User Fees for Inspected Towing Vessels, 1378-1390 [2022-00200]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
1378
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
not required because of the FONSI. A
copy of the Plan and FONSI may be
viewed on the park’s planning website
at https://parkplanning.nps.gov/mora
by clicking on the link entitled ‘‘2018
Mount Rainier National Park Fisheries
Management Plan Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact’’ and then clicking
on the link entitled ‘‘Document List.’’
Effects on the Energy Supply (Executive
Order 13211)
This rule is not a significant energy
action under the definition in Executive
Order 13211. A Statement of Energy
Effects is not required.
Clarity of This Rule
We are required by Executive Orders
12866 (section 1(b)(12)) and 12988
(section 3(b)(1)(B)), and 13563 (section
1(a)), and by the Presidential
Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write
all rules in plain language. This means
that each rule we publish must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
(c) Use common, everyday words and
clear language rather than jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and
sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever
possible.
If you feel that we have not met these
requirements, send us comments by one
of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES
section. To better help us revise the
rule, your comments should be as
specific as possible. For example, you
should tell us the numbers of the
sections or paragraphs that you find
unclear, which sections or sentences are
too long, the sections where you feel
lists or tables would be useful, etc.
Public Participation
It is the policy of the Department of
the Interior, whenever practicable, to
afford the public an opportunity to
participate in the rulemaking process.
Accordingly, interested persons may
submit written comments regarding this
proposed rule by one of the methods
listed in the ADDRESSES section of this
document.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone
number, email address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Jan 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 7
Coast Guard
District of Columbia, National parks,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
46 CFR Part 2
[Docket No. USCG–2018–0538]
In consideration of the foregoing, the
National Park Service proposes to
amend 36 CFR part 7 as follows:
RIN 1625–AC55
PART 7—SPECIAL REGULATIONS,
AREAS OF THE NATIONAL PARK
SYSTEM
AGENCY:
1. The authority for part 7 continues
to read as follows:
■
Authority: 54 U.S.C. 100101, 100751,
320102; Sec. 7.96 also issued under D.C.
Code 10–137 and D.C. Code 50–2201.07.
2. In § 7.5, revise paragraph (a) to read
as follows:
■
§ 7.5
Mount Rainier National Park.
(a) Fishing. (1) Fishing closures and
restrictions, based on management
objectives for the preservation of the
park’s natural resources, are established
by the Superintendent.
(2) The Superintendent may establish
closures and restrictions, in accordance
with the criteria and procedures of § 1.5
of this chapter, on any activity
pertaining to fishing, including, but not
limited to species of fish that may be
taken, seasons and hours during which
fishing may take place, methods of
taking, and size, creel, and possession
limits.
(3) Except in emergency situations,
the Superintendent will notify the
public of any such closures or
restrictions through one or more
methods listed in § 1.7 of this chapter,
including publication in the
Superintendent’s Compendium (or
written compilation) of discretionary
actions referred to paragraph (b) of § 1.7.
(4) Fishing in closed waters or
violating a condition or restriction
established by the Superintendent
under this paragraph (a) is prohibited.
*
*
*
*
*
Shannon A. Estenoz,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and
Parks.
[FR Doc. 2022–00231 Filed 1–10–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312–52–P
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
User Fees for Inspected Towing
Vessels
ACTION:
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Coast Guard is proposing
to update its user fees for seagoing
towing vessels that are 300 gross tons or
more and to revise user fees for other
inspected towing vessels. The Coast
Guard is proposing these updates
because we are required to establish and
maintain a fair fee for our vessel
inspection services and to separate the
fees for inspection options that involve
third-party auditors and surveyors from
inspection options that do not involve
third parties. Under this proposed rule,
vessels using the Alternate Compliance
Program, Streamlined Inspection
Program, or the Towing Safety
Management System options would pay
a lower fee than vessels that use the
traditional Coast Guard inspection
option.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before April 11, 2022.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2018–0538 using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public
Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
further instructions on submitting
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
information about this document call or
email Mr. Scott Kuhaneck, Coast Guard;
telephone 202–372–1221, email
Thomas.S.Kuhaneck@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Table of Contents for Preamble
I. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
II. Abbreviations
III. Basis and Purpose
A. The Problem We Seek To Address
B. Legal Authority To Address This
Problem
C. Recent Legislation
IV. Background
A. Origins of Annual Vessel Inspection
Fees
B. Current Fees for Subchapter I and
Subchapter M Towing Vessels
E:\FR\FM\11JAP1.SGM
11JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
V. Discussion of Proposed Rule
A. Categories of Annual Fees
B. Amending Annual Inspection Fees for
Seagoing Towing Vessels Subject to
Subchapter I
C. Establishing Specific Annual Inspection
Fees for Towing Vessels Subject to
Subchapter M
D. Methodology for Calculating Fees
VI. Regulatory Analyses
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Small Entities
C. Assistance for Small Entities
D. Collection of Information
E. Federalism
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
G. Taking of Private Property
H. Civil Justice Reform
I. Protection of Children
J. Indian Tribal Governments
K. Energy Effects
L. Technical Standards
M. Environment
I. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
The Coast Guard views public
participation as essential to effective
rulemaking, and will consider all
comments and material received during
the comment period. Your comment can
help shape the outcome of this
rulemaking. If you submit a comment,
please include the docket number for
this rulemaking, indicate the specific
section of this document to which each
comment applies, and provide a reason
for each suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit
comments through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. If you cannot
submit your material by using https://
www.regulations.gov, contact the person
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this proposed rule
for alternate instructions. Documents
mentioned in this proposed rule as
being in the docket, and all public
comments, will be available in our
online docket at https://
www.regulations.gov, and can be viewed
by following that website’s instructions.
Additionally, if you visit the online
docket and sign up for email alerts, you
will be notified when comments are
posted or if a final rule is published.
We accept anonymous comments. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and
submissions to the docket in response to
this document, see DHS’s eRulemaking
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226,
March 11, 2020).
We do not plan to hold a public
meeting but we will consider doing so
if public comments indicate that a
meeting would be helpful and we
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Jan 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
determine that a meeting would aid this
rulemaking. We would issue a separate
Federal Register notice to announce the
date, time, and location of such a
meeting.
II. Abbreviations
ACP Alternate Compliance Program
CGAA Frank LoBiondo Coast Guard
Authorization Act of 2018
COI Certificate of Inspection
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
FTE Full-Time Equivalent
IRFA Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
MISLE Marine Information for Safety and
Law Enforcement
NAICS North American Industry
Classification System
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
OBRA Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act
of 1990
OMB Office of Management and Budget
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
SBA Small Business Administration
§ Section
SIP Streamlined Inspection Program
SSM Sector Staffing Model
TSMS Towing Safety Management System
U.S.C. United States Code
III. Basis and Purpose
In this section, the Coast Guard
identifies the problem we intend to
address, the well-established statutory
authority that enables us to issue this
proposed rule, and the recent legislation
that provides additional authority for
this proposed rulemaking.
A. The Problem We Seek To Address
The Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation Act of 2004 1 added
towing vessels to the list of vessels
subject to inspection in 46 U.S.C. 3301.
As directed by 46 U.S.C. 3307, each
vessel subject to inspection under part
A of Subtitle II must undergo an initial
inspection for certification, and after
receiving a Certificate of Inspection
(COI) the vessel must undergo periodic
inspections.
On June 20, 2016, we published an
Inspection of Towing Vessels final rule
that established safety regulations
governing the inspection, standards, and
safety management systems for towing
vessels.2 We estimated that the rule
would apply to more than 5,500 towing
vessels that had previously been
uninspected vessels. That rule
established the 46 CFR subchapter M—
Towing Vessels (parts 136 through 144),
which requires vessels subject to
subchapter M to obtain a COI. The
phase-in period for obtaining these COIs
1 Public Law 108–293, 118 Stat. 1028 (August 9,
2004), with relevant chapters codified in 46 U.S.C.
3301.
2 81 FR 40004.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1379
under subchapter M runs from July 20,
2018 to July 19, 2022.3
In the Inspection of Towing Vessels
final rule, we stated our plan to begin
a separate rulemaking for annual
inspection fees for towing vessels that
would reflect the specific program costs
associated with the two options for
documenting compliance to obtain a
COI,4 the Coast Guard option and the
Towing Safety Management System
(TSMS) option.5 We also stated that
until then we will use the existing fee
of $1,030 in 46 CFR 2.10–101 that
applies to any inspected vessel not
listed in Table 2.10–101 as the annual
inspection fee for towing vessels subject
to subchapter M.6
In addition to towing vessels subject
to subchapter M that are required to
obtain COIs, there are towing vessels
that qualify as seagoing motor vessels
(300 gross tons or more) that are subject
to 46 CFR chapter I, subchapter I
regulations for cargo and miscellaneous
vessels.7 These vessels are currently
required to have COIs. The annual
inspection fee for these subchapter I
towing vessels was established in 1995
at $2,915, and has never been updated.8
The law requires that we establish a
fee for our inspection services that is
fair and based on costs to the
Government, value to the recipient, and
public interest. It further requires that
we review the costs to the Government
of such inspections for towing vessel
using the Coast Guard option and those
using an option involving a third party,
revise such fees if there is a difference,
3 See 46 CFR 136.202, which calls for 25 percent
of the vessels of each owner or managing operator
of more than one existing towing vessel to have
COIs by July 22, 2019. It calls for an additional 25
percent to obtain COIs for each of the remaining 3
years of the phase-in period. The final rule was
effective July 20, 2016, but it delayed the
implementation of most of its part 140 Operations,
part 141 Lifesaving, part 142 Fire Protection, part
143 Machinery and Electrical Systems and
Equipment, and part 144 Construction and
Arrangement requirements until July 20, 2018. See
§§ 140.105, 141.105, 142.105, 143.200, and 144.105.
4 See 46 CFR 136.130—Options for documenting
compliance to obtain a Certificate of Inspection.
5 TSMS is a voluntary inspection option that
permits qualified third-party organizations to
conduct certain vessel examinations in place of
Coast Guard inspections. See 46 CFR 138—Towing
Safety Management System (TSMS).
6 See 81 FR at 40005.
7 See 46 CFR 2.01–7 and 90.05–1. Under 46
U.S.C. 3301, seagoing motor vessels are subject to
inspection. Towing vessels are motor vessels,
(vessels propelled by machinery other than steam)
and they fall within the definition of ‘‘seagoing
motor vessel’’ if they are at least 300 gross tons and
make voyages beyond the Boundary Line. See
definitions in 46 U.S.C. 2101.
8 See Direct User Fees for Inspection or
Examination of U.S. and Foreign Commercial
Vessels (60 FR 13550 (March 13, 1995); 46 CFR
2.10–101.
E:\FR\FM\11JAP1.SGM
11JAP1
1380
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
and comply with the same requirements
for establishing fees when doing so.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
B. Legal Authority To Address This
Problem
The Coast Guard is issuing this
proposed rule based on authority in
section 2110 of Title 46 of the United
States Code (46 U.S.C. 2110), which has
been delegated to the Commandant
under DHS Delegation No.
0170.1(II)(92). Section 2110 of Title 46
directs the Secretary of the Department
in which the Coast Guard is operating
to establish a fee or charge for a service
or thing of value provided by the
Secretary under Subtitle II of Title 46.
Inspections and related services
described in Subtitle II of Title 46 are
considered a service or thing of value
provided by the Secretary.9
Section 2110 also directs that the fee
or charge be established in accordance
with 31 U.S.C. 9701, which specifies
that each charge be fair and based on the
costs to the Government, the value of
the service or thing to the recipient,
public policy or interest served, and
other relevant facts. Consistent with
these objectives, once a fee or charge is
established, section 2110 allows it to be
adjusted to accommodate changes in the
cost of providing a specific service or
thing of value.
C. Recent Legislation
On December 4, 2018, the Frank
LoBiondo Coast Guard Authorization
Act of 2018 (CGAA) was enacted.10
Section 815 of CGAA directs the Coast
Guard to review and revise the fee for
inspections. First, the Coast Guard must
compare the costs to the Government of
towing vessel inspections performed by
the Coast Guard and towing vessel
inspections performed by a third party,
to determine if they are different. The
Coast Guard interprets ‘‘costs to the
Government’’ in section 815(a) to mean
the cost to the Coast Guard of providing
inspection and related services to
determine whether a vessel meets
requirements necessary for it to
maintain its COI. We have conducted
that comparison and determined that
there is a difference in costs to the
Government between the inspection
options for towing vessels that involve
a third party and those that do not.
If there is a difference in costs, section
815 of CGAA directs us to revise the fee
we assess for such inspections to
conform to 31 U.S.C. 9701, and to base
the fee on the cost to the Government.
This is the intent of this notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
9 46
U.S.C. 2110(a)(1).
Law 115–282, 132 Stat. 4192.
10 Public
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Jan 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
IV. Background
A. Origins of Annual Vessel Inspection
Fees
The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation
Act of 1990 (OBRA) amended 46 U.S.C.
2110 and removed long-standing
prohibitions against imposing certain
user fees.11 As amended by the OBRA,
46 U.S.C. 2110 requires the
establishment and collection of user fees
for Coast Guard services provided under
Subtitle II of Title 46, United States
Code. On March 13, 1995, the Coast
Guard published the final rule on Direct
User Fees for Inspection or Examination
of U.S. and Foreign Commercial
Vessels.12 The fees were intended to
recover the costs associated with
providing Coast Guard vessel inspection
services directly or through an
alternative reinspection program,
although alternative reinspection
program only applied to certain offshore
supply vessels. The final rule
established user fees for services related
to commercial vessel inspection
including annual fees for seagoing
towing vessels.
On June 20, 2016, the Coast Guard
published the final rule on the
Inspection of Towing Vessels. The
vessels subject to this 2016 rule were
not considered when the original vessel
inspection fees were established in
1995, except to the extent that the table
of fees included a default fee for any
inspected vessel not listed. We
indicated in the 2016 rule that we
would establish specific fees, in a
subsequent rulemaking, that would
reflect program costs associated with the
TSMS and Coast Guard inspection
options for obtaining COIs. We stated
that until those specific fees were
established, the annual inspection fee
for towing vessels subject to subchapter
M would be the existing fee of $1,030
in 46 CFR 2.10–101 for any inspected
vessel not listed in Table 2.10–101.13
B. Current Fees for Subchapter I and
Subchapter M Towing Vessels
The Coast Guard currently charges an
annual vessel inspection fee for U.S.
and foreign vessels requiring a COI,
following the fee schedule set in § 2.10–
101.14 The current fee for seagoing
11 Public Law 101–508, 104 Stat. 1388 with
relevant chapters codified in 46 U.S.C. 2110.
12 60 FR 13550.
13 See 81 FR at 40005.
14 Under 46 CFR 2.01–6(b), foreign vessels from
countries which are non-signatory to the
International Convention for the Safety of Life at
Sea, 1974, are issued a COI, if the inspector
approves the vessel and its equipment as described
in § 2.01–5. We have records of COIs issued to
foreign vessels in our Marine Information for Safety
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
towing vessels inspected under
subchapter I is $2,915 for all inspection
options—the Coast Guard, the Alternate
Compliance Program (ACP), and the
Streamlined Inspection Program (SIP).
The current fee for towing vessels
inspected under subchapter M (all
inspection options) is $1,030, which is
the fee for ‘‘[a]ny vessel not listed in this
table.’’
V. Discussion of Proposed Rule
This proposed rule would update
existing annual inspection fees for both
seagoing towing vessels (300 gross tons
or more) and vessels subject to the
relatively new towing-vessel regulations
in 46 CFR subchapter M.
The annual inspection fees are located
in 46 CFR part 2—Vessel Inspections. In
addition to fees in § 2.10–101, this part
contains definitions in § 2.10–25. We
propose to add the following new
defined terms to § 2.10–25—
• Annual vessel inspection fee;
• Alternate Compliance Program
option;
• Coast Guard option;
• Streamlined Inspection Program
option;
• Towing Safety Management System
option; and
• Towing vessel.
To reflect the involvement of third
parties in inspection options, such as
the ACP and TSMS, we propose to
define ‘‘annual vessel inspection fee’’ as
the fee charged by the Coast Guard for
providing inspection and related
services to determine whether a vessel
meets the requirements to maintain its
COI. The fee charged by the Coast Guard
reflects the cost to the Coast Guard.
There are several existing options for
inspection, which we propose to define
in revised § 2.10–25 by reference to the
regulations that establish each option.
For both seagoing and subchapter M
towing vessels, there is a Coast Guard
option in which the Coast Guard
performs all of the relevant inspection
activity. For both types of vessels there
is also a third-party option, already
established in regulation, in which a
third party performs some of the
relevant activity, but the Coast Guard
still inspects the vessel and examines
evidence of compliance provided by
third parties.
For seagoing towing vessels there is
an additional option, the SIP. The SIP
option does not involve a third party.
Under the SIP option, a vessel is
inspected in accordance with an
approved Vessel Action Plan that the
company’s SIP agent develops with
and Law Enforcement (MISLE) database, but no
records of a COI issued to a foreign towing vessel.
E:\FR\FM\11JAP1.SGM
11JAP1
1381
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
guidance from the Coast Guard. In our
definition of SIP, we point to subpart E
of 46 CFR part 8, which spells out SIP
program requirements.
We propose to define ‘‘towing vessel’’
as 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. This definition
matches the definition of towing vessel
in 46 U.S.C. 2101.
We are also proposing to modify the
definition of an existing term in § 2.10–
25, Sea-going towing vessel. We would
remove the modifier ‘‘seagoing’’ used
within the definition itself, and insert a
description of what seagoing means.
The proposed insertion is ‘‘and that
makes voyages beyond the Boundary
Line as defined by 46 U.S.C. 103.’’ 15 We
would further specify that the vessel
must be 300 gross tons or more, to
distinguish seagoing towing vessels
from towing vessels subject to
subchapter M that travel beyond the
Boundary Line. We would also remove
the hyphen from seagoing.
A. Categories of Annual Fees
For towing vessels subject to
subchapter M, we propose two fee
categories; the Coast Guard option and
the TSMS option. For seagoing towing
vessels subject to subchapter I, we
propose three fee categories; the Coast
Guard option, the ACP option and the
SIP option. This would allow the Coast
Guard to provide reduced fees for
subchapter M vessel owners who choose
the TSMS option described in 46 CFR
part 138, and for subchapter I vessel
owners who choose the ACP or SIP
option described in 46 CFR part 8. We
anticipate this fee structure will help to
ensure the Coast Guard’s ability to
recover full costs to the Government,
and to separate annual inspection fees
for options involving third-party
surveys and audits of towing vessels
using safety management systems.
Several inspection options have lower
user fees than the Coast Guard option.
These inspection alternatives either
require fewer Coast Guard inspection
activities or the Coast Guard inspection
activities take less time and thus have
a lower cost.
B. Amending Annual Inspection Fees
for Seagoing Towing Vessels Subject to
Subchapter I
We are proposing to charge one of
three annual fees for seagoing towing
vessels that are inspected under
subchapter I:
• $2,747 for those using the Coast
Guard option;
• $1,850 for those using the ACP
option; and
• $2,260 for those using the SIP
option.
The current annual fee for seagoing
towing vessels that are inspected under
subchapter I is $2,915.
For a detailed discussion of how these
fees were derived, see Methodology for
Calculating Fees in section V.D.
C. Establishing Specific Annual
Inspection Fees for Towing Vessels
Subject to Subchapter M
We are also proposing to charge one
of two fees for towing vessels inspected
under subchapter M:
• $2,184 for those using the Coast
Guard option, and
• $973 for those using the TSMS
option.
The current annual fee applied to
subchapter M towing vessels is $1,030.
For a more detailed discussion of how
these fees were derived, see
Methodology for Calculating Fees in
section V.D.
D. Methodology for Calculating Fees
This section summarizes the
methodology for calculating fees. For
more details, see the Cost Study for
Determining User Fees for Inspected
Towing Vessels in the docket where
indicated under the section I of this
preamble.
To derive the costs of the various
inspection types, we used an activitybased costing 16 approach in
conjunction with the Sector Staffing
Model (SSM). The SSM is an activitybased model designed to establish
human capital requirements and
quantify resources at Shore Forces
units.17 The SSM measures specific
activity and frequency to determine the
Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) workforce
needed to meet a particular workload.
Data in the model is derived from Coast
Guard enterprise databases and surveys
conducted at the Coast Guard field unit
level. The model also incorporates unit
specific travel times for conducting
missions, collateral duty workload, and
mission required training. In the spring
of 2012, the SSM was accredited in
accordance with official Coast Guard
policy and currently serves as the
primary decision tool for managing
sector enterprise staffing. Table 1 shows
the cost of activities for providing COI
services to each type of inspection.
These costs are derived using SSM FTE
calculations; see the Cost Study in the
docket for the full derivation of figures.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
TABLE 1—PER VESSEL COST OF ACTIVITIES FOR PROVIDING COI SERVICES BY USER FEE SEGMENT
Subchapter M:
Coast Guard
Subchapter M:
TSMS
Subchapter I:
Coast Guard
Subchapter I:
ACP
Subchapter I:
SIP
Inspection Activity Costs ......................................................
Travel Costs .........................................................................
Supervision and Administration Costs .................................
Indirect Costs .......................................................................
$1,183
317
243
442
$408
40
84
442
$1,618
356
332
442
$874
356
179
442
$1,213
356
249
442
Total Annual Costs .......................................................
2,184
973
2,747
1,850
2,260
The Coast Guard intends to collect
one of five different user fees from the
approximately 5,385 towing vessels that
require COIs under subchapters I and
M.18 Table 2 shows the current fee, the
proposed fee, the incremental fee
adjustment and the percent change to
the user fee. The annual costs of
services for each vessel class is the
proposed user fee for that vessel class.
15 Under 46 U.S.C. 103 and 33 U.S.C. 151(b),
boundary lines are used for dividing inland waters
of the United States from the high seas to delineate
the application of certain U.S. statutes. For a list of
boundary lines and the statutes those lines are used
to delineate, see 46 CFR part 7, which lists
boundary lines for the Atlantic Coast, Gulf Coast,
Pacific Coast, and the states of Alaska and Hawaii.
16 Activity-based costing is a method for
determining the cost of a service based on the cost
of each individual element of that service.
17 Shore Forces units are Coast Guard sector
commands and their sub-units or field units. See
the USCG Strategic Cost Manual, M7000.4
(February 2005).
18 Vessel population data came from MISLE as of
June 2021. See the Affected Population section for
more details.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Jan 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\11JAP1.SGM
11JAP1
1382
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 2—CURRENT SUBCHAPTER M AND I USER FEES AND PROPOSED USER FEE ADJUSTMENT AMOUNTS
Current
fee
Fee type/user fee class
Subchapter
Subchapter
Subchapter
Subchapter
Subchapter
M: Coast Guard option .................................................................
M: TSMS ......................................................................................
I: Coast Guard option ...................................................................
I: Alternative Compliance Program option ...................................
I: Streamlined Inspection Program option ....................................
VI. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after
considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking.
Our analyses based on these statutes or
Executive orders follows.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory
Planning and Review) and 13563
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review) direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). Executive Order 13563
emphasizes the importance of
quantifying costs and benefits, reducing
costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting
flexibility.
This proposed rule is a significant
regulatory action under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866. Accordingly,
the rule has been reviewed by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB).
Section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866
requires an assessment of potential costs
and benefits. The analysis follows.
Currently, towing vessels are
inspected under subchapter I or
subchapter M, dependent on their size
and area of operation. All inspected
towing vessels are required to pay a user
fee. Subchapter I towing vessels pay a
user fee of $2,915 annually. Subchapter
M towing vessels pay a user fee of
Proposed
fee
$1,030
1,030
2,915
2,915
2,915
$1,030 annually. The subchapter M user
fee is not specific to towing vessels,
rather it is for all inspected vessels that
do not have a specific user fee on Table
2.10–101.
We calculate that in total 42 towing
vessels inspected under subchapter I are
paying $122,430 annually and that in
total 5,343 towing vessels inspected
under subchapter M are paying
$5,503,290 annually for inspection
services. Towing vessels choose
between several vessel inspection
alternatives. Once selected, the
inspection option is unlikely to change
due to a change in user fees, since there
are private business costs associated
with changing inspection options. Coast
Guard COI service costs are fully funded
through annual appropriations.19
This proposed rulemaking would
establish a user fee specific to
subchapter M towing vessels, revise the
user fee specific to subchapter I towing
vessels, and establish user fees for
vessel inspection alternatives that
require fewer Coast Guard inspection
activities or the Coast Guard inspection
activities take less time and thus have
a lower cost to Coast Guard. We
anticipate this proposed fee structure
will help to ensure the Coast Guard’s
ability to offset costs to the government,
and to separate annual inspection fees
for options involving third-party
surveys and audits of towing vessels
using safety management systems. This
proposed rule would result in estimated
transfers from towing vessel operators
for the COI services of $1.5 million to
$1.6 million per year to the Federal
$2,184
973
2,747
1,850
2,260
Incremental
fee adjustment
$1,154
¥57
¥168
¥1,065
¥655
Percent
change
112
¥6
¥6
¥37
¥22
Government. The 10-year transfers,
undiscounted, total $15,719,319. The
discounted annualized figure, at 7
percent, is $1,577,491.
The Coast Guard proposes to do the
following through this rulemaking:
(1) Modify the definition in § 2.10–25
of Sea-going towing vessel. We would
remove the modifier ‘‘seagoing’’ used
within the definition, and replace it
with a description of what ‘‘seagoing’’
means. The proposed insertion is ‘‘and
that makes voyages beyond the
Boundary Line as defined by 46 U.S.C.
103.’’ Also, we would specify that the
vessel must be 300 gross tons or more
to distinguish seagoing towing vessels
from towing vessels that travel beyond
the Boundary Line, which may be
subject to subchapter M. This is an
administrative change and it would
have no economic impact.
(2) Amend the user fees for 46 CFR
subchapter I towing vessels. The current
fee for the 42 seagoing towing vessels
inspected under subchapter I is $2,915
for all inspection options (Coast Guard,
ACP, and SIP). This proposed rule
would make the fees specific to each
inspection as shown below in table 3.
Vessels have already chosen their
inspection option and are unlikely to
change away from their current option.
This is because there are costs
associated with switching inspection
options and there are private industry
transactions and business specific costs
beyond the inspection cost that make
the user fee a small portion of the
overall cost of inspections.
TABLE 3—CURRENT AND PROPOSED SUBCHAPTER I TOWING VESSEL USER FEES
Inspection type
Current fee
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Coast Guard option .................................................................................................................................................
Alternate Compliance Program option (ACP) .........................................................................................................
Streamlined Inspection Program option (SIP) .........................................................................................................
$2,915
Proposed fee
$2,747
1,850
2,260
(3) Create a specific user fee category
for the 5,343 towing vessels under 46
CFR subchapter M towing vessels in the
table of fees in § 2.10–101 and update
the current user fees for annual
inspection fees for towing vessels to
reflect the specific program costs
associated with the two subchapter M
options: The TSMS option and the Coast
Guard inspection option. The current
fee is $1,030 for the annual inspection
fee for towing vessels subject to
19 The user fees collected for these services are
offsetting receipts and are deposited to the
Department of Treasury and credited to DHS
appropriation as proprietary receipts. See 46 U.S.C.
2110(h).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Jan 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\11JAP1.SGM
11JAP1
1383
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
subchapter M. This proposed rule
would make the fees specific to each
inspection type as shown below in table
4. Similar to subchapter I vessels,
subchapter M vessels have already
chosen their inspection option and are
unlikely to change for the same reasons.
TABLE 4—CURRENT AND PROPOSED SUBCHAPTER M TOWING VESSEL USER FEES
Inspection type
Current fee
Coast Guard option .................................................................................................................................................
TSMS option ............................................................................................................................................................
$1,030
........................
(4) Define the following new terms
that will be added to the table of fees in
§ 2.10–101: Annual vessel inspection
fee, Alternative Compliance Program
option, Coast Guard option,
Streamlined Inspection Program option,
Towing Safety Management System
option, and Towing Vessel. This is an
administrative change and has no
economic impact. All of these points are
described in greater detail in the Cost
Study.
To obtain the affected population for
this proposed rule, we used the MISLE
(Marine Information for Safety and Law
Enforcement) database. MISLE is the
Coast Guard’s vessel and marine activity
database which contains the best and
most readily available vessel population
data. According to MISLE data as of
June 2021, the total affected population
of this rule is 5,385 inspected towing
vessels. There are approximately 5,343
towing vessels that will require
inspection under 46 CFR subchapter M
and 42 towing vessels that are inspected
under 46 CFR subchapter I. Though the
subchapter M population is decreasing
by an average of 33 vessels per year
since 2016, the subchapter I population
is expected to remain stable, because it
historically has done so.
Rather than a single fee category for
all towing vessels covered by a
subchapter, the Coast Guard is
proposing two categories for subchapter
M and three categories for subchapter I
vessels. For subchapter M, the
Proposed fee
$2,184
973
inspection types are the Coast Guard
option and the TSMS option. For
subchapter I, the inspection types are
the Coast Guard option, the ACP option,
and the SIP option. Table 5 presents the
total population of inspected towing
vessels that would be impacted by this
proposed rule. These are the current
rates of inspection for the subchapters,
though not all vessels are currently
inspected. Table 6 presents the
projected subchapter M population and
their projected counts of inspection
type. We assume that the subchapter M
towing vessel population will maintain
a 70-percent-TSMS option and 30percent-Coast-Guard option split over
the duration of the analysis.
TABLE 5—TOTAL AFFECTED POPULATION FOR INSPECTED TOWING VESSELS
User fee categories
Subchapter M
Population
Coast Guard
option
Population ................................................................................
% of Population .......................................................................
Subchapter I
TSMS
1,603
30
Coast Guard
option
Total
3,740
70
5,343
100
Vessel Inspection Alternative
Alternate
Compliance
Program
(ACP)
Total
Streamlined
Inspection
Program
(SIP)
Population ................................................................................
% of Population .......................................................................
28
67
13
31
1
2
42
100
Total Population ................................................................
..............................
..............................
..............................
5,385
TABLE 6—PROJECTED SUBCHAPTER M POPULATION BY INSPECTION OPTION
Estimated annual subchapter M population by inspection type
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
CG option
1 ......................................................................................................................................................................
2 ......................................................................................................................................................................
3 ......................................................................................................................................................................
4 ......................................................................................................................................................................
5 ......................................................................................................................................................................
6 ......................................................................................................................................................................
7 ......................................................................................................................................................................
8 ......................................................................................................................................................................
9 ......................................................................................................................................................................
10 ....................................................................................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Jan 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\11JAP1.SGM
11JAP1
1,603
1,592
1,583
1,574
1,563
1,554
1,543
1,534
1,524
1,514
TSMS option
3,740
3,718
3,694
3,670
3,648
3,624
3,602
3,578
3,555
3,532
1384
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
Costs and Benefits
This proposed rule would not impose
any new societal costs as all of the
inspection activities are currently being
done by the regulated entities and Coast
Guard. Rather the impacts of this rule
would be in the form of transfer
payments, which are monetary
payments from one group to another
that do not affect total resources
available to society.
This rule would not provide any
quantitative benefits. However, it would
have a qualitative benefit. This rule
would revise user fees to more closely
reflect the actual cost to the Coast Guard
of providing inspection services. The
result would be a more fair distribution
of costs to inspected towing vessels by
inspection type. Title 46 U.S.C. 2110
directs that the fee or charge be
established in accordance with 31
U.S.C. 9701, which specifies that each
charge be fair and based on: The costs
to the Government; the value of the
service or thing to the recipient, public
policy, or interest served; and other
relevant facts. Consistent with these
objectives, once a fee or charge is
established, section 2110 allows it to be
adjusted to accommodate changes in the
cost of providing a specific service or
thing of value. This rulemaking aids the
Coast Guard in compliance with those
statutory requirements.
Transfer Payments
The Coast Guard proposes to adjust
the user fees collected from the current
entities so that there are now five
different fees based on the towing vessel
subchapter and program utilized for
vessel certification. The Coast Guard
estimates this total is approximately
5,385 towing vessels. Table 7 shows the
current fee, the proposed fee, the change
and the percent change to the user fee.
The annual costs of services for each
vessel class is the proposed user fee for
that vessel class.
TABLE 7—CURRENT SUBCHAPTER M AND I USER FEES AND PROPOSED USER FEE ADJUSTMENT AMOUNTS
Fee type/
user fee class
Subchapter
Subchapter
Subchapter
Subchapter
Subchapter
Current
fee
M: Coast Guard option .................................................................
M: TSMS ......................................................................................
I: Coast Guard option ...................................................................
I: Alternative Compliance Program option ...................................
I: Streamlined Inspection Program option ....................................
Incremental
fee
adjustment
Proposed
fee
$1,030
1,030
2,915
2,915
2,915
$2,184
973
2,747
1,850
2,260
$1,154
¥57
¥168
¥1,065
¥655
Percent
change
112
¥6
¥6
¥37
¥22
Note: Since there are no distinct categories for TSMS, SIP, or ACP in the current user fee table, all of subchapter M vessels pay one fee and
all of subchapter I vessels pay one fee. Totals may not sum due to rounding.
In table 8, we show the total annual
transfer payments from each vessel class
to the Government and the total for all
vessels. For example, Subchapter M
vessels that choose the Coast Guard
option would pay $1,154 additional
dollars per vessel in user fees to the
Coast Guard for their inspection
services. Negative numbers represent a
decrease in user fees. Transfer payments
are monetary payments from one group
to another that do not affect total
resources. For this proposed
rulemaking, a user fee is a transfer
payment from the vessel owner or
operator to the Government to offset the
costs to the Coast Guard for providing
COI services. This is found by
multiplying the vessel population by the
incremental fee change. Because the
subchapter M vessel population is
projected to decrease, table 9 shows
annual transfer payments for this
subchapter, totals are found by
multiplying the populations in table 6
by the appropriate fees.
TABLE 8—ANNUAL INCREMENTAL FEE AMOUNTS—FY 2021
Fee type/
user fee class
Estimated
population
Incremental
fee change
First year
fee transfer
payments
Subchapter M: Coast Guard option .............................................................................................
Subchapter M: TSMS option .......................................................................................................
1,603
3,740
$1,154
¥57
$1,849,862
¥213,180
Subtotal .................................................................................................................................
Subchapter I: Coast Guard option ...............................................................................................
Subchapter I: ACP option ............................................................................................................
Subchapter I: SIP option .............................................................................................................
5,343
28
13
1
........................
¥168
¥1,065
¥655
1,636,682
¥4,704
¥13,845
¥655
Subtotal .................................................................................................................................
42
........................
¥19,204
Annual Total ..................................................................................................................
........................
........................
1,617,478
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
TABLE 9—SUBCHAPTER M ANNUAL TRANSFER PAYMENTS
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
1
2
3
4
5
6
CG option
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Jan 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
$1,849,862
1,837,168
1,826,782
1,816,396
1,803,702
1,793,316
E:\FR\FM\11JAP1.SGM
11JAP1
TSMS option
($213,180)
(211,926)
(210,558)
(209,190)
(207,936)
(206,568)
Subchapter M
total
$1,636,682
1,625,242
1,616,224
1,607,206
1,595,766
1,586,748
1385
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 9—SUBCHAPTER M ANNUAL TRANSFER PAYMENTS—Continued
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
CG option
7 ..........................................................................................................................................
8 ..........................................................................................................................................
9 ..........................................................................................................................................
10 ........................................................................................................................................
With the reduction in fees to vessels
under the subchapter I and subchapter
M TSMS options, the first year transfers
from the government to the towing
vessel industry is $232,384. The Coast
Guard expects to have transfers from
1,780,622
1,770,236
1,758,696
1,747,156
TSMS option
Subchapter M
total
(205,314)
(203,946)
(202,635)
(201,324)
1,575,308
1,566,290
1,556,061
1,545,832
annualized figure, at 7 percent, is
$1,577,491. Table 10 summarizes the
total 10-year transfer payments from the
towing vessel industry to the
Government.
towing vessel operators for the COI
services of $1,636,682 in the first year
to the Government. The sum of these
transfers is $1,617,478 in the first year.
The 10-year transfers, undiscounted,
total $15,719,319. The discounted
TABLE 10—DISCOUNTED TRANSFER PAYMENTS FROM TOWING VESSEL OPERATORS TO THE GOVERNMENT *
Discounted
Year
Undiscounted
7%
3%
1 ...................................................................................................................................................
2 ...................................................................................................................................................
3 ...................................................................................................................................................
4 ...................................................................................................................................................
5 ...................................................................................................................................................
6 ...................................................................................................................................................
7 ...................................................................................................................................................
8 ...................................................................................................................................................
9 ...................................................................................................................................................
10 .................................................................................................................................................
$1,617,478
1,606,038
1,597,020
1,588,002
1,576,562
1,567,544
1,556,104
1,547,086
1,536,857
1,526,628
$1,511,662
1,402,776
1,303,644
1,211,479
1,124,067
1,044,521
969,063
900,418
835,948
776,060
$1,570,367
1,513,845
1,461,500
1,410,919
1,359,956
1,312,793
1,265,255
1,221,284
1,177,873
1,135,955
Total ......................................................................................................................................
15,719,319
11,079,638
13,429,747
Annualized ...................................................................................................................................
........................
1,577,491
1,574,376
* Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Regulatory Alternatives
A discussion of regulatory alternatives
is available in the section VI.B(6) of this
preamble.
B. Small Entities
In accordance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
(RFA), the Coast Guard prepared this
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA) that examines the impacts of the
proposed rule on small entities. Due to
the anticipated impacts on small
businesses, the Coast Guard is including
an analysis of the NPRM requirements
for informational purposes.
A small entity may be a small
independent business, defined as
independently owned and operated,
that is organized for profit and is not
dominant in its field per the Small
Business Act (5 U.S.C. 632). A small
entity can also be a small not-for-profit
organization (any not-for-profit
enterprise that is independently owned
and operated and is not dominant in its
field) or a small governmental
jurisdiction (a locality with fewer than
50,000 people) per the RFA. An IRFA
addresses the following:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Jan 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
(1) A description of the reasons why
action by the agency is being
considered;
(2) A succinct statement of the
objectives of, and legal basis for, the
rule;
(3) A description of and, where
feasible, an estimate of the number of
small entities to which the rule will
apply;
(4) A description of the projected
reporting, recordkeeping and other
compliance requirements of the rule,
including an estimate of the classes of
small entities that will be subject to the
requirement and the type of professional
skills necessary for preparation of the
report or record;
(5) An identification, to the extent
practicable, of all relevant Federal rules
that may duplicate, overlap or conflict
with the rule; and
(6) A description of any significant
alternatives to the rule that accomplish
the stated objectives of applicable
statutes and that minimize any
significant economic impact of the rule
on small entities.20
20 5
PO 00000
U.S.C. 603.
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Below is a discussion of the IRFA
analysis for each of these six elements.
1. A description of the reasons why
action by the agency is being
considered.
The Coast Guard is considering
updating the user fees for inspected
towing vessels because after reviewing
the costs to the Government of
inspections under the Coast Guard
option or options using a third party,
the Coast Guard has determined that
updates are necessary to ensure that fees
for all options are fair and based on
costs to the Government. User fees for
subchapter I inspected towing vessels
have not been updated since 1995. The
proposed changes are also consistent
with the Coast Guard’s statement in the
2016 final rule, Inspection of Towing
Vessels, that we planned to promulgate
a separate rulemaking for annual
inspection fees for towing vessels that
would reflect the specific program costs
associated with the two subchapter M
options—the TSMS option and the
Coast Guard inspection option.
The purpose of this proposed rule is
to redistribute the burden of inspection
E:\FR\FM\11JAP1.SGM
11JAP1
1386
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
activities from the Coast Guard to the
towing vessel industry.
2. A succinct statement of the
objective of, and legal basis for, the rule.
This proposed regulatory action is
necessary to adjust the user fee schedule
to better reflect the cost of COI services
to the government, for subchapters I and
M towing vessels. The Coast Guard is
issuing this proposed rule based on
authority in 46 U.S.C. 2110, which has
been delegated to the Commandant
under DHS Delegation No.
0170.1(II)(92). Title 46 U.S.C. 2110
directs the Coast Guard to establish a
fee, or charge, for a service or thing of
value it provides in accordance with 31
U.S.C. 9701. Inspections and related
services described in Subtitle II of Title
46 United States Code are considered a
service of value provided by the Coast
Guard. Section 31 U.S.C. 9701 specifies
that each fee or charge be fair and based
on the costs to the government, the
value of the service to the recipient,
public policy or interest served, and
other relevant facts. Once a fee or charge
is established, 46 U.S.C. 2110 allows it
to be adjusted to accommodate changes
in the cost of providing a specific
service or thing of value.
In addition, section 815 of CGAA
directs the Coast Guard to review and
revise the fee for inspections if
necessary to comply with 31 U.S.C.
9701. The Coast Guard interprets ‘‘costs
to the Government’’ in section 815(a) to
mean the cost to the Coast Guard of
providing inspection and related
services to determine whether a vessel
meets requirements necessary for it to
maintain its COI.
3. A description of and, where
feasible, an estimate of the number of
small entities to which the rule will
apply.
The proposed rule would affect the
owners and operators of certain towing
vessels under subchapters I and M. We
constructed this towing vessel
population from the Coast Guard’s
MISLE system. From this database, we
identified 5,385 vessels affected by this
proposed rule—5,343 subchapter M
towing vessels and 42 subchapter I
towing vessels. There are 1,236 unique
companies that own or operate these
vessels. Five companies own vessels
under both subchapters I and M.
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.21 We
found vessels owned by 21 government
entities and 4 non-profit entities. The
remaining 1,211 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 evaluated whether the nonprofit was
independently owned and operated and
was not dominant in its field.22 For the
business entities, we matched their
information with the latest Small
Business Administration (SBA) Table of
Small Business Size Standards to
determine if a business entity is small
in its primary line of business as
classified in the North American
Industry Classification System
(NAICS).23
We broke the population down into
subchapters I and M. For subchapter M,
we randomly selected a sample size
from the 1,222 unique towing vessel
companies to reach the 95 percent
confidence level. Using Cochran’s
Formula, Coast Guard chose a
statistically valid random sample of 385
businesses that own and operate towing
vessels.24
There are a total of 97 NAICS-coded
industries in this proposed rule’s
sample affected population. Table 11
displays the 10 industries that appear
most frequently in the affected
population of owners or operators of
towing vessels in subchapters I and M.
TABLE 11—MOST COMMON NAICS CODES
Description
Small entity
definition
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
Navigational Services to Shipping ....................................................................
Marinas .............................................................................................................
Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction .............................................
Site Preparation Contractors ............................................................................
Boat Dealers .....................................................................................................
Inland Water Freight Transportation .................................................................
Marine Cargo Handling .....................................................................................
Ship Building and Repairing .............................................................................
488210 ......
483212 ......
Support Activities for Rail Transportation .........................................................
Inland Water Passenger Transportation ...........................................................
<$41,500,000 ...
<$8,000,000 .....
<$39,500,000 ...
<$16,500,000 ...
<$35,000,000 ...
<750 Employees
<$41,500,000 ...
<1,250 Employees.
<$16,500,000 ...
<500 Employees
NAICS code
488330
713930
237990
238910
441222
483211
488320
336611
Count of
towing vessel
owners or
operators
Percent
of total *
40
34
31
31
28
23
12
10
10
9
8
8
7
6
3
3
5
5
1
1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
* Note: Total does not sum to 100 percent, since these percentages reflect only the top 10 most common NAICS codes of the sample. The remaining 44 percent of NAICS codes were not within the 10 most commonly occurring.
Coast Guard chose a subchapter M
sample of 385 businesses that own and
operate the towing vessels. Of the 385
businesses, 37 exceeded the SBA small
business size standards, 265 companies
were considered to be small businesses
by the SBA size standards, and 83
companies had no information
available. Consistent with DHS practice,
entities with no information available
will be considered as small entities.
Thus, there are 348 businesses in our
sample that we consider to be small
entities. Based on our random sample,
90.4 percent of subchapter M entities
are considered small and therefore
when applied to the population of
unique towing vessel companies, 1,105
subchapter M entities would be
considered small.
For subchapter I, we searched all 14
unique towing vessel companies in the
available databases. Of the 14 unique
towing vessel companies in the
21 https://www.cortera.com/ and https://
www.manta.com/.
22 https://www.guidestar.org.
23 https://www.sba.gov/document/support--tablesize-standards.
24 A statistically valid random sample size of 292
businesses would be required to achieve a 95percent confidence level out of the 1,222 unique
towing vessel companies. In this analysis, Coast
Guard oversampled to analyze 385 businesses to
ensure enough data and information was available
on the businesses to meet the sampling
requirements.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Jan 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\11JAP1.SGM
11JAP1
1387
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
subchapter I population, 13 had
available revenue and employee data. Of
these 13 unique towing vessel
companies, 6 exceeded the SBA small
business size standards and 7 were
considered small businesses by the SBA
size standards. Consistent with DHS
practice, we consider entities for which
information was not available to be
small. Thus, there are eight businesses
in our population that we consider to be
small entities.
For this analysis, we considered the
annual weighted average transfer from
industry to the Coast Guard by
subchapter. For subchapter M vessels,
we found the average fleet size for small
entities is two vessels and multiplied it
by the weighted average of incremental
changes in user fees. According to our
analysis of small subchapter M vessels,
97 percent of them choose the Coast
Guard option for their inspection option
and 3 percent choose the TSMS option.
Thus, we multiplied the rates for vessels
choosing their inspection option by the
incremental change in user fees and the
average fleet size for small subchapter M
entities, which yielded an average
impact of $1,117 per subchapter M
vessel and $2,234 per small subchapter
M entity. We repeated this process for
subchapter I entities. We found the
average fleet size for small entities,
which is 1, and multiplied it by the
weighted average of incremental
changes in user fees. According to our
analysis of small subchapter I vessels,
50 percent of them choose the ACP
option for their inspection option, 37.5
percent choose the Coast Guard option,
and the remaining 12.5 percent choose
the SIP option. This proposed rule
would save subchapter I entities an
average of $799. Tables 12 and 13 show
the impact on small company revenue
for each subchapter that we had revenue
data for.
TABLE 12—SUBCHAPTER M ESTIMATED ANNUAL REVENUE IMPACT
Number of
entities
Revenue impact range
Percent of
entities
0% ≤ 1% ..................................................................................................................................................................
1% ≤ 3% ..................................................................................................................................................................
3% ≤ 5% ..................................................................................................................................................................
Above 5% ................................................................................................................................................................
233
27
3
2
87.9
10.2
1.1
0.8
Total ..................................................................................................................................................................
265
100
TABLE 13—SUBCHAPTER I ESTIMATED ANNUAL REVENUE IMPACT
Number of
entities
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Revenue impact range
Percent of
entities
0% ≤ 1% ..................................................................................................................................................................
1% ≤ 3% ..................................................................................................................................................................
3% ≤ 5% ..................................................................................................................................................................
5% ≤ 10% ................................................................................................................................................................
Above 10% ..............................................................................................................................................................
7
0
0
0
0
100
0
0
0
0
Total ..................................................................................................................................................................
7
100
According to our analysis, 87.9
percent of subchapter M entities will
have an annual impact to revenue of 1
percent or less. Approximately, 10.2
percent will have an annual impact to
revenue between 1 and 3 percent. The
remaining 1.9 percent will have an
annual impact to revenue greater than 3
percent. For subchapter I entities, our
analysis shows a less than 1 percent
impact to annual revenue for all small
entities.
4. 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 requirements and the type of
professional skills necessary for
preparation of the report or record.
This proposed rule calls for no new
reporting, recordkeeping or other
compliance requirements.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Jan 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
5. An identification, to the extent
practicable, of all relevant Federal rules
which may duplicate, overlap or conflict
with the rule.
There are no relevant Federal rules
that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict
with this proposed rule.
6. A description of any significant
alternatives to the rule which
accomplish the stated objectives of
applicable statutes and which minimize
any significant economic impact of the
rule on small entities.
Alternatives considered include
adjusting our current user fees for
inflation, updating only the Coast Guard
option user fees or continuing with the
current user fees. Each of these options
will be considered in the following
discussion.
Under the first alternative, Coast
Guard considered to adjust the current
user fees for inflation from 1995 dollars
to 2020 dollars. To adjust for inflation,
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
we use an inflation factor from the
annual GDP deflator data. We calculate
the inflation factor of 1.58 by dividing
the annual 2020 index number (113.623)
by the annual 1995 index number
(71.864). We then multiply the current
fees for subchapters I and M by the
inflation factor and round it to the
nearest dollar. Subchapters I and M
would experience a 58-percent increase
in fees and incur annual fees of $597
and $1,691, respectively. The fees, when
multiplied by the number of annual COI
renewals, yield an annual revenue of
approximately $8.9 million and transfer
payments of $3.2 million. We rejected
this alternative because the annual
revenue collected under this
methodology does not reflect the full
cost to the Coast Guard of providing the
COI-related services. Table 14 shows the
inflation adjusted user fees for
subchapter I and M vessels.
E:\FR\FM\11JAP1.SGM
11JAP1
1388
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 14—COMPARISON OF USER FEES IN 1995 DOLLARS AND 2020 DOLLARS
[Alternative 1] *
Fee category
1995 $
(current fee)
Inflation
factor
2020 $
Incremental
fee
adjustment
Population
Annual fee
transfer
payments
Annual
revenue
collected
from
user fees
Subchapter I vessels ...
Subchapter M vessels
$2,915
1,030
1.58
1.58
$4,606
1,627
42
5,343
$1,691
597
$71,009
3,191,908
$193,439
8,695,198
Total ......................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
3,262,918
8,888,638
* Note: All dollar figures rounded to the closest whole dollar.
In our second alternative, we
considered updating only the Coast
Guard option user fees. We rejected this
alternative because it would not comply
with section 815 of CGAA. That section
directs the Coast Guard to review and,
based on our findings, revise the fee for
towing vessel inspections. First, the
Coast Guard must compare the costs to
the Government of towing vessel
inspections performed by the Coast
Guard and towing vessel inspections
performed by a third party, to determine
if they are different. We have conducted
that comparison and determined that
there is a difference in costs to the
Government between the inspection
options for towing vessels that involve
a third party and those that do not. If
there is a difference in costs, section 815
of CGAA directs us to revise the fees we
assess for towing vessel inspections to
conform to 31 U.S.C. 9701, and to base
the fee on the cost to the Government.
In our third alternative, we
considered maintaining the current user
fee without an adjustment. We rejected
this alternative because the annual
revenue collected under this
methodology would not cover the full
cost to the Coast Guard of providing the
COI-related services.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Conclusion
In conclusion, we estimate that 87.9
percent of subchapter M entities with
revenue data will have an annual
impact to revenue of 1 percent or less.
Approximately, 10.2 percent will have
an annual impact to revenue between 1
and 3 percent. The remaining 1.9
percent will have an annual impact to
revenue greater than 3 percent. For
subchapter I entities, our analysis shows
a less than 1 percent impact to annual
revenue for all small entities that had
revenue data. We also discussed several
regulatory alternatives including our
preferred alternative. Our preferred
alternative is to: (1) Update the user fee
for seagoing towing vessels; (2) revise
the user fee for other inspected towing
vessels; and (3) establish fees for towing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Jan 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
vessels using the ACP, SIP, or the TSMS
options. Vessels using the ACP, SIP or
TSMS option would pay a lower fee
than vessels that use the traditional
Coast Guard inspection option.
We are interested in the potential
impacts from this rule on small entities
and we request public comment on
these potential impacts. If you think that
this rule will have a significant
economic impact on you, your business,
or your organization, please submit a
comment to the docket at the address
under ADDRESSES in the rule. In your
comment, explain why, how, and to
what degree you think this rule will
have an economic impact on you.
C. Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104–
121, we want to assist small entities in
understanding this proposed rule so that
they can better evaluate its effects on
them and participate in the rulemaking.
If the proposed rule would affect your
small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact
the person in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
proposed rule. The Coast Guard will not
retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this
proposed rule or any policy or action of
the Coast Guard.
Small businesses may send comments
on the actions of Federal employees
who enforce, or otherwise determine
compliance with, Federal regulations to
the Small Business and Agriculture
Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman
and the Regional Small Business
Regulatory Fairness Boards. The
Ombudsman evaluates these actions
annually and rates each agency’s
responsiveness to small business. If you
wish to comment on actions by
employees of the Coast Guard, call 1–
888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247).
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
D. Collection of Information
This proposed rule would call for no
new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44
U.S.C. 3501–3520.
The Coast Guard has a collection of
information for the collection of user
fees from inspected vessels. This
collection is 1625–0074 titled ‘‘Direct
User Fees for Inspection or Examination
of U.S. and Foreign Commercial
Vessels.’’ The collection of information
hour burden for collecting user fees is
independent of the amount collected.
Towing vessels inspected under 46 CFR
subchapters I and M must currently pay
$1,030 and $2,915 respectively. This
proposed rulemaking would simply
adjust the user fee amount to more
accurately reflect the current cost of the
Coast Guard for performing
inspections—and would not change the
number of towing vessels that must pay
a user fee or the time it takes to pay the
user fee.
E. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism) if it has a substantial direct
effect on 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 proposed rule under
Executive Order 13132 and have
determined that it is consistent with the
fundamental federalism principles and
preemption requirements described in
Executive Order 13132. Our analysis
follows.
This NPRM proposes to establish and
revise user fees for services provided by
the Coast Guard pursuant to the
Congressional mandate contained in 46
U.S.C. 2110. Congress has not granted
the authority to the States to establish
user fees for Coast Guard-provided
services. This NPRM would not impact
a State’s general ability to render
services or assess or collect fees for
State-rendered services. Therefore, this
E:\FR\FM\11JAP1.SGM
11JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
rule does not have federalism
implications as described in Executive
Order 13132.
While it is well settled that States may
not regulate in categories in which
Congress intended the Coast Guard to be
the sole source of a vessel’s obligations,
the Coast Guard recognizes the key role
that State and local governments may
have in making regulatory
determinations. Additionally, for rules
with federalism implications and
preemptive effect, Executive Order
13132 specifically directs agencies to
consult with State and local
governments during the rulemaking
process. If you believe this proposed
rule would have implications for
federalism under Executive Order
13132, please contact the person listed
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this preamble.
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 million (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Although this
proposed rule would not result in such
an expenditure, we do discuss the
effects of this proposed rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
G. Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not cause a
taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under
Executive Order 12630 (Governmental
Actions and Interference with
Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights).
H. Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable
standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of
Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice
Reform) to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce
burden.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
I. Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Executive Order 13045
(Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks). This proposed 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Jan 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
J. Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have
tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175 (Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments), because it would not
have a substantial direct effect on one or
more Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes.
K. Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Executive Order 13211 (Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use). We have
determined that it is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under Executive Order
13211, because although it is a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
Executive Order 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
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 (for
example, specifications of materials,
performance, design, or operation; test
methods; sampling procedures; and
related management systems practices)
that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies.
This proposed rule does not use
technical standards. Therefore, we did
not consider the use of voluntary
consensus standards.
M. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023–01,
Rev. 1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental
Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in
complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have made a
preliminary determination that this
action is one of a category of actions that
do not individually or cumulatively
have a significant effect on the human
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1389
environment. A preliminary Record of
Environmental Consideration
supporting this determination is
available in the docket. For instructions
on locating the docket, see the
ADDRESSES section of this preamble.
This proposed rule would be
categorically excluded under paragraphs
L54 and L57 of Appendix A, Table 1 of
DHS Instruction Manual 023–01, Rev.
1.25 Paragraph L54 pertains to
regulations which are editorial or
procedural. Paragraph L57 pertains to
regulations concerning manning,
documentation, admeasurement,
inspection, and equipping of vessels.
This proposed rule would update the
existing user fee for seagoing towing
vessels that are 300 gross tons or more
and establish specific user fees for other
towing vessels that have more recently
become subject to inspection. We seek
any comments or information that may
lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this
proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 46 CFR Part 2
Marine safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Vessels.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 46 CFR part 2 as follows:
PART 2—VESSEL INSPECTIONS
1. The authority citation for part 2 is
revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: Sec. 622, Pub. L. 111–281; 33
U.S.C. 1903; 43 U.S.C. 1333; 46 U.S.C. 2103,
2110, 3306, 3316, 3703, 70034; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1(II)(77), (90), (92)(a), (92)(b); E.O.
12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p.
277, sec. 1–105.
2. Amend § 2.10–25 by:
a. Revising the definition of ‘‘Seagoing towing vessel’’; and
■ b. Adding the definitions in
alphabetical order for ‘‘Alternative
Compliance Program option’’, ‘‘Annual
vessel inspection fee’’, ‘‘Coast Guard
option’’, ‘‘Streamlined Inspection
Program option’’, ‘‘Towing Safety
Management System option’’, and
‘‘Towing vessel’’.
The additions and revision read as
follows:
■
■
§ 2.10–25
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Alternative Compliance Program
option means the option described in 46
CFR part 8, subpart D.
25 https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/
publications/DHS_Instruction%20Manual%2002301-001-01%20Rev%2001_
508%20Admin%20Rev.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\11JAP1.SGM
11JAP1
1390
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
Annual vessel inspection fee means
the fee charged for inspection and
related services provided by the Coast
Guard to determine whether a vessel
meets the requirements to maintain its
Certificate of Inspection.
Coast Guard option means an option
used by—
(1) A vessel inspected under a 46 CFR
subchapter that is not participating in
the Alternative Compliance Program
described in 46 CFR part 8, subpart D;
(2) A vessel inspected under a 46 CFR
subchapter that is not participating in
the Streamlined Inspection Program
described in 46 CFR part 8, subpart E;
or
(3) A vessel inspected under 46 CFR
subchapter M that is not participating in
the Towing Safety Management System
option described in 46 CFR part 138.
*
*
*
*
*
Seagoing towing vessel means a
commercial vessel 300 gross tons or
more engaged in or intending to engage
in the service of pulling, pushing or
hauling alongside, or any combination
of pulling, pushing or hauling
alongside, and that makes voyages
beyond the Boundary Line as defined by
46 U.S.C. 103, and has been issued a
Certificate of Inspection under the
provisions of subchapter I of this
chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
Streamlined Inspection Program
option means the option described in 46
CFR part 8, subpart E.
*
*
*
*
*
Towing Safety Management System
option means the option described in 46
CFR part 138 for towing vessels subject
to 46 CFR subchapter M.
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.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Amend § 2.10–101, in Table 2.10–
101, by:
■ a. Revising the ‘‘Sea-going Towing
Vessels’’ entry; and
■ b. Adding an entry for ‘‘Towing
Vessels (Inspected under 46 CFR
Subchapter M)’’.
The addition and revision read as
follows:
§ 2.10–101
Annual vessel inspection fee.
*
*
*
*
*
TABLE 2.10–101—ANNUAL VESSEL INSPECTION FEES FOR U.S. AND FOREIGN VESSELS REQUIRING A CERTIFICATE OF
INSPECTION
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Seagoing Towing Vessels (Inspected under 46 CFR Subchapter I):
Coast Guard option ........................................................................................................................................................................................................
Alternative Compliance Program option ........................................................................................................................................................................
Streamlined Inspection Program option .........................................................................................................................................................................
$2,747
1,850
2,260
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Towing Vessels (Inspected under 46 CFR Subchapter M):
Coast Guard option ........................................................................................................................................................................................................
Towing Safety Management System option ..................................................................................................................................................................
2,184
973
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: December 23, 2021.
Karl L. Schultz,
Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commandant.
[FR Doc. 2022–00200 Filed 1–10–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2020–0109;
FF09E22000 FXES11130900000 223]
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
RIN 1018–BC98
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Removal of 23 Extinct
Species From the Lists of Endangered
and Threatened Wildlife and Plants;
Ivory-Billed Woodpecker
the public comment period on our
September 30, 2021, proposal to remove
the ivory-billed woodpecker from the
Federal Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants (List)
due to extinction. We are taking this
action to conduct a public hearing on
the proposal to remove the ivory-billed
woodpecker from the List and to allow
all interested parties additional time to
comment on the proposed rule to delist
the ivory-billed woodpecker (docket
number: FWS–R4–ES–2020–0109).
Comments previously submitted need
not be resubmitted and will be fully
considered in preparation of the final
rule. This comment period reopening is
only for the ivory-billed woodpecker
proposed delisting; we are not taking
any comments in regard to the other 22
species proposed in the same rule, for
which the comment periods closed on
November 29, 2021.
AGENCY:
DATES:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), are reopening
Written comments: The comment
period on the proposed rule that
published September 30, 2021 (86 FR
54298), is reopened only for the ivorybilled woodpecker proposed delisting.
We will accept comments on the ivorybilled woodpecker proposed delisting
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of
comment period and announcement of
public hearing.
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Jan 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
that are received or postmarked on or
before February 10, 2022. Please note
that comments submitted electronically
using the Federal eRulemaking Portal
(see ADDRESSES, below) must be
received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on
the closing date, and comments
submitted by U.S. mail must be
postmarked by that date, to ensure
consideration.
Public hearing: On January 26, 2021,
we will hold a public hearing on the
ivory-billed woodpecker proposed
delisting from 6:00 to 7:30 p.m., Central
Time, using the Zoom platform (for
more information, see Public Hearing,
below).
ADDRESSES:
Availability of documents: You may
obtain copies of the September 30, 2021,
proposed rule and associated
documents on the internet at https://
www.regulations.gov under Docket No.
FWS–R4–ES–2020–0109.
Written comments: You may submit
written comments by one of the
following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Search box,
enter the RIN or docket number, which
E:\FR\FM\11JAP1.SGM
11JAP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 7 (Tuesday, January 11, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1378-1390]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-00200]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
46 CFR Part 2
[Docket No. USCG-2018-0538]
RIN 1625-AC55
User Fees for Inspected Towing Vessels
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to update its user fees for
seagoing towing vessels that are 300 gross tons or more and to revise
user fees for other inspected towing vessels. The Coast Guard is
proposing these updates because we are required to establish and
maintain a fair fee for our vessel inspection services and to separate
the fees for inspection options that involve third-party auditors and
surveyors from inspection options that do not involve third parties.
Under this proposed rule, vessels using the Alternate Compliance
Program, Streamlined Inspection Program, or the Towing Safety
Management System options would pay a lower fee than vessels that use
the traditional Coast Guard inspection option.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before April 11, 2022.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2018-0538 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about this document
call or email Mr. Scott Kuhaneck, Coast Guard; telephone 202-372-1221,
email [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents for Preamble
I. Public Participation and Request for Comments
II. Abbreviations
III. Basis and Purpose
A. The Problem We Seek To Address
B. Legal Authority To Address This Problem
C. Recent Legislation
IV. Background
A. Origins of Annual Vessel Inspection Fees
B. Current Fees for Subchapter I and Subchapter M Towing Vessels
[[Page 1379]]
V. Discussion of Proposed Rule
A. Categories of Annual Fees
B. Amending Annual Inspection Fees for Seagoing Towing Vessels
Subject to Subchapter I
C. Establishing Specific Annual Inspection Fees for Towing
Vessels Subject to Subchapter M
D. Methodology for Calculating Fees
VI. Regulatory Analyses
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Small Entities
C. Assistance for Small Entities
D. Collection of Information
E. Federalism
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
G. Taking of Private Property
H. Civil Justice Reform
I. Protection of Children
J. Indian Tribal Governments
K. Energy Effects
L. Technical Standards
M. Environment
I. Public Participation and Request for Comments
The Coast Guard views public participation as essential to
effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material
received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the
outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the
docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of
this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for
each suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If you cannot submit your
material by using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule for
alternate instructions. Documents mentioned in this proposed rule as
being in the docket, and all public comments, will be available in our
online docket at https://www.regulations.gov, and can be viewed by
following that website's instructions. Additionally, if you visit the
online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when
comments are posted or if a final rule is published.
We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and
submissions to the docket in response to this document, see DHS's
eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).
We do not plan to hold a public meeting but we will consider doing
so if public comments indicate that a meeting would be helpful and we
determine that a meeting would aid this rulemaking. We would issue a
separate Federal Register notice to announce the date, time, and
location of such a meeting.
II. Abbreviations
ACP Alternate Compliance Program
CGAA Frank LoBiondo Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2018
COI Certificate of Inspection
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
FTE Full-Time Equivalent
IRFA Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
MISLE Marine Information for Safety and Law Enforcement
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
OBRA Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990
OMB Office of Management and Budget
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
SBA Small Business Administration
Sec. Section
SIP Streamlined Inspection Program
SSM Sector Staffing Model
TSMS Towing Safety Management System
U.S.C. United States Code
III. Basis and Purpose
In this section, the Coast Guard identifies the problem we intend
to address, the well-established statutory authority that enables us to
issue this proposed rule, and the recent legislation that provides
additional authority for this proposed rulemaking.
A. The Problem We Seek To Address
The Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2004 \1\ added
towing vessels to the list of vessels subject to inspection in 46
U.S.C. 3301. As directed by 46 U.S.C. 3307, each vessel subject to
inspection under part A of Subtitle II must undergo an initial
inspection for certification, and after receiving a Certificate of
Inspection (COI) the vessel must undergo periodic inspections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Public Law 108-293, 118 Stat. 1028 (August 9, 2004), with
relevant chapters codified in 46 U.S.C. 3301.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 20, 2016, we published an Inspection of Towing Vessels
final rule that established safety regulations governing the
inspection, standards, and safety management systems for towing
vessels.\2\ We estimated that the rule would apply to more than 5,500
towing vessels that had previously been uninspected vessels. That rule
established the 46 CFR subchapter M--Towing Vessels (parts 136 through
144), which requires vessels subject to subchapter M to obtain a COI.
The phase-in period for obtaining these COIs under subchapter M runs
from July 20, 2018 to July 19, 2022.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 81 FR 40004.
\3\ See 46 CFR 136.202, which calls for 25 percent of the
vessels of each owner or managing operator of more than one existing
towing vessel to have COIs by July 22, 2019. It calls for an
additional 25 percent to obtain COIs for each of the remaining 3
years of the phase-in period. The final rule was effective July 20,
2016, but it delayed the implementation of most of its part 140
Operations, part 141 Lifesaving, part 142 Fire Protection, part 143
Machinery and Electrical Systems and Equipment, and part 144
Construction and Arrangement requirements until July 20, 2018. See
Sec. Sec. 140.105, 141.105, 142.105, 143.200, and 144.105.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Inspection of Towing Vessels final rule, we stated our plan
to begin a separate rulemaking for annual inspection fees for towing
vessels that would reflect the specific program costs associated with
the two options for documenting compliance to obtain a COI,\4\ the
Coast Guard option and the Towing Safety Management System (TSMS)
option.\5\ We also stated that until then we will use the existing fee
of $1,030 in 46 CFR 2.10-101 that applies to any inspected vessel not
listed in Table 2.10-101 as the annual inspection fee for towing
vessels subject to subchapter M.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See 46 CFR 136.130--Options for documenting compliance to
obtain a Certificate of Inspection.
\5\ TSMS is a voluntary inspection option that permits qualified
third-party organizations to conduct certain vessel examinations in
place of Coast Guard inspections. See 46 CFR 138--Towing Safety
Management System (TSMS).
\6\ See 81 FR at 40005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to towing vessels subject to subchapter M that are
required to obtain COIs, there are towing vessels that qualify as
seagoing motor vessels (300 gross tons or more) that are subject to 46
CFR chapter I, subchapter I regulations for cargo and miscellaneous
vessels.\7\ These vessels are currently required to have COIs. The
annual inspection fee for these subchapter I towing vessels was
established in 1995 at $2,915, and has never been updated.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See 46 CFR 2.01-7 and 90.05-1. Under 46 U.S.C. 3301,
seagoing motor vessels are subject to inspection. Towing vessels are
motor vessels, (vessels propelled by machinery other than steam) and
they fall within the definition of ``seagoing motor vessel'' if they
are at least 300 gross tons and make voyages beyond the Boundary
Line. See definitions in 46 U.S.C. 2101.
\8\ See Direct User Fees for Inspection or Examination of U.S.
and Foreign Commercial Vessels (60 FR 13550 (March 13, 1995); 46 CFR
2.10-101.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The law requires that we establish a fee for our inspection
services that is fair and based on costs to the Government, value to
the recipient, and public interest. It further requires that we review
the costs to the Government of such inspections for towing vessel using
the Coast Guard option and those using an option involving a third
party, revise such fees if there is a difference,
[[Page 1380]]
and comply with the same requirements for establishing fees when doing
so.
B. Legal Authority To Address This Problem
The Coast Guard is issuing this proposed rule based on authority in
section 2110 of Title 46 of the United States Code (46 U.S.C. 2110),
which has been delegated to the Commandant under DHS Delegation No.
0170.1(II)(92). Section 2110 of Title 46 directs the Secretary of the
Department in which the Coast Guard is operating to establish a fee or
charge for a service or thing of value provided by the Secretary under
Subtitle II of Title 46. Inspections and related services described in
Subtitle II of Title 46 are considered a service or thing of value
provided by the Secretary.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 46 U.S.C. 2110(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 2110 also directs that the fee or charge be established in
accordance with 31 U.S.C. 9701, which specifies that each charge be
fair and based on the costs to the Government, the value of the service
or thing to the recipient, public policy or interest served, and other
relevant facts. Consistent with these objectives, once a fee or charge
is established, section 2110 allows it to be adjusted to accommodate
changes in the cost of providing a specific service or thing of value.
C. Recent Legislation
On December 4, 2018, the Frank LoBiondo Coast Guard Authorization
Act of 2018 (CGAA) was enacted.\10\ Section 815 of CGAA directs the
Coast Guard to review and revise the fee for inspections. First, the
Coast Guard must compare the costs to the Government of towing vessel
inspections performed by the Coast Guard and towing vessel inspections
performed by a third party, to determine if they are different. The
Coast Guard interprets ``costs to the Government'' in section 815(a) to
mean the cost to the Coast Guard of providing inspection and related
services to determine whether a vessel meets requirements necessary for
it to maintain its COI. We have conducted that comparison and
determined that there is a difference in costs to the Government
between the inspection options for towing vessels that involve a third
party and those that do not.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Public Law 115-282, 132 Stat. 4192.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If there is a difference in costs, section 815 of CGAA directs us
to revise the fee we assess for such inspections to conform to 31
U.S.C. 9701, and to base the fee on the cost to the Government. This is
the intent of this notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
IV. Background
A. Origins of Annual Vessel Inspection Fees
The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (OBRA) amended 46
U.S.C. 2110 and removed long-standing prohibitions against imposing
certain user fees.\11\ As amended by the OBRA, 46 U.S.C. 2110 requires
the establishment and collection of user fees for Coast Guard services
provided under Subtitle II of Title 46, United States Code. On March
13, 1995, the Coast Guard published the final rule on Direct User Fees
for Inspection or Examination of U.S. and Foreign Commercial
Vessels.\12\ The fees were intended to recover the costs associated
with providing Coast Guard vessel inspection services directly or
through an alternative reinspection program, although alternative
reinspection program only applied to certain offshore supply vessels.
The final rule established user fees for services related to commercial
vessel inspection including annual fees for seagoing towing vessels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Public Law 101-508, 104 Stat. 1388 with relevant chapters
codified in 46 U.S.C. 2110.
\12\ 60 FR 13550.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 20, 2016, the Coast Guard published the final rule on the
Inspection of Towing Vessels. The vessels subject to this 2016 rule
were not considered when the original vessel inspection fees were
established in 1995, except to the extent that the table of fees
included a default fee for any inspected vessel not listed. We
indicated in the 2016 rule that we would establish specific fees, in a
subsequent rulemaking, that would reflect program costs associated with
the TSMS and Coast Guard inspection options for obtaining COIs. We
stated that until those specific fees were established, the annual
inspection fee for towing vessels subject to subchapter M would be the
existing fee of $1,030 in 46 CFR 2.10-101 for any inspected vessel not
listed in Table 2.10-101.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See 81 FR at 40005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Current Fees for Subchapter I and Subchapter M Towing Vessels
The Coast Guard currently charges an annual vessel inspection fee
for U.S. and foreign vessels requiring a COI, following the fee
schedule set in Sec. 2.10-101.\14\ The current fee for seagoing towing
vessels inspected under subchapter I is $2,915 for all inspection
options--the Coast Guard, the Alternate Compliance Program (ACP), and
the Streamlined Inspection Program (SIP). The current fee for towing
vessels inspected under subchapter M (all inspection options) is
$1,030, which is the fee for ``[a]ny vessel not listed in this table.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Under 46 CFR 2.01-6(b), foreign vessels from countries
which are non-signatory to the International Convention for the
Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, are issued a COI, if the inspector
approves the vessel and its equipment as described in Sec. 2.01-5.
We have records of COIs issued to foreign vessels in our Marine
Information for Safety and Law Enforcement (MISLE) database, but no
records of a COI issued to a foreign towing vessel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Discussion of Proposed Rule
This proposed rule would update existing annual inspection fees for
both seagoing towing vessels (300 gross tons or more) and vessels
subject to the relatively new towing-vessel regulations in 46 CFR
subchapter M.
The annual inspection fees are located in 46 CFR part 2--Vessel
Inspections. In addition to fees in Sec. 2.10-101, this part contains
definitions in Sec. 2.10-25. We propose to add the following new
defined terms to Sec. 2.10-25--
Annual vessel inspection fee;
Alternate Compliance Program option;
Coast Guard option;
Streamlined Inspection Program option;
Towing Safety Management System option; and
Towing vessel.
To reflect the involvement of third parties in inspection options,
such as the ACP and TSMS, we propose to define ``annual vessel
inspection fee'' as the fee charged by the Coast Guard for providing
inspection and related services to determine whether a vessel meets the
requirements to maintain its COI. The fee charged by the Coast Guard
reflects the cost to the Coast Guard. There are several existing
options for inspection, which we propose to define in revised Sec.
2.10-25 by reference to the regulations that establish each option. For
both seagoing and subchapter M towing vessels, there is a Coast Guard
option in which the Coast Guard performs all of the relevant inspection
activity. For both types of vessels there is also a third-party option,
already established in regulation, in which a third party performs some
of the relevant activity, but the Coast Guard still inspects the vessel
and examines evidence of compliance provided by third parties.
For seagoing towing vessels there is an additional option, the SIP.
The SIP option does not involve a third party. Under the SIP option, a
vessel is inspected in accordance with an approved Vessel Action Plan
that the company's SIP agent develops with
[[Page 1381]]
guidance from the Coast Guard. In our definition of SIP, we point to
subpart E of 46 CFR part 8, which spells out SIP program requirements.
We propose to define ``towing vessel'' as 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. This definition matches the definition of towing
vessel in 46 U.S.C. 2101.
We are also proposing to modify the definition of an existing term
in Sec. 2.10-25, Sea-going towing vessel. We would remove the modifier
``seagoing'' used within the definition itself, and insert a
description of what seagoing means. The proposed insertion is ``and
that makes voyages beyond the Boundary Line as defined by 46 U.S.C.
103.'' \15\ We would further specify that the vessel must be 300 gross
tons or more, to distinguish seagoing towing vessels from towing
vessels subject to subchapter M that travel beyond the Boundary Line.
We would also remove the hyphen from seagoing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Under 46 U.S.C. 103 and 33 U.S.C. 151(b), boundary lines
are used for dividing inland waters of the United States from the
high seas to delineate the application of certain U.S. statutes. For
a list of boundary lines and the statutes those lines are used to
delineate, see 46 CFR part 7, which lists boundary lines for the
Atlantic Coast, Gulf Coast, Pacific Coast, and the states of Alaska
and Hawaii.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Categories of Annual Fees
For towing vessels subject to subchapter M, we propose two fee
categories; the Coast Guard option and the TSMS option. For seagoing
towing vessels subject to subchapter I, we propose three fee
categories; the Coast Guard option, the ACP option and the SIP option.
This would allow the Coast Guard to provide reduced fees for subchapter
M vessel owners who choose the TSMS option described in 46 CFR part
138, and for subchapter I vessel owners who choose the ACP or SIP
option described in 46 CFR part 8. We anticipate this fee structure
will help to ensure the Coast Guard's ability to recover full costs to
the Government, and to separate annual inspection fees for options
involving third-party surveys and audits of towing vessels using safety
management systems. Several inspection options have lower user fees
than the Coast Guard option. These inspection alternatives either
require fewer Coast Guard inspection activities or the Coast Guard
inspection activities take less time and thus have a lower cost.
B. Amending Annual Inspection Fees for Seagoing Towing Vessels Subject
to Subchapter I
We are proposing to charge one of three annual fees for seagoing
towing vessels that are inspected under subchapter I:
$2,747 for those using the Coast Guard option;
$1,850 for those using the ACP option; and
$2,260 for those using the SIP option.
The current annual fee for seagoing towing vessels that are
inspected under subchapter I is $2,915.
For a detailed discussion of how these fees were derived, see
Methodology for Calculating Fees in section V.D.
C. Establishing Specific Annual Inspection Fees for Towing Vessels
Subject to Subchapter M
We are also proposing to charge one of two fees for towing vessels
inspected under subchapter M:
$2,184 for those using the Coast Guard option, and
$973 for those using the TSMS option.
The current annual fee applied to subchapter M towing vessels is
$1,030.
For a more detailed discussion of how these fees were derived, see
Methodology for Calculating Fees in section V.D.
D. Methodology for Calculating Fees
This section summarizes the methodology for calculating fees. For
more details, see the Cost Study for Determining User Fees for
Inspected Towing Vessels in the docket where indicated under the
section I of this preamble.
To derive the costs of the various inspection types, we used an
activity-based costing \16\ approach in conjunction with the Sector
Staffing Model (SSM). The SSM is an activity-based model designed to
establish human capital requirements and quantify resources at Shore
Forces units.\17\ The SSM measures specific activity and frequency to
determine the Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) workforce needed to meet a
particular workload. Data in the model is derived from Coast Guard
enterprise databases and surveys conducted at the Coast Guard field
unit level. The model also incorporates unit specific travel times for
conducting missions, collateral duty workload, and mission required
training. In the spring of 2012, the SSM was accredited in accordance
with official Coast Guard policy and currently serves as the primary
decision tool for managing sector enterprise staffing. Table 1 shows
the cost of activities for providing COI services to each type of
inspection. These costs are derived using SSM FTE calculations; see the
Cost Study in the docket for the full derivation of figures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Activity-based costing is a method for determining the cost
of a service based on the cost of each individual element of that
service.
\17\ Shore Forces units are Coast Guard sector commands and
their sub-units or field units. See the USCG Strategic Cost Manual,
M7000.4 (February 2005).
Table 1--Per Vessel Cost of Activities for Providing COI Services by User Fee Segment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subchapter M: Subchapter M: Subchapter I: Subchapter I: Subchapter I:
Coast Guard TSMS Coast Guard ACP SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection Activity Costs....... $1,183 $408 $1,618 $874 $1,213
Travel Costs.................... 317 40 356 356 356
Supervision and Administration 243 84 332 179 249
Costs..........................
Indirect Costs.................. 442 442 442 442 442
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Annual Costs.......... 2,184 973 2,747 1,850 2,260
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Coast Guard intends to collect one of five different user fees
from the approximately 5,385 towing vessels that require COIs under
subchapters I and M.\18\ Table 2 shows the current fee, the proposed
fee, the incremental fee adjustment and the percent change to the user
fee. The annual costs of services for each vessel class is the proposed
user fee for that vessel class.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Vessel population data came from MISLE as of June 2021. See
the Affected Population section for more details.
[[Page 1382]]
Table 2--Current Subchapter M and I User Fees and Proposed User Fee Adjustment Amounts
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incremental
Fee type/user fee class Current fee Proposed fee fee adjustment Percent change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subchapter M: Coast Guard option................ $1,030 $2,184 $1,154 112
Subchapter M: TSMS.............................. 1,030 973 -57 -6
Subchapter I: Coast Guard option................ 2,915 2,747 -168 -6
Subchapter I: Alternative Compliance Program 2,915 1,850 -1,065 -37
option.........................................
Subchapter I: Streamlined Inspection Program 2,915 2,260 -655 -22
option.........................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Our analyses based on these
statutes or Executive orders follows.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and 13563
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review) direct agencies to assess
the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying costs and
benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility.
This proposed rule is a significant regulatory action under section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the rule has been reviewed
by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 6(a)(3) of
Executive Order 12866 requires an assessment of potential costs and
benefits. The analysis follows.
Currently, towing vessels are inspected under subchapter I or
subchapter M, dependent on their size and area of operation. All
inspected towing vessels are required to pay a user fee. Subchapter I
towing vessels pay a user fee of $2,915 annually. Subchapter M towing
vessels pay a user fee of $1,030 annually. The subchapter M user fee is
not specific to towing vessels, rather it is for all inspected vessels
that do not have a specific user fee on Table 2.10-101.
We calculate that in total 42 towing vessels inspected under
subchapter I are paying $122,430 annually and that in total 5,343
towing vessels inspected under subchapter M are paying $5,503,290
annually for inspection services. Towing vessels choose between several
vessel inspection alternatives. Once selected, the inspection option is
unlikely to change due to a change in user fees, since there are
private business costs associated with changing inspection options.
Coast Guard COI service costs are fully funded through annual
appropriations.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ The user fees collected for these services are offsetting
receipts and are deposited to the Department of Treasury and
credited to DHS appropriation as proprietary receipts. See 46 U.S.C.
2110(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposed rulemaking would establish a user fee specific to
subchapter M towing vessels, revise the user fee specific to subchapter
I towing vessels, and establish user fees for vessel inspection
alternatives that require fewer Coast Guard inspection activities or
the Coast Guard inspection activities take less time and thus have a
lower cost to Coast Guard. We anticipate this proposed fee structure
will help to ensure the Coast Guard's ability to offset costs to the
government, and to separate annual inspection fees for options
involving third-party surveys and audits of towing vessels using safety
management systems. This proposed rule would result in estimated
transfers from towing vessel operators for the COI services of $1.5
million to $1.6 million per year to the Federal Government. The 10-year
transfers, undiscounted, total $15,719,319. The discounted annualized
figure, at 7 percent, is $1,577,491.
The Coast Guard proposes to do the following through this
rulemaking:
(1) Modify the definition in Sec. 2.10-25 of Sea-going towing
vessel. We would remove the modifier ``seagoing'' used within the
definition, and replace it with a description of what ``seagoing''
means. The proposed insertion is ``and that makes voyages beyond the
Boundary Line as defined by 46 U.S.C. 103.'' Also, we would specify
that the vessel must be 300 gross tons or more to distinguish seagoing
towing vessels from towing vessels that travel beyond the Boundary
Line, which may be subject to subchapter M. This is an administrative
change and it would have no economic impact.
(2) Amend the user fees for 46 CFR subchapter I towing vessels. The
current fee for the 42 seagoing towing vessels inspected under
subchapter I is $2,915 for all inspection options (Coast Guard, ACP,
and SIP). This proposed rule would make the fees specific to each
inspection as shown below in table 3. Vessels have already chosen their
inspection option and are unlikely to change away from their current
option. This is because there are costs associated with switching
inspection options and there are private industry transactions and
business specific costs beyond the inspection cost that make the user
fee a small portion of the overall cost of inspections.
Table 3--Current and Proposed Subchapter I Towing Vessel User Fees
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection type Current fee Proposed fee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coast Guard option...................... $2,915 $2,747
Alternate Compliance Program option 1,850
(ACP)..................................
Streamlined Inspection Program option 2,260
(SIP)..................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Create a specific user fee category for the 5,343 towing
vessels under 46 CFR subchapter M towing vessels in the table of fees
in Sec. 2.10-101 and update the current user fees for annual
inspection fees for towing vessels to reflect the specific program
costs associated with the two subchapter M options: The TSMS option and
the Coast Guard inspection option. The current fee is $1,030 for the
annual inspection fee for towing vessels subject to
[[Page 1383]]
subchapter M. This proposed rule would make the fees specific to each
inspection type as shown below in table 4. Similar to subchapter I
vessels, subchapter M vessels have already chosen their inspection
option and are unlikely to change for the same reasons.
Table 4--Current and Proposed Subchapter M Towing Vessel User Fees
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection type Current fee Proposed fee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coast Guard option...................... $1,030 $2,184
TSMS option............................. .............. 973
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(4) Define the following new terms that will be added to the table
of fees in Sec. 2.10-101: Annual vessel inspection fee, Alternative
Compliance Program option, Coast Guard option, Streamlined Inspection
Program option, Towing Safety Management System option, and Towing
Vessel. This is an administrative change and has no economic impact.
All of these points are described in greater detail in the Cost Study.
To obtain the affected population for this proposed rule, we used
the MISLE (Marine Information for Safety and Law Enforcement) database.
MISLE is the Coast Guard's vessel and marine activity database which
contains the best and most readily available vessel population data.
According to MISLE data as of June 2021, the total affected population
of this rule is 5,385 inspected towing vessels. There are approximately
5,343 towing vessels that will require inspection under 46 CFR
subchapter M and 42 towing vessels that are inspected under 46 CFR
subchapter I. Though the subchapter M population is decreasing by an
average of 33 vessels per year since 2016, the subchapter I population
is expected to remain stable, because it historically has done so.
Rather than a single fee category for all towing vessels covered by
a subchapter, the Coast Guard is proposing two categories for
subchapter M and three categories for subchapter I vessels. For
subchapter M, the inspection types are the Coast Guard option and the
TSMS option. For subchapter I, the inspection types are the Coast Guard
option, the ACP option, and the SIP option. Table 5 presents the total
population of inspected towing vessels that would be impacted by this
proposed rule. These are the current rates of inspection for the
subchapters, though not all vessels are currently inspected. Table 6
presents the projected subchapter M population and their projected
counts of inspection type. We assume that the subchapter M towing
vessel population will maintain a 70-percent-TSMS option and 30-
percent-Coast-Guard option split over the duration of the analysis.
Table 5--Total Affected Population for Inspected Towing Vessels
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User fee categories Population
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subchapter M Coast Guard Total
option TSMS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Population.......................... 1,603 3,740 5,343
% of Population..................... 30 70 100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subchapter I Coast Guard Total
option Vessel Inspection Alternative
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternate Streamlined
Compliance Inspection
Program Program
(ACP) (SIP)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Population.......................... 28 13 1 42
% of Population..................... 67 31 2 100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Population................ ................. ................. ................. 5,385
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6--Projected Subchapter M Population by Inspection Option
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated annual subchapter M population by inspection type
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year CG option TSMS option
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1.................................. 1,603 3,740
Year 2.................................. 1,592 3,718
Year 3.................................. 1,583 3,694
Year 4.................................. 1,574 3,670
Year 5.................................. 1,563 3,648
Year 6.................................. 1,554 3,624
Year 7.................................. 1,543 3,602
Year 8.................................. 1,534 3,578
Year 9.................................. 1,524 3,555
Year 10................................. 1,514 3,532
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 1384]]
Costs and Benefits
This proposed rule would not impose any new societal costs as all
of the inspection activities are currently being done by the regulated
entities and Coast Guard. Rather the impacts of this rule would be in
the form of transfer payments, which are monetary payments from one
group to another that do not affect total resources available to
society.
This rule would not provide any quantitative benefits. However, it
would have a qualitative benefit. This rule would revise user fees to
more closely reflect the actual cost to the Coast Guard of providing
inspection services. The result would be a more fair distribution of
costs to inspected towing vessels by inspection type. Title 46 U.S.C.
2110 directs that the fee or charge be established in accordance with
31 U.S.C. 9701, which specifies that each charge be fair and based on:
The costs to the Government; the value of the service or thing to the
recipient, public policy, or interest served; and other relevant facts.
Consistent with these objectives, once a fee or charge is established,
section 2110 allows it to be adjusted to accommodate changes in the
cost of providing a specific service or thing of value. This rulemaking
aids the Coast Guard in compliance with those statutory requirements.
Transfer Payments
The Coast Guard proposes to adjust the user fees collected from the
current entities so that there are now five different fees based on the
towing vessel subchapter and program utilized for vessel certification.
The Coast Guard estimates this total is approximately 5,385 towing
vessels. Table 7 shows the current fee, the proposed fee, the change
and the percent change to the user fee. The annual costs of services
for each vessel class is the proposed user fee for that vessel class.
Table 7--Current Subchapter M and I User Fees and Proposed User Fee Adjustment Amounts
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incremental
Fee type/ user fee class Current fee Proposed fee fee adjustment Percent change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subchapter M: Coast Guard option................ $1,030 $2,184 $1,154 112
Subchapter M: TSMS.............................. 1,030 973 -57 -6
Subchapter I: Coast Guard option................ 2,915 2,747 -168 -6
Subchapter I: Alternative Compliance Program 2,915 1,850 -1,065 -37
option.........................................
Subchapter I: Streamlined Inspection Program 2,915 2,260 -655 -22
option.........................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Since there are no distinct categories for TSMS, SIP, or ACP in the current user fee table, all of
subchapter M vessels pay one fee and all of subchapter I vessels pay one fee. Totals may not sum due to
rounding.
In table 8, we show the total annual transfer payments from each
vessel class to the Government and the total for all vessels. For
example, Subchapter M vessels that choose the Coast Guard option would
pay $1,154 additional dollars per vessel in user fees to the Coast
Guard for their inspection services. Negative numbers represent a
decrease in user fees. Transfer payments are monetary payments from one
group to another that do not affect total resources. For this proposed
rulemaking, a user fee is a transfer payment from the vessel owner or
operator to the Government to offset the costs to the Coast Guard for
providing COI services. This is found by multiplying the vessel
population by the incremental fee change. Because the subchapter M
vessel population is projected to decrease, table 9 shows annual
transfer payments for this subchapter, totals are found by multiplying
the populations in table 6 by the appropriate fees.
Table 8--Annual Incremental Fee Amounts--FY 2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First year fee
Fee type/ user fee class Estimated Incremental transfer
population fee change payments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subchapter M: Coast Guard option................................ 1,603 $1,154 $1,849,862
Subchapter M: TSMS option....................................... 3,740 -57 -213,180
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal.................................................... 5,343 .............. 1,636,682
Subchapter I: Coast Guard option................................ 28 -168 -4,704
Subchapter I: ACP option........................................ 13 -1,065 -13,845
Subchapter I: SIP option........................................ 1 -655 -655
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal.................................................... 42 .............. -19,204
-----------------------------------------------
Annual Total............................................ .............. .............. 1,617,478
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 9--Subchapter M Annual Transfer Payments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subchapter M
Year CG option TSMS option total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1.......................................................... $1,849,862 ($213,180) $1,636,682
Year 2.......................................................... 1,837,168 (211,926) 1,625,242
Year 3.......................................................... 1,826,782 (210,558) 1,616,224
Year 4.......................................................... 1,816,396 (209,190) 1,607,206
Year 5.......................................................... 1,803,702 (207,936) 1,595,766
Year 6.......................................................... 1,793,316 (206,568) 1,586,748
[[Page 1385]]
Year 7.......................................................... 1,780,622 (205,314) 1,575,308
Year 8.......................................................... 1,770,236 (203,946) 1,566,290
Year 9.......................................................... 1,758,696 (202,635) 1,556,061
Year 10......................................................... 1,747,156 (201,324) 1,545,832
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With the reduction in fees to vessels under the subchapter I and
subchapter M TSMS options, the first year transfers from the government
to the towing vessel industry is $232,384. The Coast Guard expects to
have transfers from towing vessel operators for the COI services of
$1,636,682 in the first year to the Government. The sum of these
transfers is $1,617,478 in the first year. The 10-year transfers,
undiscounted, total $15,719,319. The discounted annualized figure, at 7
percent, is $1,577,491. Table 10 summarizes the total 10-year transfer
payments from the towing vessel industry to the Government.
Table 10--Discounted Transfer Payments From Towing Vessel Operators to the Government *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discounted
Year Undiscounted -------------------------------
7% 3%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................................... $1,617,478 $1,511,662 $1,570,367
2............................................................... 1,606,038 1,402,776 1,513,845
3............................................................... 1,597,020 1,303,644 1,461,500
4............................................................... 1,588,002 1,211,479 1,410,919
5............................................................... 1,576,562 1,124,067 1,359,956
6............................................................... 1,567,544 1,044,521 1,312,793
7............................................................... 1,556,104 969,063 1,265,255
8............................................................... 1,547,086 900,418 1,221,284
9............................................................... 1,536,857 835,948 1,177,873
10.............................................................. 1,526,628 776,060 1,135,955
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 15,719,319 11,079,638 13,429,747
-----------------------------------------------
Annualized...................................................... .............. 1,577,491 1,574,376
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.
Regulatory Alternatives
A discussion of regulatory alternatives is available in the section
VI.B(6) of this preamble.
B. Small Entities
In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) (RFA), the Coast Guard prepared this Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) that examines the impacts of the proposed
rule on small entities. Due to the anticipated impacts on small
businesses, the Coast Guard is including an analysis of the NPRM
requirements for informational purposes.
A small entity may be a small independent business, defined as
independently owned and operated, that is organized for profit and is
not dominant in its field per the Small Business Act (5 U.S.C. 632). A
small entity can also be a small not-for-profit organization (any not-
for-profit enterprise that is independently owned and operated and is
not dominant in its field) or a small governmental jurisdiction (a
locality with fewer than 50,000 people) per the RFA. An IRFA addresses
the following:
(1) A description of the reasons why action by the agency is being
considered;
(2) A succinct statement of the objectives of, and legal basis for,
the rule;
(3) A description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number
of small entities to which the rule will apply;
(4) A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping and
other compliance requirements of the rule, including an estimate of the
classes of small entities that will be subject to the requirement and
the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report
or record;
(5) An identification, to the extent practicable, of all relevant
Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap or conflict with the rule;
and
(6) A description of any significant alternatives to the rule that
accomplish the stated objectives of applicable statutes and that
minimize any significant economic impact of the rule on small
entities.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ 5 U.S.C. 603.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below is a discussion of the IRFA analysis for each of these six
elements.
1. A description of the reasons why action by the agency is being
considered.
The Coast Guard is considering updating the user fees for inspected
towing vessels because after reviewing the costs to the Government of
inspections under the Coast Guard option or options using a third
party, the Coast Guard has determined that updates are necessary to
ensure that fees for all options are fair and based on costs to the
Government. User fees for subchapter I inspected towing vessels have
not been updated since 1995. The proposed changes are also consistent
with the Coast Guard's statement in the 2016 final rule, Inspection of
Towing Vessels, that we planned to promulgate a separate rulemaking for
annual inspection fees for towing vessels that would reflect the
specific program costs associated with the two subchapter M options--
the TSMS option and the Coast Guard inspection option.
The purpose of this proposed rule is to redistribute the burden of
inspection
[[Page 1386]]
activities from the Coast Guard to the towing vessel industry.
2. A succinct statement of the objective of, and legal basis for,
the rule.
This proposed regulatory action is necessary to adjust the user fee
schedule to better reflect the cost of COI services to the government,
for subchapters I and M towing vessels. The Coast Guard is issuing this
proposed rule based on authority in 46 U.S.C. 2110, which has been
delegated to the Commandant under DHS Delegation No. 0170.1(II)(92).
Title 46 U.S.C. 2110 directs the Coast Guard to establish a fee, or
charge, for a service or thing of value it provides in accordance with
31 U.S.C. 9701. Inspections and related services described in Subtitle
II of Title 46 United States Code are considered a service of value
provided by the Coast Guard. Section 31 U.S.C. 9701 specifies that each
fee or charge be fair and based on the costs to the government, the
value of the service to the recipient, public policy or interest
served, and other relevant facts. Once a fee or charge is established,
46 U.S.C. 2110 allows it to be adjusted to accommodate changes in the
cost of providing a specific service or thing of value.
In addition, section 815 of CGAA directs the Coast Guard to review
and revise the fee for inspections if necessary to comply with 31
U.S.C. 9701. The Coast Guard interprets ``costs to the Government'' in
section 815(a) to mean the cost to the Coast Guard of providing
inspection and related services to determine whether a vessel meets
requirements necessary for it to maintain its COI.
3. A description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number
of small entities to which the rule will apply.
The proposed rule would affect the owners and operators of certain
towing vessels under subchapters I and M. We constructed this towing
vessel population from the Coast Guard's MISLE system. From this
database, we identified 5,385 vessels affected by this proposed rule--
5,343 subchapter M towing vessels and 42 subchapter I towing vessels.
There are 1,236 unique companies that own or operate these vessels.
Five companies own vessels under both subchapters I and M.
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.\21\ We found vessels owned by 21 government entities and 4
non-profit entities. The remaining 1,211 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 evaluated whether the nonprofit was independently owned
and operated and was not dominant in its field.\22\ For the business
entities, we matched their information with the latest Small Business
Administration (SBA) Table of Small Business Size Standards to
determine if a business entity is small in its primary line of business
as classified in the North American Industry Classification System
(NAICS).\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ https://www.cortera.com/ and https://www.manta.com/.
\22\ https://www.guidestar.org.
\23\ https://www.sba.gov/document/support--table-size-standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We broke the population down into subchapters I and M. For
subchapter M, we randomly selected a sample size from the 1,222 unique
towing vessel companies to reach the 95 percent confidence level. Using
Cochran's Formula, Coast Guard chose a statistically valid random
sample of 385 businesses that own and operate towing vessels.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ A statistically valid random sample size of 292 businesses
would be required to achieve a 95-percent confidence level out of
the 1,222 unique towing vessel companies. In this analysis, Coast
Guard oversampled to analyze 385 businesses to ensure enough data
and information was available on the businesses to meet the sampling
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are a total of 97 NAICS-coded industries in this proposed
rule's sample affected population. Table 11 displays the 10 industries
that appear most frequently in the affected population of owners or
operators of towing vessels in subchapters I and M.
Table 11--Most Common NAICS Codes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Count of
towing vessel Percent of
NAICS code Description Small entity definition owners or total *
operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
488330................. Navigational Services to <$41,500,000................. 40 10
Shipping.
713930................. Marinas................. <$8,000,000.................. 34 9
237990................. Other Heavy and Civil <$39,500,000................. 31 8
Engineering
Construction.
238910................. Site Preparation <$16,500,000................. 31 8
Contractors.
441222................. Boat Dealers............ <$35,000,000................. 28 7
483211................. Inland Water Freight <750 Employees............... 23 6
Transportation.
488320................. Marine Cargo Handling... <$41,500,000................. 12 3
336611................. Ship Building and <1,250 Employees............. 10 3
Repairing.
488210................. Support Activities for <$16,500,000................. 5 1
Rail Transportation.
483212................. Inland Water Passenger <500 Employees............... 5 1
Transportation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Note: Total does not sum to 100 percent, since these percentages reflect only the top 10 most common NAICS
codes of the sample. The remaining 44 percent of NAICS codes were not within the 10 most commonly occurring.
Coast Guard chose a subchapter M sample of 385 businesses that own
and operate the towing vessels. Of the 385 businesses, 37 exceeded the
SBA small business size standards, 265 companies were considered to be
small businesses by the SBA size standards, and 83 companies had no
information available. Consistent with DHS practice, entities with no
information available will be considered as small entities. Thus, there
are 348 businesses in our sample that we consider to be small entities.
Based on our random sample, 90.4 percent of subchapter M entities are
considered small and therefore when applied to the population of unique
towing vessel companies, 1,105 subchapter M entities would be
considered small.
For subchapter I, we searched all 14 unique towing vessel companies
in the available databases. Of the 14 unique towing vessel companies in
the
[[Page 1387]]
subchapter I population, 13 had available revenue and employee data. Of
these 13 unique towing vessel companies, 6 exceeded the SBA small
business size standards and 7 were considered small businesses by the
SBA size standards. Consistent with DHS practice, we consider entities
for which information was not available to be small. Thus, there are
eight businesses in our population that we consider to be small
entities.
For this analysis, we considered the annual weighted average
transfer from industry to the Coast Guard by subchapter. For subchapter
M vessels, we found the average fleet size for small entities is two
vessels and multiplied it by the weighted average of incremental
changes in user fees. According to our analysis of small subchapter M
vessels, 97 percent of them choose the Coast Guard option for their
inspection option and 3 percent choose the TSMS option. Thus, we
multiplied the rates for vessels choosing their inspection option by
the incremental change in user fees and the average fleet size for
small subchapter M entities, which yielded an average impact of $1,117
per subchapter M vessel and $2,234 per small subchapter M entity. We
repeated this process for subchapter I entities. We found the average
fleet size for small entities, which is 1, and multiplied it by the
weighted average of incremental changes in user fees. According to our
analysis of small subchapter I vessels, 50 percent of them choose the
ACP option for their inspection option, 37.5 percent choose the Coast
Guard option, and the remaining 12.5 percent choose the SIP option.
This proposed rule would save subchapter I entities an average of $799.
Tables 12 and 13 show the impact on small company revenue for each
subchapter that we had revenue data for.
Table 12--Subchapter M Estimated Annual Revenue Impact
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Percent of
Revenue impact range entities entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0% <= 1%................................ 233 87.9
1% <= 3%................................ 27 10.2
3% <= 5%................................ 3 1.1
Above 5%................................ 2 0.8
-------------------------------
Total............................... 265 100
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 13--Subchapter I Estimated Annual Revenue Impact
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Percent of
Revenue impact range entities entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0% <= 1%................................ 7 100
1% <= 3%................................ 0 0
3% <= 5%................................ 0 0
5% <= 10%............................... 0 0
Above 10%............................... 0 0
-------------------------------
Total............................... 7 100
------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to our analysis, 87.9 percent of subchapter M entities
will have an annual impact to revenue of 1 percent or less.
Approximately, 10.2 percent will have an annual impact to revenue
between 1 and 3 percent. The remaining 1.9 percent will have an annual
impact to revenue greater than 3 percent. For subchapter I entities,
our analysis shows a less than 1 percent impact to annual revenue for
all small entities.
4. 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 requirements and
the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report
or record.
This proposed rule calls for no new reporting, recordkeeping or
other compliance requirements.
5. An identification, to the extent practicable, of all relevant
Federal rules which may duplicate, overlap or conflict with the rule.
There are no relevant Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with this proposed rule.
6. A description of any significant alternatives to the rule which
accomplish the stated objectives of applicable statutes and which
minimize any significant economic impact of the rule on small entities.
Alternatives considered include adjusting our current user fees for
inflation, updating only the Coast Guard option user fees or continuing
with the current user fees. Each of these options will be considered in
the following discussion.
Under the first alternative, Coast Guard considered to adjust the
current user fees for inflation from 1995 dollars to 2020 dollars. To
adjust for inflation, we use an inflation factor from the annual GDP
deflator data. We calculate the inflation factor of 1.58 by dividing
the annual 2020 index number (113.623) by the annual 1995 index number
(71.864). We then multiply the current fees for subchapters I and M by
the inflation factor and round it to the nearest dollar. Subchapters I
and M would experience a 58-percent increase in fees and incur annual
fees of $597 and $1,691, respectively. The fees, when multiplied by the
number of annual COI renewals, yield an annual revenue of approximately
$8.9 million and transfer payments of $3.2 million. We rejected this
alternative because the annual revenue collected under this methodology
does not reflect the full cost to the Coast Guard of providing the COI-
related services. Table 14 shows the inflation adjusted user fees for
subchapter I and M vessels.
[[Page 1388]]
Table 14--Comparison of User Fees in 1995 Dollars and 2020 Dollars
[Alternative 1] *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual fee Annual revenue
Fee category 1995 $ Inflation 2020 $ Population Incremental transfer collected from
(current fee) factor fee adjustment payments user fees
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subchapter I vessels.................... $2,915 1.58 $4,606 42 $1,691 $71,009 $193,439
Subchapter M vessels.................... 1,030 1.58 1,627 5,343 597 3,191,908 8,695,198
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................... .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. 3,262,918 8,888,638
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Note: All dollar figures rounded to the closest whole dollar.
In our second alternative, we considered updating only the Coast
Guard option user fees. We rejected this alternative because it would
not comply with section 815 of CGAA. That section directs the Coast
Guard to review and, based on our findings, revise the fee for towing
vessel inspections. First, the Coast Guard must compare the costs to
the Government of towing vessel inspections performed by the Coast
Guard and towing vessel inspections performed by a third party, to
determine if they are different. We have conducted that comparison and
determined that there is a difference in costs to the Government
between the inspection options for towing vessels that involve a third
party and those that do not. If there is a difference in costs, section
815 of CGAA directs us to revise the fees we assess for towing vessel
inspections to conform to 31 U.S.C. 9701, and to base the fee on the
cost to the Government.
In our third alternative, we considered maintaining the current
user fee without an adjustment. We rejected this alternative because
the annual revenue collected under this methodology would not cover the
full cost to the Coast Guard of providing the COI-related services.
Conclusion
In conclusion, we estimate that 87.9 percent of subchapter M
entities with revenue data will have an annual impact to revenue of 1
percent or less. Approximately, 10.2 percent will have an annual impact
to revenue between 1 and 3 percent. The remaining 1.9 percent will have
an annual impact to revenue greater than 3 percent. For subchapter I
entities, our analysis shows a less than 1 percent impact to annual
revenue for all small entities that had revenue data. We also discussed
several regulatory alternatives including our preferred alternative.
Our preferred alternative is to: (1) Update the user fee for seagoing
towing vessels; (2) revise the user fee for other inspected towing
vessels; and (3) establish fees for towing vessels using the ACP, SIP,
or the TSMS options. Vessels using the ACP, SIP or TSMS option would
pay a lower fee than vessels that use the traditional Coast Guard
inspection option.
We are interested in the potential impacts from this rule on small
entities and we request public comment on these potential impacts. If
you think that this rule will have a significant economic impact on
you, your business, or your organization, please submit a comment to
the docket at the address under ADDRESSES in the rule. In your comment,
explain why, how, and to what degree you think this rule will have an
economic impact on you.
C. Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104-121, we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its
provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule. The
Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or
complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast
Guard.
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247).
D. Collection of Information
This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.
The Coast Guard has a collection of information for the collection
of user fees from inspected vessels. This collection is 1625-0074
titled ``Direct User Fees for Inspection or Examination of U.S. and
Foreign Commercial Vessels.'' The collection of information hour burden
for collecting user fees is independent of the amount collected. Towing
vessels inspected under 46 CFR subchapters I and M must currently pay
$1,030 and $2,915 respectively. This proposed rulemaking would simply
adjust the user fee amount to more accurately reflect the current cost
of the Coast Guard for performing inspections--and would not change the
number of towing vessels that must pay a user fee or the time it takes
to pay the user fee.
E. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism) if it has a substantial direct effect on 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 proposed rule under Executive Order
13132 and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental
federalism principles and preemption requirements described in
Executive Order 13132. Our analysis follows.
This NPRM proposes to establish and revise user fees for services
provided by the Coast Guard pursuant to the Congressional mandate
contained in 46 U.S.C. 2110. Congress has not granted the authority to
the States to establish user fees for Coast Guard-provided services.
This NPRM would not impact a State's general ability to render services
or assess or collect fees for State-rendered services. Therefore, this
[[Page 1389]]
rule does not have federalism implications as described in Executive
Order 13132.
While it is well settled that States may not regulate in categories
in which Congress intended the Coast Guard to be the sole source of a
vessel's obligations, the Coast Guard recognizes the key role that
State and local governments may have in making regulatory
determinations. Additionally, for rules with federalism implications
and preemptive effect, Executive Order 13132 specifically directs
agencies to consult with State and local governments during the
rulemaking process. If you believe this proposed rule would have
implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, please contact
the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble.
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 million (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Although this proposed rule would
not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this
proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble.
G. Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not cause a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630
(Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights).
H. Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform) to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
I. Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045
(Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks). This proposed rule is not an economically significant rule and
would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that
might disproportionately affect children.
J. Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments), because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
K. Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211
(Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use). We have determined that it is not a
``significant energy action'' under Executive Order 13211, because
although it is a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 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
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 (for example,
specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test
methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices)
that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies.
This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
M. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination 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 preliminary Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket.
For instructions on locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of
this preamble. This proposed rule would be categorically excluded under
paragraphs L54 and L57 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual
023-01, Rev. 1.\25\ Paragraph L54 pertains to regulations which are
editorial or procedural. Paragraph L57 pertains to regulations
concerning manning, documentation, admeasurement, inspection, and
equipping of vessels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/DHS_Instruction%20Manual%20023-01-001-01%20Rev%2001_508%20Admin%20Rev.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposed rule would update the existing user fee for seagoing
towing vessels that are 300 gross tons or more and establish specific
user fees for other towing vessels that have more recently become
subject to inspection. We seek any comments or information that may
lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this
proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 46 CFR Part 2
Marine safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 46 CFR part 2 as follows:
PART 2--VESSEL INSPECTIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 2 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 622, Pub. L. 111-281; 33 U.S.C. 1903; 43 U.S.C.
1333; 46 U.S.C. 2103, 2110, 3306, 3316, 3703, 70034; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1(II)(77), (90), (92)(a),
(92)(b); E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277, sec. 1-
105.
0
2. Amend Sec. 2.10-25 by:
0
a. Revising the definition of ``Sea-going towing vessel''; and
0
b. Adding the definitions in alphabetical order for ``Alternative
Compliance Program option'', ``Annual vessel inspection fee'', ``Coast
Guard option'', ``Streamlined Inspection Program option'', ``Towing
Safety Management System option'', and ``Towing vessel''.
The additions and revision read as follows:
Sec. 2.10-25 Definitions.
* * * * *
Alternative Compliance Program option means the option described in
46 CFR part 8, subpart D.
[[Page 1390]]
Annual vessel inspection fee means the fee charged for inspection
and related services provided by the Coast Guard to determine whether a
vessel meets the requirements to maintain its Certificate of
Inspection.
Coast Guard option means an option used by--
(1) A vessel inspected under a 46 CFR subchapter that is not
participating in the Alternative Compliance Program described in 46 CFR
part 8, subpart D;
(2) A vessel inspected under a 46 CFR subchapter that is not
participating in the Streamlined Inspection Program described in 46 CFR
part 8, subpart E; or
(3) A vessel inspected under 46 CFR subchapter M that is not
participating in the Towing Safety Management System option described
in 46 CFR part 138.
* * * * *
Seagoing towing vessel means a commercial vessel 300 gross tons or
more engaged in or intending to engage in the service of pulling,
pushing or hauling alongside, or any combination of pulling, pushing or
hauling alongside, and that makes voyages beyond the Boundary Line as
defined by 46 U.S.C. 103, and has been issued a Certificate of
Inspection under the provisions of subchapter I of this chapter.
* * * * *
Streamlined Inspection Program option means the option described in
46 CFR part 8, subpart E.
* * * * *
Towing Safety Management System option means the option described
in 46 CFR part 138 for towing vessels subject to 46 CFR subchapter M.
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.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 2.10-101, in Table 2.10-101, by:
0
a. Revising the ``Sea-going Towing Vessels'' entry; and
0
b. Adding an entry for ``Towing Vessels (Inspected under 46 CFR
Subchapter M)''.
The addition and revision read as follows:
Sec. 2.10-101 Annual vessel inspection fee.
* * * * *
Table 2.10-101--Annual Vessel Inspection Fees for U.S. and Foreign
Vessels Requiring a Certificate of Inspection
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Seagoing Towing Vessels (Inspected under 46 CFR
Subchapter I):
Coast Guard option.................................. $2,747
Alternative Compliance Program option............... 1,850
Streamlined Inspection Program option............... 2,260
* * * * * * *
Towing Vessels (Inspected under 46 CFR Subchapter M):
Coast Guard option.................................. 2,184
Towing Safety Management System option.............. 973
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Dated: December 23, 2021.
Karl L. Schultz,
Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commandant.
[FR Doc. 2022-00200 Filed 1-10-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
