20770 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2001 / Proposed Rules

promulgated, will not have a significant

economic impact, positive or negative,

on a substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft

regulatory evaluation prepared for this

action is contained in the Rules Docket.

A copy of it may be obtained by

contacting the Rules Docket at the

location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

Aerospatiale: Docket 2001–NM–08–AD.

Applicability: Model ATR42–200, –300,

and –320 series airplanes, certificated in any

category; except those modified in

accordance with Modification 3047 or

Avions de Transport Regional Service

Bulletin ATR42–80–0001.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in

the area subject to the requirements of this

AD. For airplanes that have been modified,

altered, or repaired so that the performance

of the requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (b) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent the loss of electrical power

supply of the DC emergency and standby

buses, which could result in the loss of some

electrical loads and the consequent display of

erroneous information to the flight crew,

accomplish the following:

Modification

(a) Within 6 months after the effective date

of this AD, modify the wiring of the starting

rotary switch, in accordance with Avions de

Transport Regional Service Bulletin ATR42–

80–0001, Revision 2, dated November 15,

2000.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(b) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport

Airplane Directorate, FAA. Operators shall

submit their requests through an appropriate

FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who

may add comments and then send it to the

Manager, International Branch, ANM–116.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the International Branch,

ANM–116.

Special Flight Permits

(c) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French airworthiness directive 2000–454–

081(B), dated November 15, 2000.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 18,

2001.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–10178 Filed 4–24–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 159

[CGD17–01–003]

RIN 2115–AG12

Discharge of Effluents in Certain

Alaskan Waters by Cruise Vessel

Operations

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes

regulations regarding sewage and

graywater discharges from certain cruise

vessels transiting applicable waters of

Alaska. Operators of cruise vessels

carrying 500 or more passengers and

transiting applicable waters of Alaska

are restricted in where they may

discharge effluents and would be

required to perform testing of sewage

and graywater discharges and maintain

records of such discharges. The Coast

Guard would inspect, monitor, and

oversee this process to ensure

compliance with applicable water

quality laws and regulations.

DATES: Comments and related material

must reach the Coast Guard on or before

May 25, 2001.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments

and related material to the Commander

Seventeenth Coast Guard District (m),

P.O. Box 25517, Juneau, AK, 99802–

5517, or deliver them to room 751 of the

Federal Building in Juneau, AK between

9:30 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except Federal holidays. The

telephone number is 907–463–2802.

You must also mail comments on

collection of information to the Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs,

Office of Management and Budget, 725

17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503,

ATTN: Desk Officer, U.S. Coast Guard.

The Coast Guard Seventeenth District

(m) Secretary maintains the public

docket for this rulemaking. Comments

and material received from the public,

as well as documents indicated in this

preamble as being available in the

docket, will become part of this docket

and will be available for inspection or

copying at room 751, U.S. Coast Guard

Seventeenth District (m), between 9:30

a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

LCDR Spencer Wood, Seventeenth

District (moc), 907–463–2809.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

We encourage you to participate in

this rulemaking by submitting

comments and related material. If you

do so, please include your name and

address, identify the docket number for

this rulemaking (CGD17–01–003),

indicate the specific section of this

document to which each comment

applies, and give the reason for each

comment. Please submit two copies of

all comments and related material in an

unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by

11 inches, suitable for copying. If you

would like to know they reached us,

please enclose a stamped, self-addressed

postcard or envelope. We will consider

all comments and material received

during the comment period. We may

change this proposed rule in view of

them.

We are using 30-day comment period

for this rulemaking. Due to the localized

interest in this proposed regulation, we

feel that this comment period will allow

all interested parties enough time to file

comments with the Coast Guard.

Additionally, because the Alaska cruise

season is seasonal, a shorter comment

period is needed in order to allow for

publication of a Final Rule before the

2001 season ends in mid-September.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2001 / Proposed Rules 20771

Public Meeting

We do not now plan to hold a public

meeting. But you may submit a request

for one to the docket at the address

under ADDRESSES explaining why one

would be beneficial. If we determine

that one would aid this rulemaking, we

will hold one at a time and place

announced by a later notice in the

Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

Congress passed ‘‘Title XIV—Certain

Alaskan Cruise Ship Operations’’ of the

Miscellaneous Appropriations Bill (H.R.

5666) on December 21, 2000 in the

Consolidated Appropriations Act of

2001 (P.L. 106–554) [‘‘Title XIV’’] in

response to public concern with

environmental impacts of cruise vessels

on Alaska waters. This legislation was

drafted in the wake of past incidents of

illegal wastewater discharges, the

discovery of high levels of fecal coliform

in legal discharges of treated sewage and

graywater, the projected growth of the

industry, and the trend within the

industry towards larger vessels that

carry over 5000 people. In December of

1999, a task force comprised of

representatives from the federal

government, State government, the

cruise industry, and environmental

groups was established to develop

voluntary procedures for sampling and

analyzing wastes generated by cruise

vessels while operating in Alaska’s

waters during the 2000 cruise vessel

season.

During the summer 2000 cruise

season, the relevant segment of the

cruise industry voluntarily agreed not to

discharge treated sewage or graywater

while in port, not to discharge garbage

or untreated sewage in Southeast

Alaska’s ‘‘Donut Holes’’ (bodies of water

greater than three miles from any

shoreline yet within Alaska’s inside

passage), and not to discharge treated

sewage or graywater, unless more than

10 miles from port and proceeding at a

speed of not less than 6 knots.

Additionally, a voluntary sampling

and testing protocol and Quality

Assurance/Quality Control Plan (QA/

QPC) for treated sewage and graywater

were developed. The protocol and QA/

QPC were applied to 21 cruise vessels

calling on Alaska ports during the 2000

season.

The test results revealed that the

majority of the vessels’ discharges, both

treated sewage and graywater, exceeded

marine sanitation device (MSD) design

standards for water quality of 200 fecal

coliform per 100 milliliters and 150

milligrams per liter total suspended

solids (TSS). The high levels of fecal

coliform and TSS found in treated

sewage indicate that the MSDs used by

cruise vessels may not be operating

properly or functioning as designed.

The Coast Guard boarded 15 vessels as

a result of high fecal coliform and TSS

levels. Five vessels were found to have

evidence of improperly functioning

MSDs. The source of the high fecal

coliform and TSS found in graywater

has yet to be positively determined.

Concurrent with this voluntary

sampling process, Congress was drafting

legislation that addressed sewage and

graywater discharges in Alaska’s waters

and sought to close the ‘‘Donut Holes’’

located in Southeast Alaska’s Inside

Passage to untreated sewage discharge.

