Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 43915 

instruction within that final rule that 

deleted existing regulatory text that 

should not have been deleted. 

DATES: This correction is effective on 

August 30, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this rule, call or 

email Mr. Lee D. Soule, Bridge 

Management Specialist, Ninth Coast 

Guard District; telephone 216–902– 

6085, email Lee.D.Soule@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Correction 

On July 30, 2021 the Coast Guard 

published a final rule titled 

‘‘Drawbridge Operation Regulation; 

Chicago River, Chicago, IL’’ (86 FR 

40957). In this document, FR Doc. 

2021–15986, appearing on page 40959, 

in the first and second columns, the 

final rule inadvertently deleted what 

was in paragraph (d) and replaced it 

with new text. The Coast Guard did not 

intend to delete the existing text and 

requirements in 117.391(d). Therefore, 

we are correcting the final rule to 

instead add a new paragraph (e) with 

the same regulatory text as was issued 

in the final rule and preserve what has 

been in existing paragraph (d). 

On page 40959, in the first column, in 

part 117, amendatory instruction 

number 2 is corrected to read as follows: 

■ 2. Amend § 117.391 by adding 

paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 117.391 Chicago River. 

* * * * * 

(e) The Amtrak Bridge, mile 3.77, is 

authorized to operate remotely and open 

to the intermediate position on signal, 

unless a request for a full opening is 

received by the drawtender. The bridge 

is required to operate a marine radio. 

* * * * * 

M. T. Cunningham, 

Chief, Office of Regulations and 

Administrative Law. 

[FR Doc. 2021–17103 Filed 8–10–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

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 benjamin.d.mazyck@uscg.mil. 

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 TransportationRelated 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 

§ 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 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
43916 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

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 § 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 § 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 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 43917 

1We 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. 

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 § 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-bysection 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

Finally, within § 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 § 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 § 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 § 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 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
43918 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

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 revisionspecific identifying information on the 

letter, but could eventually include an 

electronic certification with this 

information. 

Paragraph (f) of § 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 § 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 § 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 wholemanual 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 

§ 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 

§ 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 § 154.325 

(previously paragraph (e) of § 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 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 43919 

2The 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.’’ 

3For 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. 

4See 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. 

5This change, from one copy to two copies, was 

made due to new information provided by Coast 

Guard subject matter experts (SMEs). 

6This change, from zero copies to one copy, was 

made due to new input from Coast Guard SMEs. 

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. 

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

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. 

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 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
43920 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

7The 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). 

8Based 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. 

9Each 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. 

10These 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. 

11The Coast Guard envisions sending back an 

electronic format of the manual with an 

electronically stamped watermark, notification, or 

similar method. 

12The 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). 

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. 

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

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. 

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. 

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. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 43921 

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF THE IMPACTS OF THE FINAL RULE 1

Category Summary 

Applicability ........................................................................ • 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. 

• 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. 

• Updates 33 CFR parts 127 and 154 to permit the Coast Guard to send notices of 

adequacy or inadequacy to facilities electronically. 

• 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, 7% discount rate) ......... 10-year cost savings: $276,689; Annualized: $39,394. 

Cost savings to the Coast Guard ($2020, 7% discount 

rate).

10-year cost savings: $60,512; Annualized: $8,616. 

Total Cost Savings ($2020, 7% discount rate) .................. 10-year cost savings: $337,200; Annualized: $48,010. 

1All dollar figures rounded to the closest whole dollar. 

2Electronic 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). 3Of 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

Population Cost savings element 

Final rule 

annual cost 

savings 

NPRM cost 

savings Difference 

LNG/LHG Facilities ................. Savings from not having to produce printed manuals (and 

amendments) to mail to the COTP.

$579 $498 $81 

Savings from not having to produce printed manuals (and 

amendments) for placement at facility marine transfer 

areas.

242 234 8 

Savings from not having to mail manuals (and amendments) to the COTP.1,011 994 17 

Savings from not having to place printed manuals (and 

amendments) at facility marine transfer areas.

1,634 1,605 29 

Total Annual LNG/LHG 

Facility Cost Savings.

................................................................................................. 3,466 3,331 135 

MTR Facility ............................ Savings from not having to produce printed manuals (and 

amendments) to mail to the COTP.

11,839 9,895 1,944 

Savings from not having to produce printed manuals (and 

amendments) for placements at facility marine transfer 

areas.

2,120 2,023 97 

Savings from not having to mail manuals (and amendments) to the COTP.14,312 13,536 776 

Savings from not having to place printed manuals (and 

amendments) at facility marine transfer areas.

7,658 7,522 136 

Total Annual MTR Facility 

Cost Savings.

................................................................................................. 35,929 32,976 2,953 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
43922 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

13Electronic versions at the marine transfer areas 

of facilities will be on electronic devices that must 

comply with applicable electrical safety standards. 

TABLE 2—ANNUAL COST SAVINGS OF FINAL RULE AND NPRM COMPARED—Continued 

Population Cost savings element 

Final rule 

annual cost 

savings 

NPRM cost 

savings Difference 

Total Private Sector Cost 

Savings.

................................................................................................. 39,395 36,307 3,088 

Coast Guard ........................... Savings from not having to mail printed manuals (and 

amendments) back to facilities.

8,616 7,426 1,190 

Total Annual Coast Guard 

Cost Savings.

................................................................................................. 8,616 7,426 1,190 

Total Private + Government Sector.................................................................................................. 48,011 43,733 4,278 

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

Final rule NPRM Difference % 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

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 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 43923 

14The search of MISLE was conducted on 

November 18, 2019. 

15A 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. 

16The 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. 

17This information was obtained from Coast 

Guard SMEs in CG–FAC. 

18The 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-touchslant-rings-600-sheet-capacity-heavy-duty-viewbinder-white/-/A-14432722); and (5) Amazon 

(https://www.amazon.com/Wilson-Jones-BinderBasic-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). 

19This information was obtained from Coast 

Guard SMEs in CG–FAC. 

20A 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.’’ 

21The original pages that the newly submitted 

pages replace, assuming the document was in paper 

format, are disposed of by the COTP. 

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: 

• The size of the facility; 

• 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); 

• The number and type of products 

transferred at the facility; 

• The types of transfer operations 

occurring at the facility; and 

• 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. 

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. 

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. 

We examined MISLE data between 

2009 and 2019 (inclusively) to 

determine that an annual average of 60 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
43924 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

22An 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. 

23This number is rounded to the nearest whole 

number, as are all population numbers provided 

below. 

24This 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. 26The 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). 

27We conducted this search of MISLE on 

November 18, 2019. 

28This number is rounded up to the closest whole 

number. 

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

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. 

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

Facility 

type 

Total 

instances of 

operations and 

emergency 

manuals filed 

Total 

instances of 

operations and 

emergency 

manual 

amendments 

filed 

Total 

instances of 

documents 

filed 

Total 

instances of 

operations and 

emergency 

manuals filed 

electronically 

Total 

instances of 

operations and 

emergency 

manual 

amendments 

filed electronically 

Total 

instances of 

manuals filed 

electronically 

Total 

instances of 

operations and 

emergency 

manuals filed 

in print form 

Total 

instances of 

operations and 

emergency 

manual 

amendments 

filed in print 

form 

Total 

instances of 

manual 

amendments 

filed in print 

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

Population Cost savings element 

Annual cost 

savings 

($2020) 1

LNG/LHG Facilities ................................... Savings from not having to produce printed manuals (and amendments) to mail to 

the COTP.2

3 $579 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 43925 

29 33 CFR 127.019(a) and (b). 

30As 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). 

TABLE 5—ANNUAL COST SAVINGS OF FINAL RULE TO PRIVATE SECTOR BY POPULATION AND COST SAVINGS ELEMENT— 

Continued 

Population Cost savings element 

Annual cost 

savings 

($2020) 1

Savings from not having to produce printed manuals (and amendments) for placement at facility marine transfer areas.4

5 242 

Savings from not having to mail manuals (and amendments) to the COTP .............. 6 1,011 

Savings from not having to place printed manuals (and amendments) at facility marine transfer areas.

7 1,634 

Total Annual LNG/LHG Facility Cost 

Savings.

....................................................................................................................................... 8 3,466 

MTR Facilities ........................................... Savings from not having to produce printed manuals (and amendments) to mail to 

the COTP.9

10 11,839 

Savings from not having to produce printed manuals (and amendments) for placements at facility marine transfer areas.11

12 2,120 

Savings from not having to mail manuals (and amendments) to the COTP .............. 13 14,312 

Savings from not having to place printed manuals (and amendments) at facility marine transfer areas.

14 7,658 

Total Annual MTR Facility Cost Savings........................................................................................................................................ 15 35,929 

Total ............................................ ....................................................................................................................................... 16 39,395 

1 Rounded to closest whole dollar. 

2 Includes cost of binder, paper, printing and labor required to assemble. 

3From 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. 5From table 14. 

6From table 12. 

7From table 16. 

8Total figure may not be exact due to rounding. 

9 Includes cost of binder, paper, printing, and labor required to assemble. 

10From 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. 12From table 15. 13From table 13. 14From table 17. 15Total figure may not be exact due to rounding. 16Total figure may not be exact due to rounding. 

TABLE 6—ANNUAL COST SAVINGS OF FINAL RULE TO COAST GUARD

Population Administrative cost savings element 

Annual cost 

savings 

($2020) 1

Coast Guard ............................................. Savings from not having to mail printed manuals (and amendments) back to facilities.

2 $8,616 

1 Rounded to closest whole dollar. 

2From 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, 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
43926 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

32The 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 

33The five different websites were: (1) Office 

Depot (https://www.officedepot.com/a/products/ 

765530/Aurora-EarthView-Round-RingOrganization-Binder/) ($5.99), (2) Staples (https://

www.staples.com/Simply-5-inch-Light-Use-Round3-Ring-Binder-Red-26852/product_1337664) 

($3.29), (3) Walmart (https://www.walmart.com/ip/ 

Pen-Gear-0-5-inch-Durable-Binder-Clearview-CoverWhite/945565181) ($2.47), (4) Target (https:// 

www.target.com/p/avery-120-sheet-0-5-34-durableview-ring-binder-black/-/A-16978071) ($2.59), and 

(5) Amazon (https://www.amazon.com/AveryEconomy-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. 

34The specific series used was CUSR0000SA0 

(seasonally adjusted), downloaded from the BLS’s 

Consumer Price Index seasonally adjusted tables 

(https://www.bls.gov/cpi/tables/seasonaladjustment/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 × 1.013 = $3.708, 

rounded to $3.71). 

35The websites were: (1) Office Depot (https://

www.officedepot.com/a/products/841195/OfficeDepot-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/PenGear-Copy-Paper-8-5x11-92-Bright-20-lb-1-ream500-Sheets/487634010) ($3.97), (4) Amazon 

(https://www.amazon.com/Hammermill-RecycledPrinter-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-durableview-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 × 1.013 = $0.633, rounded to $0.63. 

37This 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 × 1.013 = $2.258, rounded to $2.26. 

39 $3.71 + $0.63 + $2.26 = $6.60. 

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. 

42Bureau 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. 

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. 

45Bureau 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. 

47This 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. 

and current industry practice is to 

submit printed documents.32

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

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

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. 

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. 

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 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 43927 

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. 52These numbers can be found in table 5 of the 

NPRM. 

53The 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. 

54From table 6 in the NPRM. 

55 $0.06 × 1.013 = $0.06078, rounded to $0.06. 

$0.22 × 1.013 = $0.2228, rounded to $0.22. 

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. 

60From table 6 in the NPRM. 

61For 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. 

62The 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. 

63ArcGIS has a website listing the full set of 41 

zones (https://hub.arcgis.com/datasets/ 

geoplatform::us-coast-guard-uscg-captain-of-theport-zones/explore?showTable=true, downloaded 

July 6, 2021). 

64The 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). 

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

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. 

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 

$2.14.56 57 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. 58 59 These costs 

are detailed in table 8. In the NPRM, we 

estimated the associated costs at $1.60 

and $2.28.60

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

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 costeffective 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. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
43928 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

65We 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-OrganizationBinder/; (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-CoverWhite/945565181; (4) https://www.target.com/p/ 

avery-120-sheet-0-5-34-durable-view-ring-binderblack/-/A-16978071; and (5) https://

www.amazon.com/Avery-Economy-Binder-0-5-InchRound/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 × 320 = 32 

ounces). Those five websites were: (1) https://

www.officedepot.com/a/products/841195/OfficeDepot-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-printerpaper-white-up-up-153/-/A-75001545; (5) https://

www.amazon.com/Hammermill-Recycled-PrinterLetter-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/usunited-states/services/Service_Guide_2021.pdf) 

shows that FedEx charged $10.19. Hence, the 

average was $10.19. 

67See table 7 of the NPRM. 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/usunited-states/services/Service_Guide_2021.pdf) 

shows that FedEx charged $9.25. Hence, the average 

was $9.25. 

69See table 7 in the NPRM. 

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/usunited-states/services/Service_Guide_2021.pdf) 

shows that FedEx charged $8.23. Hence, the average 

was $8.23. 

71See table 7 in the NPRM. 

72This 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. 

73Based 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. 

76See table 8 of the NPRM. 

77 0.07 multiplied by $70.65 equals $4.95. 

78 0.07 multiplied by $106.82 equals $7.48. 

79See table 8 of NPRM. 

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

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

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

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

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

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 Manuals (one 0.5-inch 

binder) for LNG/LHG facilities.

$9.25 (NPRM: $9.56) ............... $5.65 (NPRM: $5.27) ............... $14.90 (NPRM: $14.83). 

Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals (two 0.5-inch 

binders) for LNG/LHG facilities.

$10.19 (NPRM: $10.11) ........... $5.65 (NPRM: $5.27) ............... $15.84 (NPRM: $15.38). 

Amendments (one or two 5-page amendments) for LNG/LHG 

facilities.

$8.23 (NPRM: $8.88) ............... $4.95 (NPRM: $4.61) ............... $13.18 (NPRM: $13.49). 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 43929 

80Currently, 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. 

81 90 percent multiplied by 30 percent equals 27 

percent. 

TABLE 9—SHIPPING AND HANDLING COSTS BY FACILITY AND DOCUMENT TYPE—Continued 

[Final Rule and NPRM] 

Document type Shipping cost Handling 

(labor costs) Total 

MTR Facility Documents 

Operations Manuals (one 0.5-inch binder) for MTR facilities ...... $9.25 (NPRM: $9.56) ............... $8.55 (NPRM: $8.00) ............... $17.80 (NPRM: $17.56). 

Operations Manuals (two 0.5-inch binders) for MTR facilities ..... $10.19 (NPRM: $10.11) ........... $8.55 (NPRM: $8.00) ............... $18.74 (NPRM: $18.11). 

Amendments (one or two 5-page amendments) for MTR facilities.$8.23 (NPRM: $8.88) ............... $7.48 (NPRM: $7.00) ............... $15.71 (NPRM: $15.88). 

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. 

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: 

• 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. 

• 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. 

• LNG/LHG facilities storing fewer 

printed Operations Manuals and 

Emergency Manuals (0.5-inch binders) 

and amendments (5 pages) at marine 

transfer areas. 

• MTR facilities initially printing and 

mailing fewer printed Operations 

Manuals (0.5-inch binders) and 

amendments (5 pages) to the COTP. 

• MTR facilities printing and mailing 

fewer printed Operations Manuals (0.5- 

inch binders) and amendments that 

have to be resubmitted to the COTP. 

• 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 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
43930 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

82 10 percent multiplied by 30 percent is 3 

percent. 

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. 

85The 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. 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. 

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. 

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. 

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

TABLE 10—ANNUAL LNG/LHG FACILITY PRODUCTION COST SAVINGS 1

LNG/LHG production cost savings from: 

Instances of 

documents 

forecast to be 

submitted 

Expected rate 

of electronic 

documents 

submitted 

(%) 

Reduction in 

printed 

documents 

needed 

Production 

costs 

(each) 2

Total 

production 

cost savings 

Manuals Submitted Electronically ........................................ 18 90 2 $9.50 $307.80 

Manuals Submitted in Printed Form .................................... ........................ 10 1 9.50 17.10 

Amendments Submitted Electronically ................................ 42 90 2 1.69 127.76 

Amendments Submitted in Printed Form ............................ ........................ 10 1 1.69 7.10 

Inadequate Manuals Submitted Electronically ..................... 18 27 2 9.50 92.34 

Inadequate Manuals Submitted in Printed Form ................. ........................ 3 1 9.50 5.13 

Inadequate Amendments Submitted Electronically ............. 42 14 2 1.69 19.87 

Inadequate Amendments Submitted in Printed Form ......... ........................ 2 1 1.69 1.42 

Total .............................................................................. ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ 578.52 

1All figures rounded to the nearest whole cent. 

2All 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.88 89

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. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 43931 

TABLE 11—ANNUAL MTR FACILITY PRODUCTION COST SAVINGS

MTR facility production cost savings from: 

Instances of 

documents 

forecast to be 

submitted 

Expected rate 

of electronic 

documents 

submitted 

(%) 

Reduction in 

printed 

documents 

needed 

Production 

costs 

(each) 1

Total 

production 

cost savings 

Manuals Submitted Electronically ........................................ 261 75 2 $16.21 $6,346.22 

Manuals Submitted in Printed Form .................................... ........................ 25 1 16.21 1,057.70 

Amendments Submitted Electronically ................................ 442 75 2 2.42 1,604.46 

Amendments Submitted in Printed Form ............................ ........................ 25 1 2.42 267.41 

Inadequate Manuals Submitted Electronically ..................... 261 23 2 16.21 1,946.17 

Inadequate Manuals Submitted in Printed Form ................. ........................ 8 1 16.21 338.46 

Inadequate Amendments Submitted Electronically ............. 442 11 2 2.42 235.32 

Inadequate Amendments Submitted in Printed Form ......... ........................ 4 1 2.42 42.79 

Total .............................................................................. ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ 11,838.53 

1All 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

LNG/LHG facility shipping cost savings from: 

Instances of 

documents 

forecast to be 

submitted 

Expected rate 

of electronic 

documents 

submitted 

Shipping and 

handling costs 

(each 

package) 1

Total annual 

shipping cost 

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

MTR facility shipping cost savings from: 

Instances of 

documents 

forecast to be 

submitted 

Expected rate 

of electronic 

documents 

submitted 

Shipping costs 

(each 

package 1) 

Total annual 

shipping cost 

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 

1All numbers in this column are from table 9. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
43932 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

90This electronic documentation will be accessed 

via a device such as an electronic tablet. 

91LNG/LHG facilities must have Operations 

Manuals and Emergency Manuals at these locations, 

and MTR facilities have Operations Manuals only. 

92For example, through Wi-Fi or hardwire 

connection. 

93See tables 5 and 6 and the discussions 

accompanying them. 

94See discussion under the ‘‘Affected 

Population’’ section of this RA. 

95See tables 7 and 8 and the discussions 

accompanying them. 96See discussion under the ‘‘Affected 

Population’’ section of this RA. 97There is no comparable BLS occupational code 

51–1011 under the BLS’s NAICS 483000 (Water 

Transportation). 98May 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. 

99We 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 

× 0.51 = $18.40) = $54.47. 

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. 

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. 

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. 

TABLE 14—ANNUAL LNG/LHG FACILITY PRODUCTION COST SAVINGS FOR MARINE TRANSFER AREAS

Marine transfer area cost savings: 

Instances of 

documents per 

year 

Electronic 

document use 

at marine 

transfer areas 

(%) 

Marine 

transfer areas 

per facility 

Production 

costs 

(each) 

Annual 

production 

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. 

TABLE 15—ANNUAL MTR FACILITY PRODUCTION COST SAVINGS FOR MARINE TRANSFER AREAS

Marine transfer area cost savings: 

Instances of 

documents per 

year 

Electronic 

document use 

at marine 

transfer areas 

(%) 

Marine 

transfer areas 

per facility 

Production 

costs 

(each) 

Annual 

production 

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

Using the estimated loaded labor rate 

of $54.47 per hour, multiplied by the 

affected populations discussed 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 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

Labor of storing manuals and amendments 

Instances 

of documents 

per year 

Electronic 

document use 

at marine 

transfer areas 

(%) 

Labor costs 

Total annual 

labor cost 

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

Labor of storing manuals and amendments 

Instances of 

documents 

per year 

Electronic 

document use 

at marine 

transfer areas 

Labor costs 

Total annual 

labor cost 

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% 

LNG/LHG cost savings Nominal terms 1 7% discounted 

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 

1Sum 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% 

MTR cost savings Nominal terms 1 7% discounted 

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 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
43934 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

100 33 CFR 127.019(c). 

101 33 CFR 154.300(e). 

102The 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. 

103Source: Table 9. 

104Commandant 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. 

TABLE 19—ANNUAL COST SAVINGS FOR MTR FACILITIES ON A NOMINAL BASIS AND DISCOUNTED AT 7%—Continued 

MTR cost savings Nominal terms 1 7% discounted 

rate 

Total .......................................................................................................................................................... 359,290.22 252,350.42 

Annualized ................................................................................................................................................ ............................ 35,929.02 

1Sum 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% 

Total private sector cost savings Nominal terms 7% discounted 

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. 

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. 

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

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.105 106 We estimated 

labor costs at $3.60 for an E–4 and $4.32 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 43935 

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. 

109Both of these figures are rounded to the 

nearest whole cent. 

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].’’ 

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. 

TABLE 21—COAST GUARD SHIPPING AND HANDLING COSTS

Shipping and handling costs 

Mailing costs Handling 

(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. 

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

Cost savings to the coast guard 

Instances of 

documents per 

year 1

Expected rate 

of electronic 

documents 

production 

(%) 

Shipping and 

handling costs 

Annual cost 

savings 

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 

1See 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% 

Coast guard cost savings Nominal terms 7% Discounted 

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 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
43936 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

111Of 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. 

112We conducted this search of the MISLE 

database in mid-December 2020. 

113As 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. 

114Rounded to nearest whole number. 85 

multiplied by 45 percent equals 38.25 (rounded to 

38). 

115From table 18, rounded to closest whole 

dollar. 

116 $3,465 divided by 38 equals $91.18 per 

impacted owner per year. 

TABLE 23—COAST GUARD COSTS SAVINGS ON A NOMINAL BASIS AND DISCOUNTED AT 7%—Continued 

Coast guard cost savings Nominal terms 7% Discounted 

rate 1

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 cost savings Nominal terms 7% Discounted 

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-forprofit 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. 

With respect to the MTR facility 

population, we estimate that 527 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 43937 

117See the discussion under the ‘‘Affected 

Population’’ section of this RA. 

118Rounded 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. 

119We conducted this search of the MISLE 

database in Mid-December 2020. 

120We 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: [Z2*p*q]/(e2) and (N/[1+(N*(e2))]. 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: 

[(1.962)*0.5*0.5]/(0.052) = 310.6 (rounded to 311) 

and 1,390/[1+(1,390*(0.052)] = 384.16 (rounded to 

385). As 385 is the higher number we select it as 

our relevant sample size. 

121We 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. 

122 1,390 multiplied by 21 percent equals 291.9. 

123From 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. 

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=USCG2019-0353). 

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. 

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. 

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. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
43938 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

127Annual 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. 

129The 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. 

130OMB Control Number: 1625–0093. 

131The existing collection of information states 

that the Letters of Intent submissions equal the 

number of Operation Manual submissions. 

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. 

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. 

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

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 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 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. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
43940 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

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 

■ 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. 

■ 2. Revise § 127.019 to read as follows: 

§ 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 § 127.305 or 

§ 127.1305 and that the Emergency 

Manual meets § 127.307 or § 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. 

■ 3. In § 127.309, revise the introductory 

text and paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 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; 

* * * * * 

■ 4. In § 127.1309, revise the 

introductory text and paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 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 

■ 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). 

■ 6. Amend § 154.300 as follows: 

■ a. Revise paragraph (a) introductory 

text and add paragraph (a)(4); 

■ b. In paragraphs (b) and (c), remove 

the word ‘‘shall’’ and add, in its place, 

the word ‘‘must’’; and 

■ c. Revise paragraphs (d), (e), and (f). 

The additions and revisions read as 

follows: 

§ 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 revisionspecific 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 § 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; 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Amend § 154.320 as follows: 

■ a. Revise paragraphs (a), (b), and (c); 

and 

■ b. Add paragraph (e). 

The additions and revisions read as 

follows: 

§ 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 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 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. 

■ 8. Amend § 154.325 as follows: 

■ a. Remove paragraph (a); 

■ b. Redesignate paragraphs (b) through 

(g) as paragraphs (a) through (f), 

respectively; and 

■ c. Revise newly redesignated 

paragraphs (a) through (d) to read as 

follows: 

§ 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 

■ 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. 

■ 10. Revise § 156.120(t)(2) to read as 

follows: 

§ 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 

POSTAL SERVICE 

39 CFR Part 121 

Revised Service Standards for MarketDominant Mail Products 

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Postal Service is adding 

one to two days to the service standards 

for certain First-Class Mail and 

Periodicals. 

DATES: Effective October 1, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Twana Barber, Strategic 

Communications Business Partner, at 

202–714–3417. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

II. Comments 

III. Response to Comments 

A. Representative Concerns 

B. Other Statutory Concerns 

IV. Explanation of Final Rules 

A. Service Standards Generally 

B. First-Class Mail 

C. Periodicals 

I. Introduction 

On April 23, 2021, the Postal Service 

published proposed revisions to FirstClass Mail and Periodicals service 

standards in the Federal Register and 

sought public comment (the Proposed 

Rule). Service Standards for MarketDominant Mail Products, 86 FR 21675 

(Apr. 23, 2021). These proposed service 

standards constitute a central element of 

the Postal Service’s Delivering for 

America strategic plan to achieve 

service excellence and financial 

sustainability, which was announced on 

March 23, 2021. The comment period 

for the Proposed Rule closed on June 22, 

2021. Current service standards require 

the Postal Service to rely heavily on air 

transportation, using air cargo 

transportation carriers and commercial 

passenger air carriers. Air transportation 

is subject to a number of factors that 

make it less reliable than surface 

transportation, such as weather delays, 

network congestion, and air traffic 

control ground stops; air transportation 

also tends to cost significantly more 

than surface transportation. The basic 

logic of the changes is that the addition 

of one or two days to current service 

standards for First-Class Mail and 

Periodicals would enable the Postal 

Service to convey a greater volume of 

mail within the contiguous United 

States by surface transportation, thereby 

achieving a better balance of on-time 

reliability and cost-effectiveness. It 

would also enable the Postal Service to 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES