Marine Casualty Reporting on the Outer Continental Shelf, 38765-38789 [2023-12513]

Agencies

• Coast Guard
• DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 114 (Wednesday, June 14, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38765-38789]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-12513]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 140 and 146

46 CFR Parts 4 and 109

[Docket No. USCG-2013-1057]
RIN 1625-AB99


Marine Casualty Reporting on the Outer Continental Shelf

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes changing the reporting criteria for 
certain casualties that occur on foreign floating outer continental 
shelf (OCS) facilities (FOFs), mobile offshore drilling units (MODUs), 
and vessels engaged in OCS activities. In this supplemental notice of 
proposed rulemaking (SNPRM), the Coast Guard revises the approach 
described in the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published in 2014 
and responds to

[[Page 38766]]

public comments about the NPRM. The Coast Guard proposes this action to 
harmonize the casualty-reporting regimes that apply to foreign and U.S. 
FOFs, MODUs, and vessels engaged in OCS activities and to account for 
the changes in technology on the OCS, since the casualty-reporting 
regulations were originally published in 1982. In addition, in response 
to public comment on the 2014 NPRM, the Coast Guard proposes to raise 
the property damage dollar threshold that triggers a casualty report 
from $25,000 to $75,000 for fixed facilities on the OCS because the 
original regulation setting the property damage threshold amount was 
issued in the 1980s and has not since been updated. Through this SNRPM, 
the Coast Guard would update Coast Guard regulations to keep up with 
technology, improve awareness of accident trends on the OCS, improve 
safety on the OCS, and reduce the regulatory burden on operators of 
fixed OCS platforms.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received before September 
12, 2023.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2013-1057 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion 
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on 
submitting comments.
    Collection of information. Submit comments on the collection of 
information discussed in section IX.D. of this preamble both to the 
Coast Guard's online docket and to the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the White House Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) using their website www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. 
Comments sent to OIRA on the collection of information must reach OMB 
on or before the comment due date listed on their website.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this 
supplemental proposed rule, call or email CDR Amanda Fahrig, Office of 
Investigations and Casualty Analysis (CG-INV), telephone 202-372-1035, 
email, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents for Preamble

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments
II. Abbreviations
III. Basis and Purpose
IV. Regulatory History
V. Background
VI. Discussion of Proposed Rule
VII. Discussion of Comments on the NPRM
VIII. Differences between the NPRM and SNPRM
IX. Regulatory Analyses
    A. Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Small Entities
    C. Assistance for Small Entities
    D. Collection of Information
    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 eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov. To do so, go to 
https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2013-1057 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 www.regulations.gov, call or email 
the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this SNPRM 
for alternate instructions.
    Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this 
SNPRM 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 www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) web page. 
That FAQ page also explains how to subscribe for email alerts that will 
notify you when comments are posted or if a final rule is published. 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 www.regulations.gov will include any personal information you 
have provided. For more about privacy and submissions to the docket, 
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 public comments indicate that a meeting would be 
helpful. We would issue a separate Federal Register notice to announce 
the date, time, and location of such a meeting.

II. Abbreviations

BLS U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
BSEE Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COI Collection of information
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FOF Floating OCS facility
FR Federal Register
IADC International Association of Drilling Contractors
ICR Information Collection Request
MCR Marine casualty reports
MISLE Marine Information for Safety and Law Enforcement
MODU Mobile offshore drilling unit
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NMA National Mariners Association
NOSAC National Offshore Safety Advisory Committee
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
OCS Outer continental shelf
OIRA Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OOC Offshore Operators Committee
SNPRM Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

III. Basis and Purpose

    Through Title 43 of the United States Code (U.S.C.), Section 
1333(d)(1), Congress authorizes the Secretary of the Department in 
which the Coast Guard is operating to promulgate and enforce reasonable 
regulations to promote safety of life and property on the outer 
continental shelf (OCS), artificial islands, installations, and other 
devices permanently or temporarily attached to the seabed, and in 
waters adjacent to such artificial islands, installations, or devices. 
The Secretary delegates this authority to the Commandant of the Coast 
Guard through the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Delegation No. 
00170.1 (90), Revision No. 01.2.
    In this supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM), the 
Coast Guard revises the proposals detailed in the notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPRM) published on January 10, 2014 (79 FR 1780) to account 
for public comment as well as to simplify our explanation of the

[[Page 38767]]

proposed regulatory changes. Through this SNPRM, we would collect more 
comprehensive casualty data to help protect the safety of life and 
property on the OCS, account for changes in technology, and improve the 
Coast Guard's maritime domain awareness.
    In addition, through this SNPRM, the Coast Guard seeks to reduce 
the regulatory burden on fixed OCS facilities by raising the monetary 
property damage threshold amount for reporting a marine casualty from 
$25,000 to $75,000.

IV. Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard published an NPRM titled ``Marine Casualty 
Reporting on the Outer Continental Shelf'' on January 10, 2014 (79 FR 
1780). In the NPRM, we explained our rationale for changing the 
criteria under which foreign floating OCS facilities (FOFs), mobile 
offshore drilling units (MODUs), and vessels engaged in OCS activities 
report marine casualties. While we propose most of the same criteria 
changes in this SNPRM, we utilize a different regulatory approach and 
offer additional proposals in response to public comment. This SNPRM 
completely replaces the 2014 NPRM and reference to the NPRM should not 
be necessary to review and comment on the Coast Guard's proposed 
supplemental changes.
    In section VII of this SNPRM, we also address the comments received 
in response to the NPRM.

V. Background

    The Coast Guard's regulations for OCS activities appear in Title 33 
of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) subchapter N, parts 140 
through 147. Regulations for reporting casualties on the OCS reside in 
33 CFR part 146--Operations. The terms ``OCS facility,'' ``floating OCS 
facility,'' ``mobile offshore drilling unit,'' and ``fixed OCS 
facility'' are defined in 33 CFR part 140--General.
    The owner, operator, or person in charge of a U.S. or foreign FOF, 
fixed OCS facility, MODU, or vessel must submit marine casualty reports 
(MCRs) in accordance with the applicable regulations. 33 CFR 146.30--
Notice of casualties, applies to U.S. and foreign OCS facilities 
including MODUs affixed to the seabed. 33 CFR 146.301 and 33 CFR 
146.303--Subpart D--Vessels--Notice of Casualty, apply to U.S. and 
foreign vessels, including MODUs not affixed to the seabed, engaged in 
OCS activities other than U.S. vessels already required to report 
marine casualties under 46 CFR subpart 4.05--Notice of Marine 
Casualties and Voyage Records. In 1987 (52 FR 47526, 47536, December 
14, 1987), the Coast Guard amended 46 CFR 109.411--Notice and reporting 
of casualty, to require the owner, operator, or person in charge of a 
U.S. MODU must report accidents in accordance with 46 CFR part 4.
    The criteria for reporting casualties are not identical between 
titles 33 and 46 of the CFR. The differences in these regulations 
result from the fact that the original title 33 CFR casualty reporting 
regulations published in 1956 (21 FR 900, February 9, 1956) applied to 
stationary artificial islands and fixed structures. In 1982 (47 FR 
9366, March 4, 1982), the Coast Guard extended application of these 
regulations to floating facilities and vessels engaged in OCS 
activities to implement amendments to the Outer Continental Lands Act 
(Pub. L. 95-372) and did not align the reporting criteria with 46 CFR 
part 4. Table 1 shows the significant reporting differences between 
titles 33 and 46 of the CFR. In particular, table 1 shows that, because 
of the evolution of the casualty reporting requirements on the OCS, 
U.S. MODUs are regulated by two different reporting regimes and that 
the casualty reporting requirements for foreign MODUs are less 
stringent than those for U.S. MODUs.

       Table 1--Coast Guard Marine Casualty Reporting Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Topic                33 CFR part 146        46 CFR part 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Statutory authority.........  43 U.S.C. 1333......  43 U.S.C. 1333; 46
                                                     U.S.C. 2103, 2303a,
                                                     2306, 6101, 6301.
Applies to..................  U.S. and foreign      U.S. vessels and
                               FOFs, fixed OCS       MODUs in any
                               facilities, MODUs     waters.
                               when in contact      Foreign vessels in
                               with the seabed,      U.S. waters.
                               and vessels engaged
                               in OCS activities.
Reportable casualties.......  No similar            Vessel in distress
                               requirement for       or loss of
                               vessel in distress.   communication with
                                                     vessel.
                              Death...............  Death.
                              Injuries to 5+        Injury.
                               persons.
                              Incapacitation >72    No similar
                               hours.                incapacitation
                                                     requirement.
                              Property damage       Property damage
                               >$25,000.             >$75,000.
                              Damage affecting the  Grounding.
                               usefulness of        Allision:
                               primary lifesaving
                               or firefighting
                               equipment.
                                                    Loss of--
                                                     Main
                                                     propulsion.
                                                     Primary
                                                     steering.
                                                     Associated
                                                     systems or
                                                     components
                                                     affecting
                                                     maneuverability.
                                                    Impairment of--
                                                     Vessel
                                                     operation.
                                                     Vessel
                                                     components.
                                                     Cargo.
                                                    Material or adverse
                                                     impact to vessel's--
 
                                                    
                                                     Seaworthiness.
                                                     Fitness for
                                                     service.
                                                     Fitness for
                                                     route.
                                                     Examples--
                                                     fire, flooding,
                                                     failure of or
                                                     damage to fire
                                                     extinguishing,
                                                     lifesaving,
                                                     auxiliary power,
                                                     and bilge pumping
                                                     systems.
                                                    Significant harm to
                                                     the environment.
When to report..............  As soon as possible.  Immediately after
                                                     addressing
                                                     resultant safety
                                                     concerns.
Subsequent reports..........  Within 10 days,       Within 5 days,
                               describe possible     written casualty
                               contributing          report required.
                               factors.
Alcohol/drug testing........  Required............  Required.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 38768]]

    Under 33 CFR 146.30 (facilities) and 146.303 (vessels), the owner, 
operator, or person in charge of an FOF, a fixed OCS facility, a MODU 
(when in contact with the seabed of the OCS for exploration or 
exploitation of subsea resources), or a vessel when engaged in OCS 
activities, must report to the Coast Guard as soon as possible any 
casualties involving:
     Death;
     Injury to five or more persons in a single incident;
     Injury causing any person to be incapacitated for more 
than 72 hours;
     Damage affecting the usefulness of primary lifesaving or 
firefighting equipment; and
     Certain other property damage in excess of $25,000.
    The reporting party must follow the initial report in writing with 
a description of the factors that may have contributed to the casualty, 
including whether there is any evidence of alcohol or drug use by 
individuals directly involved in the casualty. The written report must 
be submitted on Coast Guard Form CG-2692 ``Report of Marine Casualty, 
Commercial Diving Casualty, or OCS-Related Casualty'' or in a narrative 
that supplies the same information as in the form. The CG-2692 form or 
narrative can be supplemented, as necessary by appended Forms CG-2692 A 
``Barge Addendum,'' CG-2692B ``Report of Mandatory Chemical Testing 
Following a Serious Marine Incident Involving Vessels in Commercial 
Service,'' CG-2693C ``Personnel Casualty Addendum,'' and/or CG-2692D 
``Involved Persons and Witnesses Addendum.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The CG-2692 form and other CG-2692 addendum forms are 
accessible at https://www.dco.uscg.mil/Our-Organization/Assistant-Commandant-for-Prevention-Policy-CG-5P/Inspections-Compliance-CG-5PC-/Office-of-Investigations-Casualty-Analysis/2692-Reporting-Forms-NVIC-01-15/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    U.S. vessels operating anywhere and foreign vessels operating 
within the navigable waters of the United States are subject to the 
marine casualty reporting requirements found in 46 CFR part 4. The 
regulations in 46 CFR part 4 also apply to U.S. MODUs operating on the 
OCS because 46 CFR 109.411 requires U.S. MODUs to report casualties in 
accordance with 46 CFR part 4. U.S. FOFs also report casualties under 
46 CFR part 4. Title 46 CFR part 4 does not apply to foreign vessels, 
FOFs, or MODUs operating on waters beyond the navigable waters of the 
United States, except for certain foreign tank vessels operating in the 
Exclusive Economic Zone. See 46 CFR 4.05-2(b).
    Under 46 CFR part 4, a vessel's owner, agent, master, operator, or 
person-in-charge must report to the Coast Guard, casualties involving:
     Allision;
     Collision;
     Explosion;
     Failures or occurrences, regardless of cause, which impair 
any aspect of a vessel's operation, components, or cargo;
     Fire;
     Flooding;
     Foundering;
     Grounding;
     Impacts to vessel seaworthiness or fitness for service or 
route;
     Loss of life, or injury requiring professional medical 
treatment;
     Loss of main propulsion or vessel maneuverability;
     Property damage in excess of $75,000;
     Reduction or loss of electrical power, propulsion, or 
steering capability;
     Significant harm to the environment;
     Stranding; or
     Vessel in distress or loss of communication with vessel.
    The initial MCR required under 46 CFR 4.05-1 must be followed 
within 5 days by a written report on the CG-2692 form. See 46 CFR 4.05-
10. Additionally, under 46 CFR 4.05-12, the Coast Guard requires the 
marine employer to determine whether there is any evidence of alcohol 
or drug use by individuals directly involved in the casualty. This 
information can be included on the CG-2692 form or, as necessary, on a 
CG-2692B form. Reports for closed investigations of reportable marine 
casualties investigated by the US Coast Guard from 2002 to present are 
publicly available at the USCG Maritime Information Exchange.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ https://cgmix.uscg.mil/IIR/Default.aspx. Users should select 
``Search IIR'' in the top left corner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During their casualty analysis, the members of the marine board of 
investigation for the foreign MODU Deepwater Horizon casualty \3\ noted 
the inconsistencies between 33 CFR part 146 and 46 CFR part 4. In their 
accident report, the board members emphasized the disparate casualty 
reporting and chemical testing requirements between U.S. MODUs and 
foreign MODUs operating beyond navigable waterways of the United 
States. U.S. FOFs, MODUs, and vessels engaged in OCS activities report 
casualties under 46 CFR part 4, whereas foreign FOFs, MODUs, and 
vessels engaged in OCS activities report casualties under 33 CFR part 
146. The reporting criteria in 33 CFR part 146 includes fewer types of 
casualties than the reporting criteria in 46 CFR part 4. Thus, foreign 
FOFs, foreign MODUs, and foreign vessels engaged in OCS activity have a 
less comprehensive casualty-reporting regime than their U.S. 
counterparts. These differences are important in the offshore oil and 
gas exploration, development, and production industry because a lack of 
casualty data could hamper early detection of risks. As the coastal 
State with jurisdiction, we propose that it is the same casualty 
reporting standards of foreign vessels, MODUs, and floating facilities 
that engage in OCS activities as their U.S. counterparts. Additionally, 
having a uniform reporting standard for both U.S. and foreign FOFs, 
MODUs, and vessels that engage in OCS activities equalizes the 
regulatory burden.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Report of Investigation into the Circumstances Surrounding 
the Explosion, Fire, Sinking and Loss of Eleven Crew Members Aboard 
the MOBILE OFFSHORE DRILLING UNIT DEEPWATER HORIZON--In the GULF OF 
MEXICO April 20-22, 2010. See docket USCG-2013-1057.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, the Coast Guard believes the casualty reporting 
regulations in 33 CFR parts 140 and 146 lag both technological 
developments and present-day operations in the OCS industry, because 
the Coast Guard has not updated marine casualty reporting requirements 
on the OCS since 1982. At that time, MODUs affixed to the seabed, such 
as jack-up units, conducted most of the oil and natural gas exploration 
on the OCS in waters to about 500 feet deep. Similarly, oil and gas 
companies erected fixed facilities to produce oil and natural gas 
because these types of facilities are feasible to the same 500-foot 
water depth.
    In the past 30 years, the use of floating MODUs and facilities has 
become commonplace as exploration and production activities moved into 
deeper waters of the OCS. Today, FOFs and MODUs operate in waters up to 
8,000 feet deep, much further offshore, and distant from emergency 
assistance. These floating facilities and MODUs are more like ocean-
going vessels than fixed OCS facilities and MODUs grounded to the 
seabed.
    Therefore, in this SNPRM, as in the NPRM, the Coast Guard proposes 
changing the criteria by which foreign FOFs, MODUs, and vessels engaged 
in OCS activities report casualties. This action would improve 
collection and analysis of casualty information on the OCS to help the 
Coast Guard and industry develop policies and procedures that prevent 
future marine casualties.
    In this SNPRM, the Coast Guard also proposes raising the dollar 
threshold for reporting property damage under 33

[[Page 38769]]

CFR part 146. The Coast Guard established the property damage threshold 
of $25,000 in 33 CFR part 146 through a final rule that published on 
March 4, 1982 (47 FR 9366). The $25,000 threshold has not been changed 
in over 30 years and has not kept pace with inflation. Over time, this 
has resulted in reports of a greater number of casualties involving 
relatively minor property damage.
    Until recently, a similar situation existed with reporting property 
damage under 46 CFR part 4. In that case, to account for inflation, the 
Coast Guard published a final rule titled ``Marine Casualty Reporting 
Property Damage Thresholds'' on March 19, 2018 (83 FR 11889) (hereafter 
the 2018 Final Rule). In that final rule, the Coast Guard raised the 
property damage reporting criteria in 46 CFR part 4 from $25,000 per 
incident to $75,000 based on the CPI-U increase between 1980 (82.408) 
and 2016 (240.007).\4\ The Coast Guard sees no reason why the property 
damage threshold in 33 CFR part 146 should be different than the 
threshold in 46 CFR part 4. Accordingly, through this supplemental 
proposed rule, we would raise the reportable monetary property damage 
threshold amount to $75,000 in 33 CFR part 146. Raising the threshold 
to $75,000 would only apply to fixed OCS facilities because, through 
this supplemental proposed rule, FOFs, MODUs, and vessels operating on 
the OCS would be required to report casualties under the criteria in 46 
CFR part 4, which has already been raised to $75,000 for property 
damage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 2016 was the most recent full year of data available at the 
time of the analysis for the final rule (83 FR 11889). See CPI 
Detailed Report, Data for December 2016, Table 24, https://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpid1512.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Discussion of the Supplemental Proposed Rule

    Based on the comments we received to our 2014 NPRM, we are 
proposing changes to that proposal requiring foreign FOFs, MODUs, and 
vessels engaged in an OCS activity to report casualties under 46 CFR 
part 4.
    The comments we received about the 2014 NPRM led us to decide on 
two substantive changes to the proposals in the 2014 NPRM. First, we 
decided not to propose changing the casualty reporting requirement for 
fixed OCS facilities. Second, we decided to propose increasing the 
property damage dollar threshold to $75,000 and align title 33 of the 
CFR with title 46 of the CFR. These changes are fully discussed in 
sections V, VI, and VIII of this SNPRM.
    These substantive changes to our proposals in the 2014 NPRM 
necessitate we re-propose our regulatory changes through this SNPRM. As 
discussed above, this SNPRM completely replaces the 2014 NPRM and 
reference to the NPRM should not be necessary to review and comment on 
the Coast Guard's proposed supplemental changes. Consequently, the 
Coast Guard proposes the following amendments to the CFR through this 
SNPRM.

33 CFR 140.10--Definitions

    We propose adding dynamically positioned floating facilities to the 
definition of floating OCS facility. The dynamic positioning systems in 
use on the OCS today did not exist when the current regulations were 
published in 1982. At that time, secure anchoring was the only reliable 
method of maintaining station. With modern controls, computers, and 
Global Positioning Systems, FOFs can safely remain on station without 
the need for complex anchoring systems. We did not propose this change 
in the 2014 NPRM because, at that time, the Coast Guard was developing 
two related rulemakings that addressed standards for dynamic 
positioning systems. These were titled ``Outer Continental Shelf 
Activities'' (USCG-1998-3868) (withdrawn on September 19, 2019, see 83 
FR 47324) and ``Requirements for MODUs and Other Vessels Conducting 
Outer Continental Shelf Activities with Dynamic Positioning Systems'' 
(USCG-2014-0063) (withdrawn on May 20, 2022, see 87 FR 30849).

33 CFR 140.201--General

    We propose removing the specific types of casualties listed in 
paragraphs (a) through (c) and, instead, referencing 33 CFR 146.30 and 
46 CFR part 4, which apply to all fixed OCS facilities and floating OCS 
facilities, MODUs, and vessels, respectively. We retain the 
requirements of paragraphs (d) and (e) and re-designate them as (c) and 
(d).

33 CFR 140.203--Investigations Procedures

    We propose updating U.S. Geological Survey to U.S. Bureau of Safety 
and Environmental Enforcement. This proposed change is an 
administrative correction because the U.S. Geological Survey no longer 
conducts investigations of casualties on the OCS.

33 CFR 146.30--Notice of Casualties

    We propose applying the casualty reporting criteria listed in this 
section to FOFs only. See the discussion of proposed 46 CFR 4.03-1 
below, in which we propose to require the owner, operator, or person in 
charge of FOFs, MODUs, and vessels engaged in an OCS activity to report 
casualties under 46 CFR part 4. We also propose to raise the dollar 
threshold for reporting property damage from $25,000 per incident to 
$75,000. In addition, we propose removing the phrase ``. . . drydocking 
or demurrage . . .'' in paragraph (d), as these terms do not apply to a 
fixed OCS facility.
    Finally, in 33 CFR 146.30, we propose to require the owner, 
operator, or person in charge of foreign FOFs, MODUs, and vessels 
engaged in an OCS activity to include in the written casualty report 
required under 46 CFR 4.05-12 information relating to alcohol or drug 
involvement. This is not a new requirement as it is currently included 
in 33 CFR 146.35 that applies collectively to FOFs and fixed OCS 
facilities. We repeat it in the proposed 33 CFR 146.30 because this 
section would now distinguish between reporting requirements for fixed 
and floating facilities and to ensure FOFs reporting under 46 CFR part 
4 are aware of their continued responsibility to include drug and 
alcohol information.

33 CFR 146 Subpart D, Vessels--Notice of Casualty

    We propose removing subpart D, Vessels--Notice of Casualty, in 33 
CFR part 146 because, through this proposed change, the vessels 
currently reporting under subpart D requirements would report 
casualties under the provisions of 46 CFR part 4. Accordingly, we also 
propose re-designating the current subpart E, Vessels--Safety and 
Security Notice of Arrival as the new subpart D.

46 CFR 4.01-1--Scope of Regulation

    We propose revising the existing text for clarity.

46 CFR 4.01-3--Reporting Exclusion

    We propose exempting the owner, operator, or person in charge of 
FOFs, and MODUs from casualty reporting requirements for deaths or 
injuries of shipyard or harbor workers when the casualty does not 
result from either a reportable casualty or a reportable equipment 
failure and the incident is reportable to the Occupational Safety and 
Health Administration (OSHA) under 29 CFR part 1904.

Subpart 46 CFR 4.03--Definitions

    We propose adding Sec.  4.03-0, Definitions in this subpart, to 
explain that subpart 4.03 contains terms defined for purposes of part 
4.

[[Page 38770]]

46 CFR 4.03-1--Marine Casualty or Accident

    We propose amending the definition of Marine casualty or accident 
to include casualties on an FOF, MODU, or vessel when they are engaged 
in an OCS activity. We would also revise the existing list of events 
included in the definition of Marine casualty or accident for clarity.

46 CFR 4.03-2--Serious Marine Incident

    We propose amending the definition of Serious marine incident to 
include incidents on an FOF, MODU, or vessel when they are engaged in 
an OCS activity.

46 CFR 4.03-65--Significant Harm to the Environment

    We propose amending the definition of Significant harm to the 
environment to include incidents on an FOF, MODU, or vessel when they 
are engaged in an OCS activity.

46 CFR 4.03-80--Outer Continental Shelf (OCS)

    In this new section, we propose adding the definition for Outer 
continental shelf (OCS) from 33 CFR 140.10.

46 CFR 4.03-85--OCS Activity

    In this new section, we propose adding the definition for OCS 
activity from 33 CFR 140.10.

46 CFR 4.03-90--Floating OCS Facility

    In this new section, we propose adding the revised definition for 
Floating OCS facility from 33 CFR 140.10.

46 CFR 4.03-95--Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit (MODU)

    In this new section, we propose adding the definition for Mobile 
offshore drilling unit (MODU) from 33 CFR 140.10.

46 CFR Subpart 4.04--Notice of Potential Vessel Casualty

    We propose broadening the applicability of reporting requirements 
to include all FOFs, MODUs, and vessels engaged in an OCS activity.

46 CFR Subpart 4.05--Notice of Marine Casualty and Voyage Records

    We propose broadening the notice and record retention requirements 
to include all FOFs, MODUs, and vessels engaged in an OCS activity.

46 CFR Subpart 4.06--Mandatory Chemical Testing Following Serious 
Marine Incidents Involving Vessels in Commercial Service

    We propose broadening the post-casualty chemical testing 
requirements to include all FOFs and MODUs when engaged in an OCS 
activity. We also propose adding a new paragraph 4.06-15(b)(3) allowing 
the owner, operator, or person in charge of an FOF, MODU, or vessel to 
request an alternative drug testing process in lieu of the drug testing 
requirements in 49 CFR part 40--Procedures for Transportation Workplace 
Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs, referenced in 46 CFR 4.06-15.

46 CFR 4.07-45--Foreign Units of Coast Guard, Investigation by

    We propose broadening the applicability to all FOFs and MODUs when 
engaged in an OCS activity.

46 CFR 109.411--Notice and Reporting of Casualty

    We propose amending the existing text to provide clarity regarding 
the persons responsible for providing notice and the reporting of 
marine casualties involving U.S. MODUs. This proposed change is also 
consistent with the language in subpart 4.05 regarding the persons 
responsible for the notice and reporting of marine casualties.

VII. Discussion of Comments on the 2014 NPRM

    In the 2014 NPRM, the Coast Guard proposed requiring that the 
owners, operators, or person-in-charge of all U.S. and foreign fixed 
OCS facilities, FOFs, MODUs, and vessels engaged in an OCS activity 
report casualties under the criteria of 46 CFR part 4 instead of 33 CFR 
part 146.
    We received seven responses with comments about the NPRM including 
one response from a Federal agency, one response from a Federal 
advisory committee, four responses from industry organizations, and one 
response from the general public. We summarize the comments and our 
responses in the paragraphs that follow.
    The Department of the Interior Bureau of Safety and Environmental 
Enforcement (BSEE) and the Coast Guard share jurisdiction on the OCS. 
After reviewing the NPRM, BSEE recommended we retain casualty reporting 
for fixed OCS platforms in 33 CFR subchapter N. The Coast Guard concurs 
and does not propose to change the reporting procedures for fixed OCS 
facilities in this SNPRM except to raise the dollar threshold for 
reporting property damage.
    We received five comments from the National Offshore Safety 
Advisory Committee (NOSAC). NOSAC is a Federal Advisory Committee, 
subject to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Title 5 U.S.C. 
Appendix). The Coast Guard regularly consults NOSAC on ``matters 
relating to activities directly involved with, or in support of, the 
exploration of offshore mineral and energy resources, to the extent 
that such matters are within the jurisdiction of the Coast Guard.'' The 
Coast Guard approved a task statement for NOSAC to address the NPRM and 
NOSAC completed their report on September 24, 2014. A copy of the NOSAC 
report is included in the rulemaking docket.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ A copy of NOSAC's report is included in the rulemaking 
docket, www.regulations.gov/document/USCG-2013-1057-0009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The members of NOSAC asserted that some of the vessel populations 
we used in the NPRM's cost and benefit analysis were underestimated, 
but not to a degree that would significantly affect the outcomes of our 
cost and benefit estimates. The Coast Guard notes NOSAC's comment, 
however, we do not plan to revise our estimate methodology because 
vessel and facility populations fluctuate on the OCS depending on 
industry dynamics and the number and frequency of new leases. The data 
used in this SNPRM reflects changes in the population since 2014 that 
make the data provided in NOSAC's comment out of date. In addition, we 
added detail on the affected population to address concerns that the 
population of industrial vessels in the Marine Information for Safety 
and Law Enforcement (MISLE) database undercounts the affected 
population. We believe the numbers in our analyses represent the 
affected vessel and OCS facility populations because they are taken 
from the most current information about FOFs, MODUs, and vessels 
working on the OCS.
    The members of NOSAC also asserted that we underestimated 
collection of information costs by not including the effort of a 
company's internal review of an accident report prior to submission. 
NOSAC submitted a similar comment to the NPRM we published on raising 
the property damage dollar threshold amount in 46 CFR part 4, which we 
discussed in the subsequent 2018 Final Rule. The Coast Guard agrees 
with this comment and, in this SNPRM, we increased our estimated 
collection of information costs by 10 percent of the casualty reports 
to account for internal company review required by some of the more 
complex reports, as was done in the 2018 Final Rule.

[[Page 38771]]

    The members of NOSAC also urged us to raise the property damage 
reporting threshold from $25,000 per incident to at least $100,000. We 
partially agree and propose in this SNPRM to raise the dollar threshold 
amount in 33 CFR 146.30 to $75,000. As previously mentioned, through 
our 2018 Final Rule, we raised the property damage reporting criteria 
in 46 CFR part 4 from $25,000 per incident to $75,000 to account for 
inflation. We do not see any reason why the property damage threshold 
in 33 CFR part 146 should be different than the threshold in 46 CFR 
part 4. Accordingly, for the same reasons that we increased the 
property damage threshold amount in 46 CFR part 4, for consistency in 
accident reporting, and in response to comments, we propose to make the 
same increase to the dollar threshold amount in 33 CFR part 146.
    In addition to the comments we received from BSEE and NOSAC, we 
received six public comments on the NPRM. These comments came from two 
industry groups, one company, one mariner's association, one student, 
and one unaffiliated person.
    The National Mariners Association (NMA) \6\ expressed its 
longstanding concerns about the failures of employers to submit 
accident reports in a timely manner. We understand the association's 
concern as timely intervention is only possible when casualty reports 
are promptly reported. It is for this reason that Coast Guard 
regulations prescribe when casualty reports must be submitted. 
Violations of the Coast Guard's casualty reporting regulations, whether 
in 46 CFR part 4 or 33 CFR part 146, are subject to civil penalties, as 
set forth in 46 U.S.C. 6103 and 43 U.S.C. 1350, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ https://www.nationalmariners.us.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Offshore Operators Committee (OOC),\7\ generally supported the 
proposed rule and noted that the Coast Guard did not seek to harmonize 
accident reporting requirements between the Coast Guard and BSEE 
through the NPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ https://www.theooc.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Coast Guard and BSEE are aware that some accidents lead to dual 
investigations. These investigations are based on accident information 
collected through separate Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
approved Information Collection Requests (ICRs) that are not identical. 
In this SNPRM, the Coast Guard would update the ICR governing accident 
information collection under 46 CFR part 4 to apply to foreign FOFs, 
MODUs, and vessels operating on the OCS. However, this action would not 
eliminate the possibility of dual investigations or address the 
differences between the Coast Guard and BSEE's ICRs.
    In a joint publication titled, ``United States Coast Guard & Bureau 
of Safety and Environmental Enforcement Joint Activity Summary 2017-
2018,'' \8\ the Coast Guard and BSEE describe how they collaborate on 
OCS inspections and investigations. In 2017, the Coast Guard and BSEE 
established a memorandum of agreement titled ``BSEE/USCG MOA: OCS-05'' 
regarding incident notification and investigations.\9\ This memorandum 
details jurisdiction, responsibilities, enforcement, training, 
regulatory coordination, and information sharing. While sharing 
accident information is hampered by differences in information 
technology infrastructure, software, and security requirements, the 
memorandum explains how the Coast Guard and BSEE have agreed to 
collaborate as much as possible. The BSEE and Coast Guard Prevention 
Working Group also continues to seek solutions that would lead to 
closer cooperation and reciprocity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ https://www.bsee.gov/sites/bsee.gov/files/bsee-uscg-joint-summary-final-5-1-2018.pdf.
    \9\ https://www.bsee.gov/sites/bsee.gov/files/interagency-agreements-mous-moas/bsee-uscg-moa-ocs-05-18jan2017.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its comments, the OOC also criticized the Coast Guard for 
continued reliance on a burdensome paper-based accident reporting 
system. The Coast Guard agrees that we do not have a fully online 
accident reporting system. However, the fillable Coast Guard accident 
report forms (CG-2692 series) are available online at www.dco.uscg.mil/Portals/9/DCO%20Documents/5p/CG-5PC/INV/docs/CG_2692.pdf?ver=2019-07-24-113027-740 and can be submitted via email to the appropriate Coast 
Guard office. BSEE regulations in 30 CFR 250.190(b) also allow 
submission of a CG-2692 form to fulfill its reporting requirements if 
the narrative contains the required information.
    The OOC, NMA, and International Association of Drilling Contractors 
(IADC),\10\ also expressed concerns, from a resource standpoint, about 
the Coast Guard's ability to adequately investigate marine casualties 
on the OCS. These three organizations remarked that additional casualty 
reports will overwhelm the Coast Guard's investigative resources. In 
addition, they believe the Coast Guard's assignment practices lead to 
frequent turnover and the lack of experienced personnel often results 
in inconsistencies in enforcement actions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ https://www.iadc.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We believe this SNPRM would not significantly affect our inspection 
and investigation resources because we estimate the number of 
additional casualty reports submitted for foreign FOFs, MODUs, and 
vessels under 46 CFR part 4 would be small, as shown in the regulatory 
analysis below. Additionally, we estimate this increase in the number 
of casualty reports would be offset partially by a decrease in reports 
from fixed OCS facilities resulting from our proposed increase from 
$25,000 to $75,000 as the threshold for reporting property damage. 
While we note the commenters' concerns about Coast Guard training and 
assignment practices, those issues are beyond the scope of this 
rulemaking, and we do not propose to address them in this SNPRM. The 
Coast Guard addresses the potential for inconsistencies in enforcement 
actions through our current employment policies and procedures. We hold 
general training programs, maintain an extensive portfolio of guidance 
and policy preferences, and conduct ongoing oversight. We also assign 
qualified civilian personnel in lieu of uniformed members, who are 
subject to transfers, as investigating officers to help maintain 
consistency in accident investigation actions and analyses.
    In addition to the comments discussed above, the IADC expressed 
support for the 2014 proposed rule and commended the Coast Guard for 
its continuing collaboration with BSEE to alleviate duplicate 
reporting. The IADC also recommended the Coast Guard confirm that same 
or similar Department of Labor exemption, which applies to health 
information in ``Occupational Safety and Health Administration form 
300, Log of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses,'' should apply to 
marine casualty reporting as well. The Coast Guard notes this concern 
and confirms that we safeguard personal health information in 
accordance with Coast Guard policy and the Department of Health and 
Human Service's Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act 
Privacy regulations.\11\ In this SNPRM we are not proposing any changes 
to the regulations related to this topic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 45 CFR part 160 and subparts A and E of 45 CFR part 164.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The IADC also asked for clarification of the proposed 46 CFR 4.03-
1(b) in the NPRM because it implied that a marine casualty can occur 
only when an event is caused by or involves a vessel and, in

[[Page 38772]]

that case, conflicts with the proposed 46 CFR 4.03-1(a).
    We agree that the NPRM's language for proposed 46 CFR 4.03-1(b) was 
confusing given our goal is to require FOFs and MODUs to report 
casualties under the more comprehensive reporting criteria contained in 
46 CFR part 4. In the NPRM, we proposed including FOFs and MODUs in the 
definition of ``vessel'' for the purposes of that proposed rule. We 
decided that this approach could cause confusion and we seek to resolve 
that issue in this SNPRM by proposing revisions to 33 CFR 146.30 and 
146.301 and 46 CFR 4.03-1 that distinctly delineate the regulation's 
applicability to vessels, FOFs, and MODUs.
    One public commenter expressed support for the Coast Guard's goal 
of collecting better casualty information on the OCS. The Coast Guard 
appreciates this support. Another public commenter expressed the 
opinion that the proposed rule would have no significant use or benefit 
because it does not help other important national interests such as 
poverty or the national debt. The commenter stated that casualty 
reporting to help measure the kind of marine life that is being killed 
is important in certain respects, and the commenter further stated that 
the Coast Guard should not undertake rules that collect casualty data 
on marine life because the Coast Guard's mission is to provide 
reasonably free, safe, and unobstructed passage for waterborne traffic 
while considering the needs of land transportation. We believe the 
commenter may be under a misimpression that the phrase ``marine 
casualty'' in the NPRM refers to or includes the deaths of marine life. 
The Coast Guard acknowledges this comment and wishes to clarify that 
the definition of marine casualty does not include the death of marine 
life.

VIII. Differences Between the NPRM and SNPRM

    In this SNPRM, we no longer propose that fixed OCS facilities would 
report casualties under the criteria of 46 CFR part 4 and instead we 
propose they continue to report casualties in accordance with 33 CFR 
parts 140 and 146. In the 2014 NPRM, we proposed to move all OCS 
facilities marine casualty reporting requirements from 33 CFR 
subchapter N to 46 CFR part 4. In this SNPRM, we have moved away from 
that approach and instead use the term ``Floating OCS Facility'' to 
differentiate between floating and fixed facilities.
    The 46 CFR part 4 regulations are vessel casualty regulations for 
floating entities and provide appropriate regulations for floating OCS 
facilities but not necessarily for fixed OCS facilities for the 
following reasons. Floating OCS facilities experience similar types of 
accidents as other vessels, such as flooding, loss of stability, and 
inability to maintain station. Therefore, we believe it is appropriate 
to continue to propose that floating OCS facilities report casualties 
under 46 CFR part 4. However, fixed OCS facilities do not experience 
substantially similar casualties. In addition, as explained in Section 
VII of this supplemental proposed rule, BSEE recommended we do not 
change the reporting criteria for fixed OCS facilities because they are 
sufficient. In agreement with BSEE's recommendation, the fixed 
facilities marine casualty reporting requirements would remain in 
subchapter N because the current accident reporting regime for fixed 
OCS facilities is sufficient for collecting accident data and 
responding to trends in that population. The 33 CFR part 140 and 146 
are more relevant and tailored to fixed platforms and facilities. We 
concur that the regulations in 33 CFR parts 140 and 146 are more 
appropriate for fixed OCS facilities. Therefore, we proposed that fixed 
OCS facilities would continue to report casualties under 33 CFR parts 
140 and 146, and not 46 CFR part 4.
    In this SNPRM, we propose revising the definition of Floating OCS 
facility in 33 CFR 140.10 by adding language to include dynamically 
positioned facilities. We propose this change to update our regulations 
with technology changes on the OCS since the regulations were published 
in 1982. At that time, complex anchoring systems were the only reliable 
means of keeping floating facilities on location. Modern controls, 
computers, and Global Positioning Systems have replaced anchoring 
systems for station keeping.
    In this SNPRM, we propose revisions to 33 CFR 146.30 to raise the 
dollar amount threshold for reporting property damage from $25,000 to 
$75,000 to account for inflation over the past 30-plus years and to 
help reduce the regulatory burden on fixed OCS facilities.
    In this SNPRM, we are not proposing to remove 33 CFR 146.30 through 
146.45, because we are no longer proposing to combine them in 33 CFR 
146.50.
    In this SNPRM, we no longer seek to add a new 33 CFR 140.50, 
because our SNPRM proposal to have FOFs, MODUs, and vessels engaged in 
OCS activities report casualties under 46 CFR part 4 makes it 
unnecessary.
    In the 2014 NPRM, we proposed adding to 46 CFR part 4 a new 
definition for OCS unit that included any OCS facility, vessel, rig, 
platform, or other vehicle or structure. We also proposed adding 
another new definition in 46 CFR part 4 for the term vessel that 
included OCS unit. We proposed this approach as a convenient device to 
avoid writing ``facility, vessel, rig, platform or other vehicle or 
structure'' each time they were needed in the regulatory text. However, 
after reviewing the comments on the NPRM, we ultimately abandoned this 
approach because the resulting definition of vessel in 46 CFR part 4 
would conflict with the statutory definition found in 1 U.S.C. 3: of 
``. . . every description of watercraft or other artificial contrivance 
used, or capable of being used, as a means of transportation on 
water.'' Therefore, in this SNPRM, we propose, instead, adding in 46 
CFR part 4 the title 33 of the CFR definitions for OCS activity, 
floating OCS facility, and MODU and writing out how this SNPRM applies 
to each.
    In this SNPRM, we propose to revise the language in 46 CFR 109.411 
to provide clarity regarding the persons responsible for providing 
notice and reporting of marine casualties involving U.S. MODUs. We did 
not propose this change in the NPRM.
    The differences between the NPRM and SNPRM are summarized in table 
2.

             Table 2--Summary of Changes From NPRM to SNPRM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      NPRM                  SNPRM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Affected Population.........  Fixed OCS facilities  Fixed OCS facilities
                               report under 46 CFR   remain under 33 CFR
                               part 4.               parts 140 and 146.
Affected Population           NPRM created a term   SNPRM separately
 Description.                  ``OCS Units'' in an   defines ``vessel
                               attempt to leverage   engaged in OCS
                               a consolidated        activity,''
                               definition.           ``floating OCS
                                                     facility,'' and
                                                     ``MODU.''

[[Page 38773]]

 
Property Damage Threshold...  Threshold in title    Threshold raised to
                               33 of the CFR         $75,000 to be
                               listed as $25,000.    consistent with
                                                     prior update to 46
                                                     CFR part 4.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

IX. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this SNPRM 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 both costs and 
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting 
flexibility.
    This SNPRM is a significant regulatory action, although not 
economically significant, under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. 
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has reviewed it under that 
Executive order. Section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 requires an 
assessment of potential costs and benefits. We fully explain our 
assessment in the remaining paragraphs of this section.
    In this SNPRM, as in the NPRM, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 
regulations in which marine casualties, under 33 CFR subchapter N, are 
reported for foreign vessels, MODUs, and floating facilities operating 
on the OCS. The proposed amendments would align casualty reporting 
requirements for U.S. and foreign FOFs, MODUs, and vessels engaged in 
an OCS activity under the 46 CFR part 4 reporting requirements. In 
addition to the change from the NPRM, the Coast Guard proposes in this 
SNPRM, to update the property damage threshold for reporting under 33 
CFR part 146 to align with the threshold in 46 CFR part 4, which was 
raised in the 2018 Final Rule.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ ``Marine Casualty Reporting Property Damage Thresholds'' 
(83 FR 11889, March 19, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed threshold change addresses a concern raised by NOSAC 
in its comment on the 2014 NPRM, that the property damage threshold for 
casualty reporting should be increased from $25,000 to account for 
inflation.\13\ Acting on that comment, the Coast Guard updated the 
threshold under 46 CFR part 4 to $75,000 in the 2018 Final Rule and 
would propose to do the same under title 33 of the CFR in this SNPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ NOSAC Approved Final Report--Marine Casualty Reporting, 
September 24, 2014, www.regulations.gov/document?D=USCG-2013-1057-0009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2018 Final Rule also adjusted the burden hours of the ICR for 
MCRs in response to NOSAC's comment, to account for review of a draft 
MCR by company management and legal counsel. This SNPRM continues to 
use the updated burden implemented in the 2018 Final Rule to account 
for additional review of some casualty reports, this change was not 
initially included in the 2014 NPRM.\14\ We added additional detail on 
the affected population since the NPRM to address NOSAC's concerns that 
the population of industrial vessels in the MISLE database undercounts 
the affected population, particularly FOFs.\15\ The affected population 
numbers have also been reviewed by the floating OCS facilities working 
group to ensure accuracy. The impacts of the proposed changes of this 
SNPRM are summarized in table 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Ibid.
    \15\ Ibid.

              Table 3--Summary of the Impacts of the SNPRM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Category                              Summary
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicability.....................  Requires marine casualties,
                                     involving foreign FOFs, MODUs, and
                                     vessels engaged in OCS activities,
                                     to be reported under 46 CFR part 4
                                     as consistent with U.S. FOFs,
                                     MODUs, and vessels.
                                    Raises the monetary reportable
                                     marine casualty dollar threshold in
                                     33 CFR part 146 from $25,000 to
                                     $75,000 to align with 46 CFR part
                                     4.
Affected Population...............  For marine casualties on FOFs,
                                     MODUs, and vessels currently
                                     required to be reported under 33
                                     CFR part 146:
                                        588 foreign FOFs, MODUs,
                                        and vessels would shift
                                        reporting to 46 CFR part 4.
                                     1,754 fixed platforms would
                                     continue to report under 33 CFR
                                     part 146.
Costs (2019 dollars, 7% Discount    Cost for U.S. Government:
 Rate).                             10-Year: $25,806.
                                    Annualized: $3,674.
                                    Cost for Foreign Industry:
                                    10-Year: $95,039.
                                    Annualized: $13,531.
                                    On average, we anticipate an
                                     increase of 78 marine casualty
                                     reports annually.
Cost Saving to Industry (2019       Savings for U.S. industry:
 dollars, 7% Discount Rate).        10-Year: ($8,389).
                                    Annualized: ($1,194).
                                    Savings for Foreign Industry:
                                    10-Year: ($11,542).
                                    Annualized: ($1,643).
                                    Reduced reporting from raising the
                                     property damage threshold for a
                                     reportable marine casualty.

[[Page 38774]]

 
Net Cost (2019 dollars, 7%          Net Cost for U.S. Government and
 Discount Rate).                     Industry:
                                    10-Year: $17,417.
                                    Annualized: $2,480.
                                    Net Cost for Foreign Industry:
                                    10-Year: $83,497.
                                    Annualized: $11,888.
Unquantified Benefits.............  Increases the Coast Guard's domain
                                     awareness through harmonization of
                                     marine casualty reporting
                                     requirements across CFR parts.
                                     Potential for risk mitigation if
                                     problems are mitigated before they
                                     develop into more serious
                                     accidents.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This SNPRM has been determined a significant regulatory action 
under Executive Order 12866. Therefore, in accordance with OMB Circular 
A-4, we have prepared an accounting statement showing the 
classification of impacts associated with this SNPRM.\16\ The first A-4 
in table 4 is the total U.S. cost, including the annualized cost to the 
US government, $3,674, and the annualized cost saving to US industry, 
$1,194 for a total annualized monetized cost of $2,480. The second A-4 
shown in table 5 is the total cost of the rule including net annualized 
foreign costs $11,888, for an annualized monetized cost of $14,368.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/circulars/A4/a-4.pdf.

               Table 4--OMB A-4 Accounting Statement for U.S. Costs to Industry and Government 2021-2031 Period of Analysis--2019 Dollars
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Category                        Primary estimate
                                                  Minimum estimate
                                                    High estimate          Source
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits:
    Annualized monetized benefits...........         None           7%         None           7%         None           7%  RA.
                                                     None           3%         None           35         None           3%
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Annualized quantified, but non-                                               None                                      RA.
     monetized, benefits.
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Unquantifiable Benefits.................  Increased domain awareness from additional MCRs. Potential for risk           RA.
                                              mitigation by increasing awareness of early accident indicators.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost:
    Annualized monetized cost...............       $2,480           7%         None           7%         None           7%  RA.
                                                   $2,480           3%         None           3%         None           3%  RA.
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Annualized quantified, but non-                                               None                                      RA.
     monetized, cost.
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Qualitative (unquantified) cost.........                                                                                RA.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transfers:
 
                                                                        ...........
    Annualized monetized transfers: ``on           Not calculated
     budget''.
                                                   Not calculated
                                                   Not calculated               RA.
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From who to whom?.......................                                                                                RA.
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Annualized monetized transfers (``off-              None
     budget'').
                                                        None
                                                        None
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From who to whom?.......................            None
                                                        None
                                                        None
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Miscellaneous Analyses/Category:
 
                                                                        ...........
    Effects on State, local, and tribal                 None
     governments.
                                                        None
                                                        None
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Effects on small businesses.............  Will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small  RA.
                                              entities.
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Effects on wages........................            None
                                                        None
                                                        None
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Effects on growth.......................      No determination
                                                  No determination
                                                  No determination
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                    Table 5--OMB A-4 Accounting Statement for All Costs Including Foreign 2021-2031 Period of Analysis--2019 Dollars
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Category                        Primary estimate
                                                  Minimum estimate
                                                    High estimate          Source
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits:
    Annualized monetized benefits...........         None           7%         None           7%         None           7%  RA.
                                                     None           3%         None           3%         None           3%
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Annualized quantified, but non-                                               None                                      RA.
     monetized, benefits.
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Unquantifiable Benefits.................  Increased domain awareness from additional MCRs. Potential for risk           RA.
                                              mitigation by increasing awareness of early accident indicators.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 38775]]

 
Cost:
    Annualized monetized cost...............      $14,368           7%         None           7%         None           7%  RA.
                                                  $14,368           3%         None           3%         None           3%  RA.
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Annualized quantified, but non-                                               None                                      RA.
     monetized, cost.
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Qualitative (unquantified) cost.........                                                                                RA.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transfers:
 
                                                                        ...........
    Annualized monetized transfers: ``on           Not calculated
     budget''.
                                                   Not calculated
                                                   Not calculated               RA.
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From who to whom?.......................                                                                                RA.
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Annualized monetized transfers (``off-              None
     budget'').
                                                        None
                                                        None
    From who to whom?.......................            None
                                                        None
                                                        None
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Miscellaneous Analyses/Category:
 
                                                                        ...........
    Effects on State, local, and tribal                 None
     governments.
                                                        None
                                                        None
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Effects on small businesses.............  Will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small  RA.
                                              entities.
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Effects on wages........................            None
                                                        None
                                                        None
    Effects on growth.......................      No determination
                                                  No determination
                                                  No determination
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Affected Population
    As in the NPRM,\17\ the affected population comprises all foreign 
FOFs identified in the MISLE database as floating production systems 
and floating production storage offloading vessels, as well as various 
types of industrial vessels,\18\ MODUs, and lift boats. Table 6 shows 
detail on the affected population to address concerns that the 
population of industrial vessels in the MISLE database undercounts the 
affected population. Since the 2014 NPRM, MISLE now distinguishes FOFs, 
so we listed those separately from industrial vessels to show that the 
population is not undercounted. We excluded types that did not have an 
ocean-going route under the assumption that they would not operate on 
the OCS. In table 5, U.S. fixed OCS facilities are listed as an 
affected population only because of SNPRM proposal to update the 
property damage threshold for reporting a marine casualty, no other 
trigger for reporting a casualty would change under 33 CFR part 146.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ ``Marine Casualty Reporting on the Outer Continental 
Shelf'' (79 FR 1780, January 10, 2014).
    \18\ The following vessel types are excluded: cable laying, 
dredger, dredger barge, factory ship, fishing support vessel, 
floating dry dock, orbital launch, offshore service vessel, pilot 
vessel, radio ship, and seabed mining vessel. Supply vessels not 
listed as offshore service vessels and operating on an ocean route 
are included.

                      Table 6--Affected Population
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            NPRM (2014)    SNPRM (2020)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moved to Report under 46 CFR part 4:
    Industrial Vessels (Foreign)........             310             310
    Oil Supply Vessels (Foreign)........               9               0
    MODUs (Foreign) *...................              73             257
    Lift Boats (Foreign)................             N/A              13
    Floating OCS Facilities (Foreign)...              28               8
                                         -------------------------------
        Total Foreign Vessels...........             420             588
Updated Property Damage Threshold:
    Fixed Platforms (All U.S.)..........             N/A           1,754
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This number reflects active MODUs as reported by MISLE. It does not
  necessarily show how many are actively drilling, or in contact with
  the seabed.

Baseline Reporting
    Table 7 describes the different events that prompt reporting of a 
marine casualty under 33 CFR part 146 and 46 CFR part 4. Title 46 CFR 
part 4 has more casualty reporting triggers than 33 CFR part 146. 
Therefore, an FOF, MODU, or vessel would report more casualties under 
46 CFR part 4 than under 33 CFR part 146.

   Table 7--Current Coast Guard Marine Casualty Reporting Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            33 CFR part 146                       46 CFR part 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Death..................................  Death.
Injuries to 5+ persons.................  Injury.
Incapacitation >72 hours; Property       Property damage >$75,000.
 damage >$25,000 (fixed facilities
 only).
                                         Grounding.

[[Page 38776]]

 
(33 CFR 146.30 and 146.303.)
                                         Allision.
                                         Vessel in distress or loss of
                                          communication with vessel.
                                         Loss of--
                                          Main propulsion.
                                             Primary steering.
                                          Associated systems or
                                          components affecting
                                          maneuverability.
                                         Impairment of--
                                          Vessel operation.
                                          Vessel components.
                                          Cargo.
                                         Material or adverse impact to
                                          vessels'--
                                          Seaworthiness.
                                          Fitness for service.
                                          Fitness for route.
                                             Examples--fire,
                                             flooding, failure of or
                                             damage to fire
                                             extinguishing, lifesaving,
                                             auxiliary power, bilge
                                             pumping systems.
                                         Significant harm to the
                                          environment (defined in 46 CFR
                                          4.03-65).
                                         (46 CFR 4.04-1, 4.04-2, and
                                          4.05-1.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The transfer of marine casualty reporting of FOFs, MODUs, and 
vessels to 46 CFR part 4 would require an increase in the types of 
reportable casualties, including injury to fewer than five persons, 
grounding, stranding, foundering, flooding, collision, allision, 
explosion, fire, loss of propulsion, loss of steering, and impaired 
operations. There are already some voluntary submissions of MCRs for 
incidents on foreign FOFs, MODUs, and vessels involving the above 
criteria, although they are not required under 33 CFR part 146. Even 
with a count of active foreign FOFs, MODUs, and vessels each year, we 
are unable to determine the number of incidents that were non-
reportable under 33 CFR part 146, but would have been reportable under 
46 CFR part 4. Without aligned reporting, we are unable to compare how 
often one type of incident occurs on foreign FOFs, MODUs, and vessels 
compared to their U.S. counterparts, while accounting for differences 
in the total population sizes, how much of those populations actively 
report, and general risk levels between the two populations.
    The reports for non-fatal types of incidents described as voluntary 
for foreign FOFs, MODUs, and vessels are mandatory for U.S. FOFs, 
MODUs, and vessels and would become mandatory for all flags with this 
SNPRM. We show the number of voluntary and mandatory MCR by flag type 
in table 8. From 2015 to 2019, MISLE recorded 188 total voluntary 
reports of casualties that met the reporting criteria under 46 CFR part 
4 from a total of 114 uniquely identified foreign FOFs, MODUs, and 
vessels reporting under title 33 of the CFR.\19\ Table 8 shows the 
number of MCRs from foreign FOFs, MODUs, and vessels that met the 
criteria for a reportable casualty under title 46 of the CFR but not 
under title 33 of the CFR, meaning those reports were submitted 
voluntarily. Table 9 shows the number of unique foreign FOFs, MODUs, 
and vessels that submitted voluntary reports in each year. These 
reports are unique only within each year; across the entire range from 
2015 to 2019, there were 78 unique entities meaning 36 foreign FOFs, 
MODUs, or vessels submitted reports in multiple years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Voluntary reports are identified by keywords included in 
the activity title that match a reporting criterion, such as 
``grounding'' or ``ground.'' Subjectivity or error in the entry of a 
casualty into MISLE or overlapping reporting criteria may cause 
error in identifying the cause of a report.

                                         Table 8--Casualty Reports by Type From Foreign FOFs, MODUs, and Vessels
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                   Grand        Annual
                                                                   2015         2016         2017         2018         2019        total       average
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Reportable Under Title 46 of the CFR but Not Under Title 33
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Injury <5 & >0...............................................           47           23           24           43           21  ...........  ...........
Grounding....................................................            0            4            6            0            0  ...........  ...........
Allision.....................................................            0            2            3            1            0  ...........  ...........
Stranding....................................................            0            0            0            0            0  ...........  ...........
Loss of Propulsion...........................................            1            1            0            0            0  ...........  ...........
Loss of Steering.............................................            0            0            0            0            0  ...........  ...........
Impaired Operation...........................................            0            0            0            0            0  ...........  ...........
Foundering...................................................            0            0            0            0            0  ...........  ...........
Flooding.....................................................            0            0            3            0            0  ...........  ...........
Collision....................................................            1            0            0            0            0  ...........  ...........
Explosion....................................................            0            0            0            0            0  ...........  ...........
Fire.........................................................            5            1            1            1            0  ...........  ...........
                                                              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total....................................................           54           31           37           45           21          188         37.6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 38777]]

 
                                                          Reportable Under Title 33 of the CFR
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fatality.....................................................            3            0            1            1            0            5          1.0
Injury >5....................................................            0            0            0            0            0            0            0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                      Table 9--Number of Unique Reporting Foreign FOFs, MODUs, and Vessels
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                      Annual
      2015             2016            2017            2018            2019            Total          average
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           32               19              20              23              20             114            22.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, from 2015 to 2019, MISLE recorded 803 total reports from 
498 identified U.S. FOFs, MODUs, and vessels that matched the reporting 
criteria for voluntary reports from foreign FOFs, MODUs, and vessels, 
although those types of reports are mandatory for U.S. FOFs, MODUs, and 
vessels. Table 10 shows the number of MCRs from U.S. FOFs, MODUs, and 
vessels that met the criteria for a reportable casualty under title 46 
of the CFR but not under title 33 of the CFR. Table 11 shows the number 
of unique U.S. FOFs, MODUs, and vessels that submitted reports in each 
year. These are unique only within each year, across the entire range 
from 2015 to 2019, there were 382 unique entities meaning 116 U.S. 
FOFs, MODUs, or vessels submitted reports in multiple years.

                                          Table 10--Casualty Reports by Type From U.S. FOFs, MODUs, and Vessels
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                   Grand        Annual
                                                                   2015         2016         2017         2018         2019        total       average
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Reportable Under Title 46 of the CFR
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Injury <5 & >0...............................................          118           94          116          115           99  ...........  ...........
Grounding....................................................            8           20           16            6           10  ...........  ...........
Allision.....................................................           23           15           16           12           13  ...........  ...........
Stranding....................................................            0            0            0            0            0  ...........  ...........
Loss of Propulsion...........................................            4            3           12            5            3  ...........  ...........
Loss of Steering.............................................            1            1            0            0            0  ...........  ...........
Impaired Operation...........................................            0            0            0            0            0  ...........  ...........
Foundering...................................................            0            0            0            0            0  ...........  ...........
Flooding.....................................................           14           12           10            6           10  ...........  ...........
Collision....................................................            8            5            9            3            3  ...........  ...........
Explosion....................................................            0            0            0            0            0  ...........  ...........
Fire.........................................................            5            3            1            2            2  ...........  ...........
                                                              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total....................................................          181          153          180          149          140          803        160.6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Reportable Under Title 33 of the CFR
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fatality.....................................................            3            1            1            2            0            7          1.4
Injury >5....................................................            0            0            0            0            0            0            0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                       Table 11--Number of Unique Reporting U.S. FOFs, MODUs, and Vessels
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                      Annual
      2015             2016            2017            2018            2019            Total          average
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          107               95             114             102              80             498            99.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For MCRs involving fatalities, which are mandatory for everyone, an 
average 0.04 fatality reports from 2015 to 2019 were submitted for 
foreign FOFs, MODUs, and vessels, compared to an average of 0.01 
fatality reports submitted for U.S. FOFs, MODUs, and vessels.\20\ Table 
13 shows the 5-year average number of MCRs per unique FOF, MODU, and 
vessel. The averages presented were rounded to two decimal places for 
presentation, but were not rounded in the calculations for the 
estimates in this analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ The 5-year average of fatality reports per reporting 
foreign FOFs, MODUs, and vessels is 0.04 ((3 + 0 + 1 + 1 + 0) / (32 
+ 19 + 20 + 23 + 20)) or ((0.09 + 0.00 + 0.05 + 0.04 + 0.00)/5) as 
shown above. The 5-year average of fatality reports per reporting 
U.S. FOF, MODU, and vessel is 0.01 ((3 + 1 + 1 + 2 + 0) / (107 + 95 
+ 114 + 102 + 80)) or ((0.03 + 0.01 + 0.01 + 0.02 + 0.00)/5).

[[Page 38778]]



   Table 13--5-Year Average Casualty Reports per Unique FOF, MODU, and
                         Vessel, From 2014-2019
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Foreign          U.S.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average number of FOF, MODU, and vessels           22.80           99.60
 reporting annually.....................
Average number of non-fatality reports..           37.60          160.60
Average number of fatality reports......            1.00            1.40
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Ratios are sensitive to rounding and were not rounded in the
  calculations for the analysis.

    Currently, fatal MCRs are mandatory for both populations while, in 
this sample, non-fatal MCRs are voluntary for foreign FOFs, MODUs, and 
vessels.
Costs From Increased Reporting
    Under this SNPRM, the Coast Guard would require that owners and 
operators of foreign FOFs, MODUs, and vessels engaged in an OCS 
activity report marine casualties using the CG-2692 form under the 
reporting requirements of 46 CFR part 4 instead of the requirements 
under 33 CFR part 146. All U.S. entities already comply with these 
requirements. To estimate the potential increase in non-fatal MCRs 
generated by foreign FOFs, MODUs, and vessels, the Coast Guard 
estimates how many MCRs would be generated if the average number of 
non-fatality MCRs for the foreign population matched those of the U.S. 
population. Coast Guard estimates this by taking the proportion of US 
non-fatality reports to fatality reports and foreign non-fatality 
reports to fatality reports and solving for foreign non-fatality 
reports as shown in equation (A). Coast Guard believes that this is the 
best approximation available, given uncertainty about differences in 
the total population sizes, differences in the percentage of the active 
populations that report MCRs, and differences in general risk levels of 
operations between the two populations. The Coast Guard welcomes any 
suggestions or data that may better account for these uncertainties.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14JN23.000

    Using the figures for average annual reports from Table 12, we then 
apply the formula shown in (A), assuming that the total value of 
foreign non-fatality reports is unknown and that the 37.60 non-fatality 
reports from foreign FOFs, MODUs, and vessels are voluntary but not 
equal to the total number of reports that would be realized under this 
proposed rule. The result is 114.71 foreign non-fatality reports, the 
total number of non-fatality reports that would have been reported, if 
the proportion of foreign fatality reports was the same as US fatality 
reports. The calculation of this 114.7 is shown in the equations (B), 
(C), and (D).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14JN23.001

    In (B), we assume that the U.S. non-fatality reports is equal to 
160.60 as shown in Table 12, that U.S. fatality reports is equal to 
1.40, and that foreign fatality reports is equal to 1.0. In (C), we 
begin solving the proportion for x by multiplying 160.60 by 1.0 and 
multiplying 1.40 by x, which results in 160.67 = 1.40x. Finally, in 
(D), we divide 160.60 by 1.40, which equals 114.71, the total number of 
foreign non-fatality reports.
    Then, we subtract the number of voluntary reports already received 
from the foreign population to get the marginal increase in MCRs. This 
is the total of 114.71 foreign non- fatality reports minus the 37.60 
voluntary foreign non-fatality reports, for an increase of 77.11 
reports. Therefore, Coast Guard assumes that by making the requirements 
for reporting non-fatal casualties by foreign FOFs, MODUs, and vessels 
the same as for US FOFs, MODUs, and vessels, that foreign FOFs, MODUs, 
and vessels would report an average of 78 more non-fatality reports per 
year, rounding 77.11 up to the nearest whole number.
    Table 14 summarizes the annual cost of additional MCRs submitted 
for foreign FOFs, MODUs, and vessels. The time burden and wage cost of 
generating MCRs comes from the collection of information (COI) ``OMB 
Control No. 1625-0001, Report of Marine Casualty and Chemical Testing 
of Commercial Vessel Personnel.'' It lists the burden hour per response 
for an MCR as 1 hour, with a corresponding loaded hourly wage of $30, 
which is equivalent to the 2019 GS-3 Outside Government Wage.\21\ In 
this SNPRM, we use the 2019 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) wage 
for captains, mates, and pilots of water vessels, which is a loaded 
hourly wage of $64.14,\22\ instead of the 2019

[[Page 38779]]

Commandant Instruction 7310.1T, Reimbursable Standard Rates \23\ wage 
used in the NPRM because we believe it is a closer match to the 
occupation of the submitter and, therefore, more accurate. In the 2018 
Final Rule updating the property damage threshold for 46 CFR part 4, 
the Coast Guard acknowledged industry comments that some particularly 
complex reports require additional review before submission to the 
Coast Guard. Thus, the Coast Guard uses the same adjustment for MCRs 
under 33 CFR and assumes that 10 percent of MCRs have an additional 
burden-hour response of 10 hours, to account for internal company 
review conducted by lawyers or upper management. This assumption does 
not increase the number of MCRs but increases the burden time for each 
MCR, the total increase in reports is 78 and 8 of those reports will 
take 11 hours to prepare instead of 1 hour. The current collection 
lists a corresponding wage rate of $110, equivalent to the 2019 GS-14 
Outside Government Wage.\24\ As above, for this SNPRM, we use the BLS 
wage for lawyers, which is a loaded hourly wage of $106.61,\25\ instead 
of the Commandant Instruction wage, because we believe it more 
accurately reflects who is performing this review of the more complex 
report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewDocument?ref_nbr=201903-1625-001.
    \22\ The 2019 mean wage for captains, mates, and pilots of water 
vessels is $42.03 (www.bls.gov/oes/2019/may/oes535021.htm). The load 
factor is equal to the ratio of total compensation 
(CMU2010000520000D) over wages and salaries (CMU2020000520000D) from 
2019 or $33.20 divided by $21.76, or 1.526. The loaded wage is the 
mean wage multiplied by the load factor. The loaded wage, $64.14, 
equals $42.03 multiplied by 1.526. Series are from the Bureau of 
Labor Statistics, Employer Cost for Employee Compensation for 
Private Industry Workers, Transportation and Material Moving.
    \23\ www.uscg.mil/Portals/0/NPFC/docs/7310/Cl_7310_1T.pdf?ver=2019-01-28-080829-207.
    \24\ Ibid.
    \25\ The 2019 mean wage for lawyers is $69.86 (www.bls.gov/oes/2019/may/oes231011.htm). The load factor is equal to the ratio of 
total compensation (CMU2010000520000D) over wages and salaries 
(CMU2020000520000D) from 2019 or $33.20 divided by $21.7676, or 
1.526. The loaded wage is the mean wage multiplied by the load 
factor. The loaded wage, $106.61, equals $69.86 multiplied by 1.526. 
Series are from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employer Cost for 
Employee Compensation for Private Industry Workers, Transportation 
and Material Moving.

           Table 14--Annual Cost of Additional Casualty Reports From Foreign FOFs, MODUs, and Vessels
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Annual       Burden  hours    Annual  hour                      Annual  cost
                                 responses     per  response       burden         Wage  rate         burden
                                         (A)             (B)   (C) = (A) x (B)             (D)   (E) = (C) x (D)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marine Casualty Report......              78               1                78          $64.14            $5,003
Additional Burden for 10% of               8              10                80          106.61             8,529
 Respondents *..............
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total Annual Cost.......  ..............  ..............  ................  ..............           $13,531
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Note that these increased review times do not constitute separate MCRs. Rather, they increase the total burden
  time of a single report. We have only 78 new reports, 8 of which will require 11 total hours to prepare.

    Table 15 shows the annual costs across a 10-year period of 
analysis. This annual cost of $13,531 generates a total cost of $95,039 
over 10 years in 2019 dollars discounted at 7 percent, or $13,531 
annualized.

                                    Table 15--Cost to Industry Over 10 Years
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Annual            Total,  discounted
                              Year                                 undiscounted  -------------------------------
                                                                       cost             7%              3%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...............................................................         $13,531         $12,646         $13,137
2...............................................................          13,531          11,819          12,755
3...............................................................          13,531          11,046          12,383
4...............................................................          13,531          10,323          12,023
5...............................................................          13,531           9,648          11,672
6...............................................................          13,531           9,017          11,332
7...............................................................          13,531           8,427          11,002
8...............................................................          13,531           7,875          10,682
9...............................................................          13,531           7,360          10,371
10..............................................................          13,531           6,879          10,069
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................         135,315          95,039         115,426
    Annualized..................................................  ..............          13,531          13,531
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Benefits
    Through this SNPRM, the Coast Guard would update our casualty 
reporting regulations under 33 CFR part 146, issued in 1955, to keep up 
with technology and recognize that floating OCS facilities and MODUs 
are more like ocean-going vessels than the fixed OCS facilities the 
regulations were originally written to address. We would also harmonize 
reporting requirements for all foreign FOFs, MODUs, and vessels to the 
same reporting standards as their U.S. counterparts. These proposed 
changes would help provide consistency on the OCS and increase our 
maritime domain awareness by creating the mechanism for more complete 
casualty data that leads to planning contingencies, evaluating risks, 
and identifying trends.
    Coast Guard District, Area, Headquarters, Area, District, and local 
offices, and the OCS National Center of Expertise analyze and share 
accident information. In addition, the Coast Guard ``Marine Safety 
Manual'' \26\ contains guidance about broad distribution of accident 
and inspection information when potentially hazardous or systemic 
problems are found with a vessel, operator, or type of equipment. This 
data helps the Coast Guard identify and address safety issues 
proactively while improving the accuracy of Coast Guard's decision 
making and policy

[[Page 38780]]

development. Therefore, we believe a qualitative benefit of this 
proposed supplemental rule would come from the Coast Guard receiving 
reports of casualties that we would not otherwise receive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ www.uscg.mil/guidance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cost Savings From Property Damage Threshold Update
    As a supplement to the reporting change for foreign FOFs, MODUs, 
and vessels in this SNPRM, the Coast Guard would also align reporting 
by updating the property damage threshold for reporting a marine 
casualty under 33 CFR 146.30 from $25,000 to $75,000 to align with the 
threshold listed in 46 CFR 4.05-1. The threshold in 46 CFR part 4 was 
previously updated to $75,000 in the 2018 Final Rule.\27\ Raising the 
threshold for reportable property damage would decrease the number of 
marine casualties reported, since more damage would have to be incurred 
to meet the reportable threshold. The decrease in reports from the 
threshold update would mitigate the increase in reports generated by 
the cost section of this supplemental proposed rulemaking. In the 
following analysis, we apply the updated damage threshold of $75,000 to 
reports submitted for fixed OCS facilities under 33 CFR part 146 as 
well as to the estimated increase of 66 MCRs, which used the $25,000 
threshold when reported. Fixed OCS facilities were not included in the 
analysis of the 2018 Final Rule. So, the reduction in reports from 
fixed OCS reporting facilities was never estimated.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ ``Marine Casualty Reporting Property Damage Thresholds'' 
(83 FR 11889, March 19, 2018).
    \28\ See page 11891 of 83 FR 11889 under ``E. Amending the 
Dollar Amount Thresholds for Outer Continental Shelf Casualty 
Reporting in Title 33 of the CFR.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To estimate the decrease in reports, the Coast Guard identified 
MCRs submitted in the last 3 years that were generated because of 
property damage alone and would no longer meet the updated higher 
damage threshold for reporting. These are MCRs with property damage 
between the threshold of $25,000 and the proposed threshold of $75,000. 
We did not include fatality or injury, as these types of incidents are 
reportable regardless of property damage.
    The Coast Guard identified 41 total reports submitted for FOFs, 
MODUs, and vessels currently reporting under 33 CFR part 146, generated 
because of property damage between $25,000 and $75,000 for a 5-year 
average of 9 reports annually. We then apply the same assumption that 
10 percent of MCRs have an additional burden hour response of 10 hours 
to account for additional review time. We use the same assumed burden 
hour and wage used above for MCRs, with a corresponding loaded wage 
rate of $64.14. Table 16 shows how these assumptions generate a total 
annual saved cost of $1,643 that can be applied to the increased costs 
described in the Costs from Increased Reporting section to reduce net 
costs.

     Table 16--Decreased Reporting Costs for Foreign FOFs, MODUs, and Vessels Moving to Title 46 of the CFR
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Estimated
                              responses that
                                 would no      Burden  hours     Annual hour                       Annual cost
                                longer meet    per  response       burden          Wage rate          saved
                                 reporting
                                 threshold
                                         (A)             (B)   (C) = (A) x (B)             (D)   (E) = (C) x (D)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Decrease from Property                    -9               1                -9          $64.14              $577
 Damage Threshold...........
Additional Burden for 10% of              -1              10               -10          106.61             1,066
 Respondents................
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total Cost Saved........  ..............  ..............  ................  ..............             1,643
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 17--shows how this annual savings of $1,643 generates $11,542 
in cost savings over 10 years in 2019 dollars, discounted at 7 percent, 
or $1,643 annualized.

                    Table 17--Cost Savings to Foreign FOFs, MODUs, and Vessels Over 10 Years
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Annual             Total, discounted
                              Year                                 undiscounted  -------------------------------
                                                                       cost             7%              3%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...............................................................          -1,643         -$1,536         -$1,595
2...............................................................          -1,643          -1,435          -1,549
3...............................................................          -1,643          -1,341          -1,504
4...............................................................          -1,643          -1,254          -1,460
5...............................................................          -1,643          -1,172          -1,418
6...............................................................          -1,643          -1,095          -1,376
7...............................................................          -1,643          -1,023          -1,336
8...............................................................          -1,643            -956          -1,297
9...............................................................          -1,643            -894          -1,259
10..............................................................          -1,643            -835          -1,223
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................         -16,433         -11,542         -14,018
    Annualized..................................................  ..............          -1,643          -1,643
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 38781]]

    For fixed OCS facilities, we identified three reports generated 
because of property damage between $25,000 and $75,000, and applied the 
same assumption that 10 percent of MCRs have an additional burden hour 
response of 10 hours to account for additional review time. Since we 
assume any fraction of a report would be a whole report, we round the 
5-year average of 0.15 up to one report. Table 18 shows how we use the 
same burden hour and wage assumptions as above to generate an annual 
cost savings of $1,194, which reduces the net cost of this rule.

                                              Table 18--Decreased Reporting Costs for Fixed OCS Facilities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Estimated
                                                      responses that
                                                         would no     Rounding up to   Burden hours      Annual hour                       Annual cost
                                                        longer meet    nearest whole   per response        burden          Wage rate          saved
                                                         reporting        number
                                                         threshold
                                                                                 (A)             (B)   (C) = (A) x (B)             (D)   (E) = (C) x (D)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Decrease from Property Damage Threshold.............              -2              -2               1                -2           64.14               128
Additional Burden for 10% of Respondents............           -0.15              -1              10               -10          106.61             1,066
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total Cost Saved................................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ................  ..............             1,194
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 19 shows how this annual savings of $1,194 generates $8,389 
in cost savings over 10 years discounted at 7 percent, or $1,194 
annualized.

                          Table 19--Cost Savings to Fixed OCS Facilities Over 10 Years
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Annual             Total, discounted
                              Year                                 undiscounted  -------------------------------
                                                                       cost             7%              3%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...............................................................         -$1,194         -$1,116         -$1,160
2...............................................................          -1,194          -1,043          -1,126
3...............................................................          -1,194            -975          -1,093
4...............................................................          -1,194            -911          -1,061
5...............................................................          -1,194            -852          -1,030
6...............................................................          -1,194            -796          -1,000
7...............................................................          -1,194            -744            -971
8...............................................................          -1,194            -695            -943
9...............................................................          -1,194            -650            -915
10..............................................................          -1,194            -607            -889
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................         -11,944          -8,389         -10,188
    Annualized..................................................  ..............          -1,194          -1,194
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Together, these cost savings to industry total $2,838 ($1,643 + 
$1,194) annually. Table 20 shows how these annual savings generate 
$19,931 in cost savings to industry over 10 years discounted at 7 
percent, or $2,838 annualized.

                                          Table 20--Total Cost Savings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Annual             Total, discounted
                              Year                                 undiscounted  -------------------------------
                                                                      savings           7%              3%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...............................................................         -$2,838         -$2,652         -$2,755
2...............................................................          -2,838          -2,479          -2,675
3...............................................................          -2,838          -2,316          -2,597
4...............................................................          -2,838          -2,165          -2,521
5...............................................................          -2,838          -2,023          -2,448
6...............................................................          -2,838          -1,891          -2,377
7...............................................................          -2,838          -1,767          -2,307
8...............................................................          -2,838          -1,652          -2,240
9...............................................................          -2,838          -1,544          -2,175
10..............................................................          -2,838          -1,443          -2,112
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................         -28,377         -19,931         -24,206
    Annualized..................................................  ..............          -2,838          -2,838
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 38782]]

Cost to Government
    The increase of 78 MCRs would be mitigated by a total decrease of 
11 reports; 9 from the increased property damage threshold for FOFs, 
MODUs, and vessels, and 2 from the update to fixed OCS facilities. 
Following the methodology in appendix B of the COI number 1625-0001, we 
do not assume that the 10 percent of reports that take longer to 
prepare for submission would take longer for the Coast Guard to review. 
The burden hour established in the COI already accounts for variance in 
the time to review MCRs of differing complexity and severity.
    We assume that there is 1 hour of processing time at a GS-9 wage of 
$54.84 for each MCR.\29\ For the 67 additional responses, there is a 
total annual cost of $3,674, as shown in table 21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ Casualty reports are reviewed at Coast Guard Headquarters 
and the 2020 Washington, DC locality wage of $32.33 for a GS-9, Step 
5, employee is used (www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salary-tables/pdf/2020/DCB_h.pdf). The load factor is 
1.70 (rounded) estimated by dividing $67.00 average total 
compensation per hour by $39.50 average hourly wage from tables 4 
and 2, respectively, of the 2017 Congressional Budget Office report, 
``Comparing the Compensation of Federal and Private-Sector Employees 
2011-2015'' (www.cbo.gov/system/files/115th-congress-2017-2018/reports/52637-federalprivatepay.pdf). The loaded wage is the mean 
wage multiplied by the load factor. The loaded wage, $54.84, equals 
$32.33 multiplied by 1.6962.

                                          Table 21--Cost to Government
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Burden hours
          Cost category              Responses     per response    Annual hours      Wage rate      Annual cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Processing MCR..................              67               1              67          $54.84          $3,674
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total Annual Cost...........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............           3,674
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 22 shows how the annual cost of $3,674 generates a total cost 
of $25,806 over 10 years in 2019 dollars, discounted at 7 percent, or 
$3,674 annualized.

                                   Table 22--Cost to Government Over 10 Years
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Annual             Total, discounted
                              Year                                 undiscounted  -------------------------------
                                                                       cost             7%              3%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...............................................................          $3,674          $3,434          $3,567
2...............................................................           3,674           3,209           3,463
3...............................................................           3,674           2,999           3,362
4...............................................................           3,674           2,803           3,264
5...............................................................           3,674           2,620           3,169
6...............................................................           3,674           2,448           3,077
7...............................................................           3,674           2,288           2,987
8...............................................................           3,674           2,138           2,900
9...............................................................           3,674           1,999           2,816
10..............................................................           3,674           1,868           2,734
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................          36,742          25,806          31,341
    Annualized..................................................  ..............           3,674           3,674
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Net Cost

    The net annualized costs of this rule would be $14,368 [($13,531 + 
$3,674)--$2,838], discounted at 7-percent. Table 23 shows the sum of 
the net costs over 10 years for a total net cost of $100,914 in 2019 
dollars discounted at 7 percent, or $14,368 annualized.

                                                                Table 23--Total Net Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                 Total, discounted
                          Year                                Cost to         Cost to      Cost savings      Net cost    -------------------------------
                                                             industry       government      to industry                         7%              3%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.......................................................         $13,531          $3,674        $(2,838)         $14,368         $13,428         $13,949
2.......................................................          13,531           3,674         (2,838)          14,368          12,550          13,543
3.......................................................          13,531           3,674         (2,838)          14,368          11,729          13,149
4.......................................................          13,531           3,674         (2,838)          14,368          10,961          12,766
5.......................................................          13,531           3,674         (2,838)          14,368          10,244          12,394
6.......................................................          13,531           3,674         (2,838)          14,368           9,574          12,033
7.......................................................          13,531           3,674         (2,838)          14,368           8,948          11,682
8.......................................................          13,531           3,674         (2,838)          14,368           8,362          11,342
9.......................................................          13,531           3,674         (2,838)          14,368           7,815          11,012
10......................................................          13,531           3,674         (2,838)          14,368           7,304          10,691
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................................  ..............  ..............  ..............         143,680         100,914         122,562

[[Page 38783]]

 
    Annualized..........................................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............          14,368          14,368
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alternatives Considered
    (1) No Action.
    Keeping current reporting requirements would perpetuate reporting 
requirement inconsistencies between foreign and U.S. FOFs, MODUs, and 
vessels engaged in an OCS activity. The resulting information asymmetry 
prevents the Coast Guard from maintaining domain awareness on the OCS. 
Under the status quo, near misses on foreign FOFs, MODUs, and vessels 
would continue to not be reported to the Coast Guard, unlike they are 
on U.S. FOFs, MODUs, and vessels.
    Although there is no increased reporting cost with this 
alternative, it perpetuates information asymmetry in the maritime 
domain. Therefore, the Coast Guard did not choose this alternative.
    (2) Lower Reporting Requirements for U.S. FOFs, MODUs, and Vessels 
to Harmonize.
    Rather than alter foreign reporting to harmonize with reporting in 
46 CFR part 4, the Coast Guard could alter all U.S. reporting in 46 CFR 
part 4 to harmonize with 33 CFR part 146. This would reduce the types 
of triggers that generate a reportable marine casualty and likely 
decrease the number of reports submitted to the Coast Guard. While 
reduced reporting could be a cost saving to industry, it could also 
reduce the Coast Guard's maritime domain awareness and increase risk to 
maritime safety and the marine environment as suggested in the 
Deepwater Horizon accident report. For instance, under this alternative 
Coast Guard would not receive reports from vessels about casualties 
involving allision, collision, grounding, or significant harm to the 
environment, etc. These types of casualties are often associated with 
injury, fatality, and property damage and losing awareness of these 
incidents would likely decrease safety on the outer continental shelf. 
This alternative would also undermine the Coast Guard's efforts to keep 
up with technology as the energy development industry moved further 
offshore. In this environment, floating OCS facilities are typical and, 
as explained in section V. of this preamble, the current regulations in 
33 CFR part 146 were originally developed and applied to fixed OCS 
facilities operating closer to land. Therefore, the Coast Guard did not 
choose this alternative.
    (3) Alter Reporting Requirements on Foreign FOFs, MODUs, and 
Vessels to Harmonize with Reporting Requirements under 46 CFR part 4 
(Proposed).
    The impact of altering the reporting requirements on foreign FOFs, 
MODUs, and vessels engaged in an OCS activity to harmonize with 46 CFR 
part 4 is demonstrated in the analysis above. The Coast Guard chooses 
this alternative over no action or reducing reporting because it 
increases domain awareness at relatively little cost to industry while 
not losing situational awareness on particular casualty types as with 
alternative two.

B. Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, we 
have considered whether this SNPRM would have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. This interim RFA 
updates the analysis done in the 2014 NPRM to account for changes in 
revenues during the intervening period. The Coast Guard did not receive 
comments on the previous small entity analysis. 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.
    Operations on the OCS encompass many different North American 
Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes. In a random sample of 80 
foreign entities taken from a population of 99 operators for this 
regulatory analysis, 15 different NAICS codes applied.\30\ Therefore, 
the standard for a small business in this sample has a wide range, with 
revenue thresholds ranging from $16.5 million to $1,250 million, and 
employee thresholds ranging from 100 to 1,000 employees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ Not all operators had an available NAICS code; those that 
did not were assumed to be small entities.

                                  Table 24--Applicable NAICS Codes of Operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Number of
             NAICS code                             Description                   operators      Size standard
                                                                                 classified
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
114111..............................  Finfish Fishing........................               1            * 1,000
212111..............................  Oil & Gas Exploration and Services.....               1            * 1,000
213111..............................  Drilling Oil and Gas Wells.............              11            * 1,000
213112..............................  Support Activities for Oil and Gas                    4        $41,500,000
                                       Operations.
236115..............................  New Single-Family Housing Construction                1        $39,500,000
                                       (Excludes For-Sale Builders).
237110..............................  Water and Sewer Line and Related                      8        $39,500,000
                                       Structures Construction.
238910..............................  Site Preparation Contractors...........               1        $16,500,000
333132..............................  Oil and Gas Field Machinery and                       2     $1,250,000,000
                                       Equipment Manufacturing.
423990..............................  Other Miscellaneous Durable Goods                     1              * 100
                                       Merchant Wholesalers.
424460..............................  Fish & Seafood Merchant Wholesalers....               1              * 100
441222..............................  Boat Dealers...........................               2        $35,000,000
524298..............................  All Other Insurance Related Activities.               4        $16,500,000
541330..............................  Engineering Services...................               2        $16,500,000

[[Page 38784]]

 
999990..............................  Unclassified...........................               1                N/A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Employees.

    In this sample of 80 foreign entities, 63 had a known revenue or 
employee count. Of these 63 foreign entities, 24 had annual revenues 
less than the threshold for a small business of that NAICS code. Five 
entities had fewer employees than the threshold for a small business of 
that NAICS code. In total, 29 entities of the 80 (36 percent) were 
small businesses.
    The primary cost of this rule would be the additional MCR reports 
submitted by foreign businesses operating foreign FOFs, MODUs, and 
vessels on the OCS. The Coast Guard estimates the total annual cost 
would be $13,531 from an increase of 78 reports. While this cost would 
be distributed across the entire industry, we do not know the exact 
distribution, since the number of MCRs per operator depends on that 
operator's specific behavior, which can change over time. In the last 
10 years, the average number of reports per owner was 1.03 (compared to 
the 5-year average of 1.64 from table 6). Assuming that trend 
continues, no single operator would generate more than two additional 
reports (rounding up) under the proposed change. For this small entity 
analysis, we show the possible impact of two reports per operator at 
$346.96. This assumes the total average cost per report is $173.48 
($13,531 divided by 78 reports) to account for variance in the 
complexity of a report. To have a significant impact on an individual 
company under SBA standards, the cost would need to represent more than 
1 percent of an individual company's total revenue. In this scenario, 
the company's total revenue would have to be $35,500 or less. In the 
sample of 62 operators with known revenues, none had a revenue smaller 
than $34,696.

  Table 25--Entities Where Cost Represents More Than 1 Percent of Total
                                Revenues
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          With revenue
                                            less than          Total
                                             $34,696
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Operators...................                 0              80
% of small entities with known revenue                 0              24
% of entities with known revenue......                 0              62
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The primary cost savings of this SNPRM would be the reduced 
reporting by U.S. businesses operating fixed OCS facilities, who would 
report under the higher damage threshold of 33 CFR part 146. The Coast 
Guard estimates the total annual cost savings would be $2,838 in 2019 
dollars, discounted at 7 percent for the entire industry. As this is a 
cost savings that helps mitigate the impact of the cost of this rule, 
we do not consider this SNPRM would have a significant negative impact 
on small entities.
    Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that 
this SNPRM, if promulgated, would not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. We are interested in 
the potential impacts from this SNPRM on small businesses and request 
public comment on these potential impacts. If you think that your 
business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a 
small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic 
impact on it, please submit a comment to the docket at the address 
listed in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble. In your comment, 
explain why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this 
SNPRM 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 SNPRM so that they can better evaluate 
its potential effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the 
SNPRM 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 SNPRM. The Coast Guard will 
not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about 
this SNPRM or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
    Small businesses may also 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

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520 requires 
that the Coast Guard consider the impact of paperwork and other 
information collection burdens imposed on the public. An agency may not 
collect or sponsor the collection of information, nor may it impose an 
information collection requirement unless it displays a currently valid 
OMB control number.
    This action contains proposed amendments to the existing 
information collection requirements previously approved under OMB 
Control Number 1625-0001.\31\ This amendment would increase the number 
of affected facilities and the burden for the existing COI number as 
described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAOMBHistory?ombControlNumber=1625-0001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Title: Report of Marine Casualty Information and Chemical Testing 
of Commercial Vessel Personnel.

[[Page 38785]]

    OMB Control Number: 1625-0001.
    Summary of the Collection of Information: This collection requires 
responses such as the preparation of written notification by completing 
a CG-2692 (series) form and the processing of records. We use this 
information to identify pertinent safety lessons and to initiate 
appropriate steps for reducing the likelihood of similar accidents in 
the future. The collection of information will aid the regulated public 
in assuring safe practices.
    Need for Information: These reporting requirements permit the Coast 
Guard to investigate marine casualties, as required by 46 U.S.C. 6301, 
to determine the causes of casualties and whether existing safety 
standards are adequate or new laws or regulations need to be developed. 
Receipt of a marine casualty report is often the only way in which the 
Coast Guard becomes aware of a marine casualty. It is, therefore, a 
necessary first step that provides the Coast Guard with the opportunity 
to determine the extent to which a casualty will be investigated.
    Proposed Use of Information: In the short term, the information 
provided in the report may also trigger corrective safety actions 
addressing immediate hazards or defective conditions, further 
investigations of mariner conduct or professional competence, or civil 
or criminal enforcement actions by the Coast Guard, other Federal 
agencies, or State and local authorities. In the long term, the 
information contained in the report becomes part of the Coast Guard's 
MISLE database. The Coast Guard uses the information in the MISLE 
database to identify safety problems and long-term trends, publish 
casualty summaries and annual statistics for public use, establish 
whether additional safety oversight or regulation is needed, measure 
the effectiveness of existing regulatory programs, and better focus the 
Coast Guard's limited marine safety resources.
    Description of the Respondents: The respondents are the owners, 
agents, masters, operators, or persons in charge that notify the 
nearest Sector Office, Marine Inspection Office, or Coast Guard's Group 
Office whenever a vessel or facility is involved in a marine casualty.
    Number of Respondents: We estimate an increase of 55 respondents 
for a written report of marine casualty. This increases the total 
number of respondents for reporting marine casualties from 5,617 to 
5,684.
    Frequency of Response: The notification response is required only 
if a marine casualty occurs as defined in 46 CFR 4.03-2 and 46 CFR 
4.05-1.
    Burden of Response: For each response, we estimate that it takes 1 
hour for a vessel crewmember to complete all of the necessary forms 
(CG-2692 series). In addition, some marine casualty forms may undergo 
additional processing by the respondents. To account for this 
additional time, 10 percent of the forms submitted have 10 hours of 
additional burden.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ The Coast Guard estimates that it takes up to 1 hour to 
complete the necessary CG-2692 (series) form. However, we received 
public comments in 2013 on COI number 1625-0001 stating that some 
submitters take more time--up to 8 to 12 hours--to complete the 
form. See www.regulations.gov/docket?D=USCG-2011-0710. The reason 
for this difference is that some entities have the form(s) reviewed 
by shore-side personnel, such as an attorney, prior to submission to 
the Coast Guard. The practice of having a form reviewed by an 
attorney is not required by Coast Guard regulation. While we believe 
that this does not typically occur, we have adjusted our burden 
estimate to account for the added review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimate of Total Annual Burden: We estimate an increase of 675 
respondents for the 1-hour response of a written report of marine 
casualty. This increases the total burden hours for reporting marine 
casualties from 5,617 to 5,684.
    As required by 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), we will submit a copy of this 
SNPRM to OMB for its review of the collection of information.
    We ask for public comment on the proposed collection of information 
to help us determine, among other things--
     How useful the information is;
     Whether the information can help us perform our functions 
better;
     How we can improve the quality, usefulness, and clarity of 
the information;
     Whether the information is readily available elsewhere;
     How accurate our estimate is of the burden of collection;
     How valid our methods are for determining the burden of 
collection; and
     How we can minimize the burden of collection.
    If you submit comments on the collection of information, submit 
them to both the OMB and to the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.
    You need not respond to a collection of information unless it 
displays a currently valid control number from OMB. Before the Coast 
Guard could enforce the collection of information requirements in this 
SNPRM, OMB would need to approve the Coast Guard's request to collect 
this information.

E. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132 
(Federalism) if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on 
the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on 
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels 
of government. We have analyzed this rule under that 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 specifically granted the authority to regulate artificial 
islands, installations, and other devices permanently or temporarily 
attached to the (OCS) and in the waters adjacent thereto as it relates 
to the safety of life to the Secretary of the Department in which the 
Coast Guard is operating. Title 43 U.S.C. 1333(d)(1) states that the 
Secretary ``shall have the authority to promulgate and enforce such 
reasonable regulations with respect to lights and other warning 
devices, safety equipment, and other matters relating to the promotion 
of safety of life and property on the artificial islands, 
installations, and other devices . . . as he may deem necessary.'' As 
this SNPRM would improve the Coast Guard's ability to collect and 
analyze casualty data for incidents on the OCS in order to maintain and 
improve safety of life on OCS installations, it falls within the scope 
of authority Congress granted exclusively to the Secretary. This 
authority has been delegated to the Coast Guard and is exercised in 
this rulemaking, and the States may not regulate within this category 
of marine casualty reporting. Therefore, the rule is consistent with 
the principles of federalism and preemption requirements 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 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 SNPRM 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

[[Page 38786]]

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 SNPRM would not result in such an 
expenditure, we do discuss the potential effects of this SNPRM 
elsewhere in this preamble.

G. Taking of Private Property

    This SNPRM 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 SNPRM meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 
of Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform) to minimize litigation, 
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

I. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this SNPRM under Executive Order 13045 (Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks). This 
SNPRM is not an economically significant rule and would not create an 
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might 
disproportionately affect children.

J. Indian Tribal Governments

    This SNPRM does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 
13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments), 
because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more 
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and 
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

K. Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this SNPRM 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 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 (e.g., 
specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test 
methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) 
that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies.
    This SNPRM does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not 
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

M. Environment

    We have analyzed this SNPRM 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 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and 
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a 
category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a 
significant effect on the human environment. A preliminary Record of 
Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available 
in the docket. For instructions on locating the docket, see the 
ADDRESSES section of this preamble.
    This SNPRM is likely to be categorically excluded under paragraphs 
L54 and L57 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-
001-01, Rev. 1.\33\ Paragraph L54 pertains to regulations which are 
editorial or procedural. Paragraph L57 pertains to regulations 
concerning the manning, documentation, admeasurement, inspection, and 
equipping of vessels. This rule involves changing the reporting 
criteria for certain casualties that occur on the OCS for foreign 
floating facilities, MODUs, and vessels engaged in OCS activities, and 
better harmonizes the casualty reporting requirements with those in 
place for similar U.S. FOFs, MODUs, and vessels. These proposed changes 
would promote the Coast Guard's marine safety mission. We seek any 
comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant 
environmental impact from this SNPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/DHS_InstructionManual023-01-001-01Rev01_508compliantversion.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects

33 CFR Part 140

    Continental shelf, Investigations, Marine safety, Occupational 
safety and health, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

33 CFR Part 146

    Continental shelf, Marine safety, Occupational safety and health, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels.

46 CFR Part 4

    Administrative practice and procedure, Drug testing, 
Investigations, Marine safety, National Transportation Safety Board, 
Nuclear vessels, Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Safety, Transportation.

46 CFR Part 109

    Marine safety, Occupational safety and health, Oil and gas 
exploration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes 
to amend 33 CFR parts 140 and 146 and 46 CFR parts 4 and 109 as 
follows:

Title 33--Navigation and Navigable Waters

PART 140--GENERAL

0
1. The authority citation for part 140 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  43 U.S.C. 1333, 1348, 1350, 1356; Department of 
Homeland Security Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.3.

0
2. Amend Sec.  140.10 by revising the definition of ``Floating OCS 
facility'' to read as follows:


Sec.  140.10  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Floating OCS facility means a U.S. or foreign buoyant OCS facility 
that is dynamically positioned on location or securely and 
substantially moored so that it cannot be moved without a special 
effort. This term includes tension leg platforms and permanently moored 
semisubmersibles or shipshape hulls, but does not include mobile 
offshore drilling units and other vessels, as defined in this part.
* * * * *
0
3. Revise Sec.  140.201 to read as follows:


Sec.  140.201  General.

    The Coast Guard investigates casualties occurring on the OCS 
including:
    (a) Casualties on floating OCS facilities, MODUs, and vessels as 
described in 46 CFR part 4;
    (b) Casualties on fixed OCS facilities as described in 33 CFR 
146.30;

[[Page 38787]]

    (c) Oil spillage exceeding 200 barrels of oil in one occurrence 
during a 30-day period; and
    (d) Other injuries, casualties, accidents, complaints of unsafe 
working conditions, fires, pollution, and incidents occurring as a 
result of OCS activities as the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, 
deems necessary to promote the safety of life or property or protect 
the marine environment.


Sec.  140.203  [Amended]

0
4. Amend Sec.  140.203 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (b) introductory text, remove the text ``Geological 
Survey'' and add, in its place, the text ``Bureau of Safety and 
Environmental Enforcement''.
0
b. In paragraph (b)(3), remove the text ``examing'' and add, in its 
place, the text ``examining''.

PART 146--OPERATIONS

0
5. The authority citation for part 146 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1333, 1348, 1350, 1356; Sec. 109, Pub. L. 
109-347, 120 Stat. 1884; Department of Homeland Security Delegation 
No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.3.

0
6. Revise Sec.  146.30 to read as follows:


Sec.  146.30  Notice of casualties.

    (a) The owner, operator, or person in charge of a fixed OCS 
facility must ensure that the Coast Guard is notified as soon as 
possible after a casualty occurs, and by the most rapid means 
available, of each casualty involving the facility which results in:
    (1) Death;
    (2) Injury to five or more persons in a single incident;
    (3) Damage affecting the usefulness of primary lifesaving or 
firefighting equipment;
    (4) Injury causing any person to be incapacitated for more than 72 
hours;
    (5) Damage to the facility exceeding $75,000 resulting from a 
collision by a vessel with the facility; or
    (6) Damage to the facility exceeding $75,000.
    (b) The notice required by paragraph (a) of this section must 
identify the person giving the notice and the facility involved and 
describe, insofar as practicable, the nature of the casualty and the 
extent of injury to personnel and damage to property.
    (c) Damage costs referred to in paragraphs (a)(5) and (a)(6) of 
this section include the cost of labor and material to restore the 
facility to the service condition which existed prior to the casualty, 
but does not include the cost of salvage, cleaning, or gas freeing 
facility.
    (d) The owner, operator, or person in charge of any floating OCS 
facility, mobile offshore drilling unit, or vessel engaged in an OCS 
activity must report casualties in accordance with 46 CFR part 4.
    (e) The owner, operator, or person in charge of a foreign floating 
OCS facility, mobile offshore drilling unit, or vessel engaged in an 
OCS activity must include in the written casualty report required under 
46 CFR 4.05-12 information relating to alcohol or drug involvement.

Subpart D [Removed]

0
7. Remove subpart D, comprising Sec. Sec.  146.301 and 146.303.

Subpart E [Redesignated as Subpart D]

0
8. Redesignate subpart E, comprising Sec. Sec.  146.401, 146.402 and 
146.405, as subpart D.

Title 46--Shipping

PART 4--MARINE CASUALTIES AND INVESTIGATIONS

0
9. The authority citation for part 4 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1333; 46 U.S.C. 2103, 2303a, 2306, 6101, 
6301, 6305, 56311, and 70034; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.3. Subpart 4.40 issued under 
49 U.S.C. 1903(a)(1)(E).

0
10. Revise Sec.  4.01-1 to read as follows:


Sec.  4.01-1  Scope of regulation.

    The regulations in this part govern marine casualty reporting, 
investigations of marine casualties, and submission of reports designed 
to increase the likelihood of timely assistance to vessels in distress.
0
11. Revise Sec.  4.01-3(c) to read as follows:


Sec.  4.01-3  Reporting exclusion.

* * * * *
    (c) Vessels, floating OCS facilities, and MODUs are excluded from 
the requirements of Sec.  4.05-1(a)(5) and (6) with respect to the 
death or injury of shipyard or harbor workers when such accidents are 
not the result of either a reportable casualty (e.g., collision) or a 
reportable equipment casualty (e.g., cargo boom failure) and are 
subject to the reporting requirements of Occupational Safety and Health 
Administration (OSHA) under 29 CFR part 1904.
* * * * *
0
12. Add Sec.  4.03-0 to subpart 4.03 to read as follows:


Sec.  4.03-0  Definitions that apply to this subpart.

    This subpart contains terms defined for purposes of this part.
0
13. Revise Sec.  4.03-1 to read as follows:


Sec.  4.03-1  Marine casualty or accident.

    Marine casualty or accident means--
    (a) Any casualty or accident involving any vessel other than a 
public vessel that--
    (1) Occurs upon the navigable waters of the United States, its 
territories or possessions;
    (2) Involves any U.S. vessel wherever such casualty or accident 
occurs; or
    (3) With respect to a foreign tank vessel operating in waters 
subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, including the 
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), involves significant harm to the 
environment or material damage affecting the seaworthiness or 
efficiency of the vessel.
    (b) Any casualty or accident involving a vessel, floating OCS 
facility, or MODU as defined in 33 CFR part 140, when they are engaged 
in an OCS activity.
    (c) The term ``marine casualty or accident'' applies to events 
including, but not limited to:
    (1) Any fall overboard, injury, or loss of life of any person;
    (2) Grounding;
    (3) Stranding;
    (4) Foundering;
    (5) Flooding;
    (6) Collision;
    (7) Allision;
    (8) Explosion;
    (9) Fire;
    (10) Reduction or loss of electrical power, propulsion, or steering 
capabilities;
    (11) Failures or occurrences, regardless of cause, which impair any 
aspect of operation, components, or cargo;
    (12) Any other circumstance that might affect or impair 
seaworthiness, efficiency, or fitness for service or route;
    (13) Any incident involving significant harm to the environment;
    (14) Any occurrences of injury or loss of life to any person while 
diving from a vessel, and using underwater breathing apparatus; or
    (15) Any incident described in Sec.  4.05-1(a).


Sec.  4.03-2  [Amended]

0
14. Amend Sec.  4.03-2 as follows:
0
a. In the introductory text, remove the text, ``in commercial 
service'', and add in its place, ``, floating OCS facility, or MODU as 
described in Sec.  4.03-1(a) and (b)''.
0
b. In paragraph (a) introductory text, add the text ``(c)'' following 
the text, ``Sec.  4.03-1''.

[[Page 38788]]

0
c. In paragraph (a)(2), remove the text ``a vessel in commercial 
service, which renders the individual unfit to perform routine vessel 
duties;'', and add, in its place the text, ``, which renders the 
individual unfit to perform routine duties;''.
0
d. In paragraph (a)(4), add the text ``, floating OCS facility, or 
MODU'' following the text ``vessel''.
0
15. Revise Sec.  4.03-65(c)(1), (6), and (7), to read as follows:


Sec.  4.03-65  Significant harm to the environment.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) Vessel, floating OCS facility, or MODU location and proximity 
to land or other navigational hazards;
* * * * *
    (6) The nature of damage to the vessel, floating OCS facility, or 
MODU; and
    (7) Failure or breakdown aboard the vessel, floating OCS facility, 
or MODU, its machinery, or equipment.
0
16. Add Sec.  4.03-80 to read as follows:


Sec.  4.03-80  Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).

    Outer Continental Shelf or OCS means all submerged lands lying 
seaward and outside of the area of ``lands beneath navigable waters'' 
as defined in section 2(a) of the Submerged Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 
1301(a)) and of which the subsoil and seabed appertain to the United 
States and are subject to its jurisdiction and control.
0
17. Add Sec.  4.03-85 to read as follows:


Sec.  4.03-85  OCS Activity.

    OCS activity means any offshore activity associated with 
exploration for, or development or production of, the minerals of the 
Outer Continental Shelf.
0
18. Add Sec.  4.03-90 to read as follows:


Sec.  4.03-90  Floating OCS facility.

    Floating OCS facility means a U.S. or foreign buoyant OCS facility 
that is dynamically positioned on location or securely and 
substantially moored so that it cannot be moved without a special 
effort. This term includes tension leg platforms and permanently moored 
semisubmersibles or shipshape hulls, but does not include mobile 
offshore drilling units and other vessels, as defined in 33 CFR part 
140.
0
19. Add Sec.  4.03-95 to read as follows:


Sec.  4.03-95  Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit (MODU).

    Mobile offshore drilling unit or MODU means a vessel, other than a 
public vessel of the United States, capable of engaging in drilling 
operations for exploration or exploitation of subsea resources.
0
20. Revise the heading of subpart 4.04 to read as follows:

Subpart 4.04--Notice of Potential Casualty

0
21. Revise Sec.  4.04-1 to read as follows:


Sec.  4.04-1  Reports of potential casualty.

    (a) An owner, charterer, managing operator, or agent of a vessel, 
floating OCS facility, or MODU to which this part applies must 
immediately notify either of the following Coast Guard officers if 
there is reason to believe the vessel, floating OCS facility, or MODU 
is lost or imperiled:
    (1) The Coast Guard district rescue coordination center (RCC) 
cognizant over the area the vessel, floating OCS facility, or MODU was 
last operating; or
    (2) The Coast Guard search and rescue authority nearest to where 
the vessel, floating OCS facility, or MODU was last operating.
    (b) Reasons for belief that a vessel, floating OCS facility, or 
MODU is in distress include, but are not limited to, lack of 
communication with or nonappearance of the vessel, floating OCS 
facility, or MODU.
0
22. Revise Sec.  4.04-3 to read as follows:


Sec.  4.04-3  Reports of lack of communication.

    The owner, charterer, managing operator or agent that is required 
to report to the United States Flag Merchant Vessel Location Filing 
System under the authority of section 212(A) of the Merchant Marine 
Act, 1936 (46 App. U.S.C. 1122a), must immediately notify the Coast 
Guard if more than 48 hours have passed since receiving communication. 
This notification must be given to the Coast Guard district RCC 
cognizant over the last known operating area.
0
23. Amend Sec.  4.04-5 by revising the introductory paragraph and 
paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec.  4.04-5  Substance of reports.

    The owner, charterer, managing operator or agent, notifying the 
Coast Guard under Sec.  4.04-1 or Sec.  4.04-3, must:
    (a) Provide the name and identification number of the vessel, 
floating OCS facility, or MODU, the names of the individuals on board, 
and other information that may be requested by the Coast Guard (when 
providing the names of the individuals on board for a passenger vessel, 
the list of passengers need only meet the requirements of 46 U.S.C. 
3502); and
* * * * *


Sec.  4.05-1  [Amended]

0
24. Amend Sec.  4.05-1 by:
0
a. Revising the introductory text of paragraph (a);
0
b. In paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(3), adding the text ``, floating OCS 
facility, or MODU'' following the text, ``vessel'';
0
c. In paragraph (a)(4), after the text ``adversely affecting'', 
removing the text ``the vessel's''; and
0
d. Revising paragraph (a)(6).
    The revisions read as follows:


Sec.  4.05-1  Notice of Marine Casualty.

    (a) Immediately after addressing resultant safety concerns, the 
owner, agent, master, operator, or person in charge, shall notify any 
one of the nearest Coast Guard units, to include Sector, Marine Safety 
Office, Coast Guard District or Area Offices, whenever a vessel, 
floating OCS facility or MODU to which this part applies is involved in 
a marine casualty consisting in--
* * * * *
    (6) An injury that requires professional medical treatment 
(treatment beyond first aid) and, if the person is engaged or employed 
on board a vessel, floating OCS facility, or MODU in commercial 
service, that renders the individual unfit to perform their routine 
duties; or
* * * * *
0
25. Revise Sec.  4.05-5 to read as follows:


Sec.  4.05-5  Substance of marine casualty notice.

    The notice required in Sec.  4.05-1 must include the name and 
official number of the vessel, floating OCS facility, or MODU involved, 
the name of the owner or agent, the nature and circumstances of the 
casualty, the locality in which it occurred, the nature and extent of 
injury to persons, and the damage to property.
0
26. Revise Sec.  4.05-15(a) to read as follows:


Sec.  4.05-15  Voyage records, retention of.

    (a) The owner, agent, master, or person in charge of any vessel, 
floating OCS facility, or MODU involved in a marine casualty must 
retain such voyage records as are normally maintained, such as both 
rough and smooth deck and engine room logs, bell books, navigation 
charts, navigation work books, compass deviation cards, gyro records, 
stowage plans, records of draft, aids to mariners, night order books, 
radiograms sent and received, radio logs, crew and passenger lists, 
articles of shipment, official logs and other material which might be 
of assistance in investigating and determining the cause of the 
casualty. The owner, agent, master, other officer or person responsible 
for the custody thereof, shall make these records available upon

[[Page 38789]]

request, to a duly authorized investigating officer, administrative law 
judge, officer or employee of the Coast Guard.
* * * * *
0
27. Revise Sec.  4.05-20 to read as follows:


Sec.  4.05-20  Report of accident to aid to navigation.

    Whenever a vessel, floating OCS facility, or MODU collides with a 
buoy, or other aid to navigation under the jurisdiction of the Coast 
Guard, or is connected with any such collision, the person in charge 
must report the accident to the nearest Officer in Charge, Marine 
Inspection. No report on Form CG-2692 is required unless one or more of 
the results listed in Sec.  4.05-1 occur.
0
28. Revise the heading of subpart 4.06 to read as follows:

Subpart 4.06--Mandatory Chemical Testing Following Serious Marine 
Incidents Involving Vessels, Floating OCS Facilities, or MODUs in 
Commercial Service

0
29. Amend Sec.  4.06-1 by revising paragraphs (b) and (e) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  4.06-1  Responsibilities of the marine employer.

* * * * *
    (b) When a marine employer determines that a casualty or incident 
is, or is likely to become, a serious marine incident, the marine 
employer must take all practicable steps to have each individual 
engaged or employed on board the vessel, floating OCS facility, or MODU 
who is directly involved in the incident chemically tested for evidence 
of drug and alcohol use as required in this part.
* * * * *
    (e) The marine employer must ensure that all individuals engaged or 
employed on board a vessel, floating OCS facility, or MODU are fully 
indoctrinated in the requirements of this subpart, and that appropriate 
vessel personnel are trained as necessary in the practical applications 
of these requirements.


Sec.  4.06-3  [Amended]

0
30. Amend Sec.  4.06-3 in paragraphs (a)(1) introductory text and 
(b)(1) introductory text, by adding the text ``, floating OCS facility, 
or MODU'' following the text, ``vessel''.
0
31. Amend Sec.  4.06-5 by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  4.06-5  Responsibility of individuals directly involved in 
serious marine incidents.

    (a) Any individual engaged or employed on board a vessel, floating 
OCS facility, or MODU who is determined to be directly involved in an 
SMI must provide a blood, breath, saliva, or urine specimen for 
chemical testing when directed to do so by the marine employer or a law 
enforcement officer.
    (b) If the individual refuses to provide a blood, breath, saliva, 
or urine specimen, this refusal must be noted on Forms CG-2692 and CG-
2692B and in the vessel's official log book, if a log book is required. 
The marine employer must remove the individual as soon as practical 
from duties that directly affect the safe operation of the vessel, 
floating OCS facility, or MODU.
* * * * *
0
32. Amend Sec.  4.06-15 by:
0
a. In paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(3), and (b)(2), adding the text ``, 
floating OCS facility, or MODU'' following the text, ``vessel''; and
0
b. Adding paragraph (b)(3).
    The addition reads as follows:


Sec.  4.06-15  Accessibility of chemical testing devices.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) The owner, operator, or person in charge of a foreign vessel, 
floating OCS facility, or MODU who is unable to meet the drug testing 
requirements of 49 CFR part 40 may request approval for an alternative 
drug testing process from the U.S. Coast Guard Drug and Alcohol 
Prevention and Investigation Program Manager via email at 
[email protected].


Sec.  4.06-30  [Amended]

0
33. In Sec.  4.06-30 amend paragraph (a) by adding the text ``, 
floating OCS facility, or MODU'' following the text, ``vessel'' in the 
first sentence.
0
34. Revise Sec.  4.06-60(a) to read as follows:


Sec.  4.06-60  Submission of reports and test results.

    (a) Whenever an individual engaged or employed on a vessel, 
floating OCS facility, or MODU is identified as being directly involved 
in a serious marine incident, the marine employer must complete Form 
CG-2692B (Report of Mandatory Chemical Testing Following a Serious 
Marine Incident Involving Vessels in Commercial Service).
* * * * *


Sec.  4.07-45  [Amended]

0
35. In Sec.  4.07-45, add the text ``, floating OCS facility 
(facilities), or MODU(s)'' following the text, ``vessel(s)''.

PART 109--OPERATIONS

0
36. The authority citation for part 109 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1333; 46 U.S.C. 3306, 6101, 10104; 
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No. 
01.3.

0
37. Revise Sec.  109.411 to read as follows:


Sec.  109.411  Notice and reporting of casualty.

    The owner, operator, or person in charge of a MODU regulated under 
this part must provide notice and report marine casualties in 
accordance with 46 CFR part 4.

    Dated: June 4, 2023.
Linda Fagan,
Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commandant.
[FR Doc. 2023-12513 Filed 6-13-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P