Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 35 / Friday, February 21, 1997 / Proposed Rules 7971

Portsmouth, Virginia 23704–5004, or

hand delivered to Room 516 at the same

address between 7:30 a.m. and 5 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, except Federal

holidays. The telephone number is (757)

398–6204. Comments will become part

of this docket and will be available for

inspection and copying at the above

address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

S. L. Phillips, Project Manager, Search

and Rescue Branch, at (757) 398–6204.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

This Coast Guard encourages

interested persons to participate in this

rulemaking by submitting written views,

data, or arguments. Persons submitting

comments should include their names

and addresses, identify this rulemaking

(CGD 05–97–004) and the specific

section of this proposal to which each

comment applies, and give the reason

for each comment. Please submit two

copies of all comments and attachments

in an unbound format, no larger than

81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying

and electronic filing. Persons waiting

acknowledgement of receipt of

comments should enclose stamped, selfaddressed postcards or envelopes. The

Coast Guard will consider all comments

received during the comment period. It

may change this proposal in view of the

comments.

The Coast Guard plans no public

hearing. Persons may request a public

hearing by writing to the address listed

under ADDRESSES. The request should

include the reasons why a hearing

would be beneficial. If it determines that

the opportunity for oral presentations

will aid this rulemaking, the Coast

Guard will hold a public hearing at a

time and place announced by a later

notice in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

Ports Events, Inc., the sponsor of the

Crawford Bay Crew Classic, has

requested to change the dates of this

annual event from the third Friday and

Saturday in March to the fourth Friday

and Saturday in April to conduct the

event in warmer weather conditions. To

enhance the safety of participants,

spectators, and transiting vessels,

special local regulations are necessary to

control vessel traffic during the event.

This proposal would update the

regulations to reflect the new dates of

the event.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

The Coast Guard proposes to amend

the effective period of special local

regulations previously established for

this event from the third Friday and

Saturday in March to the fourth Friday

and Saturday in April to reflect the new

event dates. Since this action will not

increase the period of time that the

channel is restricted and the Coast

Guard patrol commander will be

allowing vessels to transit whenever a

race heat is not being run, commercial

traffic should not be severely disrupted.

Regulatory Evaluation

This proposal is not a significant

regulatory action under section 3(f) of

Executive Order 12866 and does not

require an assessment of potential costs

and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that

order. It has been exempted from review

by the Office of Management and

Budget under that order. It is not

significant under the regulatory policies

and procedures of the Department of

Transportation (DOT) (44 FR 11040;

February 26, 1979). The Coast Guard

expects the economic impact of this

proposal to be so minimal that a full

Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph

10e of the regulatory policies and

procedures of DOT is unnecessary. This

proposal merely changes the effective

date of an existing regulation and does

not impose any new restriction on

vessel traffic.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Coast Guard

must consider whether this proposal, if

adopted, will have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. ‘‘Small

Entities’’ include independently owned

and operated small businesses that are

not dominant in their field and that

otherwise qualify as ‘‘small business

concerns’’ under section 3 of the Small

Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632). Because it

expects the impact of this proposal to be

minimal, the Coast Guard certifies

under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), that this

proposal, if adopted, will not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

Collection of Information

This proposal contains no collection

of Information requirements under the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.).

Federalism

The Coast Guard has analyzed this

proposal under the principles and

criteria contained in Executive Order

12612 and has determined that this

proposal does not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Environment

The Coast Guard considered the

environmental impact of this proposal

and concluded that, under section

2.b.2.e(34)(h) of Commandant

Instruction M16475.1b (as amended, 61

FR 13564; 27 March 1996), this proposal

is categorically excluded form further

environmental documentation.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

Marine safety, Navigation (water),

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Waterways.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to

amend 33 CFR Part 100 as follows:

PART 100—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 100

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233; 49 CFR 1.46.

2. Section 100.523 is amended by

revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:

§ 100.523 Southern Branch, Elizabeth

River, Portsmouth, Virginia.

* * * * *

(c) Effective periods. This section is

effective on the fourth Friday of April

and on the fourth Saturday of April,

unless otherwise specified in the Coast

Guard Local Notice to Mariners and a

Federal Register notice.

Dated: February 5, 1997.

Kent H. Williams,

Vice Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander,

Fifth Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 97–4357 Filed 2–20–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–14–M

33 CFR Part 181

[CGD 92–065]

RIN 2115–AE37

Hull Identification Numbers for

Recreational Boats

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of

proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing

to amend its regulations concerning the

identification numbers affixed to the

hulls of recreational boats, including

boats carrying six or fewer passengers

for hire. These amendments are

necessary to align the present

numbering system with the newlyadopted international system. This

would facilitate the sale of U.S.

products abroad. In addition, the Coast

Guard is proposing several minor

amendments to its regulations on hull

identification numbers.
7972 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 35 / Friday, February 21, 1997 / Proposed Rules

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before May 22, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

the Executive Secretary, Marine Safety

Council (G–LRA/3406) (CGD 92–065),

U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters 2100

Second Street SW., Washington, DC

20593–0001, or may be delivered to

room 3406 at the same address between

9:30 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except Federal holidays. The

telephone number is (202) 267–1477.

Comments on collection-of-information

requirements must be mailed also to the

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Office of Management and

Budget, 725 17th Street NW.,

Washington, DC 20503, ATTN: Desk

Officer, U.S. Coast Guard.

The Executive Secretary maintains the

public docket for this rulemaking.

Comments will become part of this

docket and will be available for

inspection or copying at room 3406,

U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, between

9:30 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except Federal holidays.

A copy of the material listed in

‘‘Incorporation by Reference’’ of this

preamble is available for inspection at

room 3104, U.S. Coast Guard

Headquarters.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Alston Colihan, Office of Boating Safety,

(202) 267–0981.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

The Coast Guard encourages

interested persons to participate in this

rulemaking by submitting written data,

views, or arguments. Persons submitting

comments should include their names

and addresses, identify this rulemaking

(CGD 92–065) and the specific section of

this proposal to which each comment

applies, and give the reason for each

comment. Please submit two copies of

all comments and attachments in an

unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by

11 inches, suitable for copying and

electronic filing. Persons wanting

acknowledgment of receipt of comments

should enclose stamped, self-addressed

postcards or envelopes.

The Coast Guard will consider all

comments received during the comment

period. It may change this proposal in

view of the comments.

The Coast Guard plans no public

hearing. Persons may request a public

hearing by writing to the Marine Safety

Council at the address under

ADDRESSES. The request should include

the reasons why a hearing would be

beneficial. If it determines that the

opportunity for oral presentations will

aid this rulemaking, the Coast Guard

will hold a public hearing at a time and

place announced by a later notice in the

Federal Register.

Regulatory History

On May 6, 1994, the Coast Guard

published a notice of proposed

rulemaking (NPRM) entitled ‘‘Expanded

Hull Identification Number and New

Requirements for Certificates of Origin’’

in the Federal Register (59 FR 23651).

The Coast Guard received 114 letters

commenting on the proposal. No public

hearing was requested, and none was

held.

On November 9, 1994, a notice

announcing a workshop and reopening

the comment period for the NPRM was

published in the Federal Register (59

FR 55823).

Background and Purpose

Under 46 U.S.C. 12501, the Secretary

of Transportation is required to

establish and maintain a vessel

identification system (VIS) for use by

law enforcement and other public

officials. This authority has been

delegated to the Commandant of the

Coast Guard (49 CFR 1.46(ss)). The VIS

is intended to provide a nationwide

pool of information on vessels and

vessel owners that will help in

identifying and recovering stolen

vessels and deterring vessel theft. To aid

in the development of a VIS for

recreational boats, the Coast Guard

proposed to expand the hull

identification number required for those

boats under 33 CFR part 181 to include

certain vessel-specific information and a

check digit to make fraudulent

alternations more difficult. In addition,

the Coast Guard proposed that vessel

manufacturers and importers provide a

Certificate of Origin (COO) with each

vessel produced in, or imported into,

the U.S. for the purposes of sale. The

COO would ensure that documentation

certifying the information and

establishing a chain of ownership was

available.

Due to extensive opposition to the

proposed 19-character HIN and the

COO, the comment period was extended

from November 9, 1994, to January 9,

1995, and a public workshop was held

on December 8, 1994. After review of all

comments received, the Coast Guard

decided to issue a new proposal that

would align the HIN with the recentlyadopted standard of the International

Organization for Standardization (ISO)

and delete the COO.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

to the NPRM

The Coast Guard received 114

comments in response to the NPRM

from 33 boat manufacturers, 8 boat

dealers, 6 insurance companies, 42 State

and law-enforcement organizations, and

25 individuals and organizations. In

addition, the Coast Guard received oral

comments at the December 8, 1994,

workshop. These comments and the

changes made to the NPRM are

summarized as follows.

(a) Format of hull identification

number (proposed § 181.25). The

present regulation in 33 CFR 181.25

requires that a 12-character HIN be

affixed in two places on the hull of each

new recreational boat made in the U.S.

or imported into the U.S. The HIN

consists of the manufacturer

identification code (three characters),

the boat’s serial number (five

characters), the month and year of

certification or manufacture (two

characters), and the model year (two

characters). The NPRM proposed an

expansion of the present HIN to include

a two-character prefix to indicate the

country of origin and five characters

following the HIN to indicate overall

length, hull material, means of

propulsion, type of boat, and a check

digit to help detect fraudulent

alterations of the HIN. As a result of the

overwhelmingly negative comments

received to the NPRM, this

supplemental notice of proposed

rulemaking (SNPRM) proposes to add

only the two-character prefix for

country of origin and delete the last five

proposed characters. The HIN, as

proposed in this notice, is aligned with

the format recently adopted by the

International Organization for

Standardization (ISO).

The HIN format, as proposed in the

NPRM, was based on the Vehicle

Identification Number (VIN), which has

worked well in the automotive industry.

