1378 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

not required because of the FONSI. A 

copy of the Plan and FONSI may be 

viewed on the park’s planning website 

at https://parkplanning.nps.gov/mora 

by clicking on the link entitled ‘‘2018 

Mount Rainier National Park Fisheries 

Management Plan Environmental 

Assessment and Finding of No 

Significant Impact’’ and then clicking 

on the link entitled ‘‘Document List.’’ 

Effects on the Energy Supply (Executive 

Order 13211) 

This rule is not a significant energy 

action under the definition in Executive 

Order 13211. A Statement of Energy 

Effects is not required. 

Clarity of This Rule 

We are required by Executive Orders 

12866 (section 1(b)(12)) and 12988 

(section 3(b)(1)(B)), and 13563 (section 

1(a)), and by the Presidential 

Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write 

all rules in plain language. This means 

that each rule we publish must: 

(a) Be logically organized; 

(b) Use the active voice to address 

readers directly; 

(c) Use common, everyday words and 

clear language rather than jargon; 

(d) Be divided into short sections and 

sentences; and 

(e) Use lists and tables wherever 

possible. 

If you feel that we have not met these 

requirements, send us comments by one 

of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES

section. To better help us revise the 

rule, your comments should be as 

specific as possible. For example, you 

should tell us the numbers of the 

sections or paragraphs that you find 

unclear, which sections or sentences are 

too long, the sections where you feel 

lists or tables would be useful, etc. 

Public Participation 

It is the policy of the Department of 

the Interior, whenever practicable, to 

afford the public an opportunity to 

participate in the rulemaking process. 

Accordingly, interested persons may 

submit written comments regarding this 

proposed rule by one of the methods 

listed in the ADDRESSES section of this 

document. 

Public Availability of Comments 

Before including your address, phone 

number, email address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment—including your 

personal identifying information—may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

While you can ask us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 7 

District of Columbia, National parks, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

National Park Service proposes to 

amend 36 CFR part 7 as follows: 

PART 7—SPECIAL REGULATIONS, 

AREAS OF THE NATIONAL PARK 

SYSTEM 

■ 1. The authority for part 7 continues 

to read as follows: 

Authority: 54 U.S.C. 100101, 100751, 

320102; Sec. 7.96 also issued under D.C. 

Code 10–137 and D.C. Code 50–2201.07. 

■ 2. In § 7.5, revise paragraph (a) to read 

as follows: 

§ 7.5 Mount Rainier National Park. 

(a) Fishing. (1) Fishing closures and 

restrictions, based on management 

objectives for the preservation of the 

park’s natural resources, are established 

by the Superintendent. 

(2) The Superintendent may establish 

closures and restrictions, in accordance 

with the criteria and procedures of § 1.5 

of this chapter, on any activity 

pertaining to fishing, including, but not 

limited to species of fish that may be 

taken, seasons and hours during which 

fishing may take place, methods of 

taking, and size, creel, and possession 

limits. 

(3) Except in emergency situations, 

the Superintendent will notify the 

public of any such closures or 

restrictions through one or more 

methods listed in § 1.7 of this chapter, 

including publication in the 

Superintendent’s Compendium (or 

written compilation) of discretionary 

actions referred to paragraph (b) of § 1.7. 

(4) Fishing in closed waters or 

violating a condition or restriction 

established by the Superintendent 

under this paragraph (a) is prohibited. 

* * * * * 

Shannon A. Estenoz, 

Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and 

Parks. 

[FR Doc. 2022–00231 Filed 1–10–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4312–52–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

46 CFR Part 2 

[Docket No. USCG–2018–0538] 

RIN 1625–AC55 

User Fees for Inspected Towing 

Vessels 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing 

to update its user fees for seagoing 

towing vessels that are 300 gross tons or 

more and to revise user fees for other 

inspected towing vessels. The Coast 

Guard is proposing these updates 

because we are required to establish and 

maintain a fair fee for our vessel 

inspection services and to separate the 

fees for inspection options that involve 

third-party auditors and surveyors from 

inspection options that do not involve 

third parties. Under this proposed rule, 

vessels using the Alternate Compliance 

Program, Streamlined Inspection 

Program, or the Towing Safety 

Management System options would pay 

a lower fee than vessels that use the 

traditional Coast Guard inspection 

option. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before April 11, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2018–0538 using the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at https://

www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public 

Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for 

further instructions on submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information about this document call or 

email Mr. Scott Kuhaneck, Coast Guard; 

telephone 202–372–1221, email 

Thomas.S.Kuhaneck@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents for Preamble 

I. Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

II. Abbreviations 

III. Basis and Purpose 

A. The Problem We Seek To Address 

B. Legal Authority To Address This 

Problem 

C. Recent Legislation 

IV. Background 

A. Origins of Annual Vessel Inspection 

Fees 

B. Current Fees for Subchapter I and 

Subchapter M Towing Vessels 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules 1379 

1Public Law 108–293, 118 Stat. 1028 (August 9, 

2004), with relevant chapters codified in 46 U.S.C. 

3301. 

2 81 FR 40004. 

3See 46 CFR 136.202, which calls for 25 percent 

of the vessels of each owner or managing operator 

of more than one existing towing vessel to have 

COIs by July 22, 2019. It calls for an additional 25 

percent to obtain COIs for each of the remaining 3 

years of the phase-in period. The final rule was 

effective July 20, 2016, but it delayed the 

implementation of most of its part 140 Operations, 

part 141 Lifesaving, part 142 Fire Protection, part 

143 Machinery and Electrical Systems and 

Equipment, and part 144 Construction and 

Arrangement requirements until July 20, 2018. See 

§§ 140.105, 141.105, 142.105, 143.200, and 144.105. 

4See 46 CFR 136.130—Options for documenting 

compliance to obtain a Certificate of Inspection. 

5TSMS is a voluntary inspection option that 

permits qualified third-party organizations to 

conduct certain vessel examinations in place of 

Coast Guard inspections. See 46 CFR 138—Towing 

Safety Management System (TSMS). 

6See 81 FR at 40005. 

7See 46 CFR 2.01–7 and 90.05–1. Under 46 

U.S.C. 3301, seagoing motor vessels are subject to 

inspection. Towing vessels are motor vessels, 

(vessels propelled by machinery other than steam) 

and they fall within the definition of ‘‘seagoing 

motor vessel’’ if they are at least 300 gross tons and 

make voyages beyond the Boundary Line. See 

definitions in 46 U.S.C. 2101. 

8See Direct User Fees for Inspection or 

Examination of U.S. and Foreign Commercial 

Vessels (60 FR 13550 (March 13, 1995); 46 CFR 

2.10–101. 

V. Discussion of Proposed Rule 

A. Categories of Annual Fees 

B. Amending Annual Inspection Fees for 

Seagoing Towing Vessels Subject to 

Subchapter I 

C. Establishing Specific Annual Inspection 

Fees for Towing Vessels Subject to 

Subchapter M 

D. Methodology for Calculating Fees 

VI. Regulatory Analyses 

A. Regulatory Planning and Review 

B. Small Entities 

C. Assistance for Small Entities 

D. Collection of Information 

E. Federalism 

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

G. Taking of Private Property 

H. Civil Justice Reform 

I. Protection of Children 

J. Indian Tribal Governments 

K. Energy Effects 

L. Technical Standards 

M. Environment 

I. Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

The Coast Guard views public 

participation as essential to effective 

rulemaking, and will consider all 

comments and material received during 

the comment period. Your comment can 

help shape the outcome of this 

rulemaking. If you submit a comment, 

please include the docket number for 

this rulemaking, indicate the specific 

section of this document to which each 

comment applies, and provide a reason 

for each suggestion or recommendation. 

We encourage you to submit 

comments through the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at https://

www.regulations.gov. If you cannot 

submit your material by using https://

www.regulations.gov, contact the person 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section of this proposed rule 

for alternate instructions. Documents 

mentioned in this proposed rule as 

being in the docket, and all public 

comments, will be available in our 

online docket at https://

www.regulations.gov, and can be viewed 

by following that website’s instructions. 

Additionally, if you visit the online 

docket and sign up for email alerts, you 

will be notified when comments are 

posted or if a final rule is published. 

We accept anonymous comments. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to https://

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. For more about privacy and 

submissions to the docket in response to 

this document, see DHS’s eRulemaking 

System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, 

March 11, 2020). 

We do not plan to hold a public 

meeting but we will consider doing so 

if public comments indicate that a 

meeting would be helpful and we 

determine that a meeting would aid this 

rulemaking. We would issue a separate 

Federal Register notice to announce the 

date, time, and location of such a 

meeting. 

II. Abbreviations 

ACP Alternate Compliance Program 

CGAA Frank LoBiondo Coast Guard 

Authorization Act of 2018 

COI Certificate of Inspection 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

FTE Full-Time Equivalent 

IRFA Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

MISLE Marine Information for Safety and 

Law Enforcement 

NAICS North American Industry 

Classification System 

NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking 

OBRA Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 

of 1990 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act 

SBA Small Business Administration 

§ Section 

SIP Streamlined Inspection Program 

SSM Sector Staffing Model 

TSMS Towing Safety Management System 

U.S.C. United States Code 

III. Basis and Purpose 

In this section, the Coast Guard 

identifies the problem we intend to 

address, the well-established statutory 

authority that enables us to issue this 

proposed rule, and the recent legislation 

that provides additional authority for 

this proposed rulemaking. 

A. The Problem We Seek To Address 

The Coast Guard and Maritime 

Transportation Act of 2004 1 added 

towing vessels to the list of vessels 

subject to inspection in 46 U.S.C. 3301. 

As directed by 46 U.S.C. 3307, each 

vessel subject to inspection under part 

A of Subtitle II must undergo an initial 

inspection for certification, and after 

receiving a Certificate of Inspection 

(COI) the vessel must undergo periodic 

inspections. 

On June 20, 2016, we published an 

Inspection of Towing Vessels final rule 

that established safety regulations 

governing the inspection, standards, and 

safety management systems for towing 

vessels.2 We estimated that the rule 

would apply to more than 5,500 towing 

vessels that had previously been 

uninspected vessels. That rule 

established the 46 CFR subchapter M— 

Towing Vessels (parts 136 through 144), 

which requires vessels subject to 

subchapter M to obtain a COI. The 

phase-in period for obtaining these COIs 

under subchapter M runs from July 20, 

2018 to July 19, 2022.3

In the Inspection of Towing Vessels 

final rule, we stated our plan to begin 

a separate rulemaking for annual 

inspection fees for towing vessels that 

would reflect the specific program costs 

associated with the two options for 

documenting compliance to obtain a 

COI,4 the Coast Guard option and the 

Towing Safety Management System 

(TSMS) option.5 We also stated that 

until then we will use the existing fee 

of $1,030 in 46 CFR 2.10–101 that 

applies to any inspected vessel not 

listed in Table 2.10–101 as the annual 

inspection fee for towing vessels subject 

to subchapter M.6

In addition to towing vessels subject 

to subchapter M that are required to 

obtain COIs, there are towing vessels 

that qualify as seagoing motor vessels 

(300 gross tons or more) that are subject 

to 46 CFR chapter I, subchapter I 

regulations for cargo and miscellaneous 

vessels.7 These vessels are currently 

required to have COIs. The annual 

inspection fee for these subchapter I 

towing vessels was established in 1995 

at $2,915, and has never been updated.8

The law requires that we establish a 

fee for our inspection services that is 

fair and based on costs to the 

Government, value to the recipient, and 

public interest. It further requires that 

we review the costs to the Government 

of such inspections for towing vessel 

using the Coast Guard option and those 

using an option involving a third party, 

revise such fees if there is a difference, 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
1380 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

9 46 U.S.C. 2110(a)(1). 

10Public Law 115–282, 132 Stat. 4192. 

11Public Law 101–508, 104 Stat. 1388 with 

relevant chapters codified in 46 U.S.C. 2110. 

12 60 FR 13550. 

13See 81 FR at 40005. 

14Under 46 CFR 2.01–6(b), foreign vessels from 

countries which are non-signatory to the 

International Convention for the Safety of Life at 

Sea, 1974, are issued a COI, if the inspector 

approves the vessel and its equipment as described 

in § 2.01–5. We have records of COIs issued to 

foreign vessels in our Marine Information for Safety 

and Law Enforcement (MISLE) database, but no 

records of a COI issued to a foreign towing vessel. 

and comply with the same requirements 

for establishing fees when doing so. 

B. Legal Authority To Address This 

Problem 

The Coast Guard is issuing this 

proposed rule based on authority in 

section 2110 of Title 46 of the United 

States Code (46 U.S.C. 2110), which has 

been delegated to the Commandant 

under DHS Delegation No. 

0170.1(II)(92). Section 2110 of Title 46 

directs the Secretary of the Department 

in which the Coast Guard is operating 

to establish a fee or charge for a service 

or thing of value provided by the 

Secretary under Subtitle II of Title 46. 

Inspections and related services 

described in Subtitle II of Title 46 are 

considered a service or thing of value 

provided by the Secretary.9

Section 2110 also directs that the fee 

or charge be established in accordance 

with 31 U.S.C. 9701, which specifies 

that each charge be fair and based on the 

costs to the Government, the value of 

the service or thing to the recipient, 

public policy or interest served, and 

other relevant facts. Consistent with 

these objectives, once a fee or charge is 

established, section 2110 allows it to be 

adjusted to accommodate changes in the 

cost of providing a specific service or 

thing of value. 

C. Recent Legislation 

On December 4, 2018, the Frank 

LoBiondo Coast Guard Authorization 

Act of 2018 (CGAA) was enacted.10

Section 815 of CGAA directs the Coast 

Guard to review and revise the fee for 

inspections. First, the Coast Guard must 

compare the costs to the Government of 

towing vessel inspections performed by 

the Coast Guard and towing vessel 

inspections performed by a third party, 

to determine if they are different. The 

Coast Guard interprets ‘‘costs to the 

Government’’ in section 815(a) to mean 

the cost to the Coast Guard of providing 

inspection and related services to 

determine whether a vessel meets 

requirements necessary for it to 

maintain its COI. We have conducted 

that comparison and determined that 

there is a difference in costs to the 

Government between the inspection 

options for towing vessels that involve 

a third party and those that do not. 

If there is a difference in costs, section 

815 of CGAA directs us to revise the fee 

we assess for such inspections to 

conform to 31 U.S.C. 9701, and to base 

the fee on the cost to the Government. 

This is the intent of this notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM). 

IV. Background 

A. Origins of Annual Vessel Inspection 

Fees 

The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation 

Act of 1990 (OBRA) amended 46 U.S.C. 

2110 and removed long-standing 

prohibitions against imposing certain 

user fees.11 As amended by the OBRA, 

46 U.S.C. 2110 requires the 

establishment and collection of user fees 

for Coast Guard services provided under 

Subtitle II of Title 46, United States 

Code. On March 13, 1995, the Coast 

Guard published the final rule on Direct 

User Fees for Inspection or Examination 

of U.S. and Foreign Commercial 

Vessels.12 The fees were intended to 

recover the costs associated with 

providing Coast Guard vessel inspection 

services directly or through an 

alternative reinspection program, 

although alternative reinspection 

program only applied to certain offshore 

supply vessels. The final rule 

established user fees for services related 

to commercial vessel inspection 

including annual fees for seagoing 

towing vessels. 

On June 20, 2016, the Coast Guard 

published the final rule on the 

Inspection of Towing Vessels. The 

vessels subject to this 2016 rule were 

not considered when the original vessel 

inspection fees were established in 

1995, except to the extent that the table 

of fees included a default fee for any 

inspected vessel not listed. We 

indicated in the 2016 rule that we 

would establish specific fees, in a 

subsequent rulemaking, that would 

reflect program costs associated with the 

TSMS and Coast Guard inspection 

options for obtaining COIs. We stated 

that until those specific fees were 

established, the annual inspection fee 

for towing vessels subject to subchapter 

M would be the existing fee of $1,030 

in 46 CFR 2.10–101 for any inspected 

vessel not listed in Table 2.10–101.13

B. Current Fees for Subchapter I and 

Subchapter M Towing Vessels 

The Coast Guard currently charges an 

annual vessel inspection fee for U.S. 

and foreign vessels requiring a COI, 

following the fee schedule set in § 2.10– 

101.14 The current fee for seagoing 

towing vessels inspected under 

subchapter I is $2,915 for all inspection 

options—the Coast Guard, the Alternate 

Compliance Program (ACP), and the 

Streamlined Inspection Program (SIP). 

The current fee for towing vessels 

inspected under subchapter M (all 

inspection options) is $1,030, which is 

the fee for ‘‘[a]ny vessel not listed in this 

table.’’ 

V. Discussion of Proposed Rule 

This proposed rule would update 

existing annual inspection fees for both 

seagoing towing vessels (300 gross tons 

or more) and vessels subject to the 

relatively new towing-vessel regulations 

in 46 CFR subchapter M. 

The annual inspection fees are located 

in 46 CFR part 2—Vessel Inspections. In 

addition to fees in § 2.10–101, this part 

contains definitions in § 2.10–25. We 

propose to add the following new 

defined terms to § 2.10–25— 

• Annual vessel inspection fee; 

• Alternate Compliance Program 

option; 

• Coast Guard option; 

• Streamlined Inspection Program 

option; 

• Towing Safety Management System 

option; and 

• Towing vessel. 

To reflect the involvement of third 

parties in inspection options, such as 

the ACP and TSMS, we propose to 

define ‘‘annual vessel inspection fee’’ as 

the fee charged by the Coast Guard for 

providing inspection and related 

services to determine whether a vessel 

meets the requirements to maintain its 

COI. The fee charged by the Coast Guard 

reflects the cost to the Coast Guard. 

There are several existing options for 

inspection, which we propose to define 

in revised § 2.10–25 by reference to the 

regulations that establish each option. 

For both seagoing and subchapter M 

towing vessels, there is a Coast Guard 

option in which the Coast Guard 

performs all of the relevant inspection 

activity. For both types of vessels there 

is also a third-party option, already 

established in regulation, in which a 

third party performs some of the 

relevant activity, but the Coast Guard 

still inspects the vessel and examines 

evidence of compliance provided by 

third parties. 

For seagoing towing vessels there is 

an additional option, the SIP. The SIP 

option does not involve a third party. 

Under the SIP option, a vessel is 

inspected in accordance with an 

approved Vessel Action Plan that the 

company’s SIP agent develops with 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules 1381 

15Under 46 U.S.C. 103 and 33 U.S.C. 151(b), 

boundary lines are used for dividing inland waters 

of the United States from the high seas to delineate 

the application of certain U.S. statutes. For a list of 

boundary lines and the statutes those lines are used 

to delineate, see 46 CFR part 7, which lists 

boundary lines for the Atlantic Coast, Gulf Coast, 

Pacific Coast, and the states of Alaska and Hawaii. 16Activity-based costing is a method for 

determining the cost of a service based on the cost 

of each individual element of that service. 

17Shore Forces units are Coast Guard sector 

commands and their sub-units or field units. See 

the USCG Strategic Cost Manual, M7000.4 

(February 2005). 

18 Vessel population data came from MISLE as of 

June 2021. See the Affected Population section for 

more details. 

guidance from the Coast Guard. In our 

definition of SIP, we point to subpart E 

of 46 CFR part 8, which spells out SIP 

program requirements. 

We propose to define ‘‘towing vessel’’ 

as a commercial vessel engaged in or 

intending to engage in the service of 

pulling, pushing, or hauling alongside, 

or any combination of pulling, pushing, 

or hauling alongside. This definition 

matches the definition of towing vessel 

in 46 U.S.C. 2101. 

We are also proposing to modify the 

definition of an existing term in § 2.10– 

25, Sea-going towing vessel. We would 

remove the modifier ‘‘seagoing’’ used 

within the definition itself, and insert a 

description of what seagoing means. 

The proposed insertion is ‘‘and that 

makes voyages beyond the Boundary 

Line as defined by 46 U.S.C. 103.’’ 15 We 

would further specify that the vessel 

must be 300 gross tons or more, to 

distinguish seagoing towing vessels 

from towing vessels subject to 

subchapter M that travel beyond the 

Boundary Line. We would also remove 

the hyphen from seagoing. 

A. Categories of Annual Fees 

For towing vessels subject to 

subchapter M, we propose two fee 

categories; the Coast Guard option and 

the TSMS option. For seagoing towing 

vessels subject to subchapter I, we 

propose three fee categories; the Coast 

Guard option, the ACP option and the 

SIP option. This would allow the Coast 

Guard to provide reduced fees for 

subchapter M vessel owners who choose 

the TSMS option described in 46 CFR 

part 138, and for subchapter I vessel 

owners who choose the ACP or SIP 

option described in 46 CFR part 8. We 

anticipate this fee structure will help to 

ensure the Coast Guard’s ability to 

recover full costs to the Government, 

and to separate annual inspection fees 

for options involving third-party 

surveys and audits of towing vessels 

using safety management systems. 

Several inspection options have lower 

user fees than the Coast Guard option. 

These inspection alternatives either 

require fewer Coast Guard inspection 

activities or the Coast Guard inspection 

activities take less time and thus have 

a lower cost. 

B. Amending Annual Inspection Fees 

for Seagoing Towing Vessels Subject to 

Subchapter I 

We are proposing to charge one of 

three annual fees for seagoing towing 

vessels that are inspected under 

subchapter I: 

• $2,747 for those using the Coast 

Guard option; 

• $1,850 for those using the ACP 

option; and 

• $2,260 for those using the SIP 

option. 

The current annual fee for seagoing 

towing vessels that are inspected under 

subchapter I is $2,915. 

For a detailed discussion of how these 

fees were derived, see Methodology for 

Calculating Fees in section V.D. 

C. Establishing Specific Annual 

Inspection Fees for Towing Vessels 

Subject to Subchapter M 

We are also proposing to charge one 

of two fees for towing vessels inspected 

under subchapter M: 

• $2,184 for those using the Coast 

Guard option, and 

• $973 for those using the TSMS 

option. 

The current annual fee applied to 

subchapter M towing vessels is $1,030. 

For a more detailed discussion of how 

these fees were derived, see 

Methodology for Calculating Fees in 

section V.D. 

D. Methodology for Calculating Fees 

This section summarizes the 

methodology for calculating fees. For 

more details, see the Cost Study for 

Determining User Fees for Inspected 

Towing Vessels in the docket where 

indicated under the section I of this 

preamble. 

To derive the costs of the various 

inspection types, we used an activitybased costing 16 approach in 

conjunction with the Sector Staffing 

Model (SSM). The SSM is an activitybased model designed to establish 

human capital requirements and 

quantify resources at Shore Forces 

units.17 The SSM measures specific 

activity and frequency to determine the 

Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) workforce 

needed to meet a particular workload. 

Data in the model is derived from Coast 

Guard enterprise databases and surveys 

conducted at the Coast Guard field unit 

level. The model also incorporates unit 

specific travel times for conducting 

missions, collateral duty workload, and 

mission required training. In the spring 

of 2012, the SSM was accredited in 

accordance with official Coast Guard 

policy and currently serves as the 

primary decision tool for managing 

sector enterprise staffing. Table 1 shows 

the cost of activities for providing COI 

services to each type of inspection. 

These costs are derived using SSM FTE 

calculations; see the Cost Study in the 

docket for the full derivation of figures. 

TABLE 1—PER VESSEL COST OF ACTIVITIES FOR PROVIDING COI SERVICES BY USER FEE SEGMENT

Subchapter M: 

Coast Guard 

Subchapter M: 

TSMS 

Subchapter I: 

Coast Guard 

Subchapter I: 

ACP 

Subchapter I: 

SIP 

Inspection Activity Costs ...................................................... $1,183 $408 $1,618 $874 $1,213 

Travel Costs ......................................................................... 317 40 356 356 356 

Supervision and Administration Costs ................................. 243 84 332 179 249 

Indirect Costs ....................................................................... 442 442 442 442 442 

Total Annual Costs ....................................................... 2,184 973 2,747 1,850 2,260 

The Coast Guard intends to collect 

one of five different user fees from the 

approximately 5,385 towing vessels that 

require COIs under subchapters I and 

M.18 Table 2 shows the current fee, the 

proposed fee, the incremental fee 

adjustment and the percent change to 

the user fee. The annual costs of 

services for each vessel class is the 

proposed user fee for that vessel class. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
1382 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

19The user fees collected for these services are 

offsetting receipts and are deposited to the 

Department of Treasury and credited to DHS appropriation as proprietary receipts. See 46 U.S.C. 

2110(h). 

TABLE 2—CURRENT SUBCHAPTER M AND I USER FEES AND PROPOSED USER FEE ADJUSTMENT AMOUNTS

Fee type/user fee class Current 

fee 

Proposed 

fee 

Incremental 

fee adjustment 

Percent 

change 

Subchapter M: Coast Guard option ................................................................. $1,030 $2,184 $1,154 112 

Subchapter M: TSMS ...................................................................................... 1,030 973 ¥57 ¥6 

Subchapter I: Coast Guard option ................................................................... 2,915 2,747 ¥168 ¥6 

Subchapter I: Alternative Compliance Program option ................................... 2,915 1,850 ¥1,065 ¥37 

Subchapter I: Streamlined Inspection Program option .................................... 2,915 2,260 ¥655 ¥22 

VI. Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this proposed rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

Executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Our analyses based on these statutes or 

Executive orders follows. 

A. Regulatory Planning and Review 

Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory 

Planning and Review) and 13563 

(Improving Regulation and Regulatory 

Review) direct agencies to assess the 

costs and benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributive impacts, and 

equity). Executive Order 13563 

emphasizes the importance of 

quantifying costs and benefits, reducing 

costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting 

flexibility. 

