Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 102 /Thursday, May 28, 1998 / Notices 29291

17See, Division of Market Regulation, SEC,

Market 2000: An Examination of Current Equity

Market Developments (January 1994), at Study V, n.

19.

18 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 19 17CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

Exchange is appropriate in that its use

by Phlx specialists should increase the

likelihood that eligible customer orders,

particularly marketable limit orders,

will be executed at an improved price

over the PACE Quote. With respect to

the two conditions above that would

cause an order to be automatically

executed at the PACE Quote, the

Commission believes that it is

reasonable for the Exchange to

automatically execute such orders at the

PACE Quote rather than subjecting them

to the POES window or stopping them

at the PACE Quote. Overall, the

Commission’s Division of Market

Regulation previously has noted that

price improvement windows, such as

POES, by themselves rarely provide an

execution that betters the quoted

market.17 The Exchange’s proposal

should enhance the price improvement

opportunities available for PACE orders

since a greater number of orders will be

eligible for automatic price

improvement than afforded under the

current Double-Up/Double-Down

automatic price improvement feature.

In addition, the Commission believes

that the Exchange’s automatic price

improvement initiative is consistent

with the maintenance of fair and orderly

auction markets on national securities

exchanges. As the examples provided by

the Exchange illustrate, the execution

criteria of the automatic price

improvement initiative should

contribute to the maintenance of an

orderly market by Phlx specialists

because it helps to reduce price

variations occurring from trade to trade

on low volume. Finally, because

automatic price improvement may be

disengaged under extraordinary

circumstances for an individual stock or

floor-wide with the approval of two

floor officials, the Exchange is able to

increase overall systems capacity for

systematized orders routed through

PACE, as well as reduce the market risk

exposure to specialists who participate

in the automatic price improvement

initiative. The Commission believes that

both of these aspects of the automatic

price improvement initiative are

consistent with the maintenance of fair

and orderly auction markets on national

securities exchanges and the protection

of investors.

IV. Conclusion

It is therefore ordered, pursuant to

Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,18 that the

proposed rule change (SR–PHLX–98–

10) is approved as amended.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.19

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–14120 Filed 5–27–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

[USCG–1998–3873]

Prevention Through People

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: Prevention Through People

(PTP) is a Coast Guard initiated program

to address marine safety and

environmental protection through a

focus on the human element. Since the

program’s inception in 1994, there has

been a steady growth of support in the

marine community. Current marine

industry practices reflect the increased

commitment to PTP. This notice

informs the public of some of the major

PTP efforts taking place within the

Coast Guard and includes the response

to comments from the four PTP public

meetings held during the spring of 1997.

ADDRESSES: The Docket Management

Facility maintains the public docket for

this notice. Documents, as indicated in

this notice, will become part of this

docket and will be available for

inspection or copying at room PL–401,

located on the Plaza Level of the Nassif

Building, 400 Seventh Street SW.,

Washington DC 20590–0001, between

10 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except Federal holidays. You

many electronically access the public

docket for this rulemaking on the

Internet at http://dms.dot.gov.

The Marine Board of the National

Academy of Science study, Advancing

the Principles of the Prevention Through

People Program, was published in

August 1997 and is available at the

National Academy Press Bookstore 2001

Wisconsin Ave. NW., Washington, DC

20418–0005; phone 800–624–6242, or

202–334–3313.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

information on the public docket,

contact Carol Kelly, Coast Guard

Dockets Team Leader, or Paulette

Twine, Chief, Documentary Services

Division, U.S. Department of

Transportation, telephone 202–366–

9328. For questions on this notice,

contact LT Duane Boniface, Human

Element and Ship Design Division (G–

MSE–1), 202–267–2997.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background of PTP

The PTP initiative began in 1994 with

the chartering of a Quality Action Team

(QAT) to develop a long-term strategy to

address the role of human and

organizational factors in marine safety

and environmental protection. The QAT

conducted an extensive literature

review and analysis of marine casualty

data, conducted mariner surveys, and

examined operations from a maritime

systems perspective that included an

assessment of vessels, facilities, and

waterways.

On July 15, 1995, the QAT generated

a report, ‘‘Prevention Through People

Quality Action Team Report.’’ This

report provided the first step towards rebalancing prevention efforts between

technical, human, and organizational

issues related to marine safety.

Subsequent focus on human and

organizational factors in safety and

environmental protection led to these

issues becoming top priorities for many

organizations, both within the

government and industry.

After the report was published, the

Coast Guard and industry pursued a

host of initiatives. These initiatives

include partnerships with industry,

studies of fatigue and communications,

and introductions of risk assessment

and risk management approaches. The

PTP Strategic Plan (available in the

docket; or contact the person under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) exposed

a wider audience to the PTP

philosophy, while the PTP

Implementation Plan set high goals with

various PTP objectives and activities for

the Coast Guard to accomplish.

Additionally, the Coast Guard held

four public meetings that allowed it to

hear valuable industry comments

concerning safety in the marine

community.

PTP Focus Plan

There are many projects and

initiatives under the umbrella of PTP. A

list of the current projects and

initiatives under the umbrella of PTP

can be found on the PTP web site at the

following website: http://www.uscg.mil/

hq/g-sm/nmc/ptp/index.htm. From the

list of these projects and initiatives, the

Coast Guard is focusing on five major

initiatives during 1998 referred to as the

PTP Focus Plan. These initiatives were

chosen based on public comments,

marine industry input, and the results of

the Marine Board of the National
29292 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 102 /Thursday, May 28, 1998 / Notices

Academy of Science study entitled

Advancing the Principles of the

Prevention Through People Program.

This study is available where indicated

under ADDRESSES.

The general consensus of the

comments received was that the Coast

Guard should concentrate on

completing several of the most

significant human-element-related

initiatives already in progress under

PTP. The five projects identified in the

1998 PTP Focus Plan provide the Coast

Guard with the best opportunities to

maximize progress in the near term

under the PTP approach. The Coast

Guard has five PTP goals outlined in the

strategic plan. Each initiative the Coast

Guard addresses corresponds to one of

these goals.

• Development of National Maritime

Safety Incident Reporting System. Both

Coast Guard and industry proposed the

concept of a national maritime safety

incident reporting system. The system

would be designed to capture

information on unsafe occurrences that

involve near-accidents, near-collision

situations, near-pollution events, and

related precursor events. The system

would be maintained by industry and

supported by the Coast Guard. The

Coast Guard held a public meeting on

May 4, 1998 (announced in the Federal

Register, 63 FR 17468; April 9, 1998) to

investigate the possibility of industry

implementing such a system. The

results of that public meeting will be

announced separately.

Information on these near-accidents

and unsafe occurrences is an untapped

source of data that would serve as

leading indicators on the level of safety

within the maritime community and

would provide a greater level of data for

analysis and safety improvement. A

concerted effort will be made through

industry’s leadership to get a prototype

system in place by the end of 1998, with

the intent to formally establish a

national system in the year 2000. This

near-miss incident reporting system

falls under the PTP goal of Know More.

This goal is meant to significantly

expand our knowledge and

understanding of the human element

and its role in maritime operations and

accidents. The status and the latest

details on the national maritime safety

incident reporting system project can be

found at the following website: http://

www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/moa/maola.htm.

• Implementation of the International

Conventions on the Standards of

Training, Certification and

Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978,

(STCW), and its amendments. A focus

of the Coast Guard is the

implementation of STCW. Significant

changes to STCW in 1995, which

became effective in 1997, require a

substantial effort by the marine

community. The Coast Guard published

an interim final rule (62 FR 34505; June

26, 1997) to reflect the amendments to

STCW. While much has been done,

there are still many issues involved with

implementing this convention. Some of

these issues include finalization of

regulations, development of

enforcement policies, training, and

outreach. The effort to implement

STCW falls under the PTP goal Train

More. This goal strives to give members

of the marine community the necessary

skills and knowledge to improve safety

and prevent pollution. Training is

always a point of interest since

regulations, equipment, operating

environment, and personnel are

constantly changing. Projects under this

goal will address human element issues

related to the individual mariner.

• Implementation of the International

Safety Management (ISM) Code.

Implementation of the ISM Code is an

important aspect of the PTP program.

Deadlines for compliance with the ISM

Code begin in 1998. The Coast Guard

has published a final rule (62 FR 67492;

Dec. 24, 1997) concerning this matter.

The ISM Code helps establish a

standard for national safety management

and harmonizes U.S. regulations with

the international standards. Beginning

in 1998, these standards would apply to

the following vessels in international

trade:

• Vessels transporting more than 12

passengers;

• Tankers;

• Bulk freight vessels; and

• High speed freight vessels of at least

500 gross tons. Beginning in the year

2002, these standards would also apply

to the following vessels in international

trade:

• Self-propelled mobil offshore

drilling units of at least 500 gross tons;

and

• Freight vessels.

Implementation of the ISM Code falls

under the goal of Do More. This goal

strives to improve professional

performance through practical

application and open communication of

human element knowledge within the

marine community. Implementation of a

quality management system, as

envisioned by the ISM Code, is a critical

step in establishing corporate cultures

that encourage safe practices. Detailed

information about the ISM Code can be

found at the following website: http://

www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/psc/

ismmain.htm.

• Development of the Streamlined

Inspection Program (SIP). The Coast

Guard is focusing on implementation of

the Streamlined Inspection Program

(SIP). The SIP provides an opportunity

for the vessel owners and operators to

have their own personnel periodically

perform many of the tests and

examinations currently conducted by

the Coast Guard marine inspectors. As

a result, participating vessel owners and

operators will promote a more

continuous level of safety. Information

on SIP has been published in the

Federal Register (62 FR 17008; April 8,

1997). Development of SIP falls under

the goal of Offer More. This goal

provides incentives for making

improvements to safety management

systems.

• Development and Implementation

of a PTP Communications Plan.

Working together with industry and the

public, the Coast Guard plans to address

the human element in transportation

safety and pollution prevention. Public

meetings and other feedback indicate

that government-to-public

communication is not as effective as it

could or should be. The Coast Guard

will focus on the development and

implementation of a PTP

Communications Plan. By focusing on

this plan, the Coast Guard will create a

partnership with industry and the

public under the PTP goal of Cooperate

More. This plan will address all forms

of communication, from describing the

results of research, to discussing lessons

learned and best practices, and other

PTP-related information. The PTP

Communications Plan will include

everyone from the boardroom to the

deckplate. This will allow for increased

communications and more effective

interaction between the marine

stakeholders and the Coast Guard.

PTP’s Integration Into the Coast Guard

‘‘M’’ Business Plan

In addition to the current PTP focus

items and the many other ongoing

projects, PTP continues to be integrated

into the Coast Guard’s operating

procedures; most noteworthy is the

Coast Guard Marine Safety and

Environmental Protection (G–M)

Business Plan (Business Plan). The goals

of the Business Plan comprise a

significant portion of the Commandant’s

Annual Performance Agreement with

the Secretary of Transportation. The

Business Plan contains performance

guidance and strategic direction for all

Coast Guard commands charged with

achieving the Coast Guard*s mission for

marine safety and environmental

protection. A key strategy for achieving

the goals of the Business Plan is PTP.

The Coast Guard recognizes the

importance of human and
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 102 /Thursday, May 28, 1998 / Notices 29293

organizational factors in marine safety

and PTP has evolved from that

philosophy. The Coast Guard will meet

the goals of the Business Plan by using

PTP as a tool to refocus prevention

efforts.

PTP Public Meetings

The Coast Guard recognizes that the

success of PTP depends on the marine

industry. Its feedback is essential for

continuous improvement to the

program. To that end, the Coast Guard

held four public meetings on PTP in the

spring of 1997. These public meetings

were held in:

• New Orleans, LA on February 25,

1997;

• Oakland, CA on February 28, 1997;

• St.Louis, MO on March 26, 1997;

and

• Newport, RI on April 18, 1997.

(Notice of meetings with request for

comments published in 62 FR 4567;

January 30, 1997).

These meetings allowed the Coast

Guard to explain PTP, discuss its

anticipated role within the marine

industry, and provide an opportunity

for public feedback.

From these meetings, it is evident that

safety is a top issue in the marine

industry, and PTP has provided an

effective forum for focusing on human

and organizational aspects of marine

safety. The feedback from the meetings

has been instrumental in providing

valuable insight about PTP and was

used to help develop the 1998 PTP

Focus Plan.

Discussion of Comments

The comments from the meetings

have been grouped by subject and are

discussed in the following paragraphs.

Partnerships

Partnership was the most frequently

addressed issue. A number of comments

specifically supported partnerships

between the Coast Guard and industry,

notably the formal PTP Quality

Partnerships, and the Safety Advisory

Committees/Councils (SAC). The SAC’s

are legislatively authorized groups that

provide advice and ideas to the Coast

Guard on regulatory and non-regulatory

issues in specific areas, such as towing

or chemical transportation. Each SAC

has formed a PTP subcommittee to

specifically address human element

issues. To find out more information

about the SAC’s and their activities,

look at the following website: http://

www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/advisory/

index.htm.

Several speakers felt that partnerships

were the most important part of PTP.

According to one speaker, PTP

articulates many of the concepts the

marine industry already follows and

allows industry to maintain them in a

centralized place. In that sense, PTP is

the umbrella for the various safety

initiatives going on in the marine

industry. PTP is not a new philosophy,

but rather, it is an extension of an

existing safety philosophy with a

human element focus. The PTP

umbrella simply allows people to share

information more conveniently and

provides the emphasis for those not

already active in this area.

Partnerships can involve many modes

of sharing. The Coast Guard and

industry partnerships were

acknowledged as important; however,

speakers wanted to make sure the shipto-shore partnerships within companies

are valued also. One speaker, who

supported partnership and its concept,

cautioned that a true partnership needs

work and attention.

The Coast Guard will continue efforts

in this area. Before the public meetings,

the Coast Guard had formal PTP Quality

Partnerships established with (1) the

American Waterways Operators; (2) the

American Petroleum Institute; (3) the

United States Chamber of Shipping; and

(4) the Passenger Vessel Association.

Since the public meetings, PTP Quality

Partnerships have been established with

the International Council of Cruise

Lines (ICCL) and the Spill Control

Association of America (SCAA). The

Coast Guard continues to explore

opportunities for partnerships with

other sectors of the maritime

community.

Recreational Boating

A comment questioned whether PTP

should encompass the recreational

boating community. Prevention

Through People is an approach to safety

for everyone; no group has been

excluded. Since passage of the Federal

Boating Safety Act of 1971, (Pub.L. 92–

75, 85 Stat. 213) the Coast Guard has

worked with the States and boating

safety organizations to cooperatively

promote safe operation of boats through

its coordination of the National Boating

Safety Program. In April 1996, members

of the National Boating Safety Advisory

Committee (NBSAC) and the Navigation

Safety Advisory Committee (NAVSAC)

met and discussed interactions between

the boating public and commercial

shipping. The committees identified

education as the number one waterway

safety issue. Subsequently, a NBSAC

PTP Subcommittee looked at ways of

increasing the safety of boaters by

applying PTP principles.

The Coast Guard is accepting

feedback on the need for, and

alternatives to, Federal requirements or

incentives for recreational boaters to

take courses in boating safety (notice to

reopen the comment period published

in 63 FR 13585; March 20, 1998) and for

boaters to wear personal flotation

devices (notice to reopen the comment

period published in 63 FR 13586; March

20, 1998).

Substandard Operators

Some comments discussed how to

capture the small percentage of

operators who are on the edge of, or

below, safe operating practices. The

Coast Guard intends to assist operators

in improving their safety operations.

Unsafe maritime practices are a cause

for concern for both Coast Guard and

industry. We must commit ourselves,

our organizations, and our operations to

producing a safer, more productive

environment.

Communication

Communication was discussed at all

four public meetings. The many

speakers commenting on this issue

addressed the Coast Guard‘s efforts to

disseminate pertinent information to

industry and individuals, the maritime

industry’s communication to the Coast

Guard, and the companies’ internal

communications. Most speakers

emphasized the need to foster better

communication methods. They also

stressed gaps in the various chains of

marine industry communications, to

include Coast Guard-to-industry, shipto-shore, and captain-to-crew, among

others. As an example of a common case

of miscommunication, a speaker

mentioned that too often specific

messages do not get to the right people.

The speaker noted that one of the

reasons this occurs is because

management neglects to pass

information down the chain of

command to the people who need it.

Some comments stated that ‘‘letters of

concern’’ are a helpful method that the

Coast Guard uses to communicate with

industry. The Coast Guard may write a

letter of concern to a company on a

safety issue or concern, instead of a

more punitive form of action (e.g., a

citation or criminal charges). Then, the

Coast Guard works with the company in

a non-regulatory manner to solve the

problem. Some speakers also mentioned

that the company could encourage

safety communication by providing

anonymous forms to report issues of

concern.

Many speakers recommended using

different media, including the Internet,

to convey information. In response to

the many speakers who echoed this

recommendation at the meetings, the
29294 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 102 /Thursday, May 28, 1998 / Notices

Coast Guard has published a PTP World

Wide Web site. As previously discussed

in this notice, under the PTP Focus

Plan, the Coast Guard is developing the

Communications Plan to provide

direction to, and support for, personnel

involved in the PTP program.

Speakers also discussed the role of

Coast Guard Headquarters in

Washington, DC, with respect to setting

effective nationwide policy. Many safety

issues, such as risk management, can be

addressed at a local level. The broad

policy and regulatory issues, though, are

most effectively addressed at the

headquarters-level.

Regulatory Process

Several speakers commented on the

Coast Guard’s regulatory process. The

comments discussed:

• Problems with the way regulations

are written and created;

• Solutions to some of the difficulties;

• The Coast Guard’s solutions that are

regulation oriented, even when the goal

is to minimize new regulations; and

• A review of the required

paperwork.

Regulations are a necessary aspect of

safety within the marine industry under

the Coast Guard’s legislative mandate

from Congress. However, seeking nonregulatory approaches to safety for

people and the environment is one of

the PTP Principles, which can be found

in the Strategic Plan. Regulations

establish minimum levels of safety as a

part of an overall safety system.

However, the Coast Guard continues to

pursue regulatory reform including

periodic reviews of paperwork and

regulatory burdens as described in its

semi-annual agenda of regulatory

actions published in the Federal

Register each fall and spring.

Several speakers commented that

some mariners find it difficult to read

and understand the technical and

complex writing style of regulations.

The Coast Guard has begun to

implement Plain Language writing to

make it easier to understand and

comply with regulations. Plain

Language writing includes simplifying

acronyms, increasing use of

conversational tone, and using

questions and answer formats.

One speaker recommended that the

Coast Guard hold more public outreach

meetings (e.g., marine industry day) at

the local Marine Safety Offices rather

than at the Coast Guard Districts. The

speaker noted that holding outreach

meetings at the local level would

provide greater access for small

businesses and would enable the Coast

Guard to better address issues specific

to a community. The Coast Guard

agrees. In several areas the Coast Guard

participates in meetings convened by

mariners on the local level. For

example, current efforts where the Coast

Guard joins with local community

groups to solve local problems include:

• Privately convened Mariners’

Advisory Committee of the Bay and

River Delaware in Philadelphia, PA;

• The Puget Sound Marine

Committee in Seattle, WA; and

• The Cuyahoga River Task Force in

Cleveland, OH.

One speaker discussed the issue of

using public meetings as part of the

regulatory process. The speaker

suggested using the format of the PTP

public meetings, stating that its ‘‘give

and take’’ format is a better model than

the regulatory public meeting format.

The Coast Guard continuously strives

for open communications balanced with

the requirements for the Administrative

Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.) so

that all members of the affected public,

not just those present at a particular

meeting, have equal and appropriate

input to a fair and unbiased regulatory

outcome.

Lessons Learned and Near Accidents

Some speakers commented on lessons

learned and near accidents. A number of

speakers gave information highlighting

their experiences of best practices,

while other speakers gave definitions of

near accident and some of the obstacles

encountered in the creation of a near

accident reporting system. Several

industry concerns need to be resolved to

the satisfaction of all interested parties,

before creating the new system. Some

industry concerns include loss of

insurance, safety awards, and exposure

to legal liability. To create a functional

reporting system, these factors must be

addressed and answered to the

satisfaction of all involved. As

mentioned earlier in this notice, this

issue is an item in the PTP Focus Plan.

Several speakers offered stories of

various lessons learned and near

accident efforts that their companies

currently apply in the quest for safety

improvements. Some projects that were

mentioned include the following:

• Developing contingency plans.

• Providing means within companies

to anonymously report issues of

concern.

• Organizing safety meetings and

lessons learned procedures followed up

with shared analysis.

• Having key learning meetings for

captains where each reports on a shared

pertinent issue.

Another speaker suggested bringing

representatives of vendors of

mechanical systems to the workers who

use them, thereby joining the people

who make the equipment and the

people who use the equipment.

Management

A number of speakers discussed

aspects of management that affect

marine safety. They highlighted best

practices as performed by their firms,

the problems they have with their

companies, management losing their

safety focus, and the management

aspects of PTP.

Many speakers stated that they feel

safety is often compromised by home

office policies. For example, some

masters are not allowed the

independence to make decisions based

on current conditions, but must operate

within established parameters. Though

this is an issue that must be addressed

within individual companies, the Coast

Guard recognizes the serious potential

for accidents that such a practice causes.

A speaker suggested allowing a

management style that gives employees

more power in decision making. The

Coast Guard applauds this approach,

which is consistent with the PTP

Principle Honor the Mariner.

It remains the responsibility of the

individual companies and management

to use their influence appropriately and

to make sure there is compliance from

the boardroom to the deck plate level.

This responsibility takes on the

increased importance as the deadlines

for compliance with the ISM Code

approach. Implementation of the ISM

Code will have a significant effect on

marine safety from the organizational

standpoint, and is being addressed as

part of the PTP Focus Plan.

Two speakers commented that the

human element provides the greatest

impact on improving marine safety and

that upper management must show

consistent, not sporadic, support.

Several speakers expressed concern

that PTP might encourage

micromanagement when it should,

instead, foster creativity. A speaker

requested having the Coast Guard focus

on its roles of encouragement,

leadership, and examples, as opposed to

regulations and management. As noted,

PTP seeks non-regulatory approaches to

safety for people and the environment.

Training

A number of speakers discussed

training. The majority of comments

shared best practices related to training

of mariners on a day-to-day basis and of

the crew as a whole. A few speakers

identified some problems with Coast

Guard procedures that affect training

mariners.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 102 /Thursday, May 28, 1998 / Notices 29295

The comments indicated that many

companies are working to provide

better, more accurate training with a

focus on safety. The Coast Guard and

the Los Angeles/Long Beach (LA/LB)

Vessel Traffic Information System

(VTIS) are currently working on a

standard for training to be used

primarily as a tool for mariners.

Improved industry training methods

also include training teams from the

same vessel, so the mariners can

practice with the people they work

with. Another suggestion described a

pocket-sized emergency responsetraining document for deckhands.

Some of the basic principles noted in

the public meetings and in the Coast

Guard’s experience are worthy of note:

• Training needs to be a priority from

the initial hiring process onwards.

• Training should encompass

everything from lessons on managing

stress to CPR and fire fighting.

• Supervisors should go through

some of the training with the crew to see

what they are learning.

Effective implementation of the

STCW Convention is necessary. Noted

previously as a 1998 Focus Plan item,

the Coast Guard will continue to

address the human element issues of the

STCW that relate to the individual

mariner.

A number of comments discussed

course approvals. It was noted that it

now appears more difficult to get

mariners to meet the basic requirements.

A course approval process Fast Action

Team met in November 1997 to find

ways to reduce the backlog of course

applications waiting for approval and

shorten the time needed to evaluate

course approval applications. As a

result of the team’s recommendations,

the following actions have been taken:

• The National Maritime Center

(NMC) increased the course approval

staff by two people and also filled a long

vacant position.

• The NMC determined the

processing time could be shortened if

courses were sent directly to the NMC

rather than to the REC’s. NMC Policy

Letter 7–98 announced this change, and

the implementing regulatory change

will be proposed in the Maritime Course

Approval Procedure Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking, CGD 97–074.

• The course approval database that

lists all Coast Guard approved courses

has been updated, as of January 15,

1998. The list of approved courses is

published on the Internet and is

updated monthly.

• The NMC has begun developing

and updating course guidelines to

standardize approved courses.

Standardizing approved courses

would reduce the time needed to review

course approval requests; provide

consistency in courses being taught; and

ensure courses, instead of exams, will

more accurately reflect the job tasks and

responsibilities of the license being

sought.

As a result of these actions, the

backlog has decreased from 95 courses

waiting for approval in November of

1997 to less than 40 courses waiting for

approval in March of 1998. The oldest

course awaiting review has been

reduced from December 1996 to

February 1998.

Honor the Mariner

Several speakers applauded and

supported the PTP philosophy Honor

the Mariner. They noted that the most

appreciated contribution of PTP has

been the recognition of the mariner as

a pivotal member of the safety equation.

Recognition of mariners helps foster a

shared working relationship with

mariners and masters. The Coast Guard

recognizes that mariners have working

knowledge of projects and equipment

and that their opinions are important.

One speaker recommended that the

Coast Guard honor the mariner

constantly, not just before the accident,

but also during and after an incident.

The Coast Guard continues to seek out

and use the expertise of mariners in

guiding safety and environmental

protection efforts, and appreciates the

time, effort, and insights of all who have

provided assistance.

Fatigue

A few speakers addressed fatigue

research, while others spoke of their

fatigue experiences. Several speakers

mentioned that their companies are

devoting research to studying fatigue

and attempting to curb it. One company

developed alertness testing devices with

the view that fatigue, stress, and illness

are impairment factors just as hindering

as drugs and alcohol. The Coast Guard

Research and Development Center is

also performing studies specifically to

address fatigue.

The PTP goal, Do More, was also

mentioned during a fatigue discussion.

The speaker addressed the concern that

people may construe the statement by

literally doing more work, but with the

same people and equipment. Do More is

directed towards striving for increased

quality and prioritization of work-do

better-as opposed to an increased

quantity of work. One speaker

acknowledged that fatigue is often a

contributing factor to many accidents.

The speaker, however, expressed

concern that fatigue is often an easy

fallback explanation for accidents, when

it may not be the causal factor in a

particular accident.

Research

A representative from the Coast Guard

Research and Development Center

described the Fatigue Research Program

and solicited participation from the

towing industry for an alertness study.

In addition, several speakers stated that

their companies are devoting more

research time to human safety and

environmental issues. The Coast Guard

applauds these efforts and encourages

the sharing of this information for the

benefit of the entire marine community.

The Coast Guard Research and

Development Center has developed a

web site http://www.rdc.uscg.mil/ to

disseminate information about its

projects. There is also a section on

studies and reports related to human

element issues on the PTP web site:

http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/nmc/ptp/

rands.htm.

Streamlined Inspection Program (SIP)

Several comments discussed SIP. In

general, they were supportive of the

program. Speakers agreed with SIP,

citing it as an example of true

partnership. They pointed out many

advantages to the program, noting its

encouragement for companies to

translate the Code of Federal

Regulations for their employees. A

speaker commented that the strength of

SIP lies in changing the inspection from

an annual snapshot by the Coast Guard

to a Coast Guard audit of the

organization’s continuous inspection

system. As a 1998 Focus Plan item, the

Coast Guard will help companies

increase ownership of their inspections

and maintenance by implementing the

SIP.

Some comments addressed the issue

of SIP by creating two classes of

operators or companies. They discussed

the problem of the Coast Guard not

issuing CG–835 forms, which require

immediate repairs, to vessels that are

part of the SIP. Some speakers felt that

industry does not want to see two

classes of operators or companies.

Manning

A few speakers addressed the

problems of working with too few crew

members. One speaker supported

regulations on manning of barges

because it is difficult to place someone

aboard an unmanned barge in adverse

weather conditions. The Coast Guard

has proposed regulations seeking to

enhance existing standards for

anchoring or retrieving drifting tank

barges (62 FR 52057, October 6, 1997;
29296 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 102 /Thursday, May 28, 1998 / Notices

and 63 FR 9980, February 27, 1998).

These proposed rules present

appropriate measures for reducing the

likelihood of loss of control and

grounding of a tank barge based on

whether or not the barge is manned. As

a result of reducing the likelihood of

groundings, fire prevention measures

and emergency control measures are

also both part of the system to address

tank barge safety.

Another speaker commented on the

often insufficient manning on foreign

flag vessels, which makes it harder to

have safe operations. With certain

exceptions, the vessel’s Flag State

establishes the manning level for each

vessel. The Coast Guard is concerned

about the safety of foreign vessels

operating in U.S. waters and is working

with the International Maritime

Organization (IMO) to develop more upto-date guidance on the principles of

safe manning. The aim of this guidance

is to have crew complements based on

the actual crew workload, taking into

account work hour limits and rest

requirements. During Port State Control

(PSC) boardings of foreign vessels, the

Safe Manning Document is checked

against the actual manning of the vessel.

In addition, licenses, certificates, and

rest requirements are checked to ensure

compliance with the STCW. The Coast

Guard will work with representatives of

the Flag State to resolve any of the

problems. The Coast Guard may detain

the vessel in port pending the resolution

of the problems to ensure the correction

of unsafe conditions, which may

include requiring additional

crewmembers if insufficient personnel

are onboard to safely operate the vessel.

Pilotage

One speaker discussed the need for

First Class Pilot’s licenses on the inland

waterway system. The speaker indicated

that the current certification of inland

pilots on parts of the inland waterway,

which does not specify a geographic

area of expertise, is insufficient. The

speaker stated that the Coast Guard

Regional Examination Centers need to

ensure capable people can get their

license.

In 1994, the Coast Guard revised the

pilot regulations in 46 CFR 15.812 to

eliminate the requirement for a First

Class Pilot’s license on non-designated

areas of pilotage waters. Due to this

change in regulations, it is now the

companies’ responsibility to ensure that

the pilot they hire has the necessary

expertise.

Maintenance

One speaker commented on

maintenance. The speaker highlighted

problems with main propulsion failures

due to the lack of proper maintenance

of ships and equipment. Poor

maintenance of ships and equipment

has been noted in many casualties,

including the December 1996 BRIGHT

FIELD accident in New Orleans, LA,

where poor maintenance was cited as a

cause of the accident in the

investigation report, which was

published on October 31, 1997.

The speaker noted that the issue of

maintenance should receive more

attention than it has in the past. The

Coast Guard is actively pursing these

efforts through its PSC and SIP

programs, which target foreign vessels

and domestic that are not operated or

maintained properly. Additionally, the

ISM Code becomes mandatory for many

vessels on July 1, 1998, and requires

both the company and the vessel to have

a safety management system in place. A

properly implemented safety

management system will help prevent

occurrences such as the BRIGHT

FIELD’S loss of propulsion.

Conclusion

The Coast Guard is committed to PTP

as a long-term effort to address the root

cause of many of these accidents—the

human element. Through the continuing

efforts of the Coast Guard and marine

community, we can all reduce and

perhaps, eventually, eliminate these

types of accidents. The Coast Guard has

an unwavering commitment to safety,

and through PTP is undertaking many

bold initiatives. The marine community

is invited to join in this effort to

improve marine safety and

environmental protection. Visit one of

the web sites listed in this notice to

learn more.

Dated: May 18, 1998.

R.C. North,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant

Commandant for Marine Safety and

Environmental Protection.

[FR Doc. 98–14163 Filed 5–27–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory

Committee; Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice

to advise the public of a meeting of the

Federal Aviation Administration

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory

Committee to discuss air traffic issues.

DATES: The meeting will be held on June

16, 1998, 10:00 a.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at

the Air Traffic Control Association

Headquarters, 2300 Clarendon Blvd.,

Suite 711, Arlington, VA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Beth Allen, Transportation Regulations

Analyst, Airmen and Airspace Rules

Division, Office of Rulemaking (ARM–

105), 800 Independence Avenue, SW,

Washington, DC 20591. Telephone:

(202) 267–8199, FAX: (202) 267–5075.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant

to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal

Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–43;

5 U.S.C. App. II), notice is hereby given

of a meeting of the Aviation Rulemaking

Advisory Committee. This meeting will

be held on June 16, 1998, at 10:00 a.m.,

at the Air Traffic Control Association

Headquarters, 2300 Clarendon Blvd.,

Suite 711, Arlington, VA.

The agenda for this meeting will

include a review of the Special Visual

Flight Rules (SVFR) Working Group’s

activities.

Attendance is open to the interested

public but may be limited to the space

available. The public must make

arrangements in advance to present oral

statements at the meeting or may

present written statements to the

committee at any time. In addition, sign

and oral interpretation can be made

available at the meeting, as well as an

assistive listening device, if requested

10 calendar days before the meeting.

Arrangements may be made by

contacting the person listed under the

heading FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT.

Issued in Washington, DC on May 21,

1998.

Reginald C. Matthews,

Assistant Executive Director for Air Traffic

Issues, Aviation Rulemaking Advisory

Committee.

[FR Doc. 98–14167 Filed 5–27–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory

Committee Meeting on Air Carrier

Operations

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA) DOT.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice

to advise the public of a meeting of the

Federal Aviation Administration