[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 11, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43915-43941]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-16869]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 127, 154, and 156

[Docket No. USCG-2020-0315]
RIN 1625-AC61


Electronic Submission of Facility Operations and Emergency 
Manuals

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule enables regulated facilities to electronically 
submit Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals and electronically 
communicate with the Coast Guard. This rule also allows facility 
operators to submit one electronic or printed copy of the manuals and 
one electronic or printed copy of the amendments to the manuals. 
Finally, this rule requires the regulated facilities to maintain either 
an electronic or a printed copy of each required manual in the marine 
transfer area of the facility during transfer operations.

DATES: This rule is effective September 10, 2021.

ADDRESSES: To view comments and documents mentioned in this preamble as 
being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type 
USCG-2020-0315 in the search box and click ``Search.'' Next, in the 
Document Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about this document, 
call or email Lieutenant Commander Benjamin Mazyck, Coast Guard 
Division of Cargo and Facilities; telephone 202-372-1130, email 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e68483888c878b8f88c882c88b879c9f858da693958581c88b8f8a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d4b6b1babeb5b9bdbafab0fab9b5aeadb7bf94a1a7b7b3fab9bdb8">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents for Preamble

I. Abbreviations
II. Basis and Purpose, and Regulatory History
III. Discussion of Comments and Changes from the Proposed Rule
IV. Discussion of the Final Rule
    A. Part 127--Waterfront Facilities Handling Liquefied Natural 
Gas and Liquefied Hazardous Gas
    B. Part 154--Facilities Transferring Oil or Hazardous Materials 
in Bulk
    C. Part 156--Oil and Hazardous Material Transfer Operations
    D. Technical Revisions Within Part 127 and Part 154
V. Regulatory Analyses
    A. Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Small Entities
    C. Assistance for Small Entities
    D. Collection of Information
    E. Federalism
    F. Unfunded Mandates
    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. Abbreviations

BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CG-FAC U.S. Coast Guard Office of Port and Facility Compliance
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
FWPCA Federal Water Pollution Control Act
IT Information technology
LHG Liquefied Hazardous Gas
LNG Liquefied Natural Gas
MISLE Marine Information for Safety and Law Enforcement
MTR facilities Marine Transportation-Related facilities that 
transfer oil or hazardous material in bulk
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PIC Person in Charge
RA Regulatory analysis
SBA Small Business Administration
Sec.  Section
SME Subject matter expert
UPS United Parcel Service
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Basis and Purpose, and Regulatory History

    Section 70011 of Title 46 of the United States Code (U.S.C.) 
authorizes the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 
to establish procedures, standards, and measures for the handling of 
dangerous substances, including oil and hazardous material, to prevent 
damage to any structure on or in the navigable waters of the United 
States. Additionally, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA), 
as amended and codified in 33 U.S.C. 1321(j)(5), requires the President 
to establish regulations requiring response plans for the prevention of 
discharges of oil and hazardous substances from vessels, onshore 
facilities, and offshore facilities. The FWPCA functions in 33 U.S.C. 
1321(j)(5) have been delegated from the President to the Secretary of 
the DHS by Executive Order 12777 Sec. 2(d)(2) (Volume 56 of the Federal 
Register (FR) at Page 54757, Oct. 23, 1991), as amended by Executive 
Order 13286 (68 FR 10619, March 5, 2003). The authorities in 33 U.S.C. 
1321(j)(5) and 46 U.S.C. 70011 (formerly 33 U.S.C. 1225) have been 
delegated to the Coast Guard under section II, paragraphs 70 and 73, of 
DHS Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.2.
    Title 33 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 127 requires 
facilities that transfer liquefied natural gas (LNG), or liquefied 
hazardous gas (LHG) in bulk, to or from a vessel, to maintain both an 
Operations Manual and an Emergency Manual. Similarly, part 154 requires 
facilities that transfer oil or hazardous materials in bulk (MTR 
facilities), to or from a vessel with a capacity of 39.75 cubic meters 
(250 barrels) or more, to maintain an Operations Manual. According to 
33 CFR 127.019, 154.300, and 154.325, two copies each of the Operations 
Manual

[[Page 43916]]

and the Emergency Manual must be submitted to the Captain of the Port 
(COTP) of the zone in which the facility is located for examination 
before a facility may operate. Lastly, part 156 describes the 
requirements for transferring of oil or other hazardous materials on 
the navigable waters or contiguous zone of the United States to, from, 
or within each vessel with a capacity of 39.75 cubic meters (250 
barrels) or more.
    The COTP evaluates whether the operations and safety procedures 
outlined in the manuals meet the requirements for applicable facilities 
in 33 CFR part 127 (for LNG and LHG) or parts 154 and 156 (for the 
transfer operations of oil or hazardous material). If the procedures in 
the manuals meet the requirements, then the COTP returns one copy of 
each manual, marked ``Examined by the Coast Guard.''
    As stated in the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled 
``Electronic Submission of Facility Operations and Emergency Manuals,'' 
published November 27, 2020 (85 FR 75972), the purpose of this 
rulemaking is to allow facility operators to submit and maintain the 
Operations Manual and Emergency Manual in either print or electronic 
format. The comment submissions received on the NPRM expressed general 
support for allowing electronic submissions and the proposed changes. 
Therefore, this final rule implements the changes proposed in the NPRM 
with clarifying edits, as explained in section III of this rule.
    Although the previous regulations did not explicitly state that the 
manuals had to be printed, the previous regulatory requirement for the 
owner or operator to submit two copies and for the COTP to return one 
marked copy suggested the use of printed documents. The Coast Guard 
issued the two-copy requirement for LNG and LHG facilities in 1988 (53 
FR 3370, February 5, 1988) and for oil and hazardous materials 
facilities in 1996 (61 FR 41458, August 8, 1996), when electronic mail 
and electronic storage were not common practice. This final rule 
removes the two-copy requirement and allows facility operators to 
submit one printed or electronic copy of each required manual to the 
COTP for examination. It also allows facilities to maintain either a 
printed or an electronic copy of the most recently examined manual(s) 
in the marine transfer area of the facility.

III. Discussion of Comments and Changes From the Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard received four comment submissions during the NPRM's 
60-day comment period that ended January 27, 2021. All four of the 
commenters supported the proposed change to allow electronic submission 
and communication regarding Facility Operations Manuals and Emergency 
Manuals.
    Three of the commenters requested that we consider expanding the 
use of electronic submission, digital tools, and electronic storage to 
other documents required by regulation. Currently, electronic 
submission capability exists for the submission of Facility Security 
Plans for facilities regulated under 33 CFR part 105. The NPRM only 
proposed and requested comments on allowing electronic submission of 
Facility Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals under parts 127 and 
154. The Coast Guard is exploring the long-term feasibility of 
expanding this capability beyond the current requirements, but that is 
beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
    One commenter concurred that all manuals and other written material 
could be sent electronically, but recommended keeping a printed version 
readily available and accessible for team members carrying out 
assignments at the facility. The Coast Guard wants to allow flexibility 
for facility operators to choose which format is appropriate based on 
the physical characteristics and operating procedures of their specific 
facility. While this commenter did not provide reasons why allowing 
electronic copies at the facility would be inadequate or unsafe, the 
Coast Guard wants to make it clear that there are existing electrical 
safety standards that apply to the electronic devices used to display 
electronic copies of the manuals. In response to this comment, and upon 
further deliberation, we realize that the text allowing electronic 
manuals in the marine transfer area could benefit from clarification to 
help the facilities safely adopt the electronic viewing option. This 
final rule adds an additional statement to the proposed regulatory text 
that electronic devices used to display electronic manuals must meet 
applicable electrical safety standards in the applicable CFR part.
    Parts 127 and 154 have electrical safety standards for these 
facilities that are applicable to electronic devices used in a 
facility. By adding this regulatory text, we are clarifying that 
allowing electronic viewing and storage of the Facility Operations 
Manuals or Emergency Manuals does not circumvent those safety 
requirements. The Coast Guard anticipates that some facilities will 
still have printed manuals at their operations stations; those 
facilities will not be required to maintain an electronic copy under 
this final rule. We have taken this into account in our cost savings 
calculations by using data on how many facilities will use electronic 
and printed manuals.
    We are making three changes to the regulatory text we proposed in 
the NPRM. First, as noted above, in paragraphs 127.309(a), 127.1309(a), 
and 154.300(f), we add a statement that electronic devices used to 
display the electronic manuals must meet applicable safety standards in 
the part. Second, we specify that the requirement for facilities to 
include identifying information on manual submissions must be revision-
specific identifying information, to help the Coast Guard and the 
facility identify the most recently examined manual. In paragraphs 
127.019(c) and (d), 154.300(a)(4) and (e), 154.320(e), and 154.325(c), 
we changed the proposed text, ``identifying information generated by 
the facility,'' to ``revision-specific identifying information.'' With 
respect to the revision-specific identifying information, we are also 
removing the proposed text, ``generated by the facility.'' The Coast 
Guard does not intend to limit who can create the revision-specific 
identifying information. As we discuss in section IV of this preamble, 
the purpose of requiring facilities to include the publication date, 
revision date, or other revision-specific identifying information on 
the manual submissions is so that the Coast Guard and the facility can 
identify the most recently examined version of the manual. Requiring 
the identifying information to be revision-specific will help achieve 
that purpose.
    The third change from the NPRM regulatory text is in paragraph 
156.120(t)(2), which is the existing requirement for maintaining 
Facility Operations Manuals and vessel transfer procedures at the 
facility. After publication of the NPRM, we realized that the proposed 
text inadvertently allowed electronic copies of vessel transfer 
procedures, which is in conflict with existing Sec.  155.740. Section 
155.740, paragraphs (b) and (c), require that vessel transfer 
procedures be printed and posted for viewing. The NPRM only discussed 
allowing electronic copies for the Facility Operations Manuals; we do 
not intend to allow electronic copies for vessel transfer procedures. 
Because print or electronic copies of the Facility Operations Manuals 
will be expressly permitted by new Sec.  154.300, this final rule 
revises paragraph 156.120(t)(2) from the version in the NPRM to say 
that ``copies'' instead of ``print or electronic copies'' of the 
Facility Operations Manual and vessel transfer

[[Page 43917]]

procedures must be available for viewing in the marine transfer area. 
This change in text will ensure the section does not conflict with the 
printed copy requirement for vessel transfer procedures in Sec.  
155.740.

IV. Discussion of the Final Rule

    This final rule amends the following sections in title 33 of the 
CFR: 127.019, 127.309, 127.1309, 154.300, 154.320, 154.325, and 
156.120. A section-by-section explanation of the new requirements 
follows.

A. Part 127--Waterfront Facilities Handling Liquefied Natural Gas and 
Liquefied Hazardous Gas

Section 127.019 Operations Manual and Emergency Manual: Procedures for 
examination
    This section will allow owners and operators of facilities that 
transfer LNG and LHG, in bulk, to or from a vessel to submit one print 
or electronic copy of their Operations Manual and Emergency Manual to 
the COTP for examination.
    Additionally, to codify current practices, manuals submitted after 
the effective date of the final rule must include a date, revision 
date, or other revision-specific identifying information. All manuals 
currently contain unique identifying information. Paragraph (c) of this 
section will allow them to continue to use their own identifying 
information or to use a revision date. The date, revision date, or 
other revision-specific identifying information, such as document 
control numbers, will allow the facility operator and the Coast Guard 
to determine quickly if the most recent version of the manual is being 
used.
    As specified in paragraph (d) of this section, the COTP will 
respond to the facilities electronically to reduce paperwork-processing 
costs. Under this rule, the COTP will provide notice to the facility 
that the manual has been examined, and will no longer return a marked 
copy of the manual to the facility.
    The COTP will determine the best method to return the notice to the 
facility operator by considering the facility's available contact 
information and the method in which the manuals were submitted. We 
expect the COTP's notice will initially take the form of a printed or 
electronically submitted letter to the facility operator, but could 
eventually include an electronic certification with the information. 
The COTP's notice will also include the manual's date, revision date, 
or other revision-specific identifying information so that the Coast 
Guard and facility operators can verify which manual is the most 
recently examined.
    Per paragraph (e), the COTP will notify a facility with an 
explanation of why a manual does not meet the requirements of this 
part, without having to return a printed copy. This enables electronic 
communication between the Coast Guard and a facility while reducing 
associated printing and mailing costs for the Coast Guard. The COTP 
retains the discretion to send the letters and manuals via mail to the 
facility when appropriate.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ We use the term ``mail'' throughout this final rule to refer 
to the delivery method used by the COTP or the facility to send and 
receive printed copies of letters and manuals. These methods 
include, but are not limited to, the United States Postal Service, 
FedEx, United Parcel Service (UPS), and courier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, within Sec.  127.019, as proposed in the NPRM, this rule 
removes the word ``existing'' where it appears in the context of 
``existing facility'' in paragraphs (a) and (b). ``Existing,'' as 
applied to a waterfront facility, is defined in Sec.  127.005, but the 
definition is limited to facilities that were constructed before June 
2, 1988 for LNG facilities, and before January 30, 1996 for LHG 
facilities. The specific dates used within the definition of 
``existing'' were never intended to apply to the use of ``existing'' in 
this section. To avoid confusion, we are removing ``existing'' from 
this section. The requirements in paragraph (a) will continue to apply 
to all active facilities, and the requirements of paragraph (b) will 
continue to apply to all new or inactive facilities.
Section 127.309 Operations Manual and Emergency Manual: Use
    Paragraph (a), in subpart B for waterfront facilities handling LNG, 
will require the operator to ensure that the person in charge (PIC) has 
either a printed or an electronic copy of the most recently examined 
Operations Manual and Emergency Manual readily available in the marine 
transfer area. In this paragraph, we added a statement beyond what was 
proposed in the NPRM to clarify that electronic devices used to view an 
electronic copy of the manuals must comply with applicable electrical 
safety requirements in part 127.
    In Sec.  127.309, the phrase ``readily available in the marine 
transfer area'' means that a printed or electronic copy of the manual 
is available for viewing within the operating station of the PIC. The 
PIC is not expected to keep the manual in their possession while 
conducting routine rounds during a transfer operation.
    While PICs must know the contents of the manuals under paragraph 
127.301(a)(4), the Coast Guard recognizes that it is difficult for a 
PIC to instantly recall every step of every procedure outlined in these 
manuals. Because both paragraphs 127.309(b) and (c) require each 
transfer and emergency operation to be conducted in accordance with the 
examined Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals, respectively, it has 
been common practice for PICs to have a copy of the Operations Manual 
and Emergency Manual in the marine transfer area during transfer 
operations to reference when needed. Therefore, adding a requirement 
that a printed or electronic copy of the most recently examined 
Operations Manual and Emergency Manual must be readily available to the 
PIC in the marine transfer area does not add a significant burden to 
facility operators.
Section 127.1309 Operations Manual and Emergency Manual: Use
    Section 127.1309(a) in subpart C for waterfront facilities handling 
LHG requires that the facility operators ensure the facility's PIC has 
a printed or electronic copy of the most recently examined Operations 
Manual and Emergency Manual readily available in the marine transfer 
area. This requirement in paragraph (a) will help ensure that PICs have 
access to the manuals when needed, since there may be fewer printed 
copies available when facilities opt into electronic manual submission. 
For the purpose of this section, the phrase ``readily available in the 
marine transfer area'' means a printed or electronic copy of the manual 
is available for viewing within the operating station of the PIC, but 
the PIC is not expected to keep the manual in their possession. With 
this final rule, we also added a statement to paragraph (a) to clarify 
that electronic devices used to view the electronic copy of the manuals 
must comply with applicable electrical safety requirements in part 127.