Unfortunately, while there are probably

fewer than 100 companies

manufacturing automobiles worldwide,

there are more than 4,500 boat

manufacturers in the U.S. alone.

Recreational boat manufacturers tend to

be small and less likely to have

computers. Consequently, spending 15

minutes to manually calculate the check

digit alone for a single boat is, for them,

an excessive paperwork burden.

Though the present regulations have

changed only slightly since they became

effective in 1972, the Coast Guard

estimates that hundreds of boats still are

manufactured annually with incorrect

12-character HIN’s. Were the Coast

Guard to expand the HIN to 19

characters, including a check digit, the

potential for error would significantly

increase, making it more difficult to

determine whether an error was

intentional or not.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 35 / Friday, February 21, 1997 / Proposed Rules 7973

The comments also noted a number of

practical problems. For example, several

comments noted that some boats do not

have room to accommodate a longer

number in the required location and

would have to be redesigned. One noted

that an error found in an HIN on the

transom of an aluminum boat might

require replacement of the entire

transom. Still others mentioned

problems for law enforcement officers in

reviewing documents that repeat the

HIN because of the difficulty in reading

long numbers, particularly numbers not

separated by hyphens or spaces.

Though a number of alternative

formats were suggested in the

comments, most calling for a 17-

character format, the Coast Guard

decided that it would propose using the

shorter 14-character format consistent

with ISO. By using the ISO format, it

enables U.S. manufacturers to market

their products abroad without having to

affix two different sets of numbers on

each boat.

One other reason why the Coast

Guard proposes removal of the

requirement for the five additional HIN

characters is because the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB), which

administers the Paperwork Reduction

Act (see the ‘‘Collection of Information’’

section in this preamble), received many

negative comments alleging that the

additional characters would impose

significant paperwork burdens. OMB

indicated that it would be taking a very

close look at the proposed paperwork

requirements in this rulemaking and

that more justification for the additional

characters, if retained, would be

necessary.

As the proposed 14-character HIN is

consistent with the internationallyadopted ISO HIN, entities or

organizations, such as State, insurance,

theft investigation, or law enforcement

agencies, that favor an HIN with

additional characters to aid in marine

investigations and deter boat theft

should work with the ISO to change the

international standard. In this way, a

single, internationally-recognized

format can be maintained. In the

interim, existing § 181.27 allows

manufacturers to place additional

characters before or after the HIN.

(b) Certificate of Origin (Removed).

The requirement for a certificate of

origin (COO), as proposed in the NPRM,

has been removed. The COO was to be

a document identifying the boat and

certifying transfer of ownership from its

manufacturer to the retail purchaser and

so on to subsequent purchasers. It was

expected to provide assistance in

proving ownership of the boat. Many of

the States currently have laws requiring

manufacturers to furnish COO’s.

Considering the costs and information

collection burdens associated with the

proposed COO requirements and the

fact that States are not subject to the

Paperwork Reduction Act, the States are

in a better position to develop their own

uniform Certificate of Origin

requirements. The major obstacles to the

proposed requirement for a COO are the

information-collection burdens, the

costs of forms meeting security features

recommended by the National

Association of State Boating Law

Administrators (NASBLA), and the

absence of Coast Guard authority to

charge manufacturers for expenditures

on these forms.

(c) Applicability (existing § 181.21).

Several comments suggested that the

Coast Guard require hull identification

numbers for all vessels, including

commercial vessels. These suggestions

are beyond the scope of this rulemaking,

which is limited to recreational boats,

including boats carrying six or fewer

passengers.

Section 181.21 is also proposed to be

amended to remove obsolete and

unnecessary provisions without

substantive change.

(d) Definition of model year (proposed

§ 181.3(f)). In existing § 181.3(f), ‘‘model

year’’ is defined as the period beginning

August 1 of any year and ending on July

31 of the following year, with the model

year being designated as the year in

which the period ends. Several

comments stated that this definition is

vague and subject to varying

interpretation. For example, it is not

keyed to a specific date, such as the date

of construction, assembly, or

importation. Other comments

complained that the model year should

not be confined to specified dates (i.e.,

August 1 and July 31) in case they

wanted to vary the introduction date of

a new model.

The proposed definition has been

completely revised to address these

concerns.

(e) Assignment of hull identification

number (proposed § 181.24). This new

section is provided for clarity and

contains no substantive changes from

the existing regulations.

(f) Display of hull identification

number (proposed § 181.29(b)). One

comment stated that the primary HIN

location should be revised to make the

HIN readable when a boat is in the

water. The Coast Guard agrees and

proposes amending the paragraph to

indicate that the HIN must be affixed

where it is readily visible above the

waterline.

Two identical hull identification

numbers are required to be displayed on

each boat hull, a primary HIN on the

transom of most boats and a duplicate

HIN somewhere on the interior of the

boat. The intention is for the primary

HIN to be readily visible. Marine police

officers routinely attempt to read the

HIN on boats during State law

enforcement boardings, and many HIN’s

are not visible because they are affixed

to the transom beneath swim platforms

or below the waterline. Existing § 181.29

would be amended to show that the

primary HIN must be affixed where it is

readily visible above the waterline. If,

when affixed in accordance with

proposed § 181.29(b)(1), the primary

HIN is not readily visible, the

manufacturer must affix the HIN in

accordance with proposed

§ 181.29(b)(2).

(g) Display of duplicate hull

identification number (proposed

§ 181.29(d)). A comment from a law

enforcement officer wanted a standard

international requirement for placement

of the duplicate HIN to ensure that it is

accessible without having to

disassemble portions of the boat.

While accessibility without requiring

disassembly of portions of a boat is

desirable, creating this accessibility

would defeat the purpose of having a

duplicate HIN, that is to help identify

boats on which the primary HIN has

been removed or altered. Considering

the infinite variety of boat designs and

configurations, defining such a uniform

location would be prohibitively

difficult.

(h) Permanency of hull identification

number (proposed § 181.29(e)). Several

comments stated that all vessels should

be required to have HIN’s affixed in a

uniform manner. Another comment

stated that the methods used to affix

HIN’s should be made more durable.

According to the comments,

manufacturers should be required to

stamp or emboss HIN’s into the hull

instead of allowing glued or pop-riveted

HIN plates.

The Coast Guard acknowledges the

desirability of uniform permanency

requirements for HIN’s. However,

because boats are constructed from so

many different materials, such as

canvas, vinyl, wood, aluminum and

fiberglass, the variety of materials,

prevents the establishment of uniform

permanency requirements. As currently

written in § 181.29, each HIN must be

carved, burned, stamped, embossed,

molded, bonded, or otherwise

permanently affixed to the boat so that

alteration, removal, or replacement

would be obvious. If the number is on

a separate plate, the plate must be

fastened in such a manner that its

removal would normally cause some
7974 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 35 / Friday, February 21, 1997 / Proposed Rules

scarring of or damage to the surrounding

hull area.

The words ‘‘otherwise permanently

affixed’’ and ‘‘so that alteration,

removal, or replacement would be

obvious’’ are subject to interpretation.

The Coast Guard considers these words

to mean that ordinary and reasonable

methods must be used to ensure that the

HIN will remain intact and legible for

the useful life of the boat, and in such

a way that would discourage anyone

from altering or removing the HIN

number.

(i) Assignment of manufacturer

identification code (proposed § 181.31).

One comment stated that the Coast

Guard should accept a manufacturer

identification code (MIC) issued by an

international agency or an organization

designated by the European Union (EU).

According to the comment, a U.S.

importer would then have to submit

proof that the MIC displayed on a boat

was assigned by the international

agency or EU-designated organization.

One reason for requiring

manufacturers and importers to obtain

an MIC from the Coast Guard is because

the Coast Guard has no legal recourse

against foreign manufacturers of boats

that contain substantial-risk defects or

fail to comply with applicable Federal

safety standards. The practical effect of

requiring U.S. manufacturers and

importers of boats built in foreign

countries to obtain an MIC from the

Coast Guard is to identify the U.S. agent

or U.S. subsidiary responsible for

notifying owners and correcting defects

or non-compliances in accordance with

33 CFR part 179.

The Coast Guard does not believe it

would be appropriate to accept

manufacturer identification codes

issued by other international agencies or

EU-designated organizations, until such

time as international agreements are in

effect which establish the

responsibilities and accountability of

foreign manufacturers for defective or

non-complying boats sold in the United

States.

Several comments stated that the

Coast Guard should not issue an MIC

over the telephone and that applicants

for an MIC should be required to submit

a completed application with a

notarized signature, a copy of a business

license or a seller’s permit, and

photographs of the established place of

business. The comments also stated that

the regulations should require the Coast

Guard or an official designated by the

State to inspect the place of business

before an MIC is issued.

The Coast Guard has ceased issuing

MIC’s over the telephone and concurs

with the need for some means to ensure

that a company which applies for an

MIC is, in fact, in the business of

manufacturing boats. Some companies

that have applied for and received MIC’s

were not in the business of

manufacturing boats, but were engaged

in boat theft or insurance fraud. While

the Coast Guard does not concur with

the comments proposing requirements

for photographs of established places of

business or notarized signatures, the

Coast Guard agrees that a copy of an

applicant’s State business license or a

State seller’s permit will help the Coast

Guard and the States keep track of

company owners and the physical

locations of boat manufacturing plants

and discourage the use of MIC’s for

fraudulent purposes. Submission of an

applicant’s State business license or a

seller’s permit would also preclude the

necessity for a visit to the

manufacturer’s place of business.

Both State boat registration and titling

authorities and the Coast Guard need a

means to ensure that a company

applying for an MIC is, in fact, in the

business of manufacturing boats.

Therefore, § 181.31(a) would be

amended to require a manufacturer

apply for an MIC to include a copy of

its State business license or seller’s

permit to help the Coast Guard keep

track of the identities of company

officials and the physical locations of its

plants and to discourage the use of an

MIC for fraudulent purposes.

One weakness in the existing

regulations covering the issuance of

these codes is that, as currently written,

they do not provide for Coast Guard to

refuse to issue or revoke an MIC. This

has led to companies which applied for

and received MIC’s, which were not in

the business of manufacturing boats, but

were engaged in boat theft, insurance

fraud or avoided responsibilities for

defect notification and recall by filing

for bankruptcy and then resuming boat

manufacturing under a different MIC.

Therefore, proposed § 181.31(d) is

added to allow for refusal of an

application for an MIC or revocation of

an MIC.

(j) Assignment of hull identification

numbers for persons who build or

import boats for their own use

(proposed § 181.31(c); relocated to

proposed § 181.24(b)). Paragraph (c) of

§ 181.31 as appearing in the NPRM

concerned the assignment of numbers

for persons who build or import boats

for their own use and not for the

purposes of sale. The location of this

paragraph was confusing because it was

placed in a section describing how

manufacturers are to obtain

manufacturer identification codes. It

now has been relocated, without

substantive change, to proposed

§ 181.24(b), a new section concerning

assignment of HIN’s.

(k) Conditions for use of manufacturer

identification code (existing § 181.33).

One comment stated that manufacturer

name or address changes should be in

writing.

Section 181.33(b) currently contains

this requirement.

(l) Removal of HIN (proposed

§ 181.35). Several comments

recommended that, once the HIN is

stamped or embossed, there should be

no alteration without the written

permission of the Commandant of the

Coast Guard. Two other comments

supported making the alteration of an

HIN a felony nationwide and stated that

there should be no alteration without

the written permission of the

Commandant of the Coast Guard and the

issuing authority of the State involved.

While existing § 181.35 prohibits the

removal or alteration of an HIN unless

authorized by the Commandant, the

Coast Guard agrees that the

Commandant’s permission should be in

writing to add to the integrity of the

system and proposes to amend the

section accordingly. The Coast Guard

routinely advises State issuing

authorities about the alterations to the

HIN’s it authorizes and does not believe

that requiring a separate State

authorization would substantially

enhance the integrity of the system.

(m) Miscellaneous comments. Several

comments suggested the term ‘‘length,’’

in reference to the characters indicating

length of the boat, be defined. With the

withdrawal of the proposal to require

five additional characters, one of which

would indicate a vessel’s length, this

comment is no longer relevant to the

proposed amendments.

Another comment requested changes

in boat documentation procedures. This

comment concerns 46 CFR part 67 and

is not relevant to the proposed

regulations.

One comment suggested that an

international law be established

requiring that boats be inspected by law

enforcement agencies or by State

registration authorities each time a title

is changed or transferred. This comment

is beyond the scope of this rulemaking.

A comment from an insurer of

personal watercraft (PWC) stated that all

replacement hulls for PWC should have

a serialized number permanently affixed

to the main lower portion of the hull

and that all PWC manufacturers should

be required to provide certifications of

replacements. The certification,

according to the comment, should

include the original HIN of the HIN of

the PWC, the name and signature of the
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 35 / Friday, February 21, 1997 / Proposed Rules 7975

present owner of the PWC, the name of

the facility replacing the PWC hull, and

a statement about the destruction and

disposal of damaged PWC hulls. The

Coast Guard has urged both PWC

manufacturers and manufacturers of

replacement hulls to verify the

destruction and disposal of damaged

PWC hulls and to affix the same HIN

originally assigned to a PWC. These

procedures would ensure that PWC with

replacement hulls can be traced through

manufacturer warranty and State boat

registration and numbering systems and

would make it virtually impossible for

a damaged PWC hull to be recycled as

a usable boat. The Coast Guard

recognizes that PWC represent the

largest number of boats stolen annually.

However, certification regarding

replacement, destruction, and disposal

of PWC hulls is an issue which is

beyond the scope of the present

rulemaking. The Coast Guard is

considering the problems relating to

replacement hulls under a separate

initiative.

Regulatory Evaluation

This proposal is not a significant

regulatory action under section 3(f) of

Executive Order 12866 and does not

require an assessment of potential costs

and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that

order. It has not been reviewed by the

Office of Management and Budget under

that order. It is not significant under the

regulatory policies and procedures of

the Department of Transportation (DOT)

(44 FR 11040; February 26, 1979). The

Coast Guard expects the economic

impact of this proposal to be so minimal

that a full Regulatory Evaluation under

paragraph 10e of the regulatory policies

and procedures of DOT is unnecessary.

An estimated 2,000,000 recreational

boats are manufactured or imported

annually, each presently required to

have the 12-character HIN located in

two places on the hull. In addition,

about 17,000 boats are built each year by

private individuals. This means a total

of 4,034,000 HIN’s (two per boat) are

affixed annually. The estimated average

cost for determining and affixing the

present 12-character HIN is $.50 per

boat. The estimated increase in costs for

adding two more characters, as

proposed, would be an additional $.10

or less per boat.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Coast Guard

must consider whether this proposal, if

adopted, will have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. ‘‘Small

entities’’ may include (1) small

businesses and not-for-profit

organizations that are independently

owned and operated and that are not

dominant in their fields and (2)

governmental jurisdictions with

populations of less than 50,000.

The proposed regulations would

apply to both small and large

manufacturers and importers of boats, as

well as to private individuals who build

or import their boats. Numerous

comments were received, primarily

from small manufacturers, objecting to

the burdens that would be imposed by

the use of the proposed 19-character

HIN. In response to these comments, the

Coast Guard has decided to delete the

last five characters from its proposed 19-

character HIN and propose only the

original 12-character HIN with a twocharacter prefix for country of origin.

This would result in a decrease of five

characters while aligning the HIN with

international standards. The addition of

the two-character prefix would result in

only a slight increase in costs ($.10 or

less) per boat. Therefore, the Coast

Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b)

that this new proposal, if adopted, will

not have a significant economic impact

on a substantial number of small

entities. If, however, you think that your

business or organization qualifies as a

small entity and that this proposal will

have a significant economic impact on

your business or organization, please

submit a comment (see ADDRESSES)

explaining why you think it qualifies

and in what way and to what degree this

proposal will economically affect it.

Collection of Information

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) reviews

each proposed rule that contains a

collection-of-information requirement to

determine whether the practical value of

the information is worth the burden

imposed by its collection. Collection-ofinformation requirements include

reporting, recordkeeping, notification,

labeling, and other, similar

requirements.

This proposal contains collection-ofinformation requirements in § § 181.25,

181.29, and 181.31. The following

particulars apply:

DOT: 2115.

OMB Control No.: 2115–0573.

Administration: U.S. Coast Guard.

Title: Hull Identification Number for

Recreational Boats.

Need for Information: Two characters

identifying the country of origin would

be required to be added to the presentlyrequired, 12-character HIN. This is

necessary to align the HIN format with

the newly-established standard of the

International Organization for

Standardization (ISO) in order to

maintain a uniform system and improve

access by U.S. manufacturers to

international markets.

Proposed Use of Information: To be

used by State agencies, local law

enforcement agencies, the Coast Guard,

and other Federal agencies to identify

each recreational boat manufactured

domestically or imported.

Estimated Annual Burden: It takes

about 10 minutes per boat to determine

the characters and affix the presentlyrequired, 12-character HIN. The time

required under this proposal to

determine the code for the country of

origin and add its assigned two letters

to the HIN would be negligible.

Respondents: Boat manufacturers and

importers (4,500), individuals building

their own boats (17,000) and issuing

authorities in States and territories of

the United States (56).

Forms: The two characters would be

added to the two identical HIN’s affixed

to each recreational boat.

Average Burden Hours per

Respondent: Negligible. The two

characters that would be added refer to

the country of origin, readily available

information.

The Coast Guard has submitted the

requirements to OMB for review under

section 3504(h) of the Paperwork

Reduction Act. Persons submitting

comments on the requirements should

submit their comments to both OMB

and to the Coast Guard where indicated

under ADDRESSES.

Federalism

The Coast Guard has analyzed this

proposal under the principles and

criteria contained in Executive Order

12612 and has determined that this

proposal does not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

The authority for this rulemaking

under 46 U.S.C. 12501 and 12502.

Section 12506 authorizes the Coast

Guard to delegate to a State its authority

to establish and maintain a vessel

identification system. Under 33 CFR

part 187, States may elect to participate

in the VIS program and, in doing so,

must use the hull identification

numbers assigned under the provisions

being addressed in this rulemaking.

Environment

The Coast Guard considered the

environmental impact of this proposal

and concluded that, under paragraph

2.b.2.e(34) of Commandant Instruction

M16475.1B, this proposal is

categorically excluded from further

environmental documentation. This
7976 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 35 / Friday, February 21, 1997 / Proposed Rules

proposal concerns labeling of boats for

identification and has no environmental

consequences. A ‘‘Categorical Exclusion

Determination’’ is available in the

docket for inspection or copying where

indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 181

Incorporation by reference, Labeling,

Marine safety, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to

amend 33 CFR part 181 as follows:

PART 181—MANUFACTURER

REQUIREMENTS

1. The authority citation for part 181

is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 46 U.S.C. 4302, 12501, 12502;

49 CFR 1.46.

2. In § 181.3, the definitions of Date

of manufacture and Model year are

revised to read as follows:

§ 181.3 Definitions.

* * * * *

Date of manufacture means a date

that is no earlier than the date

construction or assembly of a boat

begins and no later than the date the

boat leaves the place of manufacture or

assembly or is imported into the United

States for the purposes of sale.

* * * * *

Model year means the calendar year

(January 1 through December 31) of, or

the calendar year following

(1) The boat’s date of manufacture; or

(2) If the boat is required to be

certified, its date of certification.

* * * * *

3. In § 181.4, paragraph (a) and

paragraph (b) introductory text are

revised and, in paragraph (b), a new

item is added, in alphabetical order, to

the list to read as follows:

§ 181.4 Incorporation by reference.

(a) Certain material is incorporated by

reference into this part with the

approval of the Director of the Federal

Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1

CFR part 51. To enforce any edition

other than that specified in paragraph

(b) of this section, the Coast Guard must

publish notice of change in the Federal

Register; and the material must be

available to the public. All approved

material is available for inspection at

the Office of the Federal Register, 800

North Capitol Street NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC, and at the U.S. Coast

Guard, Office of Boating Safety (G–

OPB), 2100 Second Street SW.,

Washington, DC 20593–0001, and is

available from the sources indicated in

paragraph (b) of this section.

(b) The material approved for

incorporation by reference in this part

and the sections affected are as follows:

International Organization for

Standardization (ISO): Maintenance

Agency Secretariat, c/o DIN Deutsches

Institut fur Normung, Burggrafenstrasse

6, Postfach 1107, D–1000 Berlin 30,

Republic of Germany:

ISO 3166–88, Codes for the

Representation of Names of Counties—

181.25.

* * * * *

4. Section 181.21 is revised to read as

follows:

§ 181.21 Purpose and applicability.

This subpart prescribes requirements

for identifying boats.

5. Section 181.24 is added to read as

follows:

§ 181.24 Assignment of hull identification

number.

(a) For a boat under § 181.23(a), the

manufacturer or importer shall assign

the required hull identification number

according to § 181.25.

(b) For a boat under § 181.23(b), the

builder or importer shall obtain the

required hull identification number

from the issuing authority of the State

where the boat will be used principally

or, if the State does not assign hull

identification numbers, from the U.S.

Coast Guard Recreational Boating

Product Assurance Division, 2100

Second Street SW., Washington, DC

20593–0001.

6. Section 181.25 is revised to read as

follows:

§ 181.25 Format of hull identification

number.

(a) Each hull identification number

required by § 181.23 must consist of the

following 14 characters:

(1) The first two characters must be

the alphabetic Code from column 2 of

ISO 3166–88 indicating the country

where the boat was manufactured.

(2) Characters three through five must

be a manufacturer identification code

assigned under § 181.31.

(3) Characters 6 through 10 must be a

serial number assigned by the

manufacturer or an issuing authority in

English letters (except I, O, and Q),

Arabic numerals, or both.

(4) Characters 11 and 12 must indicate

the month and year of the date of

manufacture, date of importation into

the United States, or, if the boat is

required to be certified, the date of

certification. Character 11 must indicate

the month by using the letter ‘‘A’’ for

January, ‘‘B’’ for February, and so on

until ‘‘L’’ for December. Character 12

must be an Arabic numeral indicting the

last digit of the year.

(5) Characters 13 and 14 must indicate

the model year using Arabic numerals

for the last two numbers of the model

year, such as ‘‘96’’ for 1996 and ‘‘97’’ for

1997.

(b) The characters must not be

interrupted by slashes, hyphens, or

spaces, except for a hyphen of at least

10 millimeters (.375 in.) in length

following the first two characters.

7. Section 181.29 is revised to read as

follows:

§ 181.29 Display of hull identification

number.

(a) Two identical hull identification

numbers must be displayed on the hull

of each boat.

(b) Except as noted in paragraph (c) of

this section, the primary hull

identification number must be located

as follows:

(1) On boats with transoms, to the

starboard outboard side of the transom

above the waterline and within two

inches of the top of the transom,

gunwale, or hull/deck joint, whichever

is lowest.

(2) On boats without transoms or on

boats on which it would be impractical

to locate the number on the transom, to

the starboard outboard side of the hull

above the waterline, aft, within one foot

of the stern and within two inches of the

top of the transom, gunwale, or hull/

deck joint, whichever is lowest.

(3) On catamarans and pontoon boats

that have readily replaceable hulls, to

the aft crossbeam, within one foot of the

starboard hull attachment.

(4) On other boats with readily

replaceable hulls, a boat manufacturer

can use alternative locations with the

written permission of the U.S. Coast

Guard Recreational Boating Product

Assurance Division at the address in

§ 181.24(b).

(c) If the hull identification number

would not be readily visible if located

as required under paragraph (b)(1) of

this section (because of rails, fittings,

swim platforms, or other accessories or

transoms with reverse sheer), the

number must be affixed in accordance

with paragraph (b)(2) of this section.

(d) The duplicate hull identification

number must be affixed in an

unexposed location on the interior of

the boat or beneath a fitting or item of

hardware.

(e) Each hull identification number

must be carved, burned, stamped,

embossed, molded, bonded, or

otherwise permanently affixed to the

boat so that alteration, removal, or

replacement would be obvious. If the

number is on a separate plate attached

by a mechanical means, such as by

rivets or bolts, the plate must be
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 35 / Friday, February 21, 1997 / Proposed Rules 7977

attached by some additional means

(such as with an epoxy glue) in such a

manner that removal of the plate would

normally cause some scarring of or

damage to the surrounding hull area. A

hull identification number must not be

attached to parts of the boat that are

removable.