This proposed rule is a significant 

regulatory action under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, 

the rule has been reviewed by the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB). 

Section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 

requires an assessment of potential costs 

and benefits. The analysis follows. 

Currently, towing vessels are 

inspected under subchapter I or 

subchapter M, dependent on their size 

and area of operation. All inspected 

towing vessels are required to pay a user 

fee. Subchapter I towing vessels pay a 

user fee of $2,915 annually. Subchapter 

M towing vessels pay a user fee of 

$1,030 annually. The subchapter M user 

fee is not specific to towing vessels, 

rather it is for all inspected vessels that 

do not have a specific user fee on Table 

2.10–101. 

We calculate that in total 42 towing 

vessels inspected under subchapter I are 

paying $122,430 annually and that in 

total 5,343 towing vessels inspected 

under subchapter M are paying 

$5,503,290 annually for inspection 

services. Towing vessels choose 

between several vessel inspection 

alternatives. Once selected, the 

inspection option is unlikely to change 

due to a change in user fees, since there 

are private business costs associated 

with changing inspection options. Coast 

Guard COI service costs are fully funded 

through annual appropriations.19

This proposed rulemaking would 

establish a user fee specific to 

subchapter M towing vessels, revise the 

user fee specific to subchapter I towing 

vessels, and establish user fees for 

vessel inspection alternatives that 

require fewer Coast Guard inspection 

activities or the Coast Guard inspection 

activities take less time and thus have 

a lower cost to Coast Guard. We 

anticipate this proposed fee structure 

will help to ensure the Coast Guard’s 

ability to offset costs to the government, 

and to separate annual inspection fees 

for options involving third-party 

surveys and audits of towing vessels 

using safety management systems. This 

proposed rule would result in estimated 

transfers from towing vessel operators 

for the COI services of $1.5 million to 

$1.6 million per year to the Federal 

Government. The 10-year transfers, 

undiscounted, total $15,719,319. The 

discounted annualized figure, at 7 

percent, is $1,577,491. 

The Coast Guard proposes to do the 

following through this rulemaking: 

(1) Modify the definition in § 2.10–25 

of Sea-going towing vessel. We would 

remove the modifier ‘‘seagoing’’ used 

within the definition, and replace it 

with a description of what ‘‘seagoing’’ 

means. The proposed insertion is ‘‘and 

that makes voyages beyond the 

Boundary Line as defined by 46 U.S.C. 

103.’’ Also, we would specify that the 

vessel must be 300 gross tons or more 

to distinguish seagoing towing vessels 

from towing vessels that travel beyond 

the Boundary Line, which may be 

subject to subchapter M. This is an 

administrative change and it would 

have no economic impact. 

(2) Amend the user fees for 46 CFR 

subchapter I towing vessels. The current 

fee for the 42 seagoing towing vessels 

inspected under subchapter I is $2,915 

for all inspection options (Coast Guard, 

ACP, and SIP). This proposed rule 

would make the fees specific to each 

inspection as shown below in table 3. 

Vessels have already chosen their 

inspection option and are unlikely to 

change away from their current option. 

This is because there are costs 

associated with switching inspection 

options and there are private industry 

transactions and business specific costs 

beyond the inspection cost that make 

the user fee a small portion of the 

overall cost of inspections. 

TABLE 3—CURRENT AND PROPOSED SUBCHAPTER I TOWING VESSEL USER FEES

Inspection type Current fee Proposed fee 

Coast Guard option ................................................................................................................................................. $2,915 $2,747 

Alternate Compliance Program option (ACP) ......................................................................................................... 1,850 

Streamlined Inspection Program option (SIP) ......................................................................................................... 2,260 

(3) Create a specific user fee category 

for the 5,343 towing vessels under 46 

CFR subchapter M towing vessels in the 

table of fees in § 2.10–101 and update 

the current user fees for annual 

inspection fees for towing vessels to 

reflect the specific program costs 

associated with the two subchapter M 

options: The TSMS option and the Coast 

Guard inspection option. The current 

fee is $1,030 for the annual inspection 

fee for towing vessels subject to 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules 1383 

subchapter M. This proposed rule 

would make the fees specific to each 

inspection type as shown below in table 

4. Similar to subchapter I vessels, 

subchapter M vessels have already 

chosen their inspection option and are 

unlikely to change for the same reasons. 

TABLE 4—CURRENT AND PROPOSED SUBCHAPTER M TOWING VESSEL USER FEES

Inspection type Current fee Proposed fee 

Coast Guard option ................................................................................................................................................. $1,030 $2,184 

TSMS option ............................................................................................................................................................ ........................ 973 

(4) Define the following new terms 

that will be added to the table of fees in 

§ 2.10–101: Annual vessel inspection 

fee, Alternative Compliance Program 

option, Coast Guard option, 

Streamlined Inspection Program option, 

Towing Safety Management System 

option, and Towing Vessel. This is an 

administrative change and has no 

economic impact. All of these points are 

described in greater detail in the Cost 

Study. 

To obtain the affected population for 

this proposed rule, we used the MISLE 

(Marine Information for Safety and Law 

Enforcement) database. MISLE is the 

Coast Guard’s vessel and marine activity 

database which contains the best and 

most readily available vessel population 

data. According to MISLE data as of 

June 2021, the total affected population 

of this rule is 5,385 inspected towing 

vessels. There are approximately 5,343 

towing vessels that will require 

inspection under 46 CFR subchapter M 

and 42 towing vessels that are inspected 

under 46 CFR subchapter I. Though the 

subchapter M population is decreasing 

by an average of 33 vessels per year 

since 2016, the subchapter I population 

is expected to remain stable, because it 

historically has done so. 

Rather than a single fee category for 

all towing vessels covered by a 

subchapter, the Coast Guard is 

proposing two categories for subchapter 

M and three categories for subchapter I 

vessels. For subchapter M, the 

inspection types are the Coast Guard 

option and the TSMS option. For 

subchapter I, the inspection types are 

the Coast Guard option, the ACP option, 

and the SIP option. Table 5 presents the 

total population of inspected towing 

vessels that would be impacted by this 

proposed rule. These are the current 

rates of inspection for the subchapters, 

though not all vessels are currently 

inspected. Table 6 presents the 

projected subchapter M population and 

their projected counts of inspection 

type. We assume that the subchapter M 

towing vessel population will maintain 

a 70-percent-TSMS option and 30- 

percent-Coast-Guard option split over 

the duration of the analysis. 

TABLE 5—TOTAL AFFECTED POPULATION FOR INSPECTED TOWING VESSELS

User fee categories Population 

Subchapter M Coast Guard 

option 

TSMS Total 

Population ................................................................................ 1,603 3,740 5,343 

% of Population ....................................................................... 30 70 100 

Subchapter I Coast Guard 

option 

Vessel Inspection Alternative Total 

Alternate 

Compliance 

Program 

(ACP) 

Streamlined 

Inspection 

Program 

(SIP) 

Population ................................................................................ 28 13 1 42 

% of Population ....................................................................... 67 31 2 100 

Total Population ................................................................ .............................. .............................. .............................. 5,385 

TABLE 6—PROJECTED SUBCHAPTER M POPULATION BY INSPECTION OPTION

Estimated annual subchapter M population by inspection type 

Year CG option TSMS option 

Year 1 ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1,603 3,740 

Year 2 ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1,592 3,718 

Year 3 ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1,583 3,694 

Year 4 ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1,574 3,670 

Year 5 ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1,563 3,648 

Year 6 ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1,554 3,624 

Year 7 ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1,543 3,602 

Year 8 ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1,534 3,578 

Year 9 ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1,524 3,555 

Year 10 .................................................................................................................................................................... 1,514 3,532 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
1384 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

Costs and Benefits 

This proposed rule would not impose 

any new societal costs as all of the 

inspection activities are currently being 

done by the regulated entities and Coast 

Guard. Rather the impacts of this rule 

would be in the form of transfer 

payments, which are monetary 

payments from one group to another 

that do not affect total resources 

available to society. 

This rule would not provide any 

quantitative benefits. However, it would 

have a qualitative benefit. This rule 

would revise user fees to more closely 

reflect the actual cost to the Coast Guard 

of providing inspection services. The 

result would be a more fair distribution 

of costs to inspected towing vessels by 

inspection type. Title 46 U.S.C. 2110 

directs that the fee or charge be 

established in accordance with 31 

U.S.C. 9701, which specifies that each 

charge be fair and based on: The costs 

to the Government; the value of the 

service or thing to the recipient, public 

policy, or interest served; and other 

relevant facts. Consistent with these 

objectives, once a fee or charge is 

established, section 2110 allows it to be 

adjusted to accommodate changes in the 

cost of providing a specific service or 

thing of value. This rulemaking aids the 

Coast Guard in compliance with those 

statutory requirements. 

Transfer Payments 

The Coast Guard proposes to adjust 

the user fees collected from the current 

entities so that there are now five 

different fees based on the towing vessel 

subchapter and program utilized for 

vessel certification. The Coast Guard 

estimates this total is approximately 

5,385 towing vessels. Table 7 shows the 

current fee, the proposed fee, the change 

and the percent change to the user fee. 

The annual costs of services for each 

vessel class is the proposed user fee for 

that vessel class. 

TABLE 7—CURRENT SUBCHAPTER M AND I USER FEES AND PROPOSED USER FEE ADJUSTMENT AMOUNTS

Fee type/ 

user fee class 

Current 

fee 

Proposed 

fee 

Incremental 

fee 

adjustment 

Percent 

change 

Subchapter M: Coast Guard option ................................................................. $1,030 $2,184 $1,154 112 

Subchapter M: TSMS ...................................................................................... 1,030 973 ¥57 ¥6 

Subchapter I: Coast Guard option ................................................................... 2,915 2,747 ¥168 ¥6 

Subchapter I: Alternative Compliance Program option ................................... 2,915 1,850 ¥1,065 ¥37 

Subchapter I: Streamlined Inspection Program option .................................... 2,915 2,260 ¥655 ¥22 

Note: Since there are no distinct categories for TSMS, SIP, or ACP in the current user fee table, all of subchapter M vessels pay one fee and 

all of subchapter I vessels pay one fee. Totals may not sum due to rounding. 

In table 8, we show the total annual 

transfer payments from each vessel class 

to the Government and the total for all 

vessels. For example, Subchapter M 

vessels that choose the Coast Guard 

option would pay $1,154 additional 

dollars per vessel in user fees to the 

Coast Guard for their inspection 

services. Negative numbers represent a 

decrease in user fees. Transfer payments 

are monetary payments from one group 

to another that do not affect total 

resources. For this proposed 

rulemaking, a user fee is a transfer 

payment from the vessel owner or 

operator to the Government to offset the 

costs to the Coast Guard for providing 

COI services. This is found by 

multiplying the vessel population by the 

incremental fee change. Because the 

subchapter M vessel population is 

projected to decrease, table 9 shows 

annual transfer payments for this 

subchapter, totals are found by 

multiplying the populations in table 6 

by the appropriate fees. 

TABLE 8—ANNUAL INCREMENTAL FEE AMOUNTS—FY 2021 

Fee type/ 

user fee class 

Estimated 

population 

Incremental 

fee change 

First year 

fee transfer 

payments 

Subchapter M: Coast Guard option ............................................................................................. 1,603 $1,154 $1,849,862 

Subchapter M: TSMS option ....................................................................................................... 3,740 ¥57 ¥213,180 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................. 5,343 ........................ 1,636,682 

Subchapter I: Coast Guard option ............................................................................................... 28 ¥168 ¥4,704 

Subchapter I: ACP option ............................................................................................................ 13 ¥1,065 ¥13,845 

Subchapter I: SIP option ............................................................................................................. 1 ¥655 ¥655 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................. 42 ........................ ¥19,204 

Annual Total .................................................................................................................. ........................ ........................ 1,617,478 

TABLE 9—SUBCHAPTER M ANNUAL TRANSFER PAYMENTS

Year CG option TSMS option Subchapter M 

total 

Year 1 .......................................................................................................................................... $1,849,862 ($213,180) $1,636,682 

Year 2 .......................................................................................................................................... 1,837,168 (211,926) 1,625,242 

Year 3 .......................................................................................................................................... 1,826,782 (210,558) 1,616,224 

Year 4 .......................................................................................................................................... 1,816,396 (209,190) 1,607,206 

Year 5 .......................................................................................................................................... 1,803,702 (207,936) 1,595,766 

Year 6 .......................................................................................................................................... 1,793,316 (206,568) 1,586,748 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules 1385 

20 5 U.S.C. 603. 

TABLE 9—SUBCHAPTER M ANNUAL TRANSFER PAYMENTS—Continued 

Year CG option TSMS option Subchapter M 

total 

Year 7 .......................................................................................................................................... 1,780,622 (205,314) 1,575,308 

Year 8 .......................................................................................................................................... 1,770,236 (203,946) 1,566,290 

Year 9 .......................................................................................................................................... 1,758,696 (202,635) 1,556,061 

Year 10 ........................................................................................................................................ 1,747,156 (201,324) 1,545,832 

With the reduction in fees to vessels 

under the subchapter I and subchapter 

M TSMS options, the first year transfers 

from the government to the towing 

vessel industry is $232,384. The Coast 

Guard expects to have transfers from 

towing vessel operators for the COI 

services of $1,636,682 in the first year 

to the Government. The sum of these 

transfers is $1,617,478 in the first year. 

The 10-year transfers, undiscounted, 

total $15,719,319. The discounted 

annualized figure, at 7 percent, is 

$1,577,491. Table 10 summarizes the 

total 10-year transfer payments from the 

towing vessel industry to the 

Government. 

TABLE 10—DISCOUNTED TRANSFER PAYMENTS FROM TOWING VESSEL OPERATORS TO THE GOVERNMENT * 

Year Undiscounted 

Discounted 

7% 3% 

1 ................................................................................................................................................... $1,617,478 $1,511,662 $1,570,367 

2 ................................................................................................................................................... 1,606,038 1,402,776 1,513,845 

3 ................................................................................................................................................... 1,597,020 1,303,644 1,461,500 

4 ................................................................................................................................................... 1,588,002 1,211,479 1,410,919 

5 ................................................................................................................................................... 1,576,562 1,124,067 1,359,956 

6 ................................................................................................................................................... 1,567,544 1,044,521 1,312,793 

7 ................................................................................................................................................... 1,556,104 969,063 1,265,255 

8 ................................................................................................................................................... 1,547,086 900,418 1,221,284 

9 ................................................................................................................................................... 1,536,857 835,948 1,177,873 

10 ................................................................................................................................................. 1,526,628 776,060 1,135,955 

Total ...................................................................................................................................... 15,719,319 11,079,638 13,429,747 

Annualized ................................................................................................................................... ........................ 1,577,491 1,574,376 

* Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding. 

Regulatory Alternatives 

A discussion of regulatory alternatives 

is available in the section VI.B(6) of this 

preamble. 

B. Small Entities 

In accordance with the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) 

(RFA), the Coast Guard prepared this 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

(IRFA) that examines the impacts of the 

proposed rule on small entities. Due to 

the anticipated impacts on small 

businesses, the Coast Guard is including 

an analysis of the NPRM requirements 

for informational purposes. 

A small entity may be a small 

independent business, defined as 

independently owned and operated, 

that is organized for profit and is not 

dominant in its field per the Small 

Business Act (5 U.S.C. 632). A small 

entity can also be a small not-for-profit 

organization (any not-for-profit 

enterprise that is independently owned 

and operated and is not dominant in its 

field) or a small governmental 

jurisdiction (a locality with fewer than 

50,000 people) per the RFA. An IRFA 

addresses the following: 

(1) A description of the reasons why 

action by the agency is being 

considered; 

(2) A succinct statement of the 

objectives of, and legal basis for, the 

rule; 

(3) A description of and, where 

feasible, an estimate of the number of 

small entities to which the rule will 

apply; 

(4) A description of the projected 

reporting, recordkeeping and other 

compliance requirements of the rule, 

including an estimate of the classes of 

small entities that will be subject to the 

requirement and the type of professional 

skills necessary for preparation of the 

report or record; 

(5) An identification, to the extent 

practicable, of all relevant Federal rules 

that may duplicate, overlap or conflict 

with the rule; and 

(6) A description of any significant 

alternatives to the rule that accomplish 

the stated objectives of applicable 

statutes and that minimize any 

significant economic impact of the rule 

on small entities.20

Below is a discussion of the IRFA 

analysis for each of these six elements. 

1. A description of the reasons why 

action by the agency is being 

considered. 

The Coast Guard is considering 

updating the user fees for inspected 

towing vessels because after reviewing 

the costs to the Government of 

inspections under the Coast Guard 

option or options using a third party, 

the Coast Guard has determined that 

updates are necessary to ensure that fees 

for all options are fair and based on 

costs to the Government. User fees for 

subchapter I inspected towing vessels 

have not been updated since 1995. The 

proposed changes are also consistent 

with the Coast Guard’s statement in the 

2016 final rule, Inspection of Towing 

Vessels, that we planned to promulgate 

a separate rulemaking for annual 

inspection fees for towing vessels that 

would reflect the specific program costs 

associated with the two subchapter M 

options—the TSMS option and the 

Coast Guard inspection option. 

The purpose of this proposed rule is 

to redistribute the burden of inspection 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
1386 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

21https://www.cortera.com/ and https://

www.manta.com/. 

22https://www.guidestar.org. 

23https://www.sba.gov/document/support--tablesize-standards. 24A statistically valid random sample size of 292 

businesses would be required to achieve a 95- 

percent confidence level out of the 1,222 unique 

towing vessel companies. In this analysis, Coast 

Guard oversampled to analyze 385 businesses to 

ensure enough data and information was available 

on the businesses to meet the sampling 

requirements. 

activities from the Coast Guard to the 

towing vessel industry. 

2. A succinct statement of the 

objective of, and legal basis for, the rule. 

This proposed regulatory action is 

necessary to adjust the user fee schedule 

to better reflect the cost of COI services 

to the government, for subchapters I and 

M towing vessels. The Coast Guard is 

issuing this proposed rule based on 

authority in 46 U.S.C. 2110, which has 

been delegated to the Commandant 

under DHS Delegation No. 

0170.1(II)(92). Title 46 U.S.C. 2110 

directs the Coast Guard to establish a 

fee, or charge, for a service or thing of 

value it provides in accordance with 31 

U.S.C. 9701. Inspections and related 

services described in Subtitle II of Title 

46 United States Code are considered a 

service of value provided by the Coast 

Guard. Section 31 U.S.C. 9701 specifies 

that each fee or charge be fair and based 

on the costs to the government, the 

value of the service to the recipient, 

public policy or interest served, and 

other relevant facts. Once a fee or charge 

is established, 46 U.S.C. 2110 allows it 

to be adjusted to accommodate changes 

in the cost of providing a specific 

service or thing of value. 

In addition, section 815 of CGAA 

directs the Coast Guard to review and 

revise the fee for inspections if 

necessary to comply with 31 U.S.C. 

9701. The Coast Guard interprets ‘‘costs 

to the Government’’ in section 815(a) to 

mean the cost to the Coast Guard of 

providing inspection and related 

services to determine whether a vessel 

meets requirements necessary for it to 

maintain its COI. 

3. A description of and, where 

feasible, an estimate of the number of 

small entities to which the rule will 

apply. 

The proposed rule would affect the 

owners and operators of certain towing 

vessels under subchapters I and M. We 

constructed this towing vessel 

population from the Coast Guard’s 

MISLE system. From this database, we 

identified 5,385 vessels affected by this 

proposed rule—5,343 subchapter M 

towing vessels and 42 subchapter I 

towing vessels. There are 1,236 unique 

companies that own or operate these 

vessels. Five companies own vessels 

under both subchapters I and M. 

We used available operator name and 

address information to research public 

and proprietary databases for entity type 

(subsidiary or parent company), primary 

line of business, employee size, 

revenue, and other information.21 We 

found vessels owned by 21 government 

entities and 4 non-profit entities. The 

remaining 1,211 are business entities. 

For governmental jurisdictions, we 

determined whether the jurisdiction had 

populations of less than 50,000 as per 

the criteria in the RFA. For nonprofits, 

we evaluated whether the nonprofit was 

independently owned and operated and 

was not dominant in its field.22 For the 

business entities, we matched their 

information with the latest Small 

Business Administration (SBA) Table of 

Small Business Size Standards to 

determine if a business entity is small 

in its primary line of business as 

classified in the North American 

Industry Classification System 

(NAICS).23

We broke the population down into 

subchapters I and M. For subchapter M, 

we randomly selected a sample size 

from the 1,222 unique towing vessel 

companies to reach the 95 percent 

confidence level. Using Cochran’s 

Formula, Coast Guard chose a 

statistically valid random sample of 385 

businesses that own and operate towing 

vessels.24

There are a total of 97 NAICS-coded 

industries in this proposed rule’s 

sample affected population. Table 11 

displays the 10 industries that appear 

most frequently in the affected 

population of owners or operators of 

towing vessels in subchapters I and M. 

TABLE 11—MOST COMMON NAICS CODES

NAICS code Description Small entity 

definition 

Count of 

towing vessel 

owners or 

operators 

Percent 

of total * 

488330 ...... Navigational Services to Shipping .................................................................... <$41,500,000 ... 40 10 

713930 ...... Marinas ............................................................................................................. <$8,000,000 ..... 34 9 

237990 ...... Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction ............................................. <$39,500,000 ... 31 8 

238910 ...... Site Preparation Contractors ............................................................................ <$16,500,000 ... 31 8 

441222 ...... Boat Dealers ..................................................................................................... <$35,000,000 ... 28 7 

483211 ...... Inland Water Freight Transportation ................................................................. <750 Employees 23 6 

488320 ...... Marine Cargo Handling ..................................................................................... <$41,500,000 ... 12 3 

336611 ...... Ship Building and Repairing ............................................................................. <1,250 Employees.10 3 

488210 ...... Support Activities for Rail Transportation ......................................................... <$16,500,000 ... 5 1 

483212 ...... Inland Water Passenger Transportation ........................................................... <500 Employees 5 1 

* Note: Total does not sum to 100 percent, since these percentages reflect only the top 10 most common NAICS codes of the sample. The remaining 44 percent of NAICS codes were not within the 10 most commonly occurring. 

Coast Guard chose a subchapter M 

sample of 385 businesses that own and 

operate the towing vessels. Of the 385 

businesses, 37 exceeded the SBA small 

business size standards, 265 companies 

were considered to be small businesses 

by the SBA size standards, and 83 

companies had no information 

available. Consistent with DHS practice, 

entities with no information available 

will be considered as small entities. 

Thus, there are 348 businesses in our 

sample that we consider to be small 

entities. Based on our random sample, 

90.4 percent of subchapter M entities 

are considered small and therefore 

when applied to the population of 

unique towing vessel companies, 1,105 

subchapter M entities would be 

considered small. 

For subchapter I, we searched all 14 

unique towing vessel companies in the 

available databases. Of the 14 unique 

towing vessel companies in the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules 1387 

subchapter I population, 13 had 

available revenue and employee data. Of 

these 13 unique towing vessel 

companies, 6 exceeded the SBA small 

business size standards and 7 were 

considered small businesses by the SBA 

size standards. Consistent with DHS 

practice, we consider entities for which 

information was not available to be 

small. Thus, there are eight businesses 

in our population that we consider to be 

small entities. 

For this analysis, we considered the 

annual weighted average transfer from 

industry to the Coast Guard by 

subchapter. For subchapter M vessels, 

we found the average fleet size for small 

entities is two vessels and multiplied it 

by the weighted average of incremental 

changes in user fees. According to our 

analysis of small subchapter M vessels, 

97 percent of them choose the Coast 

Guard option for their inspection option 

and 3 percent choose the TSMS option. 

Thus, we multiplied the rates for vessels 

choosing their inspection option by the 

incremental change in user fees and the 

average fleet size for small subchapter M 

entities, which yielded an average 

impact of $1,117 per subchapter M 

vessel and $2,234 per small subchapter 

M entity. We repeated this process for 

subchapter I entities. We found the 

average fleet size for small entities, 

which is 1, and multiplied it by the 

weighted average of incremental 

changes in user fees. According to our 

analysis of small subchapter I vessels, 

50 percent of them choose the ACP 

option for their inspection option, 37.5 

percent choose the Coast Guard option, 

and the remaining 12.5 percent choose 

the SIP option. This proposed rule 

would save subchapter I entities an 

average of $799. Tables 12 and 13 show 

the impact on small company revenue 

for each subchapter that we had revenue 

data for. 

TABLE 12—SUBCHAPTER M ESTIMATED ANNUAL REVENUE IMPACT

Revenue impact range Number of 

entities 

Percent of 

entities 

0% ≤ 1% .................................................................................................................................................................. 233 87.9 

1% ≤ 3% .................................................................................................................................................................. 27 10.2 

3% ≤ 5% .................................................................................................................................................................. 3 1.1 

Above 5% ................................................................................................................................................................ 2 0.8 

Total .................................................................................................................................................................. 265 100 

TABLE 13—SUBCHAPTER I ESTIMATED ANNUAL REVENUE IMPACT

Revenue impact range Number of 

entities 

Percent of 

entities 

0% ≤ 1% .................................................................................................................................................................. 7 100 

1% ≤ 3% .................................................................................................................................................................. 0 0 

3% ≤ 5% .................................................................................................................................................................. 0 0 

5% ≤ 10% ................................................................................................................................................................ 0 0 

Above 10% .............................................................................................................................................................. 0 0 

Total .................................................................................................................................................................. 7 100 

According to our analysis, 87.9 

percent of subchapter M entities will 

have an annual impact to revenue of 1 

percent or less. Approximately, 10.2 

percent will have an annual impact to 

revenue between 1 and 3 percent. The 

remaining 1.9 percent will have an 

annual impact to revenue greater than 3 

percent. For subchapter I entities, our 

analysis shows a less than 1 percent 

impact to annual revenue for all small 

entities. 

4. A description of the projected 

reporting, recordkeeping, and other 

compliance requirements of the rule, 

including an estimate of the classes of 

small entities which will be subject to 

the requirements and the type of 

professional skills necessary for 

preparation of the report or record. 

This proposed rule calls for no new 

reporting, recordkeeping or other 

compliance requirements. 

5. An identification, to the extent 

practicable, of all relevant Federal rules 

which may duplicate, overlap or conflict 

with the rule. 

There are no relevant Federal rules 

that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict 

with this proposed rule. 

6. A description of any significant 

alternatives to the rule which 

accomplish the stated objectives of 

applicable statutes and which minimize 

any significant economic impact of the 

rule on small entities. 

Alternatives considered include 

adjusting our current user fees for 

inflation, updating only the Coast Guard 

option user fees or continuing with the 

current user fees. Each of these options 

will be considered in the following 

discussion. 

Under the first alternative, Coast 

Guard considered to adjust the current 

user fees for inflation from 1995 dollars 

to 2020 dollars. To adjust for inflation, 

we use an inflation factor from the 

annual GDP deflator data. We calculate 

the inflation factor of 1.58 by dividing 

the annual 2020 index number (113.623) 

by the annual 1995 index number 

(71.864). We then multiply the current 

fees for subchapters I and M by the 

inflation factor and round it to the 

nearest dollar. Subchapters I and M 

would experience a 58-percent increase 

in fees and incur annual fees of $597 

and $1,691, respectively. The fees, when 

multiplied by the number of annual COI 

renewals, yield an annual revenue of 

approximately $8.9 million and transfer 

payments of $3.2 million. We rejected 

this alternative because the annual 

revenue collected under this 

methodology does not reflect the full 

cost to the Coast Guard of providing the 

COI-related services. Table 14 shows the 

inflation adjusted user fees for 

subchapter I and M vessels. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
1388 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 14—COMPARISON OF USER FEES IN 1995 DOLLARS AND 2020 DOLLARS

[Alternative 1] * 

Fee category 1995 $ 

(current fee) 

Inflation 

factor 2020 $ Population 

Incremental 

fee 

adjustment 

Annual fee 

transfer 

payments 

Annual 

revenue 

collected 

from 

user fees 

Subchapter I vessels ... $2,915 1.58 $4,606 42 $1,691 $71,009 $193,439 

Subchapter M vessels 1,030 1.58 1,627 5,343 597 3,191,908 8,695,198 

Total ...................... ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ 3,262,918 8,888,638 

* Note: All dollar figures rounded to the closest whole dollar. 

In our second alternative, we 

considered updating only the Coast 

Guard option user fees. We rejected this 

alternative because it would not comply 

with section 815 of CGAA. That section 

directs the Coast Guard to review and, 

based on our findings, revise the fee for 

towing vessel inspections. First, the 

Coast Guard must compare the costs to 

the Government of towing vessel 

inspections performed by the Coast 

Guard and towing vessel inspections 

performed by a third party, to determine 

if they are different. We have conducted 

that comparison and determined that 

there is a difference in costs to the 

Government between the inspection 

options for towing vessels that involve 

a third party and those that do not. If 

there is a difference in costs, section 815 

of CGAA directs us to revise the fees we 

assess for towing vessel inspections to 

conform to 31 U.S.C. 9701, and to base 

the fee on the cost to the Government. 

In our third alternative, we 

considered maintaining the current user 

fee without an adjustment. We rejected 

this alternative because the annual 

revenue collected under this 

methodology would not cover the full 

cost to the Coast Guard of providing the 

COI-related services. 

Conclusion 

In conclusion, we estimate that 87.9 

percent of subchapter M entities with 

revenue data will have an annual 

impact to revenue of 1 percent or less. 

Approximately, 10.2 percent will have 

an annual impact to revenue between 1 

and 3 percent. The remaining 1.9 

percent will have an annual impact to 

revenue greater than 3 percent. For 

subchapter I entities, our analysis shows 

a less than 1 percent impact to annual 

revenue for all small entities that had 

revenue data. We also discussed several 

regulatory alternatives including our 

preferred alternative. Our preferred 

alternative is to: (1) Update the user fee 

for seagoing towing vessels; (2) revise 

the user fee for other inspected towing 

vessels; and (3) establish fees for towing 

vessels using the ACP, SIP, or the TSMS 

options. Vessels using the ACP, SIP or 

TSMS option would pay a lower fee 

than vessels that use the traditional 

Coast Guard inspection option. 

We are interested in the potential 

impacts from this rule on small entities 

and we request public comment on 

these potential impacts. If you think that 

this rule will have a significant 

economic impact on you, your business, 

or your organization, please submit a 

comment to the docket at the address 

under ADDRESSES in the rule. In your 

comment, explain why, how, and to 

what degree you think this rule will 

have an economic impact on you. 

C. Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104– 

121, we want to assist small entities in 

understanding this proposed rule so that 

they can better evaluate its effects on 

them and participate in the rulemaking. 

If the proposed rule would affect your 

small business, organization, or 

governmental jurisdiction and you have 

questions concerning its provisions or 

options for compliance, please contact 

the person in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

proposed rule. The Coast Guard will not 

retaliate against small entities that 

question or complain about this 

proposed rule or any policy or action of 

the Coast Guard. 

Small businesses may send comments 

on the actions of Federal employees 

who enforce, or otherwise determine 

compliance with, Federal regulations to 

the Small Business and Agriculture 

Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman 

and the Regional Small Business 

Regulatory Fairness Boards. The 

Ombudsman evaluates these actions 

annually and rates each agency’s 

responsiveness to small business. If you 

wish to comment on actions by 

employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– 

888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). 

D. Collection of Information 

This proposed rule would call for no 

new collection of information under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 

U.S.C. 3501–3520. 

The Coast Guard has a collection of 

information for the collection of user 

fees from inspected vessels. This 

collection is 1625–0074 titled ‘‘Direct 

User Fees for Inspection or Examination 

of U.S. and Foreign Commercial 

Vessels.’’ The collection of information 

hour burden for collecting user fees is 

independent of the amount collected. 

Towing vessels inspected under 46 CFR 

subchapters I and M must currently pay 

$1,030 and $2,915 respectively. This 

proposed rulemaking would simply 

adjust the user fee amount to more 

accurately reflect the current cost of the 

Coast Guard for performing 

inspections—and would not change the 

number of towing vessels that must pay 

a user fee or the time it takes to pay the 

user fee. 

E. Federalism 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132 

(Federalism) if it has a substantial direct 

effect on States, on the relationship 

between the national government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government. We have 

analyzed this proposed rule under 

Executive Order 13132 and have 

determined that it is consistent with the 

fundamental federalism principles and 

preemption requirements described in 

Executive Order 13132. Our analysis 

follows. 

This NPRM proposes to establish and 

revise user fees for services provided by 

the Coast Guard pursuant to the 

Congressional mandate contained in 46 

U.S.C. 2110. Congress has not granted 

the authority to the States to establish 

user fees for Coast Guard-provided 

services. This NPRM would not impact 

a State’s general ability to render 

services or assess or collect fees for 

State-rendered services. Therefore, this 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules 1389 

25https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/ 

publications/DHS_Instruction%20Manual%20023- 

01-001-01%20Rev%2001_

508%20Admin%20Rev.pdf. 

rule does not have federalism 

implications as described in Executive 

Order 13132. 

While it is well settled that States may 

not regulate in categories in which 

Congress intended the Coast Guard to be 

the sole source of a vessel’s obligations, 

the Coast Guard recognizes the key role 

that State and local governments may 

have in making regulatory 

determinations. Additionally, for rules 

with federalism implications and 

preemptive effect, Executive Order 

13132 specifically directs agencies to 

consult with State and local 

governments during the rulemaking 

process. If you believe this proposed 

rule would have implications for 

federalism under Executive Order 

13132, please contact the person listed 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section of this preamble. 

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, requires 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their discretionary regulatory actions. In 

particular, the Act addresses actions 

that may result in the expenditure by a 

State, local, or tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100 million (adjusted for inflation) or 

more in any one year. Although this 

proposed rule would not result in such 

an expenditure, we do discuss the 

effects of this proposed rule elsewhere 

in this preamble. 

G. Taking of Private Property 

This proposed rule would not cause a 

taking of private property or otherwise 

have taking implications under 

Executive Order 12630 (Governmental 

Actions and Interference with 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights). 

H. Civil Justice Reform 

This proposed rule meets applicable 

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of 

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice 

Reform) to minimize litigation, 

eliminate ambiguity, and reduce 

burden. 

I. Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13045 

(Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks). This proposed rule is not an 

economically significant rule and would 

not create an environmental risk to 

health or risk to safety that might 

disproportionately affect children. 

J. Indian Tribal Governments 

This proposed rule does not have 

tribal implications under Executive 

Order 13175 (Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments), because it would not 

have a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes. 

K. Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13211 (Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use). We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under Executive Order 

13211, because although it is a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

Executive Order 12866, it is not likely 

to have a significant adverse effect on 

the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy, and the Administrator of OMB’s 

Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs has not designated it as a 

significant energy action. 

L. Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act, codified as a 

note to 15 U.S.C. 272, directs agencies 

to use voluntary consensus standards in 

their regulatory activities unless the 

agency provides Congress, through 

OMB, with an explanation of why using 

these standards would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (for 

example, specifications of materials, 

performance, design, or operation; test 

methods; sampling procedures; and 

related management systems practices) 

that are developed or adopted by 

voluntary consensus standards bodies. 

This proposed rule does not use 

technical standards. Therefore, we did 

not consider the use of voluntary 

consensus standards. 

M. Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Department of Homeland 

Security Management Directive 023–01, 

Rev. 1, associated implementing 

instructions, and Environmental 

Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), 

which guide the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 

U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have made a 

preliminary determination that this 

action is one of a category of actions that 

do not individually or cumulatively 

have a significant effect on the human 

environment. A preliminary Record of 

Environmental Consideration 

supporting this determination is 

available in the docket. For instructions 

on locating the docket, see the 

ADDRESSES section of this preamble. 

This proposed rule would be 

categorically excluded under paragraphs 

L54 and L57 of Appendix A, Table 1 of 

DHS Instruction Manual 023–01, Rev. 

1.25 Paragraph L54 pertains to 

regulations which are editorial or 

procedural. Paragraph L57 pertains to 

regulations concerning manning, 

documentation, admeasurement, 

inspection, and equipping of vessels. 

This proposed rule would update the 

existing user fee for seagoing towing 

vessels that are 300 gross tons or more 

and establish specific user fees for other 

towing vessels that have more recently 

become subject to inspection. We seek 

any comments or information that may 

lead to the discovery of a significant 

environmental impact from this 

proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 46 CFR Part 2 

Marine safety, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Vessels. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 46 CFR part 2 as follows: 

PART 2—VESSEL INSPECTIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 2 is 

revised to read as follows: 

Authority: Sec. 622, Pub. L. 111–281; 33 

U.S.C. 1903; 43 U.S.C. 1333; 46 U.S.C. 2103, 

2110, 3306, 3316, 3703, 70034; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 

0170.1(II)(77), (90), (92)(a), (92)(b); E.O. 

12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 

277, sec. 1–105. 

■ 2. Amend § 2.10–25 by: 

■ a. Revising the definition of ‘‘Seagoing towing vessel’’; and 

■ b. Adding the definitions in 

alphabetical order for ‘‘Alternative 

Compliance Program option’’, ‘‘Annual 

vessel inspection fee’’, ‘‘Coast Guard 

option’’, ‘‘Streamlined Inspection 

Program option’’, ‘‘Towing Safety 

Management System option’’, and 

‘‘Towing vessel’’. 

The additions and revision read as 

follows: 

§ 2.10–25 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Alternative Compliance Program 

option means the option described in 46 

CFR part 8, subpart D. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
1390 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

Annual vessel inspection fee means 

the fee charged for inspection and 

related services provided by the Coast 

Guard to determine whether a vessel 

meets the requirements to maintain its 

Certificate of Inspection. 

Coast Guard option means an option 

used by— 

(1) A vessel inspected under a 46 CFR 

subchapter that is not participating in 

the Alternative Compliance Program 

described in 46 CFR part 8, subpart D; 

(2) A vessel inspected under a 46 CFR 

subchapter that is not participating in 

the Streamlined Inspection Program 

described in 46 CFR part 8, subpart E; 

or 

(3) A vessel inspected under 46 CFR 

subchapter M that is not participating in 

the Towing Safety Management System 

option described in 46 CFR part 138. 

* * * * * 

Seagoing towing vessel means a 

commercial vessel 300 gross tons or 

more engaged in or intending to engage 

in the service of pulling, pushing or 

hauling alongside, or any combination 

of pulling, pushing or hauling 

alongside, and that makes voyages 

beyond the Boundary Line as defined by 

46 U.S.C. 103, and has been issued a 

Certificate of Inspection under the 

provisions of subchapter I of this 

chapter. 

* * * * * 

Streamlined Inspection Program 

option means the option described in 46 

CFR part 8, subpart E. 

* * * * * 

Towing Safety Management System 

option means the option described in 46 

CFR part 138 for towing vessels subject 

to 46 CFR subchapter M. 

Towing vessel means a commercial 

vessel engaged in or intending to engage 

in the service of pulling, pushing, or 

hauling alongside, or any combination 

of pulling, pushing, or hauling 

alongside. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 2.10–101, in Table 2.10– 

101, by: 

■ a. Revising the ‘‘Sea-going Towing 

Vessels’’ entry; and 

■ b. Adding an entry for ‘‘Towing 

Vessels (Inspected under 46 CFR 

Subchapter M)’’. 

The addition and revision read as 

follows: 

§ 2.10–101 Annual vessel inspection fee. 

* * * * * 

TABLE 2.10–101—ANNUAL VESSEL INSPECTION FEES FOR U.S. AND FOREIGN VESSELS REQUIRING A CERTIFICATE OF

INSPECTION

*******

Seagoing Towing Vessels (Inspected under 46 CFR Subchapter I): 

Coast Guard option ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ $2,747 

Alternative Compliance Program option ........................................................................................................................................................................ 1,850 

Streamlined Inspection Program option ......................................................................................................................................................................... 2,260 

*******

Towing Vessels (Inspected under 46 CFR Subchapter M): 

Coast Guard option ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 2,184 

Towing Safety Management System option .................................................................................................................................................................. 973 

* * * * * 

Dated: December 23, 2021. 

Karl L. Schultz, 

Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commandant. 

[FR Doc. 2022–00200 Filed 1–10–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2020–0109; 

FF09E22000 FXES11130900000 223] 

RIN 1018–BC98 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Removal of 23 Extinct 

Species From the Lists of Endangered 

and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 

Ivory-Billed Woodpecker 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of 

comment period and announcement of 

public hearing. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), are reopening 

the public comment period on our 

September 30, 2021, proposal to remove 

the ivory-billed woodpecker from the 

Federal Lists of Endangered and 

Threatened Wildlife and Plants (List) 

due to extinction. We are taking this 

action to conduct a public hearing on 

the proposal to remove the ivory-billed 

woodpecker from the List and to allow 

all interested parties additional time to 

comment on the proposed rule to delist 

the ivory-billed woodpecker (docket 

number: FWS–R4–ES–2020–0109). 

Comments previously submitted need 

not be resubmitted and will be fully 

considered in preparation of the final 

rule. This comment period reopening is 

only for the ivory-billed woodpecker 

proposed delisting; we are not taking 

any comments in regard to the other 22 

species proposed in the same rule, for 

which the comment periods closed on 

November 29, 2021. 

DATES: 

Written comments: The comment 

period on the proposed rule that 

published September 30, 2021 (86 FR 

54298), is reopened only for the ivorybilled woodpecker proposed delisting. 

We will accept comments on the ivorybilled woodpecker proposed delisting 

that are received or postmarked on or 

before February 10, 2022. Please note 

that comments submitted electronically 

using the Federal eRulemaking Portal 

(see ADDRESSES, below) must be 

received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on 

the closing date, and comments 

submitted by U.S. mail must be 

postmarked by that date, to ensure 

consideration. 

Public hearing: On January 26, 2021, 

we will hold a public hearing on the 

ivory-billed woodpecker proposed 

delisting from 6:00 to 7:30 p.m., Central 

Time, using the Zoom platform (for 

more information, see Public Hearing, 

below). 

ADDRESSES: 

Availability of documents: You may 

obtain copies of the September 30, 2021, 

proposed rule and associated 

documents on the internet at https://

www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 

FWS–R4–ES–2020–0109. 

Written comments: You may submit 

written comments by one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: https://

www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, 

enter the RIN or docket number, which 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS