[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 184 (Friday, September 23, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55728-55730]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19005]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 168

[CGD 91-202; USCG-2003-14734]
RIN 1625-AA05 (Formerly RIN 2115-AE10); RIN 1625-AA65


Escort Vessels for Certain Tankers--Crash Stop Criteria

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is permanently removing a ``crash stop'' 
requirement for tanker escort vessels in Prince William Sound and Puget 
Sound. The requirement appeared in a final rule published in 1994 under 
docket number CGD 91-202, but was suspended for safety reasons before 
it ever went into effect. Removal of the suspended provision is the 
final action for both the CGD 91-202 and the USCG-2003-14734 
rulemakings.

DATES: This final rule is effective October 24, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as 
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, 
are part of docket USCG-2003-14734 and are available for inspection or 
copying at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, 
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays. You may also find this docket on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, 
call Lieutenant Commander Samson Stevens, GMSR-2, telephone 202-267-
0751, e-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cd9e9eb9a8bba8a3be8daea2a0a9b9e3b8beaeaae3a0a4a1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="530000273625363d2013303c3e37277d262030347d3e3a3f">[email protected]</span></a>. If you have questions on viewing 
the docket, call Ms. Andrea M. Jenkins, Program Manager, Docket 
Operations, telephone 202-366-0271.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 55729]]

Regulatory History

    On March 28, 2005, we published in the Federal Register a notice of 
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled Escort Vessels for Certain Oil 
Tankers--Crash Stop Criteria (70 FR 15609). We received no comments on 
the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested and none was held.

Background and Purpose

    This rule addresses ``unfinished business'' from 1994. On August 
19, 1994, we published the final rule entitled Escort Vessels for 
Certain Tankers under docket number CGD 91-202, which adopted 33 CFR 
part 168 (57 FR 30058). The rule drew on a study to determine the 
capabilities of escort vessels to control disabled tankers. The study 
was published in two parts (59 FR 1411, Jan. 10, 1994; 60 FR 6345, Feb. 
1, 1995). Preliminary data for the second study became available after 
publication of the final rule, but before the rule took effect on 
November 19, 1994. This preliminary data indicated that it might be 
dangerous to implement the final rule's crash stop provision, 33 CFR 
168.50(b)(2). That provision required an escort vessel to be able to 
stop a disabled tanker within the same distance that it could ``crash-
stop,'' that is, come to an emergency stop itself by putting its engine 
into full astern position, from a speed of 6 knots. Therefore, on 
November 1, 1994 (59 FR 54519), we suspended the crash stop provision 
before it could take effect with the other provisions of part 168. In 
1995, the final results of the study of escort vessel capabilities 
showed that the crash stop criteria were not an effective performance 
characteristic for disabled tankers. No further action was taken with 
respect to the crash stop provision, and it remains suspended today.
    As long as the crash stop provision's suspension remains in effect, 
we have continued reporting the CGD 91-202 rulemaking on the Uniform 
Regulatory Agenda of the United States, the Federal Government's 
official list of ongoing regulatory projects. CGD 91-202 appears in the 
most recent edition of the Agenda, under the Department of Homeland 
Security entries beginning at 70 FR 26892 (May 16, 2005). Twice each 
year, the Coast Guard spends valuable administrative time maintaining 
its Uniform Regulatory Agenda reports, whether or not a reported 
project is active.
    For the reasons given under ``Removal of Crash Stop Provision,'' 
the Coast Guard maintains the position it first adopted in 1994, that 
the crash stop provision should not be implemented. Therefore, we now 
will permanently remove the crash stop provision. Removal of the crash 
stop provision also allows us to complete the CGD 91-202 rulemaking.
    Since 1998, the Coast Guard has used the Department of 
Transportation's Docket Management System (DMS) to make its rulemaking 
documents widely available to the public. DMS assigns unique docket 
numbers to each rulemaking, and the format of those docket numbers 
(e.g., USCG-2003-14734) is not compatible with the format of Coast 
Guard pre-1998 rulemaking docket numbers (e.g., CGD 91-202). Therefore, 
in order to complete CGD 91-202 in a way that makes our actions visible 
to the public through DMS, we opened a DMS-compatible docket number, 
USCG-2003-14734. Thus, removal of the crash stop provision constitutes 
the final action for two rulemaking dockets with the same subject 
matter, CGD 91-202 and USCG-2003-14734.

Removal of Crash Stop Provision

    We received two public comments in response to our 1994 notice 
suspending 33 CFR 168.50(b)(2). We placed both comments in the docket 
for USCG-2003-14734. One comment supported the suspension. The other 
forwarded a copy of a technical evaluation of 33 CFR 165.50(b), but did 
not address the crash stop criteria at all. As noted earlier, in 1995, 
the final results of the study of escort vessel capabilities showed 
that the crash stop criteria were not an effective performance 
characteristic for disabled tankers. Additionally, we noted a 
significant increase in tractor tug availability in the waters to which 
part 168 applies, which allows for more effective response and action 
when a tanker becomes disabled. Taken together, these factors persuaded 
us to remove the crash stop provision of 33 CFR 168.50(b)(2). Our March 
2005 NPRM, proposing removal, elicited no public comments that would 
alter our decision. Therefore we are proceeding with removal of the 
crash stop provision. The remainder of part 168 is not affected by this 
action.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section 
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does 
not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not 
reviewed it under that Order. This rule allows us to finalize the 
status quo and close out CGD 91-202.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this 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 application and impact of this rule is limited. First, the 
escort vessel regulations only apply to laden single hull tankers of 
5,000 gross tons or more operating on Prince William Sound or Puget 
Sound. We estimate the number of these tankers is 18. This figure will 
diminish over time as these single hull tankers are phased out of 
service, as required by OPA 90. Second, small entities typically do not 
own or operate vessels of this size. These vessels are normally owned 
and operated by larger corporations, including subsidiaries of major 
oil companies. As the rule finalizes the status quo, we do not believe 
that we are imposing any new burden on small entities.
    Therefore, 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.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we offered to assist small 
entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate 
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking.
    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).

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,

[[Page 55730]]

Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local 
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial 
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under 
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for 
federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    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 $100,000,000 or more in any 
one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we 
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in the preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will 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.

Civil Justice Reform

    This 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 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.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, 
because it does 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.

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. The Administrator of the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy 
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects 
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards 
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, 
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why 
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., 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 rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not 
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 
which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and 
have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit 
the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the 
Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under 
Figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(i) of the Instruction, from further 
environmental documentation. An ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' 
and a ``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' are available in the 
docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 168

    Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Waterways.

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 
CFR part 168 as follows.

PART 168--ESCORT REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN TANKERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 168 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: Section 4116(c), Pub. L. 101-380, 104 Stat. 520 (46 
U.S.C. 3703 note); Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 
170.1, para. 2(82).


Sec.  168.50  [Amended]

0
2. In Sec.  168.50, remove and reserve paragraph (b)(2).

    Dated: September 15, 2005.
T.H. Gilmour,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety, 
Security and Environmental Protection.
[FR Doc. 05-19005 Filed 9-22-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


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