(f) The characters of each hull

identification number must be no less

than one-fourth of an inch in height.

8. Section § 181.31 is revised to read

as follows:

§ 181.31 Assignment of manufacturer

identification code.

(a) To obtain the manufacturer

identification code required by

§ 181.25(a)(2), each manufacturer, other

than an importer, required under

§ 181.23(a) to identify a boat shall

submit a written request to the U.S.

Coast Guard Recreational Boating

Product Assurance Branch, 2100 Second

Street SW., Washington, DC 20593–

0001. The request must indicate the

manufacturer’s name and U.S. address

along with the general types and lengths

of boats that will be manufactured. The

request must also include a copy of the

manufacturer’s State business license or

seller’s permit.

(b) To obtain the manufacturer

identification code required by

§ 181.25(a)(2), each importer required

under § 181.23(a) to identify a boat shall

submit a written request for a

manufacturer identification code as

required by paragraph (a) of this section.

The request must indicate the importer’s

name and U.S. address along with a list

of the manufacturers and their

addresses, and the general types and

lengths, of boats that will be imported.

The request must also include a copy of

the importer’s State business license or

seller’s permit.

(c) The Coast Guard has assigned

manufacturer identification codes to

issuing authorities in the States for the

assignment of hull identification

numbers to persons who are required to

identify boats under § 181.23(b).

(d) The Coast Guard may refuse to

issue a manufacturer identification code

and may revoke a previously issued

code.

9. Section 181.35 is revised to read as

follows:

§ 181.35 Removal of hull identification

number.

No person may remove or alter a hull

identification number without the

written permission of the Commandant

of the Coast Guard.

Dated: February 14, 1997.

N.T. Saunders,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant

Commandant for Operations.

[FR Doc. 97–4360 Filed 2–20–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–14–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 50

[AD–FRL–5692–2]

RIN 2060–AE66

National Ambient Air Quality

Standards for Particulate Matter:

Proposed Appendix L Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Availability of

Supplemental Information.

SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is

to inform the public that EPA is

considering minor technical changes to

the proposed Federal Reference Method

(FRM) for PM2.5 sampling published on

December 13, 1996. The nature of these

changes include improvements in the

inlet assembly to prevent precipitation

inside the inlet and reduce solar

heating, and other miscellaneous

modifications to provide more reliable

sampling capability. There may be

unanticipated modifications, which will

be described in the docket and

elsewhere. A description of these

changes will be placed in Docket No. A–

95–54 and, when available posted on

EPA’s Technical Transfer Network/

Bulletin Board System (TTN/BBS). If

EPA concludes that it is necessary to

evaluate additional changes, these will

be placed in the docket at a later date.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

questions regarding the FRM, contact

Neil H. Frank at (919) 541–5560. For

general questions regarding the NAAQS

contact Patrica Koman at (919) 431–

5170.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Docket. Docket No. A–95–54,

containing supporting information used

in developing the aforementioned

changes in the FRM hardware and/or

method is available for public

inspection and copying between 8 a.m.

and 5:30 p.m. on weekdays, at the U. S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460. A

reasonable fee may be charged for

copying.

Documents Available Electronically.

An electronic version of this action as

well as the December 13, 1996 Federal

Register proposal notice will be

available for download from EPA’s

TTN/BBS. The service is free, except for

the cost of a telephone call. Dial (919)

541–5742 for data transfer of up to

14,400 bits per second. This information

is available from both the Clean Air Act

Amendments (CAAA) technical area

and the Ambient Monitoring

Technology Information Center

(AMTIC) technical area. The TTN is also

available via the Internet, TTN 2000

CAAA Internet Web site at www

address (http://134.67.104.12/html/

caaa/caaa.html#CAAM) and the AMTIC

at www address (134.67.104.12/html/

amtic/amtic.html#AMOl). For more

information on the TTN, contact the

systems operator at (919) 541–5384.

Dated: February 14, 1997.

Mary D. Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation.

[FR Doc. 97–4329 Filed 2–20–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–M

40 CFR Part 63

[AD–FRL–5691–1]

RIN 2060–AD94

National Emission Standards for

Hazardous Air Pollutants: Petroleum

Refineries

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This action proposes to

expand and clarify definitions in the

‘‘National Emission Standards for

Hazardous Air Pollutants: Petroleum

Refineries’’, which was issued as a final

rule on August 18, 1995. Because the

revisions add and clarify definitions, the

EPA does not anticipate receiving

adverse comments. Consequently the

revisions are also being issued as a

direct final rule in the final rules section

of this Federal Register. If no significant

adverse comments are timely received,

no further action will be taken with

respect to this proposal and the direct

final rule will become final on the date

provided in that action.

DATES: Comments. Comments must be

received on or before March 24, 1997

unless a hearing is required by March

10, 1997. If a hearing is requested,

written comments must be received by

April 22, 1997. If a hearing is held, it

will take place on March 24, 1997

beginning at 10 a.m.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Comments

should be submitted (in duplicate, if

possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket