[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 20 (Friday, January 30, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5282-5337]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01331]



[[Page 5281]]

Vol. 80

Friday,

No. 20

January 30, 2015

Part IV





Department of Homeland Security





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





Coast Guard





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





33 CFR Parts 62, 66, 101, et al.

46 CFR Parts 4 and 148





Vessel Requirements for Notices of Arrival and Departure, and Automatic 
Identification System; Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 80 , No. 20 / Friday, January 30, 2015 / 
Rules and Regulations

[[Page 5282]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 62, 66, 101, 110, 117, 118, 151, 160, 161, 164, and 
165

46 CFR Parts 4 and 148

[Docket No. USCG-2005-21869]
RIN 1625-AA99


Vessel Requirements for Notices of Arrival and Departure, and 
Automatic Identification System

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Consistent with statutory requirements and provisions, the 
Coast Guard is expanding the applicability of notice of arrival (NOA) 
and automatic identification system (AIS) requirements to include more 
commercial vessels. This final rule amends the applicability of notice 
of arrival requirements to include additional vessels, sets forth a 
mandatory method for electronic submission of NOAs, and modifies 
related reporting content, timeframes, and procedures. This final rule 
also extends the applicability of AIS requirements beyond Vessel 
Traffic Service (VTS) areas to all U.S. navigable waters, and requires 
that additional commercial vessels install and use AIS, consistent with 
statutory requirements, and in limited cases, the Secretary's 
discretionary authority. These changes will improve navigation safety, 
enhance our ability to identify and track vessels, and heighten our 
overall maritime domain awareness (MDA), thus helping us address 
threats to maritime transportation safety and security.

DATES: This final rule is effective March 2, 2015, except for 
amendments to 33 CFR part 160 which become effective April 30, 2015, 
with the further exception of Sec.  160.204(a)(6), which is effective 
April 30, 2015 through December 31, 2015; and except for Sec. Sec.  
160.204(a)(5)(vii), 160.205, 160.208(a) and (c), and 164.46(b) and (c), 
which contain collection of information requirements that have not yet 
been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The Coast 
Guard will publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the 
effective date of these four collection-of-information related 
sections. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed 
in the final rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register 
on March 2, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as 
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, 
are part of docket USCG-2005-21869 and are available for inspection or 
copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of 
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. You may also find this 
docket on the Internet by going to http://www.regulations.gov, 
inserting USCG-2005-21869 in the ``Keyword'' box, and then clicking 
``Search.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on the NOA 
portion of this final rule, call or email Lieutenant Commander Michael 
Lendvay, Office of Commercial Vessel Compliance (CG-CVC), Coast Guard; 
telephone 202-372-1218, email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#571a3e343f36323b7913791b32393321362e1722243430793a3e3b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="15587c767d7470793b513b59707b7163746c55606676723b787c79">[email protected]</span></a>. If you have 
questions on the AIS portion of this final rule, call or email Mr. 
Jorge Arroyo, Office of Navigation Systems (CG-NAV-2), Coast Guard; 
telephone 202-372-1563, email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#63290c1104064d2211110c1a0c23161000044d0e0a0f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f0ba9f829795deb182829f899fb085839397de9d999c">[email protected]</span></a>. Finally, if you 
have questions on viewing the docket, call Ms. Cheryl Collins, Program 
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents for Preamble

I. Abbreviations
II. Executive Summary and Regulatory History
    A. Executive Summary
    1. Purpose and Authority
    2. Overview of the Final Rule
    3. Costs and Benefits
    B. Regulatory History
III. Basis and Purpose
IV. Background
V. Summary of Changes From NPRM
VI. Discussion of Comments and Changes
    A. Notice of Arrival and Departure
    1. Applicability
    2. Definitions
    3. Exemptions
    4. NOA Information
    5. NOD Information
    6. Electronic Submission
    7. When To Submit an NOA
    8. When To Submit an NOD
    9. Force Majeure
    10. Need for NOAD Data and Agency Collaboration in Obtaining It
    11. Scope and Scale
    12. Financial Impact
    13. Outer Continental Shelf
    14. Miscellaneous
    B. Automatic Identification System
    1. Applicability
    2. Broader Use of AIS
    3. Expanding AIS Carriage
    4. Impracticability
    5. AIS and Nationwide AIS
    6. Fishing Industry Concerns
    7. AIS Class B
    8. AIS Displays and Integration
    9. Installation Period
    10. AIS Pilot Plug
    11. Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
    C. Regulatory Analysis and Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
    1. Notice of Arrival and Departure
    2. Automatic Identification System
VII. Incorporation by Reference
VIII. Regulatory Analyses
    A. Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Small Entities
    C. Assistance for Small Entities
    D. Collection of Information
    E. Federalism
    F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    G. Taking of Private Property
    H. Civil Justice Reform
    I. Protection of Children
    J. Indian Tribal Governments
    K. Energy Effects
    L. Technical Standards
    M. Environment
List of Tables
    Table 1--NOAD Derivation and Comparison Table: Final Rule and 
Corresponding Current Applicability or Exemption Paragraphs in 33 
CFR Part 160
    Table 2--AIS Derivation and Comparison Table: Final Rule and 
Corresponding Current Applicability Paragraphs in 33 CFR 164.46
    Table 3--Comparison of Regulatory Impact Changes Between NPRM 
and Final Rule
    Table 4--AIS Carriage Costs and Benefits
    Table 5--NOAD Derivation and Comparison Table: Final Rule and 
NPRM Applicability and Exemption Paragraphs in 33 CFR Part 160
    Table 6--AIS Derivation and Comparison Table: Final Rule and 
NPRM Applicability Paragraphs in 33 CFR 164.46
    Table 7--Cost per Small Entity To Carry Three AIS Units and 
Submit Three Additional NOAD Fields
    Table 8--Annual Risk Reduction Required for Cost to Equal 
Benefits for Passenger Vessels With Certain Passenger Capacities 
(Annual Costs at 7% Discount Rate)
    Table 9--Nature of Authority To Require Installation and Use of 
Automatic Identification System (AIS)

I. Abbreviations

AC Alternating Current
AIS Automatic Identification System
AIS AtoN Automatic Identification System Aids to Navigation
AMS Automated Manifest System
ANF Advance Notice Form
API American Petroleum Institute
APIS Advance Passenger Information System
ASM Application-specific messaging
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
AtoN Aids to Navigation
CBP U.S. Customs and Border Protection
CDC Certain Dangerous Cargo
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CMTS Committee on the Maritime Transportation System

[[Page 5283]]

COP Common Operating Picture
COTP Captain of the Port
CSR Continuous Synopsis Record
DGPS Differential Global Positioning System
DHS U.S. Department of Homeland Security
ECDIS Electronic Chart Display and Information System
ECS Electronic Chart System
eNOAD Electronic Notice of Arrival and Departure
FCC Federal Communications Commission
FILS Federal/Industry Logistics Standardization
FRFA Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
IMO International Maritime Organization
INS mmigration and Naturalization Service
IRFA Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
IRVMC Inland River Vessel Movement Center
ISM International Safety Management
ISPS International Ship and Port Facility Security
ISSC International Ship Security Certificate
ITU International Telecommunications Union
LOOP Louisiana Offshore Oil Port
LRIT Long Range Identification and Tracking
MARPOL International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from 
Ships
MARSEC Maritime Security
MDA Maritime Domain Awareness
MEPC IMO Marine Environment Protection Committee
MISLE Marine Information for Safety and Law Enforcement
MKD Minimal Keyboard Display
MMSI Maritime Mobile Service Identity
MODU Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit
MTSA Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NAIS Nationwide Automatic Identification System
NARA National Archives and Records Administration
NAVSAC Navigation Safety Advisory Council
NEMA National Electrical Manufacturers Association
NMEA National Marine Electronics Association
NOA Notice of Arrival
NOA OCS Notice of Arrival on the Outer Continental Shelf
NOAD Notice of Arrival and Departure
NOD Notice of Departure
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
N-RAT National Risk Assessment Tool
NVMC National Vessel Movement Center
OCS Outer Continental Shelf
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OSRV Oil Spill Response Vessel
OSV Offshore Supply Vessel
PWSA Ports and Waterways Safety Act
RA Regulatory Analysis
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RTCM Radio Technical Commission for Maritime Services
Sec.  Section
SAFE Port Act Security and Accountability for Every Port Act of 2006
SBA Small Business Administration
SN/Circ. (IMO) Safety of Navigation Circular
SNPRM Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
SOLAS International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea
TWIC Transportation Worker Identification Credential
ULC Universal Location Code
U.S.C. United States Code
VMRS Vessel Movement Reporting System
VSL Value of Statistical Life
VTC Vessel Traffic Center
VTS Vessel Traffic Service
WDR Waste Delivery Receipt
WMD Weapon of Mass Destruction
WME Weapon of Mass Effect

II. Executive Summary and Regulatory History

A. Executive Summary

1. Purpose and Authority
    The Coast Guard is expanding the applicability of notice of arrival 
(NOA) and automatic identification system (AIS) requirements to include 
more commercial vessels, consistent with statutory requirements and 
provisions. The Coast Guard is finalizing a narrow expansion of the 
applicability beyond the Congressionally-mandated requirements using 
the Secretary's discretionary authority. The purpose of these changes 
is to improve navigation safety, enhance the Coast Guard's ability to 
identify and track vessels, and heighten the Coast Guard's overall 
situational and maritime domain awareness (MDA), which will enhance 
mariner's navigation safety and the Coast Guard's ability to address 
threats to maritime transportation security.
    The authority for the Coast Guard to issue AIS and NOA requirements 
stems from the Ports and Waterways Safety Act (PWSA) (33 U.S.C. 1221 et 
seq.), which allows the Secretary to require the installation of 
specified navigation and communications equipment on vessels that 
operate within a vessel traffic service (VTS) area, pre-arrival 
notices, and other measures to protect navigation and the marine 
environment. The authority for the Coast Guard to issue AIS-related 
requirements also comes from the Maritime Transportation Security Act 
of 2002 (MTSA), Public Law 107-295, which directs that AIS be required 
on certain commercial vessels operating on U.S. navigable waters. See 
specifically, 46 U.S.C. 70114.
2. Overview of the Final Rule
    This final rule amends the applicability of notice of arrival (NOA) 
requirements to include additional vessels (commercial vessels 300 
gross tons or less coming from a foreign port or place), sets forth a 
mandatory method for electronic NOAD submission, and modifies related 
reporting content, timeframes, and procedures. This final rule also 
extends the applicability of AIS requirements beyond VTS areas--to all 
U.S. navigable waters--and to non-VTS users.
3. Costs and Benefits
    The cost of this final rule will be borne by approximately 18,000 
U.S.-flag and foreign-flag vessel owners or operators. We estimate the 
total discounted cost of the final rule to be $46.1 million over the 
10-year period of analysis at a 7-percent discount rate, and we 
estimate that 98 percent of this cost will be borne by U.S. vessels 
owners and operators. The NOA burden on industry from this rule was 
minimized to the maximum extent possible and includes three new 
information fields, consistent with the objectives of this rule. No new 
government resources are needed to process the NOA information or AIS-
related requirements of this rule. The AIS-related requirements of this 
rule were not applied to low risk, smaller vessels. Based on current 
estimates of the risks and benefits, expanding AIS installation 
requirements is not justified for smaller vessels that are not moving 
certain dangerous cargo (CDC) or flammable or combustible liquid cargo 
in bulk.
    We expect benefits of this final rule to include improved security, 
safety and environmental protection. The Coast Guard believes that this 
final rule will enhance maritime and navigational safety through a 
synergistic effect of NOA and AIS, and will strengthen maritime 
security. Specifically, when reliable NOA data is combined with other 
data from sources such as AIS and long-range identification and 
tracking (LRIT) reporting, a common operating picture is formed in 
which vessel-specific movements to, from, or in U.S. ports and 
waterways can be monitored in near-real time. This will enable the 
Coast Guard to filter data from collection mechanisms that do not 
require vessel compliance, such as radar, and thereby enhance our 
ability to rapidly detect, identify, and track suspicious vessels. This 
assists the Coast Guard and our other interagency partners in decision-
making regarding homeland security, and affords decision-makers an 
opportunity to prioritize resources and meet mission requirements while 
maintaining MDA.
    Improving MDA will also result in improvements to maritime and 
navigational safety. We assess additional improvements to safety and 
environmental protection quantitatively, given the existence of 
historic casualty

[[Page 5284]]

data from which to develop such estimates. From the casualty history we 
can assess the mitigation of fatalities, injuries, property damage, and 
environmental impacts as a result of oil spills from casualty 
incidents. We estimate the total discounted benefit (injuries and 
fatalities avoided) for the AIS portion of the final rule, derived from 
marine casualty cases for the period 1996 to 2010, to be between $25.1 
and $31.2 million, using $9.1 million for the value of statistical life 
(VSL) at 7- and 3-percent discount rates, respectively. We expect the 
AIS portion of this final rule to prevent on average 14 barrels of oil 
(undiscounted) from being spilled annually, or between 85 and 106 
barrels at 7- and 3-percent discount rates, respectively, over the 10-
year period of analysis.

B. Regulatory History

    On December 16, 2008, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) titled ``Vessel Requirements for Notices of Arrival and 
Departure, and Automatic Identification System'' in the Federal 
Register (73 FR 76295). The preamble of that NPRM contains an extensive 
post-September 11, 2001, history of NOA and AIS regulatory actions. We 
provided a 4-month comment period for the proposed rule. We received 91 
written submissions, and 27 persons made oral statements at our public 
meetings. There were approximately 475 comments in response to our 
NPRM.
    Public meetings were requested and two were held. We held the first 
meeting in Washington, DC, on March 5, 2009, and the second in Seattle, 
WA, on March 25, 2009. See 74 FR 3534, January 21, 2009, and 74 FR 
9071, March 2, 2009.

III. Basis and Purpose

    This final rule makes revisions to NOAD regulations in 33 CFR part 
160 that are necessary to require the submission of comprehensive and 
timely information on vessels entering U.S. ports and transiting U.S. 
waters. Also, the revision requiring electronic submissions will 
expedite processing of NOAD information. Prompt receipt of this 
information about a vessel and its voyage, cargo, and persons on board, 
and the operational condition of its navigation equipment will assist 
us in--
    <bullet> Preventing damage to structures on, in, or adjacent to the 
navigable waters of the United States; and
    <bullet> Protecting those navigable waters.

The Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security has delegated to 
the Coast Guard authority from the PWSA (33 U.S.C. 1221 et seq.). Under 
this authority, the Coast Guard may promulgate regulations to--
    <bullet> Require receipt of pre-arrival messages from vessels 
destined for a U.S. port or place in sufficient time to permit advance 
vessel traffic planning prior to port entry.
    <bullet> Protect the navigable waters of the United States, as well 
as bridges over those waters, and land structures and shore area 
immediately adjacent to such waters, including measures involving the 
movement of explosives or other dangerous articles and substances.

See specifically 33 U.S.C. 1223(a)(5), 1225, and 1231.
    This final rule also amends AIS and AIS-related regulations in 33 
CFR parts 62, 66, 161, 164, and 165 necessary to implement section 102 
of MTSA, Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064, which directs that AIS be 
installed and operating on most commercial vessels on the navigable 
waters of the United States. See 46 U.S.C. 70114. In addition, this 
final rule implements certain mandatory provisions of the International 
Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, (SOLAS), as amended. 
See specifically SOLAS, Chapter V, regulation 19.2.4, which requires 
all ships of 300 gross tonnage and upwards engaged on international 
voyages, cargo ships of 500 gross tonnage and upwards not engaged on 
international voyages, and passenger ships irrespective of size, to be 
fitted with AIS; and regulation 1.4, which gives the United States some 
discretion in implementing these AIS requirements for ships. As a 
Contracting Government to SOLAS, the United States has a responsibility 
to implement mandatory SOLAS provisions such as these AIS, SOLAS 
Chapter V provisions. See SOLAS Art. I, SOLAS, 32 U.S.T. 47, and the 
Protocol of 1978 relating to SOLAS, 32 U.S.T. 5577. As with NOAD data, 
AIS data also assist us in traffic management, safety, and security.
    The combination of these NOA and AIS revisions will help provide a 
more comprehensive picture of the maritime domain. These NOA and AIS 
data go into a common operating picture (COP) that uses input from 
various sources to provide both a visual display of marine traffic and 
a display of each vessel's accompanying information. This system allows 
us to detect anomalies in these data elements. Specifically, NOA 
provides the stated intent of the vessel, which AIS complements by 
providing actual movement and a historical pattern of behavior. 
Combining the two, along with non-cooperative means of detection/
tracking, provides a check on both, and thus an early indication of 
abnormal behavior, hazardous situations and/or potential security 
incidents.

IV. Background

    The NOA- and AIS-specific regulations appear in 33 CFR part 160 
subpart C and Sec.  164.46, respectively. AIS-related regulations 
appear in 33 CFR parts 62, 66, 161, and 165. As noted, the preamble of 
the NPRM published December 16, 2008, contains an extensive post-
September 11, 2001, history of NOA and AIS regulatory actions. See 73 
FR 76298-76300.

V. Summary of Changes From NPRM

    We made changes from the proposed rule to reduce the burden of the 
final rule, to more closely align it with statutory requirements, to 
make it more effective, and to clarify it. We made many of these 
changes in response to public comments, which we discuss in Section VI, 
``Discussion of Comments and Changes.'' If the rationale for the change 
appears in Section VI, then we point to the specific location of that 
response in this Section V summary. Otherwise, we provide the rationale 
for the change by section number here in this summary of NPRM-to-final-
rule changes.
    <bullet> We added a section to 33 CFR part 62 and amended two 
sections in part 66 to address a comment requesting that we expand AIS 
carriage to offshore fixed structures. In our NPRM, we encouraged 
broader use of AIS, but this comment highlighted a particular 
shortcoming regarding offshore fixed structures. Our proposed rule 
addressed mobile shipboard devices such as AIS Class A or B, but not 
offshore structures or AIS Aids to Navigation (AIS AtoN) systems which 
are best suited for fixed position deployment, such as on offshore oil 
platforms. Existing AtoN regulations (see 33 CFR 66.01-1 Basic 
Provisions) bar the use of AIS as a Private Aid to Navigation, and thus 
preclude the use of an AIS AtoN on certain fixed structures. This 
prohibition in the current AtoN regulations is inconsistent with our 
stated objective of broadening the use of AIS. An AIS AtoN would 
provide position, name, and health status of the aid, such as ``on 
station, watching properly.'' These amendments to parts 62 and 66, 
which allow for enhanced MDA and improved navigation safety, would not 
require anyone subject to our rule to establish an AIS AtoN, they would 
merely make that option available.
    <bullet> We amended 33 CFR 118.120 for the same reasons we amended 
part 66, to allow the use of an AIS AtoN on certain fixed structures, 
here

[[Page 5285]]

specifically bridges. We added the following sentence to Sec.  118.120: 
The District Commander may authorize the use of Automatic 
Identification System Aids to Navigation in lieu of or in addition to a 
racon.
    <bullet> We removed a technical amendment to Sec.  160.5(d) because 
that change was implemented in a separate rulemaking, ``Navigation and 
Navigable Waters; Technical, Organizational, and Conforming 
Amendments,'' in 2010. See 75 FR 36273, 36287, June 25, 2010.
    <bullet> In the NOA General section, Sec.  160.201, we inserted a 
note to inform readers that notice-of-arrival requirements for the U.S. 
Outer Continental Shelf appear in 33 CFR part 146.
    <bullet> In the NOA Definitions section, Sec.  160.202, we made 
five changes. First, we removed the definition for the word 
``disembark'' because we no longer use that term in our NOAD 
regulations. Second, in part because Sec. 617 of the Coast Guard 
Authorization Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-281) amended the 46 U.S.C. 
2101(19) definition of ``offshore supply vessel'' after our NPRM was 
published, we deleted this proposed definition and five others we 
proposed (``commercial service,'' ``oil spill response vessel,'' 
``passenger vessel,'' ``recreational vessel,'' and ``towing vessel'') 
that appear in 46 U.S.C. 2101. Inserting 46 U.S.C. 2101 definitions in 
the CFR may make it easier for CFR readers to find the definition of a 
term used in part 160, but as this recent legislation demonstrates, by 
inserting these statutory definitions, we create the potential for 
conflicting definitions. With the recent availability of an online 
official source of the U.S. Code (see http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/search/home.action), access to 46 U.S.C. 2101 is not as limited as when we 
proposed our definition section. Our introductory text in Sec.  160.202 
pointing to 46 U.S.C. 2101, combined with a new online source for that 
authority, will make it easy to find the 46 U.S.C. 2101 definitions we 
have not separately included in Sec.  160.202. Third, rather than use a 
jurisdictional term not found in 33 CFR part 2, we did not add a 
definition of ``Continental United States'' as proposed, but instead 
specified those jurisdictions in the sections in which we proposed to 
use that term: Sec. Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(iii) and 160.212(a)(2) and 
(b)(2). Fourth, to address public comments, we added definitions for 
the following terms that we did not propose to add in the NPRM and that 
are not defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101: ``ferry schedule'' and ``Operating 
exclusively within a single Captain of the Port zone.'' For a 
discussion of these two definitions, see the ``Exemptions'' discussion 
in VI.A.3. Fifth, we added a definition of the term ``boundary waters'' 
that we use in a new Sec.  160.212 paragraph on when to submit an NOA.
    <bullet> In the NOA Applicability section, Sec.  160.203, we 
specified in paragraph (a) that the referenced ports and places were 
those within the navigable waters of the United States or any deepwater 
port as defined in 33 CFR 148.5 and otherwise clarified that paragraph. 
For our rationale, see the ``Applicability'' discussion in VI.A.1.
    <bullet> We revised the NOA Exemptions and exceptions section, 
Sec.  160.204, to address public comments by adding to the list of 
exempted or excepted vessels United States- or Canadian-flag vessels 
engaged in certain salvage operations and certain ferries on fixed 
routes. We also added the requirements each such vessel must meet to 
qualify for the exemption or exception. In response to a suspension of 
reporting requirements under regulated navigation area requirements in 
Sec. Sec.  165.830 and 165.921 until December 31, 2015, we revised 
exemption (a)(3), which cited to those reporting requirements, and 
added a temporary exemption in paragraph (a)(6). For our rationale, see 
``Miscellaneous'' discussion in VI.A.14. Also, we revised the heading 
of this section to better reflect that paragraphs (b) and (c) identify 
exceptions and for clarification, we replaced ``need not'' with ``is 
not required to'' in those two paragraphs. And in paragraph 
(a)(5)(vii), we excluded ferries on fixed routes provided the ferry 
operator submits an accurate schedule, along with information in 
paragraphs (a)(5)(vii)(A)-(J), to the Captain of the Port for each port 
or place of destination listed in the schedule at least 24 hours in 
advance of the first date and time of arrival listed on the schedule 
and updates if the schedule or other information submitted changes. For 
our rationale, see ``Exemptions'' discussion in VI.A.3.
    <bullet> Based on comments, in the Information required in an NOA 
section, Sec.  160.206, we did not include the proposed entrance-to-
the-port field, Table 160.206(2)(xi); crewmember passport country of 
issuance and passport date of expiration fields, Table 160.206(4)(v) & 
(vi); or the person in addition to crew passport country of issuance 
and passport date of expiration fields, Table 160.206(5)(v) & (vi), in 
this final rule. For our rationale, see the ``NOA Information'' 
discussion in VI.A.4. In this section, we also made non-substantive 
edits for clarity. Effective October 30, 2013, a Nontank Vessel 
Response Plans and Other Response Plan Requirements final rule (78 FR 
60135, Sept. 30, 2013) added another field to Sec.  160.206, in Table 
160.206: USCG Vessel Response Plan Control Number, if applicable. We 
included that field in our revision of Sec.  160.206.
    <bullet> We delete the Information required in an NOD section, 
Sec.  160.207, based on our decision not to require notices of 
departure. For our rationale, see the ``When to Submit an NOD'' 
discussion in VI.A.8. We made appropriate edits throughout the 
regulatory text to reflect our removal of the NOD requirement, 
including the removal of Sec.  160.213.
    <bullet> In the Methods for submitting an NOA section, Sec.  
160.210, in paragraph (a), we specify that the methods for submitting 
an NOA include both currently available options, and methods that may 
be made available on http://www.nvmc.uscg.gov in the future. This 
change ensures that current options described in this final rule will 
still satisfy submission method requirements even if new options are 
later made available on http://www.nvmc.uscg.gov. We clarified 
paragraph (b) of Sec.  160.210 by eliminating the restricting eNOAD-
application reference when identifying allowable methods for submitting 
NOAs. The eNOAD application provides an easy-to-use, efficient method 
for reporting the vessel arrival or departure information required by 
the Coast Guard or some other Federal agencies for vessels bound for or 
departing from U.S. ports. It was developed to enable an NOA or NOA 
update to be submitted directly to the NVMC via the Internet even while 
the vessel is underway, thereby avoiding the need for fax machines, 
scanners, and telephones. It provides a means for managing and storing 
recently submitted NOA data, and allows a previously submitted NOA to 
be updated and a partially completed NOA to be saved and submitted at a 
later time. These eNOAD application features make completing and 
submitting subsequent NOAs faster and easier, but this final rule makes 
clear that the Coast Guard will continue to accept other electronic 
methods of submission, such as emailing an XML spreadsheet to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f69398999792b698809b95d883859591d8919980"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="aecbc0c1cfcaeec0d8c3cd80dbddcdc980c9c1d8">[email protected]</span></a>. As discussed in VI.A.12, we amended Sec.  
160.210(a) to provide the option for a vessel operator who does not 
have shore-side support available to fax or phone in an NOA or an 
update, for a vessel in an area without internet access or when 
experiencing technical difficulties with an onboard computer.
    <bullet> We revised the When to submit an NOA section, Sec.  
160.212, to adjust, in paragraph (a)(3), when NOA

[[Page 5286]]

submissions would be required for Canadian-flag vessels less than 300 
gross tons arriving directly from Canada via boundary waters in 
response to provisions of the Treaty between the United States and 
Great Britain relating to boundary waters between the United States and 
Canada (Boundary Waters Treaty), 36 Stat. 2448; Treaty Series 548. (For 
a discussion of comments related to this treaty's provisions, see 
``When to submit an NOA'' discussion in VI.A.7; also see the 
``Exemptions'' discussion of this treaty in VI.A.3). Also, we inserted 
``Times for submitting NOAs are as follows'' as introductory text for 
paragraph (a)(4) to conform with the introductory text of paragraph 
(b)(4).
    <bullet> In response to comments on the When to submit an NOD 
section, Sec.  160.213, we decided to eliminate our proposed NOD 
requirement and to remove Sec.  160.213 . We determined that NOA 
submission requirements would provide sufficient information. For our 
rationale, see the ``When to Submit an NOD'' discussion in VI.A.8.
    <bullet> In the Vessel operating requirements section, Sec.  
161.12, we corrected a section reference from ``Sec.  160.203'' to 
``Sec.  160.202.'' We also made similar conforming amendments to 
reflect the redesignation of our definitions section to Sec.  160.202 
in: 33 CFR 101.105, 110.158, 110.168, 110.214, 117.1007, 151.2025, 
161.12, 161.19, 165.503, 165.510, 165.753, 165.811, 165.830, 165.921, 
165.1181, 165.1183, and 46 CFR 4.05-1 and 148.11. Also as a conforming 
amendment in a note to table 161.12(c) in Sec.  161.12, we removed a 
reference to Sec.  164.46 requirements applying to certain VTS and 
Vessel Movement Reporting System (VMRS) areas because our amendment to 
Sec.  164.46 in this final rule expands AIS applicability beyond VTS 
and VMRS areas.
    <bullet> In the Applicability exception for foreign vessels 
section, Sec.  164.02, we inserted the word ``foreign'' into paragraph 
(a) to clarify that, except where noted, the requirements of this part 
do not apply to foreign vessels that meet the criteria listed in 
paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of that section.
    <bullet> In the Incorporation by reference section, Sec.  164.03, 
for reasons stated in the description of Sec.  164.46(a) changes 
immediately below, we added IMO Safety of Navigation Circular SN.1/
Circ.289, regarding ``Guidance on the Use of AIS Application-Specific 
Messages;'' deleted SN/Circ.236, which SN.1/Circ.289 revoked; and added 
National Marine Electronics Association (NMEA) Installation Standard 
0400-3.10. We also updated and supplemented contact information for 
organizations listed in this section.
    <bullet> In the Automatic Identification System section, Sec.  
164.46, we made the following revisions:
    [cir] In paragraph (a), Definitions, we revised the definition for 
``Properly installed, operational'' by adding International Maritime 
Organization Safety of Navigation Circular 289, deleting Circular 236, 
and adding the National Marine Electronics Association (NMEA) 
Installation Standard 0400-3.10. The IMO Maritime Safety Committee 
approved SN.1/Circ.289 after publication of our NPRM. This new circular 
revises two application specific messages denoted in IMO SN/Circ.236, 
revokes five others, and, adds 14 new applications. As noted below in 
our ``Broader Use of AIS'' discussion in VI.B.2, the applications added 
by SN.1/Circ.289 will broadly expand the capability and use of AIS. 
SN.1/Circ.289 revoked SN/Circ.236 effective January 1, 2013. Based on a 
comment, we added NMEA Installation Standard 0400-3.10 as an option to 
comply with it in lieu of SN/Circ.227 and 245 because the IMO AIS 
requirements and guidelines were tailored to large deep-draft seagoing 
vessels and may be impractical for the majority of small and shallow-
draft vessels subject to this rule. An example of an impracticality 
created by IMO AIS requirements would be a 27-foot vessel attempting to 
maintain a 30-foot separation between radio antennas on board. For our 
response to the comment, see the ``Impracticability'' discussion in 
VI.B.4.
    [cir] In response to comments, in paragraph (b), AIS carriage, we 
specified a Coast Guard type-approved AIS Class A device as the 
standard for meeting the carriage requirement (for our rationale, see 
``AIS Class B'' discussion in VI.B.7); we redesignated paragraphs 
(b)(1)-(5) as (b)(1)(i)-(v) to facilitate our addition of paragraph 
(b)(2) that lists vessels we determined may use a Coast Guard type-
approved AIS Class B device to satisfy the carriage requirement (for 
our rationale, see ``AIS Class B'' discussion in VI.B.7); we revised 
the applicability criteria for vessels carrying passengers by setting a 
higher general threshold than we had proposed--those carrying more than 
150 passengers (instead of more than 50)--and by not adopting our 
proposed inclusion of vessels carrying more than 12 passengers for hire 
and capable of speeds in excess of 30 knots (for our rationale, see 
``Applicability'' and ``Broader Use of AIS'' discussions in VI.B.1 and 
VI.B.2); and we supplemented the vessels-moving-certain-dangerous-cargo 
applicability paragraph to ensure that vessels carrying or moving 
propane and gasoline as cargo are also required to use AIS (for our 
rationale, see ``Definitions'' discussion in VI.A.2 and 
``Applicability'' and ``Expanding AIS Carriage'' discussions in VI.B.1 
and VI.B.3). To be consistent in our terminology, we changed ``engaged 
in commercial towing'' in paragraph (b)(1)(ii) that expressly covers 
towing vessels to ``engaged in commercial service,'' and in paragraph 
(b)(1)(v) we deleted the ``es'' from ``cargoes'' to match the term we 
point to as being defined in 33 CFR part 160 subpart C, ``certain 
dangerous cargo.'' We also replaced the content of the informational 
note to paragraph (b), which discussed AIS Class B devices, with 
information regarding a Coast Guard Captain of the Port's (COTP's) 
authority under 33 U.S.C. 1223(b)(3) and 33 CFR 160.111 to restrict the 
operation of a vessel if he or she determines that, by reason of 
weather, visibility, sea conditions, port congestion, other hazardous 
circumstances, or the condition of such vessel, the restriction is 
justified in the interest of safety.
    [cir] In paragraph (c), SOLAS provisions, we included the titles of 
Chapter V regulations 19.2.1.6, 19.2.3.5, and 19.2.5.1 (``Positioning 
System,'' ``Transmitting Heading Device,'' and ``Gyro Compass,'' 
respectively) to make it easier for the reader to identity the subject 
matter of the SOLAS regulation listed. We also removed paragraph (c)(1) 
because the vessels we intended to cover with it that do not engage on 
international voyages are covered by Sec.  164.46(b)(1) and those that 
do are covered by both Sec.  164.46(b)(1) and proposed Sec.  
164.46(c)(2), which we redesignated as (c)(1) in this final rule.
    [cir] Within paragraph (d), Operations--
    [ssquf] In (d)(1), we replaced ``33 U.S.C. 2001 through 2073'' with 
``33 CFR part 83,'' because 33 U.S.C. 2001-2038 have been repealed, and 
the inland navigation rules are now contained in 33 CFR part 83. See 
Sec. 303 of Public Law 108-293, and 75 FR 19544, April 15, 2010;
    [ssquf] In (d)(2)(i), we removed the unnecessary phrase ``should 
the need arise'' and restructured this paragraph regarding the ability 
to reinitialize AIS so that it was easier to understand;
    [ssquf] In (d)(2)(iv), we added the word ``fields'' to identify AIS 
data that must be accurately inputted;
    [ssquf] In (d)(2)(v), we limited the applicability of the paragraph 
to vessels subject to Sec.  164.46 (b) to distinguish SOLAS based-
requirements applicable to vessels subject to paragraph (c); in 
response to comments (see

[[Page 5287]]

``Impracticability'' discussion in VI.B.4), we added the words ``and at 
least 15 minutes prior to getting underway if the vessel is'' to limit 
the time AIS must be in continual operation on moored vessels; and, 
lastly, we condensed the discussion of AIS being turned off when 
continual operation would compromise safety or a security incident is 
imminent;
    [ssquf] In (d)(3), we made minor edits to more clearly distinguish 
safety-related AIS text messaging from AIS application-specific 
messaging;
    [ssquf] We added paragraph (d)(4) to address the emerging use of 
AIS ASM--and to further distinguish AIS ASM from AIS text messaging--by 
stating that AIS application-specific messages are permissible, but are 
limited to no more than one per minute and to messages consistent with 
international standards and registered for use in the United States or 
Canada; and
    [ssquf] In the note to paragraph (d), we inserted a reference to, 
and World Wide Web address for, the ``U.S. AIS Encoding Guide'' to help 
AIS users encode (input) consistent and accurate data; we deleted the 
sentence referring to external positioning systems and amended the word 
`integration' to the more proper term `interfacing'; current AIS does 
not require further integration for its operation. We also added the 
sentence ``Most application-specific messages require interfacing to an 
external system that is capable of their portrayal, such as equipment 
certified to meet Radio Technical Commission for Maritime Services 
(RTCM) standard 10900 series'' to provide useful information to those 
planning to use AIS ASM.
    [cir] In paragraphs (e), Watchkeeping, and (f), Portable AIS, we 
made minor edits for clarification.
    [cir] In response to comments, in paragraph (g), Pilot Port, we 
replaced the term ``Pilot Port'' with the more specific term ``AIS 
Pilot Plug;'' added ``by other than the vessel Master and crew'' to 
qualify the subject-to-pilotage-based applicability of this paragraph; 
added ``and permanently affixed (not an extension cord) and adjacent'' 
to clarify positioning of the AIS Pilot Plug; and inserted a reference 
to NEMA 5-15 as an example of a 120-volt 50/60 Hz AC power receptacle.
    [cir] In response to comments, in paragraph (h), Exceptions, we 
increased the possible maximum duration of a deviation from 1 year to 5 
years (for our rationale, see the ``Broader Use of AIS'' discussion in 
VI.B.2); inserted examples to supplement our description of types of 
vessels that may seek a deviation from AIS requirements; added vessels 
whose design or construction makes it impracticable to operate an AIS 
device (e.g., a submersible); and added those vessels using an AIS 
Class B device that lacks a display as a possible candidate for a 
deviation from AIS requirements in paragraphs (d)(2)(ii) and (e).
    [cir] We redesignated paragraph (i), Implementation Date, as 
paragraph (j), and inserted a new paragraph (i), Prohibition. In the 
new ``Implementation Date'' paragraph (j) we included those vessels 
identified in paragraphs (b) and (c) of Sec.  164.46 in the group of 
vessels that must install AIS no later than 13 months after publication 
of this final rule--the NPRM had proposed 7 months after publication. 
For our rationale, see the ``Installation Period'' discussion in 
VI.B.9.
    [cir] We added new paragraph (i), Prohibition, to note there is a 
prohibition of shore-side broadcasts from AIS Class A or B devices 
unless such stations are specifically licensed (e.g., a marine support 
station) to do so by the Federal Communications Commission. Class A and 
B devices are mobile devices not intended for shore-side use; their 
reporting rate is set by speed and course changes and so they have a 
navigation status. Using them ashore could confuse mariners on the 
water, who may assume they are mobile devices on the water (e.g., 
coming around a bend vice in warehouse ashore) and take action 
accordingly.

VI. Discussion of Comments and Changes

    As noted above, we received 91 written submissions to our docket, 
and statements from 27 persons who spoke at our public meetings. In 
total, there were approximately 475 comments in response to our NPRM. 
These written submissions and summaries of our two public meetings are 
available in the public docket for this rulemaking, where indicated 
under ADDRESSES or use direct link http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=USCG-2005-21869.
    Below, we summarize these comments and any changes we made to the 
regulatory text in response. We discuss the NOAD comments first, then 
the AIS comments, and, finally, the Regulatory Assessment comments.

A. Notice of Arrival and Departure

    In the NPRM, we used 11 categories to describe our proposed 
revisions to NOA regulations. See 73 FR 76302-03, December 16, 2008. We 
used nine of these same categories below to discuss comments we 
received on the NOAD portion of the NPRM. We did not receive comments 
on our proposed Sec.  160.205 to clarify who must submit an NOAD or on 
our proposed removal of a suspended requirement related to Customs Form 
1302, so we did not use those two categories below. We have inserted 
five additional comment discussion categories: Need for NOAD Data and 
Agency Collaboration in Obtaining It, Scope and Scale, Financial 
Impact, Outer Continental Shelf, and Miscellaneous. Some comments 
raised issues in more than one of these categories, so we occasionally 
return to a discussion of a comment.
1. Applicability
    One commenter recommended that we clarify the phrase ``port or 
place of the United States'' as it pertains to U.S. Outer Continental 
Shelf (OCS) locations. The commenter noted that the Coast Guard used 
the term ``port or place of the United States'' in Sec.  160.203, which 
sets out the applicability of this rule, without providing a specific 
definition. They said that the Coast Guard declined to define this term 
as requested by the commenter in its August 5, 2002 submission to the 
docket (USCG-2002-11865-0008) for the ``Automatic Identification 
System; Vessel Carriage Requirement'' rulemaking that produced a final 
rule in 2003. The commenter seeks to clarify this term as it pertains 
to a location on the OCS, which can become viewed as a ``place in the 
United States'' when a Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit (MODU) is 
operating on location. The commenter notes that the Coast Guard's 
statement in the 2003 rule (68 FR 9537, 9538, Feb. 28, 2003) suggests 
that the Coast Guard may not consider a location on OCS to be a U.S. 
port or place.
    The Coast Guard addressed Notice of Arrival issues concerning the 
OCS in a January 2011 final rule titled ``Notice of Arrival on the 
Outer Continental Shelf'' (76 FR 2254, January 13, 2011). Based on this 
and similar comments, however, and as discussed further below in the 
NOA ``Definitions'' and ``Outer Continental Shelf'' sections, VI.A.2 
and VI.A.14, we have revised Sec.  160.203 to limit the applicability 
of regulations in 33 CFR part 160, subpart C, to vessels bound for or 
departing from U.S. ports or places in the navigable waters of the 
United States or deepwater ports. This revision is intended to make 
clear that, with the exception of visits to deepwater ports, visits to 
ports or places in the OCS are covered by 33 CFR part 146 and are not 
covered by this rule.
    We have placed NOA applicability and exemption provisions from both 
the final rule and the current CFR adjacent to each other in the 
following derivation and comparison table so that you may

[[Page 5288]]

quickly identify changes this final rule is introducing that may impact 
your vessel or company.

 Table 1--NOAD Derivation and Comparison Table: Final Rule and Corresponding Current Applicability or Exemption
                                          Paragraphs in 33 CFR Part 160
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Corresponding section
Final rule section or paragraph in                                   or paragraph
          33 CFR part 160                      Text              currently in 33 CFR              Text
                                                                       part 160
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.   160.203(a).................  This subpart applies to     Sec.   160.202(a) &    (a) This subpart applies
                                     the following vessels       (b).                   to U.S. and foreign
                                     that are bound for or                              vessels bound for or
                                     departing from ports or                            departing from ports or
                                     places within the                                  places in the United
                                     navigable waters of the                            States.
                                     United States, as defined                         (b) This subpart does not
                                     in 33 CFR 2.36(a), which                           apply to U.S.
                                     includes internal waters                           recreational vessels
                                     and the territorial seas                           under 46 U.S.C. 4301 et
                                     of the United States, and                          seq., but does apply to
                                     any deepwater port as                              foreign recreational
                                     defined in 33 CFR 148.5:                           vessels.
                                    (1) U.S. vessels in
                                     commercial service, and.
                                    (2) All foreign vessels...
Sec.   160.204(a).................  NO CHANGE IN TEXT FROM      Sec.   160.203(a)....  Except for reporting
                                     CURRENT CORRESPONDING CFR                          notice of hazardous
                                     PARAGRAPH.                                         conditions, the
                                                                                        following vessels are
                                                                                        exempt from requirements
                                                                                        in this subpart:
    (1)...........................  A passenger or offshore        (1)...............  Passenger and supply
                                     supply vessel when                                 vessels when they are
                                     employed in the                                    employed in the
                                     exploration for or in the                          exploration for or in
                                     removal of oil, gas, or                            the removal of oil, gas,
                                     mineral resources on the                           or mineral resources on
                                     continental shelf.                                 the continental shelf.
    (2)...........................  An oil spill response          (2)...............  Oil Spill Recovery
                                     vessel (OSRV) when                                 Vessels (OSRVs) when
                                     engaged in actual spill                            engaged in actual spill
                                     response operations or                             response operations or
                                     during spill response                              during spill response
                                     exercises.                                         exercises.
    (3)...........................  After December 31, 2015, a     (3)...............  (3) Vessels operating
                                     vessel required by 33 CFR                          upon the following
                                     165.830 or 165.921 to                              waters:
                                     report its movements, its                         (i) Mississippi River
                                     cargo, or the cargo in                             between its sources and
                                     barges it is towing.                               mile 235, Above Head of
                                                                                        Passes;
                                                                                       (ii) Tributaries emptying
                                                                                        into the Mississippi
                                                                                        River above mile 235;
                                                                                       (iii) Atchafalaya River
                                                                                        above its junction with
                                                                                        the Plaquemine-Morgan
                                                                                        City alternate waterway
                                                                                        and the Red River; and
                                                                                       (iv) The Tennessee River
                                                                                        from its confluence with
                                                                                        the Ohio River to mile
                                                                                        zero on the Mobile River
                                                                                        and all other
                                                                                        tributaries between
                                                                                        those two points.
    (4)...........................  A United States or          .....................  NO CORRESPONDING
                                     Canadian vessel engaged                            PARAGRAPH.
                                     in the salving operations
                                     of any property wrecked,
                                     or rendering aid and
                                     assistance to any vessels
                                     wrecked, disabled, or in
                                     distress, in waters
                                     specified in Article II
                                     of the 1908 Treaty of
                                     Extradition, Wrecking and
                                     Salvage (35 Stat. 2035;
                                     Treaty Series 502).
    (5)...........................  The following vessels       (b)..................  If not carrying certain
                                     neither carrying certain                           dangerous cargo or
                                     dangerous cargo nor                                controlling another
                                     controlling another                                vessel carrying certain
                                     vessel carrying certain                            dangerous cargo, the
                                     dangerous cargo.                                   following vessels are
                                                                                        exempt from NOA
                                                                                        requirements in this
                                                                                        subpart:
        (i).......................  A foreign vessel 300 gross     (1)...............  Vessels 300 gross tons or
                                     tons or less not engaged                           less, except for foreign
                                     in commercial service.                             vessels entering any
                                                                                        port or place in the
                                                                                        Seventh Coast Guard
                                                                                        District as described in
                                                                                        33 CFR 3.35-1(b).

[[Page 5289]]

 
        (ii)......................  A vessel operating             (2)...............  Vessels operating
                                     exclusively within a                               exclusively within a
                                     single Captain of the                              Captain of the Port
                                     Port zone. Captain of the                          Zone.
                                     Port zones are defined in
                                     33 CFR part 3.
        (iii).....................  A U.S. towing vessel and a     (4)...............  Towing vessels and barges
                                     U.S. barge operating                               operating solely between
                                     solely between ports or                            ports or places in the
                                     places of the contiguous                           continental United
                                     48 states, Alaska, and                             States.
                                     the District of Columbia.
        (iv)......................  A public vessel...........     (5)...............  Public vessels.
        (v).......................  Except for a tank vessel,      (6)...............  Except for tank vessels,
                                     a U.S. vessel operating                            U.S. vessels operating
                                     solely between ports or                            solely between ports or
                                     places of the United                               places in the United
                                     States on the Great Lakes.                         States on the Great
                                                                                        Lakes.
        (vi)......................  A U.S. vessel 300 gross     (b)(1)...............  Vessels 300 gross tons or
                                     tons or less, engaged in                           less, except for foreign
                                     commercial service not                             vessels entering any
                                     coming from a foreign                              port or place in the
                                     port or place.                                     Seventh Coast Guard
                                                                                        District as described in
                                                                                        33 CFR 3.35-1(b).
        (vii).....................  Each ferry on a fixed       .....................  NO CORRESPONDING
                                     route that is described                            PARAGRAPH.
                                     in an accurate schedule
                                     that is submitted by the
                                     ferry operator, along
                                     with information in
                                     paragraphs (a)(5)(vii)(A)-
                                     (J) of this section, to
                                     the Captain of the Port
                                     for each port or place of
                                     destination listed in the
                                     schedule at least 24
                                     hours in advance of the
                                     first date and time of
                                     arrival listed on the
                                     schedule. At least 24
                                     hours before the first
                                     date and time of arrival
                                     listed on the ferry
                                     schedule, each ferry
                                     operator who submits a
                                     schedule under paragraph
                                     (a)(5)(vii) of this
                                     section must also provide
                                     the following information
                                     to the Captain of the
                                     Port for each port or
                                     place of destination
                                     listed in the schedule
                                     for the ferry, and if the
                                     schedule or the following
                                     submitted information
                                     changes, the ferry
                                     operator must submit an
                                     updated schedule at least
                                     24 hours in advance of
                                     the first date and time
                                     of arrival listed on the
                                     new schedule, and updates
                                     on the following items
                                     whenever the submitted
                                     information is no longer
                                     accurate:
                                    (A) Name of the vessel;
                                    (B) Country of registry of
                                     the vessel;
                                    (C) Call sign of the
                                     vessel;
                                    (D) International Maritime
                                     Organization (IMO)
                                     international number or,
                                     if the vessel does not
                                     have an assigned IMO
                                     international number, the
                                     official number of the
                                     vessel;
                                    (E) Name of the registered
                                     owner of the vessel;
                                    (F) Name of the operator
                                     of the vessel;
                                    (G) Name of the vessel's
                                     classification society or
                                     recognized organization,
                                     if applicable;
                                    (H) Each port or place of
                                     destination;
                                    (I) Estimated dates and
                                     times of arrivals at and
                                     departures from these
                                     ports or places; and

[[Page 5290]]

 
                                    (J) Name and telephone
                                     number of a 24-hour point
                                     of contact.
    (6)...........................  April 30, 2015 through      .....................  NO CORRESPONDING
                                     December 31, 2015,                                 PARAGRAPH.
                                     vessels identified as
                                     being subject to 33 CFR
                                     165.830 or 165.921.
Sec.   160.215....................  When a vessel is bound for  (b)(3)...............  Vessels arriving at a
                                     a port or place of the                             port or place under
                                     United States under force                          force majeure.
                                     majeure, it must comply
                                     with the requirements in
                                     this section, but not
                                     other sections of this
                                     subpart. The vessel must
                                     report the following
                                     information to the
                                     nearest Captain of the
                                     Port as soon as
                                     practicable:
                                    (a) The vessel Master's
                                     intentions;
                                    (b) Any hazardous
                                     conditions as defined in
                                     Sec.   160.202; and
                                    (c) If the vessel is
                                     carrying certain
                                     dangerous cargo or
                                     controlling a vessel
                                     carrying certain
                                     dangerous cargo, the
                                     amount and name of each
                                     CDC carried, including
                                     cargo UN number if
                                     applicable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Definitions
    One commenter recommended that the definition of ``certain 
dangerous cargo'' be expanded to include vessels carrying propane and 
gasoline so that these vessels would have to use AIS under AIS 
regulations redesignated as 33 CFR 164.46(b)(1)(v).
    For purposes of NOA regulations, there is a definition of certain 
dangerous cargo (CDC) in redesignated Sec.  160.202, which is 
referenced in AIS regulation 33 CFR 164.46(b)(1)(v). The definition of 
CDC was revised by a separate final rule entitled ``Notification of 
Arrival in U.S. Ports; Certain Dangerous Cargoes'' (75 FR 59617, 
September 28, 2010). We address the recommendation that vessels moving 
propane or gasoline as cargo be required to use AIS in the AIS portion 
of this final rule preamble because we amended redesignated 33 CFR 
164.46(b)(1)(v) in the AIS regulations, instead of changing the NOA 
definition of CDC in 33 CFR part 160, which would have triggered other 
requirements not requested by the commenter.
    One commenter who operates youth-program sailing vessels, 
recommended adding the following sentence to our proposed ``commercial 
service'' definition in Sec.  160.202: ``A vessel in which persons on 
board are sharing expenses, with no paid staff and which is engaged in 
youth development of character and citizenship shall not be considered 
a commercial vessel.''
    We note that our definition for ``commercial service'' mirrors the 
definition in 46 U.S.C. 2101 and is intended to cover a broad range of 
commercial activities. We did not change our definition of commercial 
service based on this comment because the suggested revision would 
unnecessarily narrow that definition.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Our definition of ``commercial service'' is also very 
similar to CBP's definition of ``commercial vessel'' in 19 CFR 
4.7b(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A youth vessel inspected as a sailing school vessel under 46 CFR 
part 169 would not be considered to be operating in commercial service, 
and thus would not be subject to NOA requirements. But the commenter 
noted that his youth-program vessels are licensed as Small Passenger 
Vessels under 46 CFR chapter I, subchapter T, which would be considered 
vessels engaged in commercial service. If these vessels are operating 
exclusively within a single COTP zone (see 33 CFR part 3 for a 
description of zones), they likely qualify for the exemption in Sec.  
160.204(a)(5)(ii). Also, under 33 CFR 160.214, the vessel owner may 
request a waiver from NOAD requirements from the local COTP. This 
waiver provision allows the COTP to make assessments based on factors 
in his or her COTP zone that are difficult to account for in a general 
rule.
    One commenter recommended that the current definition of 
``operator'' should explicitly state that, for vessels subject to SOLAS 
Chapter IX, the operator is the ``company'' listed on the vessel's 
Continuous Synopsis Record (CSR), International Safety Management (ISM) 
Document of Compliance, and Safety Management Certificate.
    We note that the operator will not always meet the SOLAS Chapter IX 
definition of ``company.'' We did not propose to change the definition 
of ``operator'' in our NPRM and we did not change the definition based 
on this comment because the SOLAS Chapter IX, Reg. 1 definition of 
``company'' does not limit the owner, organization, or person who has 
assumed responsibility for operation of the ship to the ``company'' 
listed on the vessel's Continuous Synopsis Record, ISM Document of 
Compliance, and Safety Management Certificate. The unchanged definition 
of ``operator,'' which appears in redesignated Sec.  160.202, 
identifies the ``person including, but not limited to, an owner, a 
charterer, or another contractor who conducts, or is responsible for, 
the operation of the vessel'' as the operator.
    One commenter noted that, given the availability of dynamic 
positioning systems, the definitions of ``port or place of departure'' 
and ``port or place of destination'' should be revised to capture 
locations where vessels transfer passengers or cargo offshore, even if 
the vessel is not anchored or moored.
    With respect to this final rule, we do not agree that we should add 
the offshore transfer of passengers or cargo as a factor for either of 
these definitions. This final rule expands the AIS requirements to 
include more vessels; therefore, we are increasing our MDA of

[[Page 5291]]

when two or more vessels may be engaged in the activities the commenter 
describes. Also, to the extent these offshore activities take place in 
U.S. navigable waters, revising these two Sec.  160.202 definitions as 
suggested would create a burden for vessels engaged in lightering 
offshore, and we decline to impose such a requirement without obtaining 
comments on the suggested revision. Additionally, a separate final rule 
titled ``Notice of Arrival on the Outer Continental Shelf'' (76 FR 
2254) was published January 13, 2011, which addressed NOA requirements 
for certain offshore activities.
3. Exemptions
    Commenters gave various reasons why ferries should be exempted from 
NOAD requirements: Current CBP practices of prescreening passengers in 
Canada and subjecting the vessel to a customs inspection when it 
arrives in the United States make Coast Guard NOAD requirements 
redundant and unjustifiable; ferries operate on a set arrival and 
departure schedule, so the Coast Guard already knows when a ferry will 
arrive; risks associated with pre-screened international ferry 
passengers are significantly less than risks associated with domestic 
ferries; under the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, at the United 
States-Canadian border, each person must have a passport, United States 
passport card, or certain other limited acceptable official documents; 
collecting and transmitting data 60 minutes before departure would 
eliminate a ferry operator's ability to serve last-minute travelers; 
NOA requirements on ferries would impact profitability and increase 
labor costs to collect and enter data; ferries that operate between 
different COTP zones, even though the ports are nearby, would be 
required to submit excessive daily reports even though the government 
has failed to show any heightened risk for operating between two COTP 
zones, while another operator transiting as far or farther in a single 
COTP zone would not be burdened with high costs of submitting 20 NOADs 
per day; and NOA requirements would put ferries at a competitive 
disadvantage with alternate choices in travel, such as land routes.
    Based on comments received, we have added an NOA reporting 
exemption for certain ferries. We recognize that ferries are on fixed 
routes and schedules that can result in multiple, predictable visits 
within a 24-hour period to the same U.S. port, and that, due to the 
nature of ferry operations, it would be impractical to subject ferries 
to the same NOA reporting requirements as other vessels. Therefore, in 
this final rule we exempt ferries, as defined in 46 U.S.C. 2101(10b), 
that provide certain information to COTPs. As discussed above, we have 
not included our proposed notice of departure requirement in this final 
rule.
    To qualify for this exemption, the ferry operator must submit the 
schedule for the ferry to the COTP for each port or place of 
destination listed in the schedule by April 30, 2015, or at least 24 
hours in advance of the first date and time of arrival listed on the 
schedule, in addition to other information listed in new paragraph 
Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(vii), including a 24-hour contact number. This 
exception more closely aligns with the CBP's exception in 19 CFR 
4.7b(c)(1), which does not require ferries to submit either an 
electronic passenger arrival manifest or an electronic crew member 
arrival manifest. Because we need to ensure that the Coast Guard's 41 
COTPs are aware of ferries entering their zones, a blanket exemption 
for ferries would not satisfy our need to maintain sufficient MDA.
    One commenter requested an exemption for fixed-route ferry systems 
and tour operators remaining within specific geographic areas less than 
1 nautical mile from land, whose vessels, routes, and schedules are 
established, and that this exemption apply to those operations (a) that 
are not on international voyages, (b) that do not provide overnight 
accommodations, and (c) whose voyages are less than 6 hours long. The 
commenter noted that this last provision would benefit those operations 
most impacted by the NOAD/AIS requirements: Small ferry operators, 
harbor excursion, and nature cruise operators. Also, a commenter stated 
that vessels such as large fish tenders make several short duration 
calls in separate COTP zones, triggering back-to-back reporting and an 
undue amount of paperwork.
    The final rule contains many exemptions that apply in all U.S. 
waters, but there are limits to the use of general exemptions. A given 
set of factors, such as those described by the first commenter, may not 
pose a safety or security threat in one COTP zone, but may in another. 
For those situations, the Coast Guard may issue a waiver under Sec.  
160.214 that allows us to make assessments at the COTP level to grant 
relief from NOA reporting requirements based on factors specific to a 
given port or COTP zone.
    As noted above, since publication of the NPRM, we have added an 
exemption for ferries that provide certain general information to 
COTPs. First, if the vessels on a fixed route in a specific geographic 
area the commenter describes do not meet the definition of ``ferry,'' 
but operate exclusively within one COTP zone and do not carry CDC, the 
vessels would be exempt from NOA requirements under Sec.  
160.203(a)(5)(ii). Second, if such vessels are on a fixed route 
transiting two or more COTP zones, the COTP in each of those zones has 
the discretion to grant a waiver under 33 CFR 160.214. Similarly, the 
large fish tenders, mentioned in the second comment, that make short 
trips transiting more than one COTP zone may request a waiver from the 
COTPs responsible for those zones.
    A commenter recommended that, rather than requiring an operator to 
submit for renewal annually, a waiver should remain in force until a 
material change occurs, such as a change in route or character of the 
navigable waterway. This remain-in-force-until-material-change approach 
would be similar to the EPA Vessel General Permit and the state-issued 
Department of Environmental Protection Stormwater Runoff Permit 
automated renewal precedent. This change from the proposed rule would 
relieve an operator of yet another administrative task, while 
appropriately assigning reporting responsibility.
    We note that if a waiver is granted, the termination date of that 
waiver will be at the discretion of the COTP. Over time, factors that 
impact security or safety may change. Periodic review of waivers allows 
the COTP to determine whether continuing a waiver is consistent with 
current security and safety assessments and strategy. We did not make 
any changes from the proposed rule based on this comment.
    One commenter supports NOA requirements for vessels carrying CDC, 
but noted that when conditions make such requirements unnecessary, the 
Coast Guard should provide a waiver provision.
    We note that Sec.  160.214 provides a waiver provision at the 
COTP's discretion if NOA requirements appear to be unnecessary. In 
addition, force majeure provisions in Sec.  160.215 of this final rule 
contain only limited reporting requirements under certain conditions 
beyond the control of the ship's Master. As previously noted, a 
separate final rule titled ``Notification of Arrival in U.S. Ports; 
Certain Dangerous Cargoes'' was published September 28, 2010. That rule 
is intended to relieve an unnecessary burden on industry by including 
more lower-risk cargoes in the CDC residue category, thereby reducing 
the number of notice of arrival

[[Page 5292]]

submissions required based on the cargo a vessel is carrying. These new 
CDC and CDC-residue definitions currently appear in Sec.  160.204, 
which will be redesignated by this final rule as Sec.  160.202. This 
section redesignation is intended to move the definitions closer to the 
beginning of subpart C. We made no revisions in response to this 
waiver-provision comment.
    One commenter stated that NOA regulations should not apply to 
tender vessel operations for cruise ships, whether performed by ship's 
tender or by a local vessel hired for this purpose. The commenter 
stated that non-U.S.-flag cruise ships arriving at or departing from 
any U.S. port currently must submit an NOA, irrespective of whether the 
previous port of departure or entry is a U.S. or foreign port, and that 
these notices cover passenger and crew manifests; that because the 
cruise ship is already in a U.S. port, the tender vessel is neither 
physically arriving at, nor departing from, a foreign port; that for 
CBP purposes, these persons are considered to have arrived or departed 
upon arrival or departure of the cruise ship itself; that no persons 
are permitted to come ashore unless and until the CBP officers have 
cleared the ship, and that further clearance is unnecessary when 
passengers depart the ship to the shore, whether departure is 
facilitated by a gangway or by a tendering vessel; that these vessels 
would also appear to be exempt from NOA requirements because their 
temporary operations within a port occur exclusively within a single 
COTP zone; and that some tendering vessels may be exempted or may 
receive a waiver under the limited local area of operation, but that 
exemption may be too narrowly defined, because some tendering vessels 
may travel as far as 2 or 3 miles.
    We have not established a separate NOA exemption for tender 
vessels, but under Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(ii), to the extent that the 
operations of tender vessels are exclusively within a single COTP zone, 
and the vessel is not carrying CDC, the tender vessel would not need to 
submit an NOA. If a tender vessel is carried onboard an arriving cruise 
ship, then a separate NOA need not be submitted for the tender vessel 
but if after this arrival the tender vessel begins traveling under its 
own power, it would be subject to NOAD requirements unless it fits into 
an NOAD exemption. In situations where a local tender vessel services 
one or more cruise ships, as long as it operates exclusively in a 
single COTP zone and is not carrying CDC, the tender vessel would be 
exempt from NOA requirements. In response to this and other comments, 
we have added a definition for ``Operating exclusively within a single 
Captain of the Port zone'' in Sec.  160.202 to clarify what we mean by 
that term.
    One commenter noted that its youth program vessels would not be 
able to comply with NOAD requirements because these sailing vessels 
have no computers on board and there is no Wi-Fi (wireless Internet or 
network connections) available in the inlet from which the vessels 
sail. The commenter suggested that this problem could be settled if a 
waiver or exemption is granted or if its vessels were considered 
noncommercial.
    As noted above in the ``Definitions'' discussion, VI.A.2, we did 
not change the definition of ``commercial vessel'' for these vessels 
for the reasons stated there, nor do we see a valid basis for creating 
an exemption for vessels in this program. However, the waiver section 
in subpart C, Sec.  160.214, may be a means to deal with the situation 
this commenter described. The COTP may grant a waiver of some or all of 
the NOA requirements for a given situation if, based on the COTP's 
assessment, a waiver is warranted. Also, note that in response to a 
comment discussed below in VI.A.12, we amended Sec.  160.210(a) to 
provide the option for a vessel operator who does not have shore-side 
support available to fax or phone in an NOA or an update, for a vessel 
in an area without internet access or when experiencing technical 
difficulties with an onboard computer.
    One commenter expressed support for the proposal to maintain the 
exemption for U.S. commercial vessels 300 gross tons or less and not 
carrying CDC that transit between ports or places of the United States. 
This commenter stated that changing this exemption would adversely 
affect commerce, specifically intercoastal commerce, and, subsequently, 
interstate commerce.
    This comment relates to Sec.  160.204(a)(4)(vi) in the NPRM. As 
proposed, we narrowed the 300-gross-tons-or-less exemption in the 
current Sec.  160.203(b)(1) that covers U.S. and foreign vessels. Under 
Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(vi) in this final rule, a U.S. vessel 300 gross 
tons or less, engaged in commercial service but not carrying CDC, will 
be exempt from NOA requirements only if the vessel is not coming from a 
foreign port or place. There is no longer an NOA exception for foreign 
commercial vessels based on tonnage, but Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(i) does 
contain an exemption for foreign vessels 300 gross tons or less not 
engaged in commercial service.
    One commenter asked us to consider the 1908 Treaty of Extradition, 
Wrecking and Salvage (Salvage Treaty) (35 Stat. 2035; Treaty Series 
502). This treaty states, in part, that nothing in customs, coasting, 
or other laws or regulations shall restrict in any manner salving 
operations of vessels wrecked, disabled, or in distress, or wrecking 
appliances ``in the waters or on the shores of the other country in 
that portion of the St. Lawrence River through which the International 
Boundary line extends, and, in Lake Ontario, Lake Erie, Lake St. Clair, 
Lake Huron, and Lake Superior, and in the Rivers Niagara, Detroit, St. 
Clair, and Ste Marie, and the Canals at Sault Ste Marie, and on the 
shores and in the waters of the other country along the Atlantic and 
Pacific Coasts within a distance of thirty miles from the International 
Boundary on such Coasts.'' Art. II of the Salvage Treaty. Regarding 
reporting, it states that vessels from either the United States or 
Canada employed in salving in the waters of the other shall, as soon as 
practicable afterwards, make full report at the nearest custom house of 
the country in whose waters such salving takes place. The commenter 
also noted that Article II of the Salvage Treaty also permits vessels 
from either country to conduct emergency operations in the other's 
territorial waters when necessary to assist a disabled vessel in 
distress. The commenter concluded that requiring tugs or other vessels 
to comply with time clearances and notices prior to and after embarking 
on an Article II mission would restrict salving operations, putting 
vessels, crews, property, and the environment at risk.
    Based on this comment about the Salvage Treaty which provides 
reciprocal rights for United States and Canada in matters of wrecking 
and salvage, we have added an exemption for United States- and 
Canadian-flag vessels engaged in operations identified by Article II of 
this treaty for the waters and shores it specifies. This exemption 
appears in revised Sec.  160.204(a)(4).
    One commenter noted that exemptions in proposed Sec.  
160.204(a)(4)(iii) for U.S. towing vessels and U.S. barges operating 
solely between ports or places of the continental United States should 
include passenger vessels operating solely on fixed routes between 
ports and places of the continental United States. The commenter states 
that exemptions already exist for U.S. towing vessels and barges, 
commercial U.S. vessels less than 300 gross tons, public vessels, and 
vessels other than tank vessels operating on the Great Lakes.
    We note that certain passenger vessels may qualify for some of the 
four

[[Page 5293]]

exemptions cited by this commenter, but reasons for those exemptions do 
not support creating a general exemption for all passenger vessels. 
First, towing vessels and barges do not carry passengers and, like 
other vessels, are required to comply with NOA requirements when 
carrying CDC. Second, before September 11, 2001, both United States- 
and Canadian-flag vessels that operated solely on the Great Lakes and 
that were not tank vessels or carrying CDC were exempt under 33 CFR 
160.201(c)(8)(2001) from NOA requirements. Our current Great Lakes 
exception, Sec.  160.203(b)(6), reflected in redesignated Sec.  
160.204(a)(5)(v) of this final rule, is narrower but does not exclude 
passenger vessels, and is consistent with the more-than 100-year-old 
Boundary Waters Treaty, proclaimed May 13, 1910, with specific 
provisions to ``continue free and open [navigation] for the purposes of 
commerce'' on the Great Lakes and other United States-Canadian boundary 
waters. Third, some passenger vessels would qualify for the exemption 
under Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(vi) for U.S. commercial vessels 300 gross 
tons or less that are not carrying CDC or coming from a foreign port or 
place, and those passenger vessels greater than 300 gross tons would 
share size features that warrant NOA requirements. Fourth, the Coast 
Guard established the exemption for public vessels not carrying CDC 
because such vessels would be owned or operated by a government. We 
have not made a change from the proposed rule based on this comment.
    In addition to the exemptions cited, certain passenger vessels will 
qualify for an exemption we have added to the final rule for ferries 
that provide certain general information to COTPs. Other passenger 
vessels seeking exemptions for operating solely on fixed routes between 
ports or places in the continental United States may seek a waiver 
under 33 CFR 160.214 from each COTP for the zones the vessel plans to 
transit. The operating-within-a-single-COTP-zone exception relieves a 
reporting burden for non-CDC vessels once they enter a COTP zone but 
does not interfere with each COTP having access to NOA information for 
vessels subject to NOA requirements that arrive in the COTP's zone.
    One commenter noted that the proposed revision to NOAD regulations 
does not affect its vessels transporting passengers and vehicles to the 
island of Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket, but that it would be 
unjustifiable to impose NOAD on operations within lakes, bays, or 
sounds.
    We note that the exemption for vessels not carrying CDC that 
operate exclusively within the same COTP zone may cover most vessels 
otherwise subject to NOAD regulations that operate in lakes, bays, or 
sounds. If a vessel is transiting more than one COTP zone, however, 
then under 33 CFR 160.214, the vessel Master may request a waiver from 
NOA requirements. As noted above, based on comments received on the 
NPRM, we have included an exemption for ferries that provide certain 
general information to the COTPs.
    One commenter noted that the existing Sec.  160.204(b)(2) and 
proposed Sec.  160.204(a)(4)(ii) operating-exclusively-in-a-single-
COTP-zone exception is confusing and will decrease MDA. The commenter 
stated that this exemption should be removed, made applicable to U.S.-
flag vessels only, or limited to vessels that remain inside the 
territorial sea baseline or boundary line. Finally, the commenter 
recommended that if the exemption stays, it should be reworded to 
remove ``exclusively,'' and should instead read ``A vessel that 
transits from one port or place to another port or place within a 
single Captain of the Port zone. Captain of the Port zones are defined 
in 33 CFR part 3.'' Another commenter cited Congressional mandates in 
the Security and Accountability for Every Port Act of 2006 (SAFE Port 
Act)(Pub. L. 109-347) to support his request to exclude foreign vessels 
from this exemption. Another commenter stated that, regarding the 
exemption for operating within a single COTP zone, typically, the NOA 
is understood to be required for arrival at a port. The commenter noted 
that if a COTP zone area is 200 miles all the way out to the exclusive 
economic zone, a vessel does not have to submit an NOA to that place, 
be it at the Louisiana Offshore Oil Port (LOOP) or a port. The 
commenter asked if this single-COTP-zone exemption includes ``voyages 
to nowhere;'' for example, a ship that leaves Miami, goes offshore for 
24 or 48 hours, stays within the COTP Miami zone, and comes back to 
Miami. The commenter also asked whether the exemption is for navigable 
waters only or also includes the exclusive economic zone.
    In response to the commenter who finds the term confusing, we have 
added a definition of ``operating exclusively within a single Captain 
of the Port zone'' to 33 CFR 160.204 that is intended to clarify the 
NOAD single-COTP-zone exemption.
    While a vessel's initial arrival in a COTP zone may require the 
submission of an NOA, when a vessel is operating exclusively within a 
single COTP zone, it may qualify for an exemption under Sec.  
160.204(a)(5)(ii) and thus not have to file an NOA or update for each 
of its transits within that COTP zone. With regard to the 
recommendation that this operating-in-a-single-COTP-zone exemption only 
apply to U.S.-flag vessels, we note that foreign-flag vessels are 
screened upon arrival to their first U.S. port, as are U.S. commercial 
vessels arriving from a foreign port or place. Therefore, the potential 
threat posed by a foreign vessel can be assessed and appropriate 
measures taken on a case-by-case basis, rather than having this 
exception apply only to U.S. vessels. This approach allows for 
efficient use of Coast Guard assets and resources and prevents the 
imposition of an unnecessary burden on the maritime industry.
    Under regulations in 33 CFR part 160, subpart C, the COTP zone 
exemption covers the entire COTP zone, which may extend 200 nautical 
miles from shore. If the ``trip to nowhere'' is within a single COTP 
zone, then it would not trigger NOA requirements in part 160. Current 
regulations in 33 CFR part 146, however, impose separate NOA 
requirements for vessels calling on an offshore location. See 
specifically Sec. Sec.  146.401 and 146.405. Also, in reference to the 
LOOP, Sec.  150.325 identifies NOAD requirements for the owner, Master, 
agent, or person in charge of a tanker bound for a manned deepwater 
port.
    One commenter noted that the exemption for passenger vessels and 
offshore supply vessels (OSVs)(Sec.  160.204(a)(1)) when employed in 
the exploration for or in the removal of oil, gas, or mineral resources 
on the continental shelf, and for oil spill response vessels (OSRVs) 
(Sec.  160.204(a)(2)) when engaged in actual spill response operations 
or during spill response exercises, should not extend to foreign-flag 
vessels. The commenter notes that, as written, the exemption for OSRVs 
and OSVs may be interpreted as allowing similar foreign vessels to 
enter or leave U.S. ports without reporting, and that such vessels 
currently work ``under the radar'' of government agencies and thus 
create security vulnerabilities. The commenter recommended that the 
Coast Guard add ``U.S.'' to Sec.  160.204(a) to indicate that exempt 
vessels do not include foreign-flag vessels. The commenter cautioned 
that if the Coast Guard left the final rule written as the proposed 
rule, the final rule would allow foreign-flag offshore supply vessels 
to come and go at will in this country, and that this would

[[Page 5294]]

represent a security risk to America, in direct violation of the law.
    We note that under Sec.  160.204(a), OSRVs, whether foreign flag or 
U.S. flag, will continue to be exempt from requirements in 33 CFR part 
160, subpart C, when they are engaged in actual spill response 
operations or during spill response exercises, as will U.S. and foreign 
passenger vessels and offshore supply vessels when employed in the 
exploration for or in the removal of oil, gas, or mineral resources on 
the continental shelf. As we have noted, however, we recently published 
an NOA-OCS final rule (76 FR 2254, Jan. 13, 2011) that covers notice-
of-arrival requirements on the OCS and satisfies SAFE Port Act 
implementation requirements intended to improve maritime security 
through enhanced layered defenses, and for other purposes. For NOA 
requirements on the Outer Continental Shelf, see 33 CFR part 146. We 
did not make any changes from the proposed rule based on this comment.
    One commenter stated that the Coast Guard should consider that 
individual vessel waivers by COTP will not work given the number of 
vessels visiting various ports at various times and having to be 
considered individually.
    We anticipate that COTPs will be able to meet the demand created by 
waiver requests. We recognize that factors presented by certain vessels 
that will be subject to NOAD requirement for the first time under this 
final rule may warrant a waiver for a specific vessel within a specific 
COTP zone, and that COTPs may receive more waiver requests in response 
to this final rule. We have taken into consideration the COTP's 
workload under the waiver provision of Sec.  160.214 and have reviewed 
blanket exemption requests extensively to determine if relief may be 
granted at the national level in this final rule. We have determined 
that allowing COTPs to grant waivers should continue to be a means we 
leave open to provide relief from NOAD requirements when such relief is 
justified in a specific situation.
    One commenter focused on the OCS and requested that the Coast Guard 
ensure that the exemptions from NOA only apply to U.S.-flag vessels, 
and that this exemption should be across the board--not just for 
offshore supply vessels, but for OSRVs and some of the other vessels 
that have exemptions.
    We have concluded that limiting exemptions to U.S.-flag vessels is 
impracticable because it would place an unnecessary burden on foreign-
flag vessels, which may interfere with commerce. The NOA requirements 
serve a variety of purposes, including, but not limited to, maintaining 
MDA and scheduling inspections. Once a foreign-flag ship has been 
screened and appropriate activities (inspection, boarding, etc.) have 
been carried out, the Coast Guard has assessed, and in some cases 
reduced, the risk the ship may pose.
    One commenter stated that, from the enforcement side, there is 
sometimes a difference between how arrivals and departures are 
reported. The commenter offered the following example: A vessel arrives 
in Miami and submits an NOA for Miami. While the vessel is in port, it 
shifts to Fort Lauderdale, which is still within the COTP Miami Zone. 
But for the NOD to be accurate, it would report Fort Lauderdale. The 
commenter asks whether this scenario creates enforcement confusion and 
if there is some means to address this.
    We do not believe situations like this will create an issue as it 
pertains to enforcement. The COTP is aware of his or her geographical 
boundaries and the ports within those boundaries. And, as we discuss 
elsewhere, we have eliminated our proposed notice of departure. But if 
a vessel is operating in a single COTP zone and submits an NOA from a 
departure port within that zone that is different from their arrival 
port in that zone, it will not create confusion.
    One commenter who reported making frequent near-port offshore 
transits offered his assessment that local Coast Guard concerns deal 
with the inability to monitor vessel traffic offshore. The commenter 
stated that one of the problems in the industry is the Coast Guard's 
inconsistent application of NOA exemptions or overriding regulations in 
response to security concerns.
    We work to ensure consistent application of the NOA regulations 
throughout all U.S. ports by establishing an internal NOA enforcement 
policy that provides guidance to all field units. We also provide 
general guidance to clarify the intent or purpose of certain provisions 
of the NOA and to ensure it is being applied consistently throughout 
the Coast Guard. This information is located in the General Information 
portion of the ``Port State Control'' page on Homeport (http://www.homeport.uscg.mil/) and on the NVMC World Wide Web site (http://www.nvmc.uscg.gov). We have also published a notice of policy in the 
Federal Register that addresses how the definition of ``port or place 
of destination'' is interpreted by the Coast Guard. See 71 FR 62210, 
October 24, 2006. Please note that while we try to ensure consistency, 
there are port specific factors that the COTP must take in 
consideration when evaluating the potential risk that may be associated 
with a vessel arrival to his or her zone.
4. NOA Information
    One commenter supported the proposed rule's added NOA requirements 
to submit the Maritime Mobile Service Identity (MMSI) number and to 
report whether the vessel is 300 gross tons or less, but recommended 
that the Coast Guard require the submission of information on vessel 
type, last and next port of call, and hull type for tankers and barges.
    We do not believe that collecting vessel and hull type of tankers 
and barges through NOAD reporting requirements is necessary because we 
are able to determine vessel and hull type through other means.
    Section 160.206 and Table 160.206(2)(iii) and (ix) of this final 
rule require reporting of the port or place of the United States a 
vessel will visit, as well as its last port or place of departure. 
Based on this comment, however, we did make a nomenclature revision, 
adopting defined terms for use in Table 160.206(2)(ix) by changing the 
proposed ``Last Port of Call'' to ``Last port or place of departure,'' 
and making a corresponding change in Table 160.206(2)(x).
    One commenter recommended that the Coast Guard specify the 
Universal Location Code (ULC), developed by the Federal Industry 
Logistics Standardization (FILS) Committee, as the means to report the 
data element in proposed Table 160.206(2)(iii)(``For the port or place 
of the United States to be visited, list the name of the receiving 
facility, the port or place, the city, and the state.''). The commenter 
noted that this revision would allow the Coast Guard to easily cross 
reference information on locations collected by other agencies to 
improve safety and enhance security. The commenter identified a 
government World Wide Web site where the list of location codes would 
be available.
    As noted, Sec.  160.206(a) and Table 160.206(2)(iii) of this final 
rule, as in the proposed rule, requires the name of the receiving 
facility, port or place, city and state. This information is available 
to vessel owners and provides the necessary detail required for this 
final rule to meet its PWSA objectives of obtaining information 
necessary to help enhance the safety and security of U.S. ports and 
waterways and to permit vessel traffic management. We are active 
participants of the Federal Initiative for Navigation Data Enhancement 
(FINDE)

[[Page 5295]]

and proponents of the FINDE ULC. Unfortunately, we are not currently 
able to use the ULC in our enterprise systems. Also, we would want to 
initiate a separate rulemaking to invite comments specifically on the 
use of ULCs for NOAs before imposing such a requirement. Therefore, we 
have not made any changes based on this comment.
    One commenter stated that the new requirement for vessels to submit 
their estimated time of arrival to the entrance to the port (if 
applicable) would prove extremely helpful for vessels calling on the 
Lower Mississippi River.
    We concur that it would be helpful for the Coast Guard to receive a 
vessel's estimated date and time of arrival to the entrance of the 
port, but because we can obtain this data through other existing means, 
we have decided not to include this new proposed item (2)(xi) in Table 
160.206 in this final rule. This paragraph would have required the 
submission of the estimated date and time of arrival of when a vessel 
would reach, for example, the sea buoy, pilot station, or COLREGS 
demarcation line of a port, if applicable. The Coast Guard can use AIS 
data in combination with the essential, current NOA requirement in 
paragraph (a)(2)(iv), for a vessel to estimate the date and time of its 
arrival ``[f]or the port or place of the United States to be visited,'' 
to provide MDA on when the vessel will reach the entrance to the port.
    One commenter wanted the Coast Guard to take a more aggressive 
stance on Certificate of Adequacy compliance regarding maritime 
pollution, and recommended that we use this rule to require the 
submission, as part of NOADs, of two IMO forms, the Advance Notice Form 
(ANF) discussed in MEPC.1/Circ.644, and the Waste Delivery Receipt 
(WDR) discussed in MEPC.1/Circ.645, to provide necessary visibility to 
verify COAs and help implement the International Convention for the 
Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL). The commenter stated that 
the timing differential between NOA and ANF and WDR submissions would 
need to be rectified.
    The submission of IMO forms to verify the Certification of Adequacy 
to implement MARPOL, and the implementation of a mandatory mechanism 
for ships to request shoreside reception services and a follow-up 
questionnaire are outside the scope of this rulemaking. We have not 
made any changes from the proposed rule based on this comment.
    At the March 12, 2009, public meeting on MARPOL Reception 
Facilities (see 74 FR 8807, February 26, 2009), we raised a number of 
challenges regarding the shoreside waste reception issue. We noted that 
a mandatory mechanism needs to be implemented for ships to request 
shoreside waste reception services and also to report whether services 
were provided as requested.
    One commenter stated that MARPOL reception facility reporting 
should not be integrated into the electronic Notice of Arrival and 
Departure (eNOAD) program because the commenter supports the use of 
recently published IMO standardized Advance Notice Forms and Waste 
Delivery Receipt as the vehicle by which port states can collect 
information on the adequacy of MARPOL reception facilities in their 
nations. The commenter noted that integrating various information needs 
of these forms would be difficult to do in a clear and concise fashion, 
given the already complex eNOAD format. The commenter also stated that 
waste reception facility data, under a separate system, can be routed 
directly to the appropriate Coast Guard officials for review and 
action, and obviate the need for these officials to access the eNOAD 
database to retrieve reception facility information.
    The Coast Guard has developed the eNOAD application, accessible via 
the National Vessel Movement Center's (NVMC's) World Wide Web site, to 
provide a vessel with the means of fulfilling the arrival and departure 
notification requirements of the Coast Guard and CBP online.
    While we may agree with this MARPOL reception facility comment, as 
noted above in response to a commenter with a different view, revising 
the NOA rule to integrate MARPOL reception facilities into NOAD 
requirements, and thus eNOAD application, is beyond the scope of this 
rulemaking.
    One commenter agreed with the Coast Guard in requiring only the 
last five foreign ports for domestic vessels, but the commenter stated 
that it is very important that foreign vessels supply the Coast Guard 
with the last five ports, whether domestic or foreign, because the 
Coast Guard needs to start looking at the total picture of the U.S. 
maritime domain.
    We note that, as proposed in the NPRM, we have added item (2)(ix) 
to Table 160.206, which, under Sec.  160.206(a), requires a vessel, 
domestic or foreign, to list its last port of departure. We have also 
converted two data fields for the last five ports or places visited to 
the last five foreign ports or places visited. See Table 160.206(2)(i) 
& (ii). Once the vessel has entered U.S. waters, the last-port-or-
place-of-departure data generated by Table 160.206(2)(ix) will provide 
us with sufficient data on a vessel's travel within U.S. waters to 
maintain MDA.
    This information is necessary for Coast Guard compliance 
verification examination matrixes to determine the threat a vessel 
poses to a U.S. port. The last-five-foreign-ports information is also 
needed for the Condition of Entry (COE) Program which assesses 
effectiveness of anti-terrorism measures in foreign ports. If effective 
anti-terrorism measures are not in place, then conditions of entry are 
imposed on vessels bound for the United States--see e.g., recent COE 
notice (79 FR 33771, June 12, 2014). This information has also been 
useful to screen to determine if a vessel has visited a country 
impacted by the Ebola virus outbreak within its last five ports of 
call.
    One commenter stated that the COTP in Houston needs to know that a 
vessel came from New Orleans, and prior to that, that it came from 
Mobile. The commenter noted the Coast Guard needs to be able to track a 
vessel moving through the Gulf of Mexico.
    As mentioned above, we have added item (2)(ix) in Table 160.206, 
which, under Sec.  160.206(a), requires vessels to list their last port 
or place of departure. So whether a vessel is coming from a foreign 
port or place or another U.S. port or place, the COTP in Houston in the 
commenter's example will have access to that information. If a COTP is 
interested in identifying the track of a vessel once it is in U.S. 
waters, there are other means and methods (e.g., AIS and VTS data) at 
the COTP's disposal which can be used to determine this without 
requiring vessels to list more than their last U.S. port or place of 
departure.
    One commenter stated that while it may be outside the scope of this 
rulemaking, the Coast Guard should add the following recommendation to 
the scope of the rulemaking. The commenter recommends that adding more 
data elements that combine Coast Guard reporting with additional 
customs reporting could eliminate an entire set of paperwork that is 
processed for the CBP, namely, CBP Form I-418, Passenger List--Crew 
List. The commenter noted that this is not the first time the commenter 
has made this recommendation and that, if adopted, the change would 
save both the private sector and government agencies a great deal of 
time and money. Another commenter stated that many other improvements 
can be made to this reporting system and repeated a past suggestion for 
a working group of users sitting together with the Coast Guard and the 
CBP to identify opportunities

[[Page 5296]]

for improving and streamlining the report.
    We are working with the CBP to address any eNOAD application issues 
related to Form I-418. Regarding the form itself, the CBP has noted 
that Form I-418, which is used by Masters, owners, or agents of vessels 
in complying with sections 231 and 251 of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act, is completed upon the vessel's arrival at its first 
port in the United States. See 75 FR 1069, January 8, 2010. The CBP is 
looking for ways to streamline and automate that process (see the CBP 
supporting statement for information collection 1651-0103). We have not 
made a change from the proposed rule based on this comment.
    We remain open to suggestions for improving the eNOAD reporting 
system. We have forwarded the suggestion for a working group to the 
responsible Coast Guard office. Our focus here, however, is on specific 
comments on the revisions to the CFR that we proposed in our NPRM or 
specific comments on how we might best revise NOAD regulations. We have 
made no changes from the proposed rule based on these comments.
    One commenter stated that the massive amount of reporting 
information and duplicate reports are indicative of a system that is 
``working harder and not smarter.'' The commenter presented as an 
example that the Coast Guard proposes NOAs that require four vessel 
identifiers. The commenter stated that this means that on every NOA, we 
are reporting the name, call sign, official number, and now the MMSI 
number, and that three of these are unique vessel identifiers.
    In Sec.  160.206(a) and item (1) in Table 160.206, we require 
submission of the vessel's name, call sign, IMO international number 
(or an official number if no IMO number), and, if applicable, MMSI 
number, because multiple vessels may carry the same name. These four 
NOA data elements allow us to more quickly either authenticate the 
vessel's reported identity or detect problems with those submitted 
data. In the latter case, we seek to determine if there is an error in 
one or more of the identifiers or if a vessel is attempting to submit 
false or improper identification data.
    One commenter stated that Coast Guard field units are continuously 
telling them that they have to report all broken equipment on the NOA. 
The commenter asserted this is not required currently or in the revised 
regulations, but that there is a lack of clarity on this point. 
Finally, the commenter stated that whenever there is a requirement to 
submit a CG-2692 form (Report of Marine Accident, Injury or Death) for 
a casualty report, they are constantly asked why they did not report it 
on the NOA.
    Regarding broken equipment, we work to ensure that our field units 
know NOA requirements, including the one for reporting broken 
navigation equipment on the NOA. Existing regulations do require an NOA 
report on the operational condition of navigation equipment required by 
33 CFR 164.35, and, as we proposed, Item (6) in Table 160.206 of this 
final rule expands that requirement to report on the operational 
condition of all navigation equipment (including AIS) required in 33 
CFR part 164. Moreover, in a note to Table 160.206, we specify that 
submitting this report in the NOA, ``indicating that navigation 
equipment is not operating properly[,] does not serve as notice to the 
District Commander, Captain of the Port, or Vessel Traffic Center, 
under 33 CFR 164.53,'' which has additional reporting requirements. 
Regarding casualties, if the marine casualty involves a hazardous 
condition as defined by redesignated Sec.  160.202, the notice given to 
the nearest Coast Guard Sector Office or Group Office, as required by 
redesignated 33 CFR 160.216, will satisfy 46 CFR 4.05-1 casualty 
reporting requirements. Note, however, that there is a separate 
requirement under 46 CFR 4.05-10 that requires a written report on Form 
CG-2692. The NOA is not used to satisfy the redesignated Sec.  160.216 
requirements to report hazardous conditions, but in cases where the 
failure of a vessel's navigation equipment creates a hazardous 
condition, the question as to why that condition was not reported on 
the NOA is appropriate.
    One commenter expressed problems discerning the requirements, 
particularly with immigration agencies and the CBP, regarding whether 
to use the spelling from a national passport or a U.S. Visa on our 
reports.
    We cannot address issues that pertain to the CBP or other agency 
regulations that involve immigrants; for purposes of Coast Guard NOAD 
regulations, however, we have left it to the owner or operator to 
determine which document more accurately reflects the spelling of a 
person's name. For questions pertaining to CBP electronic passenger and 
crew manifest requirements, please visit the NVMC's World Wide Web site 
at http://www.nvmc.uscg.gov or call the CBP at 409-727-0285, extension 
238.
    One commenter who occasionally deals in lightering, particularly in 
other areas of the world, was not sure whether to list a lightering 
location as a last port, because it is not officially a terminal or a 
dock. The commenter expressed problems with explaining to Masters of 
his company's vessels how to deal with transits of U.S. and 
international canals, such as the Panama Canal. The commenter offered 
an example of whether a vessel would need to report coming through the 
Chesapeake and Delaware Canal on a nearby coastwise voyage.
    If a vessel is engaged in lightering, then the lightering position 
would not be considered a port or place under 33 CFR part 160, and this 
not would trigger part 160 applicability unless, while lightering, the 
vessel anchors or moors in the navigable waters of the United States or 
at a deepwater port. If a vessel anchors or moors in foreign waters 
while it is lightering, than that lightering position would be 
considered a foreign port or place and must be included on vessel's NOA 
under Sec.  160.206 (a) and item (2)(i) in Table 160.206, if it was one 
of the last five foreign ports or places visited. Regarding canals, if 
a vessel is only transiting through a canal, and does not anchor or 
moor during that transit, then it would not be considered as arriving 
at or departing from a port or place.
    We had proposed to add new fields for crewmember passport country 
of issuance and passport date of expiration in Table 160.206(4)(v) & 
(vi), and for persons in addition to crew, passport country of issuance 
and passport date of expiration fields in Table 160.206(5)(v) & (vi). 
We have not included these new fields in our final rule because we 
consider this information to be a matter of record based on CBP 
requirements.
5. NOD Information
    One commenter discussing fishing industry vessels stated that the 
largest issue with the proposed rule is the time it takes to get an 
accurate NOD list of persons sailing and to input these data into 
electronic format for transmittal to the Coast Guard. As further 
discussed in the ``When to Submit an NOD'' section below, VI.A.8, based 
on comments on the NPRM, we have eliminated our proposal to require 
NODs. We have deleted Sec.  160.213(a); this final rule does not 
require NODs.
6. Electronic Submission
    One commenter recommended that the Coast Guard allow continued use 
of the Excel Workbook format for submission of NOADs via email, which 
the commenter believes is more process-effective. The commenter noted 
that some vessels are not set up to connect directly to the Internet to 
make real-time submissions, and that it is more process-effective for 
the ship's Master to submit

[[Page 5297]]

updates to the NVMC directly rather than by going through a vessel 
agency service. The commenter stated that the format and process for 
submitting NOADs and updates in the Excel format has been of minimum 
administrative burden for their Masters and is easily supportable 
without requiring direct real-time Internet connectivity from the ship.
    Under this final rule, and as indirectly reflected in the proposed 
rule, we will accept the following electronic forms: Submission through 
the NVMC eNOAD World Wide Web site, XML, which includes Excel Workbook 
format. XML spreadsheets may be submitted via email to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e695878895a688908b85c893958581c8818990"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d1a2b0bfa291bfa7bcb2ffa4a2b2b6ffb6bea7">[email protected]</span></a>. Based on this comment, we are revising the final 
rule from the proposed Sec.  160.210 to specify that these currently 
available options, or other methods made available on http://www.nvmc.uscg.gov in the future, may be used to satisfy this 
requirement.
    One commenter stated that many commercial fishing vessels do not 
have the capability to submit NOAD information electronically, and 
therefore the rule creates an additional administrative workload that 
may require hiring additional administrative personnel because the 
information would have to be sent by a shore-based office.
    We have sought to impose the least burden possible while still 
meeting our regulatory objectives of obtaining information necessary to 
help ensure that we reach our PWSA objective of enhancing the safety 
and security of U.S. ports and waterways and to permit vessel traffic 
management. Many commercial fishing vessels would not be required to 
submit NOADs because they would qualify for an exemption, such as 
operating exclusively within a single COTP zone (Sec.  
160.204(a)(5)(ii)) or being a U.S. vessel 300 gross tons or less, 
engaged in commercial service and not coming from a foreign port or 
place (Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(vi)).
    Regarding fishing vessels and other vessels, we do not believe our 
final rule will cause additional costs based on some vessels not having 
the capability for electronic submission other than vessels we have 
already estimated costs for in the regulatory analysis (RA). CBP 
requires electronic submission on most, if not all, of the vessels 
added by our final rule. Computer and internet access costs were 
captured by CBP in its 2005 Electronic Transmission of Passenger and 
Crew Manifests for Vessels and Aircraft (aka Advance Passenger 
Information System or APIS) final rule (70 FR 17820, April 7, 2005) 
that required all commercial vessels (minus ferries) ``arriving in the 
United States from any place outside the United States,'' to submit 
arrival manifests electronically; therefore, we did not include the 
cost of computers or internet service for vessels affected by our rule. 
The Coast Guard assumed that vessel owners and operators will submit 
arrival information from onboard the vessel and not leverage any 
efficiencies from centralized fleet reporting.
    We did revise the current Mississippi-River-and-tributaries 
exemption, but we anticipate that most of those vessels will be able to 
take advantage of other exemptions afforded in the final rule such as 
the single-COTP-zone or U.S.-vessel-300-gross-tons-or-less exemptions. 
The Coast Guard does not collect information specifically on vessels 
that transit solely on the Mississippi and its tributaries; therefore, 
we are unable to quantify the number of vessels that take advantage of 
the current exemption.
    Also, in our final rule we created an exemption for certain 
ferries. Those on a fixed route between two or more COTP zones qualify 
for an exemption if they make a one-time submission as specified in 
Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(vii) to qualify for the exemption, and are required 
to make future submissions only if their schedules or other submitted 
information changes. This alternative submission would not require a 
computer, and submission of such information has been a common industry 
practice since 2003 to obtain waivers from COTPs, and therefore any 
ferry lacking the capability for electronic submission would not incur 
additional costs as a result of our final rule.
    One commenter noted that limiting eNOAD submissions to this World 
Wide Web-based program may pose problems when severe weather events 
cause power outages; for example, companies did not have Internet 
service post-Hurricane Katrina until cell phone towers were rebuilt and 
cable re-laid. The commenter recommended that the Coast Guard provide 
an alternative method to report to the NVMC.
    This final rule does not limit submissions to only NVMC World Wide 
Web-based applications. It also allows for other electronic forms of 
submission such as email. But in cases where communication 
infrastructure is damaged and telecommunication services are not 
available due to natural disasters such as Katrina, the COTP may waive 
any or all NOA requirements within her or his COTP zone; also, a vessel 
may request a waiver under 33 CFR 160.214 of any or all NOAD 
requirements.
    One commenter noted that it operates between the eastern Caribbean 
and the Mid-Atlantic States, and would like to alert the Coast Guard to 
some obstacles that might arise by requiring only electronic 
submissions. The commenter stated that one of its bases is St. Thomas, 
USVI, and on most of its vessels, the computers--if they have them on 
board--do not support the downloading of the notices or responses to 
the notices. The commenter noted that if its employees go shoreside to 
comply, they need to use Internet cafes that have computers and 
technology dating back to the 1990s. The commenter further stated that 
if they go to the homes of fellow captains, they have dial-up systems 
instead of broadband, and it takes hours to comply, so that doing away 
with paper notification entirely presents an obstacle.
    We understand that some vessel owners may submit shoreside NOAs but 
the Coast Guard does not collect information on the number of vessels 
that utilize this method of NOA submission. For the regulatory 
analysis, we assumed that all NOADs will be submitted from the vessel, 
and not take advantage of efficiencies from centralized fleet 
reporting. As use of the Internet continues to become more popular 
including wireless Internet access via cellular/satellite networks, we 
anticipate greater access to faster Internet transmissions in more 
locations. Also, the vessel Master, owner, or agent may take advantage 
of XML spreadsheets--readily available on the NVMC's World Wide Web 
site--that can be downloaded and retained for future use to minimize 
the time needed to transmit NOAs.
    As stated in the NPRM, mandating electronic submission of NOAs 
allows the Coast Guard to quickly and automatically process, validate, 
and screen arrival notices. See 73 FR 76303, December 16, 2008. As 
discussed in VI.A.12, however, we amended Sec.  160.210(a) to permit 
phone or fax submission of an NOA or an update, in limited 
circumstances.
7. When To Submit an NOA
    As noted in the Exemptions section above, one commenter reported a 
problem with being able to meet the requirement to submit a manifest 
either 96 hours or 1 hour before departure because his youth-program 
sailing vessels, which sometime sail to Canada from Tacoma, WA, do not 
have computers onboard, and there is no wireless Internet or network 
connections in the inlet from which these vessels sail.

[[Page 5298]]

    Under existing Custom and Border Protection requirements in 19 CFR 
4.7b and 4.64, commercial vessels \2\ arriving from a foreign port or 
departing for a foreign port are required to submit arrival or 
departure manifests electronically. This Coast Guard final rule only 
requires NOAs, and those are to be submitted at the same times that CBP 
requires that arrival manifests be submitted. These youth-program 
sailing vessels may not meet CBP's definition of ``commercial vessel'' 
and thus may not trigger CBP requirement, but the Coast Guard may 
consider them vessels in commercial service and thus subject to 33 CFR 
part 160 NOAD requirements, unless they otherwise fit into an 
exemption.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ There are differences in the terms and definitions CBP and 
the Coast Guard use regarding commercial vessels. In 19 CFR 4.7b 
(a), CBP defines ``commercial vessel'' as ``any civilian vessel 
being used to transport persons or property for compensation or 
hire.'' In 33 CFR 160.202, the Coast Guard uses the 46 U.S.C. 2101 
definition of ``commercial service'' (``any type of trade or 
business involving the transportation of goods or individuals, 
except service performed by a combatant vessel'') to identify 
vessels in Sec.  160.203 that are subject to NOAD regulations.
    \3\ For arrival submission times, compare 19 CFR 4.7b(b)(2) with 
33 CFR 160.212(a)(4); for departure submission times, compare 19 CFR 
4.64 (b)(2) with 33 CFR 160.213(a). Because these youth program 
sailing vessels occasionally sail to and from Canada, they would not 
be eligible for the exception of operating within a single COTP zone 
under Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(ii) for such trips because they would be 
leaving the COTP zone and thus not operating exclusively within it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As we noted previously, under Sec.  160.212, the time an NOA must 
be submitted varies based on the duration of the vessel's voyage. Under 
Sec.  160.214, however, a vessel may request a waiver of NOAD 
requirements from the COTPs whose zones it plans to transit. This 
waiver provision allows the COTP to make assessments based on specific 
factors about the vessel or COTP zone that are difficult to reflect in 
a general rule without imposing unnecessary burdens.
    One commenter wrote that lowering the applicability threshold for 
NOA reporting would not impact its fleet, which operates exclusively in 
the Great Lakes, but the commenter found some aspects of the current 
eNOAD reporting timelines to be punitive to vessels trading exclusively 
within the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway system. This commenter 
requests that the number of hours before arrival that an NOA is due, as 
stated in Sec.  160.212, should be reduced to 6 hours for vessels 
engaged in non-ocean-going, short-haul (voyage of 24 hours or less) 
shipping. Also, for voyages of less than 24 hours, vessels may also 
have to contact local COTP.
    We considered this request to relax the timelines in 33 CFR 160.212 
for submitting NOAs and NOA updates for vessels in general engaged in 
non-ocean-going, short-haul shipping, but have determined that this 
information is needed from such vessels on the timelines we proposed so 
that the Coast Guard and other federal entities have sufficient time to 
screen these vessels. As proposed in the NPRM, however, we did add a 
provision that would allow an NOA submission 60 minutes or more before 
departure for U.S. vessels 300 gross tons or less, engaged in 
commercial service and not carrying CDC, that are coming from a foreign 
port or place on a voyage of less than 24 hours. See Sec.  
160.212(a)(3) and discussion in NPRM at 73 FR 76303, December 16, 2008. 
As discussed below in the Financial Impact section, VI.A.12, in 
response to another comment on the NPRM and provisions in the Boundary 
Waters Treaty (36 Stat. 2448; Treaty Series 548), we have revised Sec.  
160.212(a)(3) to extend its provisions to Canadian-flag vessels 
arriving directly from Canada, via boundary waters, to a U.S. port or 
place in the Great Lakes.
    We note that for vessels subject to the 60-minutes-before-departure 
requirement, under Sec.  160.214, a U.S. or foreign vessel may seek a 
waiver from the requirement for when NOA or NOA updates must be 
submitted. The COTP, who can evaluate the waiver request based on the 
circumstances of the COTP zone in which the vessel will arrive, may 
grant a waiver ``for any vessel or class of vessels upon finding that 
the vessel, route, area of operations, conditions of the voyage, or 
other circumstances are such that application of this subpart is 
unnecessary or impractical for purposes of safety, environmental 
protection, or national security.''
    One commenter asked the Coast Guard to consider allowing vessels 
with a voyage of less than 24 hours to submit an NOA prior to 
departure. The commenter stated that this change would reduce the 
number of NOAs that need to be updated because data are not really 
known until departure. This commenter noted that current discussions of 
the ``Seaborne Highway'' suggest that the number of vessels with 
relatively short port calls and voyage times, and those operating on 
established schedules, is expected to increase. Finally, this commenter 
stated there is an inability to submit NOAs with consecutive ports 
(consolidated NOAs).
    We acknowledge that for vessels making short voyages it would be 
more advantageous to the owner or operator if NOAs could be submitted 
as close to departure as possible. The Coast Guard and other government 
agencies, however, need the time specified in the final rule to analyze 
and act on NOA data. We also need NOAs to reflect current data.
    Section 160.212(a)(3) of this final rule permits U.S. commercial 
vessels of 300 gross tons or less, arriving from a foreign port or 
place on a voyage of less than 24 hours, to submit an NOA up to 60 
minutes before departure. Whether the voyage is short or long, because 
of the nature of their cargo, we require towing vessels moving CDC 
solely between ports or places of the contiguous 48 states, Alaska, and 
the District of Columbia to submit an NOA before departure, but at 
least 12 hours before arrival at the port or place of destination. See 
Sec.  160.212(a)(2).
    As for the inability to submit NOAs with consecutive ports, we note 
that the submission of consolidated NOAs was introduced by a temporary 
rule issued soon after September 11, 2001 (66 FR 50565, October 4, 
2001), and was included in a 2003 final rule (68 FR 9537, February 28, 
2003). Under current regulations, a vessel may submit a consolidated 
NOA if, while on a single voyage, it plans to stop at more than one 
port or place in the United States.
    In the NPRM, we proposed to eliminate Sec.  160.206(d), which 
specifically addresses consolidated NOAs, and to change the NOA data 
required by Sec.  160.206(a) and Table 160.206(2)(iv) & (v) from 
information regarding each U.S. port or place to be visited to 
information for ``the port or place of the United States to be 
visited.'' We proposed this change, which is contained in this final 
rule, because we found that some vessels fail to submit updated crew 
information and cargo information after submitting the consolidated 
NOA. As previously noted, we have redesigned our eNOAD application to 
retain previously submitted information to help reduce the burden of 
preparing subsequent submissions.
    One commenter requested that for U.S.-flag vessels operating on the 
Great Lakes on voyages of less than 24 hours, the Coast Guard reinstate 
a previous requirement that all vessels submit an NOA prior to 
departing the dock. The commenter notes this would avoid subsequent 
amendments caused by changes before departure but after an NOA is 
submitted. The commenter also stated that these vessels pose low 
security risk, and that they will be required to have a Transportation 
Worker Identification Credential (TWIC)

[[Page 5299]]

by April 15, 2009, and thus would not represent a security threat. In 
addition, this commenter recommended that vessels that fuel in Canada 
should be exempt from NOA requirements because there is no demonstrable 
need to file an NOA when simply fueling in Canada. This commenter noted 
that the 24-hour rule does not recognize that changes in vessel plans 
can require an unanticipated fueling in Canada, and that a refueling 
vessel would either have to check down or go to anchor to comply with 
the 24-hour rule if the local Coast Guard COTP does not allow it to 
enter sooner.
    We note that under both the existing regulations (Sec.  
160.212(a)(3)(ii)) and this final rule (Sec.  160.212(a)(4)(ii)), a 
vessel greater than 300 gross tons on a voyage of less than 96 hours 
could submit an NOA just before departure, provided the NOA is 
submitted at least 24 hours before arrival. In this final rule, we 
allow U.S-flag vessels 300 gross tons or less that are coming from a 
foreign port or place to submit an NOA 60 minutes or more prior to 
departure if the voyage is less than 24 hours and the vessel is not 
carrying CDC (see 33 CFR 160.212(a)(3)). As noted immediately above, 
the 60-minute requirement is necessary to provide the Coast Guard and 
other federal agencies an opportunity to screen the vessel's 
passengers, crew, and cargo.
    Regarding updates, for vessels greater than 300 gross tons, Sec.  
160.212(b)(4)(iii) is intended to accommodate unexpected incidents and 
allows vessels on voyages of less than 24 hours to submit an update at 
least 12 hours before arriving in the port or place of destination. For 
U.S. vessels 300 gross tons or less, under Sec.  160.212(b)(3), an NOA 
update may be submitted as late as 6 hours before arrival.
8. When To Submit an NOD
    One commenter recommended that the Coast Guard remove the proposed 
requirement that U.S.-flag vessels operating between U.S. ports submit 
NODs, because this requirement would impose an excessive administrative 
burden on vessel operators without producing significant offsetting 
security benefits. The commenter stated that the proposed rule would 
require U.S.-flag vessels traveling from one U.S. port to another U.S. 
port, after completing a voyage from a foreign port, to submit NODs--as 
U.S.-flag vessels carrying CDC are required to--even if they have never 
visited a foreign port.
    In response to comments, we have removed the NOD requirement. This 
final rule does not require NODs. We have determined that requiring an 
NOD for a vessel going to a U.S. port is unnecessarily redundant 
because the vessel would also have to submit an NOA for their next U.S. 
port of destination. For vessels departing for a foreign port or place, 
we have not retained our proposed new requirement for an NOD because we 
consider that information to be a matter of record based on CBP 
requirements for vessels departing for a foreign port of place to 
submit departure manifests.
    One commenter noted that, in the discussion of NOAD requirements, 
there is no discussion of how those requirements might impact the CBP's 
reporting requirement for vessels operating under a cruising license, 
specifically, private vessels greater than 300 gross tons. The 
commenter also stated that, while an NOD is not required while 
transiting the same COTP zone, the CBP still requires reporting. The 
commenter further asked whether this reporting will take the place of 
the reporting required if the vessel changes COTP zones.
    We work with the CBP to ensure consistency in reporting 
requirements whenever possible; there may be some differences in 
requirements, because our missions and those of the CBP differ. We do 
not believe our NOA requirements will impact CBP reporting 
requirements, and as we have noted, we have removed our proposed NOD 
requirement.
    To note differences between the CBP electronic-passenger-and-crew-
arrival-manifest requirements and our NOA requirements, compare 8 CFR 
231.1 and 19 CFR 4.7b with 33 CFR part 160, subpart C. For the CBP 
electronic-passenger-and-crew-departure-manifest requirements, see 8 
CFR 231.2 and 19 CFR 4.64; see also 8 CFR 231.3. For each regulation, 
you should ensure that you provide the information required.
9. Force Majeure
    One commenter stated that with severe weather conditions, 
requirements for eNOA filing may negatively impact vessel safety 
because a vessel may be subject to financial penalty if it deviates to 
another port or harbor. The commenter also noted that in addition to 
weather conditions, vessel destinations can change frequently and on 
short notice because of port and dock congestion, ice conditions, and 
cargo availability.
    We believe that our final rule properly addresses unanticipated or 
unforecasted severe weather conditions. Vessels that are forced to 
deviate to another port or harbor because of severe weather may claim 
Force Majeure, notify the local COTP of arrival, and provide the 
limited information required under Sec.  160.215. The NOA update 
requirements in Sec.  160.208 are designed to accommodate changes in 
arrival caused by non-weather factors, such as port and dock congestion 
or cargo availability. Under 33 CFR 160.204(a)(5)(vi), U.S. vessels 300 
gross tons or less, engaged in commercial service, not coming from a 
foreign port or place, and not carrying CDC, are exempted from meeting 
this NOA requirement.
10. Need for NOAD Data and Agency Collaboration in Obtaining It
    Many of the comments in this category were focused on the 
interaction of Coast Guard and CBP requirements. We present these 
first.
    One commenter stated that the CBP and the Coast Guard should 
collaborate to make current software more efficient and less confusing, 
and to eliminate repetitive entries. The commenter noted that the same 
data are captured currently by the CBP, so additional reporting is 
burdensome and unfair because it serves no justifiable security 
purpose. Also, the commenter stated that the CBP uses real-time data to 
screen passengers when they leave Canada and when they enter the United 
States. Another commenter noted that there is no point in collecting 
and submitting the same information gathered and recorded by the CBP.
    Another commenter noted that the CBP and the Coast Guard have the 
same security goals, and that they should improve information sharing 
to lessen the demand placed on vessel operators by duplicative 
information requests. Another commenter stated that the CBP and the 
Coast Guard undertake impractical and financially irresponsible, 
duplicative efforts, noting that all of its international ferry 
passengers are pre-inspected by the CBP at the Victoria, BC terminal 
and are then inspected on arrival at Port Angeles terminal, and that 
every passenger must complete the International Crossing Form (IMO 24-
2). Ferry operator employees provide vehicle license plate numbers to 
the CBP. The commenter also notes that under this system, there would 
be multiple layers of security for ferries, but still only one layer of 
security for the land border, which represents direct competition for 
ferries.
    Another commenter recommended that the CBP and the Coast Guard 
compare Form I-418 data with eNOAD submissions and then add other data 
fields to eliminate the need for a paper Immigration and Naturalization 
Service (INS, now the CBP) Form I-418 (Passenger List--Crew List). 
Another commenter also sought the elimination

[[Page 5300]]

of paper Form I-418 through programming changes to the eNOAD system to 
capture all necessary crew data. The second commenter noted that 
vessels are still required to file a paper Form I-418 with the CBP, 
which contains virtually the same data elements that are collected in 
the eNOAD, with the exception of the following three data elements in 
I-418:
    1. Will crewmember be performing longshore work while in the U.S.? 
(yes/no)
    2. Date crewmember joined the ship.
    3. Date crewmember separated from the ship.
    One commenter saw the need for the addition of a field to declare a 
valid International Carrier Bond, because this information would assist 
the CBP in tracking fines related to APIS submissions and reduce the 
number of intent-to-fine notices being delivered to the wrong vessel 
agent.
    Finally, a commenter stated that the Coast Guard and other parts of 
the Department of Homeland Security should coordinate their information 
needs, and noted that the proposed reporting system would require 
vessel operators to capture and forward information already captured by 
the CBP. Also, this commenter stated that creating duplicate 
information taken from several sources by different authorities or 
processes wastes time, resources, and effort and introduces the 
opportunity for error.
    We agree that we should collaborate with the CBP. We have taken 
steps to eliminate duplicate reporting requirements and have 
established the NVMC World Wide Web site and eNOAD application to 
facilitate receipt of information required by both the Coast Guard and 
CBP. (For more details on the NVMC World Wide Web site, see VI.A.4, NOA 
Information, above.) In 2013, NVMC modified the eNOAD application to 
include fields which capture the Form I-418 information, allowing for 
electronic submission of this information. We will continue to work 
towards not only providing a single window for reporting, but also an 
application that is both more user-friendly and efficient.
    As we stated in the NPRM preamble, we have worked with the CBP to 
avoid requiring a vessel to submit the same information to our agencies 
separately, but our agencies do have separate missions. The information 
we need to better enable us to fulfill our missions, for example under 
33 U.S.C. 1225--to prevent damage to structures on, in, or adjacent to 
the navigable waters of the United States, safe vessel traffic 
management, as well as protecting those navigable waters--may differ 
somewhat from information the CBP requires to implement the laws 
defining its missions. To the extent, however, that we both require the 
same information of vessels, we do not require separate submissions of 
that information to satisfy our respective regulations in 19 CFR and 33 
CFR. The eNOAD application allows a vessel owner to fill out one NOA, 
which is disseminated to both the Coast Guard and CBP upon submittal.
    This final rule requires submission of general cargo information as 
well as whether the vessel is carrying CDC, but the CBP requires more 
detailed information about the cargo. See 19 CFR 4.7. While the CBP has 
identified the eNOAD as an approved system for submitting vessel crew 
manifest data to the CBP (70 FR 17820, 17828, April 7, 2005, ``vessel 
carriers must use the eNOAD or XML transmission methods to transmit 
required manifest information''), in 19 CFR 4.7(b)(2) it identifies a 
separate means for submission of electronic cargo declaration 
information to the CBP: The vessel Automated Manifest System (AMS) or 
any electronic data interchange system approved by CBP and announced in 
the Federal Register to replace the AMS system for this purpose.
    We agree that we share security goals with the CBP. As we noted 
above and in our NPRM (73 FR 76303, Dec. 16, 2008), however, our 
agencies have different missions. We have worked with the CBP to avoid 
requiring a vessel to submit the same information to our agencies 
separately. The eNOAD application allows an arriving or departing ship 
to satisfy both agencies' crew and passenger information requirements 
with a single submission to NVMC. See 33 CFR 160.206 and 19 CFR 4.7b.
    Regarding international ferry passengers, as noted in the 
Exemptions section above, we have added an NOAD reporting exemption for 
certain ferries. To qualify for this exemption, the ferry operator must 
submit the schedule for the ferry to the COTP for each port or place of 
destination listed in the schedule by April 30, 2015 or at least 24 
hours in advance of the first date and time of arrival listed on the 
schedule after Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(vii) of this final rule becomes 
effective. Ferry operators seeking this exemption must also submit 
other information listed in new paragraph Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(vii), 
including a 24-hour contact number. This exemption more closely aligns 
our regulations with the CBP's advance electronic passenger or crew 
member manifest exception for ferries in 19 CFR 4.7b(c)(1).
    We are working with the CBP to address any eNOAD issues related to 
Form I-418, which calls for more information about passengers and crew 
than is required by the Coast Guard and CBP to be submitted 
electronically. As proposed in the NPRM, we have removed the option, 
formerly in Sec.  160.206(c), of submitting Form I-418 to satisfy crew 
and passenger information reporting requirements. Regarding the form 
itself, which is used by Masters, owners, or agents of vessels in 
complying with sections 231 and 251 of the Immigration and Nationality 
Act, the CBP has noted that it is completed upon arrival of the vessel. 
See 75 FR 1069, January 8, 2010. The CBP is looking for ways to 
streamline and automate that process (see CBP supporting statement for 
information collection 1651-0103).
    Currently, we permit multiple methods to submit an NOA. This final 
rule, which mandates electronic submission, will more closely align our 
procedures with those of the CBP, which currently receives advance 
electronic crew and passenger manifest information through the eNOAD 
application.
    The request to add a field to declare a valid International Carrier 
Bond is beyond the scope of this Coast Guard rulemaking. We have 
forwarded this comment, however, to the CBP for their consideration.
    One commenter noted that requirements for vessel operators to 
collect passenger, crew, and vessel movement information in the NOAD 
are duplicative and costly, and may produce misinformation.
    We disagree. For reasons stated in the preamble of our NPRM, we do 
not view our NOA requirements as duplicative. We have removed our 
proposed requirement for vessels to submit an NOD.
    One commenter stated that the Coast Guard's proposed changes 
represent an unnecessary redundancy when transiting between U.S. ports, 
and that this undue burden increases the potential for errors. The 
commenter recommended that information submitted in the NOD should be 
shared with the recipients of the NOA to avoid having a separate notice 
with the same data being input by the owner or operator, and that only 
one notice should be required per voyage.
    We acknowledge that there is unnecessary redundancy in the 
submittal of both an NOA and NOD for consecutive U.S. port visits. As 
previously mentioned, we have

[[Page 5301]]

eliminated our proposed NOD requirement.
    One commenter stated there is no reason why a vessel would need to 
report in again (i.e., after submitting an initial NOA) while the 
vessel is equipped with and monitored by AIS, especially if the vessel 
is participating in a cooperative VTS system. The commenter notes that 
the Coast Guard would already have information on the vessel's previous 
whereabouts at foreign ports.
    We need the information collected on the NOA to fulfill our PWSA 
regulatory objective of obtaining information necessary to help enhance 
the safety and security of U.S. ports and waterways. Neither AIS nor 
VTS requirements provide the data, such as changes in passengers or 
crew, called for by NOA requirements. The Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(ii) 
exemption for a vessel operating in a single COTP zone reduces the 
number of NOAs that need to be submitted while still ensuring that NOAs 
can be used by a COTP to find out what vessels will be entering his or 
her COTP zone and who will be on board those vessels.
    To the extent that a single transmission is the best way to meet 
agency requirements, we agree with one commenter who stated that the 
Coast Guard and sister agencies should coordinate information needs and 
submission timing so that a single NOAD submission will meet the 
information needs of all appropriate agencies. In addition to the CBP, 
we have worked with other agencies that need information from ships 
arriving at or departing from U.S. ports or places. For example, the 
Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation also allows the eNOAD to 
be used as a means of satisfying SLSDC requirements. See Seaway Notice 
No. 6-2008 (http://www.greatlakes-seaway.com/en/pdf/navigation/notice20080311.pdf).
    As noted above, based on NPRM comments, we have eliminated our 
proposed NOD requirement. We note that this change in no way alters 
CBP's current electronic passenger departure manifest and electronic 
crew member departure manifest requirements. See 19 CFR 4.64.
    One commenter noted that expansion of NOAD and AIS requirements to 
additional vessel populations and transit events will enhance MDA. The 
commenter stated that while the current eNOAD system adequately tracks 
vessels entering U.S. waters bound for a U.S. port or departing a U.S. 
port, in many cases it does not adequately track vessel movements while 
a given vessel transits among several U.S. ports. We agree; the 
expansion of NOA and AIS requirements implemented by this final rule 
will enhance MDA and greatly improve our ability to track vessel 
movements from one U.S. port or place to another.
    One commenter stated that the proposed rule is not feasible, citing 
an example of a seafood company that has 10 vessels, 8 of which have 
over 100 persons sailing, most of whom are contracted on the day of 
sailing. Noting that these persons have already undergone background 
checks prior to being offered employment, the commenter questions the 
security benefit from the added workload this final rule will place on 
the fishing vessel industry and the Coast Guard.
    As noted above, we have sought to impose the least burden possible 
while still meeting our regulatory objectives of obtaining information 
necessary to help ensure the safety and security of U.S. ports and 
waterways and to enhance vessel traffic management. A vessel large 
enough to have 100 persons on board may not qualify for the exemption 
for U.S. vessels 300 gross tons or less, engaged in commercial service 
not coming from a foreign port or place (Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(vi)), and 
may sail too widely to qualify for the exemption for a vessel operating 
exclusively in a single COTP zone (Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(ii)), but NOAs 
are intended to provide a layer of security that allows the Coast Guard 
and other federal agencies to act on current information about persons 
on vessels planning to enter U.S. waters, transiting U.S. waters, or 
about to arrive in a U.S. port or place. Background checks provide a 
layer of security, but they do not provide these real-time data that 
better enable us to prevent or respond to a maritime transportation 
security incident.
    One commenter stated that DHS regulations in 8 CFR part 231 
governing submission of arrival and departure manifests state that 
requirements for electronic submission of manifests do not apply to 
vessels arriving directly from Canada and that this should be formally 
acknowledged in this NOAD rule.
    We disagree with this commenter's reading of 8 CFR part 231. 
Paragraph (b)(2) of 8 CFR 231.1 does contain an exception to the Form 
I-94 requirement for vessels ``arriving directly from Canada on a trip 
originating in that country,'' and 8 CFR 231.2(b)(2) contains a Form I-
94 exception for vessels ``departing on a trip directly for and 
terminating in Canada.'' However, both of these sections point to 
requirements to submit manifests electronically. Section 231.1(a) 
points to 19 CFR 4.7b requirements for the ``electronic transmission of 
arrival manifests covering passengers and crew members,'' and Sec.  
231.2(a) points to 19 CFR 4.64 requirements for the ``electronic 
transmission of departure manifests covering passengers and crew 
members.''
    One commenter requested that the Coast Guard reevaluate the final 
rule after the AIS requirements have taken effect and the Nationwide 
AIS (NAIS) monitoring infrastructure is in place, and then assess the 
continued need for NOAD requirements. The commenter notes that once AIS 
is fully implemented, it could obviate the need for NOAD reports and 
foreign crew data would continue to be provided through CBP reports.
    As recommended, we will reevaluate our need for NOAD data after the 
AIS requirements in this final rule become effective and the 
development of AIS application-specific messaging that mirrors eNOAD 
(see ``Broader Use of AIS'' discussion in VI.B.2). Section 160.206 and 
paragraph 164.46(a) of this final rule reflect the different nature of 
information called for by the NOA and AIS requirements. To the extent 
that AIS can be relied on in the future to provide information that 
satisfies needs currently met only by NOAD data, we will consider 
revising NOAD regulations.
    One commenter noted that some areas that CDC vessels transit have 
VTS or AIS coverage, or both, and stated that this coverage provides 
the Coast Guard with an excellent awareness of movements within the 
port area. The commenter writes that these systems should enable the 
Coast Guard to monitor the movements of these vessels within a port 
area without the need for frequent NOA updates and delays created by 
the current system. The commenter recommends that the Coast Guard use 
VTS and/or AIS coverage to track vessel movements in the port area 
instead of requiring frequent NOA submissions for vessels carrying CDC 
within a port.
    We disagree with this recommendation. A combination of NOA, AIS, 
and VTS data provides a more complete picture that better enables us to 
meet our regulatory objectives of obtaining information necessary to 
help enhance the safety and security of U.S. ports and waterways. Not 
only would we be unaware of passenger and crew information for these 
vessels, but we would not have advance notice and other essential data 
obtained through

[[Page 5302]]

NOAs to put security measures in place for vessels carrying CDC.
    One commenter stated that just one or two typing errors on a crew 
list can be repeated multiple times in extremely short order. The 
commenter noted that Houston is the petrochemical capital of the 
Americas, and is fed by surrounding industrial ports, the majority of 
which are in the same COTP zone. The commenter stated that its ships 
bounce between these ports on a daily basis and that the port chemical 
trading pattern occurs between these ports like a ball in a pinball 
machine. The commenter noted that transits can be as long as 16 hours 
sea-buoy-to-sea-buoy, and as short as 4 hours, and that combined with 
reports for small cargo parcels, the NOA for the next port, and the NOD 
for the existing port, there could be as many as five reports 
simultaneously, with the majority of the massive amount of information 
required by each being virtually the same.
    Based on comments on the proposed rule, we eliminated our proposed 
NOD requirement. If a vessel is operating in the same COTP zone and is 
not carrying CDC, then the single-COTP-zone exemption in Sec.  
160.204(a)(5)(ii) would apply. We expanded our definition of ``CDC 
residue'' in our ``Notification of Arrival in U.S. Ports; Certain 
Dangerous Cargoes'' final rule (75 FR 59617, September 28, 2010). This 
revision, which reflects the reduced risks associated with CDC reside, 
allows more vessels to take advantage of the single-COTP-zone 
exception. For vessels carrying CDC cargo, however, the COTP must 
evaluate all factors associated with the cargo, vessel, crew, and the 
infrastructure in the port and determine if it is necessary to utilize 
Coast Guard resources to mitigate any potential threat that the vessel 
cargo may pose. Vessels carrying CDC also have the option to request a 
waiver from the local COTP under Sec.  160.214.
    In regards to reporting information, we are working towards 
eliminating the need to reenter data that are still applicable to the 
next NOA submitted via the eNOAD; through future software upgrades, we 
expect to decrease the amount of time spent on data entry with respect 
to both the NOA and NOD.
    One commenter noted that, in the past, massive updates and 
reporting have resulted in industry delays and confusion at the 
National Vessel Movement Center and at the local Coast Guard field 
units because they are overwhelmed with too many reports and cannot 
decipher the new information. The commenter noted that these reports 
always result in delays to industry, and that the minimum delay costs 
$1,000 an hour. The commenter asks why the reports cannot be 
simplified, combined, and streamlined by consolidating all of the 
repeated information. The commenter stated that once the information 
has been input on the first report, there should be no reason to repeat 
it continuously because the vessels are screened coming into every port 
by Marine Information for Safety and Law Enforcement (MISLE) at the 
field unit and the information is already contained in the first 
submitted report. Finally, the commenter makes an apparent reference to 
the 60-minutes-before-departure NOA requirement in proposed Sec.  
160.212(a)(3) when noting that for short voyages, the Coast Guard has 
already considered an allowance within its regulations for vessels 
under 300 gross tons, but not for vessels with the aid of AIS and COP 
in place. The commenter noted that no vessel bounces around ports in 
the United States more than chemical tankers, and requested that the 
Coast Guard provide some type of allowance to facilitate this type of 
trade.
    We are working proactively towards streamlining the eNOAD 
application and process. Many vessels that ``bounce around'' ports may 
qualify for an exemption because they are 300 gross tons or less or 
because they are operating exclusively in a single COTP-zone, but these 
exemptions are limited to vessels not carrying CDC. Vessels carrying 
CDC do not qualify for these exemptions because of the risk associated 
with their cargo. Also, chemical tankers departing to another COTP zone 
will need to submit an NOA. The infrastructure, assets, and other 
factors in each COTP zone may be different, creating a different level 
of risk for the zone. Each COTP will need to evaluate this risk and 
determine if there are any additional criteria or safeguards that will 
need to be put in place.
11. Scope and Scale
    One commenter noted that the rule has direct implications for a 
transit ferry system for islands in Casco Bay, and would impose a 
significant economic and administrative burden for that industry. The 
commenter recommended that the Coast Guard consider the scope and scale 
of the rule, and not underestimate the significant economic impact or 
overestimate the necessity of the rule.
    This final rule will not impact the Casco Bay ferry system because 
their vessels operate in a single COTP zone and therefore will be 
exempted. If Casco Bay ferry system chooses to operate in two or more 
COTP zones then it would need to provide the COTPs in those zones a 
one-time submission of their schedule and the information requested in 
Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(vii) to qualify for an exemption from standard NOA 
reporting.
    We gave considerable consideration to the proposed rule and 
determined it is necessary to increase MDA by extending NOAD 
requirements for vessels that were not previously covered under part 
160, but based on comments we received on the NPRM we have made 
revisions. We have revised our regulatory analysis to note existing CBP 
requirements and to reflect changes from requirements that the Coast 
Guard proposed in the NPRM and those we included in this final rule.
    We expect this final rule to impose minimal regulatory costs on 
industry as a result of our elimination of the proposed NOD 
requirements, the addition of several exemptions and an exception, and 
the addition of only three NOA information fields that are new to 
industry. Also, as noted above in the ``Exemptions'' preamble 
discussion, based on comments on the NPRM, we have added an exemption 
for certain ferries in Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(vii).
12. Financial Impact
    We received various comments on the financial impact of the rule. 
Commenters noted that companies will incur computer software, 
programming, and hardware costs to process and protect data called for 
by this rule; that the cost of this added regulatory compliance is 
significant; that this rule presents an economic burden to marine 
operators already having financial difficulties; that there are 
substantial costs to capturing, coding, and transmitting data required 
by NOAD regulations; that requirements present a negative economic 
impact during a bad economy and a negative impact and threat to the 
viability of local economies; and that NOAD data collection will add a 
big administrative burden to passenger vessel operators.
    The Coast Guard estimated the NOAD costs of the rule based on the 
rule's requirements and current CBP regulations. The additional cost 
for U.S. vessel owners and operators is for the new NOA fields on the 
NOA form; only three of these fields are new to industry. See the 
regulatory analysis in the docket for further detail. Any vessel coming 
from or departing to a foreign port or place is required to submit an 
electronic NOAD under CBP regulations, which require the use of a 
computer and associated hardware and software; therefore, we did not 
include the cost of a computer and other associated costs

[[Page 5303]]

such as programming, hardware and software for the affected vessel 
population in this rule. Based on labor costs and the time to fill in 
the information for the three fields of data that are new to industry, 
we estimate it will cost a vessel owner or operator less than 1 dollar 
per trip to submit the additional arrival information. The Coast Guard 
attempted to reduce the financial impact of the NOA requirements on 
vessel owners and operators by adding exemptions and an exception based 
on comments from the NPRM. Additionally, the Coast Guard more closely 
aligned its requirements to CBP regulations in an effort to reduce the 
financial burden on industry and we also eliminated our proposed NOD 
requirement.
    One commenter requested that the Coast Guard consider the 
cumulative financial and administrative burden for maritime operators 
from this final rule, which comes in addition to other costs associated 
with regulations for TWIC, stability, discharges, STCW, other licensing 
changes, security plans, etc.
    We have considered the cumulative impacts associated with this 
final rule. Please see the AIS Cumulative Impact section of the 
regulatory analysis in the docket, including Table 22, Cumulative 
Impacts of AIS Final Rule. Executive Order 13563 underscored Executive 
Order 12866's directive for government agencies to tailor their 
regulations to impose the least burden on society by taking into 
account the cost of cumulative regulations. The Coast Guard and DHS are 
working to implement this Order.
    In this final rule, we have sought to reduce the burden on industry 
by choosing the least-cost alternative with the use of Class B AIS 
devices for certain vessel classes given the statutory basis for AIS 
carriage, where ``no action'' is not an option. This allows us to meet 
our regulatory objectives of obtaining information necessary to help 
enhance the safety and security of United States ports and waterways 
and to enhance vessel traffic management. Moreover, regarding passenger 
vessels, in this final rule we are not adopting the threshold of 50 or 
more passengers we proposed in the NPRM. Instead, we are setting the 
threshold at vessels certificated to carry more than 150 passengers, 
which is similar to the current threshold of more than 150 passengers 
for hire. See 33 CFR 164.46(a)(3)(i) and (iii) (2013). Other than 
certain dredges, all of the vessels this final rule add to those 
currently required to install and use AIS (see Table 6 in the RA) are 
covered by 46 U.S.C. 70114(a)(1)(A) and (C) which give no discretion to 
the Secretary. Based on our analysis, all vessels moving certain 
dangerous cargo and vessels certificated to carry more than 150 
passengers are already covered by the 46 U.S.C. 70114(a)(1)(A) and (C), 
MTSA length threshold. In the regulatory analysis in the docket for 
review, we estimated the costs to industry for the NOA and AIS portions 
of this rule. From our analysis, the NOA portion of this rule adds a 
present value discounted cost of about $201,619 over the 10-year period 
of analysis using a 7 percent discount rate for all vessel owners and 
operators that must comply with NOA requirements. Our final rule adds 
less than 1 dollar per vessel trip for owners and operators to comply 
with the NOA portion of this rule. For AIS, we present a cumulative 
impact of the 2003 MTSA AIS final rule and this final rule, in the 
regulatory analysis available in the docket for review.
    For NOA, and in our effort to be as least burdensome as possible, 
the Coast Guard more closely aligned its NOA regulations with CBP 
regulations to make it easier to satisfy both requirements through a 
single submission.
    One commenter disagreed with our proposal to expand the 
applicability of NOAD regulations and noted that this revision would be 
disproportionately costly to its towing vessels which operate on the 
Great Lakes, and to small businesses, because its tugs do not have 
onboard computers, Internet access, or facsimile capability, and 
because its offices that are capable of submitting NOAD notices 
electronically to the NVMC are not manned 24 hours a day, 7 days a 
week, 365 days per year. The commenter notes that the nature of Great 
Lakes shipping involves short transits between the United States and 
Canada, with frequent border crossings, and that any form of electronic 
submission disproportionately affects this population of vessels and 
small businesses. This commenter recommended that vessels 300 gross 
tons or less arriving from a foreign port should have a more cost-
effective avenue of reporting, such as verbal [spoken] notification and 
electronic notification within 48 hours.
    Based on this comment regarding vessels 300 gross tons or less, and 
provisions in the Boundary Waters Treaty (36 Stat. 2448; Treaty Series 
548), we are extending provisions in Sec.  160.212(a)(3) to Canadian-
flag vessels arriving directly from Canada, via boundary waters, to a 
United States port or place on the Great Lakes. Such vessels 300 gross 
tons or less and on a voyage of less than 24 hours may submit an NOA as 
late as 60 minutes before departure from the foreign port or place.
    Under the waiver section in subpart C, Sec.  160.214, a COTP may 
grant a waiver of some or all of the NOA requirements for a given 
vessel in his or her COTP zone, if, based on the COTP's assessment, a 
waiver is warranted. As we stated above in response to a comment 
regarding a different type of vessel without a computer on board, if 
the COTP determines that the situation warrants it, he or she may grant 
a waiver. Further, the COTP may require as a condition of the waiver 
that, instead of NOA data being submitted to the NVMC via methods 
specified in Sec.  160.210, the NOA data be conveyed to the COTP via an 
alternative means. We do not believe that a blanket exemption for 
towing vessels coming from a foreign port or places on the Great Lakes 
is warranted. In Sec.  160.212(a)(3) of the final rule, we permit NOAs 
from certain vessels to be submitted up to 60 minutes before departure. 
However, to maintain sufficient MDA, we do need NOA data on vessels, 
persons, and cargo coming to the United States from foreign ports or 
places, even if the foreign port or place is a short distance away.
    One commenter stated that the rule understates the initial cost of 
compliance because it does not account for additional crew overtime 
incurred by requiring vessels to wait to depart from and arrive at the 
United States, the cost of Internet access, computer/Internet 
installation, and computer training for crews. The commenter noted that 
the rule places a disproportionate burden on vessels 300 gross tons or 
less and on small businesses.
    We do not believe that we underestimated the initial cost of 
compliance. Since the CBP's Electronic Transmission of Passenger and 
Crew Manifests for Vessels and Aircraft final rule (70 FR 17820, April 
7, 2005) precedes our rule for NOA requirements for vessels coming from 
a foreign port or place, we removed the costs associated with the 
submittal of NOAs and the computer cost for vessels that make these 
transits because the CBP's final rule already requires electronic 
submission and subsequently estimated these costs in the cost analysis 
for its APIS final rule; therefore, we have revised our regulatory 
analysis accordingly and removed the costs associated with NOAs for 
vessels coming from a foreign port or place. Based on NVMC data, the 
Coast Guard estimates that about 2,500 foreign flag vessels 300 gross 
tons or less come to the United States from a foreign port; we estimate 
about 500 of these vessels

[[Page 5304]]

transit two or more COTP zones; the associated cost for these vessels 
is presented in the regulatory analysis. A discussion of the population 
appears on page 24 in the NOA cost analysis section of the regulatory 
analysis available in the docket for review. The Coast Guard does not 
collect information on whether vessel owners submit arrival information 
from shoreside facilities; for the purpose of our analysis and for 
tractability, we assume vessel owners would submit arrival information 
from onboard the vessel. Even with this conservative assumption, as 
noted previously, we expect this rule to impose minimal regulatory 
costs on industry as a result of our elimination of the proposed NOD 
requirements, the addition of several exemptions and exceptions and the 
addition of only three NOA information fields that are new to industry. 
We note that under Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(vi) of this final rule, U.S. 
vessels 300 gross tons or less, engaged in commercial service not 
coming from a foreign port or place and not carrying CDC are exempted.
    The Coast Guard views U.S. vessels operating strictly on a domestic 
route as posing a reduced safety and security threat and we have 
incorporated several exemptions to exclude vessels operating solely in 
the United States. See 33 CFR 160.204. Certain vessels are still 
required to submit a NOA, however, so that COTPs can be made aware of 
vessels planning to enter his or her zone, and for the Coast Guard to 
schedule inspections, and possibly establish safety or security zones.
    One commenter asked the Coast Guard to consider the cumulative 
economic impact of the NOAD rule on ferry companies serving 
international routes. The commenter noted that, viewed in isolation, 
each regulatory proposal (e.g., TWIC, TWIC readers, DOT passenger 
vessel accessibility requirements, EPA vessel discharge permits for 
vessel incidental discharges, EPA vessel air emission restrictions, 
passenger weight limitations and vessel stability revisions, and vessel 
speed limits for the right whale) may have some justification and its 
cost to vessel operators may appear to be manageable, but taken as a 
whole, the proposals are costly and burdensome to the international 
ferry operators, who are also suffering because of the downturn in 
international traffic across the United States-Canadian border in 
recent years.
    For the final rule, we completed a Final Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis (FRFA). The specific statutory requirements of a FRFA can be 
found at 5 U.S.C. 604(a). Under these statutory requirements, we did 
not consider the cumulative impact of our other regulations on small 
businesses or affected ferry operations. This final rule will impose no 
additional costs on ferry owners and operators. Ferries that operate on 
a fixed route between two or more COTPs zones and on a regular schedule 
will be exempt from NOAD requirements if they submit the information 
required under Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(vii). This submission has been a 
common industry practice since 2003 to obtain waivers from COTPs; 
therefore, there is no additional cost associated with this provision. 
All vessels that transit within the same COTP that do not carry a CDC 
will be exempt from submitting NOADs. We acknowledge that some of our 
other regulations have imposed additional costs on vessel owners and 
operators subject to this rule, which contains revised applicability 
provisions. We have taken the cost associated with this rule into 
consideration; please see the regulatory analysis in the docket for a 
discussion of the impacts of this rule on industry. In this final rule, 
we have sought to impose the least burden possible while still meeting 
statutory and international mandates, as well as our regulatory 
objectives of obtaining information necessary to help enhance the 
safety and security of U.S. ports and waterways and to enhance vessel 
traffic management. Therefore, in our effort to reduce costs on 
industry and small entities, we abandoned our proposal to reduce the 
threshold of more than 150 passengers for AIS carriage to a threshold 
of 50 or more passengers. As previously noted, other than certain 
dredges, all of the vessels this rule adds to those currently required 
to install and use AIS (see Table 6 in the RA) are covered by 46 U.S.C. 
70114(a)(1)(A) & (C) which give no discretion to the Secretary. We also 
present a cumulative impact analysis for the 2003 AIS final rule and 
this final rule in Table 22 of the regulatory analysis available on the 
docket for review.
    One commenter noted that, with 50 ships worldwide and shipping 
offices around the world, his or her organization does not change the 
operating system on its computers often and that it has to upgrade its 
ships and offices almost simultaneously. The commenter noted its 
organization does not take computer operating system upgrades lightly.
    We do not anticipate that an upgrade to the computer operating 
system is necessary for the submission of an NOAD. In light of the 
CBP's APIS final rule published in 2005, in which vessels coming from a 
foreign port or place must submit an arrival manifest (with the 
exception of ferries), this rule would not require an upgrade or 
replacement of existing means of submitting NOAs. If a vessel operator 
is required to submit an NOA or an update, but the vessel is in an area 
without internet access, he or she would be free to radio or use other 
non-internet means to convey NOA information to others in his or her 
organization that would be able to make a submission via the internet. 
In situations where a vessel operator must submit an NOA or an update, 
for a vessel in an area without internet access or when experiencing 
technical difficulties with an onboard computer, and he or she has no 
shore-side support available, the vessel operator may fax or phone the 
NOA or update, to the NVMC. However, based on Coast Guard information 
and for the purpose of the supporting regulatory analysis, our 
estimates assume NOAD information received by the NVMC is through the 
Internet.
13. Outer Continental Shelf
    We received various requests to make changes from the proposed rule 
with respect to vessels on, or sailing to or from, the U.S. OCS.
    Because of the unique operations of vessels arriving in the OCS, we 
initiated a separate rulemaking, ``Notice of Arrival on the Outer 
Continental Shelf'' (NOA OCS) (RIN 1625-AB28), to address the statutory 
directive from section 109 of the Security and Accountability for Every 
Port Act of 2006 (SAFE Port Act), Public Law 109-347, 120 Stat. 1884). 
The final rule in that NOA OCS rulemaking was published January 13, 
2011 (76 FR 2254). That separate rule addresses applicability, OCS NOA 
reporting times, as well as information submission requirements under 
that rule. See 33 CFR part 146, as amended by 79 FR 36401, June 27, 
2014.
    As noted above in the ``Applicability'' section, VI.A.1, we have 
revised Sec.  160.203 to make it clear that visits to ports or places 
on the OCS other than deepwater ports will not directly trigger 33 CFR 
part 160, subpart C, NOAD requirements; see NOA OCS regulations in 33 
CFR part 146 that point to regulations in 33 CFR part 160. For example, 
Sec.  146.405 refers to information specified in 33 CFR Table 160.206. 
To increase awareness of 33 CFR part 146 NOA OCS requirements, we have 
added a note to Sec.  160.201 referring to these requirements.
14. Miscellaneous
    On January 21, 2009, we published a notice (74 FR 3534) announcing 
a March 5, 2010, public meeting to be held in

[[Page 5305]]

Washington, DC. Several commenters requested that we schedule an 
additional public meeting in the Pacific Northwest because west coast 
international transportation companies, including international ferry 
operators, are located there and it was impractical for small companies 
or Washington State Ferry officials to attend the public meeting in 
Washington, DC. We received an additional request to hold meetings in 
the Southwest, Mid-Continental/Mid-West, and the Atlantic Northeast.
    As noted above, we held one public meeting in Washington, DC, and 
another public meeting in Seattle, WA. We believe those two 
opportunities for the public to submit oral comments were sufficient, 
particularly given the 4-month period we provided the public in which 
to submit written comments. Also, we made audio recordings of these two 
public meetings, and made the recordings available online to the public 
via a link in the docket to audio-digital (MP3) files. These recordings 
allowed those who could not attend either meeting to listen to what was 
said at each meeting before the end of the comment period.
    One commenter recommended amending NOAD rules to allow inland 
vessels to submit NOAs to a single common authority--specifically to 
allow any barge or towing vessel that operates on the inland and 
intracoastal waterways above or below Mississippi River mile 235 to be 
classified as inland and to report to the IRVMC, rather than the NVMC. 
The commenter stated that NOA requirements call for information from 
inland vessel operators that is inapplicable to their operations and of 
no material value for national security. Further, the commenter stated 
that this information is impractical and useless as applied to inland 
vessels, particularly if the reporting vessel operates below mile 235 
on the Lower Mississippi River or the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway and 
needs to report to both NVMC and IRVMC.
    In our NPRM, we proposed to revise the current NOA exemption in 
Sec.  160.203(a)(3) that applies to all vessels operating upon the 
Mississippi River between its sources and mile 235, Above Head of 
Passes, and certain tributaries, so that this exemption would apply 
only to vessels required by 33 CFR 165.830 or 165.921 to report to 
IRVMC. The comment period on the NPRM closed April 15, 2009, but on 
January 10 and 18, 2011, the Commanders of the Eighth and Ninth Coast 
Guard Districts, respectively, published rules that stayed IRVMC 
reporting requirements for barges loaded with CDC on inland rivers in 
the Eighth Coast Guard District and a portion of the Illinois Waterway 
System located in the Ninth Coast Guard District. These stays were 
extended and now last until December 31, 2015. See 76 FR 1360, January 
10, 2011, 76 FR 2827, January 18, 2011, 78 FR 25, January 2, 2013, 78 
FR 4788, January 23, 2013, 78 FR 60216, October 1, 2013, and 78 FR 
61183, October 3, 2013.
    In this final rule, where the revised exemption is redesignated as 
Sec.  160.204(a)(3), after December 31, 2015, a vessel required to 
report under Sec. Sec.  165.830 or 165.921 would not also be required 
under part 160 to submit NOAs to NVMC. Until December 31, 2015, 
temporary exemption Sec.  160.204(a)(6) will apply to all vessels 
subject to Sec. Sec.  165.830 or 165.921. During these stays in 
reporting requirements under Sec. Sec.  165.830 or 165.921, Commanders 
of the Eighth and Ninth Coast Guard Districts will analyze future 
reporting needs and evaluate possible changes in CDC reporting 
requirements. See 78 FR 25, January 2, 2013, and 78 FR 4788, January 
23, 2013, 78 FR 60216, October 1, 2013, and 78 FR 61183, October 3, 
2013.
    The IRVMC actively tracked the movement of CDC barges on inland 
rivers in the Sec. Sec.  165.830 or 165.921 regulated navigation areas 
in Coast Guard Districts Eight and Nine, respectively, and analyzed 
data from Fleeting Area Managers. The NOA information and timing of 
submission of NOAs under 33 CFR part 160, which is a primary source of 
data for ships arriving from foreign ports or places, presents 
different burdens than the now-stayed IRVMC reporting requirements 
under Sec. Sec.  165.830 or 165.921. Compare, for example, Sec. Sec.  
160.206 and 160.212 of this final rule with stayed reporting 
requirements in Sec.  165.830(d), (e), and (f), or Sec.  165.921(d), 
(e), and (f). This final rule has been written so that Commanders of 
Eighth and Ninth Coast Guard Districts may continue to analyze 
reporting needs from vessels moving CDC barges on inland rivers in 
their districts, without subjecting those vessels subject to Sec.  
165.830 or Sec.  165.921 to NOAD requirements under 33 CFR part 160.
    As for reporting to a single common authority, this final rule does 
not control where District Eight and Nine RNA regulations may require 
vessels subject to those regulations to report. But as for vessels 
operating below mile 235 on the Lower Mississippi River, on the Gulf 
Intracoastal Waterway, or on other waters where they are subject to 33 
CFR part 160 NOAD requirements, the information we require is needed to 
meet our PWSA regulatory objectives of obtaining information necessary 
to help enhance the safety and security of U.S. ports and waterways and 
to enhance vessel traffic management.
    One commenter suggested that the Coast Guard issue a secure, World 
Wide Web-based report showing vessels cleared for arrival and that it 
use a uniform NOAD verification process with each Coast Guard COTP's 
Homeland Security group's screening of NOADs submitted and cleared by 
the NVMC. The commenter noted that it is beneficial to know whether 
additional information or a vessel boarding is required by the port's 
Homeland Security Office well in advance of the vessel's arrival so 
that time management impacts to the vessel's Master and crew can be 
minimized and the vessel can proactively communicate any prospective 
delays to the terminal or refinery waiting for its arrival.
    Once the NVMC receives an NOA, an email is sent to the submitter if 
the NOAD is not accepted. However, vessels are not ``cleared'' by the 
NVMC. Regarding advance notice of boarding, it is at the COTP's 
discretion to determine notification times if a boarding is to occur. 
Under authority of 33 U.S.C. 1223 and 33 CFR 160.111, a District 
Commander or COTP may place operational controls on a vessel when he or 
she--
    <bullet> Has reasonable cause to believe the vessel is not in 
compliance with any regulation, law, or treaty;
    <bullet> Determines that the vessel does not satisfy the conditions 
for vessel operation and cargo transfers specified in Sec.  160.113; or
    <bullet> Determines that the vessel warrants such controls in the 
interest of safety due to weather, visibility, sea conditions, 
temporary port congestion, other temporary hazardous circumstances, or 
the vessel's condition.
    Also, under 46 U.S.C. 70110, the Secretary may establish conditions 
of entry for ships coming from a foreign port that she or he has found 
does not maintain effective antiterrorism measures, and may deny entry 
to vessels that do not meet these conditions. However, we do not clear 
vessels for arrival.
    The CBP's regulation 19 CFR 4.7 references a ``Vessel Entrance or 
Clearance Statement,'' Customs Form 1300. Under 19 CFR 4.3, certain 
vessels are required to make formal entry on their arrival at a U.S. 
port or place. The CBP may grant clearance for a vessel to depart a 
U.S. port or place. See 19 CFR 4.60, 4.61 and 4.95; re CBP clearance 
related to departures, see 19 CFR 4.63 and 4.75.

[[Page 5306]]

    One commenter noted that his company operates more than 50 chemical 
tankers and has a similar amount on time charter, that it operates 
worldwide, that its tankers can carry up to 52 separate bulk liquid 
cargoes on board, that its vessels go to various U.S terminals and take 
on specific cargoes, and that with two crews for each vessel, the 
company has 100 Masters and at least 100 chief mates that it has to 
educate on NOAD procedures. According to the commenter, the company 
experiences inconsistent and confusing procedures on a regular basis, 
particularly with regard to the way regulations are applied by Coast 
Guard field units. The commenter noted at a public meeting in 
Washington, DC that there had been comments made there to the effect 
that the rules are pretty clear, but that when you get down to the 
field unit, particularly with security concerns, the regulations in the 
code are not applied universally throughout the country, particularly 
in the Gulf of Mexico.
    We are working to ensure consistent application of the NOAD 
regulations throughout all U.S. ports. Different responses by COTPs to 
NOAD data submitted for a given vessel may reflect different priorities 
based on different factors in COTP zones. Questions pertaining to NOAD 
regulations and the application of those regulations should be directed 
to the Office of Vessel Activities NOA Program Manager. Contact 
information is available on the eNOAD World Wide Web site.
    One commenter stated that, despite regular NVMC upgrades, some in 
the industry have been forced to use third-party contractors to comply 
with NOA requirements. The commenter noted that this means every report 
is handled twice--once aboard the vessel and once by a contractor--and 
thus there is twice the opportunity for errors.
    We note that an NOA can be submitted directly to the NVMC via the 
eNOAD World Wide Web application or by email. If a vessel chooses to 
use a third-party contractor, that is at the vessel owner's discretion, 
but the vessel owner retains responsibility for the accuracy of the 
information.
    One commenter stated that when small changes are made to forms or 
notices, errors may go undetected because of the massive amount of 
information that is asked for time and time again, and be repeated on 
every required form. The commenter noted these errors can result in 
cumulative penalties. The commenter stated that his company has 
experienced penalties from the CBP--specifically immigration--for crew-
caused typing errors, and that if the company is doing multiple crew 
reporting and makes one error, then submits that copied form five 
times, it has now subjected itself to five times the penalties because 
the error appears on five copies.
    We cannot speak to CBP or other agency practices as they pertain to 
penalties resulting from typing errors. We note, however, that a 
requirement in Sec.  160.208 as proposed stated that whenever events 
cause submitted NOA information to become inaccurate, vessels must 
submit an update within the times required in Sec.  160.212. Based on 
this comment, however, we are revising that regulatory text to make 
clear that the owner, agent, Master, operator, or person in charge of 
the vessel must submit an update within the times required any time 
events cause the submitted data to become inaccurate or the submitter 
realizes that the data initially submitted were inaccurate. As noted 
previously, however, if the estimated time of arrival is the only data 
element that becomes inaccurate and the new estimate is less than 6 
hours off from the original estimate, then the owner, agent, Master, 
operator, or person in charge need not submit an update. Also under 
Sec.  160.208(b), such persons need not file updates to correct the 
vessel location or position of the vessel at the time of reporting, or 
to report changes to crewmembers' positions or duties on the vessel.
    One commenter stated that there is currently a 6-hour window during 
which, if a vessel's anticipated arrival time is within plus or minus 6 
hours, no update is required. However, the commenter noted, there are 
some new provisions in the NPRM that would require the vessel to submit 
an update within 12 hours, which would not be practical.
    We note that the requirement for submitting an update is the same 
as the current requirement for a vessel whose remaining voyage is less 
than 24 hours, with the exception of U.S. vessels 300 gross tons or 
less. See Sec. Sec.  160.208 and 160.212(b)(3). We have made no changes 
from the proposed rule based on this comment.
    One commenter stated that there was a need for greater specificity 
in the regulatory language to avoid confusion when all of the 
provisions of the rule are put into practice, and to ensure that the 
Coast Guard is truly meeting the congressional intent with regards to 
security.
    As reflected in many of the changes we made from the proposed 
regulatory text, including adding definitions and specifying vessels 
that may use AIS Class B to satisfy AIS requirements, we have taken 
steps to ensure that this final rule is clear and specific. Also, in 
the preamble, we repeatedly link NOA requirements in this final rule 
with PWSA statutory objectives of helping to enhance the safety and 
security of U.S. ports and waterways.
    One commenter stated that the Coast Guard correctly exempted OSVs 
from NOAD requirements. The commenter noted that this reflects both the 
past coverage of these vessels under NOA and the many years of an 
exemption and practices that have shown that these vessels do not 
represent a significant security concern. The commenter also noted that 
the existing exemption reflects our recognition that these vessels make 
so many transits that tracking all of their arrivals and departures 
would create a burden on both the Coast Guard and the industry. The 
commenter further stated, however, that there are discussions both in 
Congress and internally in the Coast Guard over raising tonnage limits 
on OSVs, and expressed hope that the Coast Guard's definition would not 
lock this into a separate standard for OSVs than might eventually come 
out of that process.
    In the NPRM we proposed adding a definition of ``offshore supply 
vessel,'' a term we use in exemption Sec.  160.204(a)(1), based on the 
46 U.S.C. 2101(19) definition. In 2010, that statutory definition was 
amended by section 617 of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010 
(Pub. L. 111-281). For reasons stated in the ``Summary of Changes from 
NPRM'' discussion, Section V, we did not create a part 160 definition 
of ``offshore supply vessel,'' but instead simply relied on the 
introductory language in the definition section, Sec.  160.202, which 
adopts 46 U.S.C. 2101(19) definitions for otherwise undefined terms. 
This revision does not lock OSVs into a separate NOAD standard. 
Revisions to OSV-specific regulations based on a statutory change in 
OSV tonnage limits are outside the scope of this rulemaking.
    Finally, while not in response to a comment, we delayed making any 
amendments to 33 CFR part 160 effective until April 30, 2015. We 
selected this date 90 days after publication to ensure that we have 
changes to the eNOAD application thoroughly tested and in place before 
the effective date.

B. Automatic Identification System

    In the NPRM, we used 12 categories to describe our proposed 
revisions to AIS regulations. See 73 FR 76304-05, December 16, 2008. 
For this final rule, we used a different set of categories to

[[Page 5307]]

group and discuss comments we received on the AIS portion of the NPRM. 
These 11 categories are: Applicability, Broader Use of AIS, Expanding 
AIS Carriage, Impracticability, AIS and Nationwide AIS, Fishing 
Industry Concerns, AIS Class B, AIS Displays and Integration, 
Installation Period, AIS Pilot Plug, and Supplemental Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking.
1. Applicability
    Some comments received in opposition to the proposed AIS rule 
questioned the need for it, its benefits, and whether it should be 
applicable to the commenter's type of vessel (e.g., sailing vessels and 
tenders), operation (e.g., marine assistance), or operating area (e.g., 
rivers). The Marine Transportation Security Act (MTSA) of 2002 is our 
enabling statute that directs which vessels will be required to install 
and use AIS. This statute specifies self-propelled commercial vessels 
of at least 65 feet overall in length and towing vessels of more than 
26 feet overall in length and 600 horsepower. See 46 U.S.C. 
70114(a)(1)(A) and (C). In addition, MTSA directs the Secretary to 
require AIS on vessels ``carrying more than a number of passengers for 
hire as determined by the Secretary'' and vessels for which the 
Secretary finds AIS ``is necessary for the safe navigation of the 
vessel.'' See 46 U.S.C. 70114(a)(1)(B) and (D). In this final rule we 
have included the following self-propelled vessels under MTSA 
provisions in 46 U.S.C. 70114(a)(1)(B) and (D) that do provide some 
discretion to the Secretary:
    <bullet> Vessels (less than 65 feet in registered length) that are 
certificated to carry more than 150 passengers--whether or not the 
passengers are for hire.
    <bullet> Vessels engaged in dredging operations in or near a 
commercial channel or shipping fairway in a manner likely to restrict 
or affect the navigation of other vessels; and
    <bullet> Vessels engaged in the movement of CDC or flammable or 
combustible liquid cargo in bulk.
    Given the nature of their operation, these vessels pose a unique 
challenge to navigation, and we have determined that AIS is necessary 
for the safe navigation of these vessels.
    Since 1972, a similar group of vessels has been required by the 
Vessel Bridge-to-Bridge Radiotelephone Act (Pub. L. 92-63) and 
implementing regulations to have radiotelephones while navigating. See 
33 U.S.C. 1201-1208 and 33 CFR part 26. The primary purpose of the 
Radiotelephone Act is navigation safety, an objective that it shares 
with MTSA. Together, the Radiotelephone Act and MTSA AIS implementing 
regulations provide a synergy that enhances situational awareness and 
could mitigate the risk of collisions and other mishaps, such as a 
collision with a vessel carrying passengers, a vessel engaged in 
dredging near a commercial channel, or one moving hazardous cargo. Data 
from AIS provide the telephone equivalent of ``caller ID,'' which can 
greatly facilitate radiotelephone communication, reducing the time 
required to establish a joint plan for avoiding collisions.
    We have placed AIS applicability provisions from both the final 
rule and the current CFR adjacent to each other in the following 
derivation and comparison table so that you may quickly identify 
changes this final rule is introducing that may impact your vessel or 
company. Further details, including costs and impacts, are provided in 
the regulatory analysis.

 Table 2--AIS Derivation and Comparison Table: Final Rule and Corresponding Current Applicability Paragraphs in
                                                  33 CFR 164.46
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Corresponding
  Final rule paragraph in 33 CFR               Text              paragraph currently              Text
              164.46                                               in 33 CFR 164.46
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    (b)(1)........................  AIS Class A device. The     (a)..................  The following vessels
                                     following vessels must                             must have a properly
                                     have on board a properly                           installed, operational,
                                     installed, operational                             type approved AIS as of
                                     Coast Guard type-approved                          the date specified.
                                     AIS Class A device:.
        (i).......................  A self-propelled vessel of     (1) & (3)(i)......  (a)(1) Self-propelled
                                     65 feet or more in                                 vessels of 65 feet or
                                     length, engaged in                                 more in length, other
                                     commercial service.                                than passenger and
                                                                                        fishing vessels, in
                                                                                        commercial service and
                                                                                        on an international
                                                                                        voyage, not later than
                                                                                        December 31, 2004.
                                                                                       (a)(3) Notwithstanding
                                                                                        paragraphs (a)(1) and
                                                                                        (a)(2) of this section,
                                                                                        the following vessels,
                                                                                        when navigating an area
                                                                                        denoted in Table
                                                                                        161.12(c) of Sec.
                                                                                        161.12 of this chapter,
                                                                                        not later than December
                                                                                        31, 2004: (i) Self-
                                                                                        propelled vessels of 65
                                                                                        feet or more in length,
                                                                                        other than fishing
                                                                                        vessels and passenger
                                                                                        vessels certificated to
                                                                                        carry less than 151
                                                                                        passengers-for hire, in
                                                                                        commercial service;
        (ii)......................  A towing vessel of 26 feet     (3)(ii)...........  Towing vessels of 26 feet
                                     or more in length and                              or more in length and
                                     more than 600 horsepower,                          more than 600
                                     engaged in commercial                              horsepower, in
                                     service;                                           commercial service.
        (iii).....................  A vessel that is               (3)(iii)..........  Passenger vessels
                                     certificated to carry                              certificated to carry
                                     more than 150 passengers.                          more than 150 passengers-
                                                                                        for-hire.

[[Page 5308]]

 
        (iv)......................  A self-propelled vessel     .....................  NO CORRESPONDING
                                     engaged in dredging                                PARAGRAPH.
                                     operations in or near a
                                     commercial channel or
                                     shipping fairway in a
                                     manner likely to restrict
                                     or affect navigation of
                                     other vessels.
        (v).......................  A self-propelled vessel     .....................  NO CORRESPONDING
                                     engaged in the movement                            PARAGRAPH.
                                     of--(A) Certain dangerous
                                     cargo as defined in
                                     subpart C of part 160 of
                                     this chapter, or (B)
                                     Flammable or combustible
                                     liquid cargo in bulk that
                                     is listed in 46 CFR 30.25-
                                     1, Table 30.25-1.
    (b)(2)........................  AIS Class B device. Use of  .....................  NO CORRESPONDING
                                     a U.S. Coast Guard type-                           PARAGRAPH.
                                     approved AIS Class B
                                     device in lieu of an AIS
                                     Class A device is
                                     permissible on the
                                     following vessels if they
                                     are not subject to
                                     pilotage by other than
                                     the vessel Master or
                                     crew:
        (i).......................  Fishing industry vessels..  .....................  NO CORRESPONDING
                                                                                        PARAGRAPH.
        (ii)......................  Vessels identified in       .....................  NO CORRESPONDING
                                     paragraph (b)(1)(i) of                             PARAGRAPH.
                                     this section that are
                                     certificated to carry
                                     less than 150 passengers,
                                     and that--(A) Do not
                                     operate in a VTS or VMRS
                                     area defined in Table
                                     161.12(c) of Sec.
                                     161.12 of this chapter,
                                     and (B) Do not operate at
                                     speeds in excess of 14
                                     knots; and.
        (iii).....................  Vessels identified in       .....................  NO CORRESPONDING
                                     paragraph (b)(1)(iv) of                            PARAGRAPH.
                                     this section engaged in
                                     dredging operations.
    (c)...........................  SOLAS provisions. The          (2)...............  Notwithstanding paragraph
                                     following self-propelled                           (a)(1) of this section,
                                     vessels must comply with                           the following, self-
                                     International Convention                           propelled vessels, that
                                     for Safety of Life at Sea                          are on an international
                                     (SOLAS), as amended,                               voyage must also comply
                                     Chapter V, regulation                              with SOLAS, as amended,
                                     19.2.1.6 (Positioning                              Chapter V, regulation
                                     System), 19.2.4 (AIS                               19.2.1.6, 19.2.4, and
                                     Class A), and 19.2.3.5                             19.2.3.5 or 19.2.5.1 as
                                     (Transmitting Heading                              appropriate
                                     Device) or 19.2.5.1 (Gyro                          (Incorporated by
                                     Compass) as applicable                             reference, see Sec.
                                     (Incorporated by                                   164.03):
                                     reference, see Sec.
                                     164.03):.
        (1).......................  A vessel of 300 gross          (2)(ii)-(iv)......  (ii) Tankers, regardless
                                     tonnage or more, on an                             of tonnage, not later
                                     international voyage.                              than the first safety
                                                                                        survey for safety
                                                                                        equipment on or after
                                                                                        July 1, 2003; (iii)
                                                                                        Vessels, other than
                                                                                        passenger vessels or
                                                                                        tankers, of 50,000 gross
                                                                                        tonnage or more, not
                                                                                        later than July 1, 2004;
                                                                                        and
                                                                                       (iv) Vessels, other than
                                                                                        passenger vessels or
                                                                                        tankers, of 300 gross
                                                                                        tonnage or more but less
                                                                                        than 50,000 gross
                                                                                        tonnage, not later than
                                                                                        the first safety survey
                                                                                        for safety equipment on
                                                                                        or after July 1, 2004,
                                                                                        but no later than
                                                                                        December 31, 2004.
        (2).......................  A vessel of 150 gross          (2)(i)............  Passenger vessels, of 150
                                     tonnage or more, when                              gross tonnage or more,
                                     carrying more than 12                              not later than July 1,
                                     passengers on an                                   2003.
                                     international voyage.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 5309]]

2. Broader Use of AIS
    We recognize that AIS will not overcome all challenges to maritime 
transportation safety or prevent all transportation security incidents. 
It is, however, the most effective tool currently available to enhance 
a mariner's situational awareness and our own MDA. When using AIS, 
pertinent real-time, digital navigation information can be autonomously 
and continuously exchanged between AIS-equipped vessels. AIS not only 
provides a position (in a manner similar to radar), but it also 
provides vessel data (e.g., dimensions, type, call-sign, destination, 
ETA, navigation status) that are difficult, if not impossible, to 
ascertain visually and that would be burdensome, cumbersome, and 
distracting to exchange via voice communications. Additionally, AIS is 
currently the only effective means of providing real-time electronic 
navigation chart information from shore to ship via the broader use of 
AIS Application Specific Messaging (ASM), the ``smart phone'' 
applications for AIS. These applications use a common message type 
which can be processed by most AIS stations. However, embedded within 
the message are specific navigation- and safety-related data that are 
not available via other AIS messages or other existing marine safety 
information systems (Notice to Mariners, NAVTEX for delivery of 
navigational and meteorological warnings and forecasts, etc.). These 
messages can provide a more dynamic detail to information that is 
traditionally conveyed by slower means: chart updates, (e.g., new 
navigation hazards), printed notices to mariners, navigation 
publications and directives, meteorological and hydrographic Web sites, 
and more. Because this information, like all AIS data, is digital, it 
can easily be decoded and portrayed on multiple navigation devices, 
such as electronic charts, radar, and multi-function displays. In the 
near future, we expect to design and develop ASM to augment or replace 
some other types of reporting, including potentially eNOAD, IRVMC, and 
right whale sightings.
    In 2010, in Safety of Navigation Circular 289, the IMO adopted a 
compendium of ASM that promises to greatly enhance AIS utility and 
navigation safety. These ASM applications will provide: exchange, 
reporting, and broadcast of environmental, meteorological, and 
hydrological data, as is currently being done on the St. Lawrence 
Seaway, Tampa Bay, and VTS Sault Ste. Marie, and is envisioned for more 
waterways; data on dangerous cargo and/or persons on board; port 
clearance and berthing information; data on mandatory and recommended 
routes; extended vessel static and voyage related data; VTS broadcast 
of targets representing vessels with or without AIS but beyond the 
range (e.g., around a bend) of other AIS vessels; and pertinent time-
critical dynamic navigation information concerning a specified 
geographic area, polygon or position.
    We are working closely and diligently with the Committee on the 
Maritime Transportation System (CMTS) (see e-Navigation Integrated 
Action Team at http://www.cmts.gov/Activities/ActionTeams.aspx) and 
other Federal agencies, such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, to expand the 
development and ensure the consistency of ASM throughout the United 
States. Accordingly, we have added to this final rule a new provision 
in Sec.  164.46(d)(4) to ensure that in the United States, only the use 
of ``applications adopted by the International Maritime Organization 
(such as, IMO SN.1/Circ.289) or those denoted in the International 
Association of Marine Aids to Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities' 
(IALA) ASM Collection for use in the United States or Canada'' is 
permissible. Moreover, Sec.  164.46(d)(4) notes that an individual 
application transmission is limited to no more than one every minute.
    Some commenters lauded these benefits and the benefits of AIS in 
general, and requested we extend AIS applicability to other vessels 
(e.g., all vessels that interact with seagoing vessel traffic). While 
we strongly encourage the use of AIS, we recognize that not all vessels 
can achieve the full benefit of AIS because of their unique nature 
(e.g., submarines) or mode of operations (e.g., fleeting area). To 
accommodate these situations, we provide a means for individual 
operators to request a deviation from AIS carriage requirements in 33 
CFR 164.46(h). In response to comments, we have extended this provision 
to include vessels whose design (e.g., submarines or vessels with an 
open or exposed cabin), construction, or outfitting (e.g., a vessel 
without electrical power) makes it impracticable to operate an AIS. See 
33 CFR 164.46(h)(4). Further, to alleviate the administrative burden on 
industry and the Coast Guard, and at the same time recognize that 
situations may change in the future, we have extended the allowable 
deviation period from 1 to 5 years. See Sec.  164.46(h).
    Numerous commenters questioned adopting the threshold of 50-or-more 
passengers for requiring AIS. One commenter stated that the Coast Guard 
has not justified the requirement for passenger vessels with the 
capacities of between 50 and 150 passengers to carry AIS and that such 
a requirement would not diminish the potential threats to the U.S. 
marine transportation system that the Coast Guard described. We believe 
requiring AIS on vessels certificated to carry more than 50 passengers 
would help diminish threats to the U.S. maritime transportation system, 
but based on our analysis of the cost and the lack of benefits of such 
a requirement, we have abandoned the lower threshold we proposed.
    We did describe a number of maritime-related terrorist events in 
the NPRM (see 73 FR 76296, December 16, 2008), but we did not claim 
that AIS alone would prevent those or future incidents. We stated that 
these incidents called attention to the vulnerability of the United 
States to potential terrorist attacks, and that U.S. waterways and 
ports present both vulnerable and attractive targets. See 73 FR 76297. 
All vessels that carry passengers are potential terrorist targets and 
may also provide a means of transportation for terrorists; particularly 
because passengers may board the vessel without having to go through 
thorough background checks required of some crewmembers.
    AIS is the only digital source of data the Coast Guard and other 
federal agencies have to gain a comprehensive real-time understanding 
of activities in our maritime domain, with the tools currently 
available on most vessels (i.e., radar or ECS), which thus improves our 
ability to prevent and respond to transportation security and safety 
incidents. For example, if we learn that passenger vessels have been 
targeted or that one is involved in a distress situation, we are more 
readily able to locate the specific position and course of these 
vessels and mitigate the consequences of an incident, and, are also 
more readily able to share that information with others.
    The commenter specifically noted that when promulgating current AIS 
regulations in 2003, the Coast Guard determined that passenger vessels 
carrying 150 or fewer passengers do not pose a significant risk of a 
transportation security incident and therefore did not require such 
vessels to develop Coast Guard-approved vessel security plans, and that 
nothing in the NOAD AIS NPRM has changed the conclusion of very low 
security risk in the National Risk Assessment Tool (N-RAT) published in 
the 2003 Implementation of National Maritime

[[Page 5310]]

Security Initiatives temporary interim rule. See 68 FR 39246, July 1, 
2003. Based on that N-RAT analysis, however, we did not conclude that 
vessels carrying less than 150 passengers were risk free. As we 
previously stated; however, based on public comments and to reduce 
costs on industry and small entities, we have set the passenger 
threshold for AIS carriage in this final rule to those vessels 
certificated to carry more than 150 passengers.
    The commenter also noted that in a Transportation Worker 
Identification Credential (TWIC)--Reader Requirements advance NPRM (74 
FR 13360, March 27, 2009) the Coast Guard identified vessels that carry 
less than 500 passengers as being in the lowest risk category. In that 
ANPRM, which focused on identification for mariners, we did note, 
however, the potential for such vessels to be involved in a 
transportation security incident. See 74 FR 13366. A transportation 
security incident means a security incident resulting in a significant 
loss of life, environmental damage, transportation system disruption, 
or economic disruption in a particular area.
    The commenter also questions the need for AIS for navigation safety 
for vessels between 50 and 150 passengers and notes that of the 
injuries, deaths, and barrels of oil spilled the Coast Guard noted that 
might have been prevented by the use of AIS, that there is no 
apportionments as to vessel service and that the preponderance of 
waterways associated with these casualties are not typically used by 
passenger vessels generally and those carrying 50 to 150 passengers 
specifically. Given this, and the commenter's own experience, the 
commenter concluded that the contribution by passenger vessels to those 
accident and casualty totals is negligible or non-existent. Finally, 
the commenter quotes from a Coast Guard report on passenger safety on 
vessels under 1000 gross tons based on 1992-2003 data and notes the 
report states that 81.2 percent of casualties were not related to the 
operation of a vessel, and that fatalities were rare and when grouped 
by type of accident, there were no trends or patterns.
    As previously noted, in this final rule we are not adopting the 
threshold of 50 or more passengers we proposed in the NPRM. We have 
adopted a threshold of more than 150 passengers in Sec.  
164.46(b)(1)(iii) of this final rule that is similar to our current 
passenger-for-hire threshold, but we did not retain the ``for-hire'' 
qualifier. We found no passenger vessels outside of VTS areas affected 
by the AIS portion of this final rule that are less than 65 feet in 
length and carry more than 150 passengers. All passenger vessels we 
found to be affected by this final rule are included in the 65-feet-or-
more category. This approach, which is based on authority in 46 U.S.C. 
70114(a)(1)(B) & (D) and covers vessels certificated to carry more than 
150 passenger--whether for for-hire or not, is similar to that taken in 
SOLAS which does not use ``for-hire'' when establishing a passenger 
vessel threshold.
    SOLAS Regulation V.19.2.4 requires AIS on all passenger ships 
regardless of size or type of voyage. Under SOLAS any vessel carrying 
more than 12 passengers is a ``passenger ship.'' See SOLAS Regulation 
I.1(f). This AIS SOLAS provision reflects the objective of SOLAS which 
is to promote the safety of life at sea. We have exercised tonnage-
threshold discretion under SOLAS to enable us to set our MTSA-based 
passenger threshold at more than 150.
    As proposed, we eliminated the distinction of ``for hire'' from the 
types of vessels that are required to have AIS because we believe the 
safety benefits of AIS should extend beyond vessels carrying passengers 
for hire that are, nonetheless, under the MTSA threshold of 65 feet in 
length. In doing so, we ensure that this provision of the final rule 
will cover all small passenger vessels and ferries in commercial 
service that are certificated to carry more than 150 passengers.
    Some commenters requested that we exempt certain waterways, as we 
are authorized to do under MTSA. See 46 U.S.C. 70114(a)(2)(B). While we 
agree that there might be waterways where the full benefit of AIS may 
not be realized--e.g., only one vessel using AIS on that waterway, we 
do not favor a patchwork-of-waterways approach because situations for a 
given waterway may change. Because AIS is designed to provide an 
effective means for multiple users to exchange vessel navigation 
information, independent of the waterway where it is used, its benefit 
is proportional to the number of users and not necessarily the area of 
use. Therefore, rather than exempt specific waterways where there might 
be a small number of users, we have specified an exception in Sec.  
164.46(h)(3) for vessels that are not likely to encounter other AIS-
equipped vessels. AIS can also provide valuable information in certain 
waterways even where there is a likelihood of encountering only one 
other vessel with AIS--for example, rounding a bend and other 
situations where other sensors, such as radar, may not detect the other 
vessel as soon.
    One commenter stated that we failed to provide support for our 
assertion in our NPRM that passenger vessels added by the 50-passenger 
threshold would not be uniquely impacted. The commenter stated that 
nearly all passenger vessels of less than 65 feet that carry 50 to 150 
passengers are operated by small businesses and that this segment of 
the U.S. maritime industry is in fact uniquely impacted. As previously 
noted, we have abandoned our proposal to reduce the threshold of more 
than 150 passengers for AIS carriage to 50 or more passengers. In 2003, 
as part of our initial effort to obtain information before issuing an 
NPRM to expand AIS applicability beyond what was included in our 
temporary interim rule, we solicited responses to questions. See 68 FR 
39369, July 1, 2003. In the preamble of the final rule we published 
that year, we specifically mentioned reopening the comment period on 
questions we presented in that initial effort as well an additional 
question regarding expanding AIS carriage to small passenger vessels. 
See 68 FR 60562, October 22, 2003. In an October 2003 notice, we then 
asked for reasons why passenger vessels 65 feet or more in length that 
carry less than 151 passengers (and fishing vessels 65 feet or more in 
length) should be treated differently than other commercial vessels. 
See 68 FR 61819, October 30, 2003. After reviewing comments received in 
response to the questions we published in 2003 and the NPRM, we have 
found that many of these vessels may be owned by small entities that do 
not operate year around or in areas that are likely to encounter other 
AIS users (e.g., excursion vessels in Lake Tahoe). The vessels 
certificated to carry less than 150 passenger impacted by Sec.  
164.46(b)(1)(i) of this final rule, are impacted in a manner that is 
different than the other 5,560 U.S.-flag vessels that we estimate will 
be affected by the AIS portion of this final rule. Because these 
passenger vessels are greater than 65 feet in length, 46 U.S.C. 
70114(a)(1)(A) dictates that they be equipped with and operate AIS. To 
reduce the cost of this requirement, however, in Sec.  164.46(b)(2)(ii) 
we permit the use of AIS Class B devices on vessels certificated to 
carry less than 150 passengers if they do not operate in a VTS or VMRS 
area and do not operate at speeds in excess of 14 knots. Regarding our 
separate requirement in Sec.  164.46(b)(1)(iii) for vessels 
certificated to carry more than 150 passengers, we decided to maintain 
the existing

[[Page 5311]]

threshold of more than 150 passengers, rather than decrease it to the 
threshold of more than 50 passengers we proposed, but we did expand the 
threshold to include any passenger, not solely passengers for hire, 
and, as with our other AIS requirements, we expanded the threshold to 
all navigable waters. While the Coast Guard believes that AIS can be of 
great benefit to all vessels, particularly those carrying passengers, 
we recognize that the majority of these vessels that carry less than 
150 passengers (whether for hire or not) would probably request a 
deviation of this final rule because they would meet one of more of the 
exception criteria denoted in 33 CFR 164.46(h), because they either 
operate solely within a confined area, are on short fixed-schedule 
voyages, or are not likely to encounter other AIS-equipped vessels. 
Thus, to mitigate both the burden to industry of requesting deviations 
and to the Coast Guard of adjudicating a large number of requests, we 
have adopted a threshold of more than 150 passengers for all passenger 
vessels, including high-speed passenger vessels. As noted above, we did 
not include our separate 12-passenger threshold for vessels capable of 
speeds in excess of 30 knots-see Sec.  164.46(b)(4) in the NPRM--in 
this final rule.
3. Expanding AIS Carriage
    As noted above, we received comments asking us to expand AIS 
carriage beyond the population in our proposal. Below, we address the 
requests to expand AIS requirements to offshore platforms.
    The primary benefit of AIS is to provide near real-time dynamic 
information (i.e., position, course, and speed); therefore, we do not 
see the need for all fixed charted structures such as offshore 
platforms to have AIS for the safe navigation of the vessel. We do 
believe, however, that certain fixed structures, based on their 
position and proximity to shipping lanes or safety fairways, are 
sometimes relied upon as if they were aids to navigation, and thus 
could benefit from AIS Aids to Navigation (AIS AtoN) and could enhance 
MDA and navigation safety. An AIS AtoN provides position, name, and 
health status of the aid, such as whether or not the aid is on station 
and watching properly.
    Given the advent of AIS AtoN and the benefit that these stations 
may provide to the shipboard users required to have AIS under this 
final rule, we have amended 33 CFR 62.52, 66.01-1, and 66.01-5(i) to 
recognize and allow the use of AIS AtoN stations or other electronic 
private aids to navigation. Those seeking to deploy an electronic 
private AtoN are required to go through the application and approval 
process set forth in 33 CFR part 66 for private aids to navigation.
    As for requiring AIS on other vessels beyond what we proposed in 
the NPRM, we extended applicability to self-propelled vessels engaged 
in the movement of flammable or combustible liquid cargo in bulk, so we 
would be sure to include vessels moving gasoline or propane as cargo. 
As we previously stated, we encourage all commercial vessels to equip 
themselves with AIS. However, this final rule requires AIS only on 
those vessels for which we have authority to require carriage of AIS; 
that is, for those vessels specifically identified in MTSA, and other 
vessels including passenger vessels, that we have determined require 
AIS for the safe navigation of the vessel.
4. Impracticability
    We received various comments on the impracticability and safety 
risk of certain AIS provisions in our proposed rule. One such example 
was our requirement to maintain AIS in operation at all times while a 
vessel is moored, which would require having the vessel's power plant 
running to operate AIS when nobody is on board--a practice that we did 
not intend to promote by this rule. In response to this comment, we 
amended Sec.  164.46(d)(2)(v) to require AIS to be in operation only at 
least 15 minutes prior to getting underway. Similarly, others commented 
on the impracticability of having AIS because their vessels lacked an 
adequate power supply (e.g., floating plants) or because the vessel's 
design made AIS use impracticable (e.g., submarines or open cabin 
vessels).
    The focus of MTSA and our rule is to require the use of AIS devices 
on self-propelled vessels, most of which should be capable of properly 
operating an AIS. We recognize, however, that it may be impracticable 
for some vessels to install or operate AIS properly or effectively. 
Therefore, we have added paragraph (h)(4) to Sec.  164.46 that 
specifically accommodates vessels whose design or construction makes it 
impracticable to operate an AIS device (e.g., those that lack 
electrical power, have an exposed or open cabin, or are submersible) by 
allowing these vessels to seek up to a 5-year deviation. Further, we 
amended Sec.  164.46(b)(1)(iv) to apply only to a ``self-propelled 
vessel engaged in dredging operations,'' instead of a ``dredge or 
floating plant.'' This change makes it clear that non-self propelled 
dredges or floating plants are not required to be outfitted with AIS 
shipboard devices. In so doing, however, we note that via the dredging 
permitting process, state authorities and the Army Corps of Engineers 
may seek--consistent with amended regulations in 33 CFR chapter I, 
subchapter C--to have AIS AtoNs installed on certain fixed structures 
near dredging areas when necessary to provide greater safety to those 
conducting dredging or transiting the area.
    Another impracticability raised by a commenter at one of our public 
meetings was a conflict with some of the requirements (such as radio 
antenna separation in excess of 30 feet for a 27-foot towing vessel) 
set forth in the IMO installation guidelines that our NPRM incorporated 
by reference. The IMO AIS requirement and guidelines were tailored to 
large deep-draft seagoing vessels and we agree with the commenter that 
some of the IMO AIS guidance is impractical for the majority of small 
and shallow-draft vessels subject to this final rule.
    The proper installation of modern electronics is very important and 
should be done diligently to ensure that all equipment operates 
according to its design and purpose and does not degrade the use of 
other equipment (e.g., create electromagnetic interference). The 
commenter above who noted the conflict created by IMO AIS guidelines 
also brought to our attention the standard published by the NMEA.
    The NMEA has for years published marine electronic installation 
standards that are widely used and relied upon by the industry. The 
NMEA, which serves a broad constituency of deep- and shallow-draft 
vessels, is well aware that sometimes different techniques, for 
example, use of thicker or better shielded cabling, may be required 
because of the size of the vessel or other issues. We have reviewed the 
AIS-related NMEA Installation Standard and find that it provides sound 
guidance where the IMO guidelines may be impractical for some 
installations on non-seagoing vessels. Therefore, to provide users an 
alternative and options that best serve their vessels, we have 
incorporated the NMEA standard by reference and have amended Sec.  
164.46(a) to include NMEA Installation Standard 0400-3.10, in the 
definition of ``properly installed, operational.''
    Although it is not an impracticability, certain commenters 
expressed concerns with the requirement to continuously upkeep and 
ensure the accuracy of all AIS data fields. Because AIS was purposely 
designed to require minimal user interaction, entry for most data 
(e.g., MMSI, vessel name, call-sign, IMO

[[Page 5312]]

number, type, dimensions, and antenna location) is required only once, 
at the time of installation. All AIS dynamic data (e.g., position, 
speed over ground, course over ground) are either fed into AIS via an 
external source or derived from the device's internal Global Navigation 
Satellite System, all without user interaction. There are, however, 
four AIS ``voyage related'' data fields (i.e., navigation status, 
destination location, estimated time of arrival, and static draft) that 
do require manual updating as conditions change.
    To ease the burden and ensure consistent and accurate data encoding 
among all AIS users, we have developed an AIS Encoding Guide that is 
available at our ``AIS Frequently Asked Questions'' (FAQ #2) page at 
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/?pageName=AISFAQ. In this guide, users are 
advised to use their maximum draft instead of static draft, thus 
eliminating the need to update this field. The guide also provides 
formatting conventions that allow ferry operators who continuously 
operate between two set locations, or operators of vessels that perform 
``voyages to nowhere'' (such as workboats, dinner or excursion vessels, 
and certain other vessels that operate to and from their home berths), 
to encode their ``Destination'' and ``ETA'' fields only once.
    For vessels that operate between multiple ports and berths, we 
have, as requested by the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers and in support of 
the Federal/Industry Logistics Standardization (FILS), adopted the FILS 
code as the unique identifier for their destinations. Through our 
association with the Radio Technical Commission for Maritime Services 
(RTCM), we anticipate that this uniform coding scheme will be embraced 
by software and charting manufacturers and that they will develop 
simpler ways to encode this information into AIS and other systems. 
Thus, the only AIS parameter that most domestic AIS users must maintain 
is the vessel's ``navigation status,'' which usually requires only a 
selection from a drop-down menu on the vessel's AIS, and can be easily 
remembered because it will usually require updating only to reflect a 
change in the vessel's navigation lights or day shapes. We anticipate 
that this process will be automated in the future when AIS is also 
integrated with the vessel's navigation light controller. See IMO 
Resolution MSC.253(83), ``Performance Standard for Navigation Light 
Controllers.''
5. AIS and Nationwide AIS
    Some commenters questioned whether we should require AIS in areas 
where we do not have infrastructure in place to receive AIS data. 
First, as noted in our NPRM, the use of AIS from vessel to vessel may 
prevent collisions wherever it is used and does not require the 
existence of shore-side AIS infrastructure to do so. Second, since 
2007, our Nationwide AIS (NAIS) project has provided us with AIS 
receive capability throughout the Great Lakes, U.S. coastal waters and 
approaches, and in the most congested portions of the Western Rivers. 
In those few areas where we do not currently have coverage, we 
anticipate that most potential users will avail themselves of the 
waiver process because of the low number of users that operate in these 
areas, such as the Colorado and Snake Rivers. For further information 
on NAIS and its coverage, visit http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-a/Ais/.
6. Fishing Industry Concerns
    Various commenters questioned the need for AIS on fishing vessels, 
noting that these vessels are already being tracked by Vessel 
Monitoring Systems (VMS). As we have stated previously (68 FR 39353, 
``Existing AIS-Like Systems''), AIS and the National Marine Fisheries 
Service (NMFS) VMS devices are two distinct systems that are not 
interoperable or interchangeable. The NMFS VMS is primarily a one-way 
system required by NMFS as a means of monitoring and enforcing 
compliance with NMFS requirements. Conversely, AIS is a two-way system 
designed as a means for AIS users to exchange navigation information 
for collision avoidance, something the NMFS VMS is not designed to do. 
This two-way system permits AIS to be both a safety and a security 
tool.
    Some commenters also expressed concern about the impact AIS would 
have on disclosing their fishing ''hot spots'' (i.e., preferred fishing 
locations). Various commenters expressed concerns that the use of AIS 
would cause congestion by revealing the locations of a fishing vessel's 
hot spots. Even if analysis of AIS data would somehow attract vessels 
to the same spot, this situation would not supersede the importance of 
AIS in providing fishing vessels and other operators with situational 
awareness to help safely navigate while in close proximity to other 
vessels. For similar reasons, existing Navigation Rules specifically 
require any vessel engaged in fishing to display distinctive lights or 
day shapes, which indicate to other vessels that the fishing vessel may 
be unable to maneuver to avoid collision; AIS simply extends the range 
of this warning.
7. AIS Class B
    We received numerous replies to our solicitation on whether the 
option to use AIS Class B devices to satisfy AIS requirements should be 
discretionary or whether we should clearly specify in this final rule 
which vessels may use it and on which waterways. Class B devices are 
compatible and less expensive than AIS Class A devices, but, are not as 
functional (lack safety related text messaging capability), powerful 
(transmit at 2 Watts vice 12.5 Watts) or versatile (lack interfacing 
options for external sensors or displays). For other differences see 
``AIS Comparison by Class Sheet'' at http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pdf/AIS_Comparison_By_Class.pdf. A list of all Coast Guard type-approved 
equipment can be found at: https://cgmix.uscg.mil/Equipment/EquipmentSearch.aspx. Some commenters favored our decision to permit 
the use of Class B, but felt that we should prescribe or clarify who 
could use such devices and where. In response to these comments, and to 
decide which vessels should be allowed to use Class B devices and 
where, we solicited the assistance of the Navigation Safety Advisory 
Council (NAVSAC), a Coast Guard-sponsored Federal Advisory Committee 
chartered to provide the Secretary of DHS with guidance on navigation 
safety matters through the Commandant of the Coast Guard. Members of 
NAVSAC discussed and resolved the matter at their meeting in May 2008 
(see USCG-2005-21869-0106). We agreed, in part, with their resolution 
and have amended Sec.  164.46(b)(2) to clearly prescribe the use of 
U.S. Coast Guard type-approved AIS Class B devices in lieu of Class A 
devices on the following vessels if they are not subject to pilotage: 
fishing industry vessels (i.e., any vessel engaged in the fishing 
trade), vessels engaged in dredging operations, and those vessels 
certificated to carry less than 150 passengers that do not operate in a 
Coast Guard VTS or VMRS, and that are not capable of speeds in excess 
of 14 knots. Class B users operating in excess of 14 knots travel a 
much farther distance between required position reports than Class A 
users would at any speed. Because of this time delay between reports, 
and as brought to our attention by some commenters, when viewed on a 
navigation display, fast-moving vessels using Class B devices would 
appear to jump from position to position, in contrast to a more fluid 
display of vessels using Class A devices.

[[Page 5313]]

While there may be ways to mitigate these phenomena, such as dead 
reckoning Class B vessels between their 30-second position reports, we 
believe that doing so would reduce confidence in AIS data. Therefore, 
we adopted a 14-knot threshold that NAVSAC included as a threshold for 
one of its recommendations. But we did not, as NAVSAC had recommended, 
extend this option to all vessels that travel only under 14 knots 
because we anticipate that some of these vessels (e.g., vessels towing 
cargo) will need to use application specific messaging for the safe 
navigation of the vessel and such messaging is not permitted via AIS 
Class B (e.g., cargo or voyage specific reporting to Coast Guard 
Sectors or Army Corp of Engineers lockmasters).
    We did receive a comment questioning the use of Class B devices in 
a river environment where channels are close to moored vessels and 
another commenter questioned the use of AIS on rivers as a navigation 
tool because they asserted it does not take into account the change in 
the speed of the current. We note that AIS provides the identification 
and position of a vessel, as well as its course over ground and speed 
over ground. When making collision avoidance determinations on a river 
or elsewhere, speed over ground data is more desirable and reliable 
than speed over water data, which does not reflect the impact of a 
current on the vessel's speed. In Sec.  164.46(b)(2), where we specify 
when AIS Class B may be used to satisfy an AIS carriage requirement, we 
have not excluded the use of AIS Class B on rivers.
8. AIS Displays and Integration
    We received various comments regarding the installation and 
integration of AIS with other navigation equipment and display systems. 
Some stated, correctly, that we did not include these costs in our 
regulatory analysis. Our regulatory analysis did not include these 
costs because our NPRM did not propose, nor does this final rule 
require, that such displays be used.
    AIS devices consist of a main unit and two external antennas for 
GPS and VHF communications. They do not require integration with other 
systems on board. However, the main unit of each AIS, by design, allows 
for various interfacing options, primarily as outputs that can be used 
with other shipboard systems, such as radar, electronic charting 
system, and multi-function displays. This interfacing option was not 
included in the installation or unit costs because such interfacing is 
not required by AIS, and because we have no means of ascertaining how 
many users would avail themselves of this functionality or would 
purchase ancillary equipment. Although the prices of AIS have dropped 
since our NPRM, we use the same average cost we used then as well as 
the installation costs since we expect them to be about the same as our 
estimate in the NPRM. We did not receive comments specifically on our 
training estimates and therefore we continue to use the estimates as 
presented in the NPRM. Based on our estimates and assumptions in the 
NPRM, we use the values below as estimates per unit, which includes the 
AIS device, graphical display, presentation software, and other 
equipment.
    We have not required this integration or specified displays because 
standards have not yet been fully developed to ensure the safety and 
efficacy of such integration or presentation options, such as 
addressing screen clutter and target filtering. We are working with the 
various standards bodies to see that such standards are developed.
    Further, unlike AIS Class A devices, AIS Class B devices are not 
required to have a Minimal Keyboard Display (MKD) and many are designed 
with their own display systems. Consequently, we have amended Sec.  
164.46(h)(5) in this final rule so that such users are not required to 
meet the provision of Sec.  164.46(d)(2)(ii) to have the ``ability to 
access AIS information from the primary conning position.''
9. Installation Period
    Various commenters requested that we extend the proposed 7-month 
installation period for vessels not currently required to have AIS. We 
recognize that it has been several years since we published our NPRM 
and that many vessel owners or operators may not have planned or 
budgeted for this requirement. We also recognize that the purchase and 
installation of AIS requires proper budgeting and planning; therefore, 
we are amending Sec.  164.46(j) to extend the installation period to 12 
months after the effective date of this rule (13 months after 
publication) to allow the industry adequate time to purchase and 
install the equipment required by this final rule.
    One commenter stated that our proposed rule was drafted during a 
time when the assumption was that vessels would have installed AIS 
during 2008 and AIS would be operational in 2009. This commenter 
requested that we delay the effective date until the national economy 
rebounds. Since our NPRM was published in 2008, the cost of AIS has 
continued to drop. We have used current cost estimates and other 
updated data in our regulatory analysis for this final rule. And, as we 
noted, this final rule extends the AIS installation date to 12 months 
after the effective date of this rule.
10. AIS Pilot Plug
    We received various comments regarding the requirements for an AIS 
Pilot Plug. The commenters asked whether these requirements applied to 
all piloted vessels and to vessels using AIS Class B, and whether an 
extension cord was an acceptable receptacle. In response to these 
comments, we amended Sec.  164.46(g) in this final rule to clarify that 
the pilot plug must be within 3 feet of a permanently affixed 
electrical receptacle, and that these AIS pilot plug requirements apply 
only to vessels that embark a pilot. We also amended Sec.  164.46(b)(2) 
in this final rule to preclude the use of AIS Class B to satisfy Sec.  
164.46 requirements if the vessel is subject to pilotage by other than 
the vessel Master or crew.
11. Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
    We received a request from a trade association and many of its 
members to publish a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) 
in lieu of this final rule because they felt that we needed more time 
to properly address the cumulative impact of the rule and its 
associated costs, and to have it reflect a more current regulatory 
analysis. We have taken the cost associated with this rule into 
consideration; please see the regulatory analysis on the docket for a 
discussion of the impacts of the rule on the industry. We are aware 
that recently issued Coast Guard regulations may impose costs on 
vessels subject to this rule. See discussion of our cumulative impact 
assessment of this rule in Section VI.A.12 above. In this rule, we have 
sought to impose the least burden possible while still meeting our 
regulatory objectives of obtaining information necessary to help 
enhance the safety and security of United States ports and waterways 
and to enhance vessel traffic management. The industry has been 
provided with ample notice of forthcoming requirements and the 
associated cost and impact regarding this rule. Although the cost is 
not insignificant, we see no legitimate reason to further delay 
implementation of the AIS MTSA directive by issuing an SNPRM.

[[Page 5314]]

C. Regulatory Analysis and Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

1. Notice of Arrival and Departure
    We received public comments on the duplicative nature of the 
requirements and the inherent redundancy of NOAD. As a result, we 
eliminated our proposed NOD requirement. We also received public 
comments from ferry owners and operators regarding the burdensome 
nature of the requirements. We agreed and we will continue to exempt 
ferries that operate exclusively within the same COTP zone that do not 
carry CDC from the NOA requirements of this rule, as defined in Sec.  
160.204. Ferries that operate on a fixed route between two or more COTP 
zones and on a regular schedule may submit their schedule and other 
information required under Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(vii) to qualify for an 
NOAD exemption for ferries, which reduces the burden on vessel owners 
and operators. We expect the number of ferries affected after these 
exemptions to be about 150.
    We received several public comments on the Initial Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) stating that the rule will have a 
disproportionate adverse economic effect on owners of vessels of 300 
gross tons or less. In an attempt to alleviate some of the burden of 
the NOAD requirements on small entities, we have more closely aligned 
our NOA requirement with the CBP electronic passenger and crew arrival 
manifest requirements, and we have eliminated our proposed NOD 
requirement. In addition, U.S. vessels of 300 gross tons or less not 
carrying CDC and transiting two or more COTP zones are exempt under 33 
CFR 160.204(a)(5)(vi). These provisions combined should help to reduce 
the burden on some smaller vessel owners and operators. Waivers may be 
granted at a COTP's discretion under 33 CFR 160.214. We also received 
public comments from ferry owners and operators stating that ferries 
should be exempted from reporting requirements if transiting two or 
more COTP zones. As noted, we agree and established an exemption for 
certain ferries in Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(vii). Public comments also 
suggested maintaining the waiver provisions. We agree and have not 
changed the waiver provisions in Sec.  160.214.
    Please note that NOAD cost-and-impact related comments also appear 
above in Sections VI.A.6 (Electronic Submission), 10 (Need for NOAD 
Data and Agency Collaboration in Obtaining It), and 11 (Scope and 
Scale).
2. Automatic Identification System
    We received public comments stating that AIS implementation is too 
costly and should not be required for smaller vessel owner and 
operators. Based on these comments that AIS would adversely affect 
small vessels owners and operators, and our assessment of the speed and 
maneuverability of vessels, we made a change from the proposed rule 
that will allow the following vessels to meet our AIS carriage 
requirement by installing Class B AIS devices, a less costly 
alternative to Class A AIS devices: (1) Fishing industry vessels, (2) 
Vessels that are certificated to carry more than 150 passengers, that 
are less than 65 feet in length, that do not operate in a VTS or VMRS 
area defined in Table 161.12(c) of Sec.  161.12 of this chapter, and 
that are not capable of speeds in excess of 14 knots, and (3) self-
propelled vessels engaged in dredging operations in or near a 
commercial channel or shipping fairway in a manner likely to restrict 
or affect navigation of other vessels.
    The Class B AIS device is significantly less expensive (average 
unit cost of about $700) than the Class A AIS device (average unit cost 
of about $3,230) (see the Regulatory Impact Analysis in the docket for 
more detail on cost). This change in the requirement will impact about 
55 percent of the affected population of vessels and should alleviate 
some of the economic burden on smaller vessel owners and operators. In 
addition, this final rule does not require passenger vessels less than 
65 feet in length to carry an AIS device if they are not certificated 
to carry more than 150 passengers.
    We also received comments on the unaddressed associated 
installation cost of an AIS device. An AIS device is a standalone 
device that can function without the requirement of integration or a 
retrofit; therefore, we do not expect additional installation costs 
over and above the estimates presented in the NPRM. We used publicly 
available information to obtain the cost for each device.

VII. Incorporation by Reference

    The Director of the Federal Register has approved the material in 
Sec.  164.46 for incorporation by reference under 5 U.S.C. 552 and 1 
CFR part 51. Copies of the material are available from the sources 
listed in Sec.  164.03.

VIII. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and 
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses 
based on 14 of these statutes or executive orders.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 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 rule has been designated a ``significant regulatory 
action'' although not economically significant, under section 3(f) of 
Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the final rule has been reviewed by 
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). A combined final Regulatory 
Analysis and Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is available in the 
docket as indicated under ADDRESSES. A summary of the Analysis follows.
    The total cost of this rule over the 10-year period of analysis at 
a 7-percent discount rate is $46.5 million, with annualized costs of 
$6.6 million. Over 98 percent of the estimated costs of this rule are a 
direct result of express statutory mandates.
    For the NOA portion of the final rule, we estimate the total 10-
year discounted cost to be about $935,597 using a 7- percent discount 
rate. We estimate the annualized cost to be about $133,208 using a 7-
percent discount rate. Of the total overall cost for the NOA portion of 
this final rule, 100 percent of the costs are discretionary.
    For the AIS portion of this final rule, we estimate the total 10-
year discounted cost to be $46.0 million using a 7-percent discount 
rate, of which 0.15 percent of the costs are discretionary and 99.85 
percent of the costs are from provisions expressly required by statute. 
We estimate the annualized cost to be $6.5 million using a 7-percent 
discount rate. See Table 3.
    We expect benefits of this final rule to include improved security, 
safety and environmental protection. The Coast Guard believes that this 
final rule will enhance maritime and navigation safety through a 
synergistic effect of NOA and AIS, and will strengthen maritime 
security.
    We believe this final rule, through a combination of NOA and AIS, 
will strengthen and enhance maritime security. Combining the NOA 
requirement with other sources such as

[[Page 5315]]

AIS, we expect the final rule to help us form a COP in which vessel-
specific movements in our ports and waterways can be monitored in real 
time, enabling us to filter data from non-compliant collection 
mechanisms such as radar, thereby enhancing our ability to rapidly 
detect, identify, and track suspicious vessels.
    We assess improvements to maritime security qualitatively, 
resulting from the improved quantity and quality of information, and 
enhanced communications and MDA. We expect quantitative benefits in the 
form of pollution prevented and casualties avoided. From our analysis 
of casualty cases over a 15-year period from 1996-2010, we estimate 
that the final rule will prevent between 85 and 106 barrels of oil from 
being spilled, at 7- and 3-percent discount rates, respectively, over 
the 10-year period of analysis. We estimate the value of casualties 
(deaths, injuries) avoided to be between $25.1 and $31.2 million over 
the same period of analysis, at 7- and 3-percent discount rates, 
respectively. The following table provides a comparison of regulatory 
impacts resulting from changes between the NPRM and the final rule.

                  Table 3--Comparison of Regulatory Impact Changes Between NPRM and Final Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Category                         NPRM                   Final Rule             Reason for change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Compliance Start Date............  NOAD: Beginning 2009.....  NOA: April 30, 2015.....  Extension of compliance
                                   AIS: Mid 2009............  AIS: March 1, 2016......   start date.
Number of vessels affected.......  NOAD: 30,850 U.S. and      NOA: 18,377 U.S. and      Change in applicability,
                                    foreign.                   foreign vessels.          as well as improved
                                   AIS: 17,442 U.S. and       AIS: 5,922 U.S. and        data analysis, which
                                    foreign.                   foreign vessels.          explains why final rule
                                                                                         estimates are lower
                                                                                         than in NPRM.
Costs ($ millions, 7-percent       NOAD:....................  NOA:....................  Decline in NOA costs due
 discount rate) (U.S. and Foreign  10-year: $51.3-$69.5       Foreign Costs: Mean        to elimination of
 vessels combined).                 (millions).                trips, $0.73-$0.89        proposed NOD
                                   Annualized: $7.3-$9.7       million (7 and 3          requirement, the
                                    (millions).                percent).                 addition of several
                                                                                         exemptions and an
                                                                                         exception; also
                                                                                         existing CBP
                                                                                         requirements for
                                                                                         electronic submissions
                                                                                         allowed us attribute
                                                                                         the cost of computers
                                                                                         to CBP regulations.
                                                                                         Change in AIS
                                                                                         applicability;
                                                                                         additional flexibility
                                                                                         for compliance to
                                                                                         include the less costly
                                                                                         Class B AIS devices on
                                                                                         certain classes of
                                                                                         vessels.
                                   .........................  U.S. Costs: Mean trips,
                                                               $0.20-$0.24 million (7
                                                               and 3 percent).
                                   AIS:.....................
                                   10-year: $130.1 million..
                                   Annualized: $18.0 million
                                   .........................  10-year: $935,597.......
                                                              Annualized: $133,208
                                                               (above NOA costs not in
                                                               millions).
                                   Total:...................
                                   10-year: $181.4-$199.6
                                    (millions).
                                   Annualized: $25.3-$27.7
                                    (millions).
                                   .........................  AIS:....................
                                                              Foreign Costs: $0.58-
                                                               $0.69 million (7 and 3
                                                               percent).
                                   .........................  U.S. Costs: $45.0-$53.4
                                                               million (7 and 3
                                                               percent).
                                   .........................  10-year: $46.0 million..
                                                              Annualized: $6.5 million
                                   .........................  Total NOA & AIS:........
                                                              10-year: $46.5 million..
                                                              Annualized: $6.6 million
Benefits ($ millions, 7-percent    NOAD & AIS: Enhanced MDA,  NOA & AIS: Enhanced MDA,  Extension of compliance
 discount rate).                    synergy between both       synergy between both      start date; change in
                                    portions of rule;          portions of rule;         applicability.
                                    improved communication.    improved communication.
                                   AIS:.....................  AIS:....................
                                   10-year: $24.7 million     10-year: $25.1 million
                                    (avoided injuries,         (avoided injuries,
                                    fatalities).               fatalities).
                                   Annualized: $3.5 million   Annualized: $3.6 million
                                    (avoided injuries,         (avoided injuries,
                                    fatalities).               fatalities).
                                   136 barrels of oil not     85 barrels of oil not
                                    spilled (10-year).         spilled (10-year).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Coast Guard is revising the applicability of NOA and AIS to 
include more commercial vessels. The NOA requirements include: 
establishing a mandatory requirement for electronic submission of NOA, 
and modifying reporting content, timeframes, and procedures. This final 
rule will also require foreign-flag commercial vessels

[[Page 5316]]

300 gross tons and less to submit NOAs when transiting two or more COTP 
zones, will add five additional fields to the NOA information 
requirements (but information for two of these fields is already 
required by two Coast Guard fields that are being modified), and 
eliminate consolidated NOAs.
    This final rule also updates our implementation of SOLAS AIS 
requirements and permits use of AIS Class B devices for certain vessels 
not subject to SOLAS to meet Sec.  164.46 AIS requirements. It also 
extends MTSA-based AIS carriage requirements beyond the current VTS 
areas to all U.S. navigable waters. The MTSA-based, AIS portion of this 
final rule covers all commercial self-propelled vessels 65 feet or more 
in length (including fishing and passenger vessels), and towing vessels 
at least 26 feet in length and 600 horsepower. It also includes--
    <bullet> Self-propelled vessels engaged in dredging operations in 
or near a commercial channel or shipping fairway in a manner likely to 
restrict or affect navigation of other vessels, and
    <bullet> Vessels moving CDC as defined in subpart C of part 160 of 
this chapter, or flammable or combustible liquid cargo in bulk.
    <bullet> Vessels certificated to carry more than 150 passengers. 
The following table describes AIS carriage costs and benefits and 
identifies the source of each requirement:
     
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ We estimated the cost per vessel to carry AIS (Class A) in 
the 2003 MTSA final rule to be $9,500 (undiscounted). Due to 
decreasing costs of AIS units over the past 5-7 years, we estimate 
the cost per vessel to carry AIS (Class A) for this final rule to be 
about $4,500 (undiscounted) per vessel.
    \5\ These figures do not include towing vessels and dredges 
which are accounted for separately below.

               Table 4--AIS Carriage Costs Including Initialization and Updates, and Benefits \4\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                            Benefits (quantified
  Vessels required by Final     Annualized cost    Specific MTSA or   Coast Guard's effort    benefits  include
       Rule to have AIS           (7%)/vessel       SOLAS  source       to  minimize cost       all affected
                                  population          provision                                   vessels)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial vessels >= 65 feet  $4.4 million/     Title 46 U.S.C.      For all vessels       By requiring AIS on
 in length.                     4,402 vessels,    70114(a)(1)(A)       included based on     the vessels listed
                                including 2,906   (section 102 of      MTSA, a deviation     in this table, this
                                fishing           MTSA).               of up to 5 years      final rule provides
                                vessels.\5\      Mandatory; Under      may be granted for--  AIS data that--
                                                  this MTSA                                 <bullet> Enhances
                                                  provision, no       <bullet> Vessels       situational and
                                                  decision by the      that operate solely   maritime domains
                                                  Secretary is         within a very         awareness which
                                                  required to          confined area         assists users in
                                                  establish which      (e.g., less than a    traffic management,
                                                  vessels must have    1 nautical-mile       safety, and
                                                  AIS.                 radius, shipyard,     security (i.e.,
                                                                       or barge fleeting     MDA) decision-
                                                                       facility);.           making;
                                                                      <bullet> Vessels      <bullet> Enables
                                                                       that conduct only     transportation
                                                                       short voyages (less   efficiency by
                                                                       than 1 nautical       reducing the more
                                                                       mile) on a fixed      dramatic ship
                                                                       schedule (e.g., a     movements required
                                                                       bank-to-bank river    to avoid collisions
                                                                       ferry service or a    when in extremis:
                                                                       tender vessel);.      lower fuel
                                                                      <bullet> Vessels       consumption, more
                                                                       that are not likely   reliable
                                                                       to encounter other    scheduling, faster
                                                                       AIS-equipped          transits; and
                                                                       vessels;.            <bullet> Improves,
                                                                      <bullet> Vessels       as intended by
                                                                       whose design or       SOLAS, collision
                                                                       construction makes    avoidance, vessel
                                                                       it impracticable to   traffic services,
                                                                       operate an AIS        and, a means for
                                                                       device (e.g., those   authorities to
                                                                       that lack             obtain info on
                                                                       electrical power,     vessels and their
                                                                       have an exposed or    cargoes.
                                                                       open cabin, or are   Quantitative
                                                                       submersible); or.     Benefits (all
                                                                      <bullet> Vessels       vessels classes):
                                                                       denoted in           85-106 barrels of
                                                                       paragraph (b)(2)      oil not spilled, 7-
                                                                       that seek a           and 3-percent
                                                                       deviation from        discount rates, 10-
                                                                       requirements in       year period of
                                                                       paragraphs            analysis.
                                                                       (d)(2)(ii) and (e)   $25.1-$31.2 million
                                                                       of this section       in injuries and
                                                                       because their AIS     deaths at 7- and 3-
                                                                       Class B device        percent discount
                                                                       lacks a display.      rates over 10-year
                                                                      <bullet> Fishing       period of analysis,
                                                                       vessels may use an    or $3.6 million
                                                                       AIS Class B unit.     annualized at both
                                                                                             discount rates.

[[Page 5317]]

 
Passenger vessels              0 vessels \6\...  46 U.S.C.            Exercised discretion  No quantified
 certificated to carry more                       70114(a)(1)(B) &     under SOLAS not to    benefits, since no
 than 150 passengers and <65                      (D).                 include all vessels   vessels in this
 feet in length.                                 Discretionary;        carrying more than    category exist in
                                                  Under these MTSA     12 passengers.        our population of
                                                  provisions, a       MTSA mandate based     vessels.
                                                  decision by the      on DHS Secretary
                                                  Secretary is         passenger-for-hire
                                                  required to          threshold
                                                  establish which      determination.
                                                  vessels must have    SOLAS mandate
                                                  AIS.                 extends to all
                                                                       vessels carrying
                                                                       more than 12
                                                                       passengers. DHS
                                                                       determination to
                                                                       adopt a threshold
                                                                       of more than 150
                                                                       passengers takes
                                                                       into account the
                                                                       consequences of a
                                                                       transportation
                                                                       safety or security
                                                                       incident and the
                                                                       impact on small
                                                                       entities.
                                                                      <bullet> Exercised
                                                                       discretion under
                                                                       SOLAS not to
                                                                       include all vessels
                                                                       carrying more than
                                                                       12 passengers.
                                                                      <bullet> Limited to
                                                                       self-propelled
                                                                       vessels.
                                                                      <bullet> Limited to
                                                                       vessels
                                                                       certificated to
                                                                       carry more than 150
                                                                       passengers.
                                                                      May use an AIS Class
                                                                       B unit, if not in a
                                                                       VTS or VMRS area,
                                                                       and not capable of
                                                                       operating above 14
                                                                       knots.
Towing vessels >= 26 ft in     $2.0 million/     46 U.S.C.            ....................  Although expressly
 length and 600 hp.             1,429 vessels.    70114(a)(1)(C).                            required by MTSA,
                                                 Mandatory; Under                            owners and
                                                  this MTSA                                  operators of these
                                                  provision, no                              towing vessels
                                                  decision by the                            accrue the same
                                                  Secretary is                               benefits as owners
                                                  required to                                and operators all
                                                  establish which                            other vessels
                                                  vessels must have                          equipped with AIS.
                                                  AIS.                                       Quantified benefits
                                                                                             included in first
                                                                                             category of this
                                                                                             table.
Dredges......................  $0.010 million/   46 U.S.C.            <bullet> Limited to   Provides greater
                                17 vessels.       70114(a)(1)(D).      self-propelled        awareness to
                                                 Discretionary;        vessels.              vessels engaged in
                                                  Under this MTSA     <bullet> Limited to    dredging near a
                                                  provision, a         vessels that are      commercial channel
                                                  decision by the      engaged in dredging   of approaching
                                                  Secretary is         operations in or      vessels, and
                                                  required to          near a commercial     provides
                                                  establish which      channel or shipping   approaching vessels
                                                  vessels must have    fairway in a manner   with greater
                                                  AIS.                 likely to restrict    awareness of
                                                                       or affect             dredging activity,
                                                                       navigation of other   and thus addresses
                                                                       vessels.              the risk of
                                                                      <bullet> May use an    collisions and
                                                                       AIS Class B unit.     other mishaps
                                                                                             involving such
                                                                                             vessels. Quantified
                                                                                             benefits included
                                                                                             in first category
                                                                                             of this table.
Vessels engaged in the         nil \7\/0         46 U.S.C.            Limited to self-      Provides greater
 movement of certain            vessels           70114(a)(1)(D).      propelled vessels     awareness to
 dangerous cargo or flammable   (Vessels         Discretionary;        of 26 feet or under.  vessels carrying
 or combustible liquid cargo    included in       Under this MTSA                            CDC of approaching
 in bulk.                       first category    provision, a                               vessels, and
                                of this table).   decision by the                            provides all other
                                                  Secretary is                               AIS users with
                                                  required to                                greater awareness,
                                                  establish which                            and thus addresses
                                                  vessels must have                          the risk of
                                                  AIS.                                       collisions and
                                                                                             other mishaps
                                                                                             involving such
                                                                                             vessels. Quantified
                                                                                             benefits included
                                                                                             in first category
                                                                                             of this table.

[[Page 5318]]

 
Vessels >=300 gross tonnage,   nil \8\/0         SOLAS Art. I,        Use of an AIS Class   As a Contracting
 on an international voyage.    vessels.          SOLAS, 32 U.S.T.     B Device is not       Government to
                                                  47, and the          permitted under       SOLAS, the United
                                                  Protocol of 1978     SOLAS.                States has a
                                                  relating to SOLAS,                         responsibility to
                                                  32 U.S.T. 5577.                            implement mandatory
                                                  SOLAS, Chapter V,                          SOLAS provisions
                                                  regulation 1.4 and                         such as these AIS,
                                                  19.2.4.                                    SOLAS Chapter V
                                                 Mandatory; Under                            provisions.
                                                  this SOLAS
                                                  provision, no
                                                  decision by the
                                                  Secretary is
                                                  required to
                                                  establish which
                                                  vessels must have
                                                  AIS.
A vessel of >=150 gross        nil \9\/0         Same as above......  Same as above.......  Same as above.
 tonnage, when carrying more    vessels.
 than 12 passengers on an
 international voyage.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    \6\ All passenger vessels certificated to carry more than 150 
passengers are > 65 feet in length and are included in the > 65 feet 
category above.
    \7\ The analysis assumes that any vessel transporting or moving 
a barge containing CDC falls into one of the above categories (e.g., 
commercial vessel >= 65 ft; towing vessel >= 26 ft & 600 hp). This 
category of vessels is specified in the regulations to ensure that 
in the future, any vessel regardless of size/category moving CDC has 
an AIS unit.
    \8\ This requirement covers the same vessels captured by our 
previous corresponding SOLAS requirements, or by MTSA's requirement 
for commercial vessels >= 65 ft in length.
    \9\ This requirement covers the same vessels as our existing 
corresponding SOLAS requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have placed NOAD applicability and exemption provisions from 
both the final rule and the NPRM adjacent to each other in the 
following derivation and comparison table so that you may quickly 
identify differences in vessels covered by this final rule compared 
with those the NPRM proposed to cover.

 Table 5--NOAD Derivation and Comparison Table: Final Rule and NPRM Applicability and Exemption Paragraphs in 33
                                                  CFR Part 160
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Final rule paragraph in 33 CFR                                 NPRM paragraph in 33
             part 160                     Final rule text            CFR part 160          Proposed rule text
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.   160.203(a).................  This subpart applies to     Sec.   160.203(a)....  This subpart applies to
                                     the following vessels                              U.S. vessels in
                                     that are bound for or                              commercial service and
                                     departing from ports or                            all foreign vessels that
                                     places within the                                  are bound for or
                                     navigable waters of the                            departing from ports or
                                     United States, as defined                          places of the United
                                     in 33 CFR 2.36(a), which                           States.
                                     includes internal waters
                                     and the territorial seas
                                     of the United States, and
                                     any deepwater port as
                                     defined in 33 CFR 148.5:
                                    (1) U.S. vessels in
                                     commercial service, and.
                                    (2) All foreign vessels...
Sec.   160.204(a).................  NO CHANGE FROM NPRM.......  Sec.   160.204(a)....  Except for reporting
                                                                                        notice of hazardous
                                                                                        conditions, the
                                                                                        following vessels are
                                                                                        exempt from requirements
                                                                                        in this subpart:
(1)...............................  NO CHANGE FROM NPRM.......  (1)..................  A passenger or offshore
                                                                                        supply vessel when
                                                                                        employed in the
                                                                                        exploration for or in
                                                                                        the removal of oil, gas,
                                                                                        or mineral resources on
                                                                                        the continental shelf.
(2)...............................  NO CHANGE FROM NPRM.......  (2)..................  An oil spill response
                                                                                        vessel (OSRV) when
                                                                                        engaged in actual spill
                                                                                        response operations or
                                                                                        during spill response
                                                                                        exercises.
(3)...............................  After December 31, 2015, a  (3)..................  A vessel required by 33
                                     vessel required by 33 CFR                          CFR 165.830 or 165.921
                                     165.830 or 165.921 to                              to report to the Inland
                                     report its movements, its                          River Vessel Movement
                                     cargo, or the cargo in                             Center (IRVMC).
                                     barges it is towing.
(4)...............................  A United States or          .....................  NO CORRESPONDING
                                     Canadian vessel engaged                            PARAGRAPH.
                                     in the salving operations
                                     of any property wrecked,
                                     or rendering aid and
                                     assistance to any vessels
                                     wrecked, disabled, or in
                                     distress, in waters
                                     specified in Article II
                                     of the 1908 Treaty of
                                     Extradition, Wrecking and
                                     Salvage (35 Stat. 2035;
                                     Treaty Series 502).

[[Page 5319]]

 
(5)...............................  NO CHANGE IN TEXT FROM      (4)..................  The following vessels
                                     NPRM.                                              neither carrying certain
                                                                                        dangerous cargo nor
                                                                                        controlling another
                                                                                        vessel carrying certain
                                                                                        dangerous cargo:
(i)...............................  NO CHANGE FROM NPRM.......  (i)..................  A foreign vessel 300
                                                                                        gross tons or less not
                                                                                        engaged in commercial
                                                                                        service.
(ii)..............................  NO CHANGE FROM NPRM.......  (ii).................  A vessel operating
                                                                                        exclusively within a
                                                                                        single Captain of the
                                                                                        Port Zone. Captain of
                                                                                        the Port zones are
                                                                                        defined in 33 CFR part
                                                                                        3.
(iii).............................  A U.S. towing vessel and a  (iii)................  A U.S. towing vessel and
                                     U.S. barge operating                               a U.S. barge operating
                                     solely between ports or                            solely between ports or
                                     places of the contiguous                           places of the
                                     48 states, Alaska, and                             continental United
                                     the District of Columbia.                          States.
(iv)..............................  NO CHANGE FROM NPRM.......  (iv).................  A public vessel.
(v)...............................  NO CHANGE FROM NPRM.......  (v)..................  Except for a tank vessel,
                                                                                        a U.S. vessel operating
                                                                                        solely between ports or
                                                                                        places of the United
                                                                                        States on the Great
                                                                                        Lakes.
(vi)..............................  A U.S. vessel 300 gross     (vi).................  A U.S. vessel 300 gross
                                     tons or less, engaged in                           tons or less, engaged in
                                     commercial service not                             commercial service not
                                     coming from a foreign                              coming from a foreign
                                     port or place.                                     port or place.
(vii).............................  Each ferry on a fixed       .....................  NO CORRESPONDING
                                     route that is described                            PARAGRAPH.
                                     in a schedule that is
                                     submitted by the ferry
                                     operator, along with
                                     information in paragraphs
                                     (a)(5)(vii)(A)-(J) of
                                     this section, to the
                                     Captain of the Port for
                                     each port or place of
                                     destination listed in the
                                     schedule at least 24
                                     hours in advance of the
                                     first date and time of
                                     arrival listed on the
                                     schedule. At least 24
                                     hours before the first
                                     date and time of arrival
                                     listed on the ferry
                                     schedule, each ferry
                                     operator who submits a
                                     schedule under paragraph
                                     (a)(5)(vii) of this
                                     section must also provide
                                     the following information
                                     to the Captain of the
                                     Port for each port or
                                     place of destination
                                     listed in the schedule
                                     for the ferry, and if the
                                     schedule or the following
                                     submitted information
                                     changes, the ferry
                                     operator must submit an
                                     updated schedule at least
                                     24 hours in advance of
                                     the first date and time
                                     of arrival listed on the
                                     new schedule and updates
                                     on the following items
                                     whenever the submitted
                                     information is no longer
                                     accurate:
                                    (A) Name of the vessel;...
                                    (B) Country of registry of
                                     the vessel;.
                                    (C) Call sign of the
                                     vessel;.
                                    (D) International Maritime
                                     Organization (IMO)
                                     international number or,
                                     if the vessel does not
                                     have an assigned IMO
                                     international number, the
                                     official number of the
                                     vessel;.
                                    (E) Name of the registered
                                     owner of the vessel;.
                                    (F) Name of the operator
                                     of the vessel;.
                                    (G) Name of the vessel's
                                     classification society or
                                     recognized organization,
                                     if applicable;
                                    (H) Each port or place of
                                     destination;.
                                    (I) Estimated dates and
                                     times of arrivals at and
                                     departures from these
                                     ports or places; and.
                                    (J) Name and telephone
                                     number of a 24-hour point
                                     of contact..
(6)...............................  April 30, 2015 through      .....................  NO CORRESPONDING
                                     December 31, 2015,                                 PARAGRAPH.
                                     vessels identified as
                                     being subject to 33 CFR
                                     165.830 or 165.921.
Sec.   160.215....................  NO CHANGE FROM NPRM.......  Sec.   160.215.......  When a vessel is bound
                                                                                        for a port or place of
                                                                                        the United States under
                                                                                        force majeure, it must
                                                                                        comply with the
                                                                                        requirements in this
                                                                                        section, but not other
                                                                                        sections of this
                                                                                        subpart.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 5320]]

    We have placed AIS applicability provisions from both the final 
rule and the NPRM adjacent to each other in the following derivation 
and comparison table so that you may readily identify differences in 
vessels covered by this final rule compared with those the NPRM 
proposed to cover.

                       Table 6--AIS Derivation and Comparison Table: Final Rule and NPRM Applicability Paragraphs in 33 CFR 164.46
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       Corresponding NPRM
 Final rule paragraph in 33 CFR 164.46                Final rule text                  paragraph in 33 CFR                Proposed rule text
                                                                                             164.46
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b)(1)................................  AIS Class A device. The following vessels   (b).....................  The following vessels must have onboard a
                                         must have on board a properly installed,                              properly installed, operational, Coast
                                         operational Coast Guard type-approved AIS                             Guard type-approved Automatic
                                         Class A device:                                                       Identification System (AIS):
    (i)...............................  NO CHANGE IN TEXT FROM NPRM.                   (1)..................  A self-propelled vessel of 65 feet or more
                                                                                                               in length, engaged in commercial service;
    (ii)..............................  A towing vessel of 26 feet or more in          (2)..................  A towing vessel of 26 feet or more in
                                         length and more than 600 horsepower,                                  length and more than 600 horsepower,
                                         engaged in commercial service.                                        engaged in commercial towing;
    (iii).............................  A vessel that is certificated to carry         (3)..................  A self-propelled vessel carrying 50 or
                                         more than 150 passengers.                                             more passengers, engaged in commercial
                                                                                                               service;
                                        NO CORRESPONDING TEXT IN FINAL RULE.           (4)..................  A vessel carrying more than 12 passengers
                                                                                                               for hire and capable of speeds in excess
                                                                                                               of 30 knots;
    (iv)..............................  A self-propelled vessel engaged in             (5)..................  A dredge or floating plant engaged in or
                                         dredging operations in or near a                                      near a commercial channel or shipping
                                         commercial channel or shipping fairway in                             fairway in operations likely to restrict
                                         a manner likely to restrict or affect                                 or affect navigation of other vessels
                                         navigation of other vessels.                                          except for an unmanned or intermittently
                                                                                                               manned floating plant under the control
                                                                                                               of a dredge; and
    (v)...............................  A self-propelled vessel engaged in the         (6)..................  A self-propelled vessel carrying or
                                         movement of--                                                         engaged in the movement of certain
                                        (A) Certain dangerous cargo as defined in                              dangerous cargoes as defined in Sec.
                                         subpart C of part 160 of this chapter, or                             160.202 of this subchapter.
                                        (B) Flammable or combustible liquid cargo
                                         in bulk that is listed in 46 CFR 30.25-1,
                                         Table 30.25-1.
(b)(2)................................  AIS Class B device. Use of a U.S. Coast     See Note to paragraph     NO CORRESPONDING PARAGRAPH, but see
                                         Guard type-approved AIS Class B device in   (b).                      explanatory ``Note to paragraph (b):
                                         lieu of an AIS Class A device is                                      Except for those vessels denoted in
                                         permissible on the following vessels if                               paragraph (c) of this section, use of
                                         they are not subject to pilotage by other                             Coast Guard type-approved AIS Class B is
                                         than the vessel Master or crew:                                       permissible, however, not well-suited, on
                                                                                                               vessels that are highly maneuverable,
                                                                                                               navigate at high speed, or routinely
                                                                                                               operate on or near very congested
                                                                                                               waterways or in close-quarter situations
                                                                                                               with other AIS equipped vessels.''
    (i)...............................  Fishing industry vessels                    ........................  NO CORRESPONDING PARAGRAPH.
    (ii)..............................  Vessels identified in paragraph (b)(1)(i)   ........................  NO CORRESPONDING PARAGRAPH.
                                         of this section that are certificated to
                                         carry less than 150 passengers, and that--
 
                                        (A) Do not operate in a VTS or VMRS area
                                         defined in Table 161.12(c) of Sec.
                                         161.12 of this chapter, and
                                        (B) Do not operate at speeds in excess of
                                         14 knots; and engaged in dredging
                                         operations; and
    (iii).............................  Vessels identified in paragraph (b)(1)(iv)  ........................  NO CORRESPONDING PARAGRAPH.
                                         of this section engaged in dredging
                                         operations.
(c)...................................  SOLAS provisions. The following self-       (c).....................  SOLAS provisions. The following self-
                                         propelled vessels must comply with                                    propelled vessels must comply with
                                         International Convention for Safety of                                International Convention for Safety of
                                         Life at Sea (SOLAS), as amended, Chapter                              Life at Sea (SOLAS), as amended, Chapter
                                         V, regulation 19.2.1.6 (Positioning                                   V, regulation 19.2.1.6, 19.2.4 (AIS Class
                                         System), 19.2.4 (AIS Class A), and                                    A), and 19.2.3.5 or 19.2.5.1 as
                                         19.2.3.5 (Transmitting Heading Device) or                             applicable (Incorporated by reference,
                                         19.2.5.1 (Gyro Compass) as applicable                                 see Sec.   164.03):
                                         (Incorporated by reference, see Sec.
                                         164.03):
                                        NO CORRESPONDING PARAGRAPH.                    (1)..................  A vessel of 500 gross tonnage or more;
    (1)...............................  A vessel of 300 gross tonnage or more, on      (2)..................  A vessel of 300 gross tonnage or more, on
                                         an international voyage.                                              an international voyage; and

[[Page 5321]]

 
    (2)...............................  NO CHANGE IN TEXT FROM NPRM.                   (3)..................  A vessel of 150 gross tonnage or more,
                                                                                                               when carrying more than 12 passengers on
                                                                                                               an international voyage.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To eliminate confusion and redundancy within the industry, we have 
generally aligned our NOA regulations with CBP regulations under its 
APIS final rule (70 FR 17820, as amended at 72 FR 48320), which 
requires that vessels arriving from a foreign port or place to submit 
arrival manifests and those departing for a foreign port or place to 
submit departure manifests. The submission of an NOA itself for this 
population of vessels is not a new requirement. However, we have added 
five fields (vessel's MMSI number, whether vessel 300-gross-ton-or-
less, whether voyage less than 24 hours, last port of departure, and 
arrival and departure date for last port of departure) to the NOA, two 
of which are already required by two Coast Guard requirements that we 
are modifying. A NOD will not be required in this final rule.
    This rule will also require foreign commercial vessels 300 gross 
tons or less that transit two or more COTP zones to submit an NOA, 
which is not currently a CBP requirement. In addition, these vessel 
owners would be eligible to seek waivers under Sec.  160.214 at the 
discretion of the COTP, a current Coast Guard practice.
    This final rule will require the electronic submission of an NOA, 
and will modify related reporting content, timeframes, and procedures. 
This rule will also create an efficient and timesaving method of 
notification thereby reducing the hour burden on industry and Coast 
Guard resources.
    Our 60-minute notice time provides flexibility for owners of 
smaller U.S.-flag vessels and certain Canadian-flag vessels, because 
these businesses would continue to be able to operate efficiently as 
charter businesses due to the spontaneous nature of their business. 
This requirement also better aligns with the CBP's current requirement, 
which will alleviate confusion within the industry and provide 
consistency for the public.
    We estimate the NOA portion of this rule will affect approximately 
3,430 U.S. vessels and 14,947 foreign-flag vessels. The following 
estimates use a 7-percent discount rate over a 10-year period of 
analysis. We estimate the annual cost to U.S. vessel owners and 
operators to be about $28,706. We estimate the annual cost to foreign-
flag vessel owners and operators to be about $104,502. We estimate the 
10-year NOA cost to U.S. vessel owners and operators to be about 
$201,619. We estimate the 10-year NOA cost to foreign-flag vessel 
owners and operators to be about $733,978. We estimate the total 
annualized costs of the NOA requirements for both U.S. and foreign 
owners and operators to be about $133,208. We estimate the total 
present value 10-year costs of the NOA requirements for both U.S and 
foreign-flag vessel owners and operators to be about $935,597. We 
estimate this rule will add less than 1 dollar per vessel trip on 
average for an owner or operator to submit an NOA.
    The AIS costs associated with this rule as presented are a result 
of the AIS carriage requirement, which includes the AIS device cost, 
installation, maintenance, training, replacement costs, unit 
initialization, and voyage specific updates. We estimate the AIS 
provisions will affect about 5,848 U.S. vessels and about 74 foreign-
flag vessels.
    The following estimates use a 7-percent discount rate over a 10-
year period of analysis. We estimate, for owners and operators of U.S. 
vessels that will be required to carry AIS onboard, the 10-year present 
value cost to be $45.0 million, with annualized costs of about $6.4 
million at a 7-percent discount rate. We estimate for owners and 
operators of foreign-flag vessels the present value 10-year cost of 
this final rule to be $585,000, with annualized costs of about $83,000. 
We estimate for all owners and operators of U.S.- and foreign-flag 
vessels the total present value 10-year cost of the AIS provisions to 
be $45.5 million, with annualized costs of about $6.5 million.
    We estimate the total present value 10-year cost of the final rule, 
including both NOA and AIS provisions, to be $46.5 million, with 
annualized costs of about $6.6 million. In our sample of 77 small 
entities, we found these entities owned 244 total vessels, or about 3 
vessels per entity. Again, for the purpose of our analysis, we assumed 
all owners would install a Class A AIS device since we were not able to 
determine which small entities would choose to install the less costly 
Class B AIS device. Each small entity will purchase one AIS device for 
each vessel it owns. If a small entity owns one vessel, it will 
purchase one AIS device to meet the requirements of this final rule. We 
estimate this final rule will cost a small entity on average between 
about $2,000 and $14,300 to install, maintain, and carry AIS onboard 
depending upon the vessel class and whether the vessel will carry a 
Class A unit or Class B unit and to submit the three additional NOA 
fields. See Table 7.

Table 7--Cost per Small Entity To Carry Three AIS Units and Submit Three
                          Additional NOA Fields
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Average cost per
                                                     owner/operator to
                                 Types of vessels   purchase on average
       Type of AIS unit             to install      three AIS units and
                                                       complete three
                                                   additional NOA fields
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class B plus NOA submissions..  Commercial         $6,051 (initial year:
                                 Fishing and        $6,027 for three AIS
                                 vessels engaged    units and $24 for
                                 in dredging        three additional NOA
                                 operations.        fields).
                                                   $774 (annually: $250
                                                    for AIS maintenance
                                                    and $24 for three
                                                    additional NOA
                                                    fields).

[[Page 5322]]

 
Class A plus NOA submissions..  All other vessels  $14,340 (initial
                                 classes.           year: $14,316 for
                                                    three AIS units and
                                                    $24 for three
                                                    additional NOA
                                                    fields).
                                                   $1,473 (annually:
                                                    $1,449 for AIS
                                                    including updates
                                                    and $24 for three
                                                    additional NOA
                                                    fields).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We expect this final rule to improve the quantity and quality of 
information, and enhance communications and MDA. We believe this final 
rule, through a combination of NOA and AIS, will strengthen maritime 
and national security. This rule will include a large number of vessels 
not currently covered under the current NOA and AIS regulations. We 
expect this final rule will provide us with a better understanding of 
vessels coming to the United States and help us determine which vessels 
may pose a threat as a target, weapon, or transport of suspicious 
persons and/or materials. NOA provides us advance warning of those 
intending to enter our waters, and electronic submission allows us 
greater time to evaluate this information, and to take action if 
warranted based on information about a potential threat by the vessel 
or persons on board the vessel. Specifically, the NOA requirement is 
combined with other sources such as AIS to form a COP in which vessel-
specific movements in our ports and waterways can be monitored in real 
time enabling us to filter data from non-compliant collection 
mechanisms such as radar, thereby enhancing our ability to rapidly 
detect, identify, and track suspicious vessels. This information is 
used as a decision making aid by the Coast Guard field commanders and 
is also referenced in support of interagency and Department of Defense 
homeland security efforts. Creating this COP helps the Coast Guard 
prioritize its limited resources and meet mission requirements while 
maintaining MDA. Moreover, along with passenger, crew and cargo 
information required by CBP, we can determine if a suspicious person is 
onboard a vessel and by adding AIS, we can determine the position of 
the suspicious vessel. We believe NOA and AIS combined will serve as a 
deterrent and will enhance Coast Guard interdiction capabilities, but 
will not completely eliminate the risk of maritime transportation 
incidents.
    As previously mentioned, we have added three NOA data fields that 
are new to industry. The addition of the MMSI number provides Coast 
Guard a unique identifier for the vessel which correlates NOA and AIS 
data and provides an accurate picture of location, and verification of 
identity of the vessel. The addition of the field ``less than 300 gross 
tons'' allows the Coast Guard an opportunity to prioritize the 
screening of vessels, schedule inspections, and possibly establish 
security or safety zones. The addition of the field, ``voyage less than 
24 hours'' will allow certain vessels that meet an exemption, such as 
U.S. flag vessels, to clarify that their voyage is less than 24 hours 
and eliminate the possibility of any delays or penalties that they may 
incur as a result of not submitting an NOA in a timely manner. The 
change to a 60-minute notice of arrival time for U.S. vessels under 300 
gross tons provides flexibility and relief to small entities that 
typically own and operate vessels of this size.
    AIS provides further benefits by allowing for rapid filtering of 
data from mechanisms that do not rely on vessel cooperation (e.g., 
radar) and thus enhances security-related missions. AIS enables us to 
quickly locate, track, and intercept these vessels. This is a similar 
approach as taken for air transportation: Flight plan, passenger 
manifests and traffic control tracking.
    From a security perspective, vessels pose a risk in three ways: 
They can be used as a weapon for terrorists (e.g., ramming another 
vessel or infrastructure component), they can be used to transport 
personnel/materials for an attack, or they can be used as the target of 
an attack. This rule helps focus Coast Guard and other resources to 
mitigate security risk across all three scenarios. Specifically, to 
determine if a vessel can be used as a weapon, a target, or as a 
transport vehicle, the Coast Guard has several tools at its disposal 
that assign risk based on valuable information contained in an NOA, 
such as crew and passenger information that CBP and the FBI use to 
identify persons or vessels that may pose a security risk to the United 
States. After receiving the NOA information, the data are placed into a 
database or matrix (dependent on the tool being used). Points are 
assigned to each vessel and a vessel is then given a priority ranking 
based on its type and stated cargo. Above a certain threshold, the 
Coast Guard determines whether a vessel requires an escort to reduce 
the possibility of the vessel being used as a weapon, a target, or as a 
transport of suspicious persons or materials, such as weapons of mass 
destruction (WMD) or weapons of mass effect (WME). If necessary, the 
vessel may be boarded or inspected to ensure it meets international 
safety and security standards.
    We expect this rule to provide quantifiable benefits in the form of 
barrels of oil not spilled in addition to benefits from avoided 
injuries and fatalities. For the NPRM, we based quantifiable benefits 
on a review of 64 marine accident cases from our MISLE database for the 
period 1996-2003 in order to obtain casualty reports involving 
commercial vessels that may have benefitted from an onboard AIS unit. 
For the final rule, we also examined casualty cases for the period 
2004-2010 and found an additional 21 cases where AIS may have been 
beneficial in preventing an accident. For the period 1996-2009, we 
estimate the final rule will prevent 85 to 106 barrels of oil from 
being spilled during a 10-year period of analysis. We also analyzed 
more than 800 casualty incidents for 2010 and found only three cases 
where AIS may have been beneficial; however, the three cases did not 
involve any injuries, fatalities, death, or pollution and therefore did 
not provide additional benefits.
    Using a VSL of $9.1 million, we also estimated additional benefits 
(from avoided injuries and fatalities) of $25.1 million at a 7-percent 
discount rate, during the 10-year period of analysis or an annualized 
amount of about $3.6 million. The VSL estimate is based on the 2013 
memorandum from DOT titled ``Guidance on Treatment of the Economic 
Value of a Statistical Life in U.S. Department of Transportation 
Analyses.'' This memorandum is available in the docket as detailed 
under ADDRESSES. The VSL is not an estimate of the value of a person's 
life, but is instead a technical valuation of the amount one would be 
willing to pay to

[[Page 5323]]

reduce the probability of fatality. For example, a $9.1 million VSL 
means the public is willing to pay $9.10 to reduce the risk of a 
fatality by 1 in a million.
    Our evaluation of the 85 accident cases, including 2010, also 
resulted in about $5.1 million in property damage or about $350,000 per 
year.
    AIS helps reduce the risk of attack in two ways: (1) Reducing the 
likelihood of a successful attack, and (2) reducing the consequences 
should a successful attack occur. AIS reduces the likelihood of a 
successful attack which arises from the enhanced ability to defeat an 
attack. We identify the steps require to defeat an attack and how AIS 
helps to detect an attack in Table 20 of the regulatory analysis 
available on the docket for review. In Table 22 of the regulatory 
analysis, we also present illustrative scenarios where NOA in 
conjunction with AIS may be helpful in attacks ranging from any attack 
versus any size passenger vessel to an attack versus a cruise ship from 
a large VBIED. AIS also assists in identifying vessels in position to 
assist with emergency response/search and rescue by showing location of 
vessels in response operations and their proximity to vessels in need 
of response resources. This works for all attack types by reducing the 
time to get assisting vessels on the scene of the incident.
    We performed a breakeven analysis based on common passenger vessel 
capacity amounts of 12 (threshold in Regulation 2 of the SOLAS 
International Convention), 150 (threshold used in the 2003 AIS Final 
Rule), and 2,000 (for large cruise ships that may be potential targets 
of smaller vessels that carry a vessel borne improvised explosive 
device (VBIED)). Table 8 that follows presents the annual risk 
reduction required for passenger vessels with certain passenger 
capacities for the final rule to breakeven. We estimated the annualized 
cost for the 288 passenger vessels, affected by this rule, at a 7-
percent discount rate to be $0.33 million. Using the scenario of 150 
lives saved for passenger vessels as our example, we can determine the 
number of years the final rule will have to prevent one incident 
involving 150 casualties in order for benefits to outweigh costs. From 
Table 8, the benefit from casualties avoided is $1.4 billion using $9.1 
million as the value of a statistical life. Using the annualized cost 
of $0.33 million for this population of passenger vessels affected by 
the final rule (288), we can determine the number of years the final 
rule would have to prevent one casualty in order for benefits to 
outweigh costs. Multiplying $0.33 million by the variable ``time'' and 
equating it to the benefit value of $1.4 billion, we solve for time to 
obtain 4,136 years, meaning the final rule would have to prevent one 
casualty incident involving 150 passengers in this time period for the 
final rule to be beneficial.


Table 8--Annual Risk Reduction Required for Costs to Equal Benefits for Passenger Vessels With Certain Passenger
                                                   Capacities
                                    [Annual costs at 7-percent discount rate]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  Risk reduction
                                                   Benefit from     Annualized                       required
                                                    casualties       cost for     Risk reduction      (years
          Potential casualties avoided                avoided        passenger     required  (%)      between
                                                    ($millions)       vessels                         averted
                                                                    ($millions)                      attacks)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12..............................................          $109.2           $0.33            0.30             331
150.............................................           1,365            0.33            0.02           4,136
2,000...........................................          18,200            0.33          0.0018          55,152
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These estimates do not reflect the full socioeconomic benefits of 
oil spill mitigation and risk reduction associated with vessels, which 
include avoided damages to the ecosystem and regional and national 
economic impacts. The scenarios above show the loss of human capital 
only for passenger vessels with certain passenger capacities specified 
above, and with no regard for physical assets, it likely underestimates 
the monetary effects of a terrorist incident. The human capital 
scenario shown as benefits from casualties avoided provide a useful 
account of the risk reduction in years required for the final rule to 
breakeven.
    In the regulatory analysis, for the entire casualty period 1996-
2010, about 14 barrels of oil were spilled annually. We estimate the 
total benefit or barrels of oil not spilled for all 85 casualty cases 
between 1996 and 2010 to be between 85 and 106 barrels over the 10-year 
period of analysis at 7- and 3-percent discount rates, respectively. We 
expect annualized unmonetized benefits to be about 12 barrels of oil 
not spilled. The Regulatory Analysis for the final rule contains 
additional discussion of benefits, including qualitative benefits.
    The NOA provisions provide the ability to perform advanced 
screening of cargo, passengers and crew, thus enabling interdiction of 
illicit activities including smuggling of weapons of mass destruction 
and/or terrorists. These provisions also enable the planning and 
prioritization of other protective measures, including protecting 
surrounding critical infrastructures from attacks using the vessel and/
or protecting the vessel itself from attack. Given the range of attacks 
from a small passenger vessel to a cruise ship and the type of attack 
from a small device to a large VBIED as presented in the regulatory 
analysis, the casualty range can vary greatly, where the breakeven 
point can be minor to extremely minor. NOA may help prevent attacks 
from a man portable device with just one fatality, which would require 
only one attack prevented every 88 years up to an attack with major 
consequences from a WMD or WME.
    The AIS provisions support real-time situational awareness of 
vessel position and movements, and enable the detection of unusual/
threatening operations and subsequent interdiction. AIS requirements 
also provide for a better understanding of resources in the area of an 
incident and thus enable more effective response planning. Combined 
with NOA provisions, AIS requirements further provide the ability to 
compare actual operations with stated plans, thus enabling the 
identification of potentially threatening activities.
    See the ``Regulatory Analysis'' in Docket No. USCG-2005-21869 at 
http://www.regulations.gov for details of these calculations. The 
following link will take you directly to the docket: http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=USCG-2005-21869.

B. Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered

[[Page 5324]]

whether this final rule would have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities'' 
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are 
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, 
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
    When an agency promulgates a final rule under section 4 of the 
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553, after being required by 
that section or any other law to publish a general notice of proposed 
rulemaking, or promulgates a final interpretative rule involving the 
internal revenue laws of the United States, under 5 U.S.C. 603(a), the 
agency must prepare a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) or 
have the head of the agency certify pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that 
the final rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (RFA) prescribes the content of the FRFA in 5 U.S.C. 
604(a), a summary of which we discuss below.
    (1) The RFA requires a succinct statement of the need for, and 
objectives of, the final rule.
    Coast Guard response: The need and objective of this final rule is 
to (1) fully implement the Marine Transportation Security Act of 2002 
AIS directive found at 46 U.S.C. 70114, (2) implement SOLAS AIS 
requirements including provisions in V/19.2.4.3 that went into force 
internationally July 1, 2008, and (3) expand NOA requirements and 
streamline the processing of these data to further enhance Homeland 
Security under Ports and Waterways Safety Act authority (33 U.S.C. 1225 
& 1226) by increasing our awareness of vessels and people entering or 
departing U.S. ports or places. Prompt receipt of NOA and AIS data will 
assist the Coast Guard in preventing damage to structures on, in, or 
adjacent to the navigable waters of the United States and in protecting 
those navigable waters in the marine environment. AIS data will also 
assist vessels in avoiding collisions. This rule will affect a larger 
portion of relatively smaller vessels, which are not currently included 
under existing regulations (including fishing vessels).
    (2) The RFA requires a summary of the significant issues raised by 
the public comments in response to the IRFA, a summary of the 
assessment of the agency of such issues, and a statement of any changes 
made in the proposed rule as a result of such comments.
    Coast Guard response: We summarize the public comments we received 
on the NPRM in section VI.C of the preamble.
    (3) The RFA requires a description of and an estimate of the number 
of small entities to which the final rule will apply or an explanation 
of why no such estimate is available.
    Coast Guard response: As previously discussed, this rule will 
affect owners and operators of vessels that will be required to submit 
an NOA in addition to vessel owners and operators that will be required 
to carry and operate an AIS unit onboard. This Final Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis is based on our analysis of the requirements of 
the AIS portion of this rule as discussed in the separate Regulatory 
Analysis available in the docket for review. The addition of nine data 
fields to the NOA information requirements (only three of which are new 
to industry) will impose minor costs on industry because of the small 
burden associated with performing the task. The majority of the cost 
impact of this rule on small entities stems primarily from the AIS 
portion of this rule. We estimate that 5,821 U.S.-flag vessels will be 
affected by the AIS portion of this rule and we expect that a majority 
of these vessels may be owned by small entities based on our analysis.
    Based on current Coast Guard data, we estimate this rule will 
affect about 3,333 U.S. companies (entities) that own approximately 
9,278 vessels. We randomly selected a sample size of 345 vessel owners 
and operators to reach the 95 percent confidence level. We found 
revenue and employee information on 104 of the entities in the sample 
using publicly available information. Of these, we found 77 to be small 
entities according to Small Business Administration (SBA) size 
standards. We did not find government or non-profit entities in our 
sample. We consider the 241 with no revenue or employee information to 
be small entities, as the lack of available information likely 
indicates smaller entity size.
    We estimated the potential initial and annual revenue impact for 
each owner and operator that will be required to have AIS on board. We 
multiplied the initial and annual costs of AIS installation by the 
number of vessels that each entity owns and then divided by the average 
annual revenues for each small entity to obtain the share of costs to 
total annual revenues.
    We classified small entities by the North American Industry 
Classification System (NAICS) code for those entities that had revenue 
and size data. The 77 small entities with data are represented by 34 
different NAICS codes or categories. We determined if a business was 
small by using the SBA size standards for each NAICS code. We found 
that 7 NAICS categories represent about 55 percent or 42 of the 77 
small entities that we analyzed. The remaining 45 percent (or 35 small 
entities) of small entities are represented by 27 different NAICS 
categories with about 1 percent of the population of small entities in 
a majority of the categories.
    Based on the 7 NAICS categories that represent 55 percent of the 
small entities with data, about 43 percent or 33 of the 77 small 
entities are classified by 5 NAICS categories: ``Finfish Fishing,'' 
``Inland Water Freight Transportation,'' ``Shellfish Fishing,'' 
``Navigational Services to Shipping,'' and ``Fish and Seafood Merchant 
Wholesalers''. Based on available data, we did not find evidence that 
small not-for-profit organizations or small government jurisdictions 
will be impacted by this rule.
    (4) The RFA requires a description of the projected reporting, 
recordkeeping and other compliance requirements of the final rule, 
including an estimate of the classes of small entities which will be 
subject to the requirement and the type of professional skills 
necessary for preparation of the report or record.
    Coast Guard response: The final rule will require modifications to 
two existing OMB-approved collections ``Advance Notice of Arrival and 
Departure'' (OMB Control Number 1625-0100) and ``Enhanced Maritime 
Domain Awareness via Electronic Transmission of Vessel Transit Data'' 
(OMB Control Number 1625-0112). Five data elements will be added to the 
collection of information (1625-0100) and one will be deleted; of the 
five added data elements, only three (MMSI, Whether vessel is 300 GT or 
less, and whether the vessel's voyage time is less than 24 hours) are 
new to industry. We believe the burden for this additional element is 
so minimal that a change to the total burden estimate for this 
collection is unnecessary.
    The projected reporting and recordkeeping, other compliance 
requirements of the final rule, and types of activities and skills 
necessary for the preparation of NOAs and AIS information are described 
in section VIII. D., ``Collection of Information.''
    (5) The response of the agency to any comments filed by the Chief 
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration in response 
to the proposed rule, and a detailed statement

[[Page 5325]]

of any change made to the proposed rule in the final rule as a result 
of the comments.
    Coast Guard response: The Coast Guard did not receive comments on 
the NPRM from the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration.
    (6) The RFA requires a description of the steps the agency has 
taken to minimize the significant economic impact on small entities 
consistent with the stated objectives of applicable statutes, including 
a statement of the factual, policy, and legal reasons for selecting the 
alternative adopted in the final rule and why each one of the other 
significant alternatives to the final rule considered by the agency 
which affect the impact on small entities was rejected.
    Coast Guard response: The requirements for notice of arrival in 
this final rule for vessels, regardless of size, coming from a foreign 
port or place will be applied to vessels that are already required to 
comply with the CBP's APIS requirements. The evaluation of alternatives 
for this part of the final rule is unnecessary since the CBP's final 
rule precedes the Coast Guard's final rule for the submission of 
notices of arrival. Two aspects where our rule differs from the CBP's 
final rule are the Coast Guard NOA requirement (1) for foreign-flag 
commercial vessels less than 300 gross tons transiting two different 
COTP zones and (2) vessels carrying CDC. Vessels in the second category 
above will have to submit an NOA for nearly all transits. In addition, 
each COTP will have the discretion to grant waivers for these vessels 
under 33 CFR 160.214. The Coast Guard has established an exception for 
certain ferries that transit more than one COTP zone and some ferries 
will continue to qualify for the operating-exclusively-within-a-single-
COTP-zone exception.
    In drafting this rule, the Coast Guard originally contemplated 
reducing the threshold for NOADs to 100 gross tons, but we determined 
that this would have left the Coast Guard without the necessary 
visibility of these smaller vessels to ensure that we can conduct 
necessary inspections.
    These vessels also pose a unique threat due to their size and can 
be utilized as weapons, targets, or transports of suspicious persons 
and/or materials. By capturing vessels down to zero gross tons for 
notice of arrival, we have ensured that all commercial vessels would be 
required to submit NOAs if coming from a foreign port or place, and by 
more closely aligning this requirement with CBP's requirement, we 
reduce some confusion within the industry. It also allows the Coast 
Guard to identify and assess a vessel's threat level based on size, 
cargo, crew, and route.
    The Coast Guard also considered carriage of AIS units on passenger 
vessels that carry more than 12 passengers, a passenger vessel 
threshold mandated by SOLAS regardless of size or type of voyage. These 
vessels carry up to 150 passengers (and thus, the threshold of more 
than 150 passengers does not apply to them) who may be injured or 
killed in a collision or terrorist attack. However, the domestic 
population of passenger vessels that carry more than 12 passengers and 
up to 150 passengers and less than 65 feet in length is estimated to be 
4,450 vessels, which are predominantly owned by small entities. We 
estimate the cost for the carriage (including installation and 
operation and maintenance costs) of AIS units (assuming Class A units) 
on this population of vessels to be between $36.0 and $42.4 million at 
7- and 3-percent discount rates, respectively. This would have been a 
relatively large cost burden for small entities that operate these 
vessels with very few marginal benefits; therefore, the Coast Guard 
rejected this passenger vessel threshold for AIS carriage.
    The AIS portion of this final rule is based on a statutory 
directive for the carriage of AIS devices onboard commercial vessels of 
a certain size or type; some of these vessels are expressly identified 
in 46 U.S.C. 70114(a)(1)(A) and (C), and others are identified based on 
a decision by the Secretary as called for in 46 U.S.C. 70114(a)(1)(B) 
and (D). See Table 9 that follows for the source of authority for each 
Sec.  164.46 applicability paragraph, including those based on a SOLAS 
requirement. Based on public comments that the rulemaking is too costly 
for smaller vessel owners and operators and our assessment of 
alternatives to requirements we proposed, the Coast Guard has set its 
passenger threshold to vessels certificated to carry more than 150 
passengers--up from our proposed threshold of 50 or more passengers--
and will also allow certain vessel owners and operators to install the 
less costly Class B AIS unit, which should alleviate some of the cost 
burden on smaller vessel owners and operators. See the Regulatory 
Analysis in the docket for further details.

                          Table 9--Nature of Authority To Require Installation and Use of Automatic Identification System (AIS)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Expressly required by        Expressly required by         Based on discretion
            33 CFR 164.46                  Text of final rule                statute              international convention     exercised by Coast Guard
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b)(1)..............................   AIS Class A device. The following vessels must have on board a properly installed, operational Coast Guard type-
                                                                                  approved AIS Class A device:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b)(1)(i)...........................  A self-propelled vessel of   46 U.S.C. 70114(a)(1)(A)
                                       65 feet or more in length,   (``A self-propelled
                                       engaged in commercial        commercial vessel of at
                                       service.                     least 65 feet overall in
                                                                    length.'').
(b)(1)(ii)..........................  A towing vessel of 26 feet   46 U.S.C. 70114(a)(1)(C)
                                       or more in length and more   (``A towing vessel of more
                                       than 600 horsepower,         than 26 feet overall in
                                       engaged in commercial        length and 600
                                       towing.                      horsepower.'').
(b)(1)(iii).........................  A vessel that is             46 U.S.C. 70114(a)(1)(B)     ...........................  46 U.S.C. 70114(a)(1)(D)
                                       certificated to carry more   (``A vessel carrying more                                 (``Any other vessel for
                                       than 150 passengers.         than a number of                                          which the Secretary
                                                                    passengers for hire                                       decides that an automatic
                                                                    determined by the                                         identification system is
                                                                    Secretary.''.                                             necessary for the safe
                                                                                                                              navigation of the
                                                                                                                              vessel.'').

[[Page 5326]]

 
(b)(1)(iv)..........................  A self-propelled vessel      ...........................  ...........................  46 U.S.C. 70114(a)(1)(D).
                                       engaged in dredging
                                       operations in or near a
                                       commercial channel or
                                       shipping fairway in a
                                       manner likely to restrict
                                       or affect navigation of
                                       other vessels.
(b)(1)(v)...........................  A self-propelled vessel      ...........................  ...........................  46 U.S.C. 70114(a)(1)(D).
                                       engaged in the movement
                                       of--
                                      (A) Certain dangerous cargo
                                       as defined in subpart C of
                                       part 160 of this chapter,
                                       or.
                                      (B) Flammable or
                                       combustible liquid cargo
                                       in bulk that is listed in
                                       46 CFR 30.25-1, Table
                                       30.25-1.
(b)(2)(i)...........................  (2) AIS Class B device. Use  ...........................  ...........................  46 U.S.C. 70114(b) (``The
                                       of a U.S. Coast Guard type-                                                            Secretary shall prescribe
                                       approved AIS Class B                                                                   regulations implementing
                                       device in lieu of an AIS                                                               subsection (a), including
                                       Class A device is                                                                      requirements for the
                                       permissible on the                                                                     operation and maintenance
                                       following vessels if they                                                              of the automatic
                                       are not subject to                                                                     identification systems
                                       pilotage by other than the                                                             required under subsection
                                       vessel Master or crew:                                                                 (a).'').
                                      (i) Fishing industry
                                       vessels;.
(b)(2)(ii)..........................  (ii) Vessels identified in   ...........................  ...........................  46 U.S.C. 70114(b).
                                       paragraph (b)(1)(i) of
                                       this section that are
                                       certificated to carry less
                                       than 150 passengers, and
                                       that--
                                      (A) Do not operate in a VTS
                                       or VMRS area defined in
                                       Table 161.12(c) of Sec.
                                       161.12 of this chapter,
                                       and.
                                      (B) Do not operate at
                                       speeds in excess of 14
                                       knots; and.
(b)(2)(iii).........................  (iii) Vessels identified in  ...........................  ...........................  46 U.S.C. 70114(b).
                                       paragraph (b)(1)(iv) of
                                       this section engaged in
                                       dredging operations.
(c).................................  (c) SOLAS provisions. The    ...........................  SOLAS Art. I, SOLAS, 32
                                       following self-propelled                                  U.S.T. 47, and the
                                       vessels must comply with                                  Protocol of 1978 relating
                                       International Convention                                  to SOLAS, 32 U.S.T. 5577.
                                       for Safety of Life at Sea
                                       (SOLAS), as amended,
                                       Chapter V, regulation
                                       19.2.1.6 (Positioning
                                       System), 19.2.4 (AIS Class
                                       A), and 19.2.3.5
                                       (Transmitting Heading
                                       Device) or 19.2.5.1 (Gyro
                                       Compass) as applicable
                                       (Incorporated by
                                       reference, see Sec.
                                       164.03):
(c)(1)..............................  (1) A vessel of 300 gross    ...........................  Same as above, and SOLAS
                                       tonnage or more, on an                                    Chapter V, regulation
                                       international voyage.                                     19.2.4, that requires all
                                                                                                 ships of 300 gross tonnage
                                                                                                 and upwards engaged on
                                                                                                 international voyages to
                                                                                                 be fitted with AIS.

[[Page 5327]]

 
(c)(2)..............................  (2) A vessel of 150 gross    ...........................  Same as above with addition
                                       tonnage or more, when                                     of SOLAS V, regulation
                                       carrying more than 12                                     1.4, which gives the
                                       passengers on an                                          United States discretion
                                       international voyage.                                     in implementing these AIS
                                                                                                 requirements for ships
                                                                                                 less than 150 gross
                                                                                                 tonnage.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small 
entities in understanding the final rule so that they could better 
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If you 
think that this rule would affect your small business, organization, or 
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning these 
provisions or options for compliance, please consult with the Coast 
Guard personnel listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section 
of this rule. We will not retaliate against small entities that 
question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the 
Coast Guard.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal 
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal 
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory 
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory 
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and 
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to 
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR 
(1-888-734-3247).

D. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for a collection of information under the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). As defined in 5 CFR 
1320.3(c), ``collection of information'' comprises reporting, 
recordkeeping, monitoring, posting, labeling, and other, similar 
actions. The title and description of the information collections, a 
description of those who must collect the information, and an estimate 
of the total annual burden follow. The estimate covers the time for 
reviewing instructions, searching existing sources of data, gathering 
and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the 
collection.
    This rule relates to two existing OMB-approved collections of 
information, 1625-0100 and 1625-0112. Details are provided below.
    The summary of revised 1625-0100 collection follows:
    Title: Advance Notice of Vessel Arrival.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0100.
    Summary Of The Collection Of Information: We require arrival 
notices from certain vessels bound for a port or place in the United 
States. This rule revises the applicability of vessels required to 
submit an NOA, adds three new data elements that will be required by 33 
CFR part 160, and removes 1 data element with no impact on burden.
    Need For Information: To strengthen port safety and security and to 
ensure the uninterrupted flow of commerce. To this end, we must modify 
our NOA regulations.
    Proposed Use Of Information: This information is required to 
control vessel traffic, develop contingency plans, and enforce 
regulations.
    Description Of The Respondents: Respondents are the owner, agent, 
Master, operator, or person in charge of a vessel that arrives at or 
departs from a port or place in the United States.
    Number Of Respondents: The existing OMB-approved number of 
respondents is 31,594. This rule will decrease that number by 13,217. 
The total number of respondents will be 18,377. We attribute this 
decrease in the number of respondents to our improved analysis of the 
number of vessels impacted by this rulemaking.
    Frequency Of Response: The existing OMB-approved number of 
responses is 170,866, not including 150 waivers. This rule will 
decrease that number by 63,261. The total number of responses will be 
107,605 (not including waivers).
    Burden Of Response: The existing OMB-approved burden of response is 
approximately 30 minutes per response plus an additional 2 minutes for 
the three new data fields that are new to industry: Maritime Mobile 
Service Identity (MMSI), whether a vessel is 300 GT or less, and 
whether the vessel's voyage time is less than 24 hours.
    Estimate Of Total Annual Burden: The existing OMB-approved total 
annual burden is 163,994 hours (ICR Ref. No. 201012-1625-002), not 
including 150 waivers. This rule will increase that number by 4,168 
hours. The estimated total annual burden will be 168,312 hours (not 
including waivers).
    As required by 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), we submitted a copy of the final 
rule to OMB for its review of the collection of information. OMB has 
not yet completed its review of this collection. Therefore, we are not 
making Sec. Sec.  160.204(a)(5)(vii), 160.205 and 160.208 effective 
until our information collection request is approved by OMB. We will 
publish a document in the Federal Register informing the public of 
OMB's decision to approve, modify, or disapprove the collection.
    The summary of revised 1625-0112 collection follows:
    Title: Enhanced Maritime Domain Awareness via Electronic 
Transmission of Vessel Transit Data.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0112.
    Summary of the Collection of Information: We plan to collect, 
store, share, and analyze data transmitted by AIS to enhance MDA. 
Awareness and threat knowledge are critical for securing and 
maintaining safety in the maritime domain and the key to preventing 
adverse events. Domain awareness enables the early identification of 
potential threats and enhances appropriate responses, including 
interdiction at an optimal distance with capable prevention forces and 
increases the timeliness and effectiveness of response to an incident.
    Need for Information: To ensure maritime safety and security and to 
ensure the effective movement of commerce.
    Proposed Use of Information: This information collection, storage, 
and analysis would greatly expand the breadth and depth of our MDA. 
This enhanced MDA would enable quicker, more efficient responses to 
marine casualties and improve our ability to

[[Page 5328]]

prevent and respond to potential terrorist threats. It would also 
contribute an essential aspect to our COP, which is our system for 
sharing operational data among those who need it to perform their 
missions.
    Description of the Respondents: Respondents are the operators or 
persons in charge of vessels that carry AIS. The MTSA requires the 
following vessels to carry AIS:
    <bullet> A self-propelled commercial vessel of at least 65-feet in 
overall length.
    <bullet> A towing vessel of more than 26 feet overall in length and 
600 horsepower.
    <bullet> Vessels carrying more than a number of passengers for hire 
determined by the Secretary.
    <bullet> Any other vessel for which the Secretary decides that an 
automatic identification system is necessary for the safe navigation of 
the vessel. In addition to vessels subject to the MTSA, we estimate an 
additional 10 percent of voluntary compliance with this rule and 
information collection.
    Number of Respondents: The existing OMB-approved number of 
respondents is 613--LRIT system users. The AIS portion of this rule 
will increase that number by 8,922 (about 5,848 U.S.-flag vessels and 
74 foreign-flag vessels estimated for this rule including about 3,000 
existing AIS users). The total number of respondents is estimated to be 
9,535 including 613 respondents from LRIT.
    Frequency of Response: The existing OMB-approved number of 
responses is 613. This final rule will increase that number by 534,557 
(533,574 for U.S.-flag vessels and 370 for foreign-flag vessels) for a 
total of 534,944 responses including 613 responses from LRIT annually.
    Burden of Response: The existing OMB-approved burden of response is 
approximately 20 minutes per response. We retain this estimate to 
initialize the unit plus about five minutes per voyage to enter the 
information for Class A users.
    Estimate of Total Annual Burden: The existing OMB-approved total 
annual burden is 204 hours (ICR Ref. No. 201009-1625-012). This rule 
will increase that number by 46,986 hours annually for a total of 
47,190 hours. The hour burden is a function of the 20 minutes dedicated 
to the initial encoding of the AIS device with the vessel's static data 
(MMSI, IMO number, name, call sign, type, and dimension) and 
approximately 5 minute per voyage to update the vessel's dynamic data 
(status, destination, estimated time of arrival, and, static draft), 
which is based on the number of vessels subject to Class A AIS carriage 
performing an average 164 voyages per year for U.S.-flag vessels.
    As required by 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), we submitted a copy of the final 
rule to OMB for its review of the collection of information. OMB has 
not yet completed its review of this collection. Therefore, we are not 
making Sec.  164.46(b) and (c) effective until its information 
collection request is approved by OMB. We will publish a document in 
the Federal Register informing the public of OMB's decision to approve, 
modify, or disapprove the collection.
    You are not required to respond to a collection of information 
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

E. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, or 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 final rule under that Order and 
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism 
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 
13132. Our analysis is explained below.
    To the extent States have a current requirement in effect for 
notices of vessel arrivals to a State agency--for example, notices to 
pilot authorities for pilot services--we do not intend to preempt those 
requirements with this final rule. However, we reserve our position 
with respect to preemption of any prospective new State rule or legal 
requirement for a notice of arrival or submission of information 
requirements that are similar to those set forth in this final rule. 
The U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Locke, 529 U.S. 89, 120 
S.Ct. 1135 (2000), held that pursuant to title I of the Ports and 
Waterways Safety Act (PWSA) (33 U.S.C. 1221-1232), the authority for 
the NOA portion of this final rule, we can preempt conflicting or 
similar State requirements on vessel operation. Accordingly, based on 
the Supreme Court's holding in the Locke case, we believe that any 
prospective State requirement for an NOA or information gathering 
requirement directed at vessel owners or operators that is similar to 
that contained in this final rule is inconsistent with the Federalism 
principles enunciated in that case and is preempted.
    Regarding the AIS portion of this final rule, it is well settled 
that States may not regulate in categories reserved for regulation by 
the Coast Guard. It is also well settled, now, that all of the 
categories covered in 46 U.S.C. 3306, 3703, 7101, and 8101 (design, 
construction, alteration, repair, maintenance, operation, equipping, 
personnel qualification, and manning of vessels), in which Congress 
intended the Coast Guard to be the sole source of a vessel's 
obligations, are within the field foreclosed from regulation by the 
States. Our AIS carriage requirements fall into the category of 
equipping of vessels which, based on the principles in Locke, are 
within a field foreclosed from regulation by States. In addition, under 
the authority of Title I of the PWSA (specifically 33 U.S.C. 1223) and 
the MTSA, this final rule will preempt any State action on the subject 
of AIS carriage requirements. See Locke.
    In light of the analyses above, this final rule is consistent with 
the principles of federalism and preemption requirements in Executive 
Order 13132.

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary 
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may 
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for 
inflation) or more in any 1 year. Though this final rule will not 
result in such an expenditure, we discuss the effects of this final 
rule elsewhere in this preamble.

G. Taking of Private Property

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

I. Protection of Children

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

[[Page 5329]]

J. Indian Tribal Governments

    This final rule does not have tribal implications under Executive 
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments, because it does 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 final rule under Executive Order 13211, 
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant 
energy action'' under that order. Though it is a ``significant 
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866, this final rule is not 
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, 
distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a 
significant energy action. Therefore, this final rule does not require 
a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.

L. Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their 
regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the 
OMB, with an explanation of why using these standards would be 
inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary 
consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of 
materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling 
procedures; and related management systems practices) that are 
developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies.
    This final rule uses the following voluntary consensus standards:
    <bullet> IMO Resolution A.917(22), Guidelines for the Onboard 
Operational Use of Shipborne Automatic Identification System (AIS), 
adopted November 29, 2001
    <bullet> IMO SN/Circ 227, Guidelines for the Installation of a 
Shipborne Automatic Identification System (AIS), dated January 6, 2003
    <bullet> IMO SN/Circ 244, Guidance on the Use of the UN/LOCODE in 
the Destination Field in AIS Messages, dated December 15, 2004
    <bullet> IMO SN/Circ 245, Amendments to the Guidelines for the 
Installation of a Shipborne Automatic Identification System (AIS) (SN/
Circ.227), dated December 15, 2004
    <bullet> IMO SN.1/Circ 289, Guidelines on the Use of AIS 
Application-specific Messages, dated June 2, 2010
    <bullet> National Marine Electronics Association (NMEA) 0400, 
Installation Standard for Marine Electronic Equipment used on Moderate-
Sized Vessels, Version 3.10, dated February 2012
    The section that references these standards and the locations where 
these standards are available are listed in Sec.  164.03.

M. Environment

    We have analyzed this final rule under Department of Homeland 
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction 
M16475.lD, which guide us in complying with the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded that this 
action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or 
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This 
rule is categorically excluded under section 2.B.2, figure 2-1, 
paragraph (34)(a), (d), (e), and (i) of the Instruction and under 
section 6.a. of the ``Appendix to National Environmental Policy Act: 
Coast Guard Procedures for Categorical Exclusions, Notice of Final 
Agency Policy'' (67 FR 48243, 48245, July 23, 2002). This rule involves 
regulations concerning reporting procedures, equipping of vessels, 
equipment carriage requirements, aid of navigation, and vessel 
operation safety standards. An environmental analysis checklist and a 
categorical exclusion determination are available in the docket where 
indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects

33 CFR Part 62

    Navigation (water).

33 CFR Part 66

    Intergovernmental relations, Navigation (water), Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

33 CFR Part 101

    Harbors, Maritime security, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Security measures, Vessels, Waterways.

33 CFR Part 110

    Anchorage grounds.

33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

33 CFR Part 118

    Bridges.

33 CFR Part 151

    Administrative practice and procedure, Oil pollution, Penalties, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Water pollution control.

33 CFR Part 160

    Administrative practice and procedure, Harbors, Hazardous materials 
transportation, Marine safety Navigation (water), Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Vessels, Waterways.

33 CFR Part 161

    Harbors, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Vessels, Waterways.

33 CFR Part 164

    Incorporation by reference, Marine safety, Navigation (water), 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Waterways.

33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

46 CFR Part 4

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

46 CFR Part 148

    Cargo vessels, Hazardous materials transportation, Marine safety.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 
33 CFR parts 62, 66, 101, 110, 117, 118, 151, 160, 161, 164, and 165, 
and 46 CFR parts 4 and 148, as follows:

Title 33--Navigation and Navigable Waters

PART 62--UNITED STATES AIDS TO NAVIGATION SYSTEM

0
1. The authority citation for part 62 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  14 U.S.C. 85; 33 U.S.C. 1222, 1233; 43 U.S.C. 1333; 
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.


0
2. Add Sec.  62.52 to read as follows:


Sec.  62.52  Automatic Identification System Aids to Navigation (AIS 
AtoN).

    (a) Aids to Navigation (AtoN) may be enhanced by the use of an 
automatic identification system (AIS). AIS is a

[[Page 5330]]

maritime navigation safety communications protocol standardized by the 
International Telecommunication Union and adopted by the International 
Maritime Organization for the broadcast or exchange of navigation 
information between vessels, aircraft, and shore stations. AIS AtoN can 
autonomously and at fixed intervals broadcast the name, position, 
dimensions, type, characteristics and status from or concerning an aid 
to navigation.
    (b) AIS AtoN can be either real (physically fitted to the AtoN), 
synthetic (physically fitted somewhere other than to the AtoN) or 
virtual (physically nonexistent, but capable of being portrayed on AIS-
capable displays).
    (c) AIS AtoN can also be used to broadcast both laterally (e.g., 
Port Hand Mark) and non-laterally significant marine safety information 
(e.g., environmental data, tidal information, and navigation warnings).

PART 66--PRIVATE AIDS TO NAVIGATION

0
3. The authority citation for part 66 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  14 U.S.C. 83, 84, 85; 43 U.S.C. 1333; Pub. L. 107-
296, 116 Stat. 2135; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 
0170.1.


Sec.  66.01-1  [Amended]

0
4. In Sec.  66.01-1, remove paragraph (d).
0
5. Revise Sec.  66.01-5(i) to read as follows:


Sec.  66.01-5  Application procedure.

* * * * *
    (i) For AIS AtoN and racons: Manufacturer and model number of AIS 
AtoN and racon, position and height above water of desired 
installation, and requested MORSE coding or AIS AtoN message 
characteristics. Equipment must have FCC authorization.

PART 101--MARITIME SECURITY: GENERAL

0
6. The authority citation for part 101 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 
U.S.C. 191, 192; Executive Order 12656, 3 CFR 1988 Comp., p. 585; 33 
CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-11, 6.14, 6.16, and 6.19; Department of Homeland 
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

Sec.  101.105  [Amended]

0
7. In Sec.  101.105, in the definition of Certain Dangerous Cargo, 
remove the section reference ``160.204'' and add, in its place, the 
section reference ``160.202''.

PART 110--ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS

0
8. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05-
1(g); Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.


Sec.  110.158  [Amended]

0
9. In Sec.  110.158(b), remove the words ``Sec. 160.203 of this title'' 
and add, in their place, the words ``Sec.  160.202 of this chapter''.


Sec.  110.168  [Amended]

0
10. In Sec.  110.168(b), in the definition of Dangerous cargo, remove 
the section reference ``Sec.  160.204 of this title'' and add, in its 
place, the section reference ``Sec.  160.202 of this chapter''.


Sec.  110.214  [Amended]

0
11. In Sec.  110.214(a)(2)(ii) and (d)(1), remove the section reference 
'' Sec.  160.203'' and add, in its place, the section reference ``Sec.  
160.202''.