This legislation was enacted into law on

December 21, 2000, as part of the

Consolidated Appropriations Act of

2001 in the form of Title XIV.

These proposed regulations are in

response to Title XIV statutory mandate

to draft implementing regulations.

Section 1406 of Title XIV directs the

Secretary to incorporate into the

commercial vessel examination program

an inspection regime sufficient to verify

that operators of cruise vessels carrying

500 or more passengers and visiting

ports in the State of Alaska or operating

in the applicable waters of Alaska are in

full compliance with the environmental

record keeping and equipment

requirements of Title XIV, the Federal

Water Pollution Control Act, as

amended, and any regulations issued

there under, other applicable Federal

laws and regulations, and all applicable

international treaty requirements. The

applicable waters of Alaska are defined

as the waters of the Alexander

Archipelago, the navigable waters of the

United States within the State of Alaska,

and the Kachemak Bay National

Estuarine Research Reserve.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

This rule would establish a regime for

documentation and testing of treated

sewage and graywater effluent as

prescribed by Title XIV. The rule would

apply to cruise vessels that carry at least

500 passengers, and operate in the

navigable waters of the United States

within the State of Alaska. This area

extends out three nautical miles from

the shore along any portion of land that

is included within the jurisdiction of

the State of Alaska. The rule also would

apply to the same class of cruise vessels

that operate in the Alexander

Archipelago and the Kachemak Bay

National Estuarine Research Reserve.

The area designated as ‘‘The Alexander

Archipelago’’ is defined in this

proposed rule at § 159.305. The

definition closes areas of the

Archipelago that would otherwise be

open to dumping of untreated sewage.

The rule would not affect normal transit

through the designated areas. The rule

would not apply in an emergency

situation that threatens the safety of the

vessel or its passengers.

Under this rule cruise vessels would

maintain a Sewage and Graywater

Discharge Record Book while operating

in the applicable waters of Alaska. The

content of the record book is designed

to enable appropriate Coast Guard

oversight of sewage and graywater

handling practices and ensure

compliance with Title XIV. The

prescribed format is intended to

facilitate both the entry of data, as well

as the review of data by the Coast

Guard. The Coast Guard is interested in

input from the cruise industry and

interested members of the public on any

additional information that should be

included in the Sewage and Graywater

Discharge Record Book to enhance data

collection and interpretation of sample

test results.

This rule would prohibit the

discharge of untreated sewage within

the designated areas. It also provides for

sewage and graywater discharge effluent

standards, and establishes an interim

treated sewage standard. To discharge

treated sewage and graywater while in

the applicable waters of Alaska, a cruise

vessel would need to be underway at a

speed of at least 6 knots and be at least

one nautical mile from the nearest

shore. Further, the vessel’s discharge

would need to comply with all

applicable effluent standards, including

those contained within this rule. Lastly,

the vessel could not be in an area where

such discharge is prohibited. There are

currently no areas within the applicable

waters of Alaska that have been

designated as an area where such

discharge is prohibited.

The rule also would allow for

discharges of treated sewage and

graywater inside of one mile from shore

and at speeds less than six knots for

vessels with effluent treatment systems

that can treat sewage and graywater to

a much stricter standard. To employ this

provision a vessel would have to

provide 30 days notice of the intended

discharge to the appropriate Captain of

the Port (COTP). In the notice the vessel

would verify that the effluents it intends

to discharge meet the minimum fecal

coliform and residual chlorine

standards listed in 159.307(b) of this

rule and the standards set forth in 40

CFR 133.102. To satisfy these standards

the vessel would provide to the COTP

the test results of 5 samples taken over

a 30-day period that meet the

requirements. Further, for a vessel to

20772 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2001 / Proposed Rules

use this exemption it would have to

demonstrate its continued compliance

with this proposed rule by sampling and

testing for conventional pollutants, as

defined in 40 CFR Part 401.16,

periodically as determined by the COTP

and in accordance with the cruise

vessel’s Quality Assurance/Quality

Control Plan (QA/QCP).

To ensure a viable sampling regime it

is necessary to conduct sampling in

accordance with a thorough and well

developed QA/QPC with Vessel Specific

Sampling Plan (VSSP). These

documents would define the vessel,

sampler, and laboratory’s

responsibilities in the process of

discharge sampling and analysis to

ensure the results are timely and

accurate. The vessel owner/operator,

and/or subcontracted sampling team

and laboratory, using the outline in the

regulation as a minimum standard, may

craft the plans. Sample plans may be

obtained from the Seventeenth Coast

Guard District (moc) office or the Coast

Guard Marine Safety office in Juneau,

Alaska. Under the proposed rule the

Coast Guard will review and either

accept or reject the plans, and determine

when and from which sampling ports

samples will be drawn. In accordance

with the accepted plans, a third party,

contracted by the cruise vessel, would

conduct the sampling and deliver the

samples to a laboratory for analysis.

Between 30 and 120 days prior to

coming into the applicable waters of

Alaska, cruise vessel owners/operators

would self certify that the vessel’s

effluents meet the minimum standards

established by the Administrator of the

Environmental Protection Agency. In

the absence of such standards they

would certify that they meet the

minimum standards described in this

rule. Title XIV provides for the

Administrator to establish minimum

effluent standards for treated sewage

and graywater, but does not mandate

that they do so. In the event the

Administrator does establish effluent

standards, they would supersede the

standards listed in this rule. If a vessel

is not able to certify their effluents for

treated sewage and graywater as meeting

the applicable standards, operational

controls would be placed on the vessel

by the COTP, directing the vessel not to

discharge treated sewage and graywater

in the applicable waters of Alaska.

A cruise vessel can expect to be

sampled a minimum of two times while

operating in the applicable waters of

Alaska during a calendar year: Once,

within 30 days after first arriving at the

start of the cruise season, and a second

sometime during the remainder of the

vessel’s cruise season. During either of

the two sampling events, additional

samples may be drawn from randomly

selected discharge ports for priority

pollutant analysis.

The proposed rule would allow for

additional sampling, at the discretion of

the COTP to ensure continued

compliance throughout the operating

season and to follow-up on high-test

sample results.

All costs associated with compliance

with this proposed rule will be paid by

the cruise vessels operating in the

applicable waters of Alaska, except for

costs of oversight and enforcement by

the Coast Guard.

Tests results for the samples would be

forwarded to the COTP directly by the

laboratory conducting the analysis. The

time schedule specified in the rule is an

industry standard for laboratories

qualified to complete the analysis. The

laboratory will hold the samples for six

months in the case of disputed results.

After six months the samples become

unusable for any further beneficial

analysis and should be discarded.

The reports the laboratory must

submit on sample test results may be in

an electronic form. However, if

submitted electronically, they must be

in a format readable by the Coast Guard

and Alaska Department of

Environmental Conservation’s (ADEC)

data systems. Currently, the Coast Guard

and ADEC use a Windows operating

system.

Finally, the proposed rule sets out the

penalties that might be assessed if a

cruise vessel is found discharging

effluent that does not meet the

applicable standards.

Regulatory Evaluation

This interim rule is not a significant

regulatory action under section 3(f) of

Executive Order 12866 and does not

require an assessment of potential costs

and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that

Order. It has not been reviewed by the

Office of Management and Budget under

that Order. It is not significant under the

regulatory policies and procedures of

the Department of Transportation (DOT)

(44 FR 11040; February 26, l979). A

draft Regulatory Evaluation under

paragraph 10e of the regulatory policies

and procedures of DOT follows:

A Quality Assurance/Quality Control

Plan (QA/QCP) with Vessel Specific

Sampling Plan (VSSP) is required by

these regulations to establish procedures

for collecting and analyzing treated

sewage and graywater samples from

cruise vessels. During the summer 2000

voluntary cruise vessel sampling

program a single QA/QCP, acceptable to

the Coast Guard, was used by all 21

cruise vessels. A VSSP was then

developed for each vessel. It is

anticipated the same, or similar

depending on the laboratory used, QA/

QCP and VSSP will be used for

subsequent summer cruise vessel

seasons negating the need to develop

new ones. The Coast Guard is not able

to estimate the burden that may be

associated with individual cruise vessel

revisions to the QA/QCP and VSSP, if

any.

The annual burden of creating and

maintaining a Sewage and Graywater

Discharge Record Book on 23 cruise

vessels is expected to be $460. This

estimate is for the cost of purchasing a

record book and maintaining it onboard

each vessel. Entries into the record book

should be made during the normal

routine of the engineering watch so no

additional labor costs are expected.

During the summer 2000 cruise vessel

voluntary sampling program, the cruise

industry operating in Alaska spent an

estimated $65,000 on sampling of cruise

vessels while underway. An additional

estimated $150,000 was spent in having

the samples analyzed for conventional

pollutants and the complete suite of

priority pollutants listed in 40 CFR

401.15. The summer 2000 sampling

program included two separate

sampling events on 21 cruise vessels

from all overboard treated sewage and

graywater effluents and marine

sanitation devices. In addition to the

conventional pollutant suites, one of the

two sampling events included samples

drawn for a complete suite of priority

pollutants analysis.

These regulations provide for a

similar sampling and analysis regime

with cost savings in some areas and

offsetting cost increases in others. While

the number of more costly priority

pollutants analysis will decrease, the

number of overall sampling events for

conventional pollutants will likely

increase. Also, the number of

respondents is expected to increase

from 21 to 23. Therefore, the annual

burden for sampling and analysis under

these regulations is estimated to be

$215,000. When divided by the number

of participants, the annual cost to each

individual vessel is estimated to be

$9,348. The estimated cost to each

cruise vessel line is as follows:

Cruise line Vessels Cost

Princess Cruises ....... 6 $56,088

Holland American ..... 6 56,088

Celebrity .................... 2 18,696

Norwegian ................. 2 18,696

Royal Caribbean ....... 2 18,696

Carnival ..................... 1 9,348

Japan ........................ 1 9,348

World Explorer .......... 1 9,348

Crystal Cruises ......... 1 9,348

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2001 / Proposed Rules 20773

Cruise line Vessels Cost

Radisson Seven

Seas ...................... 1 9,348

The cost is based on two sampling

events on each cruise vessel. One

sample event would be required within

30 days of entering Alaska waters. The

second sample event, although

discretionary by the Coast Guard, will

be taken from vessels that visit Alaskan

waters at least four times a year.

Additional samples and analysis may be

required, along with the associated cost

increase, should the initial sample

results indicate noncompliance.

The Coast Guard is not able to

estimate the costs that might be incurred

if a cruise vessel cannot certify that their

discharges meet the applicable

standards, and does not have the

capacity to hold all of its discharges

while transiting the applicable waters of

Alaska. In that scenario, it is believed

that the cruise vessel would need to

alter its cruise itinerary in order to leave

the applicable Alaskan waters and enter

the high seas, thus enabling the vessel

to discharge. We would appreciate any

comments that might help us accurately

assess these costs.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered

whether this proposed rule would have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises

small businesses, not-for-profit

organizations that are independently

owned and operated and are not

dominant in their fields, and

governmental jurisdictions with

populations of less than 50,000.

The Coast Guard certifies under 5

U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule

would not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. This is due to the fact that the

cruise vessels that would be subject to

this proposed rule will be carrying 500

or more passengers. Typically, these

cruise vessels are owned by

corporations that do not qualify as small

entities.

If you think that your business,

organization, or governmental

jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity

and that this rule would have a

significant economic impact on it,

please submit a comment (see

ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it

qualifies and how and to what degree

this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

Under section 213(a) of the Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–

121), we want to assist small entities in

understanding this proposed rule so that

they can better evaluate its effects on

them and participate in the rulemaking.

If the rule would affect your small

business, organization, or governmental

jurisdiction and you have questions

concerning its provisions or options for

compliance, please contact LCDR

Spence Wood where listed at FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

Collection of Information

This rule provides for a collection of

information under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501

et seq.). As defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(c),

‘‘collection of information’’ includes

reporting, record keeping, monitoring,

posting, labeling, and other, similar

actions. The title and description of the

collections, a description of the

respondents, and an estimate of the total

annual burden follow. Included in the

estimate is the time for reviewing

instructions, searching existing sources

of data, gathering and maintaining the

data needed, and completing and

reviewing the collection.

Title: Discharge of Effluents in Certain

Alaskan Waters by Cruise Vessel

Operations.

Summary of the Collection of

Information: The following information

will be required to be collected by these

regulations:

Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan

(QA/QCP) with Vessel Specific

Sampling Plan (VSSP).

Sewage and Graywater Discharge

Record Book.

Sewage and graywater sampling test

results.

Need for Information: Compliance

and enforcement of ‘‘Certain Alaskan

Cruise Ship Operations’’ (P.L. 106–554).

Proposed Use of Information:

Regulatory oversight and compliance

assurance.

Description of the Respondents:

Master or other person having charge of

each cruise vessel authorized to carry

500 or more passengers while operating

in the waters of the Alexander

Archipelago and the navigable waters of

the United States within the State of

Alaska and within the Kachemak Bay

National Estuarine Research Reserve.

Number of Respondents: 23

Frequency of Response: Periodically

while operating in the waters described

above.

Burden of Response: There are three

separate record keeping requirements

involved in this regulation. Each is

addressed separately, and the estimated

total burden follows:

1. Quality Assurance/Quality Control

Plan (QA/QCP) with Vessel Specific

Sampling Plan (VSSP) development

costs. A QA/QCP with VSSP is required

by these regulations to establish

procedures for collecting and analyzing

treated sewage and graywater samples

from cruise vessels. During the summer

2000 voluntary cruise vessel sampling

program, a single QA/QCP acceptable to

the Coast Guard, was used by all 21

cruise vessels. A VSSP was then

developed for each vessel and sampling

was conducted in compliance with

these documents. It is anticipated the

same, or similar, QA/QCP and VSSP

will be used for subsequent summer

cruise vessel seasons negating the need

to develop a new QA/QCP or VSSP. The

Coast Guard is not able to estimate the

burden that may be associated with

individual cruise vessel revisions to the

QA/QCP or VSSP, if any.

2. Sewage and Graywater Discharge

Record Book costs. The annual burden

of creating and maintaining a Sewage

and Graywater Discharge Record Book

on 23 cruise vessels is expected to be

$460. This estimate is for the cost of

purchasing a record book and

maintaining it onboard each vessel.

Entries into the record book should be

made during the normal routine of the

engineering watch so no additional

labor costs are expected.

3. Sample collection and analysis

costs.

a. During the summer 2000 cruise

vessel voluntary sampling program, the

cruise industry operating in Alaska

spent an estimated $65,000 on sampling

of cruise vessels while underway. An

additional estimated $150,000 was

spent in having the samples analyzed

for conventional pollutants and the

complete suite of priority pollutants

listed in 40 CFR 401.15. The summer

2000 sampling program included two

separate sampling events on 21 cruise

vessels from all overboard treated

sewage and graywater effluents and

marine sanitation devices. In addition to

the conventional pollutant suites, one of

the two sampling events included

samples drawn for a complete suite of

priority pollutants analysis.

These regulations provide for a

similar sampling and analysis regime

with cost savings in some areas and

offsetting cost increases in others. While

the number of more costly priority

pollutants analysis will decrease, the

number of overall sampling events for

conventional pollutants will likely

increase. Also, the number of

respondents is expected to increase

20774 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2001 / Proposed Rules

from 21 to 23. Therefore, the annual

burden for sampling and analysis under

these regulations is estimated to be

$215,000. When divided by the number

of participants, the annual cost to each

individual vessel is estimated to be

$9,348.

Estimated Total Annual Burden: The

estimated total annual burden is

$215,460.

As required by section 3507(d) of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the

Coast Guard has submitted a copy of

this rule to OMB for its review of the

collection of information.

The Coast Guard solicits public

comment on the collection of

information to: (1) Evaluate whether the

information is necessary for the proper

performance of the functions of the

Coast Guard, including whether the

information will have practical utility;

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the Coast

Guard’s estimate of the burden of the

collection, including the validity of the

methodology and assumptions used; (3)

enhance the quality, utility, and clarity

of the information to be collected; and

(4) minimize the burden of the

collection on those who are to respond,

as by allowing the submittal of

responses by electronic means or the

use of other forms of information

technology.

Persons submitting comments on the

collection of information should submit

their comments both to OMB and to the

Coast Guard where indicated under

ADDRESSES by the date under DATES.

Persons are not required to respond to

a collection of information unless it

displays a currently valid OMB control

number. Before the requirements for this

collection of information become

effective, the Coast Guard will publish

a notice in the Federal Register of

OMB’s decision to approve, modify, or

disapprove the collection.

Federalism

Under Executive Order 13132, section

3(b), the Coast Guard finds that a

program monitoring effluent discharge

from cruise ships transiting certain

Alaskan waters is in the national

interest, as evidenced by Congress in

enacting ‘‘Title XIV—Certain Alaskan

Cruise Ship Operations’’ as part of the

Consolidated Appropriations Act of

2001 (Public Law 106–554). In that

legislation, Congress empowered the

Coast Guard to monitor wastewater

discharges from cruise ships transiting

certain Alaskan waters.

The sampling, testing and log-keeping

program outlined in this regulation was

taken from a similar program that was

run on a voluntary basis during the

summer of 2000. That program was one

of the results of the Alaska Cruise Ship

Initiative, which grew out of a working

group composed of representatives from

the cruise industry, the public,

environmental groups, and state and

federal government. The Coast Guard

was one of the federal government

representatives on that group. The

working group was begun by the

Commissioner of the Alaska Department

of Environmental Conservation (ADEC)

in December of 1999.

At the conclusion of the 2000 Alaskan

cruise ship season, data from the

voluntary wastewater sampling and

testing program showed that none of the

tested vessels were in full compliance

with all federal performance standards

for the discharge of treated sewage. This

data, as well as data showing high levels

of pollutants in graywater, spurred the

legislation cited above. It also spurred a

meeting between the Alaska governor,

ADEC, the Coast Guard, and members of

the cruise ship industry in November of

2000. At this meeting, the governor

expressed his approval of the thenproposed Title XIV, and the greater

authority it granted to the Coast Guard

to protect Alaskan waters from

pollutants.

This established cooperation between

the Coast Guard and the State of Alaska,

and the State’s support of the legislation

and voluntary testing program on which

the regulation is based shows how the

Coast Guard has consulted with State

officials in accordance with Executive

Order 13132, Section 3(b). The Coast

Guard will continue to consult the State

by sharing the results of sample tests

with the State, as well as requiring that

discharge logbooks be kept in a format

readable by the Alaskan Department of

Environmental Conservation.

Section 6(c)(2) of Executive Order

13132, requires, that if the agency

promulgating the regulations intends

that they have preemptive effect, it state

that intention and the rationale on

which it is based. Accordingly, the

following statement is provided:

Section 1411 (b) P.L. 106–554

specifies that, ‘‘[n]othing in this Title

shall in any way affect or restrict, or be

construed to affect or restrict, the

authority of the State of Alaska or any

political subdivision thereof—(1) to

impose additional liability or additional

requirement; * * *.’’ This language, as

well as the entire Title, is identical to

suggested text submitted to Congress by

the Department of Transportation as

part of a draft Coast Guard

Authorization Act of 2000. While the

Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2000

did not pass, the provisions of Title

XIV—Certain Alaskan Cruise Ship

Operations did become law in P.L. 106–

554. The Department of Transportation’s

letter transmitting the Administration’s

proposed alternative, which eventually

became Title XIV of P.L. 106–554,

contained an explanation of Section

1411, as follows:

There are a number of provisions in the

Administration’s substitute language that

would benefit from guidance in a conference

report. In particular, we would like to draw

the Conferees attention to Section 715 [1411]

of the Administration’s proposed alternative

to Title VII of H.R. 820, as adopted by the

Senate, which contains the ‘Savings Clause.’

In its drafting efforts, the Administration

modeled section 715 [which is identical to

Section 1411] after Section 1018 of the Oil

Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA), 33 U.S.C. 2718.

Section 1018 of OPA was recently interpreted

by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of U.S.

v. Locke, 120 S. Ct. 1135 (Mar. 6, 2000). The

case concerned Washington State efforts to

regulate oil tankers. The Court held that OPA

section 1018 does not alter the preemptive

impact of the Federal regulatory regime in

the areas of design, construction, alteration,

repair, maintenance, operation, equipping,

personnel qualification, manning and

casualty reporting for vessels. It is the intent

of the Administration that section 715 be

interpreted in the same manner as OPA

section 1918, so that future litigation on the

subject of Federal preemption of vessel

regulation can be avoided.

Accordingly, these interim rules are

construed in the same manner described

in the Department of Transportation’s

views letter cited above. Thus, any of

these regulations, which have the effect

of regulating a cruise vessel’s design,

construction, alteration, repair,

maintenance, operation, equipping,

personnel qualification, manning and

casualty reporting have preemptive

effect under existing U.S. laws and

treaties to which the United States is a

party.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) governs

the issuance of Federal regulations that

require unfunded mandates. An

unfunded mandate is a regulation that

requires a State, local, or tribal

government or the private sector to

incur direct costs without the Federal

Government’s having first provided the

funds to pay those costs. This proposed

rule would not impose an unfunded

mandate.

Taking of Private Property

This proposed rule would not effect a

taking of private property or otherwise

have taking implications under

Executive Order 12630, Governmental

Actions and Interference with

Constitutionally Protected Property

Rights.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2001 / Proposed Rules 20775

Civil Justice Reform

This proposed rule meets applicable

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

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice

Reform, to minimize litigation,

eliminate ambiguity, and reduce

burden.

Protection of Children

We have analyzed this proposed rule

under Executive Order 13045,

Protection of Children from

Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks. This rule is not an economically

significant rule and would not create an

environmental risk to health or risk to

safety that might disproportionately

affect children.

Consultation and Coordination With

Indian Tribal Governments

This proposed rule will not have

tribal implications; will not impose

substantial direct compliance costs on

Indian tribal governments; and will not

preempt tribal law. Therefore, it is

exempt from the consultation

requirements of Executive Order 13175.

If tribal implications are identified

during the comment period we will

undertake appropriate consultations

with the affected Indian tribal officials.

Environment

We have considered the

environmental impact of this proposed

rule and concluded that, under figure 2–

1, paragraph (34)(d), of Commandant

Instruction M16475.lC, this rule is

categorically excluded from further

environmental documentation. This

proposed regulation would require

operators of cruise vessels carrying 500

or more passengers in Alaskan waters to

document treated sewage and graywater

discharges to ensure that they comply

with effluent discharge standards. The

content of effluent discharges reflects

compliant equipment operations. A

‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’

is available in the docket where

indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects

Sewage disposal, Vessels, Reporting

and record keeping requirements.

For the reasons discussed in the

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes

amending 33 CFR Part 159 as follows:

PART 159—MARINE SANITATION

DEVICES

1. The authority citation for part 159

is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1322(b)(1); 49 CFR

1.45(b) and 1.46(l) and (m). Subpart E also

issued under authority of Sec. 1(a)(4), Pub. L.

106–554, 114 Stat. 2763; 49 CFR 1.46(ttt).

2. Subpart E is added to part 159 to

read as follows:

Subpart E—Discharge of Effluents in

Certain Alaskan Waters by Cruise Vessel

Operations

Sec.

159.301 Purpose.

159.303 Applicability.

159.305 Definitions.

159.307 Untreated sewage.

159.309 Limitations on discharge of treated

sewage or graywater.

159.311 Safety exception.

159.313 Inspection for compliance and

enforcement.

159.315 Sewage and graywater discharge

record book.

159.317 Sampling and reporting.

159.319 Fecal coliform and total suspended

solids standards.

159.321 Enforcement.

Subpart E—Discharge of Effluents in

Certain Alaskan Waters by Cruise

Vessel Operations

§ 159.301 Purpose.

The purpose of this subpart is to

implement ‘‘Title XIV—Certain Alaskan

Cruise Ship Operations’’ contained in

Section 1(a)(4) of Public Law 106–554,

enacted on December 21, 2000, by

prescribing regulations governing the

discharges of sewage and graywater

from cruise vessels, require sampling

and testing of sewage and graywater

discharges, and establish reporting and

record keeping requirements.

§ 159.303 Applicability.

This subpart applies to each cruise

vessel authorized to carry 500 or more

passengers operating in the waters of the

Alexander Archipelago and the

navigable waters of the United States

within the State of Alaska and within

the Kachemak Bay National Estuarine

Research Reserve.

§ 159.305 Definitions.

In this subpart:

Administrator—means the

Administrator of the United States

Environmental Protection Agency.

Applicable waters of Alaska—means

the waters of the Alexander Archipelago

and the navigable waters of the United

States within the State of Alaska and

within the Kachemak Bay National

Estuarine Research Reserve.

Captain of the Port—means the

Captain of the Port as defined in

Subpart 3.85 of this chapter.

Conventional pollutants—means the

list of pollutants listed in 40 CFR Part

401.16.

Cruise vessel—means a passenger

vessel as defined in section 2101(22) of

Title 46, United States Code. The term

does not include a vessel of the United

States operated by the federal

government or a vessel owned and

operated by the government of a State.

Discharge—means a release, however

caused, from a cruise vessel, and

includes, any escape, disposal, spilling,

leaking, pumping, emitting or emptying.

Environmental compliance records—

includes the Sewage and Graywater

Discharge Record Book, all discharge

reports, all discharge sampling test

results, as well as any other records that

must be kept under this Subpart.

Graywater—means only galley,

dishwasher, bath, and laundry waste

water. The term does not include other

wastes or waste streams.

Navigable waters—has the same

meaning as in section 502 of the Federal

Water Pollution Control Act, as

amended.

Person—means an individual,

corporation, partnership, limited

liability company, association, state,

municipality, commission or political

subdivision of a state, or any federally

recognized Indian tribal government.

Priority pollutant—means the list of

toxic pollutants listed in 40 CFR Part

401.15.

Sewage—means human body wastes

and the wastes from toilets and other

receptacles intended to receive or retain

body waste.

Treated sewage—means sewage

meeting all applicable effluent

limitation standards and processing

requirements of the Federal Water

Pollution Control Act, as amended and

of Title XIV ‘‘Certain Alaskan Cruise

Ship Operations’’ of Public Law 106–

554, and regulations promulgated under

either.

Untreated sewage—means sewage that

is not treated sewage.

Waters of the Alexander

Archipelago—means all waters under

the sovereignty of the United States

within or near Southeast Alaska, as

follows:

(1) Beginning at a point 58°11–44N,

136° 39–25W [near Cape Spencer Light],

thence southeasterly along a line three

nautical miles seaward of the baseline

from which the breadth of the territorial

sea is measured in the Pacific Ocean

and the Dixon Entrance, except where

this line intersects geodesics connecting

the following five pairs of points:

58° 05–17 N, 136° 33–49 W and 58° 11–

41 N, 136° 39–25 W [Cross Sound]

56° 09–40 N, 134° 40–00 W and 55° 49–

15 N, 134° 17–40 W [Chatham Strait]

55° 49–15 N, 134° 17–40 W and 55° 50–

30 N, 133° 54–15 W [Sumner Strait]

54° 41–30 N, 132° 01–00 W and 54° 51–

30 N, 131° 20–45 W [Clarence Strait]

54° 51–30 N, 131° 20–45 W and 54° 46–

15 N, 130° 52–00 W [Revillagigedo

Channel]

20776 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2001 / Proposed Rules

(2) The portion of each geodesic in

paragraph (1) of this definition situated

beyond 3 nautical miles from the

baseline from which the breadth of the

territorial seas is measured forms the

outer limit of the waters of the

Alexander Archipelago in those five

locations.

§ 159.307 Untreated sewage.

No person shall discharge any

untreated sewage from a cruise vessel

into the applicable waters of Alaska.

§ 159.309 Limitations on discharge of

treated sewage or graywater.

(a) No person shall discharge treated

sewage or graywater from a cruise vessel

into the applicable waters of Alaska

unless:

(1) The cruise vessel is underway and

proceeding at a speed of not less than

six knots;

(2) The cruise vessel is not less than

one nautical mile from the nearest

shore, except in areas designated by the

Coast Guard in consultation with the

State of Alaska;

(3) The discharge complies with all

applicable cruise vessel effluent

standards established pursuant to P.L.

106–554 and any other applicable law,

and

(4) The cruise vessel is not in an area

where the discharge of treated sewage or

graywater is prohibited.

(b) Until such time as the

Administrator promulgates regulations

addressing effluent quality standards for

cruise vessels operating in the

applicable waters of Alaska, treated

sewage and graywater may be

discharged from vessels in

circumstances otherwise prohibited

under paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this

section provided that:

(1) Notification to the Captain of the

Port (COTP) is made not less than 30

days prior to the planned discharge, and

such notice includes results of tests

showing compliance with this section;

(2) The discharge satisfies the

minimum level of effluent quality

specified in 40 CFR 133.102;

(3) The geometric mean of the

samples from the discharge during any

30-day period does not exceed 20 fecal

coliform/100 milliliters (ml) and not

more than 10 percent of the samples

exceed 40 fecal coliform/100 ml;

(4) Concentrations of total residual

chlorine do not exceed 10.0 milligrams

per liter (mg/l);

(5) Prior to any such discharge

occurring, the owner, operator or

master, or other person in charge of a

cruise vessel, can demonstrate to the

COTP that test results from at least five

samples taken from the vessel

representative of the effluent to be

discharged, on different days over a 30-

day period, conducted in accordance

with the guidelines promulgated by the

Administrator in 40 CFR Part 136,

which confirm that the water quality of

the effluents proposed for discharge is

in compliance with paragraphs (b)(2),

(3) and (4) of this section; and

(6) To the extent not otherwise being

done by the owner, operator, master or

other person in charge of a cruise vessel,

pursuant to § 159.317 of this subpart,

the owner, operator, master or other

person in charge of a cruise vessel shall

demonstrate continued compliance

through sampling and testing for

conventional pollutants and residual

chlorine of all treated sewage and

graywater effluents periodically as

determined by the COTP.

§ 159.311 Safety exception.

The regulations in this subpart shall

not apply to discharges made for the

purpose of securing the safety of the

cruise vessel or saving life at sea,

provided that all reasonable precautions

have been taken for the purpose of

preventing or minimizing the discharge.

§ 159.313 Inspection for compliance and

enforcement.

(a) Cruise vessels operating within the

applicable waters of Alaska are subject

to inspection by the Coast Guard to

ensure compliance with this subpart.

(b) An inspection under this section

shall include an examination of the

Sewage and Graywater Discharge

Record Book required under § 159.315

of this subpart, environmental

compliance records, and a general

examination of the vessel. A copy of any

entry in the Sewage and Graywater

Discharge Record Book may be made

and the Master of the vessel may be

required to certify that the copy is a true

copy of the original entry.

(c) A vessel not in compliance with

this subpart may be subject to the

penalties set out in § 159.321, denied

entry into the applicable waters of

Alaska, detained, or restricted in its

operations by order of the COTP.

§ 159.315 Sewage and Graywater

Discharge Record Book.

(a) While operating in the applicable

waters of Alaska each cruise vessel shall

maintain, in English, a legible Sewage

and Graywater Discharge Record Book

with the vessel’s name and official

number listed on the front cover and at

the top of each page.

(b) Entries shall be made in the

Sewage and Graywater Discharge

Record Book whenever any of the

following is released into the applicable

waters of Alaska:

(1) Sewage;

(2) Graywater; or

(3) Sewage and graywater mixture.

(c) Each entry in the Sewage and

Graywater Discharge Record Book shall,

at a minimum, contain the following

information in the order specified:

(1) Name and location of each

discharge port within the ship;

(2) Date the start of discharge

occurred;

(3) Whether the effluent is sewage,

graywater, or a sewage and graywater

mixture;

(4) Time discharge port is opened;

(5) Vessel’s latitude and longitude at

the time the discharge port is opened;

(6) Volume discharged in cubic

meters;

(7) Flow rate of discharge in liters per

minute;

(8) Time discharge port is secured;

(9) Vessel’s latitude and longitude at

the time the discharge port is secured;

and

(10) Vessel’s minimum speed during

discharge.

(d) In the event of an emergency,

accidental or other exceptional

discharge of sewage or graywater, a

statement shall be made in the Sewage

and Graywater Discharge Record Book

of the circumstances, and the reasons

for, the discharge and an immediate

notification of the discharge shall be

made to the COTP.

(e) Each entry of a discharge shall be

recorded without delay and signed and

dated by the person or persons in charge

of the discharge concerned and each

completed page shall be signed and

dated by the master or other person

having charge of the ship.

(f) The Sewage and Graywater

Discharge Record Book shall be kept in

such a place as to be readily available

for inspection at all reasonable times

and shall be kept on board the ship.

(g) The master or other person having

charge of a ship required to keep a

Sewage and Graywater Discharge

Record Book shall be responsible for the

maintenance of such record.

(h) The Sewage and Graywater

Discharge Record Book shall be

maintained on board for not less than

three years.

§ 159.317 Sampling and reporting.

(a) The owner, operator, master or

other person in charge of a cruise vessel

that discharges treated sewage and/or

graywater in the applicable waters of

Alaska shall;

(1) Not less than 90 days prior to each

vessel’s initial entry into the applicable

waters of Alaska during any calendar

year, provide to the COTP a Quality

Assurance/Quality Control Plan (QA/

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2001 / Proposed Rules 20777

QCP) and Vessel Specific Sampling Plan

(VSSP) for review and acceptance;

(2) Not less than 30 days nor more

than 120 days prior to each vessel’s

initial entry into the applicable waters

of Alaska during any calendar year,

provide a certification to the COTP that

the vessel’s treated sewage and

graywater effluents meet the minimum

standards established by the

Administrator, or in the absence of such

standards, meet the minimum

established in § 159.319 of this subpart;

(3) Within 30 days of each vessel’s

initial entry into the applicable waters

of Alaska during any calendar year

undergo sampling and testing for

conventional pollutants of all treated

sewage and graywater effluents as

directed by the COTP;

(4) While operating in the applicable

waters of Alaska be subject to

unannounced sampling of treated

sewage and graywater discharge

effluents, or combined treated sewage/

graywater discharge effluents for the

purpose of testing for a limited suite, as

determined by the Coast Guard, of

priority pollutants;

(5) While operating in the applicable

waters of Alaska be subject to additional

random sampling events, in addition to

all other required sampling, of some or

all treated sewage and graywater

discharge effluents for conventional

and/or priority pollutant testing as

directed by the COTP;

(6) Ensure all samples, as required by

this section, are collected and tested by

a laboratory accepted by the Coast

Guard for the testing of conventional

and priority pollutants, as defined by

this subpart, and in accordance with the

cruise vessel’s Coast Guard accepted

QA/QCP and VSSP;

(7) Pay all costs associated with

development of an acceptable QA/QCP

and VSSP, sampling and testing of

effluents, reporting of results, and any

additional environmental record

keeping as required by this subpart, not

to include cost of federal regulatory

oversight.

(b) A QA/QCP must, at a minimum

include:

(1) Sampling techniques and

equipment, sampling preservation

methods and holding times, and

transportation protocols, including

chain of custody;

(2) Laboratory analytical information

including methods used, calibration,

detection limits, and the laboratory’s

internal QA/QC procedures;

(3) Quality assurance audits used to

determine the effectiveness of the QA

program; and

(4) Procedures and deliverables for

data validation used to assess data

precision and accuracy, the

representative nature of the samples

drawn, comparability, and completeness

of measure parameters.

(c) A VSSP is a working document

used during the sampling events

required under this section and must, at

a minimum, include:

(1) Vessel name;

(2) Passenger and crew capacity of the

vessel;

(3) Daily water use of the vessel;

(4) Holding tank capacities for treated

sewage and graywater;

(5) Vessel schematic of discharge

ports and corresponding sampling ports;

(6) Description of discharges; and

(7) A table documenting the type of

discharge, type of sample drawn (grab or

composite), parameters (conventional or

priority pollutants), vessel location

when sample drawn, date and time of

the sampling event.

(d) Test results for conventional

pollutants shall be submitted within 15

calendar days of the date the sample

was collected, and for priority

pollutants within 30 calendar days of

the date the sample was collected, to the

COTP directly by the laboratory

conducting the testing and in

accordance with the Coast Guard

accepted QA/QCP.

(e) Samples collected for analysis

under this subpart shall be held by the

laboratory contracted to do the analysis

for not less than six months, or as

directed by the COTP.

(f) Reports required under this section

may be written or electronic. If

electronic, the reports must be in a

format readable by Coast Guard and

Alaska Department of Environmental

Conservation data systems.

§ 159.319 Fecal coliform and total

suspended solids standards.

(a) Treated sewage effluent

discharges—Until such time as the

Administrator promulgates effluent

discharge standards for treated sewage,

treated sewage effluent discharges in the

applicable waters of Alaska shall not

have a fecal coliform bacterial count of

greater than 200 per 100 ml nor total

suspended solids greater than 150 mg/

l.

(b) Graywater effluent discharges

[Reserved.]

§ 159.321 Enforcement.

(a) Administrative penalties.

(1) Violations. Any person who

violates this subpart may be assessed a

class I or class II civil penalty by the

Secretary or his delegatee.

(2) Classes of penalties.

(i) Class I. The amount of a class I

civil penalty under this section may not

exceed $10,000 per violation, except

that the maximum amount of any class

I civil penalty under this section shall

not exceed $25,000. Before assessing a

civil penalty under this subparagraph,

the Secretary or his delegatee shall give

to the person to be assessed such

penalty written notice of the Secretary’s

proposal to assess the penalty and the

opportunity to request, within 30 days

of the date the notice is received by

such person, a hearing on the proposed

penalty. Such hearing shall not be

subject to 5 U.S.C. 554 or 556, but shall

provide a reasonable opportunity to be

heard and to present evidence.

(ii) Class II. The amount of a class II

civil penalty under this section may not

exceed $10,000 per day for each day

during which the violation continues,

except that the maximum amount of any

class II civil penalty under this section

shall not exceed $125,000. Except as

otherwise provided in this paragraph, a

class II civil penalty shall be assessed

and collected in the same manner, and

subject to the same provisions as in the

case of civil penalties assessed and

collected after notice and an

opportunity for hearing on the record in

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 554.

(3) Rights of interested persons.

(i) Public notice. Before issuing an

order assessing a class II civil penalty

under this paragraph, the Secretary shall

provide public notice of and reasonable

opportunity to comment on the

proposed issuance of each order.

(ii) Presentation of evidence. Any

person who comments on a proposed

assessment of a class II civil penalty

under this section shall be given notice

of any hearing held under this

paragraph and of the order assessing

such penalty. In any hearing held under

this paragraph (a)(3), such person shall

have a reasonable opportunity to be

heard and present evidence.

(iii) Rights of interested persons to a

hearing. If no hearing is held under

paragraph (a)(2) before issuance of an

order assessing a class II civil penalty

under this section, any person who

commented on the proposed assessment

may petition, within 30 days after the

issuance of such an order, the Secretary

or his delegatee to set aside such order

and provide a hearing on the penalty. If

the evidence presented by the petitioner

in support of the petition is material and

was not considered in the issuance of

the order, the Secretary, or his

delegatee, shall immediately set aside

such order and provide a hearing in

accordance with paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of

this section. If the Secretary or his

delegatee denies a hearing under this

clause, the Secretary of his delegatee

shall provide to the petitioner and

20778 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 25, 2001 / Proposed Rules

publish in the Federal Register notice of

and the reasons for such denial.

(b) Civil judicial penalties.

(1) Generally. Any person who

violates this subpart shall be subject to

a civil penalty not to exceed $25,000 per

day for each violation. Each day a

violation continues constitutes a

separate violation.

(2) Limitation. A person is not liable

for a civil judicial penalty under this

paragraph for a violation if the person

has been assessed a civil administrative

penalty under paragraph (a) of this

section for the violation.

(c) Determination of amount. In

determining the amount of a civil

penalty under paragraphs (a) or (b) of

this section, the court or the Secretary

or his delegatee shall consider the

seriousness of the violation, any history

of such violations, any good-faith efforts

to comply with applicable requirements,

the economic impact of the penalty on

the violator, and other such matters as

justice may require.

(d) Criminal Penalties.

(1) Negligent violations. Any person

who negligently violates this subpart

commits a Class A misdemeanor.

(2) Knowing violations. Any person

who knowingly violates this subpart

commits a Class D felony.

(3) False Statements. Any person who

knowingly makes any false statement,

representation, or certification in any

record, report or other document filed or

required to be maintained under this

subpart, or who falsifies, tampers with,

or knowingly renders inaccurate any

testing or monitoring device or method

required to be maintained under this

subpart commits a Class D felony.

(e) Awards.

(1) The Secretary or his delegatee or

the court, when assessing any fines or

civil penalties, as the case may be, may

pay from any fines or civil penalties

collected under this section an amount

not to exceed one-half of the penalty or

fine collected to any individual who

furnished information which leads to

the payment of the penalty or fine. If

several individuals provide such

information, the amount shall be

divided equitably among such

individuals. No officer or employee of

the United States, the State of Alaska or

any Federally recognized Tribe who

furnishes information or renders service

in the performance of his or her official

duties shall be eligible for payment

under this paragraph (e)(1).

(2) The Secretary, his delegatee, or a

court, when assessing any fines or civil

penalties, as the case may be, may pay,

from any fines or civil penalties

collected under this section, to the State

of Alaska or any Federally recognized

Tribe providing information or

investigative assistance which leads to

payment of the penalty or fine, an

amount which reflects the level of

information or investigative assistance

provided. Should the State of Alaska or

a Federally recognized Tribe and an

individual under paragraph (e)(1) of this

section be eligible for an award, the

Secretary, his delegatee, or the court, as

the case may be, shall divide the

amount equitably.

(f) Liability in rem. A cruise vessel

operated in violation of this subpart is

liable in rem for any fine imposed under

paragraph (c) of this section or for any

civil penalty imposed under paragraphs

(a) or (b) of this section, and may be

proceeded against in the United States

district court of any district in which

the cruise vessel may be found.

Dated: April 18, 2001.

J.V. O’Shea,

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting

Commander, Seventeenth Coast Guard

District.

[FR Doc. 01–10140 Filed 4–24–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[TX–101–1–7394b; FRL–6969–2]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; Texas; Post 96

Rate of Progress Plan, Motor Vehicle

Emissions Budgets (MVEB) and

Contingency Measures for the

Houston/Galveston (HGA) Ozone

Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to give

direct final approval to portions the

Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP)

revision submitted by the Governor of

Texas on May 19, 1998 to meet the

reasonable further progress

requirements of the Clean Air Act (the

Act). We are also approving the Motor

Vehicle Emissions Budget (MVEB)

established by the Reasonable Further

Progress Plan, revisions to the Houston

area’s contingency measures and

revisions to the 1990 base year

emissions inventory for the Houston/

Galveston nonattainment area. The EPA

is proposing to take direct final action

on revisions to the Texas State

Implementation Plan.

In the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’

section of this Federal Register, EPA is

approving the State’s SIP revision as a

direct final rule without prior proposal

because the EPA views this as a

noncontroversial revision and

anticipates no adverse comment. The

EPA has explained its reasons for this

approval in the preamble to the direct

final rule. If EPA receives no relevant

adverse comments, the EPA will not

take further action on this proposed

rule. If EPA receives relevant adverse

comment, EPA will withdraw the direct

final rule and it will not take effect. The

EPA will address all public comments

in a subsequent final rule based on this

proposed rule. The EPA will not

institute a second comment period on

this action. Any parties interested in

commenting must do so at this time.

DATE: Written comments must be

received by May 25, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be addressed to Mr. Thomas H. Diggs,

Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD–L), at

the EPA Region 6 Office listed below.

Copies of documents relevant to this

action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the following locations.

Anyone wanting to examine these

documents should make an

appointment with the appropriate office

at least two working days in advance.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 6, Air Planning Section (6PD–L),

1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–

2733.

Texas Natural Resource Conservation

Commission, Office of Air Quality,

12124 Park 35 Circle, Austin, Texas

78753.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Guy R. Donaldson, P.E., Air Planning

Section (6PD–L), EPA Region 6, 1445

Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733,

telephone (214)665–6691.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

document concerns Post 96 Rate of

Progress requirements in the Houston

Galveston ozone nonattainment area.

For further information, please see the

information provided in the direct final

action that is located in the ‘‘Rules and

Regulations’’ section of this Federal

Register publication.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Dated: April 5, 2001.

Jerry Clifford,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.

[FR Doc. 01–10118 Filed 4–24–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P