B. Part 154--Facilities Transferring Oil or Hazardous Materials in Bulk

Section 154.300 Operations Manual; General
    The revised Sec.  154.300 allows facility operators to submit one 
printed or electronic copy of the Operations Manual to the COTP with a 
date, a revision date, or other revision-specific identifying 
information such as a document control number generated by the 
facility. This allows the facility and the COTP to determine quickly 
during inspections if the facility is using the most recent version of 
the manual. As

[[Page 43918]]

the inclusion of such information is current practice, we are only 
codifying this current practice.
    As proposed in the NPRM, in paragraph (a) we clarify that the 
facility operator must submit the manuals to the COTP of the zone in 
which the facility operates. The clarification will align the text with 
current practice.
    This rule implements the proposed changes to how the COTP notifies 
the facility that the Operations Manual has been examined in paragraph 
(e). Previously, after examination and determination that the manual 
meets the requirements of this part, the COTP marked the manual 
``Examined by the Coast Guard'' and returned one copy to the facility 
operator. Now the COTP will notify the facility that the manual has 
been examined and will not return a copy of the manual to the facility. 
We expect this notice to initially take the form of a printed or 
emailed letter, with the revision date or other revision-specific 
identifying information on the letter, but could eventually include an 
electronic certification with this information.
    Paragraph (f) of Sec.  154.300 allows either a printed or 
electronic copy of the most recently examined Operations Manual to be 
readily available for each facility's PIC while conducting a transfer 
operation. The facility may store the manual in print or electronic 
format. In this paragraph, this final rule adds a new statement over 
what we originally proposed in the NPRM, specifying that electronic 
devices used to view an electronic copy of the manual must comply with 
applicable electrical safety requirements in part 154. The facility may 
have either printed or electronic copies of the manual in any 
translations required under existing paragraph (a)(3).
    In Sec.  154.300(d), ``products transferred'' will also be part of 
the list of items the COTP considers when determining whether the 
manual meets the requirements of part 154 and part 156. Information 
about the products transferred, meaning the type of oil and hazardous 
material, is already required to be included in the Operation Manuals 
under Sec.  154.310(a)(5), and knowledge of the products being 
transferred is important to reviewing the adequacy of the Operations 
Manual. The facility develops their capabilities based, in part, on the 
characteristics of the oil or hazardous material they want to transfer. 
Including ``products transferred'' in the list of considerations 
increases transparency regarding the manual examination process.
Section 154.320 Operations Manual: Amendment
    This section addresses amendments to Operations Manuals. Paragraph 
(a) of this section previously stated that the COTP may require the 
facility operator to amend their Operations Manual if the manual does 
not meet the requirements of this part. This rule replaces 
``requirements of this part'' with ``requirements of this subchapter'' 
because there are other regulations in the subchapter that apply to the 
Operations Manual. The applicable subchapter is subchapter O, titled 
``Pollution,'' which includes 33 CFR parts 151 through 159.
    Section 154.320(a)(1) allows facility operators to submit to the 
Coast Guard any information, views, arguments, and proposed amendments 
in response to the inadequacies identified by the COTP. To align with 
other revisions, we added language to this section allowing facility 
operators to send their information, views, arguments, and proposed 
amendments to the COTP in print or electronically.
    Per paragraph (b)(1), facilities may submit amendments to the 
manuals to the COTP either in print or electronically. Paragraphs 
(b)(2) and (c) require the COTP to examine the amendments to an 
Operations Manual for compliance with the subchapter and then notify 
the facility that the Coast Guard has examined the amendments. If the 
amendments do not meet the requirements for Operations Manuals in 
subchapter O, the COTP will notify the facility operator of the 
inadequacies and explain why the amendments do not meet the 
requirements of the subchapter. The COTP notice may be a printed or 
emailed letter, or even an electronic certification, with the revision 
date or other revision-specific identifying information included.
    Paragraph (e) describes how facility operators may submit 
amendments and the procedures to follow in the event the entire manual 
is submitted for amendments. This rule gives the facility operator the 
choice of page or whole-manual replacement, but requires them to 
include the date, revision date, or other revision-specific identifying 
information on the submission. If a facility submits the entire manual 
with the proposed amendments, this rule requires that the changes since 
the last examined manual be highlighted, or otherwise annotated. It may 
be easier for a facility to submit the entire manual with the 
amendments highlighted or annotated, rather than isolating individual 
pages that were amended. Examples of ways facility operators could 
highlight or annotate the amendments include, but are not limited to, 
use of an electronic or ink highlighting tool, comment or text boxes 
noting where the changes are, or noting the changes in correspondence 
or a document. Ultimately, the method that the facility operator uses 
can be anything that identifies all the changes, and is not limited to 
the methods mentioned in this preamble. The purpose of highlighting or 
annotating the amendments is to assist the COTP in understanding what 
changes are being made and to reduce the resources required to examine 
amendments. After the COTP examines the amendments, the facility must 
maintain the Operations Manual with the most recently examined changes, 
but there is no requirement to keep the changes highlighted or 
annotated after they are examined.
Section 154.325 Operations Manual: Procedures for Examination
    This rule removes paragraph (a) of Sec.  154.325, so that the 
facility operator is no longer required to submit two copies of the 
Operations Manual. To align with other changes in part 154, the 
facility operator of a new facility will be able to submit one 
electronic or printed copy of the Operations Manual to the COTP.
    In re-designated paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, this rule 
replaces the previous text, ``any transfer operation'' with, ``the 
first transfer operation'' to make the regulatory text more precise. 
This clarifies that the facility must submit the Operations Manual 
prior to a new facility's first transfer or the first transfer after a 
facility is removed from caretaker status.
    We also amended the process in Sec.  154.325 to require the COTP to 
notify the facility operator when the manual has been examined. Because 
we are allowing electronic submission in this final rule, the COTP will 
no longer send back a marked printed copy of the manual stating it has 
been examined by the Coast Guard. The COTP's notice will restate the 
manual's date, revision date, or other identifying information provided 
by the facility. If the manual does not meet the requirements of 
subchapter O, the COTP will notify the facility with an explanation of 
why the manual does not meet the requirements of that subchapter.
    In paragraph (d) of Sec.  154.325 (previously paragraph (e) of 
Sec.  154.325), this final rule replaces the text ``requirements of 
this chapter'' with ``requirements of this subchapter'' because 
referencing the entire chapter is too broad. The applicable regulations

[[Page 43919]]

are in this subchapter O, which includes 33 CFR parts 151 through 159.

C. Part 156--Oil and Hazardous Material Transfer Operations

Section 156.120 Requirements for Transfer
    Part 156 contains regulations related to oil and hazardous material 
transfer operations. In accordance with other changes made by this 
rule, in paragraph 156.120(t)(2), the PIC must have a copy of the most 
recently examined facility Operations Manual readily available in the 
marine transfer area. For the purpose of this section, ``readily 
available in the marine transfer area'' means that a printed or 
electronic copy of the manual is available for viewing within the 
operating station of the PIC. The PIC is not expected to keep the 
manual in their possession while conducting routine rounds during the 
transfer operation.

D. Technical Revisions Within Part 127 and Part 154

    As proposed in the NPRM, we replace uses of the word ``shall'' with 
``must'' when specifying the actions facility operators are required to 
perform. This helps align the regulations with plain language 
guidelines. Additionally, where the COTP is required to respond to or 
notify a facility, we replace ``the COTP shall'' with ``the COTP will'' 
to state clearly what the COTP will do in certain cases. This helps 
clarify what the facility operators can expect from the COTP and aligns 
the regulations with plain language guidelines. These technical 
revisions do not change the requirements for facility operators or the 
Coast Guard.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and 
Executive orders related to rulemaking. A summary of the analysis based 
on these statutes and 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.
    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated this 
rule a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive 
Order 12866. Accordingly, OMB has not reviewed it. A regulatory 
analysis (RA) follows. The first section of this RA covers the 
alternatives considered, the second covers the affected population, the 
third covers the costs, the fourth covers the cost savings components, 
and the fifth provides a summary of the costs savings.
    As stated previously under our discussion of public comments, we 
received four comments. Three of these comments supported the 
implementation of electronic documentation in the proposed rulemaking 
as well as in other rulemakings. An anonymous fourth commenter stated 
that they would like to see all documents submitted electronically and 
kept in that form until approved by the Coast Guard, but kept in 
printed form after approval.\2\ In response to this, the final rule 
gives the facility operators, at their discretion, the flexibility to 
keep that documentation in either print or electronic form. We believe 
that the facility operators would best be suited to decide which format 
they would prefer, based on the particular circumstances of their 
specific facilities. Forcing facilities to use only printed 
documentation prevents facilities from realizing any cost savings from 
the use of digital documentation. Hence, in this final rule, we allow 
facility operators the choice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The commenter wrote, ``I would recommend that all Manuals 
and others [sic] written material to be submitted electronically 
(including if the written material needs to be amended) until the 
final approval of the Manuals and/or other documents, which then 
could be printed for the required establishments. I also recommend 
keeping a printed version (not electronic) readily available and 
accessible for team members that are carrying out assignments.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are four differences in this RA from the RA in the NPRM that 
have a quantified monetary impact. The first two involve updated 
financial data. The NPRM used the most up-to-date wage data available 
when it was written and what were then current costs to mail documents. 
More up-to-date wage data are now available,\3\ and the costs of 
mailing documents has changed between the time the NPRM was written and 
this final rule. A detailed breakdown of mailing costs, labor handling 
costs associated with mailing those documents, and aggregated shipping 
and handling costs (the combined cost of both) can be found in table 9. 
That table shows mailing costs have changed in a mixed manner, with the 
cost associated with mailing some documents going up and others going 
down. The price of labor associated with mailing documents has 
increased across all document groups, and aggregated shipping and 
handling costs (the combination of both) have increased in four of the 
six document categories. In aggregate, private sector cost savings 
associated with shipping and handling, costs have increased from 
$14,530 in the NPRM to $15,323 in the final rule.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ For example, wage data for the NPRM was taken from the May 
2019 National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage 
Estimates, while for the final rule the data were taken from the May 
2020 National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage 
Estimates. The fully burdened wages of in-scope employees rose from 
$30.28 for LNG/LHG employees and $100.03 for MTR facility employees 
in the NPRM, to $32.19 and $106.82, respectively, in the final rule.
    \4\ See table 2, specifically the aggregate of the rows 
``savings from not having to mail manuals (and amendments) to the 
COTP'' by LNG/LHG facilities and MTR facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The other two differences involve the handling of manuals and 
amendments that the COTP finds to be inadequate. We now estimate that, 
under current regulations, when the COTP finds an Operations Manual or 
Emergency Manual or amendment to be inadequate, the facility operator 
sends two copies of the document back to the COTP instead of the one 
copy originally assumed by the NPRM.\5\ The final difference is that in 
this final rule we estimate that, under current regulations, the COTP 
sends a facility one stamped copy of an Operations Manual or Emergency 
Manual or amendment after it has been modified to remedy an inadequacy 
and been deemed acceptable by the COTP. In the NPRM economic analysis, 
we incorrectly stated that no copies were sent back in such cases, 
when, in fact, the COTP does send back one copy.\6\ We discuss these 
four new in more detail in the cost savings section of this RA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ This change, from one copy to two copies, was made due to 
new information provided by Coast Guard subject matter experts 
(SMEs).
    \6\ This change, from zero copies to one copy, was made due to 
new input from Coast Guard SMEs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Other than these four modifications, there are no substantive 
changes to the requirements and calculations originally proposed in the 
NPRM. We made clarifying edits to the regulatory text, as noted in the 
Discussion of Comments and Changes from the Proposed Rule section of 
this preamble, which do not have any impact on the costs or benefits 
from what we proposed in the NPRM.
    This rule provides administrative paperwork burden relief for 
operators of LNG/LHG and MTR facilities, as the use of electronic 
documentation (as opposed

[[Page 43920]]

to print) for Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals, as well as 
associated amendments, will permit facilities to satisfy regulatory 
requirements at a lower cost. LNG and LHG facilities are required to 
submit Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals and amendments, while 
MTR facilities are required to submit only Operations Manuals and 
amendments.
    Under current regulations, facility operators are required to send 
two printed copies of each manual and set of amendments to the COTP. 
The final rule will permit these documents to be submitted 
electronically, at the discretion of the facility operators. Facility 
operators exercising this option will no longer need to assemble and 
mail printed versions, resulting in administrative cost savings. The 
final rule will also permit facility operators sending their 
documentation in print format to submit only one copy of their 
documents, resulting in further administrative cost savings.
    Additionally, current regulations require those facility operators 
whose documents were not approved by the COTP to resubmit two copies of 
revised documents to the COTP in print format. As stated previously, in 
the NPRM's economic analysis we erroneously estimated that in the 
current regulations the facility only mailed back one revised copy to 
the COTP. This has been corrected in the economic analysis of the final 
rule.\7\ The annual cost associated with the additional manual that 
must be sent by those LNG/LHG and MTR facilities, which includes the 
costs of manufacturing the additional manuals and amendments as well as 
the shipping and handling associated, is $1,056 per year and $10,563.30 
over a 10-year period (in nominal terms). The final rule will permit 
facility operators to resubmit their documents in either electronic or 
print format. Facility operators exercising the option to use an 
electronic format will no longer need to assemble and mail two printed 
versions, while those who decide to instead send printed documentation 
will only need to send one copy instead of two to the COTP. This 
reduction in paper documentation will result in additional 
administrative cost savings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The cost difference between the NPRM and the final rule, 
accounted for by correctly estimating two manuals instead of 
erroneously estimating one, is $1,056.33 per year (and $10,563.30 
over a 10-year period, in nominal terms).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the final rule permits facilities to keep documentation at 
their facility's marine transfer area in either electronic or print 
format. Currently, this documentation must be kept in print format at 
these locations. According to Coast Guard SMEs from the Office of Port 
and Facility Compliance (CG-FAC), the typical facility has, on average, 
two marine transfer areas.\8\ LNG and LHG facilities are required to 
keep one copy of an Operations Manual and one copy of an Emergency 
Manual (and to keep each manual up-to-date with amendments) at each of 
their marine transfer areas. MTR facility operators are required to 
keep one Operations Manual (and amendments) at each marine transfer 
area. Those facility operators that exercise the option to use 
electronic documents instead of print will experience a benefit, in the 
form of a cost savings, resulting from no longer having to assemble 
these printed documents (one copy for each marine transfer area),\9\ as 
well as not having to physically place this documentation at the two 
marine transfer areas.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Based on an SME assessment from CG-FAC. All Coast Guard SME 
input assessments mentioned in this final rule, unless stated 
otherwise, are from CG-FAC.
    \9\ Each marine transfer area is saved one copy. However, as 
each facility has, on average, two marine transfer areas, each 
facility is saved two copies total.
    \10\ These areas are not the same as the administrative offices 
of the facilities; hence, labor time needs to be expended to place 
manuals at the transfer areas after they are assembled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The final rule also results in administrative cost savings to the 
Coast Guard. Currently, when the COTP examines an Operations Manual or 
Emergency Manual and finds it meets the regulatory requirements (or is 
``adequate''), they must return a stamped copy to the facility. Under 
the final rule, the COTP will not return a printed copy of the manual 
via mail. Instead, the COTP will send either a printed or an electronic 
message back to the facility stating that the Coast Guard has examined 
the manual.\11\ As a result, the Coast Guard will experience cost 
savings from not having to handle and mail back to the facility a 
stamped, printed version of the manual when the facility sends 
electronic documentation to the Coast Guard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The Coast Guard envisions sending back an electronic format 
of the manual with an electronically stamped watermark, 
notification, or similar method.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On the other hand, if the COTP finds ``inadequacies'' in the 
submitted manual, meaning the manual does not meet the regulatory 
requirements, the COTP must currently mail back a copy of the manual, 
or provide a notification, with annotations or comments specifying how 
to correct the manual.\12\ Based on the requirements in the final rule, 
the COTP will be allowed to send an electronic or printed message, 
instead of only a notification in written form, explaining why the 
manual does not meet the requirements of the part. The COTP will not be 
obligated to send back any copies of the manual with their explanation 
for why the manual does not meet the requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The word ``inadequacies'' is used on numerous occasions in 
the text of the current regulation. Sections where the word is 
explicitly cited include paragraphs 154.320(a)(1) and 154.320(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, when the COTP receives corrected versions of the 
manual back from facilities, under current regulations, the COTP must 
send back to the facility one printed copy of the document. In the 
economic analysis contained in the NPRM, we had erroneously estimated 
that no printed copies of the corrected manual were sent back to the 
facility when the COTP finds the corrected manual adequate. This is 
corrected in the economic analysis contained in this final rule. As the 
final rule permits the Coast Guard to electronically notify facilities 
regarding whether their manuals are adequate or inadequate the Coast 
Guard will experience a cost savings.
    In table 1, we show a summary of the impacts of the final rule. As 
a result of the previously discussed changes between this RA and the 
NPRM, the projected cost savings to industry and Coast Guard have 
increased from the analysis in the NPRM. The annualized and 10 year 
cost savings to industry, both discounted 7 percent, increased 
approximately 9 percent from the NPRM estimates of $36,307 and $255,007 
to $39,394 and $276,689, respectively. The annualized and 10-year cost 
savings to the Coast Guard, both discounted 7 percent, increased 
approximately 16 percent, from the NPRM estimates of $7,426 and $52,160 
to $8,616 and $60,512, respectively. As a result, the aggregated annual 
and 10-year cost savings for both the private sector and the Coast 
Guard, discounted at 7 percent, increased approximately 10 percent, 
from $43,734 and $307,167 to $48,010 and $337,200, respectively.

[[Page 43921]]



           Table 1--Summary of the Impacts of the Final Rule 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Category                              Summary
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicability.....................  <bullet> Updates 33 CFR parts 127
                                     and 154 to permit regulated
                                     facilities to submit Operations
                                     Manuals and Emergency Manuals and
                                     amendments in electronic or printed
                                     format.
                                    <bullet> Updates 33 CFR parts 127
                                     and 154 to permit regulated
                                     facilities that submit printed
                                     Operations Manuals and Emergency
                                     Manuals and amendments to submit
                                     only one copy in that format.
                                    <bullet> Updates 33 CFR parts 127
                                     and 154 to permit the Coast Guard
                                     to send notices of adequacy or
                                     inadequacy to facilities
                                     electronically.
                                    <bullet> Updates 33 CFR parts 127,
                                     154, and 156 to permit regulated
                                     facilities to store electronic 2 or
                                     printed versions of their
                                     Operations Manuals and Emergency
                                     Manuals and amendments at the
                                     marine transfer areas of their
                                     facilities.
Affected Population (Annually)....  60 facilities that transfer LNG and
                                     LHG and 703 MTR facilities (total
                                     of 763 facilities).3
Cost savings to Industry ($2020,    10-year cost savings: $276,689;
 7% discount rate).                  Annualized: $39,394.
Cost savings to the Coast Guard     10-year cost savings: $60,512;
 ($2020, 7% discount rate).          Annualized: $8,616.
Total Cost Savings ($2020, 7%       10-year cost savings: $337,200;
 discount rate).                     Annualized: $48,010.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 All dollar figures rounded to the closest whole dollar.
2 Electronic versions at the marine transfer areas of facilities will be
  on electronic devices that must comply with applicable electrical
  safety standards. For more details, please see the earlier sections of
  the preamble to this final rule that discuss paragraphs 127.309(a),
  127.1309(a), and 154.320(f).
3 Of the 60 LNG/LHG facilities, we assume 54 will submit their
  documentation in electronic format and 6 in print. Of the 703 MTR
  facilities, 527 are expected to submit their documents in electronic
  format and 176 in print. For a detailed discussion of these estimates
  and calculations, refer to the ``Affected Population'' section of this
  RA.
Note: Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

    A more detailed set of tables comparing the cost savings between 
the NPRM and the final rule is provided below. Table 2 shows a specific 
breakdown by each subset of cost savings between the NPRM and the final 
rule. Table 3 shows the differences between the two, on an aggregated 
basis (for the full 10-year period looking forward after the 
implementation of the rulemaking). Specific details on the derivation 
of the numbers for the final rule are discussed later in the RA under 
the specific section for each cost element.
    As can be seen in table 2, the factor most contributing to the 
private sector aggregate cost savings increase was, for MTR facilities, 
the savings from not having to produce printed manuals (and amendments) 
to mail to the COTP. This one cost savings element, $1,944, accounted 
for approximately 63 percent of the aggregate increase in total private 
sector costs (of $3,088). With respect to total cost savings for both 
the private sector and the government, $4,278, two cost elements 
accounted for the overwhelming majority of the cost increase. Those two 
cost elements were, for MTR facilities, the cost savings from not 
having to produce printed manuals (and amendments) to mail to the COTP 
(accounting for 45 percent of the total increase of $4,278) and, for 
the Coast Guard, the cost savings from not having to mail printed 
manuals (and amendments) back to facilities (accounting for 28 percent 
of the increase).

                          Table 2--Annual Cost Savings of Final Rule and NPRM Compared
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Final rule
             Population                  Cost savings element       annual cost      NPRM cost      Difference
                                                                      savings         savings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LNG/LHG Facilities.................  Savings from not having to             $579            $498             $81
                                      produce printed manuals
                                      (and amendments) to mail
                                      to the COTP.
                                     Savings from not having to              242             234               8
                                      produce printed manuals
                                      (and amendments) for
                                      placement at facility
                                      marine transfer areas.
                                     Savings from not having to            1,011             994              17
                                      mail manuals (and
                                      amendments) to the COTP.
                                     Savings from not having to            1,634           1,605              29
                                      place printed manuals (and
                                      amendments) at facility
                                      marine transfer areas.
    Total Annual LNG/LHG Facility    ...........................           3,466           3,331             135
     Cost Savings.
MTR Facility.......................  Savings from not having to           11,839           9,895           1,944
                                      produce printed manuals
                                      (and amendments) to mail
                                      to the COTP.
                                     Savings from not having to            2,120           2,023              97
                                      produce printed manuals
                                      (and amendments) for
                                      placements at facility
                                      marine transfer areas.
                                     Savings from not having to           14,312          13,536             776
                                      mail manuals (and
                                      amendments) to the COTP.
                                     Savings from not having to            7,658           7,522             136
                                      place printed manuals (and
                                      amendments) at facility
                                      marine transfer areas.
    Total Annual MTR Facility Cost   ...........................          35,929          32,976           2,953
     Savings.

[[Page 43922]]

 
    Total Private Sector Cost        ...........................          39,395          36,307           3,088
     Savings.
Coast Guard........................  Savings from not having to            8,616           7,426           1,190
                                      mail printed manuals (and
                                      amendments) back to
                                      facilities.
    Total Annual Coast Guard Cost    ...........................           8,616           7,426           1,190
     Savings.
    Total Private + Government       ...........................          48,011          43,733           4,278
     Sector.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: All numbers rounded to nearest whole number. Figures may not sum exactly due to rounding.

    Table 3 shows the aggregated nominal and discounted (at 7%) 
differences, as well as cost savings on a discounted annualized rate 
(discounted 7%) by type of facility, for the entire private sector, the 
Coast Guard, and the private sector and Coast Guard combined. Cost 
savings differ between the final rule and NPRM for these aggregated 
figures from approximately 4 percent for LNG/LHG facilities to 9 
percent for MTR facilities to 16 percent for the Coast Guard. For the 
entire private sector the difference is 9 percent, and for the combined 
private and public sectors it is 10 percent.

                          Table 3--Annual Cost Savings of Final Rule and NPRM Compared
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   % Difference
                                                    Final rule         NPRM         Difference      (from NPRM)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LNG/LHG Facilities:
    10-Year Nominal Cost Savings................         $34,652         $33,309          $1,343               4
    10-Year Cost Savings Discounted (7%)........          24,338          23,394             944               4
    Annualized Cost Savings (Discounted at 7%)..           3,465           3,331             134               4
MTR Facilities:
    10-Year Nominal Cost Savings................         359,290         329,764          29,526               9
    10-Year Cost Savings Discounted (7%)........         252,350         231,612          20,738               9
    Annualized Cost Savings (Discounted at 7%)..          35,929          32,976           2,953               9
Total Private Sector:
    10-Year Nominal Cost Savings................         393,942         363,073          30,869               9
    10-Year Cost Savings Discounted (7%)........         276,689         255,007          21,682               9
    Annualized Cost Savings (Discounted at 7%)..          39,394          36,307           3,087               9
Coast Guard:
    10-Year Nominal Cost Savings................          86,155          74,264          11,891              16
    10-Year Cost Savings Discounted (7%)........          60,512          52,160           8,352              16
    Annualized Cost Savings (Discounted at 7%)..           8,616           7,426           1,190              16
Total Private Sector + Government Sector:
    10-Year Nominal Cost Savings................         480,097         437,337          42,760              10
    10-Year Cost Savings Discounted (7%)........         337,200         307,167          30,033              10
    Annualized Cost Savings (Discounted at 7%)..          48,010          43,734           4,276              10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: All numbers and percentages rounded to nearest whole number or percentage. Figures may not sum exactly due
  to rounding.

Alternatives Considered
    We considered three alternatives. The first is a continuation of 
current regulations (no change). The second is a modification to the 
current regulations that would require all regulated facilities to 
submit their required Operations Manuals, Emergency Manuals, and 
amendments electronically. The third is giving regulated facilities 
flexibility to submit documentation in either electronic or printed 
format. We discuss each alternative in more detail in the following 
sections.
Alternative 1--No Change
    This alternative would require regulated facility operators to 
continue to submit two printed copies of the Operations Manuals and 
Emergency Manuals, and the COTP to continue to examine these manuals 
and return them by mail. This alternative would also require facility 
operators to maintain the manuals in a printed format near the marine 
transfer areas of their facilities. This alternative would not result 
in any cost savings to either industry or the Coast Guard. Therefore, 
we rejected alternative 1.
Alternative 2--All Electronic Format Submissions
    This alternative would amend regulations to require regulated 
facility operators to submit only electronic copies of the Operations 
Manuals and Emergency Manuals, and the COTP to examine these manuals 
(and amendments) and return them only through email or other electronic 
means. Facility operators would not be permitted the option of 
submitting printed documents. Facilities would have the discretion to 
keep Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals in either printed or 
electronic format at their marine transfer areas.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Electronic versions at the marine transfer areas of 
facilities will be on electronic devices that must comply with 
applicable electrical safety standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Facility operators may experience cost savings greater than 
projected under alternative 1 or the alternative chosen in this final 
rule (alternative 3) because they would be required to submit their 
documentation electronically and to maintain electronic copies of all 
their manuals in the marine transfer areas. Savings from this 
alternative would

[[Page 43923]]

result from the facilities not having to assemble and mail printed 
documentation to the COTP. Cost savings would also result from 
facilities no longer needing to assemble and physically place printed 
documentation for the marine transfer areas. Alternative 2 would result 
in greater cost savings related to printing and mailing than 
alternative 1, as all regulated facilities would submit documents 
electronically.
    However, alternative 2 also has the highest potential cost 
associated with its implementation. This is because a number of 
facilities may not currently have the required information technology 
(IT) infrastructure to permit the use of electronic documentation at 
their marine transfer areas. For those facilities without the pre-
existing IT infrastructure, building the infrastructure could prove 
expensive compared to the cost savings from reducing the amount of 
printed manuals and amendments. Factors affecting the building of such 
IT infrastructure (not all inclusively) include the following:
    <bullet> The size of the facility;
    <bullet> How many marine transfer areas there are (each area must 
have an Operations Manual, and transfer areas in LNG and LHG facilities 
must also have an Emergency Manual);
    <bullet> The number and type of products transferred at the 
facility;
    <bullet> The types of transfer operations occurring at the 
facility; and
    <bullet> Any pre-existing infrastructure that can already 
facilitate accessing and using electronic documentation (such as ``Wi-
Fi'' or hardwired broadband connections).
    Based on these factors, for some facilities the total costs 
required to access electronic documents could exceed the cost savings 
from switching to electronic documentation. In addition, these IT costs 
could disproportionately affect facilities that are relatively small in 
terms of revenue. We believe that imposing these additional costs on 
such small entities would be financially burdensome; therefore, we 
rejected alternative 2.
Alternative 3--Option To Use Either Printed or Electronic Manuals
    Alternative 3 is the selected alternative for this rulemaking. This 
alternative explicitly states that facility operators may submit the 
required Operations Manuals, Emergency Manuals, and amendments either 
in print or electronic format. In addition, if submitting the required 
documents in print, only one copy is required. In this alternative, 
facilities facing higher IT improvement costs could continue to use 
printed manuals and submissions. Hence, this alternative will lead to 
the highest net cost savings of the three alternatives.
    For these reasons, alternative 3 is the preferred alternative. We 
provide a discussion of this alternative below.
Affected Population
    We identified 121 LNG and LHG facilities that could be potentially 
impacted by this regulation, based on a search of the Coast Guard's 
Marine Information for Safety and Law Enforcement (MISLE) database.\14\ 
We also identified 2,497 MTR facilities that could be potentially 
impacted. A discussion follows describing how the impacted population 
itself was reached.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The search of MISLE was conducted on November 18, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    LNG and LHG facilities transfer liquefied natural gas and liquefied 
hazardous gas from vessels to the shore or from the shore to vessels. 
MTR facilities transfer oil or hazardous material in bulk from vessels 
to the shore or from the shore to vessels. Operations Manuals provide 
information relating to LNG, LHG, and MTR facilities, such as physical 
characteristics (including plans and maps), descriptions of transfer 
systems and mooring areas, and diagrams of piping, electrical systems, 
control rooms, and security systems.\15\ Emergency Manuals include 
information relating to, among other items, emergency shutdown 
procedures, descriptions of and operating procedures for fire and other 
emergency equipment, first-aid procedures and stations, and emergency 
response procedures.\16\ Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals vary 
in terms of size, anywhere from 0.5-inch, three-ring binders containing 
50 pages, to 3-inch, three-ring binders.\17\ We have estimated the 3-
inch, three-ring binders to be an average of 514 pages in length.\18\ 
The 0.5-inch manuals are the most common size, accounting for the 
majority of manuals.\19\ Therefore, in our cost savings estimate, we 
assumed that all manuals are 0.5-inch, three-ring binders of 50 pages.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ A full list of what Operations Manuals need to cover for 
LNG and LHG facilities is in 33 CFR 127.305 and 127.1305, and for 
MTR facilities in 33 CFR 154.310.
    \16\ The full list of items that Emergency Manuals need to cover 
for LNG facilities can be found in 33 CFR 127.307, and for LHG 
facilities in 33 CFR 127.1307.
    \17\ This information was obtained from Coast Guard SMEs in CG-
FAC.
    \18\ The estimate of 514 was based on the maximum size capacity 
of five 3-inch three-ring binders found at five office supply stores 
on the internet. The mean capacity of these five binders was 
calculated by CG-FAC to come to 514 pages. The five stores included 
the following: (1) Office Depot (https://www.officedepot.com/a/products/502062/Wilson-Jones-Binder-3-Rings-36percent/); (2) Staples 
(https://www.staples.com/Simply-3-Inch-Round-3-Ring-Binder-Black-26857/product_1319200, accessed November 5, 2019, 460 pages); (3) 
Walmart (https://www.walmart.com/ip/Universal-Economy-Round-Ring-View-Binder-3-Capacity-Black-UNV20991/21454956); (4) Target (https://www.target.com/p/avery-3-34-one-touch-slant-rings-600-sheet-capacity-heavy-duty-view-binder-white/-/A-14432722); and (5) Amazon 
(https://www.amazon.com/Wilson-Jones-Binder-Basic-W362-49W/dp/B0001N9WM8/ref=sr_1_5?keywords=3+ring+3+inch+binder&qid=1573433167&sr=8-5, 
accessed on November 5, 2019, 550 pages).
    \19\ This information was obtained from Coast Guard SMEs in CG-
FAC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Amendments to both Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals are 
intended to keep those manuals up to date.\20\ Their length depends on 
the information required to be updated. If the information is 
significant, these amendments may be as long as the original document 
submitted to the COTP. If the change is relatively minor, the 
amendments may only be a few pages. If the amendments are only a few 
pages, they are submitted to the COTP as individual pages. The COTP 
then examines those pages and, after determining their adequacy, 
inserts them into the previous edition of the Operations Manual or 
Emergency Manual.\21\ If the facility sends the amendment in electronic 
form, the new pages that supersede the old can be inserted into the 
electronic document that the COTP has (much the same way that pages can 
be inserted into PDF documents). On the other hand, if the amendment is 
sent in paper format and the COTP deems it ``adequate,'' the COTP can 
insert new pages into the previous edition of the manual to replace the 
pages that were originally deemed ``inadequate.'' Coast Guard SMEs 
estimated that 80 percent of amendments to Operations Manuals and 
Emergency Manuals consist of 5-page inserts, while 20 percent consist 
of documents that are as long as full-length Operations Manuals or 
Emergency Manuals. In our cost savings estimate, we assumed that all 
amendments would be five pages.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ A complete list of items that must be kept current can be 
found in 33 CFR 127.1305 for LHG facilities Operations Manuals. For 
LNG facilities, the complete list can be found in 33 CFR 127.305 for 
Operations Manuals, and in 33 CFR 127.307 for Emergency Manuals. For 
MTR facilities, 33 CFR 154.300(b) and 154.300(b)(1) state, ``the 
facility operator shall maintain the operations manual so that it is 
. . . current.''
    \21\ The original pages that the newly submitted pages replace, 
assuming the document was in paper format, are disposed of by the 
COTP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We examined MISLE data between 2009 and 2019 (inclusively) to 
determine that an annual average of 60

[[Page 43924]]

instances \22\ of Emergency Manuals, Operations Manuals, and amendments 
are filed by LNG and LHG facilities per year, representing an average 
of 18 instances for manuals and 42 for amendments.\23\ These numbers 
differ from the numbers shown in appendices A and B in the Collection 
of Information Under Review by the Office of Management and Budget; OMB 
Control Number: 1625-0049.\24\ That information collected, titled 
``Waterfront Facilities Handling Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) and 
Liquefied Hazardous Gas (LHG),'' shows 8 instances of manuals and 14 
instances of amendments, for a total of 22 instances of manuals and 
amendments filed.\25\ This difference (60 versus 22) is attributable to 
the fact that the MISLE data for the collection of information and this 
RA were pulled on different dates. We performed the MISLE pull for this 
RA on November 18, 2019, while the MISLE pull for the collection of 
information occurred prior to its date of publication, August 30, 2019. 
As a result, the total LNG and LHG facility populations, as well as the 
individual manual and amendment numbers, were different. The collection 
of information found a combined LNG and LHG population of 108, while we 
found 121. Hence, this RA projects larger numbers of manuals and 
amendments than did the collection of information.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ An instance is when a document is filed. It does not 
necessarily correspond to the number of copies of manuals filed. The 
reason we use instances instead of the number of copies filed is 
that instances serve as a better basis to estimate the number of 
copies of documents required by different scenarios later in this 
RA. For example, under current regulations two copies of each type 
of document must be filed in printed format, but under this final 
rule facility operators will have the option to submit only one copy 
if they submit in printed format, or zero if they submit in 
electronic format.
    \23\ This number is rounded to the nearest whole number, as are 
all population numbers provided below.
    \24\ This Collection of Information was published in the Federal 
Register at 84 FR 45783 on August 30, 2019.
    \25\ In the collection of information, there were instances of 6 
manuals and 12 amendments filed for LHG facilities and instances of 
2 manuals and 2 amendments for LNG facilities, for a total of 8 
instances of manuals and 14 instances of amendments and a total of 
22 documents overall.
    \26\ The reason for the difference between the number of 
facilities in Collection of Information Under Review by Office of 
Management and Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625-0049 and that 
calculated in this rulemaking (22 versus 60) rests with the 
differing methods the numbers of manuals and amendments were 
estimated between the collection of information and the rulemaking. 
In the collection of information, the number of amendments was 
estimated to grow at an annual rate of 3 percent of the rate of 
facilities and the number of amendments was estimated to grow at 6 
percent the rate of facilities. In the rulemaking, the number of 
amendments and manuals was based on the actual number that was in 
the MISLE database. Once the final rule is published, the Coast 
Guard plans to synchronize the method used to estimate the number of 
amendments and manuals for the collection of information with that 
used in the rulemaking (i.e., the 3 percent and 6 percent growth 
rates will be replaced with data from the MISLE database).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Coast Guard SMEs estimated that 90 percent of LNG/LHG facilities 
will submit their documentation to the Coast Guard electronically. 
Thus, of the annual impacted population of 60 LNG/LHG facilities, we 
estimate the affected annual population of LNG/LHG facilities to be 54 
per year submitting their documentation in electronic form, with the 
remaining 10 percent, or 6 facilities, submitting their documentation 
in print form.
    The MISLE pull for this RA found the average number of instances of 
Operations Manuals and amendments filed by MTR facilities for the same 
period (2009-2019) to be 703.\27\ MTR facilities are only required to 
file Operations Manuals and amendments, not Emergency Manuals and 
amendments. Of those 703 instances of manuals and amendments, there 
were an average of 261 instances of manuals and 442 amendments 
annually. Assuming each submission is for a unique facility (for an 
annually impacted MTR population of 703), and since Coast Guard SMEs in 
CG-FAC estimated that 75 percent of MTR facilities will submit their 
documentation in an electronic format, we estimated a regulated 
population of 527 MTR facilities electing electronic submission 
annually, with 25 percent of MTR facilities, or another 176 
facilities,\28\ projected to submit their documentation in print form 
annually.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ We conducted this search of MISLE on November 18, 2019.
    \28\ This number is rounded up to the closest whole number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number of annually impacted facilities, by LNG/LHG and MTR 
facility, as well as the number of different types of manuals and 
amendments by facility type, is summarized in table 4.

                                                  Table 4--Affected Population and Number of Instances of Manuals and Amendments Filed Annually
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                       Total                                           Total
                                                                       Total                           Total       instances of                        Total       instances of        Total
                                                       Total       instances of        Total       instances of   operations and       Total       instances of   operations and   instances of
                                                   instances of   operations and   instances of   operations and     emergency     instances of   operations and     emergency        manual
                  Facility type                   operations and     emergency       documents       emergency        manual       manuals filed     emergency        manual        amendments
                                                     emergency        manual           filed       manuals filed    amendments    electronically   manuals filed    amendments    filed in print
                                                   manuals filed    amendments                    electronically       filed                       in print form  filed in print       form
                                                                       filed                                      electronically                                       form
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LNG/LHG.........................................              18              42              60              16              38              54               2               4               6
MTR.............................................             261             442             703             196             332             527              65             111             176
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: all ``total'' numbers rounded to the closest whole number

Cost Savings Components

    Tables 5 and 6 summarize the final rule's cost savings for the 
private sector and for the Coast Guard. Table 5 provides the private 
sector's cost savings for the pertinent maritime facilities of the 
affected population (LNG/LHG and MTR facilities) as well as by the four 
different cost savings categories estimated. Table 6 summarizes the 
Coast Guard's cost savings.

     Table 5--Annual Cost Savings of Final Rule to Private Sector by
                   Population and Cost Savings Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Annual cost
           Population              Cost savings element       savings
                                                            ($2020) \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LNG/LHG Facilities.............  Savings from not having        \3\ $579
                                  to produce printed
                                  manuals (and
                                  amendments) to mail to
                                  the COTP.\2\

[[Page 43925]]

 
                                 Savings from not having         \5\ 242
                                  to produce printed
                                  manuals (and
                                  amendments) for
                                  placement at facility
                                  marine transfer
                                  areas.\4\
                                 Savings from not having       \6\ 1,011
                                  to mail manuals (and
                                  amendments) to the
                                  COTP.
                                 Savings from not having       \7\ 1,634
                                  to place printed
                                  manuals (and
                                  amendments) at
                                  facility marine
                                  transfer areas.
                                ----------------------------------------
    Total Annual LNG/LHG         .......................         8 3,466
     Facility Cost Savings.
MTR Facilities.................  Savings from not having     \10\ 11,839
                                  to produce printed
                                  manuals (and
                                  amendments) to mail to
                                  the COTP.\9\
                                 Savings from not having      \12\ 2,120
                                  to produce printed
                                  manuals (and
                                  amendments) for
                                  placements at facility
                                  marine transfer
                                  areas.\11\
                                 Savings from not having     \13\ 14,312
                                  to mail manuals (and
                                  amendments) to the
                                  COTP.
                                 Savings from not having      \14\ 7,658
                                  to place printed
                                  manuals (and
                                  amendments) at
                                  facility marine
                                  transfer areas.
                                                         ---------------
    Total Annual MTR Facility    .......................     \15\ 35,929
     Cost Savings.
                                                         ---------------
        Total..................  .......................     \16\ 39,395
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Rounded to closest whole dollar.
\2\ Includes cost of binder, paper, printing and labor required to
  assemble.
\3\ From table 10.
\4\ Includes cost of binder, paper, printing and labor required to
  assemble. It is also assumed that each facility, as per Coast Guard
  SME assessment, has an average of two marine transfer areas.
\5\ From table 14.
\6\ From table 12.
\7\ From table 16.
\8\ Total figure may not be exact due to rounding.
\9\ Includes cost of binder, paper, printing, and labor required to
  assemble.
\10\ From table 11.
\11\ Includes cost of binder, paper, printing and labor required to
  assemble. It is also assumed that each facility, as per Coast Guard
  SME assessment, has an average of two marine transfer areas.
\12\ From table 15.
\13\ From table 13.
\14\ From table 17.
\15\ Total figure may not be exact due to rounding.
\16\ Total figure may not be exact due to rounding.


        Table 6--Annual Cost Savings of Final Rule to Coast Guard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Annual cost
           Population              Administrative cost        savings
                                     savings element        ($2020) \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coast Guard....................  Savings from not having      \2\ $8,616
                                  to mail printed
                                  manuals (and
                                  amendments) back to
                                  facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Rounded to closest whole dollar.
\2\ From table 2.

Cost Savings Methodology, Calculations, and Estimates
    We separated the analysis of cost savings for this rulemaking into 
three sections. The first examines the cost savings for the private 
sector. The second discusses the cost savings for the Coast Guard. The 
third provides an aggregated summary of the cost savings as well as the 
estimates on a discounted basis.
Private Sector Cost Savings
    We separated cost savings for the private sector into two 
categories. The first involves the cost savings associated with 
facility operators having the option to submit Operations Manuals and 
Emergency Manuals (and amendments) in electronic format. The second 
involves the option to place electronic versions of their Operations 
Manuals and Emergency Manuals (and amendments) at their marine transfer 
areas.
Cost Savings From the Reduced Numbers of Operations Manuals and 
Emergency Manuals (and Amendments) Sent to the Coast Guard
    LNG and LHG facility operators are currently required to submit two 
copies of their Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals and amendments 
to the COTP.\29\ Generally, they are not sent at the same time.\30\ MTR 
facility operators are currently required to submit two copies of their 
Operations
Manuals and amendments.\31\ Although current regulations do not 
explicitly state that the copies submitted must be printed, the wording 
and context suggest the use of printed documents,

[[Page 43926]]

and current industry practice is to submit printed documents.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 33 CFR 127.019(a) and (b).
    \30\ As these documents are usually written by different 
personnel and do not need to be received simultaneously, they are 
generally not sent together.
    \31\ 33 CFR 154.300(a).
    \32\ The current regulation regarding the two-copy requirement 
was issued in 1988 for LNG and LHG facilities (53 FR 3370, Feb. 5, 
1988), and in 1996 for MTR facilities (61 FR 41452, Aug. 8, 1996). 
At that time, it was not possible to electronically send a document 
as large and complicated as a complete Operations Manual or 
Emergency Manual as an attachment via email or other electronic 
means
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The cost savings components that make up the 0.5-inch binders 
consist of the actual cost of the empty 0.5-inch, 3-ring binder, the 
cost of 50 pages of paper, the cost of printing those 50 pages, and the 
labor required to put the manual together. The cost of all these 
elements, with the notable exception of labor, is the same whether the 
manual is for an LNG or LHG facility or an MTR facility. In the NPRM, 
we estimated that the cost of the empty 0.5-inch binders in 2019 
dollars is $3.66, based on the mean for 0.5-inch binders from 5 
different websites selling this item.\33\ Converting to 2020 dollars, 
using the seasonally adjusted Consumer Price Index for All Urban 
Consumers, the figure is $3.71.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ The five different websites were: (1) Office Depot (https://www.officedepot.com/a/products/765530/Aurora-EarthView-Round-Ring-Organization-Binder/) ($5.99), (2) Staples (https://www.staples.com/Simply-5-inch-Light-Use-Round-3-Ring-Binder-Red-26852/product_1337664) ($3.29), (3) Walmart (https://www.walmart.com/ip/Pen-Gear-0-5-inch-Durable-Binder-Clearview-Cover-White/945565181) 
($2.47), (4) Target (https://www.target.com/p/avery-120-sheet-0-5-34-durable-view-ring-binder-black/-/A-16978071) ($2.59), and (5) 
Amazon (https://www.amazon.com/Avery-Economy-Binder-0-5-Inch-Round/dp/B0006SWEEG/ref=sr_1_6?qid=1583117388&refinements=p_n_feature_keywords_two_browse-bin%3A7103303011&s=office-products&sr=1-6) ($4.60). The mean of all 
these figures is $3.66. All websites cited were accessed on Nov. 10, 
2019.
    \34\ The specific series used was CUSR0000SA0 (seasonally 
adjusted), downloaded from the BLS's Consumer Price Index seasonally 
adjusted tables (https://www.bls.gov/cpi/tables/seasonal-adjustment/home.htm, accessed July 6, 2021), specifically from the link 
associated with ``Revised seasonally adjusted indexes and factors, 
2016-2029.'' From the downloaded Excel sheet, the mean index for 
2020 was calculated at 258.8441 and for 2019 at 255.6525. Using 
these two figures as the basis to estimate an price multiplier, we 
derive (258.8441/255.6525 = 1.013). Multiplying the 2019 dollar 
terms $3.66 by 1.013, the figure in 2020 dollar terms is derived 
($2.66 x 1.013 = $3.708, rounded to $3.71).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the NPRM, we estimated the cost of 50 sheets of copier paper to 
be 62.5 cents, based on the mean for boxes of 500 pages from 5 
different supply stores.\35\ Converting to 2020 dollars, we obtain 
$0.63.\36\ In the NPRM, we found the cost to print 50 pages in black 
and white to be $2.23.\37\ Converting to 2020 terms, the figure is 
$2.26.\38\ Combining the 2020 dollar terms, the sum is $6.60.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ The websites were: (1) Office Depot (https://www.officedepot.com/a/products/841195/Office-Depot-Copy-And-Print-Paper/) ($8.29), (2) Staples (https://www.staples.com/500+ream+paper/directory_500%20ream%20paper?sby=1) ($5.79), (3) 
Walmart (https://www.walmart.com/ip/Pen-Gear-Copy-Paper-8-5x11-92-Bright-20-lb-1-ream-500-Sheets/487634010) ($3.97), (4) Amazon 
(https://www.amazon.com/Hammermill-Recycled-Printer-Letter-086790R/dp/B009ZMP31K/ref=sr_1_6?keywords=500+ream+paper&qid=1573437715&sr=8-6) ($9.20), 
and (5) Target (https://www.target.com/p/avery-120-sheet-0-5-34-durable-view-ring-binder-black/-/A-16978071) ($3.99). The mean of 
these five figures is $6.25. Dividing $6.25 by 500 pages results in 
a figure of .0125 cents per page. That amount multiplied by 50 pages 
gives us a cost of 62.5 cents.
    \36\ $0.625 x 1.013 = $0.633, rounded to $0.63.
    \37\ This cost is found in ``Ink-onomics: Can you Save Money by 
Spending More on Your Printer,'' PCWorld, May 2, 2012 (https://www.pcworld.com/article/254899/ink_onomics_can_you_save_money_by_spending_more_on_your_printer_.html
) was found to be 3.9 cents per page for printers costing over $200. 
This May 2012 dollar figure was converted to $2019 using the Bureau 
of Economic Analysis, National Income and Product Accounts, Table 
1.1.4 Price Indexes for Gross Domestic Product, Annual Series, last 
revised on April 29, 2020 (https://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTableHtml.cfm?reqid=19&step=3&isuri=1&1910=x&0=-99&1921=survey&1903=4&1904=2009&1905=2018&1906=a&1911=0) as a gross 
domestic product. This calculation can be accessed by the ``modify'' 
button on the right, choosing ``annual'' series, and then ``refresh 
table.'' The GDP deflator for 2012 was 100, and for 2019, 112.348. 
Hence, 3.9 cents was increased by 12.348 percent to yield a figure 
of 4.45 cents (rounded to closest whole cent). Multiplying this 
figure by 50 (for the number of pages) yields, in turn, $2.23 for 50 
pages (rounded to closest whole cent).
    \38\ $2.23 x 1.013 = $2.258, rounded to $2.26.
    \39\ $3.71 + $0.63 + $2.26 = $6.60.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As the labor costs between LNG/LHG and MTR facilities are 
different, the labor component of assembling these manuals also differ. 
According to Coast Guard SMEs, as well as the collection of 
information, OMB Control Number 1625-0049, ``Waterfront Facilities 
Handling Liquefied Natural Gas and Liquefied Hazardous Gas,'' clerical 
workers assemble manuals at LNG and LHG facilities. The BLS website has 
no specific labor category for clerical workers under North American 
Industry Classification System (NAICS) industry 483000 (Water 
Transportation). The closest we were able to find was ``Office Clerks, 
General'' (Occupational Code 43-9061).\40\ The BLS gave the mean hourly 
wage for this category of labor as $21.32.\41\ As wages account for 
only a portion of total employee costs (employee benefits account for 
the other part), we adjusted wages to take benefits into account. Using 
the BLS U.S. Department of Labor News Release for March 18, 2021 (USDL-
21-0437), benefits for employees in the ``Production, Transportation 
and Material Moving'' sector of the economy, private sector, accounted 
for $10.92 per hour, or 51 percent of wages.\42\ Thus, we estimated the 
fully burdened or loaded wage rate, at $32.19 per hour for LNG/LHG 
facilities.\43\ In the NPRM, we estimated the fully burdened wage rate 
at $30.28, a difference of $1.91.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ ``May 2020 National Industry-Specific Occupational 
Employment and Wage Estimates, NAICS 483000-Water Transportation,'' 
(https://www.bls.gov/oes/2020/May/naics3_483000.htm), downloaded 
April 16, 2021.
    \41\ Ibid.
    \42\ Bureau of Labor Statistics Employer Costs for Employee 
Compensation news release (USDL-21-0437), March 18, 2021 (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf), table 5, page 9, referenced 
April 18, 2021. According to this document, for the ``production, 
transportation and material moving'' industry, benefits were $10.92 
per hour while wages were $21.36 (for a ratio of benefits to wages 
of 51 percent).
    \43\ $21.32 plus ($21.32 multiplied by 51%) equals $32.19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to Coast Guard SMEs, as well as the latest collection of 
information, OMB Control Number 1625-0093, ``Facilities Transferring 
Oil and Hazardous Material in Bulk--Letter of Intent and Operations 
Manual,'' MTR facilities use general and operations managers to 
assemble Operations Manuals. The BLS website, under NAICS industry 
483000 (Water Transportation), reports an hourly mean wage of $70.65 
for general and operations managers (Occupational Code 11-1021).\44\ As 
stated previously, according to the BLS, employees in the ``Production, 
Transportation and Material Moving'' sector of the economy, private 
sector, have benefits corresponding to 51 percent of wages in that 
industry.\45\ Hence, the loaded wage rate for general and operations 
managers is $106.82 per hour.\46\ In the NPRM, we estimated the fully 
burdened wage rate at $100.03, a difference of $6.79.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ ``May 2020 National Industry-Specific Occupational 
Employment and Wage Estimates, NAICS 483000-Water Transportation,'' 
(https://www.bls.gov/oes/2020/May/naics3_483000.htm), downloaded 
April 16, 2021.
    \45\ Bureau of Labor Statistics Employer Costs for Employee 
Compensation news release (USDL-21-0437), March 18, 2021 (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf), table 5, page 9, referenced 
April 18, 2021. According to this document, for the ``production, 
transportation and material moving'' industry, benefits were $10.92 
per hour while wages were $21.36 (for a ratio of benefits to wages 
of 51 percent). $21.32 plus ($21.32 multiplied by 51%) equals 
$32.19.
    \46\ $70.65 plus ($70.65 multiplied by 51% equals $106.82.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the assembly of a 0.5-inch, 50-page manual, we 
performed the task ourselves and found that it took an average of 5.12 
minutes (or 0.09 hours).\47\ As a result, the labor cost of assembling 
a manual for an LNG or LHG facility came to $2.90.\48\ For an MTR

[[Page 43927]]

facility, the cost came to $9.61.\49\ Thus, for an LNG or LHG facility, 
we estimated the total cost of assembling a 0.5-inch binder for an 
Operations Manual or Emergency Manual to be $9.50.\50\ These are the 
costs associated with producing one copy of an Operations Manual or an 
Emergency Manual (we estimated that they cost the same to assemble). 
For an MTR facility Operations Manual, we estimated the total cost to 
assemble to be $16.21.\51\ All binder assembly costs are shown in table 
7. In the NPRM, in contrast, we estimated the cost to assemble an LNG/
LHG binder at $9.25 and the cost to assemble the MTR facility binder at 
$15.52.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ This time estimate is based on the average amount of time 
the Coast Guard consumed to print 50 pages and assemble them in a 
0.5-inch 3-ring binder.
    \48\ 0.09 hours multiplied by $32.19 equals $2.90.
    \49\ 0.09 hours multiplied by $106.82 equals $9.61.
    \50\ $3.71 (cost of binder) + $0.63 (cost of blank paper) + 
$2.26 (printing cost) + $2.90 (labor cost of assembly) = $9.50.
    \51\ $3.71 (cost of binder) + $0.63 (cost of blank paper) + 
$2.26 (printing cost) + $9.61 (labor cost of assembly) = $16.21.
    \52\ These numbers can be found in table 5 of the NPRM.

                    Table 7--Cost To Assemble 0.5-Inch Binders for LNG/LHG and MTR Facilities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         0.5-Inch binder assembly costs
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Binder       Print       Printing      Labor        Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LNG/LHG........................................        $3.71        $0.63        $2.26        $2.90        $9.50
MTR............................................         3.71         0.63         2.26         9.61        16.21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As amendments to both Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals are 
usually 5 pages, in the NPRM we estimated the cost of paper to total 
$0.06 \53\ and the cost of printing to total $0.22.\54\ Due to 
rounding, those figures do not change when expressed in 2020 dollar 
terms.\55\ The estimated total cost of amendments, other than labor and 
shipping, is $0.28 per amendment. These costs are the same regardless 
of whether the amendment is for an LNG or LHG facility or an MTR 
facility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ The mean cost of a 500-page ream of paper based on 5 prices 
at different retailers was found to be $6.25. Dividing $6.25 by 500 
yields a per-sheet price of 1.25 cents per page. Multiplying 1.25 by 
5 yields 6.25 cents, which is rounded down to 6 cents.
    \54\ From table 6 in the NPRM.
    \55\ $0.06 x 1.013 = $0.06078, rounded to $0.06. $0.22 x 1.013 = 
$0.2228, rounded to $0.22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Due to the difference in labor costs between LNG/LHG facilities and 
MTR facilities, the labor costs for assembling amendments differs for 
facilities of different types. As stated previously, we found the labor 
cost to be $70.65 per hour for LNG/LHG facilities and $106.82 for MTR 
facilities. We found that printing 5 pages and assembling them for 
mailing took 1.25 minutes (0.02 hours). Hence, we estimated the labor 
costs for LNG/LHG facilities at $1.41 and for MTR facilities at 
$2.14.<SUP>56 57</SUP> The total cost of creating a 5-page amendment 
for an LNG/LHG facility is $1.69 per document and for MTR facility is 
$2.42. <SUP>58 59</SUP> These costs are detailed in table 8. In the 
NPRM, we estimated the associated costs at $1.60 and $2.28.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ $70.65 multiplied by 0.02 equals $1.41.
    \57\ $106.82 multiplied by 0.02 equals $2.14.
    \58\ $0.06 (cost of paper) plus $0.22 (cost to print pages) plus 
$1.41 (labor cost to assemble) equals $1.69.
    \59\ $0.06 (cost of paper) plus $0.22 (cost to print pages) plus 
$2.00 (labor cost to assemble) equals $2.42.
    \60\ From table 6 in the NPRM.

                   Table 8--Cost To Assemble 5-Page Amendments for LNG/LHG and MTR Facilities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         5-Page amendment assembly costs
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Facility type                        Paper         Printing          Labor           Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LNG/LHG.........................................           $0.06           $0.22           $1.41           $1.69
MTR.............................................            0.06            0.22            2.14            2.42
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the cost of assembling each manual and amendment, we 
also considered shipping and handling costs. We calculated shipping and 
handling costs for both scenarios because, currently, there are 
situations when only one copy of a document needs to be mailed and 
other situations when two are needed.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ For example, currently, when documents are initially 
submitted to the Coast Guard, two copies of each are currently 
required to be sent, but when documents are required to be re-
submitted to the Coast Guard to correct inadequacies, only one copy 
of a document needs to be sent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because it is a legal requirement for these facilities to send 
their documents to the COTP, we assumed that the manuals and amendments 
are sent with a mail service that permits tracking. We also assumed 
that facilities use a cost-effective ground shipping method.\62\ As of 
June 7, 2021, there were 41 COTP zones.\63\ All of these sites are 
clustered around shipping points in order to ensure COTPs can perform 
their functions. Hence, no facility should be very far, geographically, 
from a shipping point. We assumed that the manuals and amendments are 
sent via a shipping service such as UPS or FedEx. We assumed shipping 
distances to correspond to zone 2 distances in the UPS and FedEx 
pricing guides, as this is the closest shipping distance price 
point.\64\ Current regulations require that two copies be submitted to 
the COTP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ The exact amount of time depends on the relevant applicable 
section of the regulations: 33 CFR 127.019(b) and 145.325(c) give 
facilities a time period of 30 days to file, 33 CFR 145.320(a)(1) 
and 145.320(b)(1) give facilities 45 days to file, and 33 CFR 
145.325(b) gives facilities 60 days to file.
    \63\ ArcGIS has a website listing the full set of 41 zones 
(https://hub.arcgis.com/datasets/geoplatform::us-coast-guard-uscg-captain-of-the-port-zones/explore?showTable=true, downloaded July 6, 
2021).
    \64\ The UPS pricing guide used was ``2020 UPS Rate and Service 
Guide, Daily Rates, updated October 5, 2020'' (https://www.ups.com/assets/resources/media/daily_rates.pdf, downloaded July 8, 2021); 
the FedEx price guide was ``Federal Express Service Guide, January 
6, 2020, updated September 28, 2020'' (https://www.fedex.com/content/dam/fedex/us-united-states/services/Service_Guide_2020.pdf, 
downloaded July 7, 2021).

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

[[Page 43928]]

Therefore, we calculated the shipping cost for two 0.5-inch 
binders.\65\ The two 0.5-inch binders with 50 pages each have a total 
estimated weight of 2.8 pounds, for a total of 5.6 pounds for a package 
of two. Based on a 6-pound package, the average cost for these shipping 
services was $10.19.\66\ In the NPRM, we estimated the cost at 
$10.11.\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \65\ We estimated the weight of an empty 0.5-inch binder at 13 
ounces, based on the mean weight of the same 5 binders used to 
determine the mean cost of 0.5-inch binders. For the web pages for 
those binders, where weight data was available, the mean was 
estimated. The web pages were as follows: (1) https://www.officedepot.com/a/products/765530/Aurora-EarthView-Round-Ring-Organization-Binder/; (2) https://www.staples.com/Simply-5-inch-Light-Use-Round-3-Ring-Binder-Red-26852/product_1337664; (3) https://www.walmart.com/ip/Pen-Gear-0-5-inch-Durable-Binder-Clearview-Cover-White/945565181; (4) https://www.target.com/p/avery-120-sheet-0-5-34-durable-view-ring-binder-black/-/A-16978071; and (5) https://www.amazon.com/Avery-Economy-Binder-0-5-Inch-Round/dp/B0006SWEEG/ref=sr_1_6?qid=1583117388&refinements=p_n_feature_keywords_two_browse-bin%3A7103303011&s=office-products&sr=1-6. We estimated the weight 
of the 50 pages at 32 ounces, based on the five web pages that we 
used to determine the average price of paper. The weight of a 500-
page ream of paper, on each of these websites, was 320 ounces (50/
500 x 320 = 32 ounces). Those five websites were: (1) https://www.officedepot.com/a/products/841195/Office-Depot-Copy-And-Print-Paper/; (2) https://www.staples.com/500+ream+paper/directory_500%20ream%20paper?sby=1; (3) https://www.walmart.com/ip/Pen-Gear-Copy-Paper-8-5x11-92-Bright-20-lb-1-ream-500-Sheets/487634010; (4) https://www.target.com/p/500ct-letter-printer-paper-white-up-up-153/-/A-75001545; (5) https://www.amazon.com/Hammermill-Recycled-Printer-Letter-086790R/dp/B009ZMP31K/ref=sr_1_6?keywords=500+ream+paper&qid=1573437715&sr=8-6. Therefore, 
the weight of a single 0.5-inch manual is as follows: 32 ounces + 13 
= 45 ounces = 2.8 pounds.
    \66\ ``2020 UPS Rate and Service Guide, Daily Rates, updated 
October, 5 2020,'' p. 68 (https://www.ups.com/assets/resources/media/daily_rates.pdf, downloaded July 8, 2021), shows UPS charged 
$10.19; ``Federal Express Service Guide, January 6, 2020, updated 
September 28, 2020,'' p. 107 (https://www.fedex.com/content/dam/fedex/us-united-states/services/Service_Guide_2021.pdf) shows that 
FedEx charged $10.19. Hence, the average was $10.19.
    \67\ See table 7 of the NPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, facilities send back two copies of the revised version 
of the Operations Manual or Emergency Manual when the COTP determines 
that the manual is inadequate. Under the final rule, only one copy of 
the document must be sent back to the COTP, in either print or 
electronic format.
    We calculated the shipping costs for mailing a single 0.5-inch 
Operations Manual or Emergency Manual. We estimated that a single 0.5-
inch manual weighs 2.8 pounds. For mailing purposes, UPS and FedEx 
charge the cost associated with a 3-pound item. The average cost of 
these mailing services is $9.25.\68\ In the NPRM, we estimated the cost 
at $9.56.\69\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \68\ ``2020 UPS Rate and Service Guide, Daily Rates, updated 
October, 5 2020,'' p. 68 (https://www.ups.com/assets/resources/media/daily_rates.pdf, downloaded July 8, 2021), shows UPS charged 
$9.25; ``Federal Express Service Guide, January 6, 2020, updated 
September 28, 2020,'' p. 107 (https://www.fedex.com/content/dam/fedex/us-united-states/services/Service_Guide_2021.pdf) shows that 
FedEx charged $9.25. Hence, the average was $9.25.
    \69\ See table 7 in the NPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to shipping costs associated with amendments, we made 
many of the same assumptions as for shipping and handling 0.5-inch 
manuals. For example, we assumed that UPS or FedEx ground shipping is 
the selected service. As either one or two 5-page amendments weigh less 
than 1 pound, the shipping cost is the same whether one or two are 
mailed together. The cost is $8.23 for both UPS and FedEx (for a mean 
of $8.23).\70\ In the NPRM, we estimated the associated cost for 
shipping one or two amendments at $8.88.\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \70\ ``2020 UPS Rate and Service Guide, Daily Rates, updated 
October, 5 2020,'' p. 68 (https://www.ups.com/assets/resources/media/daily_rates.pdf, downloaded July 8, 2021), shows UPS charged 
$8.23; ``Federal Express Service Guide, January 6, 2020, updated 
September 28, 2020,'' p. 107 (https://www.fedex.com/content/dam/fedex/us-united-states/services/Service_Guide_2021.pdf) shows that 
FedEx charged $8.23. Hence, the average was $8.23.
    \71\ See table 7 in the NPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, facilities must handle these manuals as part of the 
shipping process. As stated previously, labor costs differ between LNG/
LHG facilities and MTR facilities. For LNG/LHG facilities, the loaded 
hourly labor rate is $70.65, and for MTR facilities it is $106.82. We 
estimated the time required to assemble manuals to be 5 minutes (0.08 
hours),\72\ rounded to the closest whole minute, for assembling either 
one manual or two.\73\ From this, we estimated labor time for 
assembling manuals to mail to the COTP to cost $5.65 \74\ for LNG/LHG 
facilities and $8.55 for MTR facilities.\75\ In the NPRM, the 
associated numbers were $5.27 for LNG/LHG facilities and $8.00 for MTR 
facilities.\76\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \72\ This includes time to obtain a box, package up the manual 
or manuals, complete the required mailing paperwork, and place it 
into the office ``out'' mailbox.
    \73\ Based on time samples we ran, we estimated that 4.8 minutes 
were needed to remove the paper from the copier, put it in an 
envelope, fill out the documentation and place it in the office 
``out'' mailbox for one manual. To package and complete 2 manuals, 
we estimated that 5.1 minutes will be required. Rounding both to 5 
minutes, this totals an estimated 0.08 hours.
    \74\ $70.65 multiplied by 0.08 equals $5.65.
    \75\ $106.82 multiplied by 0.08 equals $8.55.
    \76\ See table 8 of the NPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Labor handling costs for amendments are also slightly different due 
to the labor cost differences between LNG/LHG and MTR facilities. We 
estimated that handling a package that contains either one or two 5-
page amendments, rounded to the nearest whole minute, takes 4 minutes 
(0.07 hours), regardless of facility type. As a result, we estimated 
labor handling costs for packages that hold one or two amendments to be 
$4.95 \77\ for LNG/LHG facilities and $7.48 for MTR facilities.\78\ In 
the NPRM, the associated figures were $4.61 for LGN/LHG facilities and 
$7.00 for MTR facilities.\79\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \77\ 0.07 multiplied by $70.65 equals $4.95.
    \78\ 0.07 multiplied by $106.82 equals $7.48.
    \79\ See table 8 of NPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The shipping and handling costs for all types of documents by both 
LNG/LHG facilities and MTR facilities are summarized in table 9. Table 
9 includes not only these costs for the final rule but also the NPRM. 
The NPRM numbers are in parentheses immediately beneath the final rule 
figures.

                       Table 9--Shipping and Handling Costs by Facility and Document Type
                                              [Final Rule and NPRM]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Document type                   Shipping cost        Handling (labor costs)           Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           LNG/LHG Facility Documents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operations Manuals and Emergency       $9.25 (NPRM: $9.56)....  $5.65 (NPRM: $5.27)....  $14.90 (NPRM: $14.83).
 Manuals (one 0.5-inch binder) for
 LNG/LHG facilities.
Operations Manuals and Emergency       $10.19 (NPRM: $10.11)..  $5.65 (NPRM: $5.27)....  $15.84 (NPRM: $15.38).
 Manuals (two 0.5-inch binders) for
 LNG/LHG facilities.
Amendments (one or two 5-page          $8.23 (NPRM: $8.88)....  $4.95 (NPRM: $4.61)....  $13.18 (NPRM: $13.49).
 amendments) for LNG/LHG facilities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 43929]]

 
                                             MTR Facility Documents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operations Manuals (one 0.5-inch       $9.25 (NPRM: $9.56)....  $8.55 (NPRM: $8.00)....  $17.80 (NPRM: $17.56).
 binder) for MTR facilities.
Operations Manuals (two 0.5-inch       $10.19 (NPRM: $10.11)..  $8.55 (NPRM: $8.00)....  $18.74 (NPRM: $18.11).
 binders) for MTR facilities.
Amendments (one or two 5-page          $8.23 (NPRM: $8.88)....  $7.48 (NPRM: $7.00)....  $15.71 (NPRM: $15.88).
 amendments) for MTR facilities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The final component of the cost savings estimate to industry is the 
quantity of manuals and amendments that facilities are sending to the 
COTP. LNG and LHG facilities are currently required to submit two 
copies of their Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals and amendments 
to the COTP, and MTR facilities are currently required to submit two 
copies of their Operations Manuals (and amendments).\80\ The final rule 
permits facilities to submit their documents in either print or 
electronic format. Facility operators submitting electronically will 
save the cost of assembling and shipping two copies of their documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \80\ Currently, two copies must be sent in initially, but if 
copies of manuals or amendments need to be sent in again because 
they were found inadequate by the Coast Guard, only one copy needs 
to be sent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The final rule also permits those facility operators submitting 
printed documents to submit one copy instead of two. Hence, those 
facilities will save the costs associated with producing and mailing 
one copy of their manuals. Coast Guard SMEs estimated that 90 percent 
of LNG/LHG facilities will submit their manuals and amendments 
electronically, and 75 percent of MTR facilities will submit their 
manuals and amendments electronically. The reason for this difference 
is that LNG/LHG facilities are much more likely to be owned by large 
multi-national conglomerates than MTR facilities. LNG/LHG facilities 
are, therefore, more likely to fully utilize modern IT systems and be 
able to submit their documents electronically.
    During the review process of the initially submitted documents, the 
COTP may reject submitted manuals and amendments due to inadequacies in 
meeting the regulatory requirements put forth in 33 CFR part 127 for 
LNG and LHG facilities, or part 154 for MTR facilities. Coast Guard 
SMEs estimated that 30 percent of the total number of all manuals (not 
amendments) sent by facilities are inadequate and must be returned for 
corrections. For amendments, Coast Guard SMEs estimated that the 
rejection rate is 15 percent. The reason for the lower rejection rate 
is that amendments are based on previously approved documents and are 
shorter, having a lower chance of containing inadequacies.
    Under current regulations, facilities send back to the COTP two 
copies, in printed format, to address an inadequacy. Under this rule, 
facilities will instead, at their discretion, respond to an inadequacy 
in either electronic or printed format. If they respond in printed 
format, they will send only one copy instead of two and will save the 
costs associated with producing and mailing one copy of the manual or 
amendment. If they submit in electronic format, they will save the 
costs associated with producing and mailing two copies of the document.
    In summary, the cost savings for the private sector stem from the 
following:
    <bullet> LNG/LHG facilities initially printing and mailing fewer 
printed Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals (0.5-inch binders) and 
amendments (5 pages) to the Coast Guard.
    <bullet> LNG/LHG facilities printing and mailing fewer printed 
Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals (0.5-inch binders) and 
amendments (5 pages) that have to be resubmitted to the COTP.
    <bullet> LNG/LHG facilities storing fewer printed Operations 
Manuals and Emergency Manuals (0.5-inch binders) and amendments (5 
pages) at marine transfer areas.
    <bullet> MTR facilities initially printing and mailing fewer 
printed Operations Manuals (0.5-inch binders) and amendments (5 pages) 
to the COTP.
    <bullet> MTR facilities printing and mailing fewer printed 
Operations Manuals (0.5-inch binders) and amendments that have to be 
resubmitted to the COTP.
    <bullet> MTR facilities storing fewer printed Operations Manuals 
(0.5-inch binders) and amendments (5 pages) at marine transfer areas.
    We calculated the cost savings by taking the annual population of 
facilities, multiplied by the number of manuals or amendments per 
facility, multiplied by the probability of the facility of 
transitioning to electronic submissions, multiplied by production and 
shipping costs. The cost savings from the changes are the same each 
year. Tables 10 through 17 show the annual cost savings to facilities 
by activity.
    We predicted that 90 percent of LNG/LHG facilities will convert 
their Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals to an electronic format. 
The remaining 10 percent of LNG/LHG facilities will still experience 
some cost savings since they will only be required to assemble one copy 
of their manuals to initially mail to the COTP (instead of the current 
two). Because these 10 percent of LNG/LHG facilities will continue to 
send the same number of ``corrected'' printed manuals back to the COTP, 
they will not experience cost savings with respect to these. The cost 
elements to produce manuals and amendments were previously shown in 
tables 7 and 8.
    Table 10 shows the administrative cost savings to LNG/LHG 
facilities from producing fewer Operations Manuals and Emergency 
Manuals that are mailed to the Coast Guard. A brief summary of the 
components of that table follows.
    The term ``Instances of Documents Forecast to be submitted'' is an 
annual average of the instances of manuals and amendments that have 
been submitted over the past 10 years, based on MISLE data. A more 
thorough discussion of these numbers can be found in the ``Affected 
Population'' section of this preamble.
    The ``Expected Rate of Electronic Documents Submitted'' is the 
percentage of documents expected to be submitted in electronic format 
instead of print. As stated previously, we based the terms on Coast 
Guard SME input. The 27 percent figure reflects the SME estimate that 
90 percent of manuals will be submitted in electronic format and that 
30 percent of all manuals submitted to the COTP are found 
inadequate.\81\ For this 27 percent of documents, there will be a cost 
savings associated with the cost of producing and mailing two printed 
manuals. Similarly, the 3

[[Page 43930]]

percent figure represents the estimated 10 percent of manuals that will 
be submitted to the COTP in printed format, 30 percent of which will be 
found inadequate.\82\ In this case, one printed document will be mailed 
as opposed to the two under the current regulation, so these facilities 
will save the cost of producing and mailing one printed copy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \81\ 90 percent multiplied by 30 percent equals 27 percent.
    \82\ 10 percent multiplied by 30 percent is 3 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Likewise, for amendments submitted electronically, the 14 percent 
figure reflects the 90 percent estimate combined with the SME estimate 
that 15 percent of all amendments submitted are found to not be 
adequate.\83\ In this case, the cost savings would arise from no longer 
having to produce and mail two printed copies. For amendments submitted 
in printed format, the analogous percentage is 2 percent.\84\ In this 
case, the associated cost savings would come from only needing to 
produce and mail one printed copy instead of the previous two.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \83\ 90 percent multiplied by 15 percent equals 13.5 percent, 
rounded up to 14 percent.
    \84\ 10 percent multiplied by 15 percent equals 1.5 percent, 
rounded to 2 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The ``Reduction in Printed Documents Needed'' column reflects the 
documents no longer needed as a result of the actions in the first 
column (compared to current regulations). For example, in the first 
row, when LNG/LHG facilities submit their manuals in electronic form, 
as opposed to print, they will not need to submit two copies of 
electronic manuals. As a result, these facilities will experience a 
cost savings that is equal to the cost of assembling the documents. In 
the second row, the facilities that continue to submit printed manuals 
(instead of electronic) will experience a cost savings from having to 
submit one document instead of two.\85\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \85\ The current regulations require the submission of two 
documents, while the final rule requires those facilities submitting 
printed documentation to submit only one copy of each document 
instead of two.

                          Table 10--Annual LNG/LHG Facility Production Cost Savings \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Instances of    Expected rate   Reduction in
 LNG/LHG production cost savings     documents     of electronic      printed       Production         Total
              from:               forecast to be     documents       documents     costs (each)     production
                                     submitted     submitted (%)      needed            \2\        cost savings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manuals Submitted Electronically              18              90               2           $9.50         $307.80
Manuals Submitted in Printed      ..............              10               1            9.50           17.10
 Form...........................
Amendments Submitted                          42              90               2            1.69          127.76
 Electronically.................
Amendments Submitted in Printed   ..............              10               1            1.69            7.10
 Form...........................
Inadequate Manuals Submitted                  18              27               2            9.50           92.34
 Electronically.................
Inadequate Manuals Submitted in   ..............               3               1            9.50            5.13
 Printed Form...................
Inadequate Amendments Submitted               42              14               2            1.69           19.87
 Electronically.................
Inadequate Amendments Submitted   ..............               2               1            1.69            1.42
 in Printed Form................
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............          578.52
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All figures rounded to the nearest whole cent.
\2\ All production cost figures cited in this column can be found in tables 7 and 8.

    Table 11 presents the administrative cost savings to MTR facilities 
from producing fewer Operations Manuals. Of MTR facilities, Coast Guard 
SMEs estimated that 75 percent will convert their Operations Manuals to 
an electronic format. The remaining 25 percent of MTR facilities will 
still experience some administrative cost savings, since they will only 
be required to produce and mail in one copy of their manuals (instead 
of the current two).
    With respect to inadequate documents that have been returned to 
facilities by the COTP, facilities' cost savings will depend on whether 
they send these back to the COTP in electronic or printed format. If 
they send documents back in electronic format, facilities will 
experience the cost savings associated with not having to produce and 
mail two copies. If they send documents back in printed format, they 
will only experience the cost savings associated with not having to 
produce and mail one copy, as they will be sending one printed document 
as opposed to the two required in the current regulations.
    Table 11 shows that the instances of Operations Manuals forecast to 
be required annually is 261 and the instances of amendments is 442, 
based on MISLE data. A more thorough discussion of these numbers can be 
found in the ``Affected Population'' section of this final rule.
    The ``Expected Rate of Electronic Documents Submitted'' column 
shows the percentage of documents expected to be submitted in 
electronic format as opposed to print. For the manuals, this was 75 
percent, and for the amendments, 25 percent. As stated previously, 
these numbers were based on Coast Guard SME input.
    We derived the 23 percent figure from SME estimates that 30 percent 
of the manuals submitted electronically will require correction.\86\ We 
derived the 8 percent figure in an analogous manner.\87\ Similarly, we 
derived the 11 percent and 4 percent figures from the SME estimate that 
15 percent of all amendments submitted are found to be 
inadequate.<SUP>88 89</SUP>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \86\ 30 percent multiplied by 75 percent equals 23 percent 
(rounded to closest whole percentage).
    \87\ 30 percent multiplied by 25 percent equals 7.5 percent, 
rounded to 8 percent.
    \88\ 15 percent multiplied by 75 percent equals 11 percent 
(rounded to closest whole percentage).
    \89\ 15 percent multiplied by 25 percent equals 3.75 percent, 
rounded to 4 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The ``Reduction in Paper Documents Needed'' column reflects, 
analogously to table 10, the decrease in each type of document required 
in paper form. For inadequate documents that are submitted 
electronically to the COTP, the cost of two paper documents is saved as 
they will no longer need to send a printed copy. Those submitting 
printed documents in response to inadequacies pointed out by the COTP 
will experience a cost savings associated with one printed document, as 
they will only be sending in one copy as opposed to the currently 
required two.

[[Page 43931]]



                              Table 11--Annual MTR Facility Production Cost Savings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Instances of    Expected rate   Reduction in
  MTR facility production cost       documents     of electronic      printed       Production         Total
          savings from:           forecast to be     documents       documents     costs (each)     production
                                     submitted     submitted (%)      needed            \1\        cost savings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manuals Submitted Electronically             261              75               2          $16.21       $6,346.22
Manuals Submitted in Printed      ..............              25               1           16.21        1,057.70
 Form...........................
Amendments Submitted                         442              75               2            2.42        1,604.46
 Electronically.................
Amendments Submitted in Printed   ..............              25               1            2.42          267.41
 Form...........................
Inadequate Manuals Submitted                 261              23               2           16.21        1,946.17
 Electronically.................
Inadequate Manuals Submitted in   ..............               8               1           16.21          338.46
 Printed Form...................
Inadequate Amendments Submitted              442              11               2            2.42          235.32
 Electronically.................
Inadequate Amendments Submitted   ..............               4               1            2.42           42.79
 in Printed Form................
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............       11,838.53
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All production cost figures in this column can be found in tables 5 and 6.

    In addition to the cost savings associated with the need to 
manufacture and assemble less documentation, there will also be a cost 
savings associated with having to mail fewer documents to the COTP. 
Tables 12 and 13 capture these savings by facility and document type.
    The ``Instances of Documents Forecast to be Submitted'' column 
represents the total number of each type of document expected to be 
submitted to the COTP. The ``Expected Rate of Electronic Documents'' 
column shows the percentage of each type of document that is expected 
to be submitted in electronic format. The ``Shipping Costs'' column 
shows the costs associated with mailing and handling each type of 
document.

                      Table 12--Annual LNG/LHG Facility Shipping and Handling Cost Savings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Instances of    Expected rate   Shipping and
                                                     documents     of electronic  handling costs   Total annual
  LNG/LHG facility shipping cost savings from:    forecast to be     documents         (each       shipping cost
                                                     submitted       submitted     package) \1\       savings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manuals Submitted Electronically................              18             0.9          $15.84         $256.61
Manuals Submitted in Printed Form...............  ..............             0.1           14.90           26.82
Amendments Submitted Electronically.............              42             0.9           13.18          498.20
Amendments Submitted in Printed Form............  ..............             0.1           13.18           55.36
Inadequate Manuals Submitted Electronically.....              18            0.27           15.84           76.98
Inadequate Manuals Submitted in Printed Form....  ..............            0.03           14.90            8.05
Inadequate Amendments Submitted Electronically..              42            0.14           13.18           77.50
Inadequate Amendments Submitted in Printed Form.  ..............            0.02           13.18           11.07
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................  ..............  ..............  ..............        1,010.59
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ It should be noted that this is the cost per document set, not per document. For example, in the first row,
  when manuals are submitted electronically, the cost of producing and mailing two documents would be saved
  ($15.84). In the second row, when a document is submitted in printed format, the cost of producing and mailing
  only one document would be saved ($14.90). All numbers in this column are from table 9.


                        Table 13--Annual MTR Facility Shipping and Handling Cost Savings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Instances of    Expected rate
                                                     documents     of electronic  Shipping costs   Total annual
    MTR facility shipping cost savings from:      forecast to be     documents    (each  package   shipping cost
                                                     submitted       submitted         \1\)           savings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manuals Submitted Electronically................             261            0.75          $18.74       $3,668.36
Manuals Submitted in Printed Form...............  ..............            0.25           17.80        1,161.45
Amendments Submitted Electronically.............             442            0.75           15.71        5,207.87
Amendments Submitted in Printed Form............  ..............            0.25           15.71        1,735.96
Inadequate Manuals Submitted Electronically.....             261            0.23           18.74        1,124.96
Inadequate Manuals Submitted in Printed Form....  ..............            0.08           17.80          371.66
Inadequate Amendments Submitted Electronically..             442            0.11           15.71          763.82
Inadequate Amendments Submitted in Printed Form.  ..............            0.04           15.71          277.75
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................  ..............  ..............  ..............       14,311.83
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All numbers in this column are from table 9.


[[Page 43932]]

    In tables 14 and 15, we show the cost savings to facilities that 
maintain required documentation at marine transfer areas in electronic 
format.\90\ These savings stem from assembling fewer Operations Manuals 
and Emergency Manuals.\91\ According to Coast Guard SMEs, a facility 
typically has two marine transfer areas. Each facility is currently 
required to keep a copy of their manuals at each marine transfer area 
in printed format, as the regulations that established this requirement 
were published before it was commonly accepted practice (or even 
possible) to access electronic records in a portable fashion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \90\ This electronic documentation will be accessed via a device 
such as an electronic tablet.
    \91\ LNG/LHG facilities must have Operations Manuals and 
Emergency Manuals at these locations, and MTR facilities have 
Operations Manuals only.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Coast Guard SMEs projected that LNG/LHG facilities have a 50-
percent likelihood of storing their manuals and amendments in 
electronic format at marine transfer areas, and MTR facilities have a 
20-percent likelihood of storing them electronically.
    The reason these percentages are low is because the adoption of 
electronic documents at these areas requires a facility to already be 
equipped to access electronic documentation at marine transfer 
areas.\92\ The cost of purchasing the new IT equipment for these 
purposes greatly offsets the cost savings from using electronic 
documentation, as facilities must have the necessary IT infrastructure 
in place to experience the cost savings. As LNG/LHG facilities are 
typically more capital-intensive and modernized in terms of IT 
infrastructure than MTR facilities, they are more likely to use 
electronic documentation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \92\ For example, through Wi-Fi or hardwire connection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated previously, the costs to assemble manuals and amendments 
for LNG/LHG facilities was $9.50 and $1.69 (each).\93\ Additionally, we 
have estimated the affected population for LNG/LHG facilities at 18 for 
manuals and 42 for amendments.\94\ Multiplying these numbers with an 
average of two marine transfer areas per facility resulted in the 
annual production cost savings figures shown in table 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \93\ See tables 5 and 6 and the discussions accompanying them.
    \94\ See discussion under the ``Affected Population'' section of 
this RA.

               Table 14--Annual LNG/LHG Facility Production Cost Savings for Marine Transfer Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Electronic
                                   Instances of    document use       Marine                          Annual
    Marine transfer area cost      documents per     at marine    transfer areas    Production      production
            savings:                   year       transfer areas   per facility    costs (each)    costs savings
                                                        (%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manuals.........................              18              50               2           $9.50         $171.00
Amendments......................              42              50               2            1.69           70.98
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............          241.98
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated previously, we estimated the costs to assemble manuals 
and amendments, for MTR facilities, at $16.21 and $2.42 (each).\95\ We 
have also estimated the affected population at 261 manuals and 442 
amendments for MTR facilities.\96\ Multiplying these numbers with an 
average of two marine transfer areas per facility resulted in the 
annual production cost savings figures shown in table 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \95\ See tables 7 and 8 and the discussions accompanying them.
    \96\ See discussion under the ``Affected Population'' section of 
this RA.

                 Table 15--Annual MTR Facility Production Cost Savings for Marine Transfer Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Electronic
                                   Instances of    document use       Marine                          Annual
    Marine transfer area cost      documents per     at marine    transfer areas    Production      production
            savings:                   year       transfer areas   per facility    costs (each)    costs savings
                                                        (%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manuals.........................             261              20               2          $16.21       $1,692.32
Amendments......................             442              20               2            2.42          427.86
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............        2,120.18
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cost Savings From Placing Electronic Versions of Operations Manuals at 
Marine Transfer Areas
    In tables 16 and 17, we show the labor cost savings to facilities 
that choose to retain electronic documents instead of printed documents 
at marine transfer areas. According to Coast Guard SMEs, normally a PIC 
(or someone with a similar background) would place the printed copies 
at a facility's marine transfer areas. Coast Guard SMEs estimated that 
it takes an hour to perform this function, due to the size of the 
facilities. The occupation best corresponding to the role of a PIC in 
the BLS occupational code series is ``First Line Supervisors of 
Production and Operating Workers'' (Occupational Code 51-1011), under 
NAICS 325000 (Chemical Manufacturing).\97\ We found the mean wage for 
this occupation to be $36.07.\98\ We estimated the loaded wage rate to 
be $54.47.\99\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \97\ There is no comparable BLS occupational code 51-1011 under 
the BLS's NAICS 483000 (Water Transportation).
    \98\ May 2020 National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment 
and Wage Estimates, NAICS 325000, (https://www.bls.gov/oes/2020/May/naics3_325000.htm), downloaded April 16, 2021.
    \99\ We estimated the loaded rate by accessing the latest 
available Bureau of Labor Statistics Employer Costs for Employee 
Compensation News Release (USDL-21-0437), March 18, 2021 (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf), referenced April 18, 2021, 
table 5, page 9. According to this document, for the ``production, 
transportation and material moving'' industry, benefits were $10.92 
per hour while wages were $21.36 (for a ratio of benefits to wages 
of 51 percent). $36.07 + ($36.07 x 0.51 = $18.40) = $54.47.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Using the estimated loaded labor rate of $54.47 per hour, 
multiplied by the affected populations discussed

[[Page 43933]]

previously under the ``Affected Population'' portion of this RA (18 
manuals for LNG/LHG facilities and 261 for MTR facilities; 42 
amendments for LNG/LHG facilities and 442 for MTR facilities) and the 
estimated rate of electronic document use at marine transfer areas 
discussed previously (50 percent at LNG/LHG facilities and 20 percent 
at MTR facilities), we derived the annual labor cost savings shown in 
tables 16 and 17.

   Table 16--Annual LNG/LHG Facility Labor Cost Savings With Respect to Electronic and Operations Manuals (and
                      Amendments) That Will Not Have To Be Placed at Marine Transfer Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Electronic
                                                   Instances of    document use                    Total annual
     Labor of storing manuals and amendments       documents per     at marine      Labor costs     labor cost
                                                       year       transfer areas                      savings
                                                                        (%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manuals.........................................              18              50           54.47         $490.23
Amendments......................................              42              50           54.47        1,143.87
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................  ..............  ..............  ..............        1,634.10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


 Table 17--Annual MTR Facility Labor Cost Savings With Respect to Operations Manuals (and Amendments) That Will
                                 Not Have To Be Placed at Marine Transfer Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Electronic
                                                   Instances of    document use                    Total annual
     Labor of storing manuals and amendments       documents per     at marine      Labor costs     labor cost
                                                       year       transfer areas                      savings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manuals.........................................             261              20           54.47       $2,843.33
Amendments......................................             442              20           54.47        4,815.15
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................  ..............  ..............  ..............        7,658.48
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Tables 18 and 19 show the total annual cost savings for LNG/LHG and 
MTR facilities in both nominal and discounted terms. We found these 
savings estimates by summing the previous tables for the total number 
of facilities by respective facility type.

 Table 18--Annual Cost Savings for LNG/LHG Facilities on a Nominal Basis
                          and Discounted at 7%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Nominal terms     7% discounted
        LNG/LHG cost savings                 \1\              rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1..............................         $3,465.19         $3,238.50
Year 2..............................          3,465.19          3,026.63
Year 3..............................          3,465.19          2,828.63
Year 4..............................          3,465.19          2,643.58
Year 5..............................          3,465.19          2,470.63
Year 6..............................          3,465.19          2,309.00
Year 7..............................          3,465.19          2,157.95
Year 8..............................          3,465.19          2,016.77
Year 9..............................          3,465.19          1,884.83
Year 10.............................          3,465.19          1,761.53
                                     -----------------------------------
    Total...........................         34,651.90         24,338.04
    Annualized......................  ................          3,465.19
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Sum of tables 16 ($1,634.10), table 14 ($241.98), table 12
  ($1,010.59) and table 10 ($578.52) equals $3,465.19.


 Table 19--Annual Cost Savings for MTR Facilities on a Nominal Basis and
                            Discounted at 7%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Nominal terms     7% discounted
          MTR cost savings                   \1\              rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1..............................        $35,929.02        $33,578.53
Year 2..............................         35,929.02         31,381.80
Year 3..............................         35,929.02         29,328.78
Year 4..............................         35,929.02         27,410.08
Year 5..............................         35,929.02         25,616.90
Year 6..............................         35,929.02         23,941.02
Year 7..............................         35,929.02         22,374.79
Year 8..............................         35,929.02         20,911.02
Year 9..............................         35,929.02         19,543.01
Year 10.............................         35,929.02         18,264.49
                                     -----------------------------------

[[Page 43934]]

 
    Total...........................        359,290.22        252,350.42
    Annualized......................  ................         35,929.02
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Sum of tables 17 ($7,658.48), table 15 ($2,120.18), table 13
  ($14,311.83) and table 11 ($11,838.53) equals $35,929.02.

    Table 20 shows the total private sector cost savings.

   Table 20--Total Private Sector Cost Savings on a Nominal Basis and
                            Discounted at 7%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          7% discounted
  Total private sector cost savings     Nominal terms         rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1..............................        $39,394.21        $36,817.02
Year 2..............................         39,394.21         34,408.43
Year 3..............................         39,394.21         32,157.41
Year 4..............................         39,394.21         30,053.66
Year 5..............................         39,394.21         28,087.53
Year 6..............................         39,394.21         26,250.03
Year 7..............................         39,394.21         24,532.74
Year 8..............................         39,394.21         22,927.79
Year 9..............................         39,394.21         21,427.84
Year 10.............................         39,394.21         20,026.02
                                     -----------------------------------
    Total...........................        393,942.12        276,688.46
    Annualized......................  ................         39,394.21
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coast Guard Cost Savings
    Under current regulations, the COTP examines the Operations 
Manuals, Emergency Manuals, and amendments that are submitted by LNG 
and LHG facilities, and the Operations Manuals and amendments that are 
submitted by MTR facilities. After examining LNG and LHG documentation, 
the COTP finds the document either adequate or inadequate. If the 
document is found adequate, the current regulation requires that ``the 
Captain of the Port returns one copy to the [facility] owner or 
operator marked `Examined by the Coast Guard'.'' \100\ The same applies 
to MTR facility documentation. If the document is found to be adequate, 
the current regulation requires that ``the COTP . . . return one copy 
of the manual marked `Examined by the Coast Guard'.'' \101\ All these 
copies are currently submitted to the COTP by facilities in the form of 
two printed copies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \100\ 33 CFR 127.019(c).
    \101\ 33 CFR 154.300(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cost Savings From the Option for the COTP To Return Electronic 
Documents to Facility Operators if Those Documents Were Electronically 
Submitted
    The COTP will return a notification explaining why a given manual 
does not meet the requirements of the part and any suggested 
corrections needed to the facilities in either electronic or printed 
format, depending on the format in which the document was 
received.\102\ In rare cases when there are extensive suggested edits, 
the COTP may choose to send back a copy of the manual with the 
corrections noted. If a document was received from a facility in 
printed format, then it likely will not be returned to the facility in 
electronic format. As previously stated, Coast Guard SMEs estimated 
that 90 percent of LNG/LHG facility documents will be received in 
electronic format, and 75 percent of MTR facility documents will be. We 
estimated that this is the same percentage the COTP will return to the 
facilities in electronic format.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \102\ The regulatory text in title 33 of the CFR (127.019(e), 
154.320(c)(2), and 154.325(d) through (e)) states that the COTP will 
notify the facility with an explanation of why it does not meet this 
part. The form of the notification will depend on the complexity 
and/or of the inadequacies that need to be addressed. If there are 
many that need to be addressed it may prove more logical to return a 
marked copy of the manual to the facility owner or operator. Some 
types of inadequacies, for example diagrams, illustrations, and/or 
maps that may need to be modified may also prove easier to 
communicate with a manual that is marked, as opposed to a 
notification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The cost savings the Coast Guard will experience from returning 
electronic responses will be the shipping and handling costs saved by 
not having to mail back the printed editions of the Operations Manuals, 
Emergency Manuals, and amendments. The Coast Guard, like the private 
sector, will likely use a mailing service such as UPS or FedEx Ground 
shipping. Since the same packages will be returned to the facilities, 
the Coast Guard's mailing costs will likely be the same as the private 
sector's. For a 0.5-inch manual, this is estimated to total $9.25, and 
for a 5-page amendment, this is estimated to total $8.23.\103\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \103\ Source: Table 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because labor costs differ between the Coast Guard and the private 
sector, labor-handling costs do also. The Coast Guard personnel 
expected to package documents to return to facilities will be either E-
4s or E-5s. According to the latest available Commandant Instruction, 
the fully loaded hourly rate for an E-4 is $45.00, and for an E-5 
$54.00.\104\ We assumed that it takes the Coast Guard the same amount 
of time to pack and prepare a 0.5-inch manual and a 5-page amendment 
for shipping as it takes the private sector: 5 Minutes, rounded to the 
closest whole minute, for a 0.5-inch manual, and 4 minutes for a 5-page 
amendment.<SUP>105 106</SUP> We estimated labor costs at $3.60 for an 
E-4 and $4.32

[[Page 43935]]

for an E-5 to mail a 0.5-inch manual.\107\ We estimated that it costs 
$3.15 for an E-4 and $3.78 for an E-5 to mail a 5-page amendment.\108\ 
We took an average of the E-4 and E-5 rates, thus deriving an estimated 
labor cost of $3.96 per 0.5-inch manual and $3.47 per 5-page 
amendment.\109\ Thus, the average total cost to mail a 0.5-inch manual 
is $13.21, and to mail a 5-page amendment is $11.70. These costs are 
summarized in table 21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \104\ Commandant Instruction 7310.1U, dated 27 February 2020, 
page 2 under the ``Hourly Standard Rates for Personnel'' section, 
https://media.defense.gov/2020/Mar/04/2002258826/-1/-1/0/CI_7310_1U.PDF. As of April 19, 2021, this was the latest edition of 
this document available.
    \105\ 5 divided by 60 equals 0.08 hours.
    \106\ 4 divided by 60 equals 0.07 hours.
    \107\ 0.08 multiplied by $45 equals $3.60 and 0.08 multiplied by 
$54 equals $4.32.
    \108\ 0.07 multiplied by $45 equals $3.15 and 0.07 multiplied by 
$54 equals $3.78.
    \109\ Both of these figures are rounded to the nearest whole 
cent.

                                Table 21--Coast Guard Shipping and Handling Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Shipping and handling costs
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Handling
                                                                   Mailing costs   (labor costs)       Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manuals.........................................................           $9.25           $3.96          $13.21
Amendments......................................................            8.23            3.47           11.70
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the documents that have been found adequate, there 
is the issue of those documents that are deemed inadequate by the COTP. 
The current regulations require the COTP to notify the facility in 
writing.\110\ This notification usually comes in the form of a marked-
up copy of the document, showing what needs to be corrected. This final 
rule provides the COTP the option to respond electronically or in print 
to either electronic or printed copies from the facility operators. The 
COTP will not be obligated to respond in the same format that the 
manual is submitted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \110\ 33 CFR 154.320(a)(1) states, ``The COTP will notify the 
facility operator [of an MTR facility] in writing of any 
inadequacies.'' 33 CFR 127.019(d) states, ``If the COTP finds that 
the Operations Manual or the Emergency Manual does not meet this 
part, the Captain of the Port will return the manual with an 
explanation of why it does not meet this part [to the LNG or LHG 
facility].''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In summary, the cost savings for the Coast Guard will arise from 
the reduced number of printed Operations Manuals, Emergency Manuals, 
and amendments returned to LNG, LHG, and MTR facilities. These savings 
can be broken out into the labor costs and the shipping costs. Table 22 
shows these annual cost saving calculations.

               Table 22--Coast Guard Annual Cost Savings From Shipping and Handling Costs Foregone
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Expected rate
                                                   Instances of    of electronic   Shipping and     Annual cost
         Cost savings to the coast guard           documents per     documents    handling costs      savings
                                                     year \1\     production (%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LNG/LHG Manuals Submitted.......................              18              90          $13.21         $214.00
LNG/LHG Amendments Submitted....................              42              90           11.70          442.26
MTR Manuals Submitted...........................             261              75           13.21        2,585.86
MTR Amendments Submitted........................             442              75           11.70        3,878.55
LNG/LHG Manuals Found Inadequate................              18          \2\ 27           13.21           64.20
LNG/LHG Amendments Found Inadequate.............              42          \3\ 14           11.70           68.80
MTR Manuals Found Inadequate....................             261          \4\ 23           13.21          793.00
MTR Amendments Found Inadequate.................             442          \5\ 11           11.70          568.85
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................  ..............  ..............  ..............        8,615.52
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See tables 12 and 13.
\2\ 90% (percentage of LNG/LHG manuals sent electronically) times 30% (percentage of LNG/LHG manuals found
  inadequate) equals 27%.
\3\ 90% (percentage of LNG/LHG amendments sent electronically) times 15% (percentage of LNG/LHG amendments found
  inadequate) equals 14%.
\4\ 75% (percentage of MTR manuals sent electronically) times 30% (percentage of MTR manuals found inadequate)
  equals 23%.
\5\ 75% (percentage of MTR amendments sent electronically) times 15% (percentage of MTR amendments found
  inadequate) equals 11%.

    The summary of these calculations for 10 years is provided in table 
23.

Table 23--Coast Guard Costs Savings on a Nominal Basis and Discounted at
                                   7%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          7% Discounted
      Coast guard cost savings          Nominal terms       rate \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1..............................         $8,615.52         $8,051.89
Year 2..............................          8,615.52          7,525.13
Year 3..............................          8,615.52          7,032.83
Year 4..............................          8,615.52          6,572.74
Year 5..............................          8,615.52          6,142.75
Year 6..............................          8,615.52          5,740.88
Year 7..............................          8,615.52          5,365.31
Year 8..............................          8,615.52          5,014.31

[[Page 43936]]

 
Year 9..............................          8,615.52          4,686.27
Year 10.............................          8,615.52          4,379.69
                                     -----------------------------------
    Total...........................         86,155.20         60,511.81
    Annualized......................  ................          8,615.52
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In 2020 dollar terms.

Summary of Cost Savings
    We show the total cost savings, for both the private sector and 
government, in nominal and discounted terms, in table 24.

   Table 24--Total Cost Savings (Private Sector Plus Government) on a
                   Nominal Basis and Discounted at 7%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Total private sector + coast guard                       7% Discounted
            cost savings                Nominal terms       rate \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1..............................        $48,009.73        $44,868.91
Year 2..............................         48,009.73         41,933.56
Year 3..............................         48,009.73         39,190.24
Year 4..............................         48,009.73         36,626.39
Year 5..............................         48,009.73         34,230.28
Year 6..............................         48,009.73         31,990.91
Year 7..............................         48,009.73         29,898.05
Year 8..............................         48,009.73         27,942.10
Year 9..............................         48,009.73         26,114.11
Year 10.............................         48,009.73         24,405.71
                                     -----------------------------------
    Total...........................        480,097.32        337,200.27
    Annualized......................  ................         48,009.73
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In 2020 dollar terms.

B. Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, we have considered whether 
this final rule will have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities'' 
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are 
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, 
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard will allow MTR facilities and LNG and LHG 
facilities to submit their Operations Manuals, Emergency Manuals, and 
amendments in electronic format. These facilities will experience a 
cost savings. We estimate that this final rule will provide cost 
savings to 703 MTR facilities, and 60 LNG and LHG facilities.
    This final rule will reduce the time and cost burden for regulated 
LNG, LHG, and MTR facilities to submit Operations Manuals and Emergency 
Manuals and amendments for the purposes of 33 CFR parts 127, 154, and 
156. The final rule enables these facilities to submit the required 
documentation electronically, enabling facilities to save time 
associated with mailing and processing printed manuals. In addition, it 
permits facilities to place electronic copies of their manuals and 
amendments at their marine transfer areas, resulting in a savings to 
facilities that choose this route because they will not have to print 
manuals and amendments and place them physically at those locations.
    We examined the LNG/LHG and MTR facility populations separately to 
provide a detailed analysis. With respect to the LNG/LHG population, we 
estimate that 54 facilities a year will be impacted by the final rule, 
or 45 percent of the 121 total number of LNG and LHG facilities.\111\ A 
search of the MISLE database revealed a total of 85 unique owners for 
these 121 LNG and LHG facilities.\112\ Of these unique owners, 15 were 
found to be small businesses, as defined by the Small Business 
Administration (SBA) ``Table of Small Size Standards.'' \113\ We were 
unable to find employee or revenue information for 16 entities. 
Entities for which data was not available were assumed to be small 
entities. Assuming that the proportion of owners is directly related to 
the number of impacted owners, taking 45 percent of the 85 unique 
owners yields a total of 38 unique owners who will be affected by the 
final rule.\114\ We estimate total nominal cost savings per year for 
LNG/LHG facilities to be $3,465 per year, as shown in table 18.\115\ 
This totals $91.18 per owner per year.\116\ There were no small LNG/LHG 
facilities for which gross sales data existed for which costs savings 
exceeded 1 percent of gross revenue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \111\ Of the 60 LNG/LHG facilities, we assume 54 will submit 
their documentation in electronic format and 6 in print. Of the 703 
MTR facilities, 527 are expected to submit their documents in 
electronic format and 176 in print. See the discussion under the 
``Affected Population'' section of this RA. 54 divided by 121 equals 
45 percent.
    \112\ We conducted this search of the MISLE database in mid-
December 2020.
    \113\ As of the latest available SBA ``Table of Size Standards'' 
at the time we performed this analysis. That table was effective as 
of Aug. 19, 2019 and is available at https://www.sba.gov/document/support-table-size-standards.
    \114\ Rounded to nearest whole number. 85 multiplied by 45 
percent equals 38.25 (rounded to 38).
    \115\ From table 18, rounded to closest whole dollar.
    \116\ $3,465 divided by 38 equals $91.18 per impacted owner per 
year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the MTR facility population, we estimate that 527

[[Page 43937]]

facilities will be impacted per year.\117\ As we found the total number 
of MTR facilities to be 2,497, the proportion of impacted facilities is 
21 percent.\118\ Our search of the MISLE database found 1,390 unique 
owners of all MTR facilities.\119\ We reduced the 1,390 to a 
representative sample.\120\ Applying this formula, while assuming a 95-
percent confidence interval, yielded a sample size of 385. We base our 
small business analysis on this sample size.\121\ Of the 385 
facilities, we estimate that 276 should be considered small. Of those 
276 facilities, 145 were small (in terms of either gross sales or 
number of employees) according to the definition provided by the SBA. 
Sales and employee data was not available for the remaining 131 
facilities, so we assumed that these facilities were also small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \117\ See the discussion under the ``Affected Population'' 
section of this RA.
    \118\ Rounded to closest whole percentage point (527 divided by 
2,497 equals 21.1 percent). This assumes that this ratio, based on 
historical MISLE data over the past 10 years, remains constant over 
the future.
    \119\ We conducted this search of the MISLE database in Mid-
December 2020.
    \120\ We used two equations and then took the higher value, as 
derived from them, rounded up to the nearest whole number. The two 
equations are as follows: [Z\2\*p*q]/(e\2\) and (N/[1+(N*(e\2\))]. 
Each term in these equations is defined as follows: Z=1.96, e=0.05, 
p=0.5, q=0.5, N = X, the relevant number of observations. The 
application of the two equations yields the following numbers: 
[(1.96\2\)*0.5*0.5]/(0.05\2\) = 310.6 (rounded to 311) and 1,390/
[1+(1,390*(0.05\2\)] = 384.16 (rounded to 385). As 385 is the higher 
number we select it as our relevant sample size.
    \121\ We picked the 385 from the 1,390 by assigning the 1,390 a 
randomly selected number between 0 and 1 using the random number 
generator in Excel and then picking the first 385 facilities, from 
highest to lowest, based on the number the random number generator 
created for each.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the total number of impacted unique MTR facility 
operators at 292.\122\ We estimate the total cost savings, as shown in 
table 19, to be $35,929 per year for all MTR facilities per year.\123\ 
Hence, we estimate that the projected cost savings per impacted 
facility will be $123.05 per year.\124\ Assuming that the proportion of 
small facilities among the 292 total impacted facilities reflects the 
ratio of small facilities in the sample derived by the application of 
the sample size estimated (72 percent), we estimate a total population 
of 210 small facilities.\125\ For the 145 small MTR facilities for 
which gross sales data existed, there were no facilities for which 
costs savings exceeded 1 percent of gross revenue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \122\ 1,390 multiplied by 21 percent equals 291.9.
    \123\ From table 19, rounded to closest whole dollar.
    \124\ $35,929 divided by 292 equals $123.05.
    \125\ 276 divided by 385 equals 71.7 percent. 292 multiplied by 
72 percent equals 210.24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the information provided above, the Coast Guard certifies 
under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this final rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

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 final rule so that they can better 
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. The 
Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or 
complain about this final 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 final rule calls for a revision to two collections of 
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520. As defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(c), ``collection of information'' 
comprises reporting, recordkeeping, monitoring, posting, labeling, and 
other similar actions. The title and description of the collections of 
information, a description of those who must collect the information, 
and an estimate of the total annual burden follow. The estimate covers 
the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing sources of 
data, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and 
reviewing the collection.
    This final rule changes the collections of information required for 
waterfront facilities handling LNG and LHG, described in OMB Control 
Number 1625-0049, and facilities transferring oil or hazardous 
materials in bulk, described in OMB Control Number 1625-0093. This 
final rule does not change the content of responses, nor the estimated 
burden of each response, but decreases the total annual burden for both 
of these collections of information. The Coast Guard will submit this 
collection of information amendments to OMB for its review.

    Title: Waterfront Facilities Handling Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) 
and Liquefied Hazardous Gas (LHG).
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0049.
    Summary of the Collection of Information: LNG and LHG present a 
risk to the public when transferred at waterfront facilities. Title 33 
CFR part 127 prescribes safety standards for the design, construction, 
equipment, operations, maintenance, personnel training, and fire 
protection at waterfront facilities handling LNG or LHG. The facility 
operators must submit Operational Manuals, Emergency Manuals, and 
amendments to the Coast Guard.
    Need for Information: The information in an Operations Manual is 
used by the Coast Guard to ensure the facility follows proper and safe 
procedures for handling LNG and LHG and to ensure facility personnel 
are trained and follow proper and safe procedures for transfer 
operations. The Emergency Manual is used by the Coast Guard to ensure 
the facility follows proper procedures in the event of an emergency 
during transfer operations. These procedures include actions in the 
event of a release, fire, or other event that requires an emergency 
shutdown, first aid, or emergency mooring or unmooring of a vessel. 
Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals are updated periodically by 
amendments to ensure they are kept current to reflect changes in 
procedures, equipment, personnel, and telephone number listings.
    Use of Information: The Coast Guard uses this information to 
monitor compliance with the rule.
    Description of the Respondents: Waterfront Facilities Handling LNG 
and LHG.
    Number of Respondents: This final rule will not have any impact on 
the number of respondents. Based on the Coast Guard's MISLE database, 
there are currently 121 LNG and LHG facilities operating in the United 
States and its territories.\126\ The final rule will reduce the number 
of hours spent assembling manuals and amendments, submitting them to 
the COTP, updating numerous copies of each manual that is amended, and 
ensuring that the most recent version of the manual with all amendments 
is available to the PIC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \126\ In the most current collection of information, the number 
of LNG and LNG facilities was 108. The current figure of 121 
reflects an increase in this population; it is not due to a change 
made by the final rule. The relevant collection of information, 
1625-0049, can be found in Regulations.Gov (https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=USCG-2019-0353).

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

[[Page 43938]]

    Frequency of Response: The number of responses per year for this 
final rule will vary by participating facilities. The Coast Guard 
anticipates that each new participant will submit an Operations Manual 
and Emergency Manual once when the new facility becomes operational. 
The operator will submit updates, in the form of amendments, to the 
manual whenever there is a significant change.
    The final rule does not increase the number of annual responses. 
The number of responses since the last collection of information, 
however, has increased, because the population size since that time has 
increased. The most recently approved collection of information 
estimates 3,356 annual responses for all LNG and LHG facilities.\127\ 
Under the final rule, the annual responses are estimated to be 
3,502.\128\ This difference is due to a change in the populations as 
opposed to other impacts of the rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \127\ Annual responses are defined as not only the number of 
Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals and amendments but also 
other documentation such as letters of intent and declarations of 
intent. The full list of documents that constitute responses can be 
found in the collection if information (1625-0049).
    \128\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Burden of Response: The burden of response will decrease due to the 
fact that facility operators will no longer need to print the manuals 
that will be submitted, mail them to the COTP, and place them at the 
marine transfer areas of the facilities (for those manuals and 
amendments that will be kept at marine transfer areas in electronic 
format).
    In the latest available collection of information, using the new 
LNG and LHG population of 121 instead of 108, along with the per-
response burden hours in that collection, the total burden hours for 
both LNG and LHG facilities, per year, is 6,768. The hours per response 
for the development of an Operations Manual or Emergency Manual is 150 
hours, and the hours per response for Operations Manual or Emergency 
Manual amendments is 2 hours.\129\ The final rule will reduce the 
burden hours for Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals and 
amendments for facility operators submitting their documents to the 
COTP and storing their documentation at their marine transfer areas in 
electronic format. This total time saved time is estimated at 33 hours 
per year. Thus, the Coast Guard estimates that 33 burden hours will be 
eliminated per year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \129\ The relevant collection of information is 1625-0049. The 
150- and 2-hour figures can be seen in Regulations.Gov (specifically 
under https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=USCG-2019-0353), in the 
supporting document ``1625-0049_SS_r0_2019_calcs-sheet_App-A-to-C'', 
pages 2-3. In that document, it can be seen that the total hours per 
response, for both LNG and LHG facilities, is 150 hours for 
development of Operations Manuals and Emergency Manual Amendments 
and 2 hours for Operations Manual and Emergency Manual amendments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimate of Total Annual Burden: The final rule will decrease the 
total burden by 33 hours, from 6,768 hours to 6,735.

    Title: Facilities Transferring Oil or Hazardous Materials in Bulk.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0093.
    Summary of the Collection of Information: The Operations Manual 
regulations in 33 CFR 154.300 through 154.325 establish procedures for 
facilities that transfer oil or hazardous materials, in bulk, to or 
from a vessel with a capacity of 39.75 cubic meters (250 barrels) or 
more. The facility operator must submit Operations Manuals and 
associated amendments to the Coast Guard.
    Need for Information: The Coast Guard uses the information in an 
Operations Manual to ensure that facility personnel follow proper and 
safe procedures for transferring oil or hazardous materials and to 
ensure facility personnel follow proper and safe procedures for dealing 
with any spills that occur during a transfer. Operations Manuals are 
updated periodically by amendments to ensure they are kept current to 
reflect changes in procedures, equipment, personnel, and telephone 
number listings.
    Use of Information: The Coast Guard uses this information to 
monitor compliance with the rule.
    Description of the Respondents: Facilities transferring oil or 
hazardous materials in bulk.
    Number of Respondents: This final rule will not have any impact on 
the number of respondents. Based on the Coast Guard's MISLE database, 
there are currently 2,497 oil and hazardous material facilities 
operating in the United States and its territories. The electronic 
submission opportunity in this final rule will reduce the number of 
hours spent printing the manuals and amendments, submitting them to the 
COTP, updating numerous copies of each manual following amendment, and 
ensuring the most recent printed version of the manual, with all 
amendments, is available to the PIC.
    Frequency of Response: The number of responses per year for this 
final rule will vary by participating facilities. The Coast Guard 
anticipates that each new participant will submit an Operations Manual 
once when the new facility becomes operational. The operator will 
submit updates to the manual whenever there is a significant change. 
Based on historical information, the Coast Guard expects facilities to 
submit 261 new Operations Manuals and 442 amendments per year. The 
number of Letters of Intent submissions is 261, equivalent to the 
number of Operations Manuals. The current collection of information 
assumes that the number of Letters of Intent equals the number of 
Operations Manual submissions. These figures are derived from the MISLE 
database. Hence, the total number of responses is 964 per year.
    Burden of Response: The final rule gives regulated facilities the 
option of submitting Operations Manuals and associated amendments to 
the COTP, at their discretion, in either print or electronic format. 
For those facilities submitting documentation in electronic format, the 
burden of response will decrease due to eliminating the need to print 
and mail these manuals. For facility operators placing electronic 
copies of their documents at their marine transfer areas, costs 
associated with printing copies and labor time related to placing them 
there will be saved.
    According to the latest collection of information, 115 hours are 
required to prepare an Operations Manual; 16 hours are required to 
prepare an amendment; and 2 hours are required to submit a Letter of 
Intent.\130\ Assuming that there are 261 Operations Manual submissions, 
442 amendment submissions, and 261 Letters of Intent, the total of 
annual burden hours in that collection of information is 37,609.\131\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \130\ OMB Control Number: 1625-0093.
    \131\ The existing collection of information states that the 
Letters of Intent submissions equal the number of Operation Manual 
submissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This final rule will reduce the burden hours for facilities because 
it will permit them to submit their documentation in electronic format 
and permit them to store their documents at their marine transfer areas 
in electronic format. The estimated burden hours reduced as a result is 
249 hours per year.
    Estimate of Total Annual Burden: The final rule will decrease the 
total burden hours by 249, from 37,609 hours to 37,360 per year.
    As required by 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), we submitted a copy of the 
proposed rule to OMB for its review of the reduction in the total 
annual burden for OMB Control Number 1625-0049. The Coast Guard did not 
receive any comments on the proposed rule regarding either collection 
of information request; accordingly no changes have been made. We will 
submit a copy of the published final rule to OMB for their

[[Page 43939]]

review and approval of the changes to both existing collections of 
information. You are not required to respond to a collection of 
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

E. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132 
(Federalism) if it has a substantial direct effect on 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 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 final rule amends the Operations Manual and Emergency Manual 
submission procedures and COTP approval process for facilities that 
transfer LNG, LHG, oil, or hazardous material, in bulk, to or from a 
vessel. These changes involve procedural requirements for the Coast 
Guard's own approval process, safety risk analysis, and appeal process 
for a facility that transfers LNG, LHG, oil, or hazardous material in 
bulk. The changes in this final rule do not conflict with State 
interests. For individual States, or their political subdivisions, any 
requirements for facilities to submit their Operations Manuals or 
Emergency Manuals to them for review or approval will be unaffected by 
this rule.
    Pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 70011(b)(1), Congress has expressly 
authorized the Coast Guard to establish ``procedures, measures and 
standards for the handling, loading, unloading, storage, stowage and 
movement on a structure of explosives or other dangerous articles and 
substances, including oil or hazardous material.'' The Coast Guard 
affirmatively preempts any State rules related to these procedures, 
measures, and standards (See United States v. Locke, 529 U.S. 89, 109-
110 (2000)). Therefore, because the States may not regulate within 
these categories, this rule is consistent with the fundamental 
federalism principles and preemption requirements described in 
Executive Order 13132.

F. Unfunded Mandates

    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 rule will not result 
in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule 
elsewhere in this preamble.

G. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise 
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630 (Governmental 
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property 
Rights).

H. Civil Justice Reform

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

I. Protection of Children

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

J. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 
13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments), 
because it will 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 rule under Executive Order 13211 (Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use). We have determined that it is not a 
``significant energy action'' under that order because it is not a 
``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is 
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, 
distribution, or use of energy.

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 
will 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 final rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did 
not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

M. Environment

    We have analyzed this final 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 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 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 rule is categorically excluded under paragraphs A3 (part d) 
and L54 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, 
Rev. 1. Paragraph A3 (part d) pertains to the promulgation of rules, 
issuance of rulings or interpretations, and the development and 
publication of policies, orders, directives, notices, procedures that 
interpret or amend an existing regulation without changing its 
environmental effect, and paragraph L54 pertains to regulations which 
are editorial or procedural. This rule allows facilities that transfer 
oil, hazardous materials, LNG, or LHG in bulk to submit and maintain 
the facility Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals electronically or 
in print, and amends the COTP examination procedures for those 
documents, thus enabling electronic communication between the facility 
operators and the Coast Guard, which will reduce the time and cost 
associated with mailing printed manuals. This action is consistent with 
the Coast Guard's port and waterway security and marine safety 
missions.

[[Page 43940]]

List of Subjects

33 CFR Part 127

    Fire prevention, Harbors, Hazardous substances, Natural gas, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures.

33 CFR Part 154

    Alaska, Fire prevention, Hazardous substances, Oil pollution, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

33 CFR Part 156

    Hazardous substances, Oil pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Water pollution control.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 
33 CFR parts 127, 154, and 156 as follows:

PART 127--WATERFRONT FACILITIES HANDLING LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS AND 
LIQUEFIED HAZARDOUS GAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 127 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; Department of 
Homeland Security Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.2.


0
2. Revise Sec.  127.019 to read as follows:


Sec.  127.019  Operations Manual and Emergency Manual: Procedures for 
examination.

    (a) The owner or operator of an active facility must submit an 
Operations Manual and Emergency Manual in printed or electronic format 
to the COTP of the zone in which the facility is located.
    (b) At least 30 days before transferring LHG or LNG, the owner or 
operator of a new or an inactive facility must submit an Operations 
Manual and Emergency Manual in printed or electronic format to the 
Captain of the Port of the zone in which the facility is located, 
unless the manuals have been examined and there have been no changes 
since that examination.
    (c) Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals submitted after 
September 10, 2021 must include a date, revision date or other 
revision-specific identifying information.
    (d) If the COTP finds that the Operations Manual meets Sec.  
127.305 or Sec.  127.1305 and that the Emergency Manual meets Sec.  
127.307 or Sec.  127.1307, the COTP will provide notice to the facility 
stating each manual has been examined by the Coast Guard. This notice 
will include the revision date of the manual or other revision-specific 
identifying information.
    (e) If the COTP finds that the Operations Manual or the Emergency 
Manual does not meet this part, the COTP will notify the facility with 
an explanation of why it does not meet this part.

0
3. In Sec.  127.309, revise the introductory text and paragraph (a) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  127.309  Operations Manual and Emergency Manual: Use.

    The operator must ensure that--
    (a) LNG transfer operations are not conducted unless the person in 
charge of transfer for the waterfront facility handling LNG has in the 
marine transfer area a readily available printed or electronic copy of 
the most recently examined Operations Manual and Emergency Manual. 
Electronic devices used to display the manuals must comply with 
applicable electrical safety standards in this part;
* * * * *

0
4. In Sec.  127.1309, revise the introductory text and paragraph (a) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  127.1309  Operations Manual and Emergency Manual: Use.

    The operator must ensure that--
    (a) LHG transfer operations are not conducted unless the person in 
charge of transfer for the waterfront facility handling LHG has a 
printed or electronic copy of the most recently examined Operations 
Manual and Emergency Manual readily available in the marine transfer 
area. Electronic devices used to display the manuals must comply with 
applicable electrical safety standards in this part;
* * * * *

PART 154--FACILITIES TRANSFERRING OIL OR HAZARDOUS MATERIAL IN BULK

0
5. The authority citation for part 154 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(j)(1)(C), (j)(5), (j)(6), and (m)(2); 
46 U.S.C. 70011, 70034; sec. 2, E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757; Department 
of Homeland Security Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.2. 
Subpart F is also issued under 33 U.S.C. 2735. Vapor control 
recovery provisions of Subpart P are also issued under 42 U.S.C. 
7511b(f)(2).


0
6. Amend Sec.  154.300 as follows:
0
a. Revise paragraph (a) introductory text and add paragraph (a)(4);
0
b. In paragraphs (b) and (c), remove the word ``shall'' and add, in its 
place, the word ``must''; and
0
c. Revise paragraphs (d), (e), and (f).
    The additions and revisions read as follows:


Sec.  154.300  Operations manual: General.

    (a) The facility operator of each facility to which this part 
applies must submit to the COTP of the zone(s) in which the facility 
operates, with the letter of intent, an Operations Manual in printed or 
electronic format that:
* * * * *
    (4) After September 10, 2021, includes a date, revision date, or 
other revision-specific identifying information.
* * * * *
    (d) In determining whether the manual meets the requirements of 
this part and part 156 of this chapter, the COTP will consider the 
products transferred, and the size, complexity, and capability of the 
facility.
    (e) If the manual meets the requirements of this part and part 156 
of this chapter, the COTP will provide notice to the facility stating 
the manual has been examined by the Coast Guard as described in Sec.  
154.325. The notice will include the date, revision date of the manual, 
or other revision-specific identifying information.
    (f) The facility operator must ensure printed or electronic copies 
of the most recently examined Operations Manual, including any 
translations required by paragraph (a)(3) of this section, are readily 
available for each facility person in charge while conducting a 
transfer operation. Electronic devices used to display the manual must 
comply with applicable electrical safety standards in this part;
* * * * *

0
7. Amend Sec.  154.320 as follows:
0
a. Revise paragraphs (a), (b), and (c); and
0
b. Add paragraph (e).
    The additions and revisions read as follows:


Sec.  154.320   Operations manual: Amendment.

    (a) Using the following procedures, the COTP may require the 
facility operator to amend the operations manual if the COTP finds that 
the operations manual does not meet the requirements in this 
subchapter:
    (1) The COTP will notify the facility operator in writing of any 
inadequacies in the Operations Manual. The facility operator may submit 
information, views, and arguments regarding the inadequacies 
identified, and proposals for amending the Manual, in print or 
electronically, within 45 days from the date of the COTP notice. After 
considering all relevant material presented, the COTP will notify the 
facility operator of any amendment required or adopted, or the COTP 
will rescind the notice. The amendment becomes effective 60 days after 
the facility operator receives the notice, unless the facility operator 
petitions the

[[Page 43941]]

Commandant to review the COTP's notice, in which case its effective 
date is delayed pending a decision by the Commandant. Petitions to the 
Commandant must be submitted in writing via the COTP who issued the 
requirement to amend the Operations Manual.
    (2) If the COTP finds that there is a condition requiring immediate 
action to prevent the discharge or risk of discharge of oil or 
hazardous material that makes the procedure in paragraph (a)(1) of this 
section impractical or contrary to the public interest, the COTP may 
issue an amendment effective on the date the facility operator receives 
notice of it. In such a case, the COTP will include a brief statement 
of the reasons for the findings in the notice. The owner or operator 
may petition the Commandant to review the amendment, but the petition 
does not delay the amendment.
    (b) The facility operator may propose amendments to the operations 
manual by:
    (1) Submitting any proposed amendment and reasons for the amendment 
to the COTP in printed or electronic format not less than 30 days 
before the requested effective date of the proposed amendment; or
    (2) If an immediate amendment is needed, requesting the COTP to 
examine the amendment immediately.
    (c) The COTP will respond to proposed amendments submitted under 
paragraph (b) of this section by:
    (1) Notifying the facility operator that the amendments have been 
examined by the Coast Guard; or
    (2) Notifying the facility operator of any inadequacies in the 
operations manual or proposed amendments, with an explanation of why 
the manual or amendments do not meet the requirements of this 
subchapter.
* * * * *
    (e) Amendments may be submitted as page replacements or as an 
entire manual. When an entire manual is submitted, the facility 
operator must highlight or otherwise annotate the changes that were 
made since the last version examined by the Coast Guard. A revision 
date or other revision-specific identifying information must be 
included on the page replacements or amended manual.

0
8. Amend Sec.  154.325 as follows:
0
a. Remove paragraph (a);
0
b. Redesignate paragraphs (b) through (g) as paragraphs (a) through 
(f), respectively; and
0
c. Revise newly redesignated paragraphs (a) through (d) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  154.325  Operations manual: Procedures for examination.

    (a) Not less than 60 days prior to the first transfer operation, 
the operator of a new facility must submit, with the letter of intent, 
an Operations Manual in printed or electronic format to the COTP of the 
zone(s) in which the facility is located.
    (b) After a facility is removed from caretaker status, not less 
than 30 days prior to the first transfer operation, the operator of 
that facility must submit an Operations Manual in printed or electronic 
format to the COTP of the zone in which the facility is located, unless 
the manual has been previously examined and no changes have been made 
since the examination.
    (c) If the COTP finds that the Operations Manual meets the 
requirements of this part and part 156 of this chapter, the COTP will 
provide notice to the facility stating the manual has been examined by 
the Coast Guard. The notice will include the date, revision date of the 
manual, or other revision-specific identifying information.
    (d) If the COTP finds that the Operations Manual does not meet the 
requirements of this part or part 156 of this subchapter, the COTP will 
notify the facility with an explanation of why the manual does not meet 
the requirements of this subchapter.
* * * * *

PART 156--OIL AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL TRANSFER OPERATIONS

0
9. The authority citation for part 156 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1321(j); 46 U.S.C. 3703, 3703a, 3715, 
70011, 70034; E.O. 11735, 3 CFR 1971-1975 Comp., p. 793; Department 
of Homeland Security Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.2.


0
10. Revise Sec.  156.120(t)(2) to read as follows:


Sec.  156.120  Requirements for transfer.

* * * * *
    (t) * * *
    (2) Has readily available in the marine transfer area a copy of the 
most recently examined facility operations manual or vessel transfer 
procedures, as appropriate; and
* * * * *

    Dated: August 3, 2021.
J.W. Mauger,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Prevention 
Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-16869 Filed 8-10-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


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