Great Lakes Pilotage Rates-2023 Annual Review and Revisions to Methodology, 52870-52900 [2022-18690]
Download as PDF
52870
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
C. New Tolerances for Inerts
PP 1E8945. EPA–HQ–OPP–2021–
0853. Corteva Agriscience, 9330
Zionsville Rd., Indianapolis, IN 46268,
requests to establish a tolerance in 40
CFR part 180 for residues of the
insecticide, sulfoxaflor, in or on the raw
agricultural commodity coffee, green
bean at 0.3 ppm and coffee, instant at
0.5. The liquid chromatography/mass
spectroscopy/mass spectroscopy (LC/
MS/MS analysis) is used to measure and
evaluate the chemical sulfoxaflor, 1-(6trifluoromethylpyridin-3-yl) ethyl
(methyl)-oxido-l4-sulfanyli
denecyanamide. Contact: RD.
detection, is available for enforcement
purposes is used to measure and
evaluate the chemical Oxathiapiprolin.
Contact: RD.
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a.
Dated: August 25, 2022.
Brian Bordelon,
Acting Director, Information Technology and
Resources Management Division, Office of
Program Support.
[FR Doc. 2022–18675 Filed 8–29–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
D. New Tolerances for Non-Inerts
1. PP 1E8933. EPA–HQ–OPP–2022–
0671. Bayer CropScience, 800 N
Lindbergh Blvd., St. Louis, MO 63141,
requests to establish a tolerance in 40
CFR part 180 for residues of the
insecticide deltamethrin, in or on pea
and bean, dried shelled, except soybean
(crop group 6c) at 0.07 ppm. The gas
chromatography equipped with an
electron capture detector (GC/ECD) is
used to measure and evaluate the
chemical deltamethrin. Contact: RD.
2. PP 1F8971. EPA–HQ–OPP–2022–
0493. Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC.,
P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419–
8300, requests to establish a tolerance in
40 CFR part 180 for inadvertent residues
of the fungicide, mefenoxam in or on
sugarcane at 0.1 ppm. The analytical
method Syngenta Crop Protection
Analytical Method ‘‘Link K (2016)
Metalaxyl—Analytical Method
GRM075.01A for the Determination of
Residues of Metalaxyl on Structurally
Related Metabolites as Common Moiety
2,6-Dimethylaniline (CGA72649) in
Crops’’ is used to measure and evaluate
the chemical mefenoxam. Contact: RD.
3. PP 1F8977. EPA–HQ–OPP–2022–
0575. ADAMA AGAN c/o Makhteshim
Agan of North America, Inc. (d/b/a
ADAMA), 3120 Highwoods Blvd., Suite
100, Raleigh, NC 27604, requests to
establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180
for residues of the herbicide metamitron
in or on pome fruit (crop group 11–10)
at 0.01 ppm. The HPLC employing
tandem mass spectrometric (MS/MS)
detection (LC–MS/MS) is used to
measure and evaluate the chemical
metamitron. Contact: RD.
4. PP F8997. EPA–HQ–OPP–2022–
0597. Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC,
P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419
requests to establish a tolerance in 40
CFR part 180 for residues of the
fungicide, Oxathiapiprolin, in or on
peanut hay at 0.15 ppm. The adequate
analytical methodology, high-pressure
liquid chromatography with MS/MS
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
Coast Guard
46 CFR Part 401
[Docket No. USCG–2022–0370]
RIN 1625–AC82
Great Lakes Pilotage Rates—2023
Annual Review and Revisions to
Methodology
Coast Guard, Department of
Homeland Security (DHS).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
statutory provisions enacted by the
Great Lakes Pilotage Act of 1960, the
Coast Guard is proposing new base
pilotage rates for the 2023 shipping
season. The Coast Guard estimates that
this proposed rule would result in an
approximately 14-percent increase in
operating costs compared to the 2022
season. Additionally, in accordance
with the requirement to conduct a full
ratemaking every 5 years, the Coast
Guard is accepting comments on the
Great Lakes pilotage ratemaking
methodology. We are also accepting
suggestions for changes to the staffing
model, for consideration in a future
ratemaking.
SUMMARY:
Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before September 29, 2022.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2022–0370 using the Federal Decision
Making 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.
DATES:
For
information about this document, call or
email Mr. Brian Rogers, Commandant,
Office of Waterways and Ocean Policy—
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Great Lakes Pilotage Division (CG–
WWM–2), Coast Guard; telephone 202–
372–1535, email Brian.Rogers@uscg.mil,
or fax 202–372–1914.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents for Preamble
I. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
II. Abbreviations
III. Executive Summary
IV. Basis and Purpose
V. Background
VI. Summary of the Ratemaking Methodology
VII. Discussion of Proposed Methodological
and Other Changes
VIII. Individual Target Pilot Compensation
Benchmark
IX. Discussion of Proposed Rate Adjustments
District One
A. Step 1: Recognize Previous Operating
Expenses
B. Step 2: Project Operating Expenses,
Adjusting for Inflation or Deflation
C. Step 3: Estimate Number of Registered
Pilots and Apprentice Pilots
D. Step 4: Determine Target Pilot
Compensation Benchmark and
Apprentice Pilot Wage Benchmark
E. Step 5: Project Working Capital Fund
F. Step 6: Project Needed Revenue
G. Step 7: Calculate Initial Base Rates
H. Step 8: Calculate Average Weighting
Factors by Area
I. Step 9: Calculate Revised Base Rates
J. Step 10: Review and Finalize Rates
District Two
A. Step 1: Recognize Previous Operating
Expenses
B. Step 2: Project Operating Expenses,
Adjusting for Inflation or Deflation
C. Step 3: Estimate Number of Registered
Pilots and Apprentice Pilots
D. Step 4: Determine Target Pilot
Compensation Benchmark and
Apprentice Pilot Wage Benchmark
E. Step 5: Project Working Capital Fund
F. Step 6: Project Needed Revenue
G. Step 7: Calculate Initial Base Rates
H. Step 8: Calculate Average Weighting
Factors by Area
I. Step 9: Calculate Revised Base Rates
J. Step 10: Review and Finalize Rates
District Three
A. Step 1: Recognize Previous Operating
Expenses
B. Step 2: Project Operating Expenses,
Adjusting for Inflation or Deflation
C. Step 3: Estimate Number of Registered
Pilots and Apprentice Pilots
D. Step 4: Determine Target Pilot
Compensation Benchmark and
Apprentice Pilot Wage Benchmark
E. Step 5: Project Working Capital Fund
F. Step 6: Project Needed Revenue
G. Step 7: Calculate Initial Base Rates
H. Step 8: Calculate Average Weighting
Factors by Area
I. Step 9: Calculate Revised Base Rates
J. Step 10: Review and Finalize Rates
X. Regulatory Analyses
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Small Entities
C. Assistance for Small Entities
D. Collection of Information
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
E. Federalism
F. Unfunded Mandates
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
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
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.
Submitting comments. We encourage
you to submit comments through the
Federal Decision Making Portal at
https://www.regulations.gov. To do so,
go to https://www.regulations.gov, type
USCG–1625–AC82 in the search box
and click ‘‘Search.’’ Next, look for this
document in the Search Results column,
and click on it. Then click on the
Comment option. If you cannot submit
your material by using https://
www.regulations.gov, call or email the
person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this proposed rule
for alternate instructions.
Viewing material in docket. To view
documents mentioned in this proposed
rule as being available in the docket,
find the docket as described in the
previous paragraph, and then select
‘‘Supporting & Related Material’’ in the
Document Type column. Public
comments will also be placed in our
online docket and can be viewed by
following instructions on the https://
www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked
Questions web page. We review all
comments received, but we will only
post comments that address the topic of
the proposed rule. We may choose not
to post off-topic, inappropriate, or
duplicate comments that we receive.
Personal information. We accept
anonymous comments. Comments we
post to https://www.regulations.gov will
include any personal information you
have provided. For more about privacy
and submissions to the docket in
response to this document, see the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
Department of Homeland Security’s
eRulemaking System of Records notice
(85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).
Public meeting. We do not plan to
hold a public meeting, but we will
consider doing so if we determine from
public comments that a meeting would
be helpful. We would issue a separate
Federal Register notification to
announce the date, time, and location of
such a meeting.
II. Abbreviations
AMOU American Maritime Officers Union
APA American Pilots’ Association
BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CPA Certified public accountant
CPI Consumer Price Index
DHS Department of Homeland Security
Director U.S. Coast Guard’s Director of the
Great Lakes Pilotage
ECI Employment Cost Index
FOMC Federal Open Market Committee
FR Federal Register
GLPA Great Lakes Pilotage Authority
(Canadian)
GLPAC Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory
Committee
GLPMS Great Lakes Pilotage Management
System
LPA Lakes Pilots Association
NAICS North American Industry
Classification System
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PCE Personal Consumption Expenditures
§ Section
SBA Small Business Administration
SLSPA Saint Lawrence Seaway Pilotage
Association
U.S.C. United States Code
WGLPA Western Great Lakes Pilots
Association
III. Executive Summary
In accordance with Title 46 of the
United States Code (U.S.C.), Chapter
93,1 the Coast Guard regulates pilotage
for oceangoing vessels on the Great
Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway —
including setting the rates for pilotage
services and adjusting them on an
annual basis for the upcoming shipping
season. The shipping season begins
when the locks open in the St. Lawrence
Seaway, which allows traffic access to
and from the Atlantic Ocean. The
opening of the locks varies annually,
depending on waterway conditions, but
is generally in March or April. The
rates, which for the 2023 season range
from a proposed $407 to $867 per pilot
hour (depending on which of the
1 46
PO 00000
U.S.C. 9301–9308.
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
52871
specific six areas pilotage service is
provided), are paid by shippers to the
pilot associations. The three pilot
associations, which are the exclusive
U.S. source of registered pilots on the
Great Lakes, use this revenue to cover
operating expenses, maintain
infrastructure, compensate apprentice
and registered pilots, acquire and
implement technological advances, train
new personnel, and allow partners to
participate in professional development.
In accordance with statutory and
regulatory requirements, we have
employed the ratemaking methodology
we introduced in 2016. Our ratemaking
methodology calculates the revenue
needed for each pilotage association
(operating expenses, compensation for
the number of pilots, and anticipated
inflation), and then divides that amount
by the expected demand for pilotage
services over the course of the coming
year, to produce an hourly rate. This is
a 10-step methodology to calculate rates.
The 10-step methodology is explained
in section VI of this preamble.
In this notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM), we are proposing a full
ratemaking, setting new pilotage rates
for 2023 based on the 10-step
ratemaking methodology, and accepting
comments on the methodology. We
conducted the last full ratemaking 5
years ago, in 2018. Per title 46 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR),
§ 404.100(a), in this NPRM, the Coast
Guard’s Director of the Great Lakes
Pilotage (‘‘the Director’’) proposes to
establish base pilotage rates by a full
ratemaking pursuant to §§ 404.101
through 404.110. Base rates would be
set to meet the goals of promoting safe,
efficient, and reliable pilotage service on
the Great Lakes, by generating sufficient
revenue for each pilotage association to
reimburse its necessary and reasonable
operating expenses, fairly compensate
trained and rested pilots, and provide
appropriate funds to use for
improvements. We use a 10-year average
when calculating traffic to smooth out
variations in traffic caused by global
economic conditions, such as those
caused by the COVID–19 pandemic. The
Coast Guard estimates that this
proposed rule would result in
$4,535,400 in additional costs.
Based on the ratemaking model
discussed in this NPRM, we are
proposing the rates shown in table 1.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
52872
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—CURRENT AND PROPOSED PILOTAGE RATES ON THE GREAT LAKES
Area
District
District
District
District
District
District
One: Designated ...............................
One: Undesignated ...........................
Two: Designated ...............................
Two: Undesignated ...........................
Three: Designated ............................
Three: Undesignated ........................
This proposed rule would affect 55
U.S. Great Lakes pilots, 7 apprentice
pilots, 3 pilot associations, and the
owners and operators of an average of
285 oceangoing vessels that transit the
Great Lakes annually. This proposed
rule is not economically significant
under Executive Order 12866 and
would not affect the Coast Guard’s
budget or increase Federal spending.
The estimated overall annual regulatory
economic impact of this rate change
would be a net increase of $4,535,400 in
estimated payments made by shippers
during the 2023 shipping season. This
NPRM establishes the 2023 yearly
compensation for pilots on the Great
Lakes at $422,336 per pilot (a $23,070
increase, or 5.78 percent, over their
2022 compensation). Because the Coast
Guard must review, and, if necessary,
adjust rates each year, we analyze these
as single-year costs and do not
annualize them over 10 years. Section X
of this preamble provides the regulatory
impact analyses of this proposed rule.
IV. Basis and Purpose
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
The legal basis of this rulemaking is
46 U.S.C. Chapter 93,2 which requires
foreign merchant vessels and United
States vessels operating ‘‘on register’’
(meaning United States vessels engaged
in foreign trade) to use United States or
Canadian pilots while transiting the
United States waters of the St. Lawrence
Seaway and the Great Lakes system.3
For U.S. Great Lakes pilots, the statute
requires the Secretary of Homeland
Security to ‘‘prescribe by regulation
rates and charges for pilotage services,
giving consideration to the public
interest and the costs of providing the
services.’’ 4 The statute requires that
rates be established or reviewed and
2 46
U.S.C. 9301–9308.
U.S.C. 9302(a)(1).
4 46 U.S.C. 9303(f).
5 Id.
6 Id.
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
St. Lawrence River ...................................................................
Lake Ontario .............................................................................
Navigable waters from Southeast Shoal to Port Huron, MI ....
Lake Erie ..................................................................................
St. Mary’s River ........................................................................
Lakes Huron, Michigan, and Superior .....................................
adjusted each year, not later than March
1.5 The statute also requires that base
rates be established by a full ratemaking
at least once every 5 years, and, in years
when base rates are not established,
they must be reviewed and, if necessary,
adjusted.6 The Secretary’s duties and
authority under 46 U.S.C. Chapter 93
have been delegated to the Coast
Guard.7
The purpose of this rule is to issue
new pilotage rates for the 2023 shipping
season. The Coast Guard believes that
the new rates will continue to promote
our goal, as outlined in 46 CFR 404.1,
of promoting safe, efficient, and reliable
pilotage service in the Great Lakes by
generating for each pilotage association
sufficient revenue to reimburse its
necessary and reasonable operating
expenses, fairly compensate trained and
rested pilots, and provide appropriate
funds to use for improvements.
V. Background
Pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 9303, the Coast
Guard, in conjunction with the
Canadian Great Lakes Pilotage Authority
(GLPA), regulates shipping practices
and rates on the Great Lakes. Under
Coast Guard regulations, all vessels
engaged in foreign trade (often referred
to as ‘‘salties’’) are required to engage
United States or Canadian pilots during
their transit through the regulated
waters.8 United States and Canadian
‘‘lakers,’’ which account for most
commercial shipping on the Great
Lakes, are not affected.9 Generally,
vessels are assigned a United States or
Canadian pilot depending on the order
in which they transit a particular area of
the Great Lakes, and do not choose the
pilot they receive. If a vessel is assigned
a U.S. pilot, that pilot will be assigned
by the pilotage association responsible
7 Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Delegation 00170.1, Revision No. 01.2, paragraph
(II)(92)(f).
8 See 46 CFR part 401.
9 46 U.S.C. 9302(f). A ‘‘laker’’ is a commercial
cargo vessel especially designed for and generally
limited to use on the Great Lakes.
3 46
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Final 2022
pilotage rate
Name
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
$834
568
536
610
662
342
Proposed 2023
pilotage rate
$867
581
606
652
818
407
for the particular district in which the
vessel is operating, and the vessel
operator will pay the pilotage
association for the pilotage services. The
GLPA establishes the rates for Canadian
registered pilots.
The U.S. waters of the Great Lakes
and the St. Lawrence Seaway are
divided into three pilotage districts.
Pilotage in each district is provided by
an association certified by the Director
to operate a pilotage pool. The Saint
Lawrence Seaway Pilotage Association
(SLSPA) provides pilotage services in
District One, which includes all U.S.
waters of the St. Lawrence River and
Lake Ontario. The Lakes Pilots
Association (LPA) provides pilotage
services in District Two, which includes
all U.S. waters of Lake Erie, the Detroit
River, Lake St. Clair, and the St. Clair
River. Finally, the Western Great Lakes
Pilots Association (WGLPA) provides
pilotage services in District Three,
which includes all U.S. waters of the St.
Marys River; Sault Ste. Marie Locks; and
Lakes Huron, Michigan, and Superior.
Each pilotage district is further
divided into ‘‘designated’’ and
‘‘undesignated’’ areas, depicted in table
2 below. Designated areas, classified as
such by Presidential Proclamation, are
waters in which pilots must direct the
navigation of vessels at all times.10
Undesignated areas, on the other hand,
are open bodies of water not subject to
the same pilotage requirements. While
working in undesignated areas, pilots
must ‘‘be on board and available to
direct the navigation of the vessel at the
discretion of and subject to the
customary authority of the master.’’ 11
For these reasons, pilotage rates in
designated areas can be significantly
higher than those in undesignated areas.
10 Presidential Proclamation 3385, Designation of
restricted waters under the Great Lakes Pilotage Act
of 1960, December 22, 1960.
11 46 U.S.C. 9302(a)(1)(b).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
52873
TABLE 2—AREAS OF THE GREAT LAKES AND ST. LAWRENCE SEAWAY
Area name 13
Pilotage association
Designation
One .............................................
Saint Lawrence Seaway Pilotage
Association.
Lakes Pilots Association .............
Designated .......
Undesignated ...
Designated .......
1
2
5
Western Great Lakes Pilots Association.
Undesignated ...
Designated .......
Undesignated ...
Undesignated ...
4
7
6
8
Two .............................................
Three ..........................................
Each pilot association is an
independent business and is the sole
provider of pilotage services in the
district in which it operates. Each pilot
association is responsible for funding its
own operating expenses, maintaining
infrastructure, compensating pilots and
apprentice pilots,14 acquiring and
implementing technological advances,
and training personnel and partners.
The Coast Guard uses a 10-step
ratemaking methodology to derive a
pilotage rate, based on the estimated
amount of traffic, which covers these
expenses.15 The methodology is
designed to measure how much revenue
each pilotage association would need to
cover expenses and provide competitive
compensation goals to registered pilots.
Since the Coast Guard cannot guarantee
demand for pilotage services, target
pilot compensation for registered pilots
is a goal. The actual demand for service
dictates the actual compensation for the
registered pilots. We then divide that
amount by the historic 10-year average
for pilotage demand. We recognize that,
in years where traffic is above average,
pilot associations will accrue more
revenue than projected, while in years
where traffic is below average, they will
take in less. We believe that over the
long term, however, this system ensures
that infrastructure will be maintained
and that pilots will receive adequate
compensation and work a reasonable
number of hours, with adequate rest
between assignments, to ensure
retention of highly trained personnel.
Over the past several years, the Coast
Guard has adjusted the Great Lakes
pilotage ratemaking methodology per
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Area
number 12
District
12 Area 3 is the Welland Canal, which is serviced
exclusively by the Canadian GLPA and,
accordingly, is not included in the United States
pilotage rate structure.
13 The areas are listed by name at 46 CFR 401.405.
14 Apprentice pilots and applicant pilots are
compensated by the pilot association they are
training with, which is funded through the pilotage
rates. The ratemaking methodology accounts for an
apprentice pilot wage benchmark in Step 4 per 46
CFR 404.104(d). The applicant pilot salaries are
included in the pilot associations’ operating
expenses used in Step 1 per 46 CFR 404.101.
15 46 CFR part 404.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
our authority in 46 U.S.C. 9303(f) to
conduct annual reviews of base pilotage
rates and adjust such base rates in each
intervening year in consideration of the
public interest and the costs of
providing the services. The current
methodology was finalized in the Great
Lakes Pilotage Rates—2022 Annual
Review and Revisions to Methodology
final rule (87 FR 18488, March 30,
2022). We summarize the current and
proposed methodology in the section
below.
VI. Summary of the Ratemaking
Methodology
As stated above, the ratemaking
methodology, outlined in 46 CFR
404.101 through 404.110, consists of 10
steps that are designed to account for
the revenues needed and total traffic
expected in each district. The result is
an hourly rate, determined separately
for each of the areas administered by the
Coast Guard.
In Step 1, ‘‘Recognize previous
operating expenses,’’ (§ 404.101) the
Director reviews audited operating
expenses from each of the three pilotage
associations. Operating expenses
include all allowable expenses minus
wages and benefits. This number forms
the baseline amount that each
association is budgeted. Because of the
time delay between when the
association submits raw numbers and
the Coast Guard receives audited
numbers, this number is 3 years behind
the projected year of expenses.
Therefore, in calculating the 2023 rates
in this proposal, we begin with the
audited expenses from the 2020
shipping season.
While each pilotage association
operates in an entire district (including
both designated and undesignated
areas), the Coast Guard determines costs
by area. With regard to operating
expenses, we allocate certain operating
expenses to designated areas and certain
operating expenses to undesignated
areas. In some cases, we can allocate the
costs based on where they are actually
accrued. For example, we can allocate
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
St. Lawrence River.
Lake Ontario.
Navigable waters from Southeast Shoal
to Port Huron, MI.
Lake Erie.
St. Marys River
Lakes Huron and Michigan.
Lake Superior.
the costs for insurance for apprentice
pilots who operate in undesignated
areas only. In other situations, such as
general legal expenses, expenses are
distributed between designated and
undesignated waters on a pro rata basis,
based upon the proportion of income
forecasted from the respective portions
of the district.
In Step 2, ‘‘Project operating
expenses, adjusting for inflation or
deflation,’’ (§ 404.102) the Director
develops the 2023 projected operating
expenses. To do this, we apply inflation
adjustors for 3 years to the operating
expense baseline received in Step 1. The
inflation factors are from the Bureau of
Labor Statistics’ (BLS) Consumer Price
Index (CPI) for the Midwest Region, or,
if not available, the Federal Open
Market Committee (FOMC) median
economic projections for Personal
Consumption Expenditures (PCE)
inflation. This step produces the total
operating expenses for each area and
district.
In Step 3, ‘‘Estimate number of
registered pilots and apprentice pilots,’’
(§ 404.103) the Director calculates how
many registered and apprentice pilots,
including apprentice pilots with limited
registration, are needed for each district.
To do this, we employ a ‘‘staffing
model,’’ described in § 401.220,
paragraphs (a)(1) through (3), to estimate
how many pilots would be needed to
handle shipping during the beginning
and close of the season. This number is
helpful in providing guidance to the
Director in approving an appropriate
number of pilots.
For the purpose of the ratemaking
calculation, we determine the number of
pilots provided by the pilotage
associations (see § 404.103) and use that
figure to determine how many pilots
need to be compensated via the pilotage
fees collected.
In the first part of Step 4, ‘‘Determine
target pilot compensation benchmark
and apprentice pilot wage benchmark,’’
(§ 404.104) the Director determines the
revenue needed for pilot compensation
in each area and district and calculates
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
52874
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
the total compensation for each pilot
using a ‘‘compensation benchmark.’’
In the second part of Step 4, set forth
in § 404.104(c), the Director determines
the total compensation figure for each
district. To do this, the Director
multiplies the compensation benchmark
by the number of pilots for each area
and district (from Step 3), producing a
figure for total pilot compensation.
In Step 5, ‘‘Project working capital
fund,’’ (§ 404.105) the Director
calculates a value that is added to pay
for needed capital improvements and
other non-recurring expenses, such as
technology investments and
infrastructure maintenance. This value
is calculated by adding the total
operating expenses (derived in Step 2)
to the total pilot compensation and total
target apprentice pilot wage (derived in
Step 4) and multiplying that figure by
the preceding year’s average annual rate
of return for new issues of high-grade
corporate securities. This figure
constitutes the ‘‘working capital fund’’
for each area and district.
In Step 6, ‘‘Project needed revenue,’’
(§ 404.106) the Director simply adds up
the totals produced by the preceding
steps. The projected operating expense
for each area and district (from Step 2)
is added to the total pilot compensation,
including apprentice pilot wage
benchmarks, (from Step 4) and the
working capital fund contribution (from
Step 5). The total figure, calculated
separately for each area and district, is
the ‘‘needed revenue.’’
In Step 7, ‘‘Calculate initial base
rates,’’ (§ 404.107) the Director
calculates an hourly pilotage rate to
cover the needed revenue as calculated
in Step 6. This step consists of first
calculating the 10-year hours of traffic
average for each area. Next, we divide
the revenue needed in each area
(calculated in Step 6) by the 10-year
hours of traffic average to produce an
initial base rate.
An additional element, the
‘‘weighting factor,’’ is required under
§ 401.400. Pursuant to that section,
ships pay a multiple of the ‘‘base rate’’
as calculated in Step 7 by a number
ranging from 1.0 (for the smallest ships,
or ‘‘Class I’’ vessels) to 1.45 (for the
largest ships, or ‘‘Class IV’’ vessels). As
this significantly increases the revenue
collected, we need to account for the
added revenue produced by the
weighting factors to ensure that shippers
are not overpaying for pilotage services.
We do this in the next step.
In Step 8, ‘‘Calculate average
weighting factors by Area,’’ (§ 404.108)
the Director calculates how much extra
revenue, as a percentage of total
revenue, has historically been produced
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
by the weighting factors in each area.
We do this by using a historical average
of the applied weighting factors for each
year since 2014 (the first year the
current weighting factors were applied).
In Step 9, ‘‘Calculate revised base
rates,’’ (§ 404.109) the Director modifies
the base rates by accounting for the
extra revenue generated by the
weighting factors. We do this by
dividing the initial pilotage rate for each
area (from Step 7) by the corresponding
average weighting factor (from Step 8),
to produce a revised rate.
In Step 10, ‘‘Review and finalize
rates,’’ (§ 404.110) often referred to
informally as ‘‘Director’s discretion,’’
the Director reviews the revised base
rates (from Step 9) to ensure that they
meet the goals set forth in 46 U.S.C.
9303(f) and 46 CFR 404.1(a), which
include promoting efficient, safe, and
reliable pilotage service on the Great
Lakes; generating sufficient revenue for
each pilotage association to reimburse
necessary and reasonable operating
expenses; compensating trained and
rested pilots fairly; and providing
appropriate revenue for improvements.
After the base rates are set, § 401.401
permits the Coast Guard to apply
surcharges. We are not proposing to use
any surcharges in this ratemaking. In
previous ratemakings where apprentice
pilot wages were not built into the rate,
the Coast Guard used surcharges to
cover applicant pilot compensation in
those years to help with applicant
recruitment. In this ratemaking, we
include the applicant trainee
compensation in the district’s operating
expenses used in step 1 of the
ratemaking. Consistent with the 2021
and 2022 rulemakings, we continue to
believe that the pilot associations are
now able to plan for the costs associated
with hiring applicant pilots to fill pilot
vacancies without relying on the Coast
Guard to impose surcharges to help with
recruiting.
VII. Discussion of Proposed
Methodological and Other Changes
The Coast Guard is proposing to use
the existing ratemaking methodology for
establishing the base rates in this full
ratemaking. The Coast Guard is not
proposing any methodological or other
policy changes to the ratemaking within
this NPRM. However, we are accepting
comments on the entire ratemaking
methodology and staffing model as part
of our full ratemaking year.
According to 46 U.S.C. 9303(f), and
restated in § 404.100(a), the Coast Guard
must establish base rates by a full
ratemaking at least once every 5 years.
We have determined that the current
base rate and methodology still
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
adequately adheres to the Coast Guard’s
goals of safety through rate and
compensation stability, while promoting
recruitment and retention of qualified
U.S. registered pilots. The Coast Guard
has made several changes to the
ratemaking over the last several
ratemakings in consideration of the
public interest and costs of providing
services. The recent changes and their
impacts are summarized as follows.
In the 2017 ratemaking (82 FR 41466,
August 31, 2017), we modified the
ratemaking methodology to account for
the additional revenue produced by the
application of weighting factors
(discussed in detail in Steps 7 through
9 for each district, in section IX of this
preamble). In the 2018 ratemaking (83
FR 26162, June 5, 2018), we adopted a
new approach in the methodology for
the compensation benchmark, based
upon United States mariners rather than
Canadian working pilots. In the 2020
ratemaking (85 FR 20088, April 9, 2020),
we revised the methodology to
accurately capture all costs and
revenues associated with Great Lakes
pilotage requirements and produce an
hourly rate that adequately and
accurately compensates pilots and
covers expenses. The 2021 ratemaking
(86 FR 14184, March 12, 2021) changed
the inflation calculation in Step 4,
§ 404.104(b) for interim ratemakings, so
that the previous year’s target
compensation value is first adjusted by
actual inflation value using the
Employment Cost Index (ECI). That
change ensures that the target pilot
compensation reimbursed to the
association remains current with
inflation and competitive with industry
pay increases. The 2022 ratemaking (87
FR 18488, March 30, 2022)
implemented an apprentice pilot wage
benchmark in Steps 3 and 4 to provide
predictability and stability to
associations training apprentice pilots.
The 2022 final rule also codified
rounding up the staffing model’s final
number to ensure the ratemaking does
not undercount the pilot need presented
by the staffing model and association
circumstances.
These refinements to the methodology
continue to promote safe, efficient, and
reliable pilotage service on the Great
Lakes, and allows each pilotage
association to generate sufficient
revenue to cover its necessary and
reasonable operating expenses, fairly
compensate trained and rested pilots,
and realize an appropriate revenue to
use for improvements. While the Coast
Guard is not proposing changes at this
time, we welcome public comments and
suggestions on the methodology.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
The Coast Guard is requesting input
on the staffing model due to the
diversification of traffic and increased
demand for pilotage services, for
consideration in a future rulemaking.
The annual Great Lakes Pilotage
Advisory Committee (GLPAC) meeting
of September 1, 2021, produced a
recommendation for the Coast Guard to
review the staffing model. A copy of the
GLPAC September 1, 2021, meeting
transcript is available in the docket,
where indicated under the Public
Participation and Request for Comments
portion of the preamble (section I). The
recommendation is on page 53 of the
transcript. We are interested in the
public’s suggestions on what changes
may improve the staffing model to
accurately capture staffing demand. We
would consider the comments and
determine any changes to propose in a
future ratemaking.
VIII. Individual Target Pilot
Compensation Benchmark
The Coast Guard is proposing to set
the target pilot compensation
benchmark in this ratemaking at the
target compensation for the ratemaking
year 2022, adjusted for inflation. In a
full ratemaking year, per 46 CFR
404.104(a), the Director determines a
base individual target pilot
compensation using a compensation
benchmark in consideration of relevant
currently available non-proprietary
information. The Director may make
necessary and reasonable adjustments to
the benchmark if circumstances require.
The compensation benchmark would be
used in Step 4 of the existing
methodology. In the following interim
year ratemakings, the base target pilot
compensation would be inflated
annually in accordance with
§ 404.104(b). We discuss how we
arrived at this proposed compensation
benchmark next.
Prior to 2016, the Coast Guard based
the compensation benchmark on data
provided by the American Maritime
Officers Union (AMOU) regarding its
contract for first mates on the Great
Lakes. However, in 2016 the AMOU
elected to no longer provide this data to
the Coast Guard. In the 2016 ratemaking
(81 FR 11908, March 7, 2016), we used
average compensation for a Canadian
pilot plus a 10-percent adjustment. The
shipping industry challenged the
compensation benchmark, and the court
found that the Coast Guard did not
adequately support the 10-percent
addition to the Canadian GLPA
compensation benchmark. American
Great Lakes Ports Association v.
Zukunft, 296 F.Supp. 3d 27 (D.D.C.
2017). The Coast Guard then based the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
2018 full ratemaking compensation
benchmark on data provided by the
AMOU regarding its contract for first
mates on the Great Lakes in the 2011 to
2015 period (83 FR 26162, June 5, 2018).
The 2018 final rule adjusted the AMOU
2015 data for inflation using FOMC
median economic projections for PCE
inflation.
In the 2020 interim year ratemaking
final rule, the Coast Guard established
its most recent pilot compensation
benchmark. Given the lack of access to
AMOU data, we did not rely on the
AMOU aggregated wage and benefit
information as the basis for the
compensation benchmark, and instead
adopted the 2019 target pilot
compensation (with inflation) as our
compensation benchmark going
forward. We stated in the 2020 final rule
that no other United States or Canadian
pilot compensation data was
appropriate to use as a benchmark at
that time. See 85 FR 20091. The Director
determined that the ratemaking
provided adequate compensation for
pilots. In the 2020 ratemaking, we
announced we would use the 2020
benchmark for future rates. See 85 FR
20091.
Based on our experience over the past
three ratemakings (2020–2022), the
Director continues to believe that the
level of target pilot compensation for
those years provided an appropriate
level of compensation for U.S.
Registered pilots. According to
§ 401.101(a), the Director may make
necessary and reasonable adjustments to
the benchmark based on current
information. However, current
circumstances do not indicate that an
adjustment, other than for inflation, is
necessary. The Director bases this
decision on the fact that there is no
indication that registered pilots are
resigning due to their compensation or
that this compensation benchmark is
causing shortfalls in achieving reliable
pilotage. We also do not believe that the
pilot compensation benchmark is too
high relative to the expertise required to
perform the job. The compensation
would continue to be adjusted annually
in accordance with published inflation
rates, which would ensure the
compensation remains competitive and
current for upcoming years.
Therefore, the Coast Guard proposes
to not seek alternative benchmarks for
target compensation at this time and,
instead, to simply adjust the amount of
target pilot compensation for inflation
as our target compensation benchmark
for 2023, as shown in Step 4. This target
compensation benchmark approach has
advanced and will continue to advance
the Coast Guard’s goals of safety through
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
52875
rate and compensation stability while
also promoting recruitment and
retention of qualified U.S. pilots.
The proposed compensation
benchmark for 2023 is $399,266 per
registered pilot, and $143,736 per
apprentice pilot, using the 2022
compensation as a benchmark. We then
follow the procedure outlined in
paragraph (b) of § 404.104, which
adjusts the existing compensation
benchmark for inflation. We are using a
two-step process to adjust target pilot
compensation for inflation. First, we
adjust the 2022 target compensation
benchmark of $399,266 by 3.4 percent
for an adjusted value of $412,841. This
first adjustment accounts for the
difference in actual first quarter 2022
ECI inflation, which is 5.6 percent, and
the 2022 PCE estimate of 2.2
percent.16 17 The second step accounts
for projected inflation from 2022 to
2023, which is 2.3 percent.18 Based on
the projected 2023 inflation estimate,
the proposed target compensation
benchmark for 2023 is $422,336 per
pilot. The proposed apprentice pilot
wage benchmark is 36 percent of the
target pilot compensation, or $152,041
($422,336 × 0.36).
IX. Discussion of Proposed Rate
Adjustments
In this NPRM, based on the proposed
policy changes described in the
previous section, we are proposing new
pilotage rates for 2023. We propose to
conduct the 2023 ratemaking as a full
ratemaking, as we last did in 2018 (83
FR 26162). Thus, the Coast Guard
proposes to adjust the compensation
benchmark following the full
ratemaking year procedures under
§ 404.100(a) rather than the procedures
for an interim ratemaking year in
§ 404.100(b).
This section discusses the proposed
rate changes using the ratemaking steps
provided in 46 CFR part 404. We will
detail all 10 steps of the ratemaking
procedure for each of the 3 districts to
show how we arrive at the proposed
new rates.
16 Employment Cost Index, Total Compensation
for Private Industry workers in Transportation and
Material Moving, Annual Average, Series ID:
CIU2010000520000A. Accessed April 29, 2022.
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/eci.t05.htm.
17 Table 1 Summary of Economic Projections, PCE
Inflation September Projection. Accessed December,
2021 https://www.federalreserve.gov/
monetarypolicy/files/fomcprojtabl20211215.pdf.
18 Table 1 Summary of Economic Projections, PCE
Inflation December Projection. Accessed March
2022 https://www.federalreserve.gov/
monetarypolicy/files/fomcprojtabl20220316.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
52876
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
District One
A. Step 1: Recognize Previous Operating
Expenses
Step 1 in our ratemaking methodology
requires that the Coast Guard review
and recognize the previous year’s
operating expenses (§ 404.101). To do
so, we begin by reviewing the
independent accountant’s financial
reports for each association’s 2020
expenses and revenues.19 For
accounting purposes, the financial
reports divide expenses into designated
and undesignated areas. For costs
accrued by the pilot associations
generally, such as employee benefits, for
example, the cost is divided between
the designated and undesignated areas
on a pro rata basis. The recognized
operating expenses for District One are
shown in table 3.
Adjustments have been made by the
auditors and are explained in the
auditor’s reports, which are available in
the docket for this rulemaking, where
indicated under the Public Participation
and Request for Comments portion of
the preamble.
In the 2020 expenses used as the basis
for this rulemaking, districts used the
term ‘‘applicant’’ to describe applicant
trainees and persons who would be
called apprentices (applicant pilots)
under the definition of ‘‘Apprentice
pilot’’ introduced in the 2022 final rule.
Therefore, when describing past
expenses, we use the term ‘‘applicant’’
to match what was reported from 2020,
which includes both applicant and
apprentice pilots. We use ‘‘apprentice’’
to distinguish apprentice pilot wages
and describe the impacts of the
ratemaking going forward.
We continue to include applicant
salaries as an allowable expense in the
2023 ratemaking, as it is based on 2020
operating expenses, when salaries were
still an allowable expense. The
apprentice salaries paid in the years
2020 and 2021 have not been
reimbursed in the ratemaking as of
publication of this proposed rule.
Applicant salaries (including applicant
trainees and apprentice pilots) will
continue to be an allowable operating
expense through the 2024 ratemaking,
which uses operating expenses from
2021, where the wages for apprentice
pilots were still authorized as operating
expenses. Beginning with the 2025
ratemaking, apprentice pilot salaries
will no longer be included as a 2022
operating expense, because apprentice
pilot wages would have already been
factored into the ratemaking Steps 3 and
4 in calculation of the 2022 rates.
Beginning in 2025, the applicant
salaries’ operating expenses for 2022
will consist of only applicant trainees
(those who are not yet apprentice
pilots).
TABLE 3—2020 RECOGNIZED EXPENSES FOR DISTRICT ONE
District One
Reported operating expenses for 2020
Designated
Undesignated
St. Lawrence River
Lake Ontario
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Total
Applicant Pilot Compensation:
Salaries .....................................................................................................................
Employee Benefits ....................................................................................................
Applicant Subsistence/Travel ...................................................................................
Applicant License Insurance ....................................................................................
Applicant Payroll Tax ................................................................................................
$257,250
13,633
14,901
1,771
20,823
$171,500
9,089
9,934
1,181
13,882
$428,750
22,722
24,835
2,952
34,705
Total Applicant Pilot Compensation ..................................................................
308,378
205,586
513,964
Other Pilot Cost:
Subsistence/Travel—Pilot .........................................................................................
Hotel/Lodging Cost ...................................................................................................
License Insurance—Pilots ........................................................................................
Payroll Taxes—Pilots ...............................................................................................
Other .........................................................................................................................
575,475
32,802
45,859
188,318
26,433
383,650
21,868
30,573
125,546
17,621
959,125
54,671
76,432
313,864
44,054
Total other pilotage costs ..................................................................................
868,887
579,258
1,448,145
Pilot Boat and Dispatch Costs:
Pilot Boat Expense (Operating) ................................................................................
Pilot Boat Cost (D1–20–01) .....................................................................................
Dispatch Expense .....................................................................................................
Payroll Taxes ............................................................................................................
325,904
104,658
139,916
22,930
217,269
69,772
93,277
15,287
543,173
174,430
233,193
38,217
Total Pilot and Dispatch Costs ..........................................................................
593,408
395,605
989,013
Administrative Expenses:
Legal—General Counsel ..........................................................................................
Legal—Shared Counsel (K&L Gates) ......................................................................
Legal—USCG Litigation ...........................................................................................
Insurance ..................................................................................................................
Employee Benefits ....................................................................................................
Payroll Taxes ............................................................................................................
Other Taxes ..............................................................................................................
Real Estate Taxes ....................................................................................................
Travel ........................................................................................................................
Depreciation ..............................................................................................................
Certified Public Accountant (CPA) Deduction (D1–19–01) ......................................
3,124
62,906
8,793
35,040
5,541
6,511
69,000
23,298
21,516
152,071
(44,623)
2,083
41,937
5,862
23,360
3,694
4,341
46,000
15,532
14,344
101,381
(29,748)
5,207
104,843
14,655
58,400
9,235
10,852
115,000
38,830
35,860
253,452
(74,371)
19 These reports are available in the docket for
this rulemaking.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
52877
TABLE 3—2020 RECOGNIZED EXPENSES FOR DISTRICT ONE—Continued
District One
Reported operating expenses for 2020
Designated
Undesignated
St. Lawrence River
Lake Ontario
Total
Interest ......................................................................................................................
CPA Deduction (D1–19–01) .....................................................................................
American Pilots’ Association (APA) Dues ................................................................
Dues and Subscriptions ...........................................................................................
Utilities ......................................................................................................................
Salaries .....................................................................................................................
Accounting/Professional Fees ..................................................................................
Other .........................................................................................................................
Applicant Administrative Expense:
Pilot Training .............................................................................................................
Supplies ....................................................................................................................
36,924
(18,710)
27,172
4,080
15,618
69,848
8,220
55,213
24,616
(12,473)
18,115
2,720
10,412
46,565
5,480
36,809
61,540
(31,183)
45,287
6,800
26,030
116,413
13,700
92,022
26,787
481
17,858
320
44,645
801
Total Administrative Expenses ..........................................................................
568,810
379,208
948,018
Total Expenses (OpEx + Applicant + Pilot Boats + Admin + Capital) ......
2,339,483
1,559,657
3,899,140
Director’s Adjustments—Applicant Surcharge Collected ................................................
Director’s Adjustments—Applicant Salaries ....................................................................
(10,814)
(19,379)
(7,209)
(12,919)
(18,024)
(32,298)
Total Director’s Adjustments ....................................................................................
(30,193)
(20,129)
(50,322)
Total Operating Expenses (OpEx + Adjustments) ...................................................
2,309,290
1,539,528
3,848,818
B. Step 2: Project Operating Expenses,
Adjusting for Inflation or Deflation
Having identified the recognized 2020
operating expenses in Step 1, the next
step is to estimate the current year’s
operating expenses by adjusting those
expenses for inflation over the 3-year
period. We calculate inflation using the
BLS data from the CPI for the Midwest
Region of the United States for the 2021
inflation rate.20 Because the BLS does
not provide forecasted inflation data, we
use economic projections from the
Federal Reserve for the 2022 and 2023
inflation modification.21 Based on that
information, the calculations for Step 2
are as follows:
TABLE 4—ADJUSTED OPERATING EXPENSES FOR DISTRICT ONE
District One
Designated
Total
2021
2022
2023
Total
Operating Expenses (Step 1) .............................................................................................
Inflation Modification (@5.1%) ...........................................................................................
Inflation Modification (@2.7033%) .....................................................................................
Inflation Modification (@2.3%) ...........................................................................................
$2,309,290
117,774
65,531
57,330
$1,539,528
78,516
43,687
38,220
$3,848,818
196,290
109,218
95,550
Adjusted 2023 Operating Expenses .....................................................................................
2,549,925
1,699,951
4,249,876
C. Step 3: Estimate Number of
Registered Pilots and Apprentice Pilots
In accordance with the text in
§ 404.103, we estimate the number of
fully registered pilots in each district.
We determine the number of fully
registered pilots based on data provided
by the SLSPA. Using these numbers, we
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Undesignated
20 The 2021 inflation rate is available at https://
data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet. Specifically,
the CPI is defined as ‘‘All Urban Consumers (CPI–
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
estimate that there will be 18 registered
pilots in 2023 in District One. We
determine the number of apprentice
pilots based on input from the district
on anticipated retirements and staffing
needs. Using these numbers, we
estimate that there will be two
apprentice pilots in 2023 in District
One. Based on the seasonal staffing
model discussed in the 2017 ratemaking
(see 82 FR 41466), we assign a certain
number of pilots to designated waters
and a certain number to undesignated
waters, as shown in table 5. These
numbers are used to determine the
amount of revenue needed in their
respective areas.
U), All Items, 1982–4=100.’’ Series CUUS0200SAO
(Downloaded March 2022)
21 The 2022 and 2023 inflation rates are available
at https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/
files/fomcprojtabl20220316.pdf. We used the PCE
median inflation value found in table 1.
(Downloaded March 2022).
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
52878
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 5—AUTHORIZED PILOTS FOR DISTRICT ONE
Item
District One
Proposed Maximum Number of Pilots (per § 401.220(a)) * .................................................................................................................
2023 Authorized Pilots (total) ..............................................................................................................................................................
Pilots Assigned to Designated Areas ..................................................................................................................................................
Pilots Assigned to Undesignated Areas ..............................................................................................................................................
2023 Apprentice Pilots .........................................................................................................................................................................
18
18
10
8
2
* For a detailed calculation, refer to the Great Lakes Pilotage Rates—2017 Annual Review final rule, which contains the staffing model. See 82
FR 41466, table 6 at 41480 (August 31, 2017).
D. Step 4: Determine Target Pilot
Compensation Benchmark and
Apprentice Pilot Wage Benchmark
In this step, we determine the total
pilot compensation for each area.
Because we are proposing a full
ratemaking this year, we propose to
follow the procedure outlined in
paragraph (a) of § 404.104, which
requires us to develop a benchmark after
considering the most relevant currently
available non-proprietary information.
In accordance with the discussion in
Section VII of this preamble, the
proposed compensation benchmark for
2023 uses the 2022 compensation of
by the pilot association. In accordance
with § 404.104(c), we use the revised
target individual compensation level to
derive the total pilot compensation by
multiplying the individual target
compensation by the estimated number
of registered pilots for District One, as
shown in table 6. We estimate that the
number of apprentice pilots with
limited registration needed will be two
for District One in the 2023 season. The
total target wages for apprentices are
allocated with 60 percent for the
designated area, and 40 percent for the
undesignated area, in accordance with
the allocation for operating expenses.
$399,266 per registered pilot as a base,
then adjusts for inflation following the
procedure outlined in paragraph (b) of
§ 404.104. The proposed target pilot
compensation for 2023 is $422,336 per
pilot. The proposed apprentice pilot
wage benchmark is 36 percent of the
target pilot compensation, or $152,041
($422,336 × 0.36).
Next, we certify that the number of
pilots estimated for 2022 is less than or
equal to the number permitted under
the staffing model in § 401.220(a). The
staffing model suggests that the number
of pilots needed is 18 pilots for District
One, which is less than or equal to 18,
the number of registered pilots provided
TABLE 6—TARGET COMPENSATION FOR DISTRICT ONE
District One
Target Pilot Compensation ..........................................................................................................
Number of Pilots ..........................................................................................................................
Total Target Pilot Compensation .................................................................................................
Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation ........................................................................................
Number of Apprentice Pilots ........................................................................................................
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation ..............................................................................
E. Step 5: Project Working Capital Fund
Next, we calculate the working capital
fund revenues needed for each area.
First, we add the figures for projected
operating expenses, total pilot
Designated
Undesignated
$422,336
10
$4,223,360
$152,041
........................
$182,449.00
$422,336
8
$3,378,688
$152,041
........................
$121,632.92
compensation, and total target
apprentice pilot wage for each area.
Next, we find the preceding year’s
average annual rate of return for new
issues of high-grade corporate securities.
Total
$422,336
18
$7,602,048
$152,041
2
$304,082
Using Moody’s data, the number is
2.7033 percent.22 By multiplying the
two figures, we obtain the working
capital fund contribution for each area,
as shown in table 7.
TABLE 7—WORKING CAPITAL FUND CALCULATION FOR DISTRICT ONE
District One
Designated
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Adjusted Operating Expenses (Step 2) .......................................................................................
Total Target Pilot Compensation (Step 4) ...................................................................................
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation (Step 4) ................................................................
Total 2023 Expenses ...................................................................................................................
Working Capital Fund (2.7033%) ................................................................................................
22 Moody’s Seasoned Aaa Corporate Bond Yield,
average of 2021 monthly data. The Coast Guard uses
the most recent year of complete data. Moody’s is
taken from Moody’s Investors Service, which is a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
bond credit rating business of Moody’s Corporation.
Bond ratings are based on creditworthiness and
risk. The rating of ‘‘Aaa’’ is the highest bond rating
assigned with the lowest credit risk. See https://
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
$2,549,925
4,223,360
182,449
6,955,734
188,037
Undesignated
$1,699,951
3,378,688
121,633
5,200,272
140,581
Total
$4,249,876
7,602,048
304,082
12,156,006
328,618
fred.stlouisfed.org/series/AAA. (Downloaded
March, 2022)
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
52879
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
F. Step 6: Project Needed Revenue
needed for each area. These expenses
include the projected operating
expenses (from Step 2), the total pilot
compensation (from Step 4), total target
In this step, we add all the expenses
accrued to derive the total revenue
apprentice pilot wage, (from Step 4) and
the working capital fund contribution
(from Step 5). We show these
calculations in table 8.
TABLE 8—REVENUE NEEDED FOR DISTRICT ONE
District One
Designated
Undesignated
Total
Adjusted Operating Expenses (Step 2) .......................................................................................
Total Target Pilot Compensation (Step 4) ...................................................................................
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation (Step 4) ................................................................
Working Capital Fund (Step 5) ....................................................................................................
$2,549,925
4,223,360
182,449
188,037
$1,699,951
3,378,688
121,633
140,581
$4,249,876
7,602,048
304,082
328,618
Total Revenue Needed ........................................................................................................
7,143,771
5,340,853
12,484,624
G. Step 7: Calculate Initial Base Rates
calculate the 10-year average of traffic in
District One, using the total time on task
or pilot bridge hours. To calculate the
time on task for each district, the Coast
Guard uses billing data from the Great
Lakes Pilotage Management System
(GLPMS). We pull the data from the
system filtering by district, year, job
Having determined the revenue
needed for each area in the previous six
steps, to develop an hourly rate we
divide that number by the expected
number of hours of traffic. Step 7 is a
two-part process. In the first part, we
status (we only include closed jobs), and
flagging code (we only include U.S.
jobs). Because we calculate separate
figures for designated and undesignated
waters, there are two parts for each
calculation. We show these values in
table 9.
TABLE 9—TIME ON TASK FOR DISTRICT ONE
[Hours]
District One
Year
Designated
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
Undesignated
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
6,188
6,265
8,232
6,943
7,605
5,434
5,743
6,810
5,864
4,771
7,871
7,560
8,405
8,445
8,679
6,217
6,667
6,853
5,529
5,121
Average ............................................................................................................................................................
6,386
7,135
Next, we derive the initial hourly rate
by dividing the revenue needed by the
average number of hours for each area.
This produces an initial rate, which is
necessary to produce the revenue
needed for each area, assuming the
amount of traffic is as expected. We
present the calculations for District One
in table 10.
TABLE 10—INITIAL RATE CALCULATIONS FOR DISTRICT ONE
Designated
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Revenue needed (Step 6) .......................................................................................................................................
Average time on task (hours) ..................................................................................................................................
Initial rate .................................................................................................................................................................
H. Step 8: Calculate Average Weighting
Factors by Area
In this step, we calculate the average
weighting factor for each designated and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
undesignated area. We collect the
weighting factors, set forth in 46 CFR
401.400, for each vessel trip. Using this
database, we calculate the average
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
$7,143,771
6,386
$1,119
Undesignated
$5,340,853
7,135
$749
weighting factor for each area using the
data from each vessel transit from 2014
onward, as shown in tables 11 and 12.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
52880
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 11—AVERAGE WEIGHTING FACTOR FOR DISTRICT ONE, DESIGNATED AREAS
Number of
transits
Vessel class/year
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
Weighting
factor
Weighted
transits
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
31
41
31
28
54
72
8
10
285
295
185
352
559
378
560
315
50
28
50
67
86
122
67
52
271
251
214
285
393
730
427
407
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
31
41
31
28
54
72
8
10
328
339
213
405
643
435
644
362
65
36
65
87
112
159
87
68
393
364
310
413
570
1059
619
590
Total ......................................................................................................................................
6,704
........................
8,640
Average weighting factor (weighted transits ÷ number of transits) ..............................
........................
1.29
........................
TABLE 12—AVERAGE WEIGHTING FACTOR FOR DISTRICT ONE, UNDESIGNATED AREAS
Number of
transits
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Vessel class/year
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
25
28
18
19
22
30
3
19
238
263
169
290
352
366
358
463
60
42
28
45
63
58
35
71
289
269
222
285
30AUP1
Weighting
factor
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
Weighted
transits
25
28
18
19
22
30
3
19
274
302
194
334
405
421
412
532
78
55
36
59
82
75
46
92
419
390
322
413
52881
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 12—AVERAGE WEIGHTING FACTOR FOR DISTRICT ONE, UNDESIGNATED AREAS—Continued
Number of
transits
Vessel class/year
Class
Class
Class
Class
4
4
4
4
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
Weighting
factor
Weighted
transits
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
382
326
334
466
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
554
473
484
676
Total ......................................................................................................................................
5,638
........................
7,291
Average weighting factor (weighted transits ÷ number of transits) ..............................
........................
........................
1.29
I. Step 9: Calculate Revised Base Rates
In this step, we revise the base rates
so that the total cost of pilotage will be
equal to the revenue needed after
considering the impact of the weighting
factors. To do this, we divide the initial
base rates calculated in Step 7 by the
average weighting factors calculated in
Step 8, as shown in table 13.
TABLE 13—REVISED BASE RATES FOR DISTRICT ONE
District One: Designated ..............................................................................................
District One: Undesignated ..........................................................................................
J. Step 10: Review and Finalize Rates
In this step, the Director reviews the
rates set forth by the staffing model and
ensures that they meet the goal of
ensuring safe, efficient, and reliable
pilotage. To establish this, the Director
considers whether the proposed rates
$1,119
749
incorporate appropriate compensation
for pilots to handle heavy traffic periods
and whether there is a sufficient number
of pilots to handle those heavy traffic
periods. The Director also considers
whether the proposed rates would cover
operating expenses and infrastructure
costs, including average traffic and
Revised rate
(Initial rate ÷
average weighting
factor)
Average
weighting factor
(Step 8)
Initial rate
(Step 7)
Area
1.29
1.29
$867
581
weighting factions. Based on the
financial information submitted by the
pilots, the Director is not proposing any
alterations to the rates in this step. We
propose to modify § 401.405(a)(1) and
(2) to reflect the final rates shown in
table 14.
TABLE 14—PROPOSED FINAL RATES FOR DISTRICT ONE
Name
District One: Designated .............................................
District One: Undesignated .........................................
St. Lawrence River .....................................................
Lake Ontario ...............................................................
District Two
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Final 2022
pilotage rate
Area
A. Step 1: Recognize Previous Operating
Expenses
Step 1 in our ratemaking methodology
requires that the Coast Guard review
and recognize the previous year’s
operating expenses (§ 404.101). To do
so, we begin by reviewing the
independent accountant’s financial
reports for each association’s 2020
expenses and revenues.23 For
accounting purposes, the financial
reports divide expenses into designated
and undesignated areas. For costs
accrued by the pilot associations
generally, such as employee benefits, for
example, the cost is divided between
the designated and undesignated areas
on a pro rata basis. The recognized
23 These reports are available in the docket for
this rulemaking.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
operating expenses for District Two are
shown in table 15.
Adjustments have been made by the
auditors and are explained in the
auditor’s reports, which are available in
the docket for this rulemaking, where
indicated under the Public Participation
and Request for Comments portion of
the preamble.
In the 2020 expenses used as the basis
for this rulemaking, districts used the
term ‘‘applicant’’ to describe applicant
trainees and persons who would be
called apprentices (applicant pilots)
under the definition introduced by the
2022 final rule. Therefore, when
describing past expenses, we use the
term ‘‘applicant’’ to match what was
reported from 2020, which includes
both applicant and apprentice pilots.
We use ‘‘apprentice’’ to distinguish
apprentice pilot wages and describe the
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
$834
568
Proposed 2023
pilotage rate
$867
581
impacts of the ratemaking going
forward.
We continue to include applicant
salaries as an allowable expense in the
2023 ratemaking, as it is based on 2020
operating expenses, when salaries were
still an allowable expense. The
apprentice salaries paid in the years
2020 and 2021 have not been
reimbursed in the ratemaking as of
publication of this proposed rule.
Applicant salaries (including applicant
trainees and apprentice pilots) will
continue to be an allowable operating
expense through the 2024 ratemaking,
which uses operating expenses from
2021 where the wages for apprentice
pilots were still authorized as operating
expenses. Beginning with the 2025
ratemaking, apprentice pilot salaries
would no longer be included as a 2022
operating expense, because apprentice
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
52882
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
pilot wages would have already been
factored into the ratemaking Steps 3 and
4 in calculation of the 2022 rates.
Beginning in 2025, the applicant
salaries’ operating expenses for 2022
will consist of only applicant trainees
(those who are not yet apprentice
pilots).
TABLE 15—2020 RECOGNIZED EXPENSES FOR DISTRICT TWO
District Two
Designated
Reported operating expenses for 2020
Undesignated
Southeast
Shoal to
Port Huron
Lake Erie
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Applicant
Applicant
Applicant
Applicant
Applicant
Total
Salaries ....................................................................................................................
Health Insurance ......................................................................................................
Subsistence/Travel ..................................................................................................
Hotel/Lodging Cost ..................................................................................................
Payroll Tax ...............................................................................................................
$101,810
12,706
6,732
3,652
4,888
$152,715
19,058
10,098
5,478
7,332
$254,525
31,764
16,830
9,130
12,220
Total Applicant Cost .........................................................................................................
129,788
194,681
324,469
Pilot Subsistence/Travel ..........................................................................................................
Hotel/Lodging Cost ..................................................................................................................
License Renewal .....................................................................................................................
Payroll Taxes ...........................................................................................................................
Insurance .................................................................................................................................
124,953
40,744
1,606
94,996
8,666
187,427
61,116
2,409
142,495
12,999
312,380
101,860
4,015
237,491
21,665
Total Other Pilotage Costs ...............................................................................................
270,965
406,446
677,411
Pilot Boat and Dispatch Costs:
Pilot Boat Cost ..................................................................................................................
Employee Benefits ............................................................................................................
Payroll taxes .....................................................................................................................
218,840
92,554
13,565
328,261
138,831
20,347
547,101
231,385
33,912
Total Pilot Boat and Dispatch Costs .........................................................................
324,959
487,439
812,398
Administrative Expense:
Legal—General Counsel ..................................................................................................
Legal—Shared Counsel (K&L Gates) ..............................................................................
Legal—Shared Counsel (K&L Gates) (D2–20–01) ..........................................................
Office Rent ........................................................................................................................
Insurance ..........................................................................................................................
Employee Benefits ............................................................................................................
Payroll Taxes ....................................................................................................................
Other Taxes ......................................................................................................................
Real Estate Taxes ............................................................................................................
Depreciation/Auto Lease/Other ........................................................................................
Interest ..............................................................................................................................
APA Dues .........................................................................................................................
Dues and Subscriptions ...................................................................................................
Utilities ..............................................................................................................................
Salaries—Admin Employees ............................................................................................
Accounting ........................................................................................................................
Pilot Training .....................................................................................................................
Other .................................................................................................................................
4,016
9,898
3,233
27,627
12,357
157,650
5,007
43,400
8,285
7,783
114
14,683
819
18,453
50,250
14,360
146
24,604
6,024
14,846
4,850
41,440
18,536
236,476
7,510
65,100
12,427
11,674
171
22,025
1,229
27,679
75,374
21,540
219
36,906
10,040
24,744
8,083
69,067
30,893
394,126
12,517
108,500
20,712
19,457
285
36,708
2,048
46,132
125,624
35,900
365
61,510
Total Administrative Expenses ..................................................................................
402,685
604,026
1,006,711
Total OpEx (Pilot Costs + Applicant Cost + Pilot Boats + Admin) ....................
1,128,397
1,692,592
2,820,989
Director’s Adjustments for Pilot Salaries:
Total Director’s Adjustments.
Total Operating Expenses (OpEx + Adjustments) ...........................................................
1,128,397
1,692,592
2,820,989
B. Step 2: Project Operating Expenses,
Adjusting for Inflation or Deflation
Having identified the recognized 2020
operating expenses in Step 1, the next
step is to estimate the current year’s
operating expenses by adjusting those
expenses for inflation over the 3-year
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
period. We calculate inflation using the
BLS data from the CPI for the Midwest
Region of the United States for the 2021
inflation rate.24
24 The
2021 inflation rate is available at https://
data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet. Specifically,
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the CPI is defined as ‘‘All Urban Consumers (CPI–
U), All Items, 1982–4=100.’’ Series CUUS0200SAO.
(Downloaded March 2022).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
52883
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
Because the BLS does not provide
forecasted inflation data, we use
economic projections from the Federal
Reserve for the 2022 and 2023 inflation
modification.25 Based on that
information, the calculations for Step 2
are as follows:
TABLE 16—ADJUSTED OPERATING EXPENSES FOR DISTRICT TWO
District Two
Undesignated
Total Operating Expenses (Step 1) .............................................................................................
2021 Inflation Modification (@5.1%) ...........................................................................................
2022 Inflation Modification (@2.7033%) .....................................................................................
2023 Inflation Modification (@2.3%) ...........................................................................................
Adjusted 2023 Operating Expenses .....................................................................................
C. Step 3: Estimate Number of
Registered Pilots and Apprentice Pilots
In accordance with the text in
§ 404.103, we estimate the number of
fully registered pilots in each district.
We determine the number of fully
registered pilots based on data provided
by the LPA. Using these numbers, we
estimate that there will be 16 registered
pilots in 2023 in District Two. We
determine the number of apprentice
pilots based on input from the district
on anticipated retirements and staffing
needs. Using these numbers, we
estimate that there will be two
apprentice pilots in 2023 in District
Two. Based on the seasonal staffing
$1,128,397
57,548
32,021
28,013
1,245,979
Designated
Total
$1,692,592
86,322
48,031
42,020
1,868,965
$2,820,989
143,870
80,052
70,033
3,114,944
model discussed in the 2017 ratemaking
(see 82 FR 41466), we assign a certain
number of pilots to designated waters
and a certain number to undesignated
waters, as shown in table 17. These
numbers are used to determine the
amount of revenue needed in their
respective areas.
TABLE 17—AUTHORIZED PILOTS FOR DISTRICT TWO
Item
District Two
Proposed Maximum Number of Pilots (per § 401.220(a)) * .................................................................................................................
2023 Authorized Pilots (total) ..............................................................................................................................................................
Pilots Assigned to Designated Areas ..................................................................................................................................................
Pilots Assigned to Undesignated Areas ..............................................................................................................................................
2023 Apprentice Pilots .........................................................................................................................................................................
16
15
6
9
2
* For a detailed calculation, refer to the Great Lakes Pilotage Rates—2017 Annual Review final rule, which contains the staffing model. See 82
FR 41466, table 6 at 41480 (August 31, 2017).
D. Step 4: Determine Target Pilot
Compensation Benchmark and
Apprentice Pilot Wage Benchmark
In this step, we determine the total
pilot compensation for each area.
Because we are proposing a full
ratemaking this year, we propose to
follow the procedure outlined in
paragraph (a) of § 404.104, which
requires us to develop a benchmark after
considering the most relevant currently
available non-proprietary information.
In accordance with the discussion in
Section VII of this preamble, the
proposed compensation benchmark for
2023 uses the 2022 compensation of
$399,266 per registered pilot as a base,
then adjusts for inflation following the
procedure outlined in paragraph (b) of
§ 404.104. The proposed target pilot
compensation for 2023 is $422,336 per
pilot. The proposed apprentice pilot
wage benchmark is 36 percent of the
target pilot compensation, or $152,041
($422,336 × 0.36).
Next, we certify that the number of
pilots estimated for 2022 is less than or
equal to the number permitted under
the staffing model in § 401.220(a). The
staffing model suggests that the number
of pilots needed is 15 pilots for District
Two, which is less than or equal to 15,
the number of registered pilots provided
by the pilot association. In accordance
with § 404.104(c), we use the revised
target individual compensation level to
derive the total pilot compensation by
multiplying the individual target
compensation by the estimated number
of registered pilots for District Two, as
shown in table 18. We estimate that the
number of apprentice pilots with
limited registration needed will be two
for District Two in the 2023 season. The
total target wages for apprentices are
allocated with 60 percent for the
designated area and 40 percent for the
undesignated area, in accordance with
the allocation for operating expenses.
TABLE 18—TARGET COMPENSATION FOR DISTRICT TWO
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
District Two
Target Pilot Compensation ..........................................................................................................
Number of Pilots ..........................................................................................................................
Total Target Pilot Compensation .................................................................................................
Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation ........................................................................................
Number of Apprentice Pilots ........................................................................................................
25 The 2022 and 2023 inflation rates are available
at https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
files/fomcprojtabl20220316.pdf. We used the PCE
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Undesignated
Designated
$422,336
9
$3,801,024
$152,041
........................
$422,336
6
$2,534,016
$152,041
........................
median inflation value found in table 1.
(Downloaded March 2022).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
Total
$422,336
15
$6,335,040
$152,041
2
52884
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 18—TARGET COMPENSATION FOR DISTRICT TWO—Continued
District Two
Undesignated
Designated
Total
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation ..............................................................................
$121,632.92
E. Step 5: Project Working Capital Fund
Next, we calculate the working capital
fund revenues needed for each area.
First, we add the figures for projected
operating expenses, total pilot
Using Moody’s data, the number is
2.7033 percent.26 By multiplying the
two figures, we obtain the working
capital fund contribution for each area,
as shown in table 19.
compensation, and total target
apprentice pilot wage for each area.
Then we find the preceding year’s
average annual rate of return for new
issues of high-grade corporate securities.
$182,449.00
$304,082
TABLE 19—WORKING CAPITAL FUND CALCULATION FOR DISTRICT TWO
District Two
Undesignated
Adjusted Operating Expenses (Step 2) .......................................................................................
Total Target Pilot Compensation (Step 4) ...................................................................................
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation (Step 4) ................................................................
Total 2023 Expenses ...................................................................................................................
Working Capital Fund (2.7033%) ................................................................................................
F. Step 6: Project Needed Revenue
In this step, we add all the expenses
accrued to derive the total revenue
needed for each area. These expenses
include the projected operating
expenses (from Step 2), the total pilot
compensation (from Step 4), total target
$1,245,979
3,801,024
121,633
5,168,636
139,725
Designated
$1,868,965
2,534,016
182,449
4,585,430
123,959
Total
$3,114,944
6,335,040
304,082
9,754,066
263,684
apprentice pilot wage, (from Step 4) and
the working capital fund contribution
(from Step 5). We show these
calculations in table 20.
TABLE 20—REVENUE NEEDED FOR DISTRICT TWO
District Two
Undesignated
Designated
Total
Adjusted Operating Expenses (Step 2) .......................................................................................
Total Target Pilot Compensation (Step 4) ...................................................................................
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation (Step 4) ................................................................
Working Capital Fund (Step 5) ....................................................................................................
$1,245,979
3,801,024
121,633
139,725
$1,868,965
2,534,016
182,449
123,959
$3,114,944
6,335,040
304,082
263,684
Total Revenue Needed ........................................................................................................
5,308,361
4,709,389
10,017,750
G. Step 7: Calculate Initial Base Rates
Having determined the revenue
needed for each area in the previous six
steps, to develop an hourly rate we
divide that number by the expected
number of hours of traffic. Step 7 is a
two-part process. In the first part, we
calculate the 10-year average of traffic in
District Two, using the total time on
task or pilot bridge hours. To calculate
the time on task for each district, the
Coast Guard uses billing data from
SeaPro. We pull the data from the
system filtering by district, year, job
status (we only include processed jobs),
and flagging code (we only include U.S.
jobs). Because we calculate separate
figures for designated and undesignated
waters, there are two parts for each
calculation. We show these values in
table 21.
TABLE 21—TIME ON TASK FOR DISTRICT TWO (HOURS)
District Two
Year
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Undesignated
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
26 Moody’s Seasoned Aaa Corporate Bond Yield,
average of 2021 monthly data. The Coast Guard uses
the most recent year of complete data. Moody’s is
taken from Moody’s Investors Service, which is a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
bond credit rating business of Moody’s Corporation.
Bond ratings are based on creditworthiness and
risk. The rating of ‘‘Aaa’’ is the highest bond rating
assigned with the lowest credit risk. See https://
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
8,826
6,232
6,512
6,150
5,139
6,425
Designated
3,226
8,401
7,715
6,655
6,074
5,615
fred.stlouisfed.org/series/AAA. (Downloaded March
2022).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
52885
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 21—TIME ON TASK FOR DISTRICT TWO (HOURS)—Continued
District Two
Year
Undesignated
2015
2014
2013
2012
Designated
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
6,535
7,856
4,603
3,848
5,967
7,001
4,750
3,922
Average ............................................................................................................................................................
6,213
5,933
Next, we derive the initial hourly rate
by dividing the revenue needed by the
average number of hours for each area.
This produces an initial rate, which is
necessary to produce the revenue
needed for each area, assuming the
amount of traffic is as expected. We
present the calculations for District Two
in table 22.
TABLE 22—INITIAL RATE CALCULATIONS FOR DISTRICT TWO
Undesignated
Revenue needed (Step 6) .......................................................................................................................................
Average time on task (hours) ..................................................................................................................................
Initial rate .................................................................................................................................................................
H. Step 8: Calculate Average Weighting
Factors by Area.
In this step, we calculate the average
weighting factor for each designated and
undesignated area. We collect the
weighting factors, set forth in 46 CFR
401.400, for each vessel trip. Using this
database, we calculate the average
$5,308,361
6,213
$854
Designated
$4,709,389
5,933
$794
weighting factor for each area using the
data from each vessel transit from 2014
onward, as shown in tables 23 and 24.
TABLE 23—AVERAGE WEIGHTING FACTOR FOR DISTRICT TWO, UNDESIGNATED AREAS
Number of
transits
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Vessel class/year
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
Weighting
factor
Weighted
transits
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
31
35
32
21
37
54
1
7
356
354
380
222
123
127
165
206
20
0
9
12
3
1
1
5
636
560
468
319
196
210
201
227
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
31
35
32
21
37
54
1
7
409
407
437
255
141
146
190
237
26
0
12
16
4
1
1
7
922
812
679
463
284
305
291
329
Total ......................................................................................................................................
Average weighting factor (weighted transits ÷ number of transits) ..............................
5,019
........................
........................
1.31
6,592
........................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
52886
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 24—AVERAGE WEIGHTING FACTOR FOR DISTRICT TWO, DESIGNATED AREAS
Number of
transits
Vessel class/year
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
Weighting
factor
Weighted
transits
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
20
15
28
15
42
48
7
12
237
217
224
127
153
281
342
240
8
8
4
4
14
1
5
2
359
340
281
185
379
403
405
268
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
20
15
28
15
42
48
7
12
273
250
258
146
176
323
393
276
10
10
5
5
18
1
7
3
521
493
407
268
550
584
587
389
Total ......................................................................................................................................
Average weighting factor (weighted transits ÷ number of transits) ..............................
4,674
........................
........................
........................
6,140
1.31
I. Step 9: Calculate Revised Base Rates
In this step, we revise the base rates
so that the total cost of pilotage will be
equal to the revenue needed after
considering the impact of the weighting
factors. To do this, we divide the initial
base rates calculated in Step 7 by the
average weighting factors calculated in
Step 8, as shown in table 25.
TABLE 25—REVISED BASE RATES FOR DISTRICT TWO
Initial rate
(Step 7)
Area
District Two: Undesignated ..........................................................................................................
District Two: Designated ..............................................................................................................
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
J. Step 10: Review and Finalize Rates
In this step, the Director reviews the
rates set forth by the staffing model and
ensures that they meet the goal of
ensuring safe, efficient, and reliable
pilotage. To establish this, the Director
considers whether the proposed rates
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
incorporate appropriate compensation
for pilots to handle heavy traffic
periods, and whether there is a
sufficient number of pilots to handle
those heavy traffic periods. The Director
also considers whether the proposed
rates would cover operating expenses
and infrastructure costs, and takes
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
$854
794
Average
weighting
factor
(Step 8)
1.31
1.31
Revised rate
(initial rate ÷
average
weighting
factor)
$652
606
average traffic and weighting factors
into consideration. Based on the
financial information submitted by the
pilots, the Director is not proposing any
alterations to the rates in this step. We
propose to modify § 401.405(a)(3) and
(4) to reflect the final rates shown in
table 26.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
52887
TABLE 26—PROPOSED FINAL RATES FOR DISTRICT TWO
Final 2022
pilotage rate
Area
Name
District Two: Designated ..........................................
Navigable waters from Southeast Shoal to Port
Huron, MI.
Lake Erie ..................................................................
District Two: Undesignated ......................................
District Three
A. Step 1: Recognize Previous Operating
Expenses
Step 1 in our ratemaking methodology
requires that the Coast Guard review
and recognize the previous year’s
operating expenses (§ 404.101). To do
so, we begin by reviewing the
independent accountant’s financial
reports for each association’s 2020
expenses and revenues.27 For
accounting purposes, the financial
reports divide expenses into designated
and undesignated areas. For costs
accrued by the pilot associations
generally, such as employee benefits, for
example, the cost is divided between
the designated and undesignated areas
on a pro rata basis. The recognized
operating expenses for District Three are
shown in table 27.
Adjustments have been made by the
auditors and are explained in the
auditor’s reports, which are available in
the docket for this rulemaking, where
indicated under the Public Participation
and Request for Comments portion of
the preamble.
In the 2020 expenses used as the basis
for this rulemaking, districts used the
term ‘‘applicant’’ to describe applicant
trainees and persons who would be
called apprentices (applicant pilots)
under the definition introduced by the
2022 final rule. Therefore, when
describing past expenses, we use the
term ‘‘applicant’’ to match what was
reported from 2020, which includes
both applicant and apprentice pilots.
We use ‘‘apprentice’’ to distinguish
apprentice pilot wages and describe the
impacts of the ratemaking going
forward.
We continue to include applicant
salaries as an allowable expense in the
2023 ratemaking, as it is based on 2020
operating expenses, when salaries were
Proposed 2023
pilotage rate
$536
$606
610
652
still an allowable expense. The
apprentice salaries paid in the years
2020 and 2021 have not been
reimbursed in the ratemaking as of
publication of this proposed rule.
Applicant salaries (including applicant
trainees and apprentice pilots) will
continue to be an allowable operating
expense through the 2024 ratemaking,
which uses operating expenses from
2021 where the wages for apprentice
pilots were still authorized as operating
expenses. Beginning with the 2025
ratemaking, apprentice pilot salaries
would no longer be included as a 2022
operating expense, because apprentice
pilot wages would have already been
factored into the ratemaking Steps 3 and
4 in calculation of the 2022 rates.
Beginning in 2025, the applicant
salaries’ operating expenses for 2022
will consist of only applicant trainees
(those who are not yet apprentice
pilots).
TABLE 27—2020 RECOGNIZED EXPENSES FOR DISTRICT THREE
District Three
Undesignated
Designated
Undesignated
Lakes Huron
and Michigan
St. Mary’s
River
Lake Superior
Total
Other Pilotage Costs:
Pilot Subsistence/Travel ...........................................................................
Hotel/Lodging Cost ...................................................................................
License Insurance- Pilots .........................................................................
Payroll Taxes ............................................................................................
Payroll Tax (D3–19–01) ............................................................................
Other .........................................................................................................
$284,547
87,208
16,749
........................
151,266
6,505
$118,603
36,349
6,981
........................
63,049
2,711
$149,261
45,745
8,786
........................
79,348
3,412
$552,411
169,302
32,516
........................
293,663
12,628
Total Other Pilotage Costs ................................................................
546,275
227,693
286,552
1,060,520
Applicant Cost:
Applicant Salaries .....................................................................................
Applicant Benefits .....................................................................................
Applicant Payroll Tax ................................................................................
Applicant Hotel/Lodging ............................................................................
340,677
66,083
25,711
31,313
141,998
27,544
10,717
13,052
178,705
34,665
13,487
16,425
661,380
128,292
49,915
60,790
Total Applicant Cost ..........................................................................
463,784
193,311
243,282
900,377
Pilot Boat and Dispatch costs:
Pilot Boat Costs ........................................................................................
Dispatch Costs .........................................................................................
Employee Benefits ....................................................................................
Payroll Taxes ............................................................................................
515,075
112,008
41,153
16,771
214,689
46,686
17,153
6,991
270,187
58,755
21,587
8,798
999,951
217,449
79,893
32,560
Total Pilot Boat and Dispatch costs ..................................................
685,007
285,519
359,327
1,329,853
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Reported operating expenses for 2020
27 These reports are available in the docket for
this rulemaking.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
52888
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 27—2020 RECOGNIZED EXPENSES FOR DISTRICT THREE—Continued
District Three
Reported operating expenses for 2020
Undesignated
Designated
Undesignated
Lakes Huron
and Michigan
St. Mary’s
River
Lake Superior
Administrative Cost:
Legal—General Counsel ..........................................................................
Legal—Shared Counsel (K&L Gates) ......................................................
Legal—Shared Counsel (K&L Gates) CPA Deduction (D3–20–03) ........
Legal—USCG Litigation ...........................................................................
Insurance ..................................................................................................
Employee Benefits ....................................................................................
Payroll Tax ................................................................................................
Other Taxes ..............................................................................................
Real Estate Taxes ....................................................................................
Depreciation/Auto Leasing/Other .............................................................
Interest ......................................................................................................
APA Dues .................................................................................................
Dues and Subscriptions ...........................................................................
Salaries .....................................................................................................
Utilities ......................................................................................................
Accounting/Professional Fees ..................................................................
Other Expenses ........................................................................................
Other Expenses CPA Deduction (D3–18–01) ..........................................
Total
1,921
21,650
3,601
8,575
18,811
80,117
8,101
15,797
2,001
61,096
2,940
23,860
4,971
50,795
54,212
23,823
38,507
(4,684)
801
9,024
1,501
3,574
7,841
33,394
3,377
6,584
834
25,465
1,225
9,945
2,072
21,172
22,596
9,930
16,050
(1,952)
1,008
11,357
1,889
4,498
9,867
42,026
4,250
8,286
1,050
32,048
1,542
12,516
2,607
26,645
28,438
12,496
20,199
(2,457)
3,730
42,031
6,991
16,647
36,519
155,537
15,728
30,667
3,885
118,609
5,707
46,321
9,650
98,612
105,246
46,249
74,756
(9,093)
Total Administrative Expenses ..........................................................
Total Operating Expenses (Other Costs + Applicant Cost +
Pilot Boats + Admin) ...............................................................
416,094
173,433
218,265
807,792
2,111,160
879,956
1,107,426
4,098,542
Director’s Adjustments—Applicant Surcharge Collected .................................
(63,120)
(26,309)
(33,110)
(122,539)
Total Director’s Adjustments .....................................................................
Total Operating Expenses (OpEx + Adjustments) ...................................
(63,120)
2,048,040
(26,309)
853,647
(33,110)
1,074,316
(122,539)
3,976,003
B. Step 2: Project Operating Expenses,
Adjusting for Inflation or Deflation
Having identified the recognized 2020
operating expenses in Step 1, the next
step is to estimate the current year’s
operating expenses by adjusting those
expenses for inflation over the 3-year
period. We calculate inflation using the
BLS data from the CPI for the Midwest
Region of the United States for the 2021
inflation rate.28 Because the BLS does
not provide forecasted inflation data, we
use economic projections from the
Federal Reserve for the 2022 and 2023
inflation modification.29 Based on that
information, the calculations for Step 2
are as follows:
TABLE 28—ADJUSTED OPERATING EXPENSES FOR DISTRICT THREE
District Three
Undesignated
Total
2021
2022
2023
Total
Operating Expenses (Step 1) .............................................................................................
Inflation Modification (@5.1%) ...........................................................................................
Inflation Modification (@2.7033%) .....................................................................................
Inflation Modification (@2.3%) ...........................................................................................
$3,122,356
159,240
88,603
77,515
$853,647
43,536
24,224
21,192
$3,976,003
202,776
112,827
98,707
Adjusted 2023 Operating Expenses .....................................................................................
3,447,714
942,599
4,390,313
C. Step 3: Estimate Number of
Registered Pilots and Apprentice Pilots
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Designated
In accordance with the text in
§ 404.103, we estimate the number of
registered pilots in each district. We
determine the number of registered
pilots based on data provided by the
WGLPA. Using these numbers, we
28 The 2021 inflation rate is available at https://
data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet. Specifically,
the CPI is defined as ‘‘All Urban Consumers (CPI–
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
estimate that there will be 22 registered
pilots in 2023 in District Three. We
determine the number of apprentice
pilots based on input from the district
on anticipated retirements and staffing
needs. Using these numbers, we
estimate that there will be three
apprentice pilots in 2023 in District
Three. Furthermore, based on the
seasonal staffing model discussed in the
2017 ratemaking (see 82 FR 41466), we
assign a certain number of pilots to
designated waters and a certain number
to undesignated waters, as shown in
table 29. These numbers are used to
determine the amount of revenue
needed in their respective areas.
U), All Items, 1982¥4 = 100.’’ Series
CUUS0200SAO (Downloaded March 2022).
29 The 2022 and 2023 inflation rates are available
at https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/
files/fomcprojtabl20220316.pdf. We used the PCE
median inflation value found in table 1.
(Downloaded March 2022).
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
52889
TABLE 29—AUTHORIZED PILOTS FOR DISTRICT THREE
Item
District Three
Proposed Maximum Number of Pilots (per § 401.220(a)) * .............................................................................................................
2023 Authorized Pilots (total) ..........................................................................................................................................................
Pilots Assigned to Designated Areas ..............................................................................................................................................
Pilots Assigned to Undesignated Areas ..........................................................................................................................................
2023 Apprentice Pilots .....................................................................................................................................................................
22
22
5
17
3
* For a detailed calculation, refer to the Great Lakes Pilotage Rates—2017 Annual Review final rule, which contains the staffing model. See 82
FR 41466, table 6 at 41480 (August 31, 2017).
D. Step 4: Determine Target Pilot
Compensation Benchmark and
Apprentice Pilot Wage Benchmark
In this step, we determine the total
pilot compensation for each area.
Because we are proposing a full
ratemaking this year, we propose to
follow the procedure outlined in
paragraph (a) of § 404.104, which
requires us to develop a benchmark after
considering the most relevant currently
available non-proprietary information.
In accordance with the discussion in
Section VII above, the proposed
compensation benchmark for 2023 uses
the 2022 compensation of $399,266 per
by the pilot association. In accordance
with § 404.104(c), we use the revised
target individual compensation level to
derive the total pilot compensation by
multiplying the individual target
compensation by the estimated number
of registered pilots for District Three, as
shown in table 30. We estimate that the
number of apprentice pilots with
limited registration needed will be three
for District Three in the 2023 season.
The total target wages for apprentices
are allocated with 21 percent for the
designated area, and 79 percent (52
percent + 27 percent) for the
undesignated areas, in accordance with
the allocation for operating expenses.
registered pilot as a base, then adjusts
for inflation following the procedure
outlined in paragraph (b) of § 404.104.
The proposed target pilot compensation
for 2023 is $422,336 per pilot. The
proposed apprentice pilot wage
benchmark is 36 percent of the target
pilot compensation, or $152,041
($422,336 × 0.36).
Next, we certify that the number of
pilots estimated for 2022 is less than or
equal to the number permitted under
the staffing model in § 401.220(a). The
staffing model suggests that the number
of pilots needed is 22 pilots for District
Three, which is less than or equal to 22,
the number of registered pilots provided
TABLE 30—TARGET COMPENSATION FOR DISTRICT THREE
District three
Target Pilot Compensation ..........................................................................................................
Number of Pilots ..........................................................................................................................
Total Target Pilot Compensation .................................................................................................
Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation ........................................................................................
Number of Apprentice Pilots ........................................................................................................
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation ..............................................................................
E. Step 5: Project Working Capital Fund
Next, we calculate the working capital
fund revenues needed for each area.
First, we add the figures for projected
operating expenses, total pilot
Undesignated
Designated
$422,336
17
$7,179,712
$152,041
........................
$358,193
$422,336
5
$2,111,680
$152,041
........................
$97,929
compensation, and total target
apprentice pilot wage for each area.
Then we find the preceding year’s
average annual rate of return for new
issues of high-grade corporate securities.
Total
$422,336
22
$9,291,392
$152,041
3
$456,122.88
Using Moody’s data, the number is
2.7033 percent.30 By multiplying the
two figures, we obtain the working
capital fund contribution for each area,
as shown in table 31.
TABLE 31—WORKING CAPITAL FUND CALCULATION FOR DISTRICT THREE
District three
Undesignated
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Adjusted Operating Expenses (Step 2) .......................................................................................
Total Target Pilot Compensation (Step 4) ...................................................................................
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation (Step 4) ................................................................
Total 2023 Expenses ...................................................................................................................
Working Capital Fund (2.7033%) ................................................................................................
30 Moody’s Seasoned Aaa Corporate Bond Yield,
average of 2021 monthly data. The Coast Guard uses
the most recent year of complete data. Moody’s is
taken from Moody’s Investors Service, which is a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
bond credit rating business of Moody’s Corporation.
Bond ratings are based on creditworthiness and
risk. The rating of ‘‘Aaa’’ is the highest bond rating
assigned with the lowest credit risk. See https://
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
$3,447,714
7,179,712
358,193
10,985,619
296,978
Designated
$942,599
2,111,680
97,929
3,152,208
85,215
Total
$4,390,313
9,291,392
456,123
14,137,828
382,193
fred.stlouisfed.org/series/AAA. (Downloaded March
2022).
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
52890
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
F. Step 6: Project Needed Revenue
In this step, we add all the expenses
accrued to derive the total revenue
needed for each area. These expenses
include the projected operating
expenses (from Step 2), the total pilot
compensation (from Step 4), and the
working capital fund contribution (from
Step 5). The calculations are shown in
table 32.
TABLE 32—REVENUE NEEDED FOR DISTRICT THREE
District three
Undesignated
Designated
Total
Adjusted Operating Expenses (Step 2) .......................................................................................
Total Target Pilot Compensation (Step 4) ...................................................................................
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation (Step 4) ................................................................
Working Capital Fund (Step 5) ....................................................................................................
$3,447,714
7,179,712
358,193
296,978
$942,599
2,111,680
97,929
85,215
$4,390,313
9,291,392
456,123
382,193
Total Revenue Needed ........................................................................................................
11,282,597
3,237,423
14,520,021
G. Step 7: Calculate Initial Base Rates
Having determined the revenue
needed for each area in the previous six
steps, to develop an hourly rate, we
divide that number by the expected
number of hours of traffic. Step 7 is a
two-part process. In the first part, we
calculate the 10-year average of traffic in
District Three, using the total time on
task or pilot bridge hours. To calculate
the time on task for each district, the
Coast Guard uses billing data from
SeaPro. We pull the data from the
system filtering by district, year, job
status (we only include processed jobs),
and flagging code (we only include U.S.
jobs). Because we calculate separate
figures for designated and undesignated
waters, there are two parts for each
calculation. We show these values in
table 33.
TABLE 33—TIME ON TASK FOR DISTRICT THREE
[Hours]
District three
Year
Undesignated
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
Designated
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
18,219
24,178
24,851
19,967
20,955
23,421
22,824
25,833
17,115
15,906
2,584
3,682
3,395
3,455
2,997
2,769
2,696
3,835
2,631
2,163
Average ............................................................................................................................................................
21,327
3,021
Next, we derive the initial hourly rate
by dividing the revenue needed by the
average number of hours for each area.
This produces an initial rate, which is
necessary to produce the revenue
needed for each area, assuming the
amount of traffic is as expected. The
calculations for District Three are set
forth in table 34.
TABLE 34—INITIAL RATE CALCULATIONS FOR DISTRICT THREE
Undesignated
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Revenue needed (Step 6) .......................................................................................................................................
Average time on task (hours) ..................................................................................................................................
Initial rate .................................................................................................................................................................
H. Step 8: Calculate Average Weighting
Factors by Area
In this step, we calculate the average
weighting factor for each designated and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
undesignated area. We collect the
weighting factors, set forth in 46 CFR
401.400, for each vessel trip. Using this
database, we calculate the average
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
$11,282,597
21,327
$529
Designated
$3,237,423
3,021
$1,072
weighting factor for each area using the
data from each vessel transit from 2014
onward, as shown in tables 35 and 36.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
52891
TABLE 35—AVERAGE WEIGHTING FACTOR FOR DISTRICT THREE, UNDESIGNATED AREAS
Number of
transits
Vessel class/year
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Weighted
transits
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
45
56
136
148
103
173
4
7
274
207
236
264
169
279
395
261
15
8
10
19
9
9
4
7
394
375
332
367
337
334
413
312
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
45
56
136
148
103
173
4
7
315
238
271
304
194
321
454
300
20
10
13
25
12
12
5
9
571
544
481
532
489
484
599
452
Total for Area 6 ....................................................................................................................
5,702
........................
7,328
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
3
0
4
4
0
0
1
4
177
169
174
151
102
120
239
96
3
0
7
18
7
6
2
1
243
253
204
269
188
254
456
182
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
3
0
4
4
0
0
1
4
204
194
200
174
117
138
275
110
4
0
9
23
9
8
3
1
352
367
296
390
273
368
661
264
Total for Area 8 ....................................................................................................................
Combined total .....................................................................................................................
3,337
9,039
........................
........................
4456
11784
Area 8
Class 1
Class 1
Class 1
Class 1
Class 1
Class 1
Class 1
Class 1
Class 2
Class 2
Class 2
Class 2
Class 2
Class 2
Class 2
Class 2
Class 3
Class 3
Class 3
Class 3
Class 3
Class 3
Class 3
Class 3
Class 4
Class 4
Class 4
Class 4
Class 4
Class 4
Class 4
Class 4
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
Weighting
factor
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
52892
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 35—AVERAGE WEIGHTING FACTOR FOR DISTRICT THREE, UNDESIGNATED AREAS—Continued
Number of
transits
Vessel class/year
Average weighting factor (weighted transits ÷ number of transits) ..............................
Weighting
factor
........................
Weighted
transits
1.30
........................
TABLE 36—AVERAGE WEIGHTING FACTOR FOR DISTRICT THREE, DESIGNATED AREAS
Number of
transits
Vessel class/year
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
Class
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2014)
(2015)
(2016)
(2017)
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
Weighting
factor
Weighted
transits
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................
27
23
55
62
47
45
16
12
221
145
174
170
126
162
250
128
4
0
6
14
6
3
4
2
321
245
191
234
225
308
385
299
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
27
23
55
62
47
45
16
12
254
167
200
196
145
186
288
147
5
0
8
18
8
4
5
3
465
355
277
339
326
447
558
434
Total ......................................................................................................................................
Average weighting factor (weighted transits ÷ number of transits) ..............................
3,910
........................
........................
1.31
5,122
........................
I. Step 9: Calculate Revised Base Rates
In this step, we revise the base rates
so that the total cost of pilotage will be
equal to the revenue needed after
considering the impact of the weighting
factors. To do this, we divide the initial
base rates calculated in Step 7 by the
average weighting factors calculated in
Step 8, as shown in table 37.
TABLE 37—REVISED BASE RATES FOR DISTRICT THREE
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
District Three: Undesignated .......................................................................................
District Three: Designated ...........................................................................................
J. Step 10: Review and Finalize Rates
In this step, the Director reviews the
rates set forth by the staffing model and
ensures that they meet the goal of
ensuring safe, efficient, and reliable
pilotage. To establish this, the Director
considers whether the proposed rates
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
Average
weighting factor
(Step 8)
Initial rate
(Step 7)
Area
$529
1,072
incorporate appropriate compensation
for pilots to handle heavy traffic periods
and whether there is a sufficient number
of pilots to handle those heavy traffic
periods. The Director also considers
whether the proposed rates would cover
operating expenses and infrastructure
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1.30
1.31
Revised rate
(initial rate ÷
average
weighting factor)
$407
818
costs and takes average traffic and
weighting factors into consideration.
Based on this information, the Director
is not proposing any alterations to the
rates in this step. We propose to modify
§ 401.405(a)(5) and (6) to reflect the final
rates shown in table 38.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
52893
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 38—PROPOSED FINAL RATES FOR DISTRICT THREE
Final 2022
pilotage rate
Area
Name
District Three: Designated ........................................
District Three: Undesignated ....................................
St. Mary’s River ........................................................
Lakes Huron, Michigan, and Superior ......................
X. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after
considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking.
A summary of 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.
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has not designated this proposed
rule a significant regulatory action
under section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866. A regulatory analysis follows.
The purpose of this proposed rule is
to establish new base pilotage rates, as
Proposed 2023
pilotage rate
$662
342
$818
407
46 U.S.C. 9303(f) requires that rates be
established or reviewed and adjusted
each year. The statute also requires that
base rates be established by a full
ratemaking at least once every 5 years,
and, in years when base rates are not
established, they must be reviewed and,
if necessary, adjusted. The last full
ratemaking was concluded in June of
2018.31 For this ratemaking, the Coast
Guard estimates an increase in cost of
approximately $4.54 million to
industry. This is approximately a 14percent increase because of the change
in revenue needed in 2023 compared to
the revenue needed in 2022.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
TABLE 39—ECONOMIC IMPACTS DUE TO PROPOSED CHANGES
Change
Description
Affected population
Rate changes ....
In accordance with 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 93, the Coast
Guard is required to review
and adjust base pilotage
rates annually.
The Coast Guard is required to review
and adjust pilotage rates on the Great
Lakes annually. See section IV of this
preamble for detailed discussions of the
legal basis and purpose for this
rulemaking. Based on our annual review
for this rulemaking, we are adjusting the
pilotage rates for the 2023 shipping
season to generate sufficient revenues
for each district to reimburse its
necessary and reasonable operating
expenses, fairly compensate trained and
rested pilots, and provide an
appropriate working capital fund to use
for improvements. The result would be
an increase in rates for all areas in
District One, District Two, and District
Three. These changes would also lead to
a net increase in the cost of service to
shippers. The change in per unit cost to
Costs
Benefits
Owners and operators of 285 Increase of $4,535,400 due
vessels transiting the Great
to change in revenue
Lakes system annually, 55
needed for 2023
United States Great Lakes
($37,022,395) from revpilots, 7 apprentice pilots,
enue needed for 2022
and 3 pilotage associations.
($32,486,995) as shown in
table 40.
each individual shipper will be
dependent on their area of operation.
A detailed discussion of our economic
impact analysis follows.
Affected Population
This proposed rule affects United
States Great Lakes pilots and apprentice
pilots, the 3 pilot associations, and the
owners and operators of 285 oceangoing
vessels that transit the Great Lakes
annually on average from 2019 to 2021.
We estimate that there will be 55
registered pilots and 7 apprentice pilots
during the 2023 shipping season. The
shippers affected by these rate changes
are those owners and operators of
domestic vessels operating ‘‘on register’’
(engaged in foreign trade) and owners
and operators of non-Canadian foreign
vessels on routes within the Great Lakes
system. These owners and operators
must have pilots or pilotage service as
required by 46 U.S.C. 9302. There is no
minimum tonnage limit or exemption
for these vessels. The statute applies
only to commercial vessels and not to
recreational vessels. United Statesflagged vessels not operating on register,
and Canadian ‘‘lakers,’’ which account
for most commercial shipping on the
Great Lakes, are not required by 46
U.S.C. 9302 to have pilots. However,
these United States- and Canadianflagged lakers may voluntarily choose to
engage a Great Lakes registered pilot.
Vessels that are U.S.-flagged may opt to
have a pilot for varying reasons, such as
unfamiliarity with designated waters
and ports, or for insurance purposes.
The Coast Guard used billing
information from the years 2019 through
31 Great Lakes Pilotage Rates—2018 Annual
Review and Revisions to Methodology (83 FR
26162), published June 5, 2018.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
New rates cover an association’s necessary and reasonable operating expenses. Promotes safe, efficient, and reliable pilotage
service on the Great
Lakes. Provides fair compensation, adequate training, and sufficient rest periods for pilots. Ensures the
association receives sufficient revenues to fund future improvements.
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
52894
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
2021 from the GLPMS to estimate the
average annual number of vessels
affected by the rate adjustment. The
GLPMS tracks data related to managing
and coordinating the dispatch of pilots
on the Great Lakes, and billing in
accordance with the services. As
described in Step 7 of the ratemaking
methodology, we use a 10-year average
to estimate the traffic. We used 3 years
of the most recent billing data to
estimate the affected population. When
we reviewed 10 years of the most recent
billing data, we found the data included
vessels that have not used pilotage
services in recent years. We believe
using 3 years of billing data is a better
representation of the vessel population
that is currently using pilotage services
and will be impacted by this
rulemaking. We found that 424 unique
vessels used pilotage services during the
years 2019 through 2021. That is, these
vessels had a pilot dispatched to the
vessel, and billing information was
recorded in the GLPMS or SeaPro. Of
these vessels, 397 were foreign-flagged
vessels and 27 were U.S.-flagged
vessels. As stated previously, U.S.flagged vessels not operating on register
are not required to have a registered
pilot per 46 U.S.C. 9302, but they can
voluntarily choose to have one.
Numerous factors affect vessel traffic,
which varies from year to year.
Therefore, rather than using the total
number of vessels over the time period,
we took an average of the unique vessels
using pilotage services from the years
2019 through 2021 as the best
representation of vessels estimated to be
affected by the rates in this rulemaking.
From 2019 through 2021, an average of
285 vessels used pilotage services
annually.32 On average, 273 of these
vessels were foreign-flagged and 12
were U.S.-flagged vessels that
voluntarily opted into the pilotage
service (these figures are rounded
averages).
Total Cost to Shippers
The rate changes resulting from this
adjustment to the rates would result in
a net increase in the cost of service to
shippers. However, the change in per
unit cost to each individual shipper will
be dependent on their area of operation.
The Coast Guard estimates the effect
of the rate changes on shippers by
comparing the total projected revenues
needed to cover costs in 2022 with the
total projected revenues to cover costs
in 2023. We set pilotage rates so pilot
associations receive enough revenue to
cover their necessary and reasonable
expenses. Shippers pay these rates
when they engage a pilot as required by
46 U.S.C. 9302. Therefore, the aggregate
payments of shippers to pilot
associations are equal to the projected
necessary revenues for pilot
associations. The revenues each year
represent the total costs that shippers
must pay for pilotage services. The
change in revenue from the previous
year is the additional cost to shippers
discussed in this proposed rule.
The impacts of the rate changes on
shippers are estimated from the district
pilotage projected revenues (shown in
tables 8, 20, and 32 of this preamble).
The Coast Guard estimates that for the
2023 shipping season, the projected
revenue needed for all three districts is
$37,022,395.
To estimate the change in cost to
shippers from this proposed rule, the
Coast Guard compared the 2023 total
projected revenues to the 2022 projected
revenues. Because we review and
prescribe rates for Great Lakes pilotage
annually, the effects are estimated as a
single-year cost rather than annualized
over a 10-year period. In the 2022
rulemaking, we estimated the total
projected revenue needed for 2022 as
$32,486,994.33 This is the best
approximation of 2022 revenues, as, at
the time of publication of this proposed
rule, the Coast Guard does not have
enough audited data available for the
2022 shipping season to revise these
projections. Table 40 shows the revenue
projections for 2022 and 2023 and
details the additional cost increases to
shippers by area and district as a result
of the rate changes on traffic in Districts
One, Two, and Three.
TABLE 40—EFFECT OF THE RULEMAKING BY AREA AND DISTRICT
[$U.S.; non-discounted]
Additional
costs of this
rulemaking
Revenue needed
in 2022
Revenue needed
in 2023
Total, District One ............................................................................................................
Total, District Two ............................................................................................................
Total, District Three .........................................................................................................
$11,791,695
8,786,881
11,908,418
$12,484,624
10,017,750
14,520,021
$692,930
1,230,868
2,611,602
System Total .............................................................................................................
32,486,994
37,022,395
4,535,400
Area
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
* All figures are rounded to the nearest dollar and may not sum.
The resulting difference between the
projected revenue in 2022 and the
projected revenue in 2023 is the annual
change in payments from shippers to
pilots as a result of the rate changes
proposed by this rulemaking. The effect
of the rate changes to shippers would
vary by area and district. After taking
into account the change in pilotage
rates, the proposed rate changes would
lead to affected shippers operating in
District One experiencing an increase in
payments of $692,930 over the previous
year. District Two and District Three
would experience an increase in
payments of $1,230,868 and $2,611,602,
respectively, when compared with 2022.
The overall adjustment in payments
would be an increase in payments by
shippers of $4,535,400 across all three
districts (a 14-percent increase when
compared with 2022). Again, because
the Coast Guard reviews and sets rates
for Great Lakes pilotage annually, we
estimate the impacts as single-year costs
rather than annualizing them over a 10year period.
Table 41 shows the difference in
revenue by revenue-component from
2022 to 2023 and presents each revenuecomponent as a percentage of the total
revenue needed. In both 2022 and 2023,
the largest revenue-component was
pilotage compensation (63 percent of
total revenue needed in 2022, and 63
percent of total revenue needed in
2023), followed by operating expenses
(31 percent of total revenue needed in
32 Some vessels entered the Great Lakes multiple
times in a single year, affecting the average number
of unique vessels using pilotage services in any
given year.
33 87 FR 18488, see table 42. https://
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-03-30/pdf/
2022-06394.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
52895
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
2022, and 32 percent of total revenue
needed in 2023).
TABLE 41—DIFFERENCE IN REVENUE BY REVENUE-COMPONENT
Revenue
needed in
2022
Revenue component
Adjusted Operating Expenses ...................
Total Target Pilot Compensation ...............
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation ..........................................................
Working Capital Fund ................................
Total Revenue Needed ..............................
Percentage
of total
revenue
needed in
2022
Revenue
needed in
2023
Percentage
of total
revenue
needed in
2023
Difference
(2023 revenue¥
2022 revenue)
Percentage
change from
previous year
$10,045,658
20,362,566
31
63
$11,755,133
23,228,480
32
63
$1,709,475
2,865,914
17
14
1,293,622
785,149
32,486,994
4
2
100
1,064,287
974,495
37,022,395
3
3
100
(229,335)
189,346
4,535,400
(18)
24
14
* All figures are rounded to the nearest dollar and may not sum.
As stated above, we estimate that
there would be a total increase in
revenue needed by the pilot associations
of $4,535,400. This represents an
increase in revenue needed for target
pilot compensation of $2,865,914, a
decrease in revenue needed for total
apprentice pilot wage benchmark of
($229,335), an increase in the revenue
needed for adjusted operating expenses
of $1,709,475, and an increase in the
revenue needed for the working capital
fund of $189,346.
The change in revenue needed for
pilot compensation, $2,865,914, is due
to three factors: (1) The changes to
adjust 2022 pilotage compensation to
account for the difference between
actual ECI inflation 34 (5.6 percent) and
predicted PCE inflation 35 (2.2 percent)
for 2022; (2) an increase of one pilot in
District Two and three pilots in District
Three compared to 2022; and (3)
projected inflation of pilotage
compensation in Step 2 of the
methodology, using predicted inflation
through 2024.
The target compensation is $422,336
per pilot in 2023, compared to $399,266
in 2022. The proposed changes to
modify the 2022 pilot compensation to
account for the difference between
predicted and actual inflation would
increase the 2022 target compensation
value by 3.4 percent. As shown in table
42, this inflation adjustment increases
total compensation by $13,575 per pilot,
and the total revenue needed by
$746,627 when accounting for all 55
pilots.
TABLE 42—CHANGE IN REVENUE RESULTING FROM THE CHANGE TO INFLATION OF PILOT COMPENSATION CALCULATION
IN STEP 4
2022 Target Pilot Compensation .............................................................................................................................................................
Adjusted 2022 Compensation ($399,266 × 1.034%) ..............................................................................................................................
Difference between Adjusted Target 2022 Compensation and Target 2022 Compensation ($412,841¥$399,266) ............................
Increase in total Revenue for 55 Pilots ($13,575 × 55) ..........................................................................................................................
$399,266
412,841
13,575
746,627
* All figures are rounded to the nearest dollar and may not sum.
Similarly, table 43 shows the impact
of the difference between predicted and
actual inflation on the target apprentice
pilot compensation benchmark. The
inflation adjustment increases the
compensation benchmark by $4,887 per
apprentice pilot, and the total revenue
needed by $34,209 when accounting for
all seven apprentice pilots.
TABLE 43—CHANGE IN REVENUE RESULTING FROM THE CHANGE TO INFLATION OF APPRENTICE PILOT COMPENSATION
CALCULATION IN STEP 4
Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation ....................................................................................................................................................
Adjusted Compensation ($143,736 × 1.034%) .......................................................................................................................................
Difference between Adjusted Target Compensation and Target Compensation ($148,623¥$143,736) ..............................................
Increase in total Revenue for Apprentices ($4,887 × 7) .........................................................................................................................
$143,736
148,623
4,887
34,209
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
* All figures are rounded to the nearest dollar and may not sum.
As noted earlier, the Coast Guard
predicts that 55 pilots would be needed
for the 2023 season. This would be an
increase of four pilots compared to the
2022 season. The difference reflects an
increase of one pilot in District Two and
three pilots in District Three. Table 44
shows the increase of $1,635,044 in
revenue needed solely for pilot
compensation. As noted previously, to
avoid double counting this value
excludes the change in revenue
resulting from the change to adjust 2022
pilotage compensation to account for
the difference between actual and
predicted inflation.
34 Employment Cost Index, Total Compensation
for Private Industry workers in Transportation and
Material Moving, Annual Average, Series ID:
CIU2010000520000A. Accessed April 29, 2022.
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/eci.t05.htm.
35 https://www.federalreserve.gov/
monetarypolicy/files/fomcprojtabl20220316.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
52896
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 44—CHANGE IN REVENUE RESULTING FROM INCREASE OF FOUR PILOTS
2023 Target Compensation .....................................................................................................................................................................
Total Number of New Pilots ....................................................................................................................................................................
Total Cost of new Pilots ($422,336 × 4) .................................................................................................................................................
Difference between Adjusted Target 2022 Compensation and Target 2022 Compensation ($412,841¥$399,266) ............................
Increase in total Revenue for 4 Pilots ($13,575 × 4) ..............................................................................................................................
Net Increase in total Revenue for 4 Pilots ($1,689,344¥$54,300) ........................................................................................................
$422,336
4
$1,689,344
$13,575
$54,300
$1,635,044
* All figures are rounded to the nearest dollar and may not sum.
Similarly, the Coast Guard predicts
that seven apprentice pilots would be
needed for the 2023 season. This would
be a decrease of two apprentices from
the 2022 season. The difference reflects
a decrease of two apprentices for
District Three. Table 45 shows the
decrease of ($294,308) in revenue
needed solely for apprentice pilot
compensation. As noted previously, to
avoid double counting this value
excludes the change in revenue
resulting from the change to adjust 2022
apprentice pilotage compensation to
account for the difference between
actual and predicted inflation.
TABLE 45—CHANGE IN REVENUE RESULTING FROM DECREASE OF TWO APPRENTICES
2023 Apprentice Target Compensation .........................................................................................................................................
Total Number of New Apprentices ................................................................................................................................................
Total Cost of new Apprentices ($152,041 ×¥2) ...........................................................................................................................
Difference between Adjusted Target 2022 Compensation and Target 2022 Compensation ($148,623¥$143,736) ..................
Increase in total Revenue for –2 Apprentices ($4,887 ×¥2) .......................................................................................................
Net Increase in total Revenue for ¥2 Apprentices (¥$304,082¥¥$9,774) ..............................................................................
$152,041
(2)
($304,081.92)
$4,887
($9,774)
($294,308)
* All figures are rounded to the nearest dollar and may not sum.
Another increase, $522,223, would be
the result of increasing compensation
for the 55 pilots to account for future
inflation of 2.3 percent in 2023. This
would increase total compensation by
$9,495 per pilot.
TABLE 46—CHANGE IN REVENUE RESULTING FROM INFLATING 2022 COMPENSATION TO 2023
Adjusted 2022 Compensation .................................................................................................................................................................
2023 Target Compensation ($412,841 × 1.023%) ..................................................................................................................................
Difference between Adjusted 2022 Compensation and Target 2023 Compensation ($422,336¥$412,841) .......................................
Increase in total Revenue for 55 Pilots ($9,495 × 55) ............................................................................................................................
$412,841
422,336
9,495
522,223
* All figures are rounded to the nearest dollar and may not sum.
Similarly, an increase of $23,927
would be the result of increasing
compensation for the 7 apprentice pilots
to account for future inflation of 2.3
percent in 2023. This would increase
total compensation by $3,418 per
apprentice pilot, as shown in table 47.
TABLE 47—CHANGE IN REVENUE RESULTING FROM INFLATING 2022 APPRENTICE PILOT COMPENSATION TO 2023
Adjusted 2022 Compensation .................................................................................................................................................................
2023 Target Compensation ($422,336 × 36%) .......................................................................................................................................
Difference between Adjusted Compensation and Target Compensation ($152,041¥$148,623) ..........................................................
Increase in total Revenue for 7 Apprentice Pilots ($3,418 × 7) ..............................................................................................................
* All figures are rounded to the nearest dollar and may not sum.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Table 48 presents the percentage
change in revenue by area and revenuecomponent, excluding surcharges, as
they are applied at the district level.36
36 The 2022 projected revenues are from the Great
Lakes Pilotage Rate—2022 Annual Review and
Revisions to Methodology final rule (86 FR 14184),
tables 9, 21, and 33. The 2023 projected revenues
are from tables 8, 20, and 32 of this final rule.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
$148,623
152,041
3,418
23,927
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
1,245,979
1,868,965
3,447,714
1,078,929
1,618,395
2,603,961
942,599
1,699,951
1,613,051
711,920
$2,549,925
$2,419,401
2023
5
5
32
32
15
15
Percentage
change
1,597,064
5,988,990
2,395,596
3,194,128
3,194,128
$3,992,660
2022
2,111,680
7,179,712
2,534,016
3,801,024
3,378,688
$4,223,360
2023
6
6
32
20
6
19
Percentage
change
Total target pilot compensation
150,923
567,756
114,989
172,483
114,989
$172,483
2022
97,929
358,193
182,449
121,633
121,633
$182,449
2023
60,924
226,880
¥37
¥35
102,261
110,101
¥29.5
58.7
121,906
$163,077
2022
85,215
296,978
123,959
139,725
140,581
$188,037
2023
40
31
21
27
15
15
Percentage
change
Working capital fund
5.8
5.8
Percentage
change
Total target apprentice pilot
compensation
TABLE 48—DIFFERENCE IN REVENUE BY REVENUE-COMPONENT AND AREA
* All figures are rounded to the nearest dollar and may not sum.
District One:
Designated ....
District One: Undesignated .....
District Two: Undesignated .....
District Two:
Designated ....
District Three:
Undesignated
District Three:
Designated ....
2022
Adjusted operating expenses
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
2,520,831
9,387,588
4,231,241
4,555,641
5,044,074
$6,747,621
2022
3,237,423
11,282,597
4,709,389
5,308,361
5,340,853
$7,143,771
2023
28.4
20.2
11.3
16.5
5.9
5.9
Percentage
change
Total revenue needed
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
52897
52898
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
Benefits
B. Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
5 U.S.C. 601–612, we have considered
whether this proposed rule would have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises
small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations that are independently
owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and
governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000.
For the rulemaking, the Coast Guard
reviewed recent company size and
ownership data for the vessels identified
in the GLPMS, and we reviewed
business revenue and size data provided
by publicly available sources such as
ReferenceUSA.37 As described in
section X.A of this preamble, Regulatory
This proposed rule allows the Coast
Guard to meet the requirements in 46
U.S.C. 9303 to review the rates for
pilotage services on the Great Lakes.
The rate changes promote safe, efficient,
and reliable pilotage service on the
Great Lakes by (1) ensuring that rates
cover an association’s operating
expenses, (2) providing fair pilot
compensation, adequate training, and
sufficient rest periods for pilots, and (3)
ensuring pilot associations produce
enough revenue to fund future
improvements. The rate changes also
help recruit and retain pilots, which
ensure a sufficient number of pilots to
meet peak shipping demand, helping to
reduce delays caused by pilot shortages.
Planning and Review, we found that 285
unique vessels used pilotage services
during the years 2019 through 2021.
These vessels are owned by 59 entities,
of which 44 are foreign entities that
operate primarily outside the United
States, and the remaining 15 entities are
U.S. entities. We compared the revenue
and employee data found in the
company search to the Small Business
Administration’s (SBA) small business
threshold as defined in the SBA’s
‘‘Table of Size Standards’’ for small
businesses to determine how many of
these companies are considered small
entities.38 Table 49 shows the North
American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) codes of the U.S.
entities and the small entity standard
size established by the SBA.
TABLE 49—NAICS CODES AND SMALL ENTITIES SIZE STANDARDS
NAICS
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
238910
423860
425120
483212
484230
488330
561510
561599
713930
813910
....................................................
....................................................
....................................................
....................................................
....................................................
....................................................
....................................................
....................................................
....................................................
....................................................
Site Preparation Contractors .................................................................................
Transportation Equipment And Supplies ...............................................................
Wholesale Trade Agents And Brokers ..................................................................
Inland Water Passenger Transportation ................................................................
Specialized Freight (Except Used Goods) Trucking .............................................
Navigational Services to Shipping .........................................................................
Travel Agencies .....................................................................................................
All Other Travel Arrangement And Reservation Services .....................................
Marinas ..................................................................................................................
Business Associations ...........................................................................................
Of the 15 U.S. entities, 8 exceed the
SBA’s small business standards for
small entities. To estimate the potential
impact on the seven small entities, the
Coast Guard used their 2021 invoice
data to estimate their pilotage costs in
2023. Of the seven small entities, from
2019 to 2021, only five used pilotage
services in 2021. We increased their
2021 costs to account for the changes in
pilotage rates resulting from this
proposed rule and the Great Lakes
Pilotage Rates—2021 Annual Review
and Revisions to Methodology final rule
(86 FR 14184). We estimated the change
in cost to these entities resulting from
this rulemaking by subtracting their
estimated 2022 pilotage costs from their
estimated 2023 pilotage costs and found
the average costs to small firms will be
approximately $25,575, with a range of
$1,580 to $95,381. We then compared
the estimated change in pilotage costs
37 See
https://resource.referenceusa.com/.
https://www.sba.gov/document/support-table-size-standards. SBA has established a ‘‘Table
of Size Standards’’ for small businesses that sets
small business size standards by NAICS code. A
size standard, which is usually stated in number of
employees or average annual receipts (‘‘revenues’’),
38 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Small entity
size standard
Description
Jkt 256001
$16,500,000
150 Employees
100 Employees
500 Employees
$30,000
$41,500,000
$22,000,000
$22,000,000
$8,000,000
$8,000,000
between 2022 and 2023 with each firm’s
annual revenue. In all but one case, the
impact of the change in estimated
pilotage expenses were below 1 percent
of revenues. For one entity, the change
in impact would be 3.7 percent of
revenues, as this entity reports revenue
approximately ten times less than the
next largest small entity.
In addition to the owners and
operators discussed previously, three
U.S. entities that receive revenue from
pilotage services will be affected by this
rulemaking. These are the three pilot
associations that provide and manage
pilotage services within the Great Lakes
districts. These associations are
designated with the same NAICS code
as Business Associations 39 with a smallentity size standard of $8,000,000.
Based on the reported revenues from
audit reports, none of the associations
qualify as small entities.
Finally, the Coast Guard did not find
any small not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and
operated and are not dominant in their
fields that will be impacted by this
proposed rule. We also did not find any
small governmental jurisdictions with
populations of fewer than 50,000 people
that will be impacted by this
rulemaking. Based on this analysis, we
conclude this rulemaking would not
affect a substantial number of small
entities, nor have a significant economic
impact on any of the affected entities.
Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies
under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed
rule would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. If you think
that your business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a
small entity and that this proposed rule
would have a significant economic
impact on it, please submit a comment
represents the largest size that a business (including
its subsidiaries and affiliates) may be in order to
remain classified as a small business for SBA and
Federal contracting programs. Accessed April 2022.
39 In previous rulemakings, the associations used
a different NAICS code, 483212 Inland Water
Passenger Transportation, which had a size
standard of 500 employees and, therefore,
designated the associations as small entities. The
change in NAICS code comes from an update to the
association’s ReferenceUSA profile in February
2022.
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
to the docket at the address listed in the
Public Participation and Request for
Comments section of this preamble. In
your comment, explain why you think
it qualifies and how and to what degree
this proposed rule would economically
affect it.
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 call or
email 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).
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
D. Collection of Information
This proposed rule would call for no
new or revised collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520.
E. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism) if it has a substantial direct
effect on 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.
Congress directed the Coast Guard to
establish ‘‘rates and charges for pilotage
services.’’ See 46 U.S.C. 9303(f). This
regulation is issued pursuant to that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
statute and is preemptive of State law as
specified in 46 U.S.C. 9306. Under 46
U.S.C. 9306, a ‘‘State or political
subdivision of a State may not regulate
or impose any requirement on pilotage
on the Great Lakes.’’ As a result, States
or local governments are expressly
prohibited from regulating within this
category. Therefore, this rulemaking is
consistent with the fundamental
federalism principles and preemption
requirements 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 call or email the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this preamble.
F. Unfunded Mandates
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
potential 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.
J. Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have
tribal implications under Executive
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
52899
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.
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.
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 that order because
it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under Executive Order 12866 and is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy.
L. Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act, 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
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
52900
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2022 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
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
A3 and L54 of Appendix A, Table 1 of
DHS Instruction Manual 023–01–001–
01, Rev. 1. Paragraph A3 pertains to the
promulgation of rules of the following
nature: (a) those of a strictly
administrative or procedural nature; (b)
those that implement, without
substantive change, statutory or
regulatory requirements; (c) those that
implement, without substantive change,
procedures, manuals, and other
guidance documents; (d) those that
interpret or amend an existing
regulation without changing its
environmental effect; (e) those that
provide technical guidance on safety
and security matters; and (f) those that
provide guidance for the preparation of
security plans. Paragraph L54 pertains
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Aug 29, 2022
Jkt 256001
to regulations which are editorial or
procedural.
This proposed rule involves setting or
adjusting the pilotage rates for the 2023
shipping season to account for changes
in district operating expenses, changes
in the number of pilots, and anticipated
inflation. In addition, the Coast Guard is
accepting comments on the entire Great
Lakes pilotage ratemaking methodology,
in accordance with the requirement to
conduct a full ratemaking every 5 years.
We are also accepting suggestions for
changes to the staffing model, for
consideration in a future rulemaking.
All of these changes are consistent with
the Coast Guard’s maritime safety
missions. 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 401
Administrative practice and
procedure, Great Lakes, Navigation
(water), Penalties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Seamen.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing
to amend 46 CFR part 401 as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
PART 401—GREAT LAKES PILOTAGE
REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 401
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 2103, 2104(a), 6101,
7701, 8105, 9303, 9304; DHS Delegation
00170.1, Revision No. 01.2, paragraphs
(II)(92)(a), (d), (e), (f).
2. Amend § 401.405 by revising
paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) to read as
follows:
■
§ 401.405
Pilotage rates and charges.
(a) * * *
(1) The St. Lawrence River is $867;
(2) Lake Ontario is $581;
(3) Lake Erie is $683;
(4) The navigable waters from
Southeast Shoal to Port Huron, MI is
$606;
(5) Lakes Huron, Michigan, and
Superior is $407; and
(6) The St. Marys River is $818.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: August 25, 2022.
W.R. Arguin,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant
Commandant for Prevention Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022–18690 Filed 8–29–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
E:\FR\FM\30AUP1.SGM
30AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 167 (Tuesday, August 30, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52870-52900]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-18690]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
46 CFR Part 401
[Docket No. USCG-2022-0370]
RIN 1625-AC82
Great Lakes Pilotage Rates--2023 Annual Review and Revisions to
Methodology
AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the statutory provisions enacted by the
Great Lakes Pilotage Act of 1960, the Coast Guard is proposing new base
pilotage rates for the 2023 shipping season. The Coast Guard estimates
that this proposed rule would result in an approximately 14-percent
increase in operating costs compared to the 2022 season. Additionally,
in accordance with the requirement to conduct a full ratemaking every 5
years, the Coast Guard is accepting comments on the Great Lakes
pilotage ratemaking methodology. We are also accepting suggestions for
changes to the staffing model, for consideration in a future
ratemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before September 29, 2022.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2022-0370 using the Federal Decision Making 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. Brian Rogers, Commandant, Office of Waterways and
Ocean Policy--Great Lakes Pilotage Division (CG-WWM-2), Coast Guard;
telephone 202-372-1535, email [email protected], or fax 202-372-
1914.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents for Preamble
I. Public Participation and Request for Comments
II. Abbreviations
III. Executive Summary
IV. Basis and Purpose
V. Background
VI. Summary of the Ratemaking Methodology
VII. Discussion of Proposed Methodological and Other Changes
VIII. Individual Target Pilot Compensation Benchmark
IX. Discussion of Proposed Rate Adjustments
District One
A. Step 1: Recognize Previous Operating Expenses
B. Step 2: Project Operating Expenses, Adjusting for Inflation
or Deflation
C. Step 3: Estimate Number of Registered Pilots and Apprentice
Pilots
D. Step 4: Determine Target Pilot Compensation Benchmark and
Apprentice Pilot Wage Benchmark
E. Step 5: Project Working Capital Fund
F. Step 6: Project Needed Revenue
G. Step 7: Calculate Initial Base Rates
H. Step 8: Calculate Average Weighting Factors by Area
I. Step 9: Calculate Revised Base Rates
J. Step 10: Review and Finalize Rates
District Two
A. Step 1: Recognize Previous Operating Expenses
B. Step 2: Project Operating Expenses, Adjusting for Inflation
or Deflation
C. Step 3: Estimate Number of Registered Pilots and Apprentice
Pilots
D. Step 4: Determine Target Pilot Compensation Benchmark and
Apprentice Pilot Wage Benchmark
E. Step 5: Project Working Capital Fund
F. Step 6: Project Needed Revenue
G. Step 7: Calculate Initial Base Rates
H. Step 8: Calculate Average Weighting Factors by Area
I. Step 9: Calculate Revised Base Rates
J. Step 10: Review and Finalize Rates
District Three
A. Step 1: Recognize Previous Operating Expenses
B. Step 2: Project Operating Expenses, Adjusting for Inflation
or Deflation
C. Step 3: Estimate Number of Registered Pilots and Apprentice
Pilots
D. Step 4: Determine Target Pilot Compensation Benchmark and
Apprentice Pilot Wage Benchmark
E. Step 5: Project Working Capital Fund
F. Step 6: Project Needed Revenue
G. Step 7: Calculate Initial Base Rates
H. Step 8: Calculate Average Weighting Factors by Area
I. Step 9: Calculate Revised Base Rates
J. Step 10: Review and Finalize Rates
X. Regulatory Analyses
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Small Entities
C. Assistance for Small Entities
D. Collection of Information
[[Page 52871]]
E. Federalism
F. Unfunded Mandates
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.
Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through
the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To
do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-1625-AC82 in the
search box and click ``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the
Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment
option. If you cannot submit your material by using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule for alternate
instructions.
Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this
proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as
described in the previous paragraph, and then select ``Supporting &
Related Material'' in the Document Type column. Public comments will
also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following
instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked
Questions web page. We review all comments received, but we will only
post comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may
choose not to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that
we receive.
Personal information. We accept anonymous comments. Comments we
post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal
information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions
to the docket in response to this document, see the Department of
Homeland Security's eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226,
March 11, 2020).
Public meeting. We do not plan to hold a public meeting, but we
will consider doing so if we determine from public comments that a
meeting would be helpful. We would issue a separate Federal Register
notification to announce the date, time, and location of such a
meeting.
II. Abbreviations
AMOU American Maritime Officers Union
APA American Pilots' Association
BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CPA Certified public accountant
CPI Consumer Price Index
DHS Department of Homeland Security
Director U.S. Coast Guard's Director of the Great Lakes Pilotage
ECI Employment Cost Index
FOMC Federal Open Market Committee
FR Federal Register
GLPA Great Lakes Pilotage Authority (Canadian)
GLPAC Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory Committee
GLPMS Great Lakes Pilotage Management System
LPA Lakes Pilots Association
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PCE Personal Consumption Expenditures
Sec. Section
SBA Small Business Administration
SLSPA Saint Lawrence Seaway Pilotage Association
U.S.C. United States Code
WGLPA Western Great Lakes Pilots Association
III. Executive Summary
In accordance with Title 46 of the United States Code (U.S.C.),
Chapter 93,\1\ the Coast Guard regulates pilotage for oceangoing
vessels on the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway -- including setting
the rates for pilotage services and adjusting them on an annual basis
for the upcoming shipping season. The shipping season begins when the
locks open in the St. Lawrence Seaway, which allows traffic access to
and from the Atlantic Ocean. The opening of the locks varies annually,
depending on waterway conditions, but is generally in March or April.
The rates, which for the 2023 season range from a proposed $407 to $867
per pilot hour (depending on which of the specific six areas pilotage
service is provided), are paid by shippers to the pilot associations.
The three pilot associations, which are the exclusive U.S. source of
registered pilots on the Great Lakes, use this revenue to cover
operating expenses, maintain infrastructure, compensate apprentice and
registered pilots, acquire and implement technological advances, train
new personnel, and allow partners to participate in professional
development.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 46 U.S.C. 9301-9308.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with statutory and regulatory requirements, we have
employed the ratemaking methodology we introduced in 2016. Our
ratemaking methodology calculates the revenue needed for each pilotage
association (operating expenses, compensation for the number of pilots,
and anticipated inflation), and then divides that amount by the
expected demand for pilotage services over the course of the coming
year, to produce an hourly rate. This is a 10-step methodology to
calculate rates. The 10-step methodology is explained in section VI of
this preamble.
In this notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), we are proposing a
full ratemaking, setting new pilotage rates for 2023 based on the 10-
step ratemaking methodology, and accepting comments on the methodology.
We conducted the last full ratemaking 5 years ago, in 2018. Per title
46 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Sec. 404.100(a), in this
NPRM, the Coast Guard's Director of the Great Lakes Pilotage (``the
Director'') proposes to establish base pilotage rates by a full
ratemaking pursuant to Sec. Sec. 404.101 through 404.110. Base rates
would be set to meet the goals of promoting safe, efficient, and
reliable pilotage service on the Great Lakes, by generating sufficient
revenue for each pilotage association to reimburse its necessary and
reasonable operating expenses, fairly compensate trained and rested
pilots, and provide appropriate funds to use for improvements. We use a
10-year average when calculating traffic to smooth out variations in
traffic caused by global economic conditions, such as those caused by
the COVID-19 pandemic. The Coast Guard estimates that this proposed
rule would result in $4,535,400 in additional costs.
Based on the ratemaking model discussed in this NPRM, we are
proposing the rates shown in table 1.
[[Page 52872]]
Table 1--Current and Proposed Pilotage Rates on the Great Lakes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final 2022 Proposed 2023
Area Name pilotage rate pilotage rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District One: Designated..................... St. Lawrence River............. $834 $867
District One: Undesignated................... Lake Ontario................... 568 581
District Two: Designated..................... Navigable waters from Southeast 536 606
Shoal to Port Huron, MI.
District Two: Undesignated................... Lake Erie...................... 610 652
District Three: Designated................... St. Mary's River............... 662 818
District Three: Undesignated................. Lakes Huron, Michigan, and 342 407
Superior.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposed rule would affect 55 U.S. Great Lakes pilots, 7
apprentice pilots, 3 pilot associations, and the owners and operators
of an average of 285 oceangoing vessels that transit the Great Lakes
annually. This proposed rule is not economically significant under
Executive Order 12866 and would not affect the Coast Guard's budget or
increase Federal spending. The estimated overall annual regulatory
economic impact of this rate change would be a net increase of
$4,535,400 in estimated payments made by shippers during the 2023
shipping season. This NPRM establishes the 2023 yearly compensation for
pilots on the Great Lakes at $422,336 per pilot (a $23,070 increase, or
5.78 percent, over their 2022 compensation). Because the Coast Guard
must review, and, if necessary, adjust rates each year, we analyze
these as single-year costs and do not annualize them over 10 years.
Section X of this preamble provides the regulatory impact analyses of
this proposed rule.
IV. Basis and Purpose
The legal basis of this rulemaking is 46 U.S.C. Chapter 93,\2\
which requires foreign merchant vessels and United States vessels
operating ``on register'' (meaning United States vessels engaged in
foreign trade) to use United States or Canadian pilots while transiting
the United States waters of the St. Lawrence Seaway and the Great Lakes
system.\3\ For U.S. Great Lakes pilots, the statute requires the
Secretary of Homeland Security to ``prescribe by regulation rates and
charges for pilotage services, giving consideration to the public
interest and the costs of providing the services.'' \4\ The statute
requires that rates be established or reviewed and adjusted each year,
not later than March 1.\5\ The statute also requires that base rates be
established by a full ratemaking at least once every 5 years, and, in
years when base rates are not established, they must be reviewed and,
if necessary, adjusted.\6\ The Secretary's duties and authority under
46 U.S.C. Chapter 93 have been delegated to the Coast Guard.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 46 U.S.C. 9301-9308.
\3\ 46 U.S.C. 9302(a)(1).
\4\ 46 U.S.C. 9303(f).
\5\ Id.
\6\ Id.
\7\ Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Delegation 00170.1,
Revision No. 01.2, paragraph (II)(92)(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The purpose of this rule is to issue new pilotage rates for the
2023 shipping season. The Coast Guard believes that the new rates will
continue to promote our goal, as outlined in 46 CFR 404.1, of promoting
safe, efficient, and reliable pilotage service in the Great Lakes by
generating for each pilotage association sufficient revenue to
reimburse its necessary and reasonable operating expenses, fairly
compensate trained and rested pilots, and provide appropriate funds to
use for improvements.
V. Background
Pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 9303, the Coast Guard, in conjunction with
the Canadian Great Lakes Pilotage Authority (GLPA), regulates shipping
practices and rates on the Great Lakes. Under Coast Guard regulations,
all vessels engaged in foreign trade (often referred to as ``salties'')
are required to engage United States or Canadian pilots during their
transit through the regulated waters.\8\ United States and Canadian
``lakers,'' which account for most commercial shipping on the Great
Lakes, are not affected.\9\ Generally, vessels are assigned a United
States or Canadian pilot depending on the order in which they transit a
particular area of the Great Lakes, and do not choose the pilot they
receive. If a vessel is assigned a U.S. pilot, that pilot will be
assigned by the pilotage association responsible for the particular
district in which the vessel is operating, and the vessel operator will
pay the pilotage association for the pilotage services. The GLPA
establishes the rates for Canadian registered pilots.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See 46 CFR part 401.
\9\ 46 U.S.C. 9302(f). A ``laker'' is a commercial cargo vessel
especially designed for and generally limited to use on the Great
Lakes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. waters of the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence Seaway are
divided into three pilotage districts. Pilotage in each district is
provided by an association certified by the Director to operate a
pilotage pool. The Saint Lawrence Seaway Pilotage Association (SLSPA)
provides pilotage services in District One, which includes all U.S.
waters of the St. Lawrence River and Lake Ontario. The Lakes Pilots
Association (LPA) provides pilotage services in District Two, which
includes all U.S. waters of Lake Erie, the Detroit River, Lake St.
Clair, and the St. Clair River. Finally, the Western Great Lakes Pilots
Association (WGLPA) provides pilotage services in District Three, which
includes all U.S. waters of the St. Marys River; Sault Ste. Marie
Locks; and Lakes Huron, Michigan, and Superior.
Each pilotage district is further divided into ``designated'' and
``undesignated'' areas, depicted in table 2 below. Designated areas,
classified as such by Presidential Proclamation, are waters in which
pilots must direct the navigation of vessels at all times.\10\
Undesignated areas, on the other hand, are open bodies of water not
subject to the same pilotage requirements. While working in
undesignated areas, pilots must ``be on board and available to direct
the navigation of the vessel at the discretion of and subject to the
customary authority of the master.'' \11\ For these reasons, pilotage
rates in designated areas can be significantly higher than those in
undesignated areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Presidential Proclamation 3385, Designation of restricted
waters under the Great Lakes Pilotage Act of 1960, December 22,
1960.
\11\ 46 U.S.C. 9302(a)(1)(b).
[[Page 52873]]
Table 2--Areas of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pilotage Area number
District association Designation \12\ Area name \13\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One............................. Saint Lawrence Designated.............. 1 St. Lawrence
Seaway Pilotage Undesignated............ 2 River.
Association. Lake Ontario.
Two............................. Lakes Pilots Designated.............. 5 Navigable waters
Association. from Southeast
Shoal to Port
Huron, MI.
Undesignated............ 4 Lake Erie.
Three........................... Western Great Lakes Designated.............. 7 St. Marys River
Pilots Association. Undesignated............ 6 Lakes Huron and
Michigan.
Undesignated............ 8 Lake Superior.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Each pilot association is an independent business and is the sole
provider of pilotage services in the district in which it operates.
Each pilot association is responsible for funding its own operating
expenses, maintaining infrastructure, compensating pilots and
apprentice pilots,\14\ acquiring and implementing technological
advances, and training personnel and partners. The Coast Guard uses a
10-step ratemaking methodology to derive a pilotage rate, based on the
estimated amount of traffic, which covers these expenses.\15\ The
methodology is designed to measure how much revenue each pilotage
association would need to cover expenses and provide competitive
compensation goals to registered pilots. Since the Coast Guard cannot
guarantee demand for pilotage services, target pilot compensation for
registered pilots is a goal. The actual demand for service dictates the
actual compensation for the registered pilots. We then divide that
amount by the historic 10-year average for pilotage demand. We
recognize that, in years where traffic is above average, pilot
associations will accrue more revenue than projected, while in years
where traffic is below average, they will take in less. We believe that
over the long term, however, this system ensures that infrastructure
will be maintained and that pilots will receive adequate compensation
and work a reasonable number of hours, with adequate rest between
assignments, to ensure retention of highly trained personnel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Area 3 is the Welland Canal, which is serviced exclusively
by the Canadian GLPA and, accordingly, is not included in the United
States pilotage rate structure.
\13\ The areas are listed by name at 46 CFR 401.405.
\14\ Apprentice pilots and applicant pilots are compensated by
the pilot association they are training with, which is funded
through the pilotage rates. The ratemaking methodology accounts for
an apprentice pilot wage benchmark in Step 4 per 46 CFR 404.104(d).
The applicant pilot salaries are included in the pilot associations'
operating expenses used in Step 1 per 46 CFR 404.101.
\15\ 46 CFR part 404.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the past several years, the Coast Guard has adjusted the Great
Lakes pilotage ratemaking methodology per our authority in 46 U.S.C.
9303(f) to conduct annual reviews of base pilotage rates and adjust
such base rates in each intervening year in consideration of the public
interest and the costs of providing the services. The current
methodology was finalized in the Great Lakes Pilotage Rates--2022
Annual Review and Revisions to Methodology final rule (87 FR 18488,
March 30, 2022). We summarize the current and proposed methodology in
the section below.
VI. Summary of the Ratemaking Methodology
As stated above, the ratemaking methodology, outlined in 46 CFR
404.101 through 404.110, consists of 10 steps that are designed to
account for the revenues needed and total traffic expected in each
district. The result is an hourly rate, determined separately for each
of the areas administered by the Coast Guard.
In Step 1, ``Recognize previous operating expenses,'' (Sec.
404.101) the Director reviews audited operating expenses from each of
the three pilotage associations. Operating expenses include all
allowable expenses minus wages and benefits. This number forms the
baseline amount that each association is budgeted. Because of the time
delay between when the association submits raw numbers and the Coast
Guard receives audited numbers, this number is 3 years behind the
projected year of expenses. Therefore, in calculating the 2023 rates in
this proposal, we begin with the audited expenses from the 2020
shipping season.
While each pilotage association operates in an entire district
(including both designated and undesignated areas), the Coast Guard
determines costs by area. With regard to operating expenses, we
allocate certain operating expenses to designated areas and certain
operating expenses to undesignated areas. In some cases, we can
allocate the costs based on where they are actually accrued. For
example, we can allocate the costs for insurance for apprentice pilots
who operate in undesignated areas only. In other situations, such as
general legal expenses, expenses are distributed between designated and
undesignated waters on a pro rata basis, based upon the proportion of
income forecasted from the respective portions of the district.
In Step 2, ``Project operating expenses, adjusting for inflation or
deflation,'' (Sec. 404.102) the Director develops the 2023 projected
operating expenses. To do this, we apply inflation adjustors for 3
years to the operating expense baseline received in Step 1. The
inflation factors are from the Bureau of Labor Statistics' (BLS)
Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the Midwest Region, or, if not
available, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) median economic
projections for Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) inflation. This
step produces the total operating expenses for each area and district.
In Step 3, ``Estimate number of registered pilots and apprentice
pilots,'' (Sec. 404.103) the Director calculates how many registered
and apprentice pilots, including apprentice pilots with limited
registration, are needed for each district. To do this, we employ a
``staffing model,'' described in Sec. 401.220, paragraphs (a)(1)
through (3), to estimate how many pilots would be needed to handle
shipping during the beginning and close of the season. This number is
helpful in providing guidance to the Director in approving an
appropriate number of pilots.
For the purpose of the ratemaking calculation, we determine the
number of pilots provided by the pilotage associations (see Sec.
404.103) and use that figure to determine how many pilots need to be
compensated via the pilotage fees collected.
In the first part of Step 4, ``Determine target pilot compensation
benchmark and apprentice pilot wage benchmark,'' (Sec. 404.104) the
Director determines the revenue needed for pilot compensation in each
area and district and calculates
[[Page 52874]]
the total compensation for each pilot using a ``compensation
benchmark.''
In the second part of Step 4, set forth in Sec. 404.104(c), the
Director determines the total compensation figure for each district. To
do this, the Director multiplies the compensation benchmark by the
number of pilots for each area and district (from Step 3), producing a
figure for total pilot compensation.
In Step 5, ``Project working capital fund,'' (Sec. 404.105) the
Director calculates a value that is added to pay for needed capital
improvements and other non-recurring expenses, such as technology
investments and infrastructure maintenance. This value is calculated by
adding the total operating expenses (derived in Step 2) to the total
pilot compensation and total target apprentice pilot wage (derived in
Step 4) and multiplying that figure by the preceding year's average
annual rate of return for new issues of high-grade corporate
securities. This figure constitutes the ``working capital fund'' for
each area and district.
In Step 6, ``Project needed revenue,'' (Sec. 404.106) the Director
simply adds up the totals produced by the preceding steps. The
projected operating expense for each area and district (from Step 2) is
added to the total pilot compensation, including apprentice pilot wage
benchmarks, (from Step 4) and the working capital fund contribution
(from Step 5). The total figure, calculated separately for each area
and district, is the ``needed revenue.''
In Step 7, ``Calculate initial base rates,'' (Sec. 404.107) the
Director calculates an hourly pilotage rate to cover the needed revenue
as calculated in Step 6. This step consists of first calculating the
10-year hours of traffic average for each area. Next, we divide the
revenue needed in each area (calculated in Step 6) by the 10-year hours
of traffic average to produce an initial base rate.
An additional element, the ``weighting factor,'' is required under
Sec. 401.400. Pursuant to that section, ships pay a multiple of the
``base rate'' as calculated in Step 7 by a number ranging from 1.0 (for
the smallest ships, or ``Class I'' vessels) to 1.45 (for the largest
ships, or ``Class IV'' vessels). As this significantly increases the
revenue collected, we need to account for the added revenue produced by
the weighting factors to ensure that shippers are not overpaying for
pilotage services. We do this in the next step.
In Step 8, ``Calculate average weighting factors by Area,'' (Sec.
404.108) the Director calculates how much extra revenue, as a
percentage of total revenue, has historically been produced by the
weighting factors in each area. We do this by using a historical
average of the applied weighting factors for each year since 2014 (the
first year the current weighting factors were applied).
In Step 9, ``Calculate revised base rates,'' (Sec. 404.109) the
Director modifies the base rates by accounting for the extra revenue
generated by the weighting factors. We do this by dividing the initial
pilotage rate for each area (from Step 7) by the corresponding average
weighting factor (from Step 8), to produce a revised rate.
In Step 10, ``Review and finalize rates,'' (Sec. 404.110) often
referred to informally as ``Director's discretion,'' the Director
reviews the revised base rates (from Step 9) to ensure that they meet
the goals set forth in 46 U.S.C. 9303(f) and 46 CFR 404.1(a), which
include promoting efficient, safe, and reliable pilotage service on the
Great Lakes; generating sufficient revenue for each pilotage
association to reimburse necessary and reasonable operating expenses;
compensating trained and rested pilots fairly; and providing
appropriate revenue for improvements.
After the base rates are set, Sec. 401.401 permits the Coast Guard
to apply surcharges. We are not proposing to use any surcharges in this
ratemaking. In previous ratemakings where apprentice pilot wages were
not built into the rate, the Coast Guard used surcharges to cover
applicant pilot compensation in those years to help with applicant
recruitment. In this ratemaking, we include the applicant trainee
compensation in the district's operating expenses used in step 1 of the
ratemaking. Consistent with the 2021 and 2022 rulemakings, we continue
to believe that the pilot associations are now able to plan for the
costs associated with hiring applicant pilots to fill pilot vacancies
without relying on the Coast Guard to impose surcharges to help with
recruiting.
VII. Discussion of Proposed Methodological and Other Changes
The Coast Guard is proposing to use the existing ratemaking
methodology for establishing the base rates in this full ratemaking.
The Coast Guard is not proposing any methodological or other policy
changes to the ratemaking within this NPRM. However, we are accepting
comments on the entire ratemaking methodology and staffing model as
part of our full ratemaking year.
According to 46 U.S.C. 9303(f), and restated in Sec. 404.100(a),
the Coast Guard must establish base rates by a full ratemaking at least
once every 5 years. We have determined that the current base rate and
methodology still adequately adheres to the Coast Guard's goals of
safety through rate and compensation stability, while promoting
recruitment and retention of qualified U.S. registered pilots. The
Coast Guard has made several changes to the ratemaking over the last
several ratemakings in consideration of the public interest and costs
of providing services. The recent changes and their impacts are
summarized as follows.
In the 2017 ratemaking (82 FR 41466, August 31, 2017), we modified
the ratemaking methodology to account for the additional revenue
produced by the application of weighting factors (discussed in detail
in Steps 7 through 9 for each district, in section IX of this
preamble). In the 2018 ratemaking (83 FR 26162, June 5, 2018), we
adopted a new approach in the methodology for the compensation
benchmark, based upon United States mariners rather than Canadian
working pilots. In the 2020 ratemaking (85 FR 20088, April 9, 2020), we
revised the methodology to accurately capture all costs and revenues
associated with Great Lakes pilotage requirements and produce an hourly
rate that adequately and accurately compensates pilots and covers
expenses. The 2021 ratemaking (86 FR 14184, March 12, 2021) changed the
inflation calculation in Step 4, Sec. 404.104(b) for interim
ratemakings, so that the previous year's target compensation value is
first adjusted by actual inflation value using the Employment Cost
Index (ECI). That change ensures that the target pilot compensation
reimbursed to the association remains current with inflation and
competitive with industry pay increases. The 2022 ratemaking (87 FR
18488, March 30, 2022) implemented an apprentice pilot wage benchmark
in Steps 3 and 4 to provide predictability and stability to
associations training apprentice pilots. The 2022 final rule also
codified rounding up the staffing model's final number to ensure the
ratemaking does not undercount the pilot need presented by the staffing
model and association circumstances.
These refinements to the methodology continue to promote safe,
efficient, and reliable pilotage service on the Great Lakes, and allows
each pilotage association to generate sufficient revenue to cover its
necessary and reasonable operating expenses, fairly compensate trained
and rested pilots, and realize an appropriate revenue to use for
improvements. While the Coast Guard is not proposing changes at this
time, we welcome public comments and suggestions on the methodology.
[[Page 52875]]
The Coast Guard is requesting input on the staffing model due to
the diversification of traffic and increased demand for pilotage
services, for consideration in a future rulemaking. The annual Great
Lakes Pilotage Advisory Committee (GLPAC) meeting of September 1, 2021,
produced a recommendation for the Coast Guard to review the staffing
model. A copy of the GLPAC September 1, 2021, meeting transcript is
available in the docket, where indicated under the Public Participation
and Request for Comments portion of the preamble (section I). The
recommendation is on page 53 of the transcript. We are interested in
the public's suggestions on what changes may improve the staffing model
to accurately capture staffing demand. We would consider the comments
and determine any changes to propose in a future ratemaking.
VIII. Individual Target Pilot Compensation Benchmark
The Coast Guard is proposing to set the target pilot compensation
benchmark in this ratemaking at the target compensation for the
ratemaking year 2022, adjusted for inflation. In a full ratemaking
year, per 46 CFR 404.104(a), the Director determines a base individual
target pilot compensation using a compensation benchmark in
consideration of relevant currently available non-proprietary
information. The Director may make necessary and reasonable adjustments
to the benchmark if circumstances require. The compensation benchmark
would be used in Step 4 of the existing methodology. In the following
interim year ratemakings, the base target pilot compensation would be
inflated annually in accordance with Sec. 404.104(b). We discuss how
we arrived at this proposed compensation benchmark next.
Prior to 2016, the Coast Guard based the compensation benchmark on
data provided by the American Maritime Officers Union (AMOU) regarding
its contract for first mates on the Great Lakes. However, in 2016 the
AMOU elected to no longer provide this data to the Coast Guard. In the
2016 ratemaking (81 FR 11908, March 7, 2016), we used average
compensation for a Canadian pilot plus a 10-percent adjustment. The
shipping industry challenged the compensation benchmark, and the court
found that the Coast Guard did not adequately support the 10-percent
addition to the Canadian GLPA compensation benchmark. American Great
Lakes Ports Association v. Zukunft, 296 F.Supp. 3d 27 (D.D.C. 2017).
The Coast Guard then based the 2018 full ratemaking compensation
benchmark on data provided by the AMOU regarding its contract for first
mates on the Great Lakes in the 2011 to 2015 period (83 FR 26162, June
5, 2018). The 2018 final rule adjusted the AMOU 2015 data for inflation
using FOMC median economic projections for PCE inflation.
In the 2020 interim year ratemaking final rule, the Coast Guard
established its most recent pilot compensation benchmark. Given the
lack of access to AMOU data, we did not rely on the AMOU aggregated
wage and benefit information as the basis for the compensation
benchmark, and instead adopted the 2019 target pilot compensation (with
inflation) as our compensation benchmark going forward. We stated in
the 2020 final rule that no other United States or Canadian pilot
compensation data was appropriate to use as a benchmark at that time.
See 85 FR 20091. The Director determined that the ratemaking provided
adequate compensation for pilots. In the 2020 ratemaking, we announced
we would use the 2020 benchmark for future rates. See 85 FR 20091.
Based on our experience over the past three ratemakings (2020-
2022), the Director continues to believe that the level of target pilot
compensation for those years provided an appropriate level of
compensation for U.S. Registered pilots. According to Sec. 401.101(a),
the Director may make necessary and reasonable adjustments to the
benchmark based on current information. However, current circumstances
do not indicate that an adjustment, other than for inflation, is
necessary. The Director bases this decision on the fact that there is
no indication that registered pilots are resigning due to their
compensation or that this compensation benchmark is causing shortfalls
in achieving reliable pilotage. We also do not believe that the pilot
compensation benchmark is too high relative to the expertise required
to perform the job. The compensation would continue to be adjusted
annually in accordance with published inflation rates, which would
ensure the compensation remains competitive and current for upcoming
years.
Therefore, the Coast Guard proposes to not seek alternative
benchmarks for target compensation at this time and, instead, to simply
adjust the amount of target pilot compensation for inflation as our
target compensation benchmark for 2023, as shown in Step 4. This target
compensation benchmark approach has advanced and will continue to
advance the Coast Guard's goals of safety through rate and compensation
stability while also promoting recruitment and retention of qualified
U.S. pilots.
The proposed compensation benchmark for 2023 is $399,266 per
registered pilot, and $143,736 per apprentice pilot, using the 2022
compensation as a benchmark. We then follow the procedure outlined in
paragraph (b) of Sec. 404.104, which adjusts the existing compensation
benchmark for inflation. We are using a two-step process to adjust
target pilot compensation for inflation. First, we adjust the 2022
target compensation benchmark of $399,266 by 3.4 percent for an
adjusted value of $412,841. This first adjustment accounts for the
difference in actual first quarter 2022 ECI inflation, which is 5.6
percent, and the 2022 PCE estimate of 2.2 percent.\16\ \17\ The second
step accounts for projected inflation from 2022 to 2023, which is 2.3
percent.\18\ Based on the projected 2023 inflation estimate, the
proposed target compensation benchmark for 2023 is $422,336 per pilot.
The proposed apprentice pilot wage benchmark is 36 percent of the
target pilot compensation, or $152,041 ($422,336 x 0.36).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Employment Cost Index, Total Compensation for Private
Industry workers in Transportation and Material Moving, Annual
Average, Series ID: CIU2010000520000A. Accessed April 29, 2022.
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/eci.t05.htm.
\17\ Table 1 Summary of Economic Projections, PCE Inflation
September Projection. Accessed December, 2021 https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/fomcprojtabl20211215.pdf.
\18\ Table 1 Summary of Economic Projections, PCE Inflation
December Projection. Accessed March 2022 https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/fomcprojtabl20220316.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IX. Discussion of Proposed Rate Adjustments
In this NPRM, based on the proposed policy changes described in the
previous section, we are proposing new pilotage rates for 2023. We
propose to conduct the 2023 ratemaking as a full ratemaking, as we last
did in 2018 (83 FR 26162). Thus, the Coast Guard proposes to adjust the
compensation benchmark following the full ratemaking year procedures
under Sec. 404.100(a) rather than the procedures for an interim
ratemaking year in Sec. 404.100(b).
This section discusses the proposed rate changes using the
ratemaking steps provided in 46 CFR part 404. We will detail all 10
steps of the ratemaking procedure for each of the 3 districts to show
how we arrive at the proposed new rates.
[[Page 52876]]
District One
A. Step 1: Recognize Previous Operating Expenses
Step 1 in our ratemaking methodology requires that the Coast Guard
review and recognize the previous year's operating expenses (Sec.
404.101). To do so, we begin by reviewing the independent accountant's
financial reports for each association's 2020 expenses and
revenues.\19\ For accounting purposes, the financial reports divide
expenses into designated and undesignated areas. For costs accrued by
the pilot associations generally, such as employee benefits, for
example, the cost is divided between the designated and undesignated
areas on a pro rata basis. The recognized operating expenses for
District One are shown in table 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ These reports are available in the docket for this
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjustments have been made by the auditors and are explained in the
auditor's reports, which are available in the docket for this
rulemaking, where indicated under the Public Participation and Request
for Comments portion of the preamble.
In the 2020 expenses used as the basis for this rulemaking,
districts used the term ``applicant'' to describe applicant trainees
and persons who would be called apprentices (applicant pilots) under
the definition of ``Apprentice pilot'' introduced in the 2022 final
rule. Therefore, when describing past expenses, we use the term
``applicant'' to match what was reported from 2020, which includes both
applicant and apprentice pilots. We use ``apprentice'' to distinguish
apprentice pilot wages and describe the impacts of the ratemaking going
forward.
We continue to include applicant salaries as an allowable expense
in the 2023 ratemaking, as it is based on 2020 operating expenses, when
salaries were still an allowable expense. The apprentice salaries paid
in the years 2020 and 2021 have not been reimbursed in the ratemaking
as of publication of this proposed rule. Applicant salaries (including
applicant trainees and apprentice pilots) will continue to be an
allowable operating expense through the 2024 ratemaking, which uses
operating expenses from 2021, where the wages for apprentice pilots
were still authorized as operating expenses. Beginning with the 2025
ratemaking, apprentice pilot salaries will no longer be included as a
2022 operating expense, because apprentice pilot wages would have
already been factored into the ratemaking Steps 3 and 4 in calculation
of the 2022 rates. Beginning in 2025, the applicant salaries' operating
expenses for 2022 will consist of only applicant trainees (those who
are not yet apprentice pilots).
Table 3--2020 Recognized Expenses for District One
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District One
-----------------------------------------------------
Reported operating expenses for 2020 Designated Undesignated
-------------------------------------- Total
St. Lawrence River Lake Ontario
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicant Pilot Compensation:
Salaries.............................................. $257,250 $171,500 $428,750
Employee Benefits..................................... 13,633 9,089 22,722
Applicant Subsistence/Travel.......................... 14,901 9,934 24,835
Applicant License Insurance........................... 1,771 1,181 2,952
Applicant Payroll Tax................................. 20,823 13,882 34,705
-----------------------------------------------------
Total Applicant Pilot Compensation................ 308,378 205,586 513,964
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Pilot Cost:
Subsistence/Travel--Pilot............................. 575,475 383,650 959,125
Hotel/Lodging Cost.................................... 32,802 21,868 54,671
License Insurance--Pilots............................. 45,859 30,573 76,432
Payroll Taxes--Pilots................................. 188,318 125,546 313,864
Other................................................. 26,433 17,621 44,054
-----------------------------------------------------
Total other pilotage costs........................ 868,887 579,258 1,448,145
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pilot Boat and Dispatch Costs:
Pilot Boat Expense (Operating)........................ 325,904 217,269 543,173
Pilot Boat Cost (D1-20-01)............................ 104,658 69,772 174,430
Dispatch Expense...................................... 139,916 93,277 233,193
Payroll Taxes......................................... 22,930 15,287 38,217
-----------------------------------------------------
Total Pilot and Dispatch Costs.................... 593,408 395,605 989,013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative Expenses:
Legal--General Counsel................................ 3,124 2,083 5,207
Legal--Shared Counsel (K&L Gates)..................... 62,906 41,937 104,843
Legal--USCG Litigation................................ 8,793 5,862 14,655
Insurance............................................. 35,040 23,360 58,400
Employee Benefits..................................... 5,541 3,694 9,235
Payroll Taxes......................................... 6,511 4,341 10,852
Other Taxes........................................... 69,000 46,000 115,000
Real Estate Taxes..................................... 23,298 15,532 38,830
Travel................................................ 21,516 14,344 35,860
Depreciation.......................................... 152,071 101,381 253,452
Certified Public Accountant (CPA) Deduction (D1-19-01) (44,623) (29,748) (74,371)
[[Page 52877]]
Interest.............................................. 36,924 24,616 61,540
CPA Deduction (D1-19-01).............................. (18,710) (12,473) (31,183)
American Pilots' Association (APA) Dues............... 27,172 18,115 45,287
Dues and Subscriptions................................ 4,080 2,720 6,800
Utilities............................................. 15,618 10,412 26,030
Salaries.............................................. 69,848 46,565 116,413
Accounting/Professional Fees.......................... 8,220 5,480 13,700
Other................................................. 55,213 36,809 92,022
Applicant Administrative Expense:
Pilot Training........................................ 26,787 17,858 44,645
Supplies.............................................. 481 320 801
-----------------------------------------------------
Total Administrative Expenses..................... 568,810 379,208 948,018
-----------------------------------------------------
Total Expenses (OpEx + Applicant + Pilot Boats 2,339,483 1,559,657 3,899,140
+ Admin + Capital)...........................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Director's Adjustments--Applicant Surcharge Collected..... (10,814) (7,209) (18,024)
Director's Adjustments--Applicant Salaries................ (19,379) (12,919) (32,298)
-----------------------------------------------------
Total Director's Adjustments.......................... (30,193) (20,129) (50,322)
-----------------------------------------------------
Total Operating Expenses (OpEx + Adjustments)......... 2,309,290 1,539,528 3,848,818
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Step 2: Project Operating Expenses, Adjusting for Inflation or
Deflation
Having identified the recognized 2020 operating expenses in Step 1,
the next step is to estimate the current year's operating expenses by
adjusting those expenses for inflation over the 3-year period. We
calculate inflation using the BLS data from the CPI for the Midwest
Region of the United States for the 2021 inflation rate.\20\ Because
the BLS does not provide forecasted inflation data, we use economic
projections from the Federal Reserve for the 2022 and 2023 inflation
modification.\21\ Based on that information, the calculations for Step
2 are as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ The 2021 inflation rate is available at https://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet. Specifically, the CPI is
defined as ``All Urban Consumers (CPI-U), All Items, 1982-4=100.''
Series CUUS0200SAO (Downloaded March 2022)
\21\ The 2022 and 2023 inflation rates are available at https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/fomcprojtabl20220316.pdf. We used the PCE median inflation value
found in table 1. (Downloaded March 2022).
Table 4--Adjusted Operating Expenses for District One
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District One
-----------------------------------------------
Designated Undesignated Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Operating Expenses (Step 1)............................... $2,309,290 $1,539,528 $3,848,818
2021 Inflation Modification (@5.1%)............................. 117,774 78,516 196,290
2022 Inflation Modification (@2.7033%).......................... 65,531 43,687 109,218
2023 Inflation Modification (@2.3%)............................. 57,330 38,220 95,550
-----------------------------------------------
Adjusted 2023 Operating Expenses............................ 2,549,925 1,699,951 4,249,876
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Step 3: Estimate Number of Registered Pilots and Apprentice Pilots
In accordance with the text in Sec. 404.103, we estimate the
number of fully registered pilots in each district. We determine the
number of fully registered pilots based on data provided by the SLSPA.
Using these numbers, we estimate that there will be 18 registered
pilots in 2023 in District One. We determine the number of apprentice
pilots based on input from the district on anticipated retirements and
staffing needs. Using these numbers, we estimate that there will be two
apprentice pilots in 2023 in District One. Based on the seasonal
staffing model discussed in the 2017 ratemaking (see 82 FR 41466), we
assign a certain number of pilots to designated waters and a certain
number to undesignated waters, as shown in table 5. These numbers are
used to determine the amount of revenue needed in their respective
areas.
[[Page 52878]]
Table 5--Authorized Pilots for District One
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item District One
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Maximum Number of Pilots (per Sec. 18
401.220(a)) *..........................................
2023 Authorized Pilots (total).......................... 18
Pilots Assigned to Designated Areas..................... 10
Pilots Assigned to Undesignated Areas................... 8
2023 Apprentice Pilots.................................. 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* For a detailed calculation, refer to the Great Lakes Pilotage Rates--
2017 Annual Review final rule, which contains the staffing model. See
82 FR 41466, table 6 at 41480 (August 31, 2017).
D. Step 4: Determine Target Pilot Compensation Benchmark and Apprentice
Pilot Wage Benchmark
In this step, we determine the total pilot compensation for each
area. Because we are proposing a full ratemaking this year, we propose
to follow the procedure outlined in paragraph (a) of Sec. 404.104,
which requires us to develop a benchmark after considering the most
relevant currently available non-proprietary information. In accordance
with the discussion in Section VII of this preamble, the proposed
compensation benchmark for 2023 uses the 2022 compensation of $399,266
per registered pilot as a base, then adjusts for inflation following
the procedure outlined in paragraph (b) of Sec. 404.104. The proposed
target pilot compensation for 2023 is $422,336 per pilot. The proposed
apprentice pilot wage benchmark is 36 percent of the target pilot
compensation, or $152,041 ($422,336 x 0.36).
Next, we certify that the number of pilots estimated for 2022 is
less than or equal to the number permitted under the staffing model in
Sec. 401.220(a). The staffing model suggests that the number of pilots
needed is 18 pilots for District One, which is less than or equal to
18, the number of registered pilots provided by the pilot association.
In accordance with Sec. 404.104(c), we use the revised target
individual compensation level to derive the total pilot compensation by
multiplying the individual target compensation by the estimated number
of registered pilots for District One, as shown in table 6. We estimate
that the number of apprentice pilots with limited registration needed
will be two for District One in the 2023 season. The total target wages
for apprentices are allocated with 60 percent for the designated area,
and 40 percent for the undesignated area, in accordance with the
allocation for operating expenses.
Table 6--Target Compensation for District One
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District One
-----------------------------------------------
Designated Undesignated Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Pilot Compensation....................................... $422,336 $422,336 $422,336
Number of Pilots................................................ 10 8 18
Total Target Pilot Compensation................................. $4,223,360 $3,378,688 $7,602,048
Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation............................ $152,041 $152,041 $152,041
Number of Apprentice Pilots..................................... .............. .............. 2
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation...................... $182,449.00 $121,632.92 $304,082
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Step 5: Project Working Capital Fund
Next, we calculate the working capital fund revenues needed for
each area. First, we add the figures for projected operating expenses,
total pilot compensation, and total target apprentice pilot wage for
each area. Next, we find the preceding year's average annual rate of
return for new issues of high-grade corporate securities. Using Moody's
data, the number is 2.7033 percent.\22\ By multiplying the two figures,
we obtain the working capital fund contribution for each area, as shown
in table 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Moody's Seasoned Aaa Corporate Bond Yield, average of 2021
monthly data. The Coast Guard uses the most recent year of complete
data. Moody's is taken from Moody's Investors Service, which is a
bond credit rating business of Moody's Corporation. Bond ratings are
based on creditworthiness and risk. The rating of ``Aaa'' is the
highest bond rating assigned with the lowest credit risk. See
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/AAA. (Downloaded March, 2022)
Table 7--Working Capital Fund Calculation for District One
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District One
-----------------------------------------------
Designated Undesignated Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjusted Operating Expenses (Step 2)............................ $2,549,925 $1,699,951 $4,249,876
Total Target Pilot Compensation (Step 4)........................ 4,223,360 3,378,688 7,602,048
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation (Step 4)............. 182,449 121,633 304,082
Total 2023 Expenses............................................. 6,955,734 5,200,272 12,156,006
Working Capital Fund (2.7033%).................................. 188,037 140,581 328,618
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52879]]
F. Step 6: Project Needed Revenue
In this step, we add all the expenses accrued to derive the total
revenue needed for each area. These expenses include the projected
operating expenses (from Step 2), the total pilot compensation (from
Step 4), total target apprentice pilot wage, (from Step 4) and the
working capital fund contribution (from Step 5). We show these
calculations in table 8.
Table 8--Revenue Needed for District One
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District One
-----------------------------------------------
Designated Undesignated Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjusted Operating Expenses (Step 2)............................ $2,549,925 $1,699,951 $4,249,876
Total Target Pilot Compensation (Step 4)........................ 4,223,360 3,378,688 7,602,048
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation (Step 4)............. 182,449 121,633 304,082
Working Capital Fund (Step 5)................................... 188,037 140,581 328,618
-----------------------------------------------
Total Revenue Needed........................................ 7,143,771 5,340,853 12,484,624
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. Step 7: Calculate Initial Base Rates
Having determined the revenue needed for each area in the previous
six steps, to develop an hourly rate we divide that number by the
expected number of hours of traffic. Step 7 is a two-part process. In
the first part, we calculate the 10-year average of traffic in District
One, using the total time on task or pilot bridge hours. To calculate
the time on task for each district, the Coast Guard uses billing data
from the Great Lakes Pilotage Management System (GLPMS). We pull the
data from the system filtering by district, year, job status (we only
include closed jobs), and flagging code (we only include U.S. jobs).
Because we calculate separate figures for designated and undesignated
waters, there are two parts for each calculation. We show these values
in table 9.
Table 9--Time on Task for District One
[Hours]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
District One
Year -------------------------------
Designated Undesignated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2021.................................... 6,188 7,871
2020.................................... 6,265 7,560
2019.................................... 8,232 8,405
2018.................................... 6,943 8,445
2017.................................... 7,605 8,679
2016.................................... 5,434 6,217
2015.................................... 5,743 6,667
2014.................................... 6,810 6,853
2013.................................... 5,864 5,529
2012.................................... 4,771 5,121
-------------------------------
Average............................. 6,386 7,135
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next, we derive the initial hourly rate by dividing the revenue
needed by the average number of hours for each area. This produces an
initial rate, which is necessary to produce the revenue needed for each
area, assuming the amount of traffic is as expected. We present the
calculations for District One in table 10.
Table 10--Initial Rate Calculations for District One
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designated Undesignated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revenue needed (Step 6)................. $7,143,771 $5,340,853
Average time on task (hours)............ 6,386 7,135
Initial rate............................ $1,119 $749
------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Step 8: Calculate Average Weighting Factors by Area
In this step, we calculate the average weighting factor for each
designated and undesignated area. We collect the weighting factors, set
forth in 46 CFR 401.400, for each vessel trip. Using this database, we
calculate the average weighting factor for each area using the data
from each vessel transit from 2014 onward, as shown in tables 11 and
12.
[[Page 52880]]
Table 11--Average Weighting Factor for District One, Designated Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Weighting Weighted
Vessel class/year transits factor transits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class 1 (2014).................................................. 31 1 31
Class 1 (2015).................................................. 41 1 41
Class 1 (2016).................................................. 31 1 31
Class 1 (2017).................................................. 28 1 28
Class 1 (2018).................................................. 54 1 54
Class 1 (2019).................................................. 72 1 72
Class 1 (2020).................................................. 8 1 8
Class 1 (2021).................................................. 10 1 10
Class 2 (2014).................................................. 285 1.15 328
Class 2 (2015).................................................. 295 1.15 339
Class 2 (2016).................................................. 185 1.15 213
Class 2 (2017).................................................. 352 1.15 405
Class 2 (2018).................................................. 559 1.15 643
Class 2 (2019).................................................. 378 1.15 435
Class 2 (2020).................................................. 560 1.15 644
Class 2 (2021).................................................. 315 1.15 362
Class 3 (2014).................................................. 50 1.3 65
Class 3 (2015).................................................. 28 1.3 36
Class 3 (2016).................................................. 50 1.3 65
Class 3 (2017).................................................. 67 1.3 87
Class 3 (2018).................................................. 86 1.3 112
Class 3 (2019).................................................. 122 1.3 159
Class 3 (2020).................................................. 67 1.3 87
Class 3 (2021).................................................. 52 1.3 68
Class 4 (2014).................................................. 271 1.45 393
Class 4 (2015).................................................. 251 1.45 364
Class 4 (2016).................................................. 214 1.45 310
Class 4 (2017).................................................. 285 1.45 413
Class 4 (2018).................................................. 393 1.45 570
Class 4 (2019).................................................. 730 1.45 1059
Class 4 (2020).................................................. 427 1.45 619
Class 4 (2021).................................................. 407 1.45 590
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 6,704 .............. 8,640
-----------------------------------------------
Average weighting factor (weighted transits / number of .............. 1.29 ..............
transits)..............................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 12--Average Weighting Factor for District One, Undesignated Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Weighting Weighted
Vessel class/year transits factor transits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class 1 (2014).................................................. 25 1 25
Class 1 (2015).................................................. 28 1 28
Class 1 (2016).................................................. 18 1 18
Class 1 (2017).................................................. 19 1 19
Class 1 (2018).................................................. 22 1 22
Class 1 (2019).................................................. 30 1 30
Class 1 (2020).................................................. 3 1 3
Class 1 (2021).................................................. 19 1 19
Class 2 (2014).................................................. 238 1.15 274
Class 2 (2015).................................................. 263 1.15 302
Class 2 (2016).................................................. 169 1.15 194
Class 2 (2017).................................................. 290 1.15 334
Class 2 (2018).................................................. 352 1.15 405
Class 2 (2019).................................................. 366 1.15 421
Class 2 (2020).................................................. 358 1.15 412
Class 2 (2021).................................................. 463 1.15 532
Class 3 (2014).................................................. 60 1.3 78
Class 3 (2015).................................................. 42 1.3 55
Class 3 (2016).................................................. 28 1.3 36
Class 3 (2017).................................................. 45 1.3 59
Class 3 (2018).................................................. 63 1.3 82
Class 3 (2019).................................................. 58 1.3 75
Class 3 (2020).................................................. 35 1.3 46
Class 3 (2021).................................................. 71 1.3 92
Class 4 (2014).................................................. 289 1.45 419
Class 4 (2015).................................................. 269 1.45 390
Class 4 (2016).................................................. 222 1.45 322
Class 4 (2017).................................................. 285 1.45 413
[[Page 52881]]
Class 4 (2018).................................................. 382 1.45 554
Class 4 (2019).................................................. 326 1.45 473
Class 4 (2020).................................................. 334 1.45 484
Class 4 (2021).................................................. 466 1.45 676
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 5,638 .............. 7,291
-----------------------------------------------
Average weighting factor (weighted transits / number of .............. .............. 1.29
transits)..............................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Step 9: Calculate Revised Base Rates
In this step, we revise the base rates so that the total cost of
pilotage will be equal to the revenue needed after considering the
impact of the weighting factors. To do this, we divide the initial base
rates calculated in Step 7 by the average weighting factors calculated
in Step 8, as shown in table 13.
Table 13--Revised Base Rates for District One
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revised rate
Initial rate Average weighting (Initial rate /
Area (Step 7) factor (Step 8) average weighting
factor)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District One: Designated................................ $1,119 1.29 $867
District One: Undesignated.............................. 749 1.29 581
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Step 10: Review and Finalize Rates
In this step, the Director reviews the rates set forth by the
staffing model and ensures that they meet the goal of ensuring safe,
efficient, and reliable pilotage. To establish this, the Director
considers whether the proposed rates incorporate appropriate
compensation for pilots to handle heavy traffic periods and whether
there is a sufficient number of pilots to handle those heavy traffic
periods. The Director also considers whether the proposed rates would
cover operating expenses and infrastructure costs, including average
traffic and weighting factions. Based on the financial information
submitted by the pilots, the Director is not proposing any alterations
to the rates in this step. We propose to modify Sec. 401.405(a)(1) and
(2) to reflect the final rates shown in table 14.
Table 14--Proposed Final Rates for District One
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final 2022 Proposed 2023
Area Name pilotage rate pilotage rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District One: Designated..................... St. Lawrence River............. $834 $867
District One: Undesignated................... Lake Ontario................... 568 581
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District Two
A. Step 1: Recognize Previous Operating Expenses
Step 1 in our ratemaking methodology requires that the Coast Guard
review and recognize the previous year's operating expenses (Sec.
404.101). To do so, we begin by reviewing the independent accountant's
financial reports for each association's 2020 expenses and
revenues.\23\ For accounting purposes, the financial reports divide
expenses into designated and undesignated areas. For costs accrued by
the pilot associations generally, such as employee benefits, for
example, the cost is divided between the designated and undesignated
areas on a pro rata basis. The recognized operating expenses for
District Two are shown in table 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ These reports are available in the docket for this
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjustments have been made by the auditors and are explained in the
auditor's reports, which are available in the docket for this
rulemaking, where indicated under the Public Participation and Request
for Comments portion of the preamble.
In the 2020 expenses used as the basis for this rulemaking,
districts used the term ``applicant'' to describe applicant trainees
and persons who would be called apprentices (applicant pilots) under
the definition introduced by the 2022 final rule. Therefore, when
describing past expenses, we use the term ``applicant'' to match what
was reported from 2020, which includes both applicant and apprentice
pilots. We use ``apprentice'' to distinguish apprentice pilot wages and
describe the impacts of the ratemaking going forward.
We continue to include applicant salaries as an allowable expense
in the 2023 ratemaking, as it is based on 2020 operating expenses, when
salaries were still an allowable expense. The apprentice salaries paid
in the years 2020 and 2021 have not been reimbursed in the ratemaking
as of publication of this proposed rule. Applicant salaries (including
applicant trainees and apprentice pilots) will continue to be an
allowable operating expense through the 2024 ratemaking, which uses
operating expenses from 2021 where the wages for apprentice pilots were
still authorized as operating expenses. Beginning with the 2025
ratemaking, apprentice pilot salaries would no longer be included as a
2022 operating expense, because apprentice
[[Page 52882]]
pilot wages would have already been factored into the ratemaking Steps
3 and 4 in calculation of the 2022 rates. Beginning in 2025, the
applicant salaries' operating expenses for 2022 will consist of only
applicant trainees (those who are not yet apprentice pilots).
Table 15--2020 Recognized Expenses for District Two
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District Two
-------------------------------------------------
Undesignated Designated
Reported operating expenses for 2020 ----------------------------------
Southeast Shoal Total
Lake Erie to Port Huron
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicant Salaries............................................ $101,810 $152,715 $254,525
Applicant Health Insurance.................................... 12,706 19,058 31,764
Applicant Subsistence/Travel.................................. 6,732 10,098 16,830
Applicant Hotel/Lodging Cost.................................. 3,652 5,478 9,130
Applicant Payroll Tax......................................... 4,888 7,332 12,220
-------------------------------------------------
Total Applicant Cost...................................... 129,788 194,681 324,469
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pilot Subsistence/Travel...................................... 124,953 187,427 312,380
Hotel/Lodging Cost............................................ 40,744 61,116 101,860
License Renewal............................................... 1,606 2,409 4,015
Payroll Taxes................................................. 94,996 142,495 237,491
Insurance..................................................... 8,666 12,999 21,665
-------------------------------------------------
Total Other Pilotage Costs................................ 270,965 406,446 677,411
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pilot Boat and Dispatch Costs:
Pilot Boat Cost........................................... 218,840 328,261 547,101
Employee Benefits......................................... 92,554 138,831 231,385
Payroll taxes............................................. 13,565 20,347 33,912
-------------------------------------------------
Total Pilot Boat and Dispatch Costs................... 324,959 487,439 812,398
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative Expense:
Legal--General Counsel.................................... 4,016 6,024 10,040
Legal--Shared Counsel (K&L Gates)......................... 9,898 14,846 24,744
Legal--Shared Counsel (K&L Gates) (D2-20-01).............. 3,233 4,850 8,083
Office Rent............................................... 27,627 41,440 69,067
Insurance................................................. 12,357 18,536 30,893
Employee Benefits......................................... 157,650 236,476 394,126
Payroll Taxes............................................. 5,007 7,510 12,517
Other Taxes............................................... 43,400 65,100 108,500
Real Estate Taxes......................................... 8,285 12,427 20,712
Depreciation/Auto Lease/Other............................. 7,783 11,674 19,457
Interest.................................................. 114 171 285
APA Dues.................................................. 14,683 22,025 36,708
Dues and Subscriptions.................................... 819 1,229 2,048
Utilities................................................. 18,453 27,679 46,132
Salaries--Admin Employees................................. 50,250 75,374 125,624
Accounting................................................ 14,360 21,540 35,900
Pilot Training............................................ 146 219 365
Other..................................................... 24,604 36,906 61,510
-------------------------------------------------
Total Administrative Expenses......................... 402,685 604,026 1,006,711
-------------------------------------------------
Total OpEx (Pilot Costs + Applicant Cost + Pilot 1,128,397 1,692,592 2,820,989
Boats + Admin)...................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Director's Adjustments for Pilot Salaries:
Total Director's Adjustments..............................
Total Operating Expenses (OpEx + Adjustments)............. 1,128,397 1,692,592 2,820,989
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Step 2: Project Operating Expenses, Adjusting for Inflation or
Deflation
Having identified the recognized 2020 operating expenses in Step 1,
the next step is to estimate the current year's operating expenses by
adjusting those expenses for inflation over the 3-year period. We
calculate inflation using the BLS data from the CPI for the Midwest
Region of the United States for the 2021 inflation rate.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ The 2021 inflation rate is available at https://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet. Specifically, the CPI is
defined as ``All Urban Consumers (CPI-U), All Items, 1982-4=100.''
Series CUUS0200SAO. (Downloaded March 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52883]]
Because the BLS does not provide forecasted inflation data, we use
economic projections from the Federal Reserve for the 2022 and 2023
inflation modification.\25\ Based on that information, the calculations
for Step 2 are as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ The 2022 and 2023 inflation rates are available at https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/fomcprojtabl20220316.pdf. We used the PCE median inflation value
found in table 1. (Downloaded March 2022).
Table 16--Adjusted Operating Expenses for District Two
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District Two
-----------------------------------------------
Undesignated Designated Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Operating Expenses (Step 1)............................... $1,128,397 $1,692,592 $2,820,989
2021 Inflation Modification (@5.1%)............................. 57,548 86,322 143,870
2022 Inflation Modification (@2.7033%).......................... 32,021 48,031 80,052
2023 Inflation Modification (@2.3%)............................. 28,013 42,020 70,033
Adjusted 2023 Operating Expenses............................ 1,245,979 1,868,965 3,114,944
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Step 3: Estimate Number of Registered Pilots and Apprentice Pilots
In accordance with the text in Sec. 404.103, we estimate the
number of fully registered pilots in each district. We determine the
number of fully registered pilots based on data provided by the LPA.
Using these numbers, we estimate that there will be 16 registered
pilots in 2023 in District Two. We determine the number of apprentice
pilots based on input from the district on anticipated retirements and
staffing needs. Using these numbers, we estimate that there will be two
apprentice pilots in 2023 in District Two. Based on the seasonal
staffing model discussed in the 2017 ratemaking (see 82 FR 41466), we
assign a certain number of pilots to designated waters and a certain
number to undesignated waters, as shown in table 17. These numbers are
used to determine the amount of revenue needed in their respective
areas.
Table 17--Authorized Pilots for District Two
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item District Two
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Maximum Number of Pilots (per Sec. 16
401.220(a)) *..........................................
2023 Authorized Pilots (total).......................... 15
Pilots Assigned to Designated Areas..................... 6
Pilots Assigned to Undesignated Areas................... 9
2023 Apprentice Pilots.................................. 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* For a detailed calculation, refer to the Great Lakes Pilotage Rates--
2017 Annual Review final rule, which contains the staffing model. See
82 FR 41466, table 6 at 41480 (August 31, 2017).
D. Step 4: Determine Target Pilot Compensation Benchmark and Apprentice
Pilot Wage Benchmark
In this step, we determine the total pilot compensation for each
area. Because we are proposing a full ratemaking this year, we propose
to follow the procedure outlined in paragraph (a) of Sec. 404.104,
which requires us to develop a benchmark after considering the most
relevant currently available non-proprietary information. In accordance
with the discussion in Section VII of this preamble, the proposed
compensation benchmark for 2023 uses the 2022 compensation of $399,266
per registered pilot as a base, then adjusts for inflation following
the procedure outlined in paragraph (b) of Sec. 404.104. The proposed
target pilot compensation for 2023 is $422,336 per pilot. The proposed
apprentice pilot wage benchmark is 36 percent of the target pilot
compensation, or $152,041 ($422,336 x 0.36).
Next, we certify that the number of pilots estimated for 2022 is
less than or equal to the number permitted under the staffing model in
Sec. 401.220(a). The staffing model suggests that the number of pilots
needed is 15 pilots for District Two, which is less than or equal to
15, the number of registered pilots provided by the pilot association.
In accordance with Sec. 404.104(c), we use the revised target
individual compensation level to derive the total pilot compensation by
multiplying the individual target compensation by the estimated number
of registered pilots for District Two, as shown in table 18. We
estimate that the number of apprentice pilots with limited registration
needed will be two for District Two in the 2023 season. The total
target wages for apprentices are allocated with 60 percent for the
designated area and 40 percent for the undesignated area, in accordance
with the allocation for operating expenses.
Table 18--Target Compensation for District Two
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District Two
-----------------------------------------------
Undesignated Designated Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Pilot Compensation....................................... $422,336 $422,336 $422,336
Number of Pilots................................................ 9 6 15
Total Target Pilot Compensation................................. $3,801,024 $2,534,016 $6,335,040
Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation............................ $152,041 $152,041 $152,041
Number of Apprentice Pilots..................................... .............. .............. 2
[[Page 52884]]
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation...................... $121,632.92 $182,449.00 $304,082
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Step 5: Project Working Capital Fund
Next, we calculate the working capital fund revenues needed for
each area. First, we add the figures for projected operating expenses,
total pilot compensation, and total target apprentice pilot wage for
each area. Then we find the preceding year's average annual rate of
return for new issues of high-grade corporate securities. Using Moody's
data, the number is 2.7033 percent.\26\ By multiplying the two figures,
we obtain the working capital fund contribution for each area, as shown
in table 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Moody's Seasoned Aaa Corporate Bond Yield, average of 2021
monthly data. The Coast Guard uses the most recent year of complete
data. Moody's is taken from Moody's Investors Service, which is a
bond credit rating business of Moody's Corporation. Bond ratings are
based on creditworthiness and risk. The rating of ``Aaa'' is the
highest bond rating assigned with the lowest credit risk. See
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/AAA. (Downloaded March 2022).
Table 19--Working Capital Fund Calculation for District Two
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District Two
-----------------------------------------------
Undesignated Designated Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjusted Operating Expenses (Step 2)............................ $1,245,979 $1,868,965 $3,114,944
Total Target Pilot Compensation (Step 4)........................ 3,801,024 2,534,016 6,335,040
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation (Step 4)............. 121,633 182,449 304,082
Total 2023 Expenses............................................. 5,168,636 4,585,430 9,754,066
Working Capital Fund (2.7033%).................................. 139,725 123,959 263,684
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. Step 6: Project Needed Revenue
In this step, we add all the expenses accrued to derive the total
revenue needed for each area. These expenses include the projected
operating expenses (from Step 2), the total pilot compensation (from
Step 4), total target apprentice pilot wage, (from Step 4) and the
working capital fund contribution (from Step 5). We show these
calculations in table 20.
Table 20--Revenue Needed for District Two
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District Two
-----------------------------------------------
Undesignated Designated Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjusted Operating Expenses (Step 2)............................ $1,245,979 $1,868,965 $3,114,944
Total Target Pilot Compensation (Step 4)........................ 3,801,024 2,534,016 6,335,040
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation (Step 4)............. 121,633 182,449 304,082
Working Capital Fund (Step 5)................................... 139,725 123,959 263,684
-----------------------------------------------
Total Revenue Needed........................................ 5,308,361 4,709,389 10,017,750
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. Step 7: Calculate Initial Base Rates
Having determined the revenue needed for each area in the previous
six steps, to develop an hourly rate we divide that number by the
expected number of hours of traffic. Step 7 is a two-part process. In
the first part, we calculate the 10-year average of traffic in District
Two, using the total time on task or pilot bridge hours. To calculate
the time on task for each district, the Coast Guard uses billing data
from SeaPro. We pull the data from the system filtering by district,
year, job status (we only include processed jobs), and flagging code
(we only include U.S. jobs). Because we calculate separate figures for
designated and undesignated waters, there are two parts for each
calculation. We show these values in table 21.
Table 21--Time on Task for District Two (Hours)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
District Two
Year -------------------------------
Undesignated Designated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2021.................................... 8,826 3,226
2020.................................... 6,232 8,401
2019.................................... 6,512 7,715
2018.................................... 6,150 6,655
2017.................................... 5,139 6,074
2016.................................... 6,425 5,615
[[Page 52885]]
2015.................................... 6,535 5,967
2014.................................... 7,856 7,001
2013.................................... 4,603 4,750
2012.................................... 3,848 3,922
-------------------------------
Average............................. 6,213 5,933
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next, we derive the initial hourly rate by dividing the revenue
needed by the average number of hours for each area. This produces an
initial rate, which is necessary to produce the revenue needed for each
area, assuming the amount of traffic is as expected. We present the
calculations for District Two in table 22.
Table 22--Initial Rate Calculations for District Two
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Undesignated Designated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revenue needed (Step 6)................. $5,308,361 $4,709,389
Average time on task (hours)............ 6,213 5,933
Initial rate............................ $854 $794
------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Step 8: Calculate Average Weighting Factors by Area.
In this step, we calculate the average weighting factor for each
designated and undesignated area. We collect the weighting factors, set
forth in 46 CFR 401.400, for each vessel trip. Using this database, we
calculate the average weighting factor for each area using the data
from each vessel transit from 2014 onward, as shown in tables 23 and
24.
Table 23--Average Weighting Factor for District Two, Undesignated Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Weighting Weighted
Vessel class/year transits factor transits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class 1 (2014).................................................. 31 1 31
Class 1 (2015).................................................. 35 1 35
Class 1 (2016).................................................. 32 1 32
Class 1 (2017).................................................. 21 1 21
Class 1 (2018).................................................. 37 1 37
Class 1 (2019).................................................. 54 1 54
Class 1 (2020).................................................. 1 1 1
Class 1 (2021).................................................. 7 1 7
Class 2 (2014).................................................. 356 1.15 409
Class 2 (2015).................................................. 354 1.15 407
Class 2 (2016).................................................. 380 1.15 437
Class 2 (2017).................................................. 222 1.15 255
Class 2 (2018).................................................. 123 1.15 141
Class 2 (2019).................................................. 127 1.15 146
Class 2 (2020).................................................. 165 1.15 190
Class 2 (2021).................................................. 206 1.15 237
Class 3 (2014).................................................. 20 1.3 26
Class 3 (2015).................................................. 0 1.3 0
Class 3 (2016).................................................. 9 1.3 12
Class 3 (2017).................................................. 12 1.3 16
Class 3 (2018).................................................. 3 1.3 4
Class 3 (2019).................................................. 1 1.3 1
Class 3 (2020).................................................. 1 1.3 1
Class 3 (2021).................................................. 5 1.3 7
Class 4 (2014).................................................. 636 1.45 922
Class 4 (2015).................................................. 560 1.45 812
Class 4 (2016).................................................. 468 1.45 679
Class 4 (2017).................................................. 319 1.45 463
Class 4 (2018).................................................. 196 1.45 284
Class 4 (2019).................................................. 210 1.45 305
Class 4 (2020).................................................. 201 1.45 291
Class 4 (2021).................................................. 227 1.45 329
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 5,019 .............. 6,592
Average weighting factor (weighted transits / number of .............. 1.31 ..............
transits)..............................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52886]]
Table 24--Average Weighting Factor for District Two, Designated Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Weighting Weighted
Vessel class/year transits factor transits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class 1 (2014).................................................. 20 1 20
Class 1 (2015).................................................. 15 1 15
Class 1 (2016).................................................. 28 1 28
Class 1 (2017).................................................. 15 1 15
Class 1 (2018).................................................. 42 1 42
Class 1 (2019).................................................. 48 1 48
Class 1 (2020).................................................. 7 1 7
Class 1 (2021).................................................. 12 1 12
Class 2 (2014).................................................. 237 1.15 273
Class 2 (2015).................................................. 217 1.15 250
Class 2 (2016).................................................. 224 1.15 258
Class 2 (2017).................................................. 127 1.15 146
Class 2 (2018).................................................. 153 1.15 176
Class 2 (2019).................................................. 281 1.15 323
Class 2 (2020).................................................. 342 1.15 393
Class 2 (2021).................................................. 240 1.15 276
Class 3 (2014).................................................. 8 1.3 10
Class 3 (2015).................................................. 8 1.3 10
Class 3 (2016).................................................. 4 1.3 5
Class 3 (2017).................................................. 4 1.3 5
Class 3 (2018).................................................. 14 1.3 18
Class 3 (2019).................................................. 1 1.3 1
Class 3 (2020).................................................. 5 1.3 7
Class 3 (2021).................................................. 2 1.3 3
Class 4 (2014).................................................. 359 1.45 521
Class 4 (2015).................................................. 340 1.45 493
Class 4 (2016).................................................. 281 1.45 407
Class 4 (2017).................................................. 185 1.45 268
Class 4 (2018).................................................. 379 1.45 550
Class 4 (2019).................................................. 403 1.45 584
Class 4 (2020).................................................. 405 1.45 587
Class 4 (2021).................................................. 268 1.45 389
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 4,674 .............. 6,140
Average weighting factor (weighted transits / number of .............. .............. 1.31
transits)..............................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Step 9: Calculate Revised Base Rates
In this step, we revise the base rates so that the total cost of
pilotage will be equal to the revenue needed after considering the
impact of the weighting factors. To do this, we divide the initial base
rates calculated in Step 7 by the average weighting factors calculated
in Step 8, as shown in table 25.
Table 25--Revised Base Rates for District Two
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revised rate
Average (initial rate
Area Initial rate weighting average
(Step 7) factor (Step weighting
8) factor)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District Two: Undesignated...................................... $854 1.31 $652
District Two: Designated........................................ 794 1.31 606
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Step 10: Review and Finalize Rates
In this step, the Director reviews the rates set forth by the
staffing model and ensures that they meet the goal of ensuring safe,
efficient, and reliable pilotage. To establish this, the Director
considers whether the proposed rates incorporate appropriate
compensation for pilots to handle heavy traffic periods, and whether
there is a sufficient number of pilots to handle those heavy traffic
periods. The Director also considers whether the proposed rates would
cover operating expenses and infrastructure costs, and takes average
traffic and weighting factors into consideration. Based on the
financial information submitted by the pilots, the Director is not
proposing any alterations to the rates in this step. We propose to
modify Sec. 401.405(a)(3) and (4) to reflect the final rates shown in
table 26.
[[Page 52887]]
Table 26--Proposed Final Rates for District Two
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final 2022 Proposed 2023
Area Name pilotage rate pilotage rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District Two: Designated.................... Navigable waters from $536 $606
Southeast Shoal to Port
Huron, MI.
District Two: Undesignated.................. Lake Erie..................... 610 652
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District Three
A. Step 1: Recognize Previous Operating Expenses
Step 1 in our ratemaking methodology requires that the Coast Guard
review and recognize the previous year's operating expenses (Sec.
404.101). To do so, we begin by reviewing the independent accountant's
financial reports for each association's 2020 expenses and
revenues.\27\ For accounting purposes, the financial reports divide
expenses into designated and undesignated areas. For costs accrued by
the pilot associations generally, such as employee benefits, for
example, the cost is divided between the designated and undesignated
areas on a pro rata basis. The recognized operating expenses for
District Three are shown in table 27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ These reports are available in the docket for this
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjustments have been made by the auditors and are explained in the
auditor's reports, which are available in the docket for this
rulemaking, where indicated under the Public Participation and Request
for Comments portion of the preamble.
In the 2020 expenses used as the basis for this rulemaking,
districts used the term ``applicant'' to describe applicant trainees
and persons who would be called apprentices (applicant pilots) under
the definition introduced by the 2022 final rule. Therefore, when
describing past expenses, we use the term ``applicant'' to match what
was reported from 2020, which includes both applicant and apprentice
pilots. We use ``apprentice'' to distinguish apprentice pilot wages and
describe the impacts of the ratemaking going forward.
We continue to include applicant salaries as an allowable expense
in the 2023 ratemaking, as it is based on 2020 operating expenses, when
salaries were still an allowable expense. The apprentice salaries paid
in the years 2020 and 2021 have not been reimbursed in the ratemaking
as of publication of this proposed rule. Applicant salaries (including
applicant trainees and apprentice pilots) will continue to be an
allowable operating expense through the 2024 ratemaking, which uses
operating expenses from 2021 where the wages for apprentice pilots were
still authorized as operating expenses. Beginning with the 2025
ratemaking, apprentice pilot salaries would no longer be included as a
2022 operating expense, because apprentice pilot wages would have
already been factored into the ratemaking Steps 3 and 4 in calculation
of the 2022 rates. Beginning in 2025, the applicant salaries' operating
expenses for 2022 will consist of only applicant trainees (those who
are not yet apprentice pilots).
Table 27--2020 Recognized Expenses for District Three
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District Three
---------------------------------------------------------------
Undesignated Designated Undesignated
Reported operating expenses for 2020 ------------------------------------------------
Lakes Huron St. Mary's Total
and Michigan River Lake Superior
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Pilotage Costs:
Pilot Subsistence/Travel.................... $284,547 $118,603 $149,261 $552,411
Hotel/Lodging Cost.......................... 87,208 36,349 45,745 169,302
License Insurance- Pilots................... 16,749 6,981 8,786 32,516
Payroll Taxes............................... .............. .............. .............. ..............
Payroll Tax (D3-19-01)...................... 151,266 63,049 79,348 293,663
Other....................................... 6,505 2,711 3,412 12,628
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total Other Pilotage Costs.............. 546,275 227,693 286,552 1,060,520
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicant Cost:
Applicant Salaries.......................... 340,677 141,998 178,705 661,380
Applicant Benefits.......................... 66,083 27,544 34,665 128,292
Applicant Payroll Tax....................... 25,711 10,717 13,487 49,915
Applicant Hotel/Lodging..................... 31,313 13,052 16,425 60,790
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total Applicant Cost.................... 463,784 193,311 243,282 900,377
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pilot Boat and Dispatch costs:
Pilot Boat Costs............................ 515,075 214,689 270,187 999,951
Dispatch Costs.............................. 112,008 46,686 58,755 217,449
Employee Benefits........................... 41,153 17,153 21,587 79,893
Payroll Taxes............................... 16,771 6,991 8,798 32,560
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total Pilot Boat and Dispatch costs..... 685,007 285,519 359,327 1,329,853
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52888]]
Administrative Cost:
Legal--General Counsel...................... 1,921 801 1,008 3,730
Legal--Shared Counsel (K&L Gates)........... 21,650 9,024 11,357 42,031
Legal--Shared Counsel (K&L Gates) CPA 3,601 1,501 1,889 6,991
Deduction (D3-20-03).......................
Legal--USCG Litigation...................... 8,575 3,574 4,498 16,647
Insurance................................... 18,811 7,841 9,867 36,519
Employee Benefits........................... 80,117 33,394 42,026 155,537
Payroll Tax................................. 8,101 3,377 4,250 15,728
Other Taxes................................. 15,797 6,584 8,286 30,667
Real Estate Taxes........................... 2,001 834 1,050 3,885
Depreciation/Auto Leasing/Other............. 61,096 25,465 32,048 118,609
Interest.................................... 2,940 1,225 1,542 5,707
APA Dues.................................... 23,860 9,945 12,516 46,321
Dues and Subscriptions...................... 4,971 2,072 2,607 9,650
Salaries.................................... 50,795 21,172 26,645 98,612
Utilities................................... 54,212 22,596 28,438 105,246
Accounting/Professional Fees................ 23,823 9,930 12,496 46,249
Other Expenses.............................. 38,507 16,050 20,199 74,756
Other Expenses CPA Deduction (D3-18-01)..... (4,684) (1,952) (2,457) (9,093)
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total Administrative Expenses........... 416,094 173,433 218,265 807,792
Total Operating Expenses (Other 2,111,160 879,956 1,107,426 4,098,542
Costs + Applicant Cost + Pilot
Boats + Admin).....................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Director's Adjustments--Applicant Surcharge (63,120) (26,309) (33,110) (122,539)
Collected......................................
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total Director's Adjustments................ (63,120) (26,309) (33,110) (122,539)
Total Operating Expenses (OpEx + 2,048,040 853,647 1,074,316 3,976,003
Adjustments)...............................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Step 2: Project Operating Expenses, Adjusting for Inflation or
Deflation
Having identified the recognized 2020 operating expenses in Step 1,
the next step is to estimate the current year's operating expenses by
adjusting those expenses for inflation over the 3-year period. We
calculate inflation using the BLS data from the CPI for the Midwest
Region of the United States for the 2021 inflation rate.\28\ Because
the BLS does not provide forecasted inflation data, we use economic
projections from the Federal Reserve for the 2022 and 2023 inflation
modification.\29\ Based on that information, the calculations for Step
2 are as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ The 2021 inflation rate is available at https://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet. Specifically, the CPI is
defined as ``All Urban Consumers (CPI-U), All Items, 1982-4 = 100.''
Series CUUS0200SAO (Downloaded March 2022).
\29\ The 2022 and 2023 inflation rates are available at https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/fomcprojtabl20220316.pdf. We used the PCE median inflation value
found in table 1. (Downloaded March 2022).
Table 28--Adjusted Operating Expenses for District Three
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District Three
-----------------------------------------------
Undesignated Designated Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Operating Expenses (Step 1)............................... $3,122,356 $853,647 $3,976,003
2021 Inflation Modification (@5.1%)............................. 159,240 43,536 202,776
2022 Inflation Modification (@2.7033%).......................... 88,603 24,224 112,827
2023 Inflation Modification (@2.3%)............................. 77,515 21,192 98,707
-----------------------------------------------
Adjusted 2023 Operating Expenses............................ 3,447,714 942,599 4,390,313
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Step 3: Estimate Number of Registered Pilots and Apprentice Pilots
In accordance with the text in Sec. 404.103, we estimate the
number of registered pilots in each district. We determine the number
of registered pilots based on data provided by the WGLPA. Using these
numbers, we estimate that there will be 22 registered pilots in 2023 in
District Three. We determine the number of apprentice pilots based on
input from the district on anticipated retirements and staffing needs.
Using these numbers, we estimate that there will be three apprentice
pilots in 2023 in District Three. Furthermore, based on the seasonal
staffing model discussed in the 2017 ratemaking (see 82 FR 41466), we
assign a certain number of pilots to designated waters and a certain
number to undesignated waters, as shown in table 29. These numbers are
used to determine the amount of revenue needed in their respective
areas.
[[Page 52889]]
Table 29--Authorized Pilots for District Three
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item District Three
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Maximum Number of Pilots (per Sec. 22
401.220(a)) *........................................
2023 Authorized Pilots (total)........................ 22
Pilots Assigned to Designated Areas................... 5
Pilots Assigned to Undesignated Areas................. 17
2023 Apprentice Pilots................................ 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* For a detailed calculation, refer to the Great Lakes Pilotage Rates--
2017 Annual Review final rule, which contains the staffing model. See
82 FR 41466, table 6 at 41480 (August 31, 2017).
D. Step 4: Determine Target Pilot Compensation Benchmark and Apprentice
Pilot Wage Benchmark
In this step, we determine the total pilot compensation for each
area. Because we are proposing a full ratemaking this year, we propose
to follow the procedure outlined in paragraph (a) of Sec. 404.104,
which requires us to develop a benchmark after considering the most
relevant currently available non-proprietary information. In accordance
with the discussion in Section VII above, the proposed compensation
benchmark for 2023 uses the 2022 compensation of $399,266 per
registered pilot as a base, then adjusts for inflation following the
procedure outlined in paragraph (b) of Sec. 404.104. The proposed
target pilot compensation for 2023 is $422,336 per pilot. The proposed
apprentice pilot wage benchmark is 36 percent of the target pilot
compensation, or $152,041 ($422,336 x 0.36).
Next, we certify that the number of pilots estimated for 2022 is
less than or equal to the number permitted under the staffing model in
Sec. 401.220(a). The staffing model suggests that the number of pilots
needed is 22 pilots for District Three, which is less than or equal to
22, the number of registered pilots provided by the pilot association.
In accordance with Sec. 404.104(c), we use the revised target
individual compensation level to derive the total pilot compensation by
multiplying the individual target compensation by the estimated number
of registered pilots for District Three, as shown in table 30. We
estimate that the number of apprentice pilots with limited registration
needed will be three for District Three in the 2023 season. The total
target wages for apprentices are allocated with 21 percent for the
designated area, and 79 percent (52 percent + 27 percent) for the
undesignated areas, in accordance with the allocation for operating
expenses.
Table 30--Target Compensation for District Three
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District three
-----------------------------------------------
Undesignated Designated Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Pilot Compensation....................................... $422,336 $422,336 $422,336
Number of Pilots................................................ 17 5 22
Total Target Pilot Compensation................................. $7,179,712 $2,111,680 $9,291,392
Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation............................ $152,041 $152,041 $152,041
Number of Apprentice Pilots..................................... .............. .............. 3
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation...................... $358,193 $97,929 $456,122.88
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Step 5: Project Working Capital Fund
Next, we calculate the working capital fund revenues needed for
each area. First, we add the figures for projected operating expenses,
total pilot compensation, and total target apprentice pilot wage for
each area. Then we find the preceding year's average annual rate of
return for new issues of high-grade corporate securities. Using Moody's
data, the number is 2.7033 percent.\30\ By multiplying the two figures,
we obtain the working capital fund contribution for each area, as shown
in table 31.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ Moody's Seasoned Aaa Corporate Bond Yield, average of 2021
monthly data. The Coast Guard uses the most recent year of complete
data. Moody's is taken from Moody's Investors Service, which is a
bond credit rating business of Moody's Corporation. Bond ratings are
based on creditworthiness and risk. The rating of ``Aaa'' is the
highest bond rating assigned with the lowest credit risk. See
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/AAA. (Downloaded March 2022).
Table 31--Working Capital Fund Calculation for District Three
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District three
-----------------------------------------------
Undesignated Designated Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjusted Operating Expenses (Step 2)............................ $3,447,714 $942,599 $4,390,313
Total Target Pilot Compensation (Step 4)........................ 7,179,712 2,111,680 9,291,392
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation (Step 4)............. 358,193 97,929 456,123
Total 2023 Expenses............................................. 10,985,619 3,152,208 14,137,828
Working Capital Fund (2.7033%).................................. 296,978 85,215 382,193
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52890]]
F. Step 6: Project Needed Revenue
In this step, we add all the expenses accrued to derive the total
revenue needed for each area. These expenses include the projected
operating expenses (from Step 2), the total pilot compensation (from
Step 4), and the working capital fund contribution (from Step 5). The
calculations are shown in table 32.
Table 32--Revenue Needed for District Three
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District three
-----------------------------------------------
Undesignated Designated Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjusted Operating Expenses (Step 2)............................ $3,447,714 $942,599 $4,390,313
Total Target Pilot Compensation (Step 4)........................ 7,179,712 2,111,680 9,291,392
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation (Step 4)............. 358,193 97,929 456,123
Working Capital Fund (Step 5)................................... 296,978 85,215 382,193
-----------------------------------------------
Total Revenue Needed........................................ 11,282,597 3,237,423 14,520,021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. Step 7: Calculate Initial Base Rates
Having determined the revenue needed for each area in the previous
six steps, to develop an hourly rate, we divide that number by the
expected number of hours of traffic. Step 7 is a two-part process. In
the first part, we calculate the 10-year average of traffic in District
Three, using the total time on task or pilot bridge hours. To calculate
the time on task for each district, the Coast Guard uses billing data
from SeaPro. We pull the data from the system filtering by district,
year, job status (we only include processed jobs), and flagging code
(we only include U.S. jobs). Because we calculate separate figures for
designated and undesignated waters, there are two parts for each
calculation. We show these values in table 33.
Table 33--Time on Task for District Three
[Hours]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
District three
Year -------------------------------
Undesignated Designated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2021.................................... 18,219 2,584
2020.................................... 24,178 3,682
2019.................................... 24,851 3,395
2018.................................... 19,967 3,455
2017.................................... 20,955 2,997
2016.................................... 23,421 2,769
2015.................................... 22,824 2,696
2014.................................... 25,833 3,835
2013.................................... 17,115 2,631
2012.................................... 15,906 2,163
-------------------------------
Average............................. 21,327 3,021
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next, we derive the initial hourly rate by dividing the revenue
needed by the average number of hours for each area. This produces an
initial rate, which is necessary to produce the revenue needed for each
area, assuming the amount of traffic is as expected. The calculations
for District Three are set forth in table 34.
Table 34--Initial Rate Calculations for District Three
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Undesignated Designated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revenue needed (Step 6)................. $11,282,597 $3,237,423
Average time on task (hours)............ 21,327 3,021
Initial rate............................ $529 $1,072
------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Step 8: Calculate Average Weighting Factors by Area
In this step, we calculate the average weighting factor for each
designated and undesignated area. We collect the weighting factors, set
forth in 46 CFR 401.400, for each vessel trip. Using this database, we
calculate the average weighting factor for each area using the data
from each vessel transit from 2014 onward, as shown in tables 35 and
36.
[[Page 52891]]
Table 35--Average Weighting Factor for District Three, Undesignated Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Weighting Weighted
Vessel class/year transits factor transits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class 1 (2014).................................................. 45 1 45
Class 1 (2015).................................................. 56 1 56
Class 1 (2016).................................................. 136 1 136
Class 1 (2017).................................................. 148 1 148
Class 1 (2018).................................................. 103 1 103
Class 1 (2019).................................................. 173 1 173
Class 1 (2020).................................................. 4 1 4
Class 1 (2021).................................................. 7 1 7
Class 2 (2014).................................................. 274 1.15 315
Class 2 (2015).................................................. 207 1.15 238
Class 2 (2016).................................................. 236 1.15 271
Class 2 (2017).................................................. 264 1.15 304
Class 2 (2018).................................................. 169 1.15 194
Class 2 (2019).................................................. 279 1.15 321
Class 2 (2020).................................................. 395 1.15 454
Class 2 (2021).................................................. 261 1.15 300
Class 3 (2014).................................................. 15 1.3 20
Class 3 (2015).................................................. 8 1.3 10
Class 3 (2016).................................................. 10 1.3 13
Class 3 (2017).................................................. 19 1.3 25
Class 3 (2018).................................................. 9 1.3 12
Class 3 (2019).................................................. 9 1.3 12
Class 3 (2020).................................................. 4 1.3 5
Class 3 (2021).................................................. 7 1.3 9
Class 4 (2014).................................................. 394 1.45 571
Class 4 (2015).................................................. 375 1.45 544
Class 4 (2016).................................................. 332 1.45 481
Class 4 (2017).................................................. 367 1.45 532
Class 4 (2018).................................................. 337 1.45 489
Class 4 (2019).................................................. 334 1.45 484
Class 4 (2020).................................................. 413 1.45 599
Class 4 (2021).................................................. 312 1.45 452
-----------------------------------------------
Total for Area 6............................................ 5,702 .............. 7,328
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Area 8
Class 1 (2014).................................................. 3 1 3
Class 1 (2015).................................................. 0 1 0
Class 1 (2016).................................................. 4 1 4
Class 1 (2017).................................................. 4 1 4
Class 1 (2018).................................................. 0 1 0
Class 1 (2019).................................................. 0 1 0
Class 1 (2020).................................................. 1 1 1
Class 1 (2021).................................................. 4 1 4
Class 2 (2014).................................................. 177 1.15 204
Class 2 (2015).................................................. 169 1.15 194
Class 2 (2016).................................................. 174 1.15 200
Class 2 (2017).................................................. 151 1.15 174
Class 2 (2018).................................................. 102 1.15 117
Class 2 (2019).................................................. 120 1.15 138
Class 2 (2020).................................................. 239 1.15 275
Class 2 (2021).................................................. 96 1.15 110
Class 3 (2014).................................................. 3 1.3 4
Class 3 (2015).................................................. 0 1.3 0
Class 3 (2016).................................................. 7 1.3 9
Class 3 (2017).................................................. 18 1.3 23
Class 3 (2018).................................................. 7 1.3 9
Class 3 (2019).................................................. 6 1.3 8
Class 3 (2020).................................................. 2 1.3 3
Class 3 (2021).................................................. 1 1.3 1
Class 4 (2014).................................................. 243 1.45 352
Class 4 (2015).................................................. 253 1.45 367
Class 4 (2016).................................................. 204 1.45 296
Class 4 (2017).................................................. 269 1.45 390
Class 4 (2018).................................................. 188 1.45 273
Class 4 (2019).................................................. 254 1.45 368
Class 4 (2020).................................................. 456 1.45 661
Class 4 (2021).................................................. 182 1.45 264
-----------------------------------------------
Total for Area 8............................................ 3,337 .............. 4456
Combined total.............................................. 9,039 .............. 11784
[[Page 52892]]
Average weighting factor (weighted transits / number of .............. 1.30 ..............
transits)..............................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 36--Average Weighting Factor for District Three, Designated Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Weighting Weighted
Vessel class/year transits factor transits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class 1 (2014).................................................. 27 1 27
Class 1 (2015).................................................. 23 1 23
Class 1 (2016).................................................. 55 1 55
Class 1 (2017).................................................. 62 1 62
Class 1 (2018).................................................. 47 1 47
Class 1 (2019).................................................. 45 1 45
Class 1 (2020).................................................. 16 1 16
Class 1 (2021).................................................. 12 1 12
Class 2 (2014).................................................. 221 1.15 254
Class 2 (2015).................................................. 145 1.15 167
Class 2 (2016).................................................. 174 1.15 200
Class 2 (2017).................................................. 170 1.15 196
Class 2 (2018).................................................. 126 1.15 145
Class 2 (2019).................................................. 162 1.15 186
Class 2 (2020).................................................. 250 1.15 288
Class 2 (2021).................................................. 128 1.15 147
Class 3 (2014).................................................. 4 1.3 5
Class 3 (2015).................................................. 0 1.3 0
Class 3 (2016).................................................. 6 1.3 8
Class 3 (2017).................................................. 14 1.3 18
Class 3 (2018).................................................. 6 1.3 8
Class 3 (2019).................................................. 3 1.3 4
Class 3 (2020).................................................. 4 1.3 5
Class 3 (2021).................................................. 2 1.3 3
Class 4 (2014).................................................. 321 1.45 465
Class 4 (2015).................................................. 245 1.45 355
Class 4 (2016).................................................. 191 1.45 277
Class 4 (2017).................................................. 234 1.45 339
Class 4 (2018).................................................. 225 1.45 326
Class 4 (2019).................................................. 308 1.45 447
Class 4 (2020).................................................. 385 1.45 558
Class 4 (2021).................................................. 299 1.45 434
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 3,910 .............. 5,122
Average weighting factor (weighted transits / number of .............. 1.31 ..............
transits)..............................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Step 9: Calculate Revised Base Rates
In this step, we revise the base rates so that the total cost of
pilotage will be equal to the revenue needed after considering the
impact of the weighting factors. To do this, we divide the initial base
rates calculated in Step 7 by the average weighting factors calculated
in Step 8, as shown in table 37.
Table 37--Revised Base Rates for District Three
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revised rate
Initial rate Average weighting (initial rate /
Area (Step 7) factor (Step 8) average weighting
factor)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District Three: Undesignated............................ $529 1.30 $407
District Three: Designated.............................. 1,072 1.31 818
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Step 10: Review and Finalize Rates
In this step, the Director reviews the rates set forth by the
staffing model and ensures that they meet the goal of ensuring safe,
efficient, and reliable pilotage. To establish this, the Director
considers whether the proposed rates incorporate appropriate
compensation for pilots to handle heavy traffic periods and whether
there is a sufficient number of pilots to handle those heavy traffic
periods. The Director also considers whether the proposed rates would
cover operating expenses and infrastructure costs and takes average
traffic and weighting factors into consideration. Based on this
information, the Director is not proposing any alterations to the rates
in this step. We propose to modify Sec. 401.405(a)(5) and (6) to
reflect the final rates shown in table 38.
[[Page 52893]]
Table 38--Proposed Final Rates for District Three
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final 2022 Proposed 2023
Area Name pilotage rate pilotage rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District Three: Designated.................. St. Mary's River.............. $662 $818
District Three: Undesignated................ Lakes Huron, Michigan, and 342 407
Superior.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
X. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and Executive orders related to rulemaking. A summary of 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.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated this
proposed rule a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866. A regulatory analysis follows.
The purpose of this proposed rule is to establish new base pilotage
rates, as 46 U.S.C. 9303(f) requires that rates be established or
reviewed and adjusted each year. The statute also requires that base
rates be established by a full ratemaking at least once every 5 years,
and, in years when base rates are not established, they must be
reviewed and, if necessary, adjusted. The last full ratemaking was
concluded in June of 2018.\31\ For this ratemaking, the Coast Guard
estimates an increase in cost of approximately $4.54 million to
industry. This is approximately a 14-percent increase because of the
change in revenue needed in 2023 compared to the revenue needed in
2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ Great Lakes Pilotage Rates--2018 Annual Review and
Revisions to Methodology (83 FR 26162), published June 5, 2018.
Table 39--Economic Impacts Due to Proposed Changes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change Description Affected population Costs Benefits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rate changes............. In accordance with Owners and operators Increase of New rates cover an
46 U.S.C. Chapter of 285 vessels $4,535,400 due to association's
93, the Coast Guard transiting the change in revenue necessary and
is required to Great Lakes system needed for 2023 reasonable
review and adjust annually, 55 United ($37,022,395) from operating
base pilotage rates States Great Lakes revenue needed for expenses. Promotes
annually. pilots, 7 2022 ($32,486,995) safe, efficient,
apprentice pilots, as shown in table and reliable
and 3 pilotage 40. pilotage service
associations. on the Great
Lakes. Provides
fair compensation,
adequate training,
and sufficient
rest periods for
pilots. Ensures
the association
receives
sufficient
revenues to fund
future
improvements.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Coast Guard is required to review and adjust pilotage rates on
the Great Lakes annually. See section IV of this preamble for detailed
discussions of the legal basis and purpose for this rulemaking. Based
on our annual review for this rulemaking, we are adjusting the pilotage
rates for the 2023 shipping season to generate sufficient revenues for
each district to reimburse its necessary and reasonable operating
expenses, fairly compensate trained and rested pilots, and provide an
appropriate working capital fund to use for improvements. The result
would be an increase in rates for all areas in District One, District
Two, and District Three. These changes would also lead to a net
increase in the cost of service to shippers. The change in per unit
cost to each individual shipper will be dependent on their area of
operation.
A detailed discussion of our economic impact analysis follows.
Affected Population
This proposed rule affects United States Great Lakes pilots and
apprentice pilots, the 3 pilot associations, and the owners and
operators of 285 oceangoing vessels that transit the Great Lakes
annually on average from 2019 to 2021. We estimate that there will be
55 registered pilots and 7 apprentice pilots during the 2023 shipping
season. The shippers affected by these rate changes are those owners
and operators of domestic vessels operating ``on register'' (engaged in
foreign trade) and owners and operators of non-Canadian foreign vessels
on routes within the Great Lakes system. These owners and operators
must have pilots or pilotage service as required by 46 U.S.C. 9302.
There is no minimum tonnage limit or exemption for these vessels. The
statute applies only to commercial vessels and not to recreational
vessels. United States-flagged vessels not operating on register, and
Canadian ``lakers,'' which account for most commercial shipping on the
Great Lakes, are not required by 46 U.S.C. 9302 to have pilots.
However, these United States- and Canadian-flagged lakers may
voluntarily choose to engage a Great Lakes registered pilot. Vessels
that are U.S.-flagged may opt to have a pilot for varying reasons, such
as unfamiliarity with designated waters and ports, or for insurance
purposes.
The Coast Guard used billing information from the years 2019
through
[[Page 52894]]
2021 from the GLPMS to estimate the average annual number of vessels
affected by the rate adjustment. The GLPMS tracks data related to
managing and coordinating the dispatch of pilots on the Great Lakes,
and billing in accordance with the services. As described in Step 7 of
the ratemaking methodology, we use a 10-year average to estimate the
traffic. We used 3 years of the most recent billing data to estimate
the affected population. When we reviewed 10 years of the most recent
billing data, we found the data included vessels that have not used
pilotage services in recent years. We believe using 3 years of billing
data is a better representation of the vessel population that is
currently using pilotage services and will be impacted by this
rulemaking. We found that 424 unique vessels used pilotage services
during the years 2019 through 2021. That is, these vessels had a pilot
dispatched to the vessel, and billing information was recorded in the
GLPMS or SeaPro. Of these vessels, 397 were foreign-flagged vessels and
27 were U.S.-flagged vessels. As stated previously, U.S.-flagged
vessels not operating on register are not required to have a registered
pilot per 46 U.S.C. 9302, but they can voluntarily choose to have one.
Numerous factors affect vessel traffic, which varies from year to
year. Therefore, rather than using the total number of vessels over the
time period, we took an average of the unique vessels using pilotage
services from the years 2019 through 2021 as the best representation of
vessels estimated to be affected by the rates in this rulemaking. From
2019 through 2021, an average of 285 vessels used pilotage services
annually.\32\ On average, 273 of these vessels were foreign-flagged and
12 were U.S.-flagged vessels that voluntarily opted into the pilotage
service (these figures are rounded averages).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Some vessels entered the Great Lakes multiple times in a
single year, affecting the average number of unique vessels using
pilotage services in any given year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Cost to Shippers
The rate changes resulting from this adjustment to the rates would
result in a net increase in the cost of service to shippers. However,
the change in per unit cost to each individual shipper will be
dependent on their area of operation.
The Coast Guard estimates the effect of the rate changes on
shippers by comparing the total projected revenues needed to cover
costs in 2022 with the total projected revenues to cover costs in 2023.
We set pilotage rates so pilot associations receive enough revenue to
cover their necessary and reasonable expenses. Shippers pay these rates
when they engage a pilot as required by 46 U.S.C. 9302. Therefore, the
aggregate payments of shippers to pilot associations are equal to the
projected necessary revenues for pilot associations. The revenues each
year represent the total costs that shippers must pay for pilotage
services. The change in revenue from the previous year is the
additional cost to shippers discussed in this proposed rule.
The impacts of the rate changes on shippers are estimated from the
district pilotage projected revenues (shown in tables 8, 20, and 32 of
this preamble). The Coast Guard estimates that for the 2023 shipping
season, the projected revenue needed for all three districts is
$37,022,395.
To estimate the change in cost to shippers from this proposed rule,
the Coast Guard compared the 2023 total projected revenues to the 2022
projected revenues. Because we review and prescribe rates for Great
Lakes pilotage annually, the effects are estimated as a single-year
cost rather than annualized over a 10-year period. In the 2022
rulemaking, we estimated the total projected revenue needed for 2022 as
$32,486,994.\33\ This is the best approximation of 2022 revenues, as,
at the time of publication of this proposed rule, the Coast Guard does
not have enough audited data available for the 2022 shipping season to
revise these projections. Table 40 shows the revenue projections for
2022 and 2023 and details the additional cost increases to shippers by
area and district as a result of the rate changes on traffic in
Districts One, Two, and Three.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ 87 FR 18488, see table 42. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-03-30/pdf/2022-06394.pdf.
Table 40--Effect of the Rulemaking by Area and District
[$U.S.; non-discounted]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional costs
Area Revenue needed Revenue needed of this
in 2022 in 2023 rulemaking
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, District One....................................... $11,791,695 $12,484,624 $692,930
Total, District Two....................................... 8,786,881 10,017,750 1,230,868
Total, District Three..................................... 11,908,418 14,520,021 2,611,602
-----------------------------------------------------
System Total.......................................... 32,486,994 37,022,395 4,535,400
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* All figures are rounded to the nearest dollar and may not sum.
The resulting difference between the projected revenue in 2022 and
the projected revenue in 2023 is the annual change in payments from
shippers to pilots as a result of the rate changes proposed by this
rulemaking. The effect of the rate changes to shippers would vary by
area and district. After taking into account the change in pilotage
rates, the proposed rate changes would lead to affected shippers
operating in District One experiencing an increase in payments of
$692,930 over the previous year. District Two and District Three would
experience an increase in payments of $1,230,868 and $2,611,602,
respectively, when compared with 2022. The overall adjustment in
payments would be an increase in payments by shippers of $4,535,400
across all three districts (a 14-percent increase when compared with
2022). Again, because the Coast Guard reviews and sets rates for Great
Lakes pilotage annually, we estimate the impacts as single-year costs
rather than annualizing them over a 10-year period.
Table 41 shows the difference in revenue by revenue-component from
2022 to 2023 and presents each revenue-component as a percentage of the
total revenue needed. In both 2022 and 2023, the largest revenue-
component was pilotage compensation (63 percent of total revenue needed
in 2022, and 63 percent of total revenue needed in 2023), followed by
operating expenses (31 percent of total revenue needed in
[[Page 52895]]
2022, and 32 percent of total revenue needed in 2023).
Table 41--Difference in Revenue by Revenue-Component
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage Percentage
of total of total Difference (2023 Percentage
Revenue component Revenue needed revenue Revenue needed revenue revenue- 2022 change from
in 2022 needed in in 2023 needed in revenue) previous year
2022 2023
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjusted Operating Expenses................................ $10,045,658 31 $11,755,133 32 $1,709,475 17
Total Target Pilot Compensation............................ 20,362,566 63 23,228,480 63 2,865,914 14
Total Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation................. 1,293,622 4 1,064,287 3 (229,335) (18)
Working Capital Fund....................................... 785,149 2 974,495 3 189,346 24
Total Revenue Needed....................................... 32,486,994 100 37,022,395 100 4,535,400 14
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* All figures are rounded to the nearest dollar and may not sum.
As stated above, we estimate that there would be a total increase
in revenue needed by the pilot associations of $4,535,400. This
represents an increase in revenue needed for target pilot compensation
of $2,865,914, a decrease in revenue needed for total apprentice pilot
wage benchmark of ($229,335), an increase in the revenue needed for
adjusted operating expenses of $1,709,475, and an increase in the
revenue needed for the working capital fund of $189,346.
The change in revenue needed for pilot compensation, $2,865,914, is
due to three factors: (1) The changes to adjust 2022 pilotage
compensation to account for the difference between actual ECI inflation
\34\ (5.6 percent) and predicted PCE inflation \35\ (2.2 percent) for
2022; (2) an increase of one pilot in District Two and three pilots in
District Three compared to 2022; and (3) projected inflation of
pilotage compensation in Step 2 of the methodology, using predicted
inflation through 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ Employment Cost Index, Total Compensation for Private
Industry workers in Transportation and Material Moving, Annual
Average, Series ID: CIU2010000520000A. Accessed April 29, 2022.
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/eci.t05.htm.
\35\ https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/fomcprojtabl20220316.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The target compensation is $422,336 per pilot in 2023, compared to
$399,266 in 2022. The proposed changes to modify the 2022 pilot
compensation to account for the difference between predicted and actual
inflation would increase the 2022 target compensation value by 3.4
percent. As shown in table 42, this inflation adjustment increases
total compensation by $13,575 per pilot, and the total revenue needed
by $746,627 when accounting for all 55 pilots.
Table 42--Change in Revenue Resulting From the Change to Inflation of
Pilot Compensation Calculation in Step 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2022 Target Pilot Compensation............................. $399,266
Adjusted 2022 Compensation ($399,266 x 1.034%)............. 412,841
Difference between Adjusted Target 2022 Compensation and 13,575
Target 2022 Compensation ($412,841-$399,266)..............
Increase in total Revenue for 55 Pilots ($13,575 x 55)..... 746,627
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* All figures are rounded to the nearest dollar and may not sum.
Similarly, table 43 shows the impact of the difference between
predicted and actual inflation on the target apprentice pilot
compensation benchmark. The inflation adjustment increases the
compensation benchmark by $4,887 per apprentice pilot, and the total
revenue needed by $34,209 when accounting for all seven apprentice
pilots.
Table 43--Change in Revenue Resulting From the Change to Inflation of
Apprentice Pilot Compensation Calculation in Step 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Apprentice Pilot Compensation....................... $143,736
Adjusted Compensation ($143,736 x 1.034%).................. 148,623
Difference between Adjusted Target Compensation and Target 4,887
Compensation ($148,623-$143,736)..........................
Increase in total Revenue for Apprentices ($4,887 x 7)..... 34,209
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* All figures are rounded to the nearest dollar and may not sum.
As noted earlier, the Coast Guard predicts that 55 pilots would be
needed for the 2023 season. This would be an increase of four pilots
compared to the 2022 season. The difference reflects an increase of one
pilot in District Two and three pilots in District Three. Table 44
shows the increase of $1,635,044 in revenue needed solely for pilot
compensation. As noted previously, to avoid double counting this value
excludes the change in revenue resulting from the change to adjust 2022
pilotage compensation to account for the difference between actual and
predicted inflation.
[[Page 52896]]
Table 44--Change in Revenue Resulting From Increase of Four Pilots
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2023 Target Compensation................................... $422,336
Total Number of New Pilots................................. 4
Total Cost of new Pilots ($422,336 x 4).................... $1,689,344
Difference between Adjusted Target 2022 Compensation and $13,575
Target 2022 Compensation ($412,841-$399,266)..............
Increase in total Revenue for 4 Pilots ($13,575 x 4)....... $54,300
Net Increase in total Revenue for 4 Pilots ($1,689,344- $1,635,044
$54,300)..................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* All figures are rounded to the nearest dollar and may not sum.
Similarly, the Coast Guard predicts that seven apprentice pilots
would be needed for the 2023 season. This would be a decrease of two
apprentices from the 2022 season. The difference reflects a decrease of
two apprentices for District Three. Table 45 shows the decrease of
($294,308) in revenue needed solely for apprentice pilot compensation.
As noted previously, to avoid double counting this value excludes the
change in revenue resulting from the change to adjust 2022 apprentice
pilotage compensation to account for the difference between actual and
predicted inflation.
Table 45--Change in Revenue Resulting From Decrease of Two Apprentices
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2023 Apprentice Target Compensation.................. $152,041
Total Number of New Apprentices...................... (2)
Total Cost of new Apprentices ($152,041 x-2)......... ($304,081.92)
Difference between Adjusted Target 2022 Compensation $4,887
and Target 2022 Compensation ($148,623-$143,736)....
Increase in total Revenue for -2 Apprentices ($4,887 ($9,774)
x-2)................................................
Net Increase in total Revenue for -2 Apprentices (- ($294,308)
$304,082--$9,774)...................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* All figures are rounded to the nearest dollar and may not sum.
Another increase, $522,223, would be the result of increasing
compensation for the 55 pilots to account for future inflation of 2.3
percent in 2023. This would increase total compensation by $9,495 per
pilot.
Table 46--Change in Revenue Resulting From Inflating 2022 Compensation
to 2023
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjusted 2022 Compensation................................. $412,841
2023 Target Compensation ($412,841 x 1.023%)............... 422,336
Difference between Adjusted 2022 Compensation and Target 9,495
2023 Compensation ($422,336-$412,841).....................
Increase in total Revenue for 55 Pilots ($9,495 x 55)...... 522,223
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* All figures are rounded to the nearest dollar and may not sum.
Similarly, an increase of $23,927 would be the result of increasing
compensation for the 7 apprentice pilots to account for future
inflation of 2.3 percent in 2023. This would increase total
compensation by $3,418 per apprentice pilot, as shown in table 47.
Table 47--Change in Revenue Resulting From Inflating 2022 Apprentice
Pilot Compensation to 2023
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjusted 2022 Compensation................................. $148,623
2023 Target Compensation ($422,336 x 36%).................. 152,041
Difference between Adjusted Compensation and Target 3,418
Compensation ($152,041-$148,623)..........................
Increase in total Revenue for 7 Apprentice Pilots ($3,418 x 23,927
7)........................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* All figures are rounded to the nearest dollar and may not sum.
Table 48 presents the percentage change in revenue by area and
revenue-component, excluding surcharges, as they are applied at the
district level.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ The 2022 projected revenues are from the Great Lakes
Pilotage Rate--2022 Annual Review and Revisions to Methodology final
rule (86 FR 14184), tables 9, 21, and 33. The 2023 projected
revenues are from tables 8, 20, and 32 of this final rule.
[[Page 52897]]
Table 48--Difference in Revenue by Revenue-Component and Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjusted operating expenses Total target pilot compensation Total target apprentice pilot Working capital fund Total revenue needed
------------------------------------------------------------------------ compensation ---------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------
2022 2023 Percentage 2022 2023 Percentage Percentage 2022 2023 Percentage 2022 2023 Percentage
change change 2022 2023 change change change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District One: Designated................................ $2,419,401 $2,549,925 5 $3,992,660 $4,223,360 6 $172,483 $182,449 5.8 $163,077 $188,037 15 $6,747,621 $7,143,771 5.9
District One: Undesignated.............................. 1,613,051 1,699,951 5 3,194,128 3,378,688 6 114,989 121,633 5.8 121,906 140,581 15 5,044,074 5,340,853 5.9
District Two: Undesignated.............................. 1,078,929 1,245,979 15 3,194,128 3,801,024 19 172,483 121,633 -29.5 110,101 139,725 27 4,555,641 5,308,361 16.5
District Two: Designated................................ 1,618,395 1,868,965 15 2,395,596 2,534,016 6 114,989 182,449 58.7 102,261 123,959 21 4,231,241 4,709,389 11.3
District Three: Undesignated............................ 2,603,961 3,447,714 32 5,988,990 7,179,712 20 567,756 358,193 -37 226,880 296,978 31 9,387,588 11,282,597 20.2
District Three: Designated.............................. 711,920 942,599 32 1,597,064 2,111,680 32 150,923 97,929 -35 60,924 85,215 40 2,520,831 3,237,423 28.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* All figures are rounded to the nearest dollar and may not sum.
[[Page 52898]]
Benefits
This proposed rule allows the Coast Guard to meet the requirements
in 46 U.S.C. 9303 to review the rates for pilotage services on the
Great Lakes. The rate changes promote safe, efficient, and reliable
pilotage service on the Great Lakes by (1) ensuring that rates cover an
association's operating expenses, (2) providing fair pilot
compensation, adequate training, and sufficient rest periods for
pilots, and (3) ensuring pilot associations produce enough revenue to
fund future improvements. The rate changes also help recruit and retain
pilots, which ensure a sufficient number of pilots to meet peak
shipping demand, helping to reduce delays caused by pilot shortages.
B. Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.
For the rulemaking, the Coast Guard reviewed recent company size
and ownership data for the vessels identified in the GLPMS, and we
reviewed business revenue and size data provided by publicly available
sources such as ReferenceUSA.\37\ As described in section X.A of this
preamble, Regulatory Planning and Review, we found that 285 unique
vessels used pilotage services during the years 2019 through 2021.
These vessels are owned by 59 entities, of which 44 are foreign
entities that operate primarily outside the United States, and the
remaining 15 entities are U.S. entities. We compared the revenue and
employee data found in the company search to the Small Business
Administration's (SBA) small business threshold as defined in the SBA's
``Table of Size Standards'' for small businesses to determine how many
of these companies are considered small entities.\38\ Table 49 shows
the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes of the
U.S. entities and the small entity standard size established by the
SBA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ See https://resource.referenceusa.com/.
\38\ See https://www.sba.gov/document/support--table-size-standards. SBA has established a ``Table of Size Standards'' for
small businesses that sets small business size standards by NAICS
code. A size standard, which is usually stated in number of
employees or average annual receipts (``revenues''), represents the
largest size that a business (including its subsidiaries and
affiliates) may be in order to remain classified as a small business
for SBA and Federal contracting programs. Accessed April 2022.
Table 49--NAICS Codes and Small Entities Size Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAICS Description Small entity size standard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
238910.................................. Site Preparation Contractors.... $16,500,000
423860.................................. Transportation Equipment And 150 Employees
Supplies.
425120.................................. Wholesale Trade Agents And 100 Employees
Brokers.
483212.................................. Inland Water Passenger 500 Employees
Transportation.
484230.................................. Specialized Freight (Except Used $30,000
Goods) Trucking.
488330.................................. Navigational Services to $41,500,000
Shipping.
561510.................................. Travel Agencies................. $22,000,000
561599.................................. All Other Travel Arrangement And $22,000,000
Reservation Services.
713930.................................. Marinas......................... $8,000,000
813910.................................. Business Associations........... $8,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of the 15 U.S. entities, 8 exceed the SBA's small business
standards for small entities. To estimate the potential impact on the
seven small entities, the Coast Guard used their 2021 invoice data to
estimate their pilotage costs in 2023. Of the seven small entities,
from 2019 to 2021, only five used pilotage services in 2021. We
increased their 2021 costs to account for the changes in pilotage rates
resulting from this proposed rule and the Great Lakes Pilotage Rates--
2021 Annual Review and Revisions to Methodology final rule (86 FR
14184). We estimated the change in cost to these entities resulting
from this rulemaking by subtracting their estimated 2022 pilotage costs
from their estimated 2023 pilotage costs and found the average costs to
small firms will be approximately $25,575, with a range of $1,580 to
$95,381. We then compared the estimated change in pilotage costs
between 2022 and 2023 with each firm's annual revenue. In all but one
case, the impact of the change in estimated pilotage expenses were
below 1 percent of revenues. For one entity, the change in impact would
be 3.7 percent of revenues, as this entity reports revenue
approximately ten times less than the next largest small entity.
In addition to the owners and operators discussed previously, three
U.S. entities that receive revenue from pilotage services will be
affected by this rulemaking. These are the three pilot associations
that provide and manage pilotage services within the Great Lakes
districts. These associations are designated with the same NAICS code
as Business Associations \39\ with a small-entity size standard of
$8,000,000. Based on the reported revenues from audit reports, none of
the associations qualify as small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ In previous rulemakings, the associations used a different
NAICS code, 483212 Inland Water Passenger Transportation, which had
a size standard of 500 employees and, therefore, designated the
associations as small entities. The change in NAICS code comes from
an update to the association's ReferenceUSA profile in February
2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the Coast Guard did not find any small not-for-profit
organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields that will be impacted by this proposed rule.
We also did not find any small governmental jurisdictions with
populations of fewer than 50,000 people that will be impacted by this
rulemaking. Based on this analysis, we conclude this rulemaking would
not affect a substantial number of small entities, nor have a
significant economic impact on any of the affected entities.
Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that
this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on
it, please submit a comment
[[Page 52899]]
to the docket at the address listed in the Public Participation and
Request for Comments section of this preamble. In your comment, explain
why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this proposed
rule would economically affect it.
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 call or email 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 or revised collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520.
E. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism) if it has a substantial direct effect on 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.
Congress directed the Coast Guard to establish ``rates and charges
for pilotage services.'' See 46 U.S.C. 9303(f). This regulation is
issued pursuant to that statute and is preemptive of State law as
specified in 46 U.S.C. 9306. Under 46 U.S.C. 9306, a ``State or
political subdivision of a State may not regulate or impose any
requirement on pilotage on the Great Lakes.'' As a result, States or
local governments are expressly prohibited from regulating within this
category. Therefore, this rulemaking is consistent with the fundamental
federalism principles and preemption requirements 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 call or
email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
of this preamble.
F. Unfunded Mandates
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 potential 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.
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.
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.
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 that order because it is not a
``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.
L. Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act, 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
[[Page 52900]]
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 A3 and L54 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual
023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. Paragraph A3 pertains to the promulgation of
rules of the following nature: (a) those of a strictly administrative
or procedural nature; (b) those that implement, without substantive
change, statutory or regulatory requirements; (c) those that implement,
without substantive change, procedures, manuals, and other guidance
documents; (d) those that interpret or amend an existing regulation
without changing its environmental effect; (e) those that provide
technical guidance on safety and security matters; and (f) those that
provide guidance for the preparation of security plans. Paragraph L54
pertains to regulations which are editorial or procedural.
This proposed rule involves setting or adjusting the pilotage rates
for the 2023 shipping season to account for changes in district
operating expenses, changes in the number of pilots, and anticipated
inflation. In addition, the Coast Guard is accepting comments on the
entire Great Lakes pilotage ratemaking methodology, in accordance with
the requirement to conduct a full ratemaking every 5 years. We are also
accepting suggestions for changes to the staffing model, for
consideration in a future rulemaking. All of these changes are
consistent with the Coast Guard's maritime safety missions. 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 401
Administrative practice and procedure, Great Lakes, Navigation
(water), Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seamen.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard is
proposing to amend 46 CFR part 401 as follows:
PART 401--GREAT LAKES PILOTAGE REGULATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 401 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 2103, 2104(a), 6101, 7701, 8105, 9303,
9304; DHS Delegation 00170.1, Revision No. 01.2, paragraphs
(II)(92)(a), (d), (e), (f).
0
2. Amend Sec. 401.405 by revising paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) to
read as follows:
Sec. 401.405 Pilotage rates and charges.
(a) * * *
(1) The St. Lawrence River is $867;
(2) Lake Ontario is $581;
(3) Lake Erie is $683;
(4) The navigable waters from Southeast Shoal to Port Huron, MI is
$606;
(5) Lakes Huron, Michigan, and Superior is $407; and
(6) The St. Marys River is $818.
* * * * *
Dated: August 25, 2022.
W.R. Arguin,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Prevention
Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-18690 Filed 8-29-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P