36384 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 128 / Monday, July 6, 1998 / Proposed Rules

U.S. ports shall be granted a clearance

at the port or place of departure from

the United States unless it is established

that the vessel has valid certificates

issued by the Federal Maritime

Commission.

13. It is proposed to revise § 4.70 to

read as follows:

§ 4.70 Public Health Service requirements.

No clearance shall be granted to a

vessel subject to the foreign quarantine

regulations of the Public Health Service.

Bonni G. Tischler,

Acting Commissioner of Customs.

Approved: June 8, 1998.

John P. Simpson,

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.

[FR Doc. 98–17815 Filed 7–2–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4820–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Chapter I

[USCG–1998–3798]

RIN 2115–AF13

Numbering of Undocumented Barges

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed

rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard seeks public

comments on establishing a statutorily

required numbering system for

operating undocumented barges more

than 100 gross tons. The numbering of

these barges would increase owner

accountability and deter their

abandonment, making fewer barges

available for disposal of oil and

hazardous substances.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast

Guard on or before November 3, 1998.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments to

the Docket Management Facility

[USCG–1998–3798], U.S. Department of

Transportation, room PL–401, 400

Seventh Street SW., Washington DC

20590–0001, or deliver them to room

PL–401, located on the Plaza level of the

Nassif Building at the same address,

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

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

The telephone number is 202–366–

9329.

The Docket Management Facility

maintains the public docket for this

rulemaking. Comments 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 at the same address, between

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

Friday, except Federal holidays. You

may also access this docket on the

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

information concerning this document,

call Mr. Thomas Willis, Director,

National Vessel Documentation Center,

U.S. Coast Guard, telephone 304–271–

2506. For questions on viewing, or

submitting material to, the docket, call

Dorothy Walker, Chief, Documents,

Department of Transportation,

telephone 202–366–9329.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

The Coast Guard encourages you to

participate in the early stages of this

rulemaking by submitting written data,

views, or arguments. Persons submitting

comments should include their names

and addresses, identify this document

[USCG–1998–3798], the specific section

or question in this document to which

your comments apply, and give the

reason for each comment. Please submit

all comments and attachments in an

unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by

11 inches, suitable for copying and

electronic filing. If you want

acknowledgment of receipt of your

comments, you should enclose a

stamped, self-addressed postcard or

envelope.

The Coast Guard will consider all

comments received during the comment

period.

The Coast Guard plans no public

meeting. You may request a public

meeting by submitting a comment

requesting one to the address under

ADDRESSES. The request should include

the reasons why a meeting would be

beneficial. If the Coast Guard

determines that a meeting should be

held, we will announce the time and

place in a later notice in the Federal

Register.

Background and Purpose

The Abandoned Barge Act of 1992,

sections 5301 to 5305 of Pub. L. 102–

587 (the Act), enacted on November 4,

1992, added a new chapter 47 to Title

46 of the United States Code (46 U.S.C.

4701–4705) and amended 46 U.S.C.

12301 to require the numbering of

undocumented barges measuring more

than 100 gross tons operating on the

navigable waters of the U.S. In enacting

this legislation, Congress noted that an

abandoned barge could become the site

for the disposal of hazardous cargoes,

wastes, and petroleum products, which

can lead to water pollution incidents.

Numbering these undocumented barges

will increase owner accountability,

reducing the likelihood barges will be

abandoned and used for disposal of oil

and hazardous substances.

Regulatory History

On October 18, 1994, the Coast Guard

published a notice in the Federal

Register [59 FR 52646] requesting

comments on issues related to a

numbering system for undocumented

barges measuring more than 100 gross

tons. The primary issues addressed in

the notice concerned who should

administer a barge numbering system,

what type of number should be

required, and how much the numbering

would cost. The Coast Guard received

twenty-two comments in response to the

notice.

Summary of Comments

The following is a summary of the

comments received in response to the

questions and issues addressed in the

1994 Notice of Request for Comments.

Comments can be viewed on the

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

Administering Agency

All comments recommended the

Coast Guard, not the States, administer

a numbering system for undocumented

barges. The comments noted several

difficulties the States would encounter

administering barge numbering

programs, including coordination with

other States, resource burdens, and

enacting State legislation.

The comments discussed several

advantages of having the Coast Guard

administer a barge numbering system,

such as its experience with the vessel

documentation system, the Marine

Safety Information System (MSIS), and

providing a single source for barge

registration.

Undocumented Barge Number

Several comments suggested the Coast

Guard should use a numbering code

similar to the code used for documented

vessels, as long as codes differentiate

between documented and

undocumented barges. Some comments

suggested assigning undocumented

barges Hull Identification Numbers

(HINs), while others suggested painting

the company name and homeport on

barges instead of numbers.

A few comments discussed a

perceived difference between inspected

undocumented barges and uninspected

undocumented barges, and suggested

addressing only uninspected

undocumented barges.

Attaching Numbers to Barges

Some comments suggested that the

barge numbers be permanently welded
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 128 / Monday, July 6, 1998 / Proposed Rules 36385

on a structural component of a barge

and clearly visible. Other comments

stated that welding a number on the

interior of a barge could make the

number difficult to locate.

Some comments recommended

numbering undocumented barges in a

manner similar to recreational vessels,

and others pointed out that these

numbers are not permanently affixed,

and could be easily removed.

Application Information

Several comments suggested that a

barge numbering application should

require information similar to that

required to document a barge.

Other comments stated that barge

owners should only provide proof of

vessel ownership or a signed affidavit of

ownership because it may be difficult to

provide information proving ownership

for an undocumented barge.

Some comments stated that a number

should not change when barge

ownership changes, and additional

registration or renewal should be

required only if ownership changes.

Economic Impacts

A few comments indicated that it

would take a survey of the barge

industry to determine the total

undocumented barge population and

the potential economic impact of any

regulations. Several comments

mentioned that it is difficult to identify

how many undocumented barges are in

operation because many barges are not

tracked by government agencies or other

organizations. One comment estimated

that there are approximately 13,000 to

14,000 undocumented barges measuring

more than 100 gross tons in operation.

Several comments supported an

estimated cost for attaching barge

numbers of $500–$1,500 per barge.

Another comment stated that related

costs to be considered include barge

out-of-service time, fleeting expenses,

shifting expenses, tug service, and gas

free certificates. Attaching numbers

during regularly scheduled maintenance

or inspections could minimize such

overhead costs. The comments

recommended a two-year phase-in

period for any regulations.

Some comments stated that barge

owners should not be charged a fee for

initial registration, and that any charges

for subsequent registration (change of

ownership, for example) should be

scaled to vessel documentation service

fees. Other comments stated that the

Coast Guard should charge fees to

recover its costs for setting up and

administering a numbering program.

Other Issues

One comment suggested that barge

owners should be allowed to voluntarily

number undocumented barges

measuring 100 gross tons or less.

Another comment opposed a costly

numbering system that would not solve

the abandoned barge problem, and

suggested the repeal of the Abandoned

Barge Act of 1992. One comment

pointed out that even identifying a few

barge owners through barge numbers

would probably not lead to an owner

with sufficient assets to remove the

barge, and the taxpayers would continue

to pay for removal of barges.

General Proposals and Related

Questions

Based on the comments received, the

Coast Guard is considering options for

establishing a Coast Guard numbering

system administered by the National

Vessel Documentation Center (NVDC).

Unlike vessel documentation, which

serves multiple purposes such as

establishing vessel nationality,

admitting vessels to restricted trades,

and permitting vessels to be the subject

of preferred mortgages, the numbering

of operating undocumented barges more

than 100 gross tons would be used to

simply identify their owners.

The Coast Guard requests comments

on the following questions, although

comments on other issues addressed in

this advance notice are also welcome. In

responding to a question, please explain

your reasons for each answer, and

follow the instructions under Request

for Comments above.

Inspected Undocumented Barges

Only documented vessels are required

to obtain and mark Official Numbers per

46 CFR part 67, subparts H and I. The

Coast Guard acknowledges that some

inspected undocumented barges may

have Official Numbers and these

numbers may still be marked on the

vessels. However, Official Numbers on

existing undocumented barges may not

provide accurate owner information.

• How should the Coast Guard

address undocumented inspected barges

with Official Numbers? Should the

barge owner be required to obtain a

number under this proposed system?

What Number Should the Coast Guard

Use for Undocumented Barges?

The Coast Guard believes assigned

barge numbers should be similar to the

numbers used for documented vessels.

We do not plan on including

undocumented barges in the Hull

Identification Number (HIN) system

since most existing undocumented

barges do not have HINs.

• Are there other options the Coast

Guard should consider for

undocumented barge numbers?

How Should Owners Attach Numbers to

Barges?

At this point, the Coast Guard

believes numbers should be

permanently welded externally to

discourage removal and be clearly

visible from a distance to help identify

barge owners. The Coast Guard does not

believe numbers should be marked on

the interior as this makes identification

difficult.

• Should barge numbers be attached

to the exterior of a vessel’s hull? How

large should the numbers be? Where

exactly should the numbers be attached?

Would numbers possibly interfere with

other barge markings?

• Should barge numbers be bead

welded to the hull? Are there other

attachment methods that the Coast

Guard could consider?

What Information Should Barge Owners

Provide on Barge Numbering

Applications?

The Coast Guard recognizes that in

many cases, it may be impossible for

owners of undocumented barges to

prove vessel ownership. The purpose of

the proposed barge numbering system is

to identify the owners of barges. The

Coast Guard does not expect owners of

undocumented barges to provide the

same information that is required to

document a vessel. The Coast Guard

plans to propose accepting any available

information indicating ownership (such

as a bill of sale), or a signed affidavit of

ownership.

Under this approach, barge owners

may be required to submit an

application with the following

identifying information: owner name,

address, e-mail, and phone number;

company name; proof or affidavit of

ownership; general barge description;

and barge operating area. We do not

anticipate requiring application

renewal, except when ownership

changes. Barge owners would also be

responsible for updating application

information as appropriate (change of

address, new phone numbers, etc.).

• Is the proposed application

information discussed above adequate

to identify barge owners? Should the

application request barge operator

information? Is the proposed

information readily available?

• How long after the effective date of

any future regulations should owners

submit their numbering applications to

the Coast Guard?

• Who should initiate numbering

application renewal upon change of
36386 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 128 / Monday, July 6, 1998 / Proposed Rules

ownership, the seller or the new owner?

How long after a change of ownership

should this paperwork be submitted to

the Coast Guard?

• If you had the option of submitting

a numbering application or application

update electronically via the Internet,

would you take advantage of the

service?

How Many Operating Undocumented

Barges Measuring More Than 100 Gross

Tons are There?

Based on available information, we

estimate that there are approximately

10,000 to 14,000 undocumented barges

measuring more than 100 gross tons and

operating on the navigable waters of the

United States. The Coast Guard’s Marine

Safety Information System (MSIS)

contains records on just under 10,000

undocumented barges measuring more

than 100 gross tons.

However, since most undocumented

and uninspected barges are listed in the

database only when Coast Guard

personnel enter information as a result

of marine safety-related activity

(casualty, boarding, etc.), many barges

may not even be listed in the database.

It is also possible that many

undocumented barges listed in the

database are no longer operating. The

Coast Guard is in the process of

commencing a study of the barge

industry to determine the number of

undocumented barges.

• Is the population range of 10,000 to

14,000 undocumented barges measuring

more than 100 gross tons accurate?

• How can the Coast Guard obtain a

more accurate population estimate?

What is the best way to contact owners

and operators of undocumented barges

measuring more than 100 gross tons?

What are the Potential Economic

Impacts of the Proposed Numbering

System?

The Preliminary Regulatory

Assessment section of this document

discusses the potential economic

impacts of this rulemaking. Please refer

to that section when reviewing the

following questions. This rulemaking

will affect owners of undocumented

barges measuring more than 100 gross

tons. Barge owners would bear the cost

of providing needed owner and barge

information and costs associated with

attaching numbers to the barges.

Submitting this information to the Coast

Guard should impose only a minimum

cost burden. Costs associated with

attaching barge numbers depend on the

form, size, and attachment method(s)

established.

The Coast Guard may charge a fee for

initial and subsequent barge numbering

to offset agency costs, and is interested

in comments regarding the

appropriateness of such fees.

• Is the cost estimate of $500 to

$1,500 for attaching permanent numbers

to barges accurate? Does it include all

costs associated with barge numbering

(barge out-of-service costs, shifting

expenses, etc.)? Will most barge owners

attach numbers in-house or have a

shipyard do the work? How would costs

differ according to types of barges (tank

barge versus construction barge, for

example)?

• What are the common uses

(services) for undocumented and

uninspected barges measuring more

than 100 gross tons? Where do most

barges operate?

• What are the average maintenance

intervals for undocumented barges

measuring more than 100 gross tons?

• What is the average barge service

life for undocumented barges measuring

more than 100 gross tons?

• What is the average annual

construction rate for new

undocumented barges measuring more

than 100 gross tons?

• How often, on average, do barges

measuring more than 100 gross tons

change owners?

How Will any Future Regulations Affect

Small Entities?

The Small Entities section of this

advance notice discusses potential

impacts on small entities and available

assistance for small entities. Please refer

to that section when reviewing the

following question. We believe many

undocumented barge owners are small

entities, and are interested in feedback

from potentially affected small

businesses, agencies, and organizations.

• If your small business, organization,

or agency may be affected by any future

barge numbering system, please tell

how, and what flexibility or compliance

alternatives we should consider to

minimize the regulatory burden on you

while promoting the intent of the

Abandoned Barge Act.

Preliminary Regulatory Assessment

The cost for mandatory numbering of

undocumented barges more than 100

gross tons is not expected to exceed

$100 million. As discussed, preliminary

population estimates for the number of

undocumented barges measuring more

than 100 gross tons ranges from just

under 10,000 to 14,000 barges.

An industry-provided cost estimate

for attaching barge numbers ranges from

$500 to $1,500 per barge, depending on

the method used and whether the work

is done in-house or at a shipyard.

Assuming a per barge cost of $500 to

$1,500 for as many as 14,000 barges, the

preliminary cost estimate ranges from

$7.0 to $21.0 million. Other associated

costs to consider include shipyard tug

services, barge out-of-service costs,

numbering fees, fleeting expense, and

shifting expense. Avoiding future

environmental damage and potentially

reducing clean-up costs are the primary

benefits associated with this

rulemaking. From January 1988 to

September 1991, the Coast Guard spent

an estimated $4.4 million to clean up

pollutants from abandoned vessels.

Approximately 15% of these pollution

incidents were attributable to

abandoned barges. According to 1997

figures, there are just over 1,000

abandoned barges in our nation’s

waterways; approximately 25 barges

pose hazards to navigation, and 15 pose

a potential pollution threat.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

[5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.], the Coast Guard

must consider whether any potential

rulemaking would have significant

economic impacts on a substantial

number of small entities. ‘‘Small

entities’’ include small businesses, notfor-profit organizations that are

independently owned and operated and

are not dominant in their fields, and

governmental jurisdictions with

populations of less than 50,000.

Many owners of undocumented

barges subject to future barge-numbering

regulations may be small entities.

Because we have not yet proposed

specific requirements and because the

number of affected small entities has not

been identified, we cannot accurately

estimate the potential impact on small

entities at this time. The Coast Guard

would like comments discussing the

potential impacts of any future

regulatory changes on small entities.

Assistance for Small Entities

Under section 213(a) of the Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996 [Pub. L. 104–21],

the Coast Guard wants to assist small

entities to understand this document so

they can better evaluate the potential

effects of this rulemaking on them and

participate in the rulemaking process. If

you believe that your small business,

organization, or agency may be affected

by this rulemaking, please explain how

you could be affected, and tell us what

flexibility or compliance alternatives the

Coast Guard should consider to

minimize the burden on you.

If you have questions concerning this

document, you may call the Coast Guard

point of contact designated in FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We also
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 128 / Monday, July 6, 1998 / Proposed Rules 36387

maintain a small business regulatory

assistance Web Page at http://

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

reghome.htm which has current

information on small entity issues and

proposed Coast Guard regulations. To

help small entities become more

involved in this rulemaking, the Coast

Guard will mail copies of this advance

notice to Small Business Development

Center (SBDC) State Directors

nationwide for distribution to local

SBDC offices and interested small

businesses.

Collection-of-Information

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act

[44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.], the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) reviews

each proposed rule that contains a

collection-of-information requirement to

determine whether the practical value of

the information is worth the burden

imposed by its collection. Collection-ofinformation requirements include

reporting, record-keeping, notification,

and other similar actions. This proposal

would include new collection-ofinformation requirements. Barge owners

would have to provide readily available

information identifying undocumented

barges and barge owners to the Coast

Guard. This information should be

readily available, so the burden should

be minimal. We cannot estimate the

exact paperwork burden associated with

this rulemaking because specific

requirements have not been proposed.

We expect that comments received in

response to this advance notice will

assist us in estimating the potential

paperwork burden, as required under

the Paperwork Reduction Act. Once a

specific proposal is developed, the

Coast Guard will prepare a request for

OMB approval of any collection-ofinformation requirements.

Environment

The Coast Guard will consider

preparing an Environmental Assessment

before publication of a notice of

proposed rulemaking. The Coast Guard

expects that an environmental impact

statement would not be required. By

increasing owner accountability, this

rulemaking may prevent future marine

pollution incidents from abandoned

barges and providing a beneficial impact

on the environment. The Coast 1 Guard

invites comments addressing possible

effects that this rulemaking may have on

the environment or addressing possible

inconsistencies with any Federal, State,

or local law or administrative

determinations relating to the

environment.

Dated: June 29, 1998.

R.C. North,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant

Commandant for Marine Safety and

Environmental Protection.

[FR Doc. 98–17814 Filed 7–2–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 98–72, RM–9265]

Radio Broadcasting Services;

Middlebury and Berlin, VT

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission requests

comments on a petition filed by

Dynamite Radio, Inc. seeking the

substitution of Channel 265C2 for

Channel 265A; the reallotment of

Channel 265C2 from Middlebury to

Berlin, VT; and the modification of

Station WGTK’s license to specify

Berlin as its community of license.

Channel 265C2 can be allotted to Berlin

in compliance with the Commission’s

minimum distance separation

requirements with a site restriction of

11.1 kilometers (6.9 miles) north of the

community. The site restriction

imposed on Channel 265C2 at Berlin

does not obviate the short-spacings to

Station CBF–FM, Channel 265C1,

Montreal, Quebec, and to Station

CBF10F, Channel 266B, Sherbrook,

Quebec, Canada. Therefore, we have

sought Canadian concurrence in the

allotment of Channel 265C2 at Berlin as

a specially negotiated short-spaced

limited allotment since Berlin is located

within 320 kilometers (200 miles) of the

U.S.-Canadian border. In accordance

with the provisions of Section 1.420(i)

of the Commission’s Rules, we will not

accept competing expressions of interest

in the use of Channel 265C2 at Berlin,

VT.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before July 13, 1998, and reply

comments on or before July 28, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, Washington, DC 20554. In

addition to filing comments with the

FCC, interested parties should serve the

petitioner, or its counsel or consultant,

as follows: Anthony A. Neri, President,

Dynamite Radio, Inc., 74 Exchange

Street, Middlebury, Vermont, 05753

(Petitioner).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Leslie K. Shapiro, Mass Media Bureau,

(202) 418–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No.

98–72, adopted May 13, 1998, and

released May 22, 1998. The full text of

this Commission decision is available

for inspection and copying during

normal business hours in the FCC’s

Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M

Street, NW, Washington, DC. The

complete text of this decision may also

be purchased from the Commission’s

copy contractor, ITS, Inc., (202) 857–

3800, 1231 20th Street, NW,

Washington, DC 20036.

Provisions of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to

this proceeding.

Members of the public should note

that from the time a Notice of Proposed

Rule Making is issued until the matter

is no longer subject to Commission

consideration or court review, all ex

parte contacts are prohibited in

Commission proceedings, such as this

one, which involve channel allotments.

See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules

governing permissible ex parte contacts.

For information regarding proper

filing procedures for comments, see 47

CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 98–17776 Filed 7–2–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 98–70, RM–9276]

Radio Broadcasting Services; Clinton

and Okarche, OK

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission requests

comments on a petition filed by Tyler

Broadcasting Corporation seeking the

substitution of Channel 294C2 for

Channel 294C1 at Clinton, OK, the

reallotment of Channel 294C2 from

Clinton to Okarche, OK, as the

community’s first local aural service,

and the modification of Station KCLI–

FM’s license to specify Okarche as its