. Sec. 140.715 and 140.725;
(viii) Any installed fire detection system; and
(ix) Any essential system identified by the cognizant OCMI or TPO,
if applicable.
(9) If a battery is used as the second source of electricity
required by paragraph (b)(8) of this section, it must be capable of
supplying the loads for at least three hours. There must be a means to
monitor the condition of the battery backup power source.
Sec. 143.560 Electrical distribution panels and switchboards.
(a) Each distribution panel or switchboard on a towing vessel must
be:
(1) In a location that is accessible, as dry as practicable,
adequately ventilated, and protected from falling debris and dripping
or splashing water; and
(2) Totally enclosed and of the dead-front type.
(b) Each switchboard accessible from the rear must be constructed
to prevent a person's accidental contact with energized parts.
(c) Nonconductive mats or grating must be provided on the deck in
front of each switchboard and, if it is accessible from the rear, on
the deck behind the switchboard.
(d) Each un-insulated current-carrying part must be mounted on
noncombustible, nonabsorbent, and high-dielectric insulating material.
(e) Equipment mounted on a door of an enclosure must be constructed
or shielded so that a person will not come into accidental contact with
energized parts.
Sec. 143.565 Electrical overcurrent protection other than generators
and motors.
(a) General requirement. Power and lighting circuits on towing
vessels must be protected by suitable overcurrent protection.
(b) Specific requirements. (1) Cable and wiring used in power and
lighting circuits must have overcurrent protection that opens the
circuit at the standard setting closest to 80 percent of the
manufacturer's listed ampacity. Overcurrent protection setting
exceptions allowed by NFPA's National Electrical Code (NEC), Article
240 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter)
may be employed.
(2) If the manufacturer's listed ampacity is not known, tables
referenced in Article 310.15(B) of the NEC (incorporated by reference,
see Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter) must be used, assuming a
temperature rating of 75 [deg]C and an assumed temperature of 50 [deg]C
for machinery spaces and 40 [deg]C for other spaces.
(3) Overcurrent protection devices must be installed in a manner
that will not open the path to ground in a circuit; only ungrounded
conductors must be protected. Overcurrent protection must be
coordinated such that an overcurrent situation is cleared by the
circuit breaker or fuse nearest to the fault.
(4) Each transformer must have protection against overcurrent that
meets Article 450 of the NEC (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
136.112 of this subchapter).
(5) On a towing vessel, other than an excepted vessel as defined in
Sec. 136.110 of this subchapter, essential systems and non-essential
systems must not be on the same circuit or share the same overcurrent
protective device.
Sec. 143.570 Electrical grounding and ground detection.
(a) An ungrounded distribution system must be provided with a
ground detection system located at the main switchboard or distribution
panel that provides continuous indication of circuit status to ground,
with a provision to temporarily remove the indicating device from the
reference ground.
(b) A dual voltage or grounded electrical distribution system must
have the neutral suitably grounded. There must be only one connection
to ground, regardless of the number of power sources. This connection
must be at the main switchboard or distribution panel.
(c) On a metallic towing vessel, a grounded distribution system
must be grounded to the hull. This grounded system must be connected to
a common, non-aluminum ground plate. The ground plate must have only
one connection to the main switchboard or distribution panel, and the
connection
[[Page 40140]]
must be readily accessible for examination.
(d) On a nonmetallic towing vessel, all electrical equipment must
be grounded to a common ground. Multiple ground plates bonded together
are acceptable.
(e) Each grounding conductor of a cable must be identified by one
of the following means:
(1) Green braid or green insulation; or
(2) Stripping the insulation from the entire exposed length of the
grounding conductor.
(f) A towing vessel's hull may not carry current as a conductor,
except for an impressed-current cathodic-protection system or a battery
system used to start an engine.
(g) Cable armor may not be used to ground electrical equipment or
systems.
(h) Each receptacle outlet and attachment plug for a portable lamp,
tool, or similar apparatus operating at 100 or more volts must have a
grounding pole and a grounding conductor in the portable cord.
(i) In a grounded distribution system, only grounded, three-prong
appliances may be used. This does not apply to double-insulated
appliances or tools and appliances of 50 volts or less.
Sec. 143.575 Electrical conductors, connections, and equipment.
(a) Each cable and wire on a towing vessel must be installed to
meet the following requirements:
(1) Each conductor must have sufficient current-carrying capacity
for the circuit in which it is used.
(2) Cable hangers for overhead and vertical cable runs must be
installed with metal supports and retention devices at least every 48
inches.
(3) Each wire and cable run must be installed in a manner to
prevent contact with personnel, mechanical hazards, and leaking fluids.
Wire and cable runs must not be installed in bilges, across a normal
walking path, or less than 24 inches from the path of movable machinery
(e.g., cranes, elevators, forktrucks, etc., where the machinery
location can change) unless adequately protected.
(4) Connections and terminations must be suitable for the installed
conductors, and must retain the original electrical, mechanical, flame-
retarding, and where necessary, fire-resisting properties of the
conductor. If twist-on types of connectors are used, the connections
must be made within an enclosure and the insulated cap of the connector
must be secured to prevent loosening due to vibration. Twist-on type of
connectors may not be used for making joints in cables, facilitating a
conductor splice, or extending the length of a circuit.
(5) Each cable and wire must be installed so as to avoid or reduce
interference with radio reception and compass indication.
(6) Each cable and wire must be protected from the weather.
(7) Each cable and wire must be supported in order to avoid chafing
or other damage.
(8) Each cable and wire must be protected by metal coverings or
other suitable means, if in areas subject to mechanical abuse.
(9) Each cable and wire must be suitable for low temperature and
high humidity, if installed in refrigerated compartments.
(10) Each cable and wire must be located outside a tank, unless it
supplies power to equipment in the tank.
(11) If wire is installed in a tank, it must have sheathing or wire
insulation compatible with the fluid in a tank.
(b) Extension cords must not be used as a permanent connection to a
source of electrical power.
(c) Multi-outlet adapters (power strips) may not be connected to
other adapters (``daisy-chained''), or otherwise used in a manner that
could overload the capacity of a receptacle.
Sec. 143.580 Alternative electrical installations.
In lieu of meeting the requirements of Sec. Sec. 143.555 through
143.575, a vessel may meet the following:
(a) ABS Rules for Building and Classing Steel Vessels Under 90
Meters (295 Feet) in Length (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
136.112 of this subchapter), Part 4, Chapter 6; or
(b) ABS Rules for Building and Classing Steel Vessels for Service
on Rivers and Intracoastal Waterways (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter), Part 4, Chapter 5, if they operate
exclusively on rivers or intracoastal waterways.
Sec. 143.585 General requirements for propulsion, steering, and
related controls on vessels that move tank barges carrying oil or
hazardous material in bulk.
(a) There must be an alternate means to control the propulsion and
steering system which must:
(1) Be independent of the primary control required by Sec.
143.225;
(2) Be located at or near the propulsion and steering equipment;
and
(3) Be readily accessible and suitable for prolonged operation.
(b) There must be a means to communicate between each operating
station and the alternate propulsion and steering controls.
(c) There must be a means to stop each propulsion engine and
steering motor from each operating station.
(d) The means to monitor the amount of thrust, rudder angle, and if
applicable, direction (ahead or astern) of thrust must be independent
of the controls required by Sec. 143.225.
(e) The propulsion control system required by Sec. 143.225 must be
designed so that, in the event of a single failure of any component of
the system, propeller speed and direction of thrust are maintained or
reduced to zero.
(f) On a towing vessel with an integrated steering and propulsion
system, such as a Z-drive, the control system required by Sec. 143.225
must be designed so that, in the event of a single failure of any
component of the system, propeller speed and direction of thrust are
maintained or the propeller speed is reduced to zero.
(g) An audible and visual alarm must actuate at each operating
station when:
(1) The propulsion control system fails;
(2) A non-follow up steering control system fails, if installed;
and
(3) The ordered rudder angle does not match the actual rudder
position on a follow-up steering control system, if installed. This
alarm must have an appropriate delay and error tolerance to eliminate
nuisance alarms.
(h) Alarms must be separate and independent of the control system
required by Sec. 143.225.
(i) A means of communication must be provided between each
operating station and any crewmember(s) required to respond to alarms.
(j) The two sources of electricity required by Sec. 143.555(a)(3)
and (b)(8) must be capable of powering electrical loads needed to
maintain propulsion, steering, and related controls for not less than 3
hours.
(k) The second source of supply required by Sec. 143.555(a)(3)
must automatically start to help restore or maintain power to
propulsion, steering, and related controls when the main power source
fails.
(l) Propulsion, steering, or related controls that are directly
reliant on stored energy, such as compressed air, battery power, or
hydraulic pressure, must have two independent stored energy systems,
such as compressed air cylinders, battery banks, or hydraulic
cylinders, that are capable of maintaining the vessel's propulsion,
steering, and related controls.
(m) After a power failure, electrical motors used to maintain
propulsion and steering must automatically restart when power is
restored, unless remote
[[Page 40141]]
control starting is provided at the operating station.
Sec. 143.590 Propulsor redundancy on vessels that move tank barges
carrying oil or hazardous material in bulk.
(a) A towing vessel must be provided with at least two independent
propulsors unless the requirements of Sec. 143.595 are met.
(b) There must be independent controls for each propulsor at each
operating station.
(c) In the event of a failure of a single propulsor, the remaining
propulsor(s) must have sufficient power to maneuver the vessel to a
safe location.
Sec. 143.595 Vessels with one propulsor that move tank barges
carrying oil or hazardous material in bulk.
(a) A towing vessel must have independent, duplicate vital
auxiliaries. For the purpose of this section, vital auxiliaries are the
equipment necessary to operate the propulsion engine, and include fuel
pumps, lubricating oil pumps, and cooling water pumps. In the event of
a failure or malfunction of any single vital auxiliary, the propulsion
engine must continue to provide propulsion adequate to maintain control
of the tow.
(b) In the event of a failure, the corresponding independent
duplicate vital auxiliary, described in paragraph (a) of this section,
must be fully capable of assuming the operation of the failed unit.
Sec. 143.600 Alternative standards for vessels that move tank barges
carrying oil or hazardous material in bulk.
In lieu of meeting Sec. Sec. 143.585 through 143.595, a towing
vessel may comply with Sections 7-5 (class ABCU) and 3-5 (class R2) of
Part 4 of the ABS Rules for Building and Classing Steel Vessels Under
90 Meters (295 Feet) in Length (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
136.112 of this subchapter), except that a vessel that operates
exclusively on rivers or intracoastal waterways does not need to comply
with 4-7-4/3.9 and the automatic day tank fill pump requirement of 4-7-
4/25.3.
Sec. 143.605 Demonstration of compliance on vessels that move tank
barges carrying oil or hazardous material in bulk.
(a) The owner or managing operator of each towing vessel must
devise test procedures that demonstrate compliance with the design and
engineering requirements prescribed in this subpart.
(b) The tests required in paragraph (a) of this section must be
satisfactorily conducted and witnessed by the cognizant OCMI or a TPO.
A record of the tests must be retained by the owner or managing
operator and be available upon request of the cognizant OCMI or TPO.
PART 144--CONSTRUCTION AND ARRANGEMENT
Sec.
Subpart A--General
144.100 Purpose.
144.105 Applicability and delayed implementation.
144.120 A classed vessel.
144.125 A vessel with a load line.
144.130 A vessel built to the International Convention for the
Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, as amended, requirements.
144.135 Verification of compliance with design standards.
144.140 Qualifications.
144.145 Procedures for verification of compliance with design
standards.
144.155 Verification of compliance with design standards for a
sister vessel.
144.160 Marking.
Subpart B--Structure
144.200 Structural standards for an existing vessel.
144.205 Structural standards for a new vessel.
144.215 Special consideration.
Subpart C--Stability and Watertight Integrity
144.300 Stability standards for an existing vessel.
144.305 Stability standards for a new vessel.
144.310 Lifting requirements for a new vessel.
144.315 Weight and moment history requirements for a vessel with
approved lightweight characteristics.
144.320 Watertight or weathertight integrity.
144.330 Review of a vessel's watertight and weathertight integrity.
Subpart D--Fire Protection
144.400 Applicability.
144.405 Fire hazards to be minimized.
144.410 Separation of machinery and fuel tank spaces from
accommodation spaces.
144.415 Combustibles insulated from heated surfaces.
144.425 Waste receptacles.
144.430 Mattresses.
Subpart E--Emergency Escape
144.500 Means of escape.
144.505 Location of escapes.
144.510 Window as a means of escape.
144.515 One means of escape required.
Subpart F--Ventilation
144.600 Ventilation for accommodations.
144.605 Means to stop fans and close openings.
144.610 Ventilation in a vessel more than 65 feet in length.
Subpart G--Crew Spaces
144.700 General requirements.
144.710 Overnight accommodations.
144.720 Crew rest consideration.
Subpart H--Rails and Guards
144.800 Handrails and bulwarks.
144.810 Storm rails.
144.820 Guards in dangerous places.
144.830 Protection against hot piping.
Subpart I--Visibility
144.905 Operating station visibility.
144.920 Window or portlight strength in a new vessel.
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3103, 3301, 3306, 3308, 3316, 8104, 8904;
33 CFR 1.05; DHS Delegation No. 0170.1.
Subpart A--General
Sec. 144.100 Purpose.
This part details the requirements for design, construction and
arrangement, and verification of compliance with this part, including
document review.
Sec. 144.105 Applicability and delayed implementation.
This part applies to each towing vessel subject to this subchapter.
Note that Sec. Sec. 144.200 and 144.300 only apply to an existing
vessel and that the following sections only apply to a new vessel:
Sec. Sec. 144.205, 144.305, 144.310, 144.405, 144.410, 144.420,
144.425, 144.430, 144.910, and 144.920.
(a) An existing towing vessel must comply with Sec. 144.320
starting July 20, 2016 and it must comply with the other applicable
requirements in this part no later than either July 20, 2018 or the
date the vessel obtains a Certificate of Inspection (COI), whichever
date is earlier.
(b) The delayed implementation provisions in paragraph (a) of this
section do not apply to a new towing vessel.
(c) Alterations or modifications made to the structure or
arrangements of an existing vessel that are a major conversion, made on
or after the July 20, 2016, must comply with the regulations applied to
a new towing vessel of this part insofar as is reasonable and
practicable. Repairs conducted on an existing vessel, resulting in no
significant changes to the original structure or arrangement of the
vessel, must comply with the standards applicable to the vessel at the
time of construction or, as an alternative, with the regulations in
this part.
Sec. 144.120 A classed vessel.
A vessel currently classed by a recognized classification society
is deemed to be in compliance with the requirements of subparts B and C
of this part.
[[Page 40142]]
Sec. 144.125 A vessel with a load line.
A vessel with a valid load line certificate issued in accordance
with subchapter E of this chapter may be deemed in compliance with the
requirements of subparts B and C of this part.
Sec. 144.130 A vessel built to the International Convention for the
Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, as amended, requirements.
A vessel built to the International Convention for the Safety of
Life at Sea, 1974, as amended, is considered to be in compliance with
this part.
Sec. 144.135 Verification of compliance with design standards.
Verification of compliance with the construction and arrangement
design standards of this part must be performed according to the
following table:
Table 144.135--Verification of Compliance With Design Standards
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then the applicable
If the vessel is-- requirements must be met--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) A new vessel,...................... Before the COI is issued.
(b) A vessel to undergo a major Before the major conversion or
conversion or alteration to the hull, alteration is performed.
machinery, or equipment that may
affect the vessel's safety,
(c) A vessel on which a new Before the new installation is
installation that is not a performed.
``replacement in kind'' is to be made
after July 20, 2016,
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 144.140 Qualifications.
Use the following table to determine the individual or entity that
may conduct a verification of compliance with design standards required
by Sec. 144.135.
Table 144.140
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Verification of compliance with design
standards may be performed by-- Provided that--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) A registered professional engineer The PE ensures he or she does
(P.E.) licensed by one of the states not exceed the scope of his or
of the United States or the District her P.E. license.
of Columbia;
(b) An authorized classification The authorized classification
society that has been delegated the society ensures that the
authority to issue the SOLAS Cargo employees that perform the
Ship Safety Construction Certificate verification of compliance
under 46 CFR 8.320; holds proper qualifications
for the type of verification
performed.
(c) The Coast Guard.................... ...............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 144.145 Procedures for verification of compliance with design
standards.
(a) Verification of compliance with design standards, when required
by Sec. 144.135, must be performed by an individual or entity who
meets the requirements of Sec. 144.140.
(b) Verification of compliance with design standards must be based
on objective evidence of compliance with the applicable requirements
and include:
(1) A description of the vessel's intended service and route;
(2) The standards used for the vessel's design and construction;
(3) Deviations from the standards used, if any;
(4) A statement that the vessel is suitable for the intended
service and route; and
(5) The identification of the individual or entity in Table 144.140
of Sec. 144.140 who conducted the verification of compliance.
(c) Verification of compliance with design standards must include
review and analyses of sufficient plans, drawings, schematics,
calculations, and other documents to ensure the vessel complies with
the standards used. The plans must be stamped with the seal authorized
for use by the individual or entity performing the verification of
compliance, or otherwise indicate that they have been reviewed and
determined to meet the applicable standards by an individual or entity
who meets the requirements of Sec. 144.140.
(d) A copy of the verified plan must be provided to the cognizant
Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) and the third-party
organization (TPO) conducting the surveys, if applicable, except as
provided in paragraph (e) of this section.
(e) Plans verified by an authorized classification society need
only be provided to the Coast Guard upon request.
(f) If the vessel is a new vessel, a copy of the verified plan must
be available at the construction site.
(g) As referred to in this section, the term plan may include, but
is not limited to drawings, documents, or diagrams of the following:
(1) Outboard profile.
(2) Inboard profile.
(3) Arrangement of decks.
(4) Midship section and scantling plans.
(5) Survival craft embarkation stations.
(6) Machinery installation, including, but not limited to:
(i) Propulsion and propulsion control, including shaft details;
(ii) Steering and steering control, including rudder details;
(iii) Ventilation diagrams;
(iv) Fuel transfer and service system, including tanks;
(v) Piping systems including: bilge, ballast, hydraulic,
combustible and flammable liquids, vents, and overflows; and
(vi) Hull penetrations and shell connections;
(7) Electrical installation including, but not limited to:
(i) Elementary one-line diagram of the power system;
(ii) Cable lists;
(iii) Type and size of generators and prime movers;
(iv) Type and size of generator cables, bus-tie cables, feeders,
and branch circuit cables;
(v) Power and lighting panelboards with number of circuits and
rating of energy consuming devices;
(vi) Capacity of storage batteries;
(vii) Rating of circuit breakers and switches, interrupting
capacity of circuit breakers, and rating and setting of overcurrent
devices; and
(viii) Electrical plant load analysis as required by Sec. 143.555
of this subchapter.
[[Page 40143]]
(8) Lifesaving equipment locations and installation;
(9) Fire protection equipment installation including, but not
limited to:
(i) Fire main system plans and calculations;
(ii) Fixed gas fire extinguishing system plans and calculations;
(iii) Fire detecting system and smoke detecting system plans;
(iv) Sprinkler system diagram and calculations; and
(v) Portable fire extinguisher types, sizes, and locations;
(10) Lines and offsets, curves of form, cross curves of stability,
tank capacities including size and location on vessel, and other
stability documents needed to show compliance; and
(11) Towing arrangements.
Sec. 144.155 Verification of compliance with design standards for a
sister vessel.
(a) Verification of compliance required by Sec. 144.135 is not
required for a sister vessel, provided that:
(1) The original vessel has been verified as complying with this
part;
(2) The owner authorizes the use of the plans for the original
vessels for the new construction of the sister vessel;
(3) The standards used in the design and construction of the
original vessel have not changed since the original verification of
compliance;
(4) The sister vessel is built to the same verified plans,
drawings, schematics, calculations, and other documents and equipped
with machinery of the same make and model as the original vessel, and
has not been subsequently modified;
(5) The sister vessel is built in the same shipyard facility as the
original vessel; and
(6) For a sister vessel subject to a stability standard, that the
conditions in Table 144.155 of this section are met:
Table 144.155
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If-- Then--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) The delivery date of the sister The approved lightweight
vessel is not more than 2 years after characteristics of that
a previous stability test date of earlier vessel are adopted by
either the original vessel or an the sister vessel;
earlier sister vessel,
(ii) Paragraph (a)(6)(i) of this The vertical center of gravity
section does not apply, and the (VCG) of the earlier vessel is
lightweight characteristics determined adopted by the sister vessel
from a deadweight survey of the sister and used with the lightweight
vessel are shown to meet both the displacement and LCG
following criteria: determined from the deadweight
(A) the lightweight displacement survey of the sister vessel;
differs by not more than 3 percent of
the earlier vessel's lightweight
displacement, and
(B) the longitudinal center of gravity
(LCG) differs by not more than 1
percent of the length between
perpendiculars (LBP) of the earlier
vessel's LCG,
(iii) Neither paragraph (a)(6)(i) nor The vessel must undergo a
(ii) of this section apply because stability test in accordance
both the criteria in paragraphs with 46 CFR part 170, subpart
(a)(6)(ii)(A) and (B) of this section F;
are not met and lightweight
characteristics were determined from a
stability test on either the original
vessel or a sister vessel,
(iv) No vessel of the class of sister One vessel of the class must
vessels previously underwent a undergo a stability test in
stability test, accordance with 46 CFR part
170, subpart F, and each
sister vessel to which a
stability standard applies
must meet either paragraph
(a)(6)(ii) or (iii) of this
section.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) A statement that verifies sister vessel status for each element
of paragraph (a) of this section from an individual or entity meeting
the requirements of Sec. 144.140 must be retained and produced upon
request.
Sec. 144.160 Marking.
(a) The hull of each documented vessel must be marked as required
by part 67 of this chapter.
(b) The hull of each undocumented vessel must be marked with its
name and hailing port.
(c) A vessel complying with either Sec. 144.300(a) or Sec.
144.305 must have draft marks that meet the requirements of Sec.
97.40-10 of this chapter.
(d) Each vessel assigned a load line must have the load line marks
and the deck line permanently scribed or embossed as required by
subchapter E of this chapter.
(e) Each watertight door and watertight hatch must be marked on
both sides in clearly legible letters at least 25 millimeters (1 inch)
high: ``WATERTIGHT DOOR--KEEP CLOSED'' or ``WATERTIGHT HATCH--KEEP
CLOSED''.
(f) Each escape hatch and emergency exit used as means of escape
must be marked on both sides in clearly legible letters at least 50
millimeters (2 inches) high: ``EMERGENCY EXIT, KEEP CLEAR''.
Subpart B--Structure
Sec. 144.200 Structural standards for an existing vessel.
An existing vessel may be deemed by the OCMI, or TPO, to be in
compliance with this subpart provided that either:
(a) The vessel is built, equipped, and maintained to conform to the
rules of a recognized classification society appropriate for the
intended service and routes, but not classed; or
(b) The vessel has been both in satisfactory service insofar as
structural adequacy is concerned and does not cause the structure of
the vessel to be questioned by either the OCMI, or TPO engaged to
perform an audit or survey.
Sec. 144.205 Structural standards for a new vessel.
(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, a
new vessels must comply with the standards established by the American
Bureau of Shipping (ABS) as provided in the following table.
[[Page 40144]]
Table 144.205(a)--Structural Standards for a New Vessel
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For a new vessel to be certificated for ABS Rules for Building and
service on-- Classing--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Lakes, bays, and sounds, limited Steel Vessels Under 90 Meters
coastwise, coastwise, and oceans (295 Feet) in Length
routes; (incorporated by reference,
see Sec. 136.112 of this
subchapter) apply; or
(2) Rivers or intracoastal waterways Steel Vessels for Service on
routes. Rivers and Intracoastal
Waterways (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 136.112
of this subchapter) apply.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Alternate design standards to comply with this subpart may be
approved in accordance with Sec. 136.115 of this subchapter.
(c) The current standards of a recognized classification society,
other than ABS, may be used provided they are accepted by the Coast
Guard as providing an equivalent level of safety.
(d) The structural standard selected must be applied throughout the
vessel including design, construction, installation, maintenance,
alteration, and repair. Deviations are subject to approval by the
Commanding Officer, Marine Safety Center.
Sec. 144.215 Special consideration.
The cognizant OCMI may give special consideration to the structural
requirements for a vessel if that vessel is:
(a) Not greater than 65 feet in length;
(b) Operating exclusively within a limited geographic area; or
(c) Of an unusual design not contemplated by the rules of the
American Bureau of Shipping or other recognized classification society.
Subpart C--Stability and Watertight Integrity
Sec. 144.300 Stability standards for an existing vessel.
(a) The owner or managing operator of an existing vessel operating
under a stability document must be able to readily produce a copy of
such document.
(b) The owner or managing operator of an existing vessel not
operating under a stability document must be able to show at least one
of the following:
(1) The vessel's operation or a history of satisfactory service
does not cause the stability of the vessel to be questioned by either
the Coast Guard or a TPO engaged to perform an audit or survey.
(2) The vessel performs successfully on operational tests to
determine whether the vessel has adequate stability and handling
characteristics.
(3) The vessel has a satisfactory stability assessment by means of
giving due consideration to each item that impacts a vessel's stability
characteristics which include, but are not limited to, the form,
arrangement, construction, number of decks, route, and operating
restrictions of the vessel.
Sec. 144.305 Stability standards for a new vessel.
Each new vessel must meet the applicable stability requirements of
part 170 and, if applicable, of part 173, subpart E, of this chapter in
addition to the requirements in the following table:
Table 144.305--Stability Standards for a New Vessel
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Each new vessel certificated to operate Must meet the requirements of--
on--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Protected waters................... Sec. 170.173(e)(2) of this
chapter.
(b) Partially protected waters......... Sec. Sec. 170.170 and
170.173(e)(1) of this chapter.
(c) Exposed waters or that is assigned Sec. Sec. 170.170 and
a load line. 174.145 of this chapter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 144.310 Lifting requirements for a new vessel.
Each new vessel equipped for lifting must meet the requirements of
part 173, subpart B, of this chapter.
Sec. 144.315 Weight and moment history requirements for a vessel with
approved lightweight characteristics.
(a) A weight and moment history of changes to the vessel since
approval of its lightweight characteristics (displacement, Longitudinal
Center of Gravity (LCG) and Vertical Center of Gravity (VCG)) must be
maintained. All weight modifications to the vessel (additions,
removals, and relocations) including a calculation of the aggregate
weight change (absolute total of all additions, removals, and
relocations) must be recorded in the history, along with a description
of the change(s), when and where accomplished, moment arms, etc. After
each modification, the lightweight characteristics must be
recalculated.
(b) When the aggregate weight change is more than 2 percent of the
vessel's approved lightweight displacement, or the recalculated change
in the vessel's lightweight LCG is more than 1 percent of the LBP, a
deadweight survey must be performed to determine the vessel's current
lightweight displacement and LCG. Use the following table to determine
when the deadweight survey results or the vessel's aggregate weight
change requires the vessel to undergo a specified stability test:
Table 144.315
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If-- Then--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) The deadweight survey results are the recalculated lightweight
both within 1 percent of the VCG can be accepted as
recalculated lightweight displacement accurate;
and within 1 percent LBP of the
recalculated lightweight LCG,
(2) The deadweight survey results do the vessel must undergo a
not meet the criteria of paragraph stability test in accordance
(b)(1) of this section, with 46 CFR 170, subpart F;
(3) The aggregate weight change is more the vessel must undergo a
than 10 percent of the vessel's stability test in accordance
approved lightweight displacement, with 46 CFR 170, subpart F.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 40145]]
Sec. 144.320 Watertight or weathertight integrity.
(a) Each vessel fitted with installed bulwarks around the exterior
of the main deck must have sufficient freeing ports or scuppers or a
combination of freeing ports and scuppers to allow water to run off the
deck quickly without adversely affecting the stability of the vessel.
(b) Closure devices must be provided for deckhouse or hull
penetrations, which open to the exterior of the vessel and which may
allow water to enter the vessel. These devices must be suitable for the
expected route.
Sec. 144.330 Review of a vessel's watertight and weathertight
integrity.
The cognizant OCMI may require review of a vessel's watertight and
weathertight integrity. This review may be performed by an individual
who meets the requirements of Sec. 144.140. The review may include an
examination of a plan that shows the original placement of decks and
bulkheads.
Subpart D--Fire Protection
Sec. 144.400 Applicability.
Except for Sec. 144.415, which applies to each new and existing
vessel, this subpart applies to each new towing vessel.
Sec. 144.405 Fire hazards to be minimized.
Each vessel must be designed and constructed to minimize fire
hazards insofar as reasonable and practicable.
Sec. 144.410 Separation of machinery and fuel tank spaces from
accommodation spaces.
Machinery and fuel tank spaces must be separated from accommodation
spaces by bulkheads. Doors may be installed provided they are the self-
closing type.
Sec. 144.415 Combustibles insulated from heated surfaces.
Internal combustion engine exhaust ducts, galley exhaust ducts and
similar ignition sources must be insulated with noncombustible
insulation if less than 450 mm (18 inches) away from combustible
material. Installations in accordance with ABYC P-1 or NFPA 302
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter) will
be considered as meeting the requirements of this section.
Sec. 144.425 Waste receptacles.
Unless other means are provided to ensure that a potential waste
receptacle fire would be limited to the receptacle, waste receptacles
must be constructed of noncombustible materials with no openings in the
sides or bottom.
Sec. 144.430 Mattresses.
Each mattress must comply with either:
(a) The Consumer Product Safety Commission Standard for Mattress
Flammability (FF 4-72, Amended), 16 CFR part 1632, subpart A, and not
contain polyurethane foam; or
(b) IMO Resolution A.688(17) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
136.112 of this subchapter) in which case the mattress may contain
polyurethane foam.
Subpart E--Emergency Escape
Sec. 144.500 Means of escape.
Where practicable and except as provided in Sec. 144.515, each
space where crew may be quartered or normally employed must have at
least two means of escape. Arrangements on an existing vessel may be
retained if it is impracticable or unreasonable to provide two means of
escape.
Sec. 144.505 Location of escapes.
The two required means of escape must be widely separated and, if
possible, at opposite ends or sides of the space. Means may include
normal and emergency exits, passageways, stairways, ladders, deck
scuttles, doors, and windows.
Sec. 144.510 Window as a means of escape.
On a vessel of 65 feet (19.8 meters) or less in length, a window or
windshield of sufficient size and proper accessibility may be used as
one of the required means of escape from an enclosed space, provided
it:
(a) Does not lead directly overboard;
(b) Is suitably marked; and
(c) Has a means to open the window or break the glass.
Sec. 144.515 One means of escape required.
Only one means of escape is required from a space where:
(a) The space has a deck area less than 30 square meters (322
square feet);
(b) There is no stove, heater, or other source of fire in the
space;
(c) The means of escape is located as far as possible from a
machinery space or fuel tank; and
(d) If an accommodation space, the single means of escape does not
include a deck scuttle or a ladder.
Subpart F--Ventilation
Sec. 144.600 Ventilation for accommodations.
Each accommodation space on a vessel must be ventilated in a manner
suitable for the purpose of the space.
Sec. 144.605 Means to stop fans and close openings.
Means must be provided for stopping each fan in a ventilation
system serving machinery spaces and for closing, in case of fire, each
doorway, ventilator, and annular space around funnels and other
openings into such spaces.
Sec. 144.610 Ventilation in a vessel more than 65 feet in length.
A vessel of more than 65 feet (19.8 meters) in length with
overnight accommodations must have a mechanical ventilation system
unless a natural system, such as opening windows, portholes, or doors,
will provide adequate ventilation in ordinary weather.
Subpart G--Crew Spaces
Sec. 144.700 General requirements.
(a) A crew accommodation space and a work space must be of
sufficient size, adequate construction, and with suitable equipment to
provide for the safe operation of the vessel and the protection and
accommodation of the crew in a manner practicable for the size,
facilities, service, route, and modes of operation of the vessel.
(b) The deck above a crew accommodation space must be located above
the deepest load waterline.
Sec. 144.710 Overnight accommodations.
Overnight accommodations must be provided for crewmembers if it is
operated more than 12 hours in a 24-hour period, unless the crew is put
ashore and the vessel is provided with a new crew.
Sec. 144.720 Crew rest consideration.
The condition of the crew accommodations must consider the
importance of crew rest. Factors to consider include vibrations,
ambient light, noise levels, and general comfort. Every effort must be
made to ensure that quarters help provide a suitable environment for
sleep and off-duty rest.
Subpart H--Rails and Guards
Sec. 144.800 Handrails and bulwarks.
(a) Rails or equivalent protection must be installed near the
periphery of all decks accessible to crew. Equivalent protection may
include lifelines, wire rope, chains, and bulwarks that provide
strength and support equivalent to fixed rails.
(b) In areas where space limitations make deck rails impractical,
such as at narrow catwalks in way of deckhouse sides, hand grabs may be
substituted.
[[Page 40146]]
Sec. 144.810 Storm rails.
On a vessel in oceans or coastwise service, suitable storm rails or
hand grabs must be installed in all passageways and at the deckhouse
sides where persons onboard might have normal access.
Sec. 144.820 Guards in dangerous places.
An exposed hazard such as gears and rotating machinery, must be
protected by a cover, guard or rail. This is not meant to restrict
access to towing equipment such as winches, drums, towing gear or
steering compartment equipment necessary for the operation of the
vessel.
Sec. 144.830 Protection against hot piping.
Each exhaust pipe from an internal combustion engine which is
within reach of personnel must be insulated or otherwise guarded to
prevent burns. On a new vessel, each pipe that contains vapor, gas, or
liquid that has a temperature exceeding 150[emsp14][deg]F (65.5 [deg]C)
which is within reach of personnel must be insulated where necessary or
otherwise guarded to prevent injury.
Subpart I--Visibility
Sec. 144.905 Operating station visibility.
(a) Windows and other openings at the operating station must be of
sufficient size and properly located to provide a clear field of vision
for safe operation in any condition.
(b) Means must be provided to ensure that windows immediately
forward of the operating station in the pilothouse allow for adequate
visibility to ensure safe navigation regardless of weather conditions.
This may include mechanical means such as windshield wipers, defoggers,
clear-view screens, or other such means, taking into consideration the
intended route of the vessel.
(c) The field of vision from the operating station on a new vessel
must extend over an arc from dead ahead to at least 60 degrees on
either side of the vessel.
(d) If a new vessel is towing astern, the operating station must be
provided with a view aft.
(e) In a new vessel, glass or other glazing material used in
windows at the operating station must have a light transmission of not
less than 70 percent according to Test 2 of ANSI/SAE Z 26.1-1996
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 136.112 of this subchapter) and
must comply with Test 15 of ANSI/SAE Z 26.1-1996 for Class I Optical
Deviation.
Sec. 144.920 Window or portlight strength in a new vessel.
(a) Each window or portlight, and its means of attachment to the
hull or the deckhouse, must be capable of withstanding the maximum
expected load from wind and waves, due to its location on the vessel
and the vessel's authorized route.
(b) Any covering or protection placed over a window or porthole
that could be used as a means of escape must be able to be readily
removed or opened from within the space.
(c) Glass and other glazing materials used in windows of a new
towing vessel must be materials that will not break into dangerous
fragments if fractured.
PART 199--LIFESAVING SYSTEMS FOR CERTAIN INSPECTED VESSELS
0
14. The authority citation for part 199 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3306, 3703; Pub. L. 103-206, 107 Stat.
2439; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
0
15. In Sec. 199.01, redesignate paragraphs (a)(3) and (4) as
paragraphs (a)(4) and (5), respectively, and add new paragraph (a)(3)
to read as follows:
Sec. 199.01 Purpose.
(a) * * *
(3) Towing vessels, which are covered by subchapter M of this
chapter;
* * * * *
0
16. Amend Sec. 199.10 as follows:
0
a. Revise Table 199.10(a); and
0
b. In paragraph (b) after the words ``small passenger vessels;'' add
the words ``towing vessels;''.
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 199.10 Applicability.
(a) * * *
Table 199.10(a)--Lifesaving Requirements for Inspected Vessels
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subchapter W subparts applicable \1\
Row 46 CFR subchapter Vessel type Vessel service ------------------------------------------------ Other \2\
A B C D E F
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.............. D................. Tank >=500 tons... International X X ...... X ...... ......
voyage \3\.
2.............. D................. Tank <500 tons.... International X X ...... X X X ...........................
voyage \3\.
3.............. D................. Tank.............. All other services X X ...... X X X ...........................
4.............. H................. Passenger......... International X X X ...... ...... ...... ...........................
voyage \3\.
5.............. H................. Passenger......... Short Inter'l X X X ...... ...... ...... ...........................
voyage \3\.
6.............. H................. Passenger......... All other services X X X ...... X X ...........................
7.............. I................. Cargo >=500 tons.. International X X ...... X ...... ...... ...........................
voyage \3\.
8.............. I................. Cargo <500 tons... International X X ...... X X X ...........................
voyage \3\.
9.............. I................. Cargo............. All other services X X ...... X X X ...........................
10............. I-A............... MODU.............. All............... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... 46 CFR part 108.
11............. K................. Small Passenger... International X X X ...... ...... ...... ...........................
voyage \3\.
12............. K................. Small Passenger... Short Inter'l X X X ...... ...... ...... ...........................
voyage \3\.
13............. K................. Small Passenger... All other services ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... 46 CFR part 117.
14............. L................. Offshore Supply... All............... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... 46 CFR part 133.
15............. M................. Towing Vessels.... International X X ...... X ...... ...... ...........................
voyage \3\.
16............. M................. Towing Vessels.... All other......... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... 46 CFR part 141.
[[Page 40147]]
17............. R--Part 167....... Public Nautical International X X X \4\ X \5\ ...... ...... ...........................
School. voyage \3\.
18............. R--Part 167....... Public Nautical All other services X X X \4\ X \5\ X X ...........................
School.
19............. R--Part 168....... Civilian Nautical International X X X \4\ X \5\ ...... ...... ...........................
School. voyage \3\.
20............. R--Part 168....... Civilian Nautical All other services X X X \4\ X \5\ X X ...........................
School.
21............. R--Part 169....... Sailing School.... All services...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... 46 CFR 169.500.
22............. T................. Small Passenger... International X X X ...... ...... ...... ...........................
voyage \3\.
23............. T................. Small Passenger... Short Int'l voyage X X X ...... ...... ...... ...........................
\3\.
24............. T................. Small Passenger... All other services ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... 46 CFR part 180.
25............. U................. Oceanographic Res. International X X X \4\ X \5\ ...... ...... ...........................
voyage \3\.
26............. U................. Oceanographic Res. All other services X X X \4\ X \5\ X X ...........................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\1\ Subchapter W of this chapter does not apply to inspected nonself-propelled vessels without accommodations or work stations on board.
\2\ Indicates section where primary lifesaving system requirements are located. Other regulations may also apply.
\3\ Not including vessels solely navigating the Great Lakes of North America and the Saint Lawrence River as far east as a straight line drawn from Cap
des Rosiers to West Point, Anticosti Island and, on the north side Anticosti Island, the 63rd meridian.
\4\ Applies to vessels carrying more than 50 special personnel, or vessels carrying not more than 50 special personnel if the vessels meet the
structural fire protection requirements in subchapter H of this chapter for passenger vessels of the same size.
\5\ Applies to vessels carrying not more than 50 special personnel that do not meet the structural fire protection requirements in subchapter H of this
chapter for passenger vessels of the same size.
* * * * *
Dated: May 25, 2016.
Paul F. Zukunft,
Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commandant.
[FR Doc. 2016-12857 Filed 6-10-16; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P