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
12. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; and Department of 
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.


Sec.  117.1007  [Amended]

0
13. In Sec.  117.1007(b)(2), remove the section reference ``160.204'' 
and add, in its place, the section reference ``160.202''.

PART 118--BRIDGE LIGHTING AND OTHER SIGNALS

0
14. The authority citation for part 118 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 494; 14 U.S.C. 85, 633; Department of 
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
15. In Sec.  118.120, add a new sentence at the end of the section to 
read as follows:


Sec.  118.120  Radar reflectors and racons.

    * * * The District Commander may authorize the use of Automatic 
Identification System Aids to Navigation in lieu of or in addition to a 
racon.

PART 151--VESSELS CARRYING OIL, NOXIOUS LIQUID SUBSTANCES, GARBAGE, 
MUNICIPAL OR COMMERCIAL WASTE, AND BALLAST WATER

0
16. The authority citation for part 151 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1321, 1902, 1903, 1908; 46 U.S.C. 6101; 
Pub. L. 104-227 (110 Stat. 3034); Pub. L. 108-293 (118 Stat. 1063), 
Sec.  623; E.O. 12777, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp. p. 351; DHS Delegation No. 
0170.1, sec. 2(77).


Sec.  151.2005  [Amended]

0
17. In Sec.  151.2005(a), remove the reference ``160.204'' and add, in 
its place, the reference ``160.202''.

PART 160--PORTS AND WATERWAYS SAFETY--GENERAL

0
18. The authority citation for part 160 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1223, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. Subpart C is 
also issued under the authority of 33 U.S.C. 1225 and 46 U.S.C. 
3715.

Subpart C--Notification of Arrival, Hazardous Conditions, and 
Certain Dangerous Cargoes

0
19. Revise the heading to subpart C to read as shown above.
0
20. Revise Sec.  160.201 to read as follows:


Sec.  160.201  General.

    This subpart contains requirements and procedures for submitting a 
notice of arrival (NOA), and a notice of hazardous condition. The 
sections in this subpart describe:
    (a) Applicability and exemptions from requirements in this subpart;
    (b) Required information in an NOA;
    (c) Required updates to an NOA;
    (d) Methods and times for submission of an NOA, and updates to an 
NOA;
    (e) How to obtain a waiver; and
    (f) Requirements for submission of the notice of hazardous 
condition.

    Note to Sec.  160.201.  For notice-of-arrival requirements for 
the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf, see 33 CFR part 146.

Sec.  160.203  [Amended]

0
21. Lift the suspension of Sec.  160.203(d) and (e).


160.202, 160.203, and 160.204   [Redesignated as 160.203, 160.204 and 
160.205]

0
22. Redesignate Sec. Sec.  160.202, 160.203, and 160.204, as Sec. Sec.  
160.203, 160.204, and 160.202, respectively.
0
23. In redesignated Sec.  160.202, revise the introductory text, and 
add definitions, in alphabetical order, for ``boundary waters'', 
``embark'', ``ferry schedule'', ``foreign vessel'', and ``operating 
exclusively within a single Captain of the Port zone'', to read as 
follows:


Sec.  160.202  Definitions.

    Terms in this subpart that are not defined in this section or in 
Sec.  160.3 have

[[Page 5331]]

the same meaning as those terms in 46 U.S.C. 2101. As used in this 
subpart--
* * * * *
    Boundary waters mean the waters from main shore to main shore of 
the lakes and rivers and connecting waterways, or the portions thereof, 
along which the international boundary between the United States and 
the Dominion of Canada passes, including all bays, arms, and inlets 
thereof, but not including tributary waters which in their natural 
channels would flow into such lakes, rivers, and waterways, or waters 
flowing from such lakes, rivers, and waterways, or the waters of rivers 
flowing across the boundary.
* * * * *
    Embark means when a crewmember or a person in addition to the crew 
joins the vessel.
    Ferry schedule means a published document that:
    (1) Identifies locations a ferry travels to and from;
    (2) Lists the times of departures and arrivals; and
    (3) Identifies the portion of the year in which the ferry maintains 
this schedule.
    Foreign vessel means a vessel of foreign registry or operated under 
the authority of a country except the United States.
* * * * *
    Operating exclusively within a single Captain of the Port zone 
refers to vessel movements within the boundaries of a single COTP zone, 
e.g., from one dock to another, one berth to another, one anchorage to 
another, or any combination of such transits. Once a vessel has arrived 
in a port in a COPT zone, it would not be considered as departing from 
a port or place simply because of its movements within that specific 
port.
* * * * *

0
24. In redesignated Sec.  160.203, remove paragraph (b); redesignate 
paragraphs (c) and (d) as paragraphs (b) and (c), respectively; and 
revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec.  160.203  Applicability.

    (a) This subpart applies to the following vessels that are bound 
for or departing from ports or places within the navigable waters of 
the United States, as defined in 33 CFR 2.36(a), which includes 
internal waters and the territorial seas of the United States, and any 
deepwater port as defined in 33 CFR 148.5:
    (1) U.S. vessels in commercial service, and
    (2) All foreign vessels.
* * * * *

0
25. In redesignated Sec.  160.204--
0
a. Revise the section heading;
0
b. Revise paragraph (a);
0
c. From April 30, 2015 through December 31, 2015, add temporary 
paragraph (a)(6) to read as set out below; and
0
d. Revise paragraphs (b) through (c) to read as set out below; and
0
e. Remove paragraphs (d) through (f).


Sec.  160.204  Exemptions and exceptions.

    (a) Except for reporting notice of hazardous conditions, the 
following vessels are exempt from requirements in this subpart:
    (1) A passenger or offshore supply vessel when employed in the 
exploration for or in the removal of oil, gas, or mineral resources on 
the continental shelf.
    (2) An oil spill response vessel (OSRV) when engaged in actual 
spill response operations or during spill response exercises.
    (3) After December 31, 2015, a vessel required by 33 CFR 165.830 or 
165.921 to report its movements, its cargo, or the cargo in barges it 
is towing.
    (4) A United States or Canadian vessel engaged in the salving 
operations of any property wrecked, or rendering aid and assistance to 
any vessels wrecked, disabled, or in distress, in waters specified in 
Article II of the 1908 Treaty of Extradition, Wrecking and Salvage (35 
Stat. 2035; Treaty Series 502).
    (5) The following vessels neither carrying certain dangerous cargo 
nor controlling another vessel carrying certain dangerous cargo:
    (i) A foreign vessel 300 gross tons or less not engaged in 
commercial service.
    (ii) A vessel operating exclusively within a single Captain of the 
Port zone. Captain of the Port zones are defined in 33 CFR part 3.
    (iii) A U.S. towing vessel and a U.S. barge operating solely 
between ports or places of the contiguous 48 states, Alaska, and the 
District of Columbia.
    (iv) A public vessel.
    (v) Except for a tank vessel, a U.S. vessel operating solely 
between ports or places of the United States on the Great Lakes.
    (vi) A U.S. vessel 300 gross tons or less, engaged in commercial 
service not coming from a foreign port or place.
    (vii) Each ferry on a fixed route that is described in an accurate 
schedule that is submitted by the ferry operator, along with 
information in paragraphs (a)(5)(vii)(A) through (J) of this section, 
to the Captain of the Port for each port or place of destination listed 
in the schedule at least 24 hours in advance of the first date and time 
of arrival listed on the schedule. At least 24 hours before the first 
date and time of arrival listed on the ferry schedule, each ferry 
operator who submits a schedule under paragraph (a)(5)(vii) of this 
section must also provide the following information to the Captain of 
the Port for each port or place of destination listed in the schedule 
for the ferry, and if the schedule or the following submitted 
information changes, the ferry operator must submit an updated schedule 
at least 24 hours in advance of the first date and time of arrival 
listed on the new schedule and updates on the following items whenever 
the submitted information is no longer accurate:
    (A) Name of the vessel;
    (B) Country of registry of the vessel;
    (C) Call sign of the vessel;
    (D) International Maritime Organization (IMO) international number 
or, if the vessel does not have an assigned IMO international number, 
the official number of the vessel;
    (E) Name of the registered owner of the vessel;
    (F) Name of the operator of the vessel;
    (G) Name of the vessel's classification society or recognized 
organization, if applicable;
    (H) Each port or place of destination;
    (I) Estimated dates and times of arrivals at and departures from 
these ports or places; and
    (J) Name and telephone number of a 24-hour point of contact.
    (6) From April 30, 2015 through December 31, 2015, vessels 
identified as being subject to 33 CFR 165.830 or 165.921.
    (b) A vessel less than 500 gross tons is not required to submit the 
International Safety Management (ISM) Code Notice (Entry 7 in Table 
160.206 of Sec.  160.206).
    (c) A U.S. vessel is not required to submit the International Ship 
and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code Notice information (Entry 8 in 
Table 160.206 of Sec.  160.206).

0
26. Add Sec.  160.205 to read as follow:


Sec.  160.205  Notices of arrival.

    The owner, agent, Master, operator, or person in charge of a vessel 
must submit notices of arrival consistent with the requirements in this 
subpart.

0
27. In Sec.  160.206, lift the suspension of item (8) in Table 160.206 
of paragraph (a), and revise Sec.  160.206 to read as follows:


Sec.  160.206  Information required in an NOA.

    (a) Information required. With the exceptions noted in paragraph 
(b) of this section, each NOA must contain all of the information items 
specified in Table 160.206. Vessel owners and operators should protect 
any personal information they gather in preparing notices for

[[Page 5332]]

transmittal to the National Vessel Movement Center (NVMC) to prevent 
unauthorized disclosure of that information.

                  Table 160.206--NOA Information Items
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Vessels
                                            neither          Vessels
                                          carrying CDC   carrying CDC or
         Required information                 nor          controlling
                                          controlling     another vessel
                                         another vessel    carrying CDC
                                          carrying CDC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Vessel Information:
    (i) Name;                                        X                X
    (ii) Name of the registered owner;               X                X
    (iii) Country of registry;                       X                X
    (iv) Call sign;                                  X                X
    (v) International Maritime                       X                X
     Organization (IMO) international
     number or, if vessel does not
     have an assigned IMO
     international number, substitute
     with official number;
    (vi) Name of the operator;                       X                X
    (vii) Name of charterer;                         X                X
    (viii) Name of classification                    X                X
     society or recognized
     organization;
    (ix) Maritime Mobile Service                     X                X
     Identity (MMSI) number, if
     applicable;
    (x) Whether the vessel is 300                    X                X
     gross tons or less (yes or no);
     and
    (xi) USCG Vessel Response Plan                   X                X
     Control Number, if applicable.
(2) Voyage Information:
    (i) Names of last five foreign                   X                X
     ports or places visited;
    (ii) Dates of arrival and                        X                X
     departure for last five foreign
     ports or places visited;
    (iii) For the port or place of the               X                X
     United States to be visited, list
     the name of the receiving
     facility, the port or place, the
     city, and the state;
    (iv) For the port or place of the                X                X
     United States to be visited, the
     estimated date and time of
     arrival;
    (v) For the port or place in the                 X                X
     United States to be visited, the
     estimated date and time of
     departure;
    (vi) The location (port or place                 X                X
     and country) or position
     (latitude and longitude or
     waterway and mile marker) of the
     vessel at the time of reporting;
    (vii) The name and telephone                     X                X
     number of a 24-hour point of
     contact;
    (viii) Whether the vessel's voyage               X                X
     time is less than 24 hours (yes
     or no);
    (ix) Last port or place of                       X                X
     departure; and
    (x) Dates of arrival and departure               X                X
     for last port or place of
     departure.
(3) Cargo Information:
    (i) A general description of                     X                X
     cargo, other than CDC, on board
     the vessel (e.g., grain,
     container, oil, etc.);
    (ii) Name of each CDC carried,      ...............               X
     including cargo UN number, if
     applicable; and
    (iii) Amount of each CDC carried.   ...............               X
(4) Information for each Crewmember On
 Board:
    (i) Full name;                                   X                X
    (ii) Date of birth;                              X                X
    (iii) Nationality;                               X                X
    (iv) Passport * or mariner's                     X                X
     document number (type of
     identification and number);
    (v) Position or duties on the                    X                X
     vessel; and
    (vi) Where the crewmember embarked               X                X
     (list port or place and country).
(5) Information for each Person On
 Board in Addition to Crew:
    (i) Full name;                                   X                X
    (ii) Date of birth;                              X                X
    (iii) Nationality;                               X                X
    (iv) Passport number; * and                      X                X
    (v) Where the person embarked                    X                X
     (list port or place and country).
(6) Operational condition of equipment               X                X
 required by 33 CFR part 164 of this
 chapter (see note to table):
(7) International Safety Management
 (ISM) Code Notice:
    (i) The date of expiration for the               X                X
     company's Document of Compliance
     certificate that covers the
     vessel;
    (ii) The date of expiration for                  X                X
     the vessel's Safety Management
     Certificate; and
    (iii) The name of the Flag                       X                X
     Administration, or the recognized
     organization(s) representing the
     vessel Flag Administration, that
     issued those certificates.
(8) International Ship and Port
 Facility Security Code (ISPS) Notice:
    (i) The date of issuance for the                 X                X
     vessel's International Ship
     Security Certificate (ISSC), if
     any;
    (ii) Whether the ISSC, if any, is                X                X
     an initial Interim ISSC,
     subsequent and consecutive
     Interim ISSC, or final ISSC;
    (iii) Declaration that the                       X                X
     approved ship security plan, if
     any, is being implemented;
    (iv) If a subsequent and                         X                X
     consecutive Interim ISSC, the
     reasons therefore;
    (v) The name and 24-hour contact                 X                X
     information for the Company
     Security Officer; and
    (vi) The name of the Flag                        X                X
     Administration or the recognized
     security organization(s)
     representing the vessel Flag
     Administration that issued the
     ISSC.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note to Table 160.206. For items with an asterisk (*), see paragraph (b)
  of this section. Submitting a response for item 6 indicating that
  navigation equipment is not operating properly does not serve as
  notice to the District Commander, Captain of the Port, or Vessel
  Traffic Center, under 33 CFR 164.53.


[[Page 5333]]

    (b) Exceptions. If a crewmember or person on board other than a 
crewmember is not required to carry a passport for travel, then 
passport information required in Table 160.206 by items (4)(iv) and (5) 
(iv) need not be provided for that person.

0
28. In Sec.  160.208--
0
a. In paragraph (b)(3), remove the reference to ``(5)(v)'', and in its 
place, add ``(4)(vii)'',
0
b. Revise the section heading and paragraphs (a) and (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  160.208  Updates to a submitted NOA.

    (a) Unless otherwise specified in this section, whenever events 
cause NOA information submitted for a vessel to become inaccurate, or 
the submitter to realize that data submitted was inaccurate, the owner, 
agent, Master, operator, or person in charge of that vessel must submit 
an update within the times required in Sec.  160.212.
* * * * *
    (c) When reporting updates, revise and resubmit the NOA.

0
29. In Sec.  160.210, lift the suspension of the last sentence of 
paragraph (b), the last sentence of paragraph (c), and paragraph (d); 
and revise Sec.  160.210 to read as follows:


Sec.  160.210  Methods for submitting an NOA.

    (a) National Vessel Movement Center (NVMC). Except as otherwise 
provided in this paragraph or paragraph (b) of this section, vessels 
must submit NOA information required by Sec.  160.206 to the NVMC using 
methods currently specified at www.nvmc.uscg.gov, which includes 
submission through the NVMC electronic Notice of Arrival and Departure 
(eNOAD) World Wide Web site, and XML, which includes the Excel Workbook 
format. These data may also be submitted using other methods that may 
be added as future options on www.nvmc.uscg.gov. XML spreadsheets may 
be submitted via email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c6a3a8a9a7a286a8b0aba5e8b3b5a5a1e8a1a9b0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a0c5cecfc1c4e0ced6cdc38ed5d3c3c78ec7cfd6">[email protected]</span></a>. If a vessel operator 
must submit an NOA or an update, for a vessel in an area without 
internet access or when experiencing technical difficulties with an 
onboard computer, and he or she has no shore-side support available, 
the vessel operator may fax or phone the submission to the NVMC. Fax at 
1-800-547-8724 or 304-264-2684. Workbook available at 
www.nvmc.uscg.gov; or, telephone at 1-800-708-9823 or 304-264-2502.
    (b) Saint Lawrence Seaway. Those vessels transiting the Saint 
Lawrence Seaway inbound, bound for a port or place in the United 
States, may meet the submission requirements of paragraph (a) of this 
section by submitting the required information to the Saint Lawrence 
Seaway Development Corporation and the Saint Lawrence Seaway Management 
Corporation of Canada using methods specified at www.nvmc.uscg.gov.

0
30. In Sec.  160.212, lift the suspension of paragraph (c), and revise 
Sec.  160.212 to read as follows:


Sec.  160.212  When to submit an NOA.

    (a) Submission of an NOA. (1) Except as set out in paragraphs 
(a)(2) and (a)(3) of this section, all vessels must submit NOAs within 
the times required in paragraph (a)(4) of this section.
    (2) Towing vessels, when in control of a vessel carrying CDC and 
operating solely between ports or places of the contiguous 48 states, 
Alaska, and the District of Columbia, must submit an NOA before 
departure but at least 12 hours before arriving at the port or place of 
destination.
    (3) U.S. vessels 300 gross tons or less, arriving from a foreign 
port or place, and whose voyage time is less than 24 hours must submit 
an NOA at least 60 minutes before departure from the foreign port or 
place. Also, Canadian vessels 300 gross tons or less, arriving directly 
from Canada, via boundary waters, to a United States port or place on 
the Great Lakes, whose voyage time is less than 24 hours must submit an 
NOA at least 60 minutes before departure from the Canadian port or 
place.
    (4) Times for submitting NOAs are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
   If your voyage time is--          Then you must submit an NOA--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) 96 hours or more; or.....  At least 96 hours before arriving at the
                                port or place of destination; or
(ii) Less than 96 hours......  Before departure but at least 24 hours
                                before arriving at the port or place of
                                destination.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Submission of updates to an NOA. (1) Except as set out in 
paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) of this section, vessels must submit 
updates in NOA information within the times required in paragraph 
(b)(4) of this section.
    (2) Towing vessels, when in control of a vessel carrying CDC and 
operating solely between ports or places in the contiguous 48 states, 
Alaska, and the District of Columbia, must submit updates to an NOA as 
soon as practicable but at least 6 hours before entering the port or 
place of destination.
    (3) U.S. vessels 300 gross tons or less, arriving from a foreign 
port or place, whose voyage time is--
    (i) Less than 24 hours but greater than 6 hours, must submit 
updates to an NOA as soon as practicable, but at least 6 hours before 
entering the port or place of destination.
    (ii) Less than or equal to 6 hours, must submit updates to an NOA 
as soon as practicable, but at least 60 minutes before departure from 
the foreign port or place.
    (4) Times for submitting updates to NOAs are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
If your remaining voyage time
             is--               Then you must submit updates to an NOA--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) 96 hours or more;          As soon as practicable, but at least 24
                                hours before arriving at the port or
                                place of destination;
(ii) Less than 96 hours but    As soon as practicable, but at least 24
 not less than 24 hours; or.    hours before arriving at the port or
                                place of destination; or
(iii) Less than 24 hours.....  As soon as practicable, but at least 12
                                hours before arriving at the port or
                                place of destination.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec.  160.215  [Redesignated as Sec.  160.216]

0
31. Redesignate Sec.  160.215 as Sec.  160.216, and add a new Sec.  
160.215 to read as follows:


Sec.  160.215  Force majeure.

    When a vessel is bound for a port or place of the United States 
under force majeure, it must comply with the requirements in this 
section, but not other sections of this subpart. The vessel must report 
the following information to the nearest Captain of the Port as soon as 
practicable:
    (a) The vessel Master's intentions;

[[Page 5334]]

    (b) Any hazardous conditions as defined in Sec.  160.202; and
    (c) If the vessel is carrying certain dangerous cargo or 
controlling a vessel carrying certain dangerous cargo, the amount and 
name of each CDC carried, including cargo UN number if applicable.

PART 161--VESSEL TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

0
32. The authority citation for part 161 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1223, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 70114, 70117; Pub. L. 
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation 
No. 0170.1.


0
33. In Sec.  161.2, revise the definition of ``VTS User'' to read as 
follows:


Sec.  161.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    VTS User means a vessel or an owner, operator, charterer, Master, 
or person directing the movement of a vessel within a VTS area that is:
    (1) Subject to the Vessel Bridge-to-Bridge Radiotelephone Act;
    (2) Required to participate in a VMRS; or
    (3) Equipped with a Coast Guard type-approved Automatic 
Identification System (AIS).
* * * * *

0
34. In Sec.  161.5, revise paragraph (b) to read as follows:


Sec.  161.5  Deviations from the rules.

* * * * *
    (b) Requests to deviate from any provision in this part due to 
circumstances that develop during a transit or immediately preceding a 
transit may be made to the appropriate Vessel Traffic Center (VTC). 
Requests to deviate must be made as far in advance as practicable. Upon 
receipt of the request, the VTC may authorize a deviation if it is 
determined that, based on vessel handling characteristics, traffic 
density, radar contacts, environmental conditions and other relevant 
information, such a deviation provides a level of safety equivalent to 
that provided by the required measure or is a maneuver considered 
necessary for safe navigation under the circumstances.


Sec.  161.12  [Amended]

0
35. In Sec.  161.12, in paragraph (c), remove the words ``Sec. Sec.  
161.21 and 164.46 of this subchapter'' from the last sentence of Note 1 
of table 161.12(c), and add, in their place, the words ``Sec.  
161.21''; and in paragraph (d)(5), remove the section reference ``Sec.  
160.204'' and add, in its place, the section reference ``Sec.  
160.202''.

0
36. In Sec.  161.19, revise paragraph (f) to read as follows:


Sec.  161.19  Sailing Plan (SP).

* * * * *
    (f) Dangerous cargo on board or in its tow, as defined in Sec.  
160.202 of this chapter.

PART 164--NAVIGATION SAFETY REGULATIONS

0
37. The authority citation for part 164 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1222(5), 1223, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 2103, 3703; 
E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277; Department of 
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. Sec. 164.13 also issued 
under 46 U.S.C. 8502. Sec. 164.46 also issued under 46 U.S.C. 70114 
and Sec. 102 of Pub. L. 107-295. Sec. 164.61 also issued under 46 
U.S.C. 6101.


0
38. In Sec.  164.02, revise the introductory text of paragraph (a) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  164.02  Applicability exception for foreign vessels.

    (a) Except for Sec.  164.46(c), none of the requirements of this 
part apply to foreign vessels that:
* * * * *

0
39. Revise Sec.  164.03 to read as follows:


Sec.  164.03  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 this section, the Coast Guard must publish notice of the 
change in the Federal Register and the material must be available to 
the public. All approved material is available for inspection at the 
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For more 
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html. Also, it is available for inspection at the Commandant 
(CG-NAV), U.S. Coast Guard Stop 7418, Attn: Office of Navigation 
Systems, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE., Washington, DC 20593-
7418, and is available from the sources listed below.
    (b) American Petroleum Institute (API), 1220 L Street NW., 
Washington, DC 20005-4070, 202-682-8000, www.api.org:
    (1) API Specification 9A, Specification for Wire Rope, Section 3, 
Properties and Tests for Wire and Wire Rope, May 28, 1984, IBR approved 
for Sec.  164.74.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (c) ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, 
PA 19428-2959, 610-832-9585, www.astm.org:
    (1) ASTM D4268-93, Standard Test Method for Testing Fiber Rope, IBR 
approved for Sec.  164.74.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (d) Cordage Institute, 350 Lincoln Street, Hingham, MA 02043.
    (1) CIA-3, Standard Test Methods for Fiber Rope Including Standard 
Terminations, Revised, June 1980, IBR approved for Sec.  164.74.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (e) International Maritime Organization (IMO), 4 Albert Embankment, 
London SE1 7SR, United Kingdom, www.imo.org:
    (1) IMO Resolution A342(IX), Recommendation on Performance 
Standards for Automatic Pilots, November 12, 1975, IBR approved for 
Sec.  164.13.
    (2) IMO Resolution A.917(22), Guidelines for the Onboard 
Operational Use of Shipborne Automatic Identification System (AIS), 
January 25, 2002, IBR approved for Sec.  164.46.
    (3) Resolution MSC.74(69), Annex 3, Recommendation on Performance 
Standards for a Universal Shipborne Automatic Identification System 
(AIS), May 12, 1998, IBR approved for Sec.  164.46.
    (4) SN/Circ.227, Guidelines for the Installation of a Shipborne 
Automatic Identification System (AIS), January 6, 2003, IBR approved 
for Sec.  164.46.
    (5) SN/Circ.244, Guidance on the Use of the UN/LOCODE in the 
Destination Field in AIS Messages, December 15, 2004, IBR approved for 
Sec.  164.46.
    (6) SN/Circ.245, Amendments to the Guidelines for the Installation 
of a Shipborne Automatic Identification System (AIS)(SN/Circ.227), 
December 15, 2004, IBR approved for Sec.  164.46.
    (7) SOLAS, International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 
1974, and 1988 Protocol relating thereto, 2000 Amendments, effective 
January and July 2002, (SOLAS 2000 Amendments), IBR approved for Sec.  
164.46.
    (8) Conference resolution 1, Adoption of amendments to the Annex to 
the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, and 
amendments to Chapter V of SOLAS 1974, adopted on December 12, 2002, 
IBR approved for Sec.  164.46.
    (9) SN.1/Circ.289, Guidance on the Use of AIS Application-Specific 
Messages, June 2, 2010, IBR approved for Sec.  164.46.
    (f) National Marine Electronics Association (NMEA), 7 Riggs Avenue, 
Severna Park, MD 21146, 800-808-6632, www.nmea.org:

[[Page 5335]]

    (1) NMEA 0400, Installation Standard for Marine Electronic 
Equipment used on Moderate-Sized Vessels, Version 3.10, February 2012, 
IBR approved for Sec.  164.46.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (g) Radio Technical Commission for Maritime Services (RTCM), 1611 
N. Kent St., Suite 605, Arlington, VA 22209, 703-527-2000, 
www.rtcm.org:
    (1) RTCM Paper 12-78/DO-100, Minimum Performance Standards, Loran C 
Receiving Equipment, 1977, IBR approved for Sec.  164.41.
    (2) RTCM Paper 71-95/SC112-STD, RTCM Recommended Standards for 
Marine Radar Equipment Installed on Ships of Less Than 300 Tons Gross 
Tonnage, Version 1.1, October 10, 1995, IBR approved for Sec.  164.72.
    (3) RTCM Paper 191-93/SC112-X, RTCM Recommended Standards for 
Maritime Radar Equipment Installed on Ships of 300 Tons Gross Tonnage 
and Upwards, Version 1.2, December 20, 1993, IBR approved for Sec.  
164.72.


Sec.  164.43  [Removed]

0
40. Remove Sec.  164.43.

0
41. Revise Sec.  164.46 to read as follows:


Sec.  164.46  Automatic Identification System.

    (a) Definitions. As used in this section--Automatic Identification 
Systems or AIS means a maritime navigation safety communications system 
standardized by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), 
adopted by the International Maritime Organization (IMO), that--
    (1) Provides vessel information, including the vessel's identity, 
type, position, course, speed, navigational status and other safety-
related information automatically to appropriately equipped shore 
stations, other ships, and aircraft;
    (2) Receives automatically such information from similarly fitted 
ships, monitors and tracks ships; and
    (3) Exchanges data with shore-based facilities.
    Gross tonnage means tonnage as defined under the International 
Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969.
    International voyage means a voyage from a country to which the 
present International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea applies 
to a port outside such country, or conversely.
    Properly installed, operational means an Automatic Identification 
System (AIS) that is installed and operated using the guidelines set 
forth by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) Resolution 
A.917(22) and Safety of Navigation Circulars (SN/Circ.) 227, 244, 245, 
and SN.1/Circ.289; or National Marine Electronics Association (NMEA) 
Installation Standard 0400-3.10 in lieu of SN/Circ.227 and 245 
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  164.03).
    (b) AIS carriage--(1) AIS Class A device. The following vessels 
must have on board a properly installed, operational Coast Guard type-
approved AIS Class A device:
    (i) A self-propelled vessel of 65 feet or more in length, engaged 
in commercial service.
    (ii) A towing vessel of 26 feet or more in length and more than 600 
horsepower, engaged in commercial service.
    (iii) A vessel that is certificated to carry more than 150 
passengers.
    (iv) A self-propelled vessel engaged in dredging operations in or 
near a commercial channel or shipping fairway in a manner likely to 
restrict or affect navigation of other vessels.
    (v) A self-propelled vessel engaged in the movement of--
    (A) Certain dangerous cargo as defined in subpart C of part 160 of 
this chapter, or
    (B) Flammable or combustible liquid cargo in bulk that is listed in 
46 CFR 30.25-1, Table 30.25-1.
    (2) AIS Class B device. Use of a Coast Guard type-approved AIS 
Class B device in lieu of an AIS Class A device is permissible on the 
following vessels if they are not subject to pilotage by other than the 
vessel Master or crew:
    (i) Fishing industry vessels;
    (ii) Vessels identified in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section that 
are certificated to carry less than 150 passengers and that--
    (A) Do not operate in a Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) or Vessel 
Movement Reporting System (VMRS) area defined in Table 161.12(c) of 
Sec.  161.12 of this chapter, and
    (B) Do not operate at speeds in excess of 14 knots; and
    (iii) Vessels identified in paragraph (b)(1)(iv) of this section 
engaged in dredging operations.

    Note to paragraph (b):
    Under 33 U.S.C. 1223(b)(3) and 33 CFR 160.111, a Coast Guard 
Captain of the Port (COTP) may restrict the operation of a vessel if 
he or she determines that by reason of weather, visibility, sea 
conditions, port congestion, other hazardous circumstances, or the 
condition of such vessel, the restriction is justified in the 
interest of safety. In certain circumstances, if a COTP is concerned 
that the operation of a vessel not subject to Sec.  164.46 would be 
unsafe, the COTP may determine that voluntary installation of AIS by 
the operator would mitigate that concern.

    (c) SOLAS provisions. The following self-propelled vessels must 
comply with International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 
as amended, Chapter V, regulation 19.2.1.6 (Positioning System), 19.2.4 
(AIS Class A), and 19.2.3.5 (Transmitting Heading Device) or 19.2.5.1 
(Gyro Compass) as applicable (Incorporated by reference, see Sec.  
164.03):
    (1) A vessel of 300 gross tonnage or more, on an international 
voyage.
    (2) A vessel of 150 gross tonnage or more, when carrying more than 
12 passengers on an international voyage.
    (d) Operations. The requirements in this paragraph are applicable 
to any vessel equipped with AIS.
    (1) Use of AIS does not relieve the vessel of the requirements to 
sound whistle signals or display lights or shapes in accordance with 
the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 
(72 COLREGS), 28 U.S.T. 3459, T.I.A.S. 8587, or Inland Navigation 
Rules, 33 CFR part 83; nor of the radio requirements of the Vessel 
Bridge-to-Bridge Radiotelephone Act, 33 U.S.C. 1201-1208, part 26 of 
this chapter, and 47 CFR part 80.
    (2) AIS must be maintained in effective operating condition, which 
includes--
    (i) The ability to reinitialize the AIS, which requires access to 
and knowledge of the AIS power source and password;
    (ii) The ability to access AIS information from the primary conning 
position of the vessel;
    (iii) The accurate broadcast of a properly assigned Maritime Mobile 
Service Identity (MMSI) number;
    (iv) The accurate input and upkeep of all AIS data fields and 
system updates; and
    (v) For those vessels denoted in paragraph (b) of this section, the 
continual operation of AIS and its associated devices (e.g., 
positioning system, gyro, converters, displays) at all times while the 
vessel is underway or at anchor, and, if moored, at least 15 minutes 
prior to getting underway; except when its operation would compromise 
the safety or security of the vessel or a security incident is 
imminent. The AIS should be returned to continuous operation as soon as 
the compromise has been mitigated or the security incident has passed. 
The time and reason for the silent period should be recorded in the 
ship's official log and reported to the nearest Captain of the Port or 
Vessel Traffic Center (VTC).
    (3) AIS safety-related text messaging must be conducted in English 
and solely to exchange or communicate pertinent navigation safety 
information (analogous to a SECURITE broadcast). Although not 
prohibited, AIS text messaging should not be relied upon as the primary 
means for broadcasting

[[Page 5336]]

distress (MAYDAY) or urgent (PAN PAN) communications. (47 CFR 80.1109, 
Distress, urgency, and safety communications).
    (4) AIS application-specific messaging (ASM) is permissible, but is 
limited to applications adopted by the International Maritime 
Organization (such as IMO SN.1/Circ.289) or those denoted in the 
International Association of Marine Aids to Navigation and Lighthouse 
Authorities' (IALA) ASM Collection for use in the United States or 
Canada, and to no more than one ASM per minute.

    Note to paragraph (d):
    The Coast Guard has developed the ``U.S. AIS Encoding Guide'' to 
help ensure consistent and accurate data encoding (input) by AIS 
users. This Guide is available at our ``AIS Frequently Asked 
Questions'' (FAQ #2) World Wide Web page at www.navcen.uscg.gov. 
Although of great benefit, the interfacing or installation of other 
external devices or displays (e.g., transmitting heading device, 
gyro, rate of turn indicator, electronic charting systems, and 
radar), is not currently required except as denoted in Sec.  
164.46(c). Most application-specific messages require interfacing to 
an external system that is capable of their portrayal, such as 
equipment certified to meet Radio Technical Commission for Maritime 
Services (RTCM) electronic chart system (ECS) standard 10900 series.

    (e) Watchkeeping. AIS is primarily intended for use by the Master 
or person in charge of the vessel, or by the person designated by the 
Master or person in charge to pilot or direct the movement of the 
vessel, who must maintain a periodic watch for AIS information.
    (f) Portable AIS. The use of a portable AIS is permissible only to 
the extent that electromagnetic interference does not affect the proper 
function of existing navigation and communication equipment on board 
and such that only one AIS device may be transmitting on board a vessel 
at any one time.
    (g) AIS Pilot Plug. The AIS Pilot Plug on any vessel subject to 
pilotage by other than the vessel Master or crew must be readily 
available and easily accessible from the primary conning position of 
the vessel and permanently affixed (not an extension cord) and adjacent 
(within 3 feet) to a 120-volt 50/60 Hz AC power receptacle (NEMA 5-15).
    (h) Exceptions. The following vessels may seek up to a 5-year 
deviation from the AIS requirements of this section by requesting a 
deviation under Sec.  164.55.
    (1) Vessels that operate solely within a very confined area (e.g., 
less than a 1 nautical-mile radius, shipyard, or barge fleeting 
facility);
    (2) Vessels that conduct only short voyages (less than 1 nautical 
mile) on a fixed schedule (e.g., a bank-to-bank river ferry service or 
a tender vessel);
    (3) Vessels that are not likely to encounter other AIS-equipped 
vessels;
    (4) Vessels whose design or construction makes it impracticable to 
operate an AIS device (e.g., those that lack electrical power, have an 
exposed or open cabin, or are submersible); or
    (5) Vessels denoted in paragraph (b)(2) that seek a deviation from 
requirements in paragraphs (d)(2)(ii) and (e) of this section because 
their AIS Class B device lacks a display.
    (i) Prohibition. Except for maritime support stations (see 47 CFR 
80.5) licensed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), 
broadcasts from AIS Class A or B devices on aircraft, non-self 
propelled vessels or from land are prohibited.
    (j) Implementation date. Those vessels identified in paragraphs (b) 
and (c) of this section that were not previously subject to AIS 
carriage must install AIS no later than March 1, 2016.


Sec.  164.53  [Amended]

0
42. In Sec.  164.53(b), after the word ``vessel's'', add the phrase 
''automatic identification system (AIS),''.

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
43. The authority citation for part 165 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 
6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 
0170.1.


Sec.  165.503  [Amended]

0
44. In Sec.  165.503(a), in the definition of Certain dangerous cargo 
or CDC, remove the section reference ``160.204'' and add, in its place, 
the section reference ``160.202''.


Sec.  165.510  [Amended]

0
45. In Sec.  165.510(b), in the definition of Dangerous Cargo, remove 
the section reference ``Sec.  160.203'' and add, in its place, the 
section reference ``Sec.  160.202''.


Sec.  165.753  [Amended]

0
46. In Sec.  165.753(c)(6), remove the reference ``160.203'' and add, 
in its place, the reference ``160.202''.


Sec.  165.811  [Amended]

0
47. In Sec.  165.811(e)(2), remove the section reference ``Sec.  
160.203'' and add, in its place, the section reference ``Sec.  
160.202''.


Sec.  165.830  [Amended]

0
48. In Sec.  165.830(c), in the definition of Barge, remove the 
reference ``160.204'' and add, in its place, the reference ``160.202''.

Sec.  165.921  [Amended]

0
49. In Sec.  165.921(c), in the definition of Barge, remove the 
reference ``160.204'' and add, in its place, the reference ``160.202''.


Sec.  165.1181  [Amended]

0
50. In Sec.  165.1181(e)(1)(ii)(C)(1), remove the words ``section 
160.203'' and add, in their place, the section reference ``Sec.  
160.202''.


Sec.  165.1183  [Amended]

0
51. In Sec.  165.1183(a)(2), in the definition of High Value Asset, 
remove the reference ``160.204'' and add, in its place, the reference 
``160.202''.


Sec.  165.1704  [Amended]

0
52. In Sec.  165.1704--
0
a. In paragraph (c)(4), after the punctuation mark ``;'', add the word 
``and'';
0
b. In paragraph (c)(5), after the term ``6 knots'', remove the text ``; 
and'' and add, in its place, the punctuation mark ``.''; and
0
c. Remove paragraph (c)(6).

Title 46--Shipping

PART 4--MARINE CASUALTIES AND INVESTIGATIONS

0
53. The authority citation for part 4 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 43 U.S.C. 1333; 46 U.S.C. 2103, 
2303a, 2306, 6101, 6301, and 6305; 50 U.S.C. 198; Department of 
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. Subpart 4.40 issued under 
49 U.S.C. 1903(a)(1)(E).

Sec.  4.05-1  [Amended]

0
54. In Sec.  4.05-1(b), remove the reference ``160.204'' and add, in 
its place, the reference ``160.202''.

PART 148--CARRIAGE OF BULK SOLID MATERIALS THAT REQUIRE SPECIAL 
HANDLING

0
55. The authority citation for part 148 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1602; E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 
Comp., p. 277; 46 U.S.C. 3306, 5111; 49 U.S.C. 5103; Department of 
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.


Sec.  148.11  [Amended]

0
56. In Sec.  148.11(b), in the last row of the Table of Hazardous or 
Potentially Dangerous Characteristics, remove the reference ``160.204'' 
and add, in its place, the reference ``160.202''.


[[Page 5337]]


    Dated: January 15, 2015.
Paul F. Zukunft,
Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commandant.
[FR Doc. 2015-01331 Filed 1-29-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>