67066 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Parts 155 and 157 

46 CFR Part 162 

[USCG–2004–18939] 

RIN 1625–AA90 

Pollution Prevention Equipment 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

revise its pollution prevention 

equipment regulations to make them 

consistent with new International 

Maritime Organization (IMO) guidelines 

and specifications issued under the 

International Convention for the 

Prevention of Pollution from Ships 

(MARPOL) Annex I. These revisions 

should effectively implement MARPOL 

Annex I regulations, reduce the amount 

of oil discharged from vessels, and 

eliminate the use of ozone-depleting 

solvents in equipment tests. The 

proposed rule would require newly 

constructed vessels carrying oil in bulk 

to install cargo monitors that meet 

revised standards and require all vessels 

replacing or installing oil separators and 

bilge alarms to install equipment that 

meets revised standards. Tests for 

approval of this equipment would also 

be revised both to deal with common 

bilge contaminants and to eliminate the 

use of ozone-depleting solvents. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must reach the Docket Management 

Facility on or before February 1, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by Coast Guard docket 

number USCG–2004–18939 to the 

Docket Management Facility at the U.S. 

Department of Transportation. To avoid 

duplication, please use only one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Web Site: http://dms.dot.gov. 

(2) Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 

20590–0001. 

(3) Fax: 202–493–2251. 

(4) Delivery: Room PL–401 on the 

Plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

The telephone number is 202–366– 

9329. 

(5) Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

You may inspect the material 

proposed for incorporation by reference 

at room 1300, U.S. Coast Guard 

Headquarters, 2100 Second Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20593–0001 between 9 

a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The 

telephone number is 202–267–6640. 

Copies of the material are available as 

indicated in the ‘‘Incorporation by 

Reference’’ section of this preamble. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this proposed 

rule, call Lieutenant Commander George 

Grills, Systems Engineering Division 

(G–MSE–3), Office of Design and 

Engineering Standards, U.S. Coast 

Guard, telephone 202–267–6640. If you 

have questions on viewing or submitting 

material to the docket, call Renee V. 

Wright, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–493–0402. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Preamble Organization 

This preamble is organized as follows: 

Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

Submitting comments 

Viewing comments and documents 

Privacy Act 

Public Meeting 

Background and Purpose 

Which vessels would this proposed rule 

affect? 

Regulatory History 

Discussion of Proposed Rule 

Incorporation by Reference 

Regulatory Evaluation 

Background 

Proposed Action 

Applicability 

Costs 

Benefits 

Smal Entities 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Collection of Information 

Federalism 

Undated Mandates Reform Act 

Taking of Private Property 

Civil Justice Reform 

Protection of Children 

Indian Tribal Governments 

Energy Effects 

Technical Standards 

Environment 

Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 

comments and related materials. All 

comments received will be posted, 

without change, to http://dms.dot.gov 

and will include any personal 

information you have provided. We 

have an agreement with the Department 

of Transportation (DOT) to use the 

Docket Management Facility. Please see 

DOT’s ‘‘Privacy Act’’ paragraph below. 

Submitting comments: If you submit a 

comment, please include your name and 

address, identify the docket number for 

this rulemaking (USCG–2004–18939), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and give the reason for each 

comment. You may submit your 

comments and material by electronic 

means, mail, fax, or delivery to the 

Docket Management Facility at the 

address under ADDRESSES; but please 

submit your comments and material by 

only one means. If you submit them by 

mail or delivery, submit them in an 

unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 

11 inches, suitable for copying and 

electronic filing. If you submit them by 

mail and would like to know that they 

reached the Facility, 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. 

Viewing comments and documents: 

To view comments, as well as 

documents mentioned in this preamble 

as being available in the docket, go to 

http://dms.dot.gov at any time and 

conduct a simple search using the 

docket number. You may also visit the 

Docket Management Facility in room 

PL–401 on the Plaza level of the Nassif 

Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., 

Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

Privacy Act: Anyone can search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review the Department of 

Transportation’s Privacy Act Statement 

in the Federal Register published on 

April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you 

may visit http://dms.dot.gov. 

Public Meeting 

We do not now plan to hold a public 

meeting. But you may submit a request 

for one to the Docket Management 

Facility 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 

Under the Act to Prevent Pollution 

from Ships, Pub. L. 96–478, sections 2 

and 4, 94 Stat. 2297, 2298 (Oct. 21, 

1980), 33 U.S.C. 1901 and 1903, the 

Secretary of the Department in which 

the Coast Guard is operating is 

authorized to prescribe any necessary or 

desired regulations to carry out the 

provisions of the Act and of Annexes I 

and II of the International Convention 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Proposed Rules 67067 

for the Prevention of Pollution from 

Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol 

of 1978 relating to that Convention 

(MARPOL 73/78). Under the Act of 

August 26, 1983, Pub. L. 98–89, 97 Stat. 

500, 504, 522, subtitle II of title 46 of the 

U.S. Code, specifically 46 U.S.C. 3703, 

the Secretary in which the Coast Guard 

is operating is authorized to issue 

equipment regulations for vessels 

carrying liquid bulk dangerous cargo, 

including oil. Authority under both of 

these acts has been delegated to the 

Coast Guard under Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 

0170.1 (2)(77) and (92)(b). 

For some time, it has been well 

understood by the international 

maritime community that existing 

pollution prevention equipment (PPE) is 

not adequately designed to process bilge 

wastes. Pollution prevention equipment 

on vessels encounter bilge wastes that 

are not replicated in test fluids used for 

certifying and approving PPE. This has 

led to release of more oil into the marine 

environment than desired. Of specific 

concern has been emulsified oil in 

water, surfactants (for example, 

detergents), and other contaminants 

typically found in bilge water. 

A second problem concerned the 

method by which oil content is 

measured in effluent samples during the 

approval process. Existing methods 

require the use of ozone-depleting 

solvents, specifically carbon 

tetrachloride and Freon 113 (CFC 113). 

Both an international treaty and laws of 

the United States call for phasing out 

the use of these solvents. Therefore, an 

alternative test method was desired. 

Having identified these concerns, the 

International Maritime Organization’s 

(IMO) Marine Environment Protection 

Committee (MEPC) instructed the Ship 

Design and Equipment subcommittee to 

develop new performance standards to 

replace those referenced in MARPOL 

Annex I. The Ship Design and 

Equipment subcommittee drafted new 

resolutions, in which the U.S. 

participated, that were ultimately 

approved by the MEPC at its 49th 

session in July 2003 and designated as 

MEPC.107(49) and MEPC.108(49). 

Which Vessels Would This Proposed 

Rule Affect? 

Our proposed rule would not change 

the type or class of vessels that require 

a cargo monitor, oily-water separator 

(OWS), or bilge alarm under 33 CFR part 

155, subpart B, or 33 CFR part 157; it 

would only require that such equipment 

meet new pollution prevention 

standards. 

Regulatory History 

Even before Annex I of MARPOL 73/ 

78 came into force internationally in 

1983, the Coast Guard issued a final rule 

(44 FR 53352, September 13, 1979) 

containing PPE design and approval 

requirements. On December 31, 2003, 

the Coast Guard published in the 

Federal Register (68 FR 75603) a notice 

of policy informing the public of the 

new MEPC resolutions, our desire to 

update 46 CFR subpart 162.050, and our 

willingness to consider alternatives to 

the performance and testing standards 

in part 162.050. 

Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The proposed rule would revise 46 

CFR subpart 162.050 to reflect the new 

IMO PPE guidelines and specifications 

that governments have been invited to 

apply on or after January 1, 2005, to 

their implementation of MARPOL 

Annex I regulations. The proposed rule 

would also align 46 CFR subpart 

162.050 more closely with the IMO PPE 

guidelines by removing the bilge 

monitor standard. The six factors that 

were considered in the decision to 

propose to remove the bilge monitor 

follow: 

1. A bilge monitor includes a 100 

parts per million (ppm) performance 

standard that is no longer an allowed 

discharge concentration of oil at sea 

nationally or internationally. 

2. There is no longer an equivalent to 

a bilge monitor requirement in the IMO 

guidelines or MARPOL Annex I. The 

IMO resolutions and Annex I call for 

three types of PPE equipment: cargo 

monitors, oil separators and bilge 

alarms. In addition to these three types 

of equipment, the equipment that can 

obtain approval under subpart 162.050 

currently also includes bilge monitors. 

Retaining the bilge monitor design and 

approval standards in the proposed 

subpart 162.050 results in unique 

testing and performance requirements 

inconsistent with international 

standards. 

3. According to our records, the Coast 

Guard has not received an approval 

application for a bilge monitor in more 

than a decade. 

4. Only four bilge monitors are listed 

in the Coast Guard equipment database 

and only one of those has maintained an 

‘‘approved’’ status. All the others are 

‘‘former-may use’’ or ‘‘expired.’’

5. There are no specific requirements 

in the current regulations for installing 

a bilge monitor—it is an alternative to 

installation of a bilge alarm. 

6. The new bilge alarm requirements 

incorporate a recording function which, 

other than the 100-ppm alarm, was the 

major difference between the bilge 

alarm and bilge monitor. As proposed, 

a bilge monitor requirement in the 

proposed subpart 162.050 would be 

both redundant and obsolete. 

Unlike many of the engineering 

references incorporated into our current 

regulations, subpart 162.050 contains 

text taken in large part from the IMO 

documents detailing the performance 

and testing requirements. Two options 

exist for updating subpart 162.050: 

1. Replace existing regulatory text 

with detailed text implementing the 

new IMO standards by describing them; 

or 

2. Replace existing regulatory text 

with new text that relies heavily on 

incorporating the new standards by 

reference to resolutions MEPC.107(49) 

and MEPC.108(49), and ISO 9377–2. 

In seeking to avoid conflicts between 

Coast Guard PPE regulations and 

MARPOL Annex I guidelines and 

specifications that Member States are 

invited to make applicable on or after 

January 1, 2005, we considered 

incorporating the MARPOL guidelines 

and specifications by reference—and 

not have any differences between the 

MARPOL guidelines and specifications 

and Coast Guard PPE standards—but we 

decided to maintain some differences. 

Some of our regulations will be more 

specific and concrete than the MARPOL 

Annex I guidelines and specifications. 

We will, for example, specify when and 

where inclination tests will be 

performed. These differences are 

intended to make the regulations easier 

to enforce and more likely to ensure that 

the oil-release-reduction goals of the 

MARPOL Annex I guidelines and 

specifications are met. 

Incorporation by Reference 

New material proposed for 

incorporation by reference is added in 

both 33 CFR 157.02 and 46 CFR 

162.050–4. You may inspect this 

material at U.S. Coast Guard 

Headquarters where indicated under 

ADDRESSES. Copies of the material are 

available from the sources listed in 

§§ 157.02 and 162.050–4. 

Before publishing a binding rule, we 

will submit copies of all of the proposed 

new material to the Director of the 

Office of the Federal Register for 

approval of the incorporation by 

reference. 

Regulatory Evaluation 

This proposed 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 

67068 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office 

of Management and Budget has not 

reviewed it under that Order. A draft 

Regulatory Evaluation follows: 

Background 

This NPRM proposes to change the 

performance standards of oily-water 

separators (OWS), bilge alarms, and 

cargo monitors to meet the revised 

guidelines and specifications for the 

MARPOL Annex I standards. 

In analyzing the cost impact of this 

proposed rule, we considered the 

increase in cost to buyers of new vessels 

who must install new pollution 

prevention equipment meeting the 

revised standards, and owners and 

operators of existing vessels who must 

replace old equipment with the new 

pollution prevention equipment. 

Proposed Action 

The Coast Guard proposes to make the 

following changes to pollution 

prevention equipment performance 

standards, outlined in 46 CFR part 162, 

subpart 162.050: 

• Remove the requirement for a bilge 

monitor; 

• Require OWSs to effectively process 

emulsified oils, surfactants, and 

contaminants; 

• Change standards for the bilge 

alarm which must now: 1. Pass new 

tests using emulsified oil and 

contaminants; 2. have a ppm display; 3. 

display each change in oil content of the 

mixture it is measuring within 5 

seconds after the change occurs instead 

of every 20 seconds; 4. limit access to 

the bilge alarm beyond checking 

instrument drift must be limited; 

repeatability of the instrument reading 

and the ability to re-zero the instrument 

must require the breaking of a seal; 5. 

activate its alarm whenever clean water 

is used for cleaning or zeroing purposes; 

and 6. record date, time, alarm status, 

and operating status of the 15 ppm bilge 

separator. The recording device must 

also store data for at least 18 months 

and be able to display or print a 

protocol. In the event the 15 ppm bilge 

alarm is replaced, means must be 

provided to ensure the data recorded 

remains available on board for 18 

months; and, 

• Change standards for cargo 

monitors that are used with category C 

and D oil-like noxious liquid 

substances. Based on our research, we 

found that the manufacturers of cargo 

monitors, plan to sell these monitors 

meeting the new standards for 

approximately the same retail price as 

the old equipment. Therefore, there is 

no additional cost to vessel owners for 

this requirement. 

We expect there to be no additional 

cost to industry for removing the 

requirement for bilge monitors, or 

changing standards for cargo monitors 

because there will be no change in cost 

for installation, operation, and 

maintenance. 

Applicability 

This proposed rule applies to all 

ocean-going vessels that operate in U.S. 

waters. Foreign vessels in compliance 

with MARPOL need not prove 

compliance with the domestic 

equipment approval standards. 

Therefore, this rule primarily affects 

U.S. flag vessels. 

The vessels impacted by the proposed 

changes for the bilge alarm and the 

OWS are described in 33 CFR 155.380, 

and are divided into three main 

categories: 

• 33 CFR 155.350—Oceangoing 

vessels of less than 400 gross tons (GT). 

These vessels are not required to have 

the equipment on board if they have the 

capacity to retain on board all oily 

mixtures and can discharge these oily 

mixtures to a reception facility. Certain 

vessels, in this category that embark on 

international voyages, however, are 

required to have an International 

Pollution Prevention Certificate (IOPP) 

that requires them to have pollution 

prevention equipment on board. Based 

on Coast Guard data, we estimate that 

30 percent of the fleet have the IOPP 

Certificate and have OWSs and bilge 

alarms on board. 

• Oceangoing vessels of 400 GT and 

above, but less than 10,000 GT. The 

current regulations require all vessels in 

this category to have an installed OWS 

and if the vessel ballasts the fuel tanks 

and/or plans to discharge through the 

OWS within 12 nm of land the vessel 

must also have a bilge alarm. 

Additionally, vessels in this category 

that embark on international voyages, 

which are required to have an IOPP 

Certificate, have the pollution 

prevention equipment on board. Based 

on Coast Guard and industry 

information, we assume the majority of 

new construction oceangoing vessels 

have bilge alarms and the OWSs on 

board. 

• 33 CFR 155.370—Oceangoing 

vessels of 10,000 GT and above. The 

current regulation requires all 

oceangoing vessels in this tonnage range 

to have both an OWS and bilge alarm. 

We assume all of these vessels comply 

with these regulations and have the 

equipment. 

Costs 

The following vessel population 

estimates are based on 2004 Coast Guard 

data. There are approximately 86 new 

oceangoing vessels built per year that 

would be affected by this proposed rule. 

Of these, approximately 29 new vessels 

are 400 GT or greater and must meet the 

new requirements to have bilge alarms 

and oily water separators that meet the 

new standards. Of the remaining 57 

vessels less than 400 GT, we assume 30 

percent, or approximately 17 vessels, 

will be installing the equipment because 

they will embarking on international 

voyages and are required to carry 

pollution prevention equipment. 

All existing vessels subject to these 

PPE regulations, approximately 5,838 

U.S. flag vessels, must install equipment 

that meets the new standards whenever 

the owners or operators replace the 

equipment. Based on Coast Guard data, 

we assume that the entire existing fleet 

of vessels 400 GT and over will update 

its equipment as it breaks down over the 

next 20 years, which is approximately 

the length of service for these U.S. flag 

vessels. We assume that the 30 percent 

of the fleet below 400 GT that has this 

equipment on board will also update it 

once over the service life of the vessel. 

The cost of this proposed rule to 

vessel owners is the additional price 

owners must pay for the higher-priced 

pollution prevention equipment that 

meets the new MARPOL standards. The 

owners and operators of existing vessels 

would face no immediate mandatory 

implementation costs from this 

proposed rule, but they would face 

ongoing costs as they update equipment 

or install new equipment on new 

vessels. 

We calculated the cost of the 

rulemaking for the next 10 years (2005–

2014), which is a long enough period of 

analysis to capture the majority of the 

future costs of this rulemaking. This 

follows OMB’s guidance that the ending 

point for calculating costs ‘‘should be 

far enough in the future to encompass 

all significant benefits and costs likely 

to result from the rule’’ (see OMB 

Circular A–4, page 31). However, in 

other cases, simply presenting 

annualized costs are sufficient. For 

example, OMB’s Circular A–4 (page 36) 

notes that if the expected flow of costs 

is constant over time, then annualizing 

the cost stream is sufficient and further 

discounting is unnecessary. That said, 

for this rulemaking we would have been 

on safe ground simply reporting 

annualized costs. 

For vessel owners and operators that 

would be replacing equipment once 

over the service life of the vessel or once 

every twenty years, we assume that five 

percent of the affected population 

would update their equipment for each 

year in the 10-year period of analysis. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Proposed Rules 67069 

We considered possible increases in 

the operation and maintenance (O&M) 

costs. Based on Coast Guard and 

industry information, we estimate that 

the O&M cost of the new equipment 

would not be more than the O&M costs 

of the existing equipment, and in some 

instances would cost less. Therefore, we 

assume that there would be no 

significant increases in O&M costs, 

since vessels routinely face similar costs 

for existing installed equipment. 

For OWSs, there is a wide range in the 

price of the equipment depending on 

flow rates and levels of technological 

capability. Based on discussions with 

manufacturers, we find that there is 

currently considerable variability in 

market prices as suppliers begin to 

market and sell the new equipment. 

Still, we believe we have estimated 

average price increases that are 

reasonably accurate. We separated the 

vessel categories into the three groups 

discussed earlier, and assume an 

average price increase of: 

• $8,000 for vessels below 400 GT; 

• $12,000 for vessels 400 GT or more 

and less than 10,000 GT; and 

• $18,000 for vessels 10,000 GT and 

over. 

For bilge alarms, there is less of a 

variation in the price. The change in the 

price ranges from approximately $400 to 

$1,500 and we assume an average price 

increase of $1,000 for all vessel 

categories. 

Thus, the total price increase for both 

oily water separators and bilge alarms 

combined is: 

• $9,000 for vessels below 400 GT; 

• $13,000 for vessels 400 GT or more 

and less than 10,000 GT; and 

• $19,000 for vessels 10,000 GT and 

over. 

We estimate the total annual cost for 

new vessels is $548,000 and the total 

annual cost for existing vessels is 

$2,298,000. See Tables 1 and 2 below 

for details on the calculations of the 

annual costs. 

TABLE 1.—ANNUAL COST OF OILY-WATER SEPARATORS (OWS) & BILGE ALARMS FOR NEW VESSELS

Vessel types Price increase Annually affected 

New vessels Annual cost 

<400 GT ..................................................................................................................... $9,000 17 $153,000 

≥400 GT and <10,000 GT ......................................................................................... 13,000 26 338,000

≥10,000 GT ................................................................................................................ 19,000 3 57,000 

Total .................................................................................................................... .............................. 46 548,000 

TABLE 2.—ANNUAL COST OF OWSS & BILGE ALARMS FOR EXISTING VESSELS

Vessel types Price increase 

Annually affected 

existing vessels 

(w/ 20-yr breakdown rate) 

Annual cost 

<400 GT ..................................................................................................................... $9,000 50 $450,000 

≥400 GT and <10,000 GT ......................................................................................... 13,000 91 1,183,000 

≥10,000 GT ................................................................................................................ 19,000 35 665,000 

Total .................................................................................................................... .............................. 176 2,298,000 

We estimate the total annual cost of 

this rule to industry would be 

$2,846,000 ($548,000 + $2,298,000). The 

present value of the total cost for the 

next 10 years is $21,388,531, based on 

a 7 percent discount rate, and 

$25,005,266, based on a 3 percent 

discount rate. 

To the extent that shippers purchase 

equipment from U.S. suppliers, this is a 

transfer from shippers to suppliers. 

To the extent that shippers will pass 

on these costs to their customers, these 

consumers and their customers will bear 

most of the burden of the rule. Given 

that vessel owners will phase in the 

equipment over 20 years, vessel owners 

may be more likely to try to absorb as 

much of this increase as possible over 

the first few years. 

To the extent that vessel owners do 

eventually pass on costs to consumers, 

these price increases would be small 

given vessel owners and operators can 

spread these costs over thousands of 

voyages. 

Benefits 

The benefits of this proposed rule are 

mainly in the improved environmental 

conditions resulting from the use of PPE 

which meets higher standards of 

pollution prevention. The new OWSs 

will better handle the separation of 

emulsified oils, surfactants and 

contaminants from water whereas in 

previously approved units this may not 

have occurred. There would also be a 

broader range and volume of pollutants 

no longer released into the environment 

because of these new standards, which 

is a positive impact of this proposed 

rule. 

Testing standards for pollution 

prevention equipment outlined in 46 

CFR 162.050–39 currently require the 

use of the solvents carbon tetrachloride 

and Freon 113 (CFC 113), which have 

been phased out by the Montreal 

Protocol on Substances that Deplete the 

Ozone Layer. This proposed rule would 

require a new test protocol to be used 

for testing the oil separating capabilities 

of pollution prevention equipment—

outlined in 46 CFR 162.050–39—that 

does not include these substances. 

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 small entities affected by the 

proposed rule are vessels owners 

required to install or replace pollution 

prevention equipment meeting the new 

standards on their vessels. 

To analyze the financial impact of the 

proposed rule on small entities, we 

selected and analyzed a random sample 

of 360 vessels that is statistically 

representative of the target population 

67070 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

of 5,838. In the entire population, 2,780 

companies own these 5,838 vessels. In 

the random sample, we found that 263 

companies owned the 360 vessels. In 

this sample, 69 small companies owned 

79 vessels, 47 large companies owned 

99 vessels, the Federal government 

owned 26 vessels and we found 156 

vessels with no revenue information 

available on their 146 owners. 

We then assessed the impact of cost 

on the revenue of the companies with 

information that we identified as small 

entities, and broke them down by the 

percentage impact on revenue. The large 

majority of small entities (about 87 

percent) face an impact on revenue 

between 0 and 4 percent. To be 

conservative, we assumed that all 

vessels with no available information on 

their ownership were owned by small 

entities. We further assumed that the 

percentage impact of annual cost on 

annual revenue was distributed in the 

same proportion as the small businesses 

for both the vessels with no information 

in the random sample, and for the entire 

target population. See Table 3 below for 

details. 

TABLE 3.—IMPACT OF COST ON SMALL ENTITIES

Percent of annual revenue impact 

Number of entities 

with known annual 

revenues 

Percentage of entities with known 

annual revenues 

Expanded number 

of entities with unknown annual revenues 

Distribution of 

small entities in 

total population 

0¥1% ...................................................................................... 41 59 87 1,074 

>1%¥4% ................................................................................. 19 28 40 498 

>4%¥10% ............................................................................... 5 7 11 131 

>10%¥20% ............................................................................. 0 0 0 0 

>20%¥30% ............................................................................. 3 4 6 79 

>30% ........................................................................................ 1 1 2 26 

Total .................................................................................. 69 100 146 1,807 

* Some values may not total due to rounding. 

Under the Clean Air Act, as amended, 

specifically under 42 U.S.C. 7671a, we 

must eliminate the use of ozonedepleting testing solvents in our current 

PPE regulations. Therefore, ‘‘no action’’

is not an option. Also, the United States 

is party to MARPOL Annex I. To 

effectively implement MARPOL Annex 

I regulations, we must revise our other 

PPE regulations to reflect that 

resolutions MEPC.107(49) and 

MEPC.108(49) have superseded 

resolutions MEPC.60(33) and A.586(14), 

respectively. 

We believe the proposed regulations 

will have a minimal costs to small 

businesses. First, existing vessels are not 

required to immediately install 

pollution prevention equipment 

meeting the new standards, but only 

when they are replacing it, which could 

be over a long period of time. Second, 

57 percent of vessel types in the small 

business category are below 400 GT, and 

owners of these vessels have the option 

of not installing pollution prevention 

equipment and instead discharging oily 

mixtures at a reception facility. Finally, 

the prices of OWS systems (the highest 

cost component of this proposed rule) 

vary widely depending on a range of 

factors including their technological 

capability, so that vessel owners can 

choose cheaper versions within the 

options available to them. 

Therefore, 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. 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 to the 

Docket Management Facility at the 

address under ADDRESSES. In your 

comment, explain 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 (Pub. L. 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 consult Lt. George 

Grills, Office of Systems Engineering 

(G–MSE–3), Coast Guard, telephone 

202–267–6640. The Coast Guard will 

not retaliate against small entities that 

question or complain about this rule or 

any policy or action of the Coast Guard. 

Collection of Information 

This proposed rule would call for no 

new collection of information under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3520). 

The paperwork burden associated 

with the manufacture, laboratory 

testing, approval tests, and marking of 

pollution prevention equipment is 

addressed in the existing collection of 

information, OMB #1625–0035, entitled 

‘‘Title 46 CFR Subchapter Q: Lifesaving, 

Electrical, and Engineering Equipment; 

Construction and Materials.’’ This 

collection of information was approved 

by the Office of Management and 

Budget on December 10, 2002, and will 

expire after the 3-year approval period 

ends on December 31, 2005. 

Federalism 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132, 

Federalism, if it has a substantial direct 

effect on State or local governments or 

would either preempt State law or 

impose a substantial direct cost of 

compliance on them. Based on our 

survey of vessels expected to be 

effected, we have identified only 26 

state-owned vessels that may be 

affected, and these vessels are already 

subject to regulation under the sections 

affected by the proposed amendments. 

Therefore, we conclude the proposed 

rule would not impose a substantial 

direct cost of compliance on State or 

local governments. 

It is well settled that States may not 

regulate in categories reserved for 

regulation by the Coast Guard. It is also 

well settled, now, that all of the 

categories covered in 46 U.S.C. 3306, 

3703, 7101, and 8101 (design, 

construction, alteration, repair, 

maintenance, operation, equipping, 

personnel qualification, and manning of 

vessels), as well as the reporting of 

casualties and any other category in 

which Congress intended the Coast 

Guard to be the sole source of a vessel’s 

obligations, are within the field 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Proposed Rules 67071 

foreclosed from regulation by the States. 

(See the decision of the Supreme Court 

in the consolidated cases of United 

States v. Locke and Intertanko v. Locke, 

529 U.S. 89, 120 S. Ct. 1135 (March 6, 

2000)). Our proposed rule would revise 

standards for pollution prevention 

equipment. Because the States may not 

regulate within this category, 

preemption under Executive Order 

13132 is not an issue. 

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 proposed rule would not 

result in such an expenditure, we do 

discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere 

in this preamble. 

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. 

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. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This proposed rule does not have 

tribal implications under Executive 

Order 13175, Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments, because it would 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 proposed 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 proposed rule uses the following 

new voluntary consensus standards: 

1. IMO Assembly Resolution 

A.393(X)—Recommendation on 

International Performance and Test 

Specifications For Oily-Water 

Separating Equipment and Oil Content 

Meters; 

2. IMO Assembly Resolution 

A.496(XII)—Guidelines and 

Specifications for Oil Discharge 

Monitoring and Control Systems for Oil 

Tankers; 

3. IMO Assembly Resolution 

A.586(14)—Revised Guidelines and 

Specifications for Oil Discharge 

Monitoring and Control Systems for Oil 

Tankers; 

4. IMO Marine Environment 

Protection Committee Resolution 

MEPC.13(19)—Guidelines for Plan 

Approval and Installation Survey of Oil 

Discharge Monitoring and Control 

Systems for Oil Tankers and 

Environmental Testing of Control 

Sections Thereof; 

5. IMO Marine Environment 

Protection Committee Resolution 

MEPC.108(49)—Revised Guidelines and 

Specifications for Oil Discharge 

Monitoring and Control Systems for Oil 

Tankers; 

6. International Organization of 

Standardization Standard ISO 8217 

(1996) Petroleum products—Fuels (class 

F)—Specification of marine fuels; 

7. International Organization of 

Standardization Standard ISO 9377–2 

(2000), Water Quality—Determination of 

hydrocarbon oil index—Part 2: Method 

Using solvent extraction and Gas 

Chromatography. 

The proposed sections that reference 

these standards and the locations where 

these standards are available are listed 

in 33 CFR 157.02 and 46 CFR 162.050–

4. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed 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)(e), of the 

Instruction, from further environmental 

documentation. These regulations 

concern equipment approval and 

carriage requirements. A preliminary 

‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’ is 

available in the docket where indicated 

under the ‘‘Public Participation and 

Request for Comments’’ section of this 

preamble. Comments on this section 

will be considered before we make the 

final decision on whether this rule 

should be categorically excluded from 

further environmental review. 

List of Subjects 

33 CFR Part 155 

Alaska, Hazardous substances, Oil 

pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

33 CFR Part 157 

Cargo vessels, Incorporation by 

reference, Oil pollution, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

46 CFR Part 162 

Fire prevention, Incorporation by 

reference, Marine safety, Oil pollution, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR parts 155 and 157, and 

46 CFR part 162 as follows: 

67072 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

Title 33—Navigation and Navigable 

Waters 

PART 155—OIL OR HAZARDOUS 

MATERIAL POLLUTION PREVENTION 

REGULATIONS FOR VESSELS 

1. Revise the authority citation for 

part 155 to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231, 1321(j); E.O. 

11735, 3 CFR, 1971–1975 Comp., p. 793; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 0170.1. Sections 155.100 through 

155.130, 150.350 through 155.400, 155.430, 

155.440, 155.470, 155.1030(j) and (k), and 

155.1065(g) are also issued under 33 U.S.C. 

1903(b). Sections 155.480, 155.490, 

155.750(e), and 155.775 are also issued under 

46 U.S.C. 3703. Section 155.490 is also 

issued under section 4110(b) of Pub. L. 101–

380. Note: Additional requirements for 

vessels carrying oil or hazardous materials 

are contained in 46 CFR parts 30 through 40, 

150, 151, and 153. 

2. In § 155.380, revise the section 

heading and paragraph (c) to read as 

follows: 

§ 155.380 Oily-water separating equipment 

and bilge alarm approval standards. 

* * * * * 

(c) A ship that is required to have a 

bilge alarm may defer installment and 

use a previously installed bilge monitor 

provided the bilge monitor met Coast 

Guard approval requirements at the time 

of its installation and it does not allow 

more than a 15 ppm oil content in water 

discharge. 

PART 157—RULES FOR THE 

PROTECTION OF THE MARINE 

ENVIRONMENT RELATING TO TANK 

VESSELS CARRYING OIL IN BULK 

3. Revise the authority citation for 

part 157 to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1903; 46 U.S.C. 3703, 

3703a (note); Department of Homeland 

Security Delegation No. 0170.1. Subparts G, 

H, and I are also issued under section 

4115(b), Pub. L. 101–380, 104 Stat. 520; Pub. 

L. 104–55, 109 Stat. 546. 

4. In § 157.02, revise paragraph (b) to 

read as follows: 

§ 157.02 Incorporation by reference. 

* * * * * 

(b) The material approved for 

incorporation by reference in this part 

and the sections affected, are as follows: 

International Maritime Organization 

(IMO)—4 Albert Embankment, 

London SE1 7SR, United Kingdom. 

IMO Assembly Resolution A.393(X), 

Recommendation on International 

Performance and Test 

Specifications For Oily-Water 

Separating Equipment and Oil 

Content Meters—157.12 

IMO Assembly Resolution A.496(XII), 

Guidelines and Specifications for 

Oil Discharge Monitoring and 

Control Systems for Oil Tankers—

157.12 

IMO Assembly Resolution A.586(14), 

Revised Guidelines and 

Specifications for Oil Discharge 

Monitoring and Control Systems for 

Oil Tankers—157.12 

IMO Marine Environment Protection 

Committee Resolution 

MEPC.13(19), Guidelines for Plan 

Approval and Installation Survey of 

Oil Discharge Monitoring and 

Control Systems for Oil Tankers 

and Environmental Testing of 

Control Sections Thereof—157.12 

IMO Marine Environment Protection 

Committee Resolution 

MEPC.108(49), Revised Guidelines 

and Specifications for Oil Discharge 

Monitoring and Control Systems for 

Oil Tankers—157.12 

IMO Assembly Resolution A.601(15), 

Provision and Display of 

Manoeuvring Information on Board 

Ships, Annex sections 1.1, 2.3, 3.1, 

and 3.2 with appendices, adopted 

on 19 November 1987—157.450 

IMO Assembly Resolution A.744(18), 

Guidelines on the Enhanced 

Programme of Inspections During 

Surveys of Bulk Carriers and Oil 

Tankers, Annex B sections 1.1.3–

1.1.4, 1.2–1.3, 2.1, 2.3–2.6, 3–8, and 

Annexes 1–10 with appendices, 

adopted 4 November 1993—157.430 

IMO Assembly Resolution A.751(18), 

Interim Standards for Ship 

Manoeuvrability, Annex sections 

1.2, 2.3–2.4, 3–4.2, and 5, adopted 

4 November 1993 with Explanatory 

Notes in MSC/Circ. 644 dated 6 

June 1994—157.445 

Oil Companies International Marine 

Forum (OCIMF) 27 Queen Anne’s 

Gate, London, SW1H 9BU, 

England]. 

International Safety Guide for Oil 

Tankers and Terminals, Fourth 

Edition, Chapters 6, 7, and 10, 

1996—157.435 

5. In § 157.12, revise paragraphs (b) 

and (c) to read as follows: 

§ 157.12 Cargo monitor and control 

system. 

* * * * * 

(b) Each monitor installed on a U.S. 

vessel must be approved under 46 CFR 

162.050. Each monitor installed on a 

foreign vessel must be approved: 

(1) Under 46 CFR 162.050; or 

(2) As meeting IMO Marine 

Environment Protection Committee 

resolution MEPC.108(49) by a country 

that has ratified the MARPOL 73/78. 

Paragraph 1.2.2 of MEPC.108(49) 

provides, as to equipment installed in 

‘‘oil tankers the keels of which are laid, 

or which are at a similar stage of 

construction, before January 1, 2005,’’

for alternative compliance with IMO 

resolutions A.393(X), A.496(XII), 

MEPC.13(19), and A.586(14). These five 

resolutions are incorporated by 

reference (see § 157.02). 

(c) Each monitor on a U.S. vessel must 

be installed in accordance with 

§§ 157.12b through 157.12g. 

6. Add §§ 157.12a through 157.12g to 

read as follows: 

§ 157.12a Definitions. 

As used in §§ 157.12a through 

157.12g—

Control section means a unit in a 

monitoring system composed of the 

items specified in § 157.12d(a)(4)(viii). 

Control unit means a device that 

receives automatic signals of oil content 

of the effluent ppm, flow rate of 

discharge m3/hour, ship’s speed in 

knots, ship’s position—latitude and 

longitude, date and time (GMT, 

Greenwich Mean Time), and status of 

the overboard discharge control. The 

control unit makes automatic recordings 

of data as specified in § 157.12d(h)(2). 

Oil discharge monitoring and control 

system or monitoring system means a 

system that monitors the discharge into 

the sea of oily ballast or other oilcontaminated water from the cargo tank 

areas and comprises the items specified 

in § 157.12d(a)(4). 

Overboard discharge control means a 

device that automatically initiates the 

sequence to stop the overboard 

discharge of the effluent in alarm 

conditions and prevents the discharge 

throughout the period the alarm 

condition prevails. The device may be 

arranged to close the overboard valves 

or to stop the relevant pumps, as 

appropriate. 

PPM or ppm means parts of oil per 

million parts of water by volume. 

Starting interlock means a facility that 

prevents the initiation of the opening of 

the discharge valve or the operation of 

other equivalent arrangements before 

the monitoring system is fully 

operational when use of the monitoring 

system is required by the Convention. 

§ 157.12b Implementation requirements. 

Oil discharge monitoring and control 

systems must be fitted to oil tankers to 

which this subpart applies. A 

monitoring and control system must 

employ a control unit and be fitted with 

a starting interlock and overboard 

discharge control. 

§ 157.12c Construction, maintenance, 

security, calibration and training. 

(a) The oil discharge monitoring and 

control system must be designed to 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Proposed Rules 67073 

ensure that user access is restricted to 

essential controls. Access beyond these 

controls must be available for 

emergency maintenance and temporary 

repair but must require the breaking of 

security seals or activation of another 

device which indicates an entry to the 

equipment. 

(b) The seals must be of a design that 

only the manufacturer or the 

manufacturer’s agent can replace the 

seals or reset the system following 

inspection and permanent repairs to the 

equipment. 

(c) The accuracy of the monitoring 

system must be verified during 

International Oil Pollution Prevention 

certificate renewal surveys. The 

calibration certificate certifying date of 

last calibration check must be retained 

on board for inspection purposes. 

(d) The monitoring system may have 

several scales as appropriate for its 

intended use. The recording device 

fitted to a meter which has more than 

one scale must indicate the scale which 

is in use. 

(e) Simple means must be provided 

aboard ship to check on instrument drift 

must be limited; repeatability of the 

instrument reading, and the ability to rezero the instrument. 

(f) Ship staff training must include 

familiarization in the operation and the 

maintenance of the equipment. 

(g) The routine maintenance of the 

monitoring system and troubleshooting 

procedures must be clearly defined in 

the Operating and Maintenance Manual. 

All routine maintenance and repairs 

must be recorded. 

§ 157.12d Technical specifications. 

(a) Oil discharge monitoring and 

control system. (1) The monitoring 

system must be capable of effectively 

monitoring and controlling the 

discharge of any effluent into the sea 

through those overboard discharge 

outlets permitted by § 157.11 that are 

necessary to fulfill the operational 

requirements of the oil tanker. 

(2) The discharge of dirty ballast 

water or other oil-contaminated water 

from the cargo tank areas into the sea 

through outlets which are not controlled 

by the monitoring system is prohibited. 

(3) The monitoring system must 

function effectively under all 

environmental conditions that oil 

tankers normally encounter, and must 

be designed and constructed to satisfy 

the specifications for approval in 46 

CFR subpart 162.050. Moreover—

(i) The system must be designed so 

that no discharge of dirty ballast or 

other oil-contaminated water from the 

cargo tank areas can take place unless 

the monitoring system is in the normal 

operating mode and the relevant 

sampling point has been selected; 

(ii) Preferably the system should 

sample the effluent discharge from a 

minimum number of discharge outlets 

and be arranged so that discharge 

overboard can take place via only one 

outlet at a time; 

(iii) Where it is intended that more 

than one line be used for simultaneous 

discharging purposes, one cargo 

monitor, together with a flow meter, 

must be installed in each discharge line. 

These instruments must be connected to 

a common processor; and 

(iv) To avoid alarms because of shortterm high oil concentration signals 

(spikes) causing indications of high 

instantaneous rates of discharge, the 

short-term high ppm signal may be 

suppressed for a maximum of 10 

seconds. Alternatively, the 

instantaneous rate of discharge may be 

continuously averaged during the 

preceding 20 seconds or less as 

computed from instantaneous ppm 

values of the cargo monitor readings 

received at intervals not exceeding 5 

seconds. 

(4) The monitoring system must 

comprise—

(i) A cargo monitor to measure the oil 

content of the effluent in ppm. The 

monitor must be approved in 

accordance with the provisions 

contained in 46 CFR 162.050 and be 

certified to take into account the range 

of cargoes carried; 

(ii) A flow rate indicating system to 

measure the rate of effluent being 

discharged into the sea; 

(iii) A ship speed indicating device to 

give the ship’s speed in knots; 

(iv) A ship position indicating device 

to give the ship’s position—latitude and 

longitude; 

(v) A sampling system to convey a 

representative sample of the effluent to 

the cargo monitor; 

(vi) An overboard discharge control to 

stop the overboard discharge; 

(vii) A starting interlock to prevent 

the discharge overboard of any effluent 

unless the monitoring system is fully 

operational; and 

(viii) A control section comprising—

(A) A processor that accepts signals of 

oil content in the effluent, the effluent 

flow rate and the ship’s speed, and 

computes these values into liters of oil 

discharged per nautical mile and the 

total quantity of oil discharged; 

(B) A means to provide alarms and 

command signals to the overboard 

discharge control; 

(C) A recording device to provide a 

record of data required under 

§ 157.12d(h)(2); 

(D) A data display to exhibit the 

current operational data required under 

§ 157.12d(i); 

(E) A manual override system to be 

used in the event of failure of the 

monitoring system; and 

(F) A means to provide signals to the 

starting interlock to prevent the 

discharge of any effluent before the 

monitoring system is fully operational. 

(5) Each main component of the 

monitoring system must be fitted with a 

name-plate, properly identifying the 

component by assembly drawing 

number, type or model number and 

serial number, as appropriate. 

(6) The electrical components of the 

monitoring system that are to be 

installed in an explosive atmosphere 

must be in compliance with 46 CFR 

162.050–25. 

(b) Sampling system. (1) Sampling 

points must be located so that relevant 

samples can be obtained from those 

outlets that are used for operational 

discharges in accordance with 

paragraph (a) of this section. The 

sampling probes located in the 

overboard discharge lines and the 

piping system connecting the sampling 

probes to the cargo monitor must meet 

the requirements of this paragraph. 

(2) The piping and probes must be of 

a material resistant to fire, corrosion, 

and oil and be of adequate strength, and 

properly jointed and supported. 

(3) The system must have a stop-valve 

fitted adjacent to each probe, except 

that, where the probe is mounted in a 

cargo line, two stop-valves must be 

fitted, in series, in the sample line; one 

of these may be the remote controlled 

sample selector valve. 

(4) Sampling probes must be arranged 

for easy withdrawal and must, as far as 

practicable, be mounted at an accessible 

location in a vertical section of the 

discharge line. Should it be necessary to 

fit sampling probes in a horizontal 

section of the discharge line it must be 

ascertained, during the installation 

survey, that the pipe runs full of liquid 

at all times during the discharge of the 

effluent. Sampling probes must 

normally penetrate inside the discharge 

pipe to a distance of one quarter the 

diameter of that pipe. 

(5) Means must be provided for 

cleaning the probes and piping system 

by the provision of permanent clean 

water flushing arrangements or an 

equivalent method. The design of the 

probes and piping must be such as to 

minimize their clogging by oil, oily 

residue, and other matter. 

(6) The velocity of the fluid in the 

piping must be such that, taking into 

consideration the length of the piping, 

the overall response time must be as 

67074 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

short as possible between an alteration 

in the mixture being pumped and the 

alteration in the cargo monitor reading 

and in any case not more than 40 

seconds, including the response time of 

the cargo monitor. 

(7) The location of sampling probes in 

relation to any point of flow diversion 

to a slop tank must be selected with 

regard to the need for sampling the oily 

water in the recirculation mode. 

(8) The arrangements for driving the 

sampling pump or any other pumps 

used in the system must account for the 

safety requirements of the space in 

which the pump is located. Any 

bulkhead penetration between a 

hazardous and a non-hazardous area 

must be of a design meeting the 

requirements of 46 CFR 32.60–20 and 46 

CFR subpart 111.105. 

(9) The flushing arrangement must be 

such that where necessary it can be 

utilized for test-running and stabilizing 

the cargo monitor and correcting for 

zero setting. 

(10) Sample water returning to the 

slop tank must not be allowed to freefall into the tank. In tankers equipped 

with an inert gas system, a water seal 

meeting the requirements of 46 CFR 

32.53–10(b) must be arranged in the 

piping leading to a slop tank. 

(11) A valve must be provided for the 

manual collection of samples from the 

inlet piping to the cargo monitor at a 

point downstream of any sampling 

pump. 

(c) Flow rate indicating system. (1) A 

flow meter for measuring the rate of 

discharge must be installed in a vertical 

section of a discharge line or in any 

other section of a discharge line as 

appropriate, so as to be always filled 

with the liquid being discharged. 

(2) A flow meter must employ an 

operating principle which is suitable for 

shipboard use and, where relevant, can 

be used in large diameter pipes. 

(3) A flow meter must be suitable for 

the full range of flow rates that may be 

encountered during normal operation. 

Alternatively, arrangements such as the 

use of two flow meters of different 

ranges or a restriction of the operational 

flow rate range may be employed if 

necessary to meet this requirement. 

(4) The flow meter, as installed, must 

have an accuracy of ±10 percent, or 

better, of the instantaneous rate of 

discharge throughout the operating 

range for discharging the effluent. 

(5) Any component part of the flow 

meter in contact with the effluent 

should be of corrosion-resistant and oilresistant material of adequate strength. 

(6) The design of the flow metering 

arrangements must account for the 

safety requirements of the space in 

which such metering arrangements are 

located. 

(d) Ship’s speed indicating system. 

The automatic speed signal required for 

a monitoring system must be obtained 

from the ship’s speed indicating device 

by means of a repeater signal. The speed 

information used may be either speed 

over the ground or speed through the 

water, depending upon the speed 

measuring equipment installed on 

board. 

Note to paragraph (d): See 

‘‘Recommendation on Performance Standards 

for Devices to Indicate Speed and Distance,’’

Annex to resolution A.824(19) as amended 

by resolution MSC.96(72). 

(e) Ship position indicating device. 

The ship position indicating device 

must consist of a receiver for a global 

navigation satellite system or a 

terrestrial radio navigation system, or 

other means, suitable for use at all times 

throughout the intended voyage to 

establish and update the ship’s position 

by automatic means. 

(f) Overboard discharge control 

management. The overboard discharge 

control must be able to stop the 

discharge of the effluent into the sea 

automatically by either closing all 

relevant overboard discharge valves or 

stopping all relevant pumps. The 

discharge control arrangement must be 

fail-safe so that all effluent discharge is 

stopped when the monitoring system is 

not in operation, at alarm conditions, or 

when the monitoring system fails to 

function. 

(g) Processor and transmitting device. 

(1) The processor of a control section 

must receive signals from the cargo 

monitor, the flow rate indicating system 

and the ship’s speed indicating system 

at time intervals not exceeding 5 

seconds and must automatically 

compute the following: 

(i) Instantaneous rate of discharge of 

oil in liters per nautical mile; and 

(ii) Total quantity of oil discharged 

during the voyage in cubic meters or 

liters. 

(2) When the limits imposed by 

§ 157.37(a)(3) and (4) are exceeded, the 

processor must provide alarms and 

provide command signals to the 

overboard discharge control 

arrangement which will cause the 

discharge of effluent into the sea to stop. 

(3) The processor must normally 

include a device for the continuous 

generation of time and date information. 

Alternative arrangements which ensure 

the automatic and continuous reception 

of time and date information from an 

external source may be approved by the 

Marine Safety Center. 

(4) In the event of power failure the 

processor must retain its memory in 

respect to computation of the total 

quantity of oil discharged, time, and 

date. A printout of data must be 

obtained when the monitoring system is 

operating with manual override, but the 

printout of data is not required if, when 

the power fails, the monitoring system 

activates the overboard discharge 

control to stop the discharge of effluent. 

(h) Recording devices. (1) The 

recording device of a control section 

must include a digital printer, which 

may be formatted electronically. The 

recorded parameters must be explicitly 

identified on the printout. The printout 

must be legible and must remain so 

once removed from the recording device 

and must be retained for at least 3 years. 

(2) The data to be automatically 

recorded must include at least the 

following: 

(i) Instantaneous rate of discharge of 

oil (liters per nautical mile); 

(ii) Instantaneous oil content (ppm); 

(iii) The total quantity of oil 

discharged (cubic meters or liters); 

(iv) Time and date (GMT, Greenwich 

Mean Time); 

(v) Ship’s speed in knots; 

(vi) Ship’s position—latitude and 

longitude; 

(vii) Effluent flow rate; 

(viii) Status of the overboard 

discharge control or arrangement; 

(ix) Oil type selector setting, where 

applicable; 

(x) Alarm condition; 

(xi) Failure, including, but not limited 

to, no flow, or fault; and 

(xii) Override action, including, but 

not limited to, manual override, 

flushing, and calibration. Any 

information inserted manually as a 

result of an override action must be 

identified as such on the printout. 

(3) Data required in paragraph (h)(2) 

of this section must be printed out or 

may be stored electronically with 

printout capability, with the following 

minimum frequency: 

(i) When the discharge is started; 

(ii) When the discharge is stopped; 

(iii) At intervals of not more than 10 

minutes (except when the system is in 

stand-by mode); 

(iv) When an alarm condition 

develops; 

(v) When normal conditions are 

restored; 

(vi) Whenever the computed rate of 

discharge varies by 10 liters per nautical 

mile; 

(vii) When zero-setting or calibration 

modes are selected; and 

(viii) On manual command. 

(4) The recording device must be 

located in a position easily accessible to 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Proposed Rules 67075 

the person in charge of the overboard 

discharge operation. 

(i) Data display. (1) In addition to the 

recorded printout, the current data must 

be visibly displayed and must as a 

minimum contain the following: 

(i) Instantaneous rate of discharge of 

oil (liters per nautical mile); 

(ii) Total quantity of oil discharged 

(cubic meters or liters); 

(iii) Instantaneous oil content (ppm) 

(iv) Flow rate; 

(v) Ship’s speed; and 

(vi) Status of the overboard discharge 

control or arrangement. 

(2) The data display must be located 

in a position easily observed by the 

person in charge of the overboard 

discharge operation. 

(j) Manually operated alternatives in 

the event of equipment malfunction. 

Acceptable alternative means of 

obtaining information in the event of a 

failure in the monitoring system include 

the following: 

(1) Cargo monitor or sampling system: 

visual observation of the surface of the 

water adjacent to the effluent discharge; 

(2) Flow meter: pump discharge 

characteristics; 

(3) Ship’s speed indicating device: 

main engine rpm; 

(4) Processor: manual calculation and 

manual recording; and 

(5) Overboard discharge control: 

manual operation of pumps and valves. 

(k) Alarm conditions resulting in the 

stopping of discharge. Audio-visual 

alarms must be activated for any of the 

following conditions and the monitoring 

system must be so arranged that the 

discharge of effluent into the sea is 

stopped: 

(1) Whenever the instantaneous rate 

of discharge of oil exceeds 30 liters per 

nautical mile; 

(2) When the total quantity of oil 

discharged reaches 1/30,000 of the 

previous cargo for new vessels and 1/ 

15,000 for existing vessels; 

(3) In the event of failure of the 

system’s operation, such as: 

(i) Power failure; 

(ii) Loss of sample; 

(iii) Significant failure of the 

measuring or recording system; or 

(iv) When the input of any sensor 

exceeds the effective capacity of the 

system. 

(l) Location of alarm indicator. The 

alarm indicator of the system must be 

installed in the cargo control room, 

where provided, and/or in other places 

where it will attract immediate attention 

and action. 

§ 157.12e Certificate of approval. 

(a) A copy of the certificate of 

approval for the cargo monitors must be 

carried aboard an oil tanker fitted with 

such equipment at all times. 

(b) A certificate of type approval must 

be issued for the specific application for 

which the cargo monitor is approved, 

that is, for crude oil, ‘‘black’’ products, 

‘‘white’’ products, or other products or 

applications as listed on the certificate. 

§ 157.12f Workshop functional test 

requirements. 

(a) Each cargo monitor and each 

control section of a monitoring system 

must be subjected to a functional test on 

a suitable test bench prior to delivery. 

The detailed program for a functional 

test of such equipment must be 

developed by the manufacturer, taking 

into account the features and functions 

of the specific design of equipment. A 

completed workshop certificate 

including the delivery test protocol 

must be received with each unit 

delivered. 

(b) A functional test conducted on a 

cargo monitor must include at least all 

the following operations: 

(1) Check flow rate, pressure drop, or 

an equivalent parameter as appropriate; 

(2) Check all alarm functions built 

into the meter; 

(3) Check all switching functions 

interconnecting with other parts of the 

system; and 

(4) Check correct reading at several 

ppm values on all measurement scales 

when operated on an oil appropriate for 

the application of the cargo monitor or 

by an equivalent method. 

(c) A functional check conducted on 

a control section of a monitoring system 

must include at least all the following 

operations: 

(1) Check all alarm functions; 

(2) Check correct function of the 

signal processor and the recording 

equipment when simulated input 

signals of ppm, flow rate, and speed are 

varied; 

(3) Check that the alarm is activated 

when the input signals are varied to 

exceed the discharge limits contained in 

§ 157.37(a)(3) and (4). 

(4) Check that a signal is given to the 

overboard discharge control when alarm 

conditions are reached; and 

(5) Check that the alarm is activated 

when each one of the input signals is 

varied to exceed the capacity of the 

system. 

§ 157.12g Plan approval requirements. 

Adequate documentation must be 

prepared well in advance of the 

intended installation of a monitoring 

system and must be submitted to the 

Marine Safety Center for approval. The 

documentation to be submitted must 

include at least all the following: 

(a) A description of the monitoring 

system. The description must include a 

diagrammatic drawing of the pumping 

and piping arrangements, identifying 

the operational outlets for dirty ballast 

and oil-contaminated water from the 

cargo tank area and compatible with the 

operational requirements set out in the 

oil tanker’s cargo and ballast handling 

manuals. Special considerations may 

have to be given to installations in oil 

tankers which have unusual pumping 

and piping arrangements. 

(b) Equipment manuals, supplied by 

manufacturers, which must contain 

details of the major components of the 

monitoring system. 

(c) An operations and technical 

manual for the complete monitoring 

system which is proposed to be 

installed in the oil tanker. This manual 

must cover the arrangements and 

operation of the system as a whole and 

must specifically describe parts of the 

system which are not covered by the 

manufacturer’s equipment manuals. 

(d) The operations section of the 

manual must include normal 

operational procedures and procedures 

for the discharge of oily water in the 

event of malfunction of the equipment. 

(e) The technical section of the 

manual must include adequate 

information (description and 

diagrammatic drawings of the pumping 

and piping arrangements of the 

monitoring system and electrical/ 

electronic wiring diagrams) to enable 

fault finding and must include 

instructions for keeping a maintenance 

record. 

(f) A technical installation 

specification defining, among other 

things, the location and mounting of 

components, arrangements for 

maintaining the integrity of the 

boundary between safe and hazardous 

spaces and the arrangement of the 

sample piping, including calculation of 

the sample response time referred to in 

§ 157.12d(b)(6). The installation must 

comply with manufacturer’s specific 

installation criteria. 

(g) A copy of the certificate of type 

approval for the cargo monitor and 

technical documentation relevant to 

other main components of the 

monitoring system. 

(h) A recommended test and checkout 

procedure specific to the monitoring 

system installed. This procedure must 

specify all the checks to be carried out 

in a functional test by the installation 

contractor and must provide guidance 

for the surveyor when carrying out the 

on-board survey of the monitoring 

system and confirming the installation 

reflects the manufacturer’s specific 

installation criteria. 

67076 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

7. Revise § 157.39(b)(3) to read as 

follows: 

§ 157.39 Machinery space bilges. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) Has in operation an oil discharge 

monitoring and control system in 

compliance with § 157.12 and oil 

separating equipment in compliance 

with 33 CFR 155.380. 

Appendix F to Part 157—[Removed and 

Reserved] 

8. Remove and reserve Appendix F to 

part 157. 

Title 46—Shipping 

PART 162—ENGINEERING 

EQUIPMENT 

9. Revise the authority citation for 

part 162 to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(j), 1903; 46 

U.S.C. 3306, 3703, 4104, 4302; E.O. 12234, 45 

FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277; E.O. 

11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR, 1971–1975 

Comp., p. 793; Department of Homeland 

Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

10. In § 162.050–1, revise paragraph 

(a)(1) to read as follows: 

§ 162.050–1 Scope. 

(a) * * * 

(1) Procedures for approval of 15 ppm 

separators, cargo monitors, and bilge 

monitors. 

* * * * * 

11. Revise § 162.050–3 to read as 

follows: 

§ 162.050–3 Definitions. 

As used in this subpart—

15 ppm separator means a separator 

that is designed to remove enough oil 

from an oil-water mixture to provide a 

resulting mixture that has an oil 

concentration of 15 ppm or less. 

Bilge alarm means an instrument that 

is designed to measure the oil content 

of oily mixtures from machinery space 

bilges and fuel oil tanks that carry 

ballast and activate an alarm at a set 

concentration limit and record date, 

time, alarm status, and operating status 

of the 15 ppm separator. 

Cargo monitor means an instrument 

that is designed to measure and record 

the oil content of cargo residues from 

cargo tanks and oily mixtures combined 

with these residues. 

Independent laboratory means a 

laboratory that—

(1) Has the equipment and procedures 

necessary to approve the electrical 

components described in §§ 162.050–

21(b) and 162.050–25(c), or to conduct 

the test described in § 162.050–37(a); 

and 

(2) Is not owned or controlled by a 

manufacturer, supplier, or vendor of 

separators, monitors, or bilge alarms. 

PPM or ppm means parts per million 

by volume of oil in water. 

Response time means the time 

elapsed between an alteration in the 

sample being supplied to the bilge alarm 

and the ppm display showing the 

correct response. 

12. Revise § 162.050–4 to read as 

follows: 

§ 162.050–4 Documents incorporated by 

reference. 

(a) Certain material is incorporated by 

reference into this subpart with the 

approval of the Director of the Federal 

Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 

CFR part 51. To enforce any edition 

other than that specified in paragraph 

(b) of this section, the Coast Guard must 

publish notice of change in the Federal 

Register and the material must be 

available to the public. All approved 

material is available for inspection at 

the National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, call 202–741–6030 or 

go to http://www.archives.gov/ 

federal_register/ 

code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html. Also, it is available 

for inspection at the Coast Guard, (G–

MSE), 2100 Second Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20593–0001, and is 

available from the sources indicated in 

paragraph (b) of this section. 

(b) The material approved for 

incorporation by reference in this part 

(subchapter), and the sections affected, 

are as follows: 

Underwriters Laboratories, Inc., (UL) 12 

Laboratory Drive, Research Triangle 

Park, NC 27709–3995. 

Underwriters Laboratories Standard 

913 (as revised April 8, 1976)—

162.050–21, 162.050–25. 

American Society for Testing and 

Materials 100 Barr Harbor Drive, 

West Conshohocken, PA 19428–

2959. 

ASTM D2777–98, Standard Practice 

for Determination of Precision and 

Bias of Applicable Test Methods of 

Committee D–19 on Water—

162.050–15. 

International Organization for 

Standardization (ISO) 1, rue de 

Varembe ́, Case postale 56, CH–1211 

Geneva 20, Switzerland (Internet: 

http://www.iso.org.) 

International Organization of 

Standardization Standard ISO 8217 

(1996) Petroleum products—Fuels 

(class F)—Specification of marine 

fuels—162.050–20. 

International Organization of 

Standardization Standard ISO 

9377–2 (2000), Water Quality—

Determination of hydrocarbon oil 

index—Part 2: Method Using 

solvent extraction and Gas 

Chromatography—162.050–39. 

§ 162.050–5 [Amended] 

13. In § 162.050–5, in paragraph (a), 

remove the abbreviation ‘‘p.p.m.’’, and 

add, in its place, the letters ‘‘ppm’’. 

§ 162.050–7 [Amended] 

14. In §162.050–7: 

a. Remove paragraph (j); 

b. Redesignate paragraph (k) as 

paragraph (j); 

c. In paragraph (e), remove the word 

and figure ‘‘fifty (50)’’ wherever they 

appear and add, in their place, the 

figure ‘‘50’’; in paragraph (h)(3), 

following the figure ‘‘3’’, remove the 

letter ‘‘S’’ and add, in its place, the letter 

‘‘A’’; and in paragraph (h)(4), following 

the figure ‘‘5’’, remove the letter ‘‘S’’ and 

add, in its place, the letter ‘‘A’’, and in 

redesignated paragraph (j)(2), remove 

the abbreviation ‘‘p.p.m.’’, and add, in 

its place, the letters ‘‘ppm’’; and 

d. Revise paragraphs (f), (h)(2), (i)(2), 

and redesignated (j)(3) to read as 

follows: 

§ 162.050–7 Approval procedures. 

* * * * * 

(f) The approval tests in this subpart 

must be performed by a facility 

designated under § 162.050–15. The 

facility must also be accepted as an 

independent laboratory by the Coast 

Guard under subpart 159.010 of this 

chapter. The facility must perform each 

test in accordance with the test 

conditions prescribed in this subpart for 

the test, prepare a test report for the 

item if it completes all of the tests, and 

send the report with three copies to the 

Commanding Officer, USCG Marine 

Safety Center. The applicant may 

observe the tests. If an item does not 

complete testing, a new application 

must be made before retesting. 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

(2) The oil content of each sample of 

separated water effluent taken during 

approval testing is 15 ppm or less; 

* * * * * 

(i) * * * 

(2) Each oil content reading recorded 

during approval testing is ±10 ppm or 

±10 percent, whichever is greater, of the 

oil content of the sample influent 

mixture taken at the time of the reading; 

* * * * * 

(j) * * * 

(3) Its response time is five seconds or 

less; and 

* * * * * 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Proposed Rules 67077 

§ 162.050–14 [Removed] 

14A. Remove § 162.050–14. 

15. In § 162.050–15, revise paragraphs 

(a), (d), (e), (f)(3) and (h) to read as 

follows: 

§ 162.050–15 Designation of facilities. 

(a) Each request for designation as a 

facility authorized to perform approval 

tests must be submitted to 

Commandant, G–MSE–3, 2100 2nd 

Street SW., Washington, DC 20593–

0001. 

* * * * * 

(d) If the facility meets the 

requirements in paragraphs (g)(1) 

through (g)(4) of this section, they must 

obtain 12 samples containing mixtures 

of oil in water that are within a 10-to30 ppm range that can be verified by an 

independent third-party source 

mutually acceptable to the applying lab 

and the Coast Guard prior to 

verification. 

(e) The facility must measure the oil 

content of each sample using the 

method described in § 162.050–39 and 

report the value of each of the 12 

measurements to Commandant, G–

MSE–3, 2100 2nd St. SW., Washington, 

DC 20593–0001. 

(f) * * * 

(3) The absolute value of Xd must be 

smaller than u based on the following 

analysis of paired observations: 

(i) Calculate the value of X ̄ d and Sd. 

This is the mean and standard 

deviation, respectively, of the 

differences between the known sample 

concentrations and the values obtained 

by the facility with their equipment. 

The value of X ̄ d for the 12 measurements 

described in paragraph (e) of this 

section, or for 11 measurements if 

paragraph (f)(2) of this section applies, 

must be within the range¥1≤X ̄ d≤+1. 

(ii) Determine the appropriate critical 

value of the Student’s t distribution 

with (n¥1) degrees of freedom for a 

confidence level of a=0.01. If all 12 

samples meet the criteria of paragraph 

(f)(1) of this section then (n¥1)=11 and 

the critical value, 

t a 1

2

− ,

is 3.106. If paragraph (f)(2) of this 

section applies, then (n¥1)=10 and 

t a 1

2

3169 − = . .

(iii) Compute the value of u, where 

u t

S

n a d = 



 





1−

2

,

where n=12 if all samples meet the 

criteria of paragraph(f)(1) and n=11 if 

paragraph (f)(2) applies. 

(iv) Compare the absolute value of X ̄ d

to the value of u. If |X ̄ d|<u, then the 

facility meets the criteria. 

* * * * * 

(h) A facility may not subcontract for 

approval testing unless previously 

authorized by the Coast Guard. A 

request for authorization to subcontract 

must be sent to Commandant, G–MSE–

3, 2100 2nd Street, SW., Washington, 

DC 20593–0001. 

16. In § 162.050–17, revise Figure 

162.050–17(a) and paragraphs (b)(1), 

(b)(2), (c)(1), and (c)(3); in paragraph (d) 

remove the reference ‘‘162.050–17(e)’’

and add in its place the reference 

‘‘162.050–17(d)’’; remove Figure 

162.050–17(e) and add in its place 

Figure 162.050–17(d) to read as follows: 

§ 162.050–17 Separator test rig. 

* * * * * 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–C 

(b) * * * 

(1) Be a centrifugal pump capable of 

operating at 1,000 revolutions per 

minute or more; 

(2) Have a delivery capacity of at least 

1.5 times the maximum throughput at 

which the separator being tested is 

designed to operate; 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(1) Influent water flows at a Reynolds 

Number of at least 10,000; 

* * * * * 

(3) Its length is at least 20 times its 

inside diameter. 

* * * * * 


EP03NO05.033</MATH> EP03NO05.034</MATH> EP03NO05.041</MATH> EP03NO05.030</GPH>
67078 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

§ 162.050–19 [Amended] 

17. In § 162.050–19(c), remove the 

words and figure ‘‘one thousand 

(1,000)’’ and add, in their place, the 

figure ‘‘1,000’’; and revise Figure 

162.050–19 to read as follows: 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–C 

18. Add § 162.050–20 to read as 

follows: 

§ 162.050–20 Separator and bilge alarm 

test fluids. 

(a) Tests required in § 162.050–23 and 

§ 162.050–35 shall be performed using 

the following three types of test fluids: 

(1) Test Fluid A which is a marine 

residual fuel oil in accordance with ISO 

8217 (Incorporated by reference, see 

§ 162.050–4), type RMG 35 (density at 

15 °C not less than 980 kg/m3); 

(2) Test Fluid B which is a marine 

distillate fuel oil in accordance with ISO 

8217, type DMA (density at 15 °C not 

less than 830 kg/m3); 

(3) Test Fluid C must be a mixture of 

an oil-in-fresh-water emulsion, where 1 

kg of the mixture consists of: 

(i) 947.8 g of fresh water; 

(ii) 25.0 g of Test Fluid A; 

(iii) 25.0 g of Test Fluid B; 


EP03NO05.031</GPH> EP03NO05.032</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Proposed Rules 67079 

(iv) 0.5 g of surfactant (sodium salt of 

dodecylbenzene sulfonic acid) in the 

dry form; and 

(v) 1.7 g of iron oxides, a black 

ferrosoferric oxide (Fe3O4) with a 

particle size distribution of which 90 

percent is less than 10 microns, the 

remainder having a maximum particle 

size of 100 microns. 

(b) Test Fluid C must be prepared as 

needed for § 162.050–23 or § 162.050–35 

by the following procedures: 

(1) Measure out 1.2 times the quantity 

of surfactant required from the 

WORKSHEET FOR DETERMINING 

CONSTITUENTS OF TEST FLUID C, 

see figure 162.050–20; 

(2) Mix it with fresh water and stir 

well in a small container to make a 

mixture until the surfactant has been 

thoroughly dissolved; 

(3) Fill clean test fluid tank with fresh 

water with a quantity 1.2 times the 

volume of the total quantity of water in 

the Test Fluid C needed for the test 

described in § 162.050–23 and 

§ 162.050–35; 

(4) Operate the centrifugal pump B 

running at a speed of not less than 3,000 

rpm with a flow rate at which the 

volume of the test fluid has been 

changed out at least once per minute; 

(5) Add the surfactant mixture from 

paragraph (b)(2) of this section first, 

followed by oil and suspended solids 

(iron oxides) respectively, both 1.2 

times the required amounts, to the fresh 

water in the tank; 

(6) To establish a stable emulsion, 

keep running the centrifugal pump B for 

one hour and confirm no oil floats on 

the surface of the test fluid; and 

(7) After the one hour stated in 

paragraph (b)(6) of this section, keep 

running the centrifugal pump B at 

reduced speed to approximately 10 

percent of original flow rate, until the 

end of the test. 

Figure 162.050–20—Worksheet for 

Determining Constituents of Test Fluid C 

1. Determine volumetric flow rate of 

separator in m3/hr. 

2. Determine net volume of fluid needed 

for testing with fluid C: 

a. Multiply Volumetric flow rate × 3 hours 

= Net volume (assumes conditioning time of 

approximately 30 minutes added to 21⁄2-hour 

test period) 

3. Determine Volume of Test Fluid C: 

a. Multiply Net Volume * 0.06 = Fluid C 

Volume 

4. Determine amounts of constituents: 

a. Volume of Test Fluid C: 1.2 × Net 

Volume; 

b. Volume of Fresh Water in Test Fluid C: 

0.9478 × Volume of Test Fluid C; 

c. Weight of Test Fluid A: 25 × Volume of 

Test Fluid C; 

d. Weight of Test Fluid B: 25 × Volume of 

Test Fluid C; 

e. Weight of Surfactant: 0.5 × Volume of 

Test Fluid C; and 

f. Weight of iron oxide: 1.7 × Volume of 

Test Fluid C. 

Example 

1. Bilge separator is rated at 2m3/hr; 

2. Net Volume needed for the Test: Volume 

of test water: 2m3 × 3 hours = 6m3; 

3. Volume Test Fluid C: 6 percent of test 

water = 0.06 × 6m3 = 0.36m3; 

4. Actual Volume to be prepared: 

a. Volume of Test Fluid C to be prepared: 

1.2 times the Net Volume of Test Fluid C = 

1.2 × 0.36 = 0.432m3; 

b. Volume of fresh water in Test Fluid C: 

(947.8g/1000g) of Test Fluid C = 0.9478 × 

0.432 = 0.4094m3; 

c. Weight of Test Fluid A: (25g/1000g) of 

Test Fluid C = 25/1000 × 0.432 × 1000 = 

10.8kg; 

d. Weight of Test Fluid B: (25g/1000g) of 

Test Fluid C = 25/1000 × 0.432 × 1000 = 

10.8kg; 

e. Weight of surfactant: (0.5g/1000g) of Test 

Fluid C = 0.5/1000 × 0.432 × 1000 = 0.216kg; 

and 

f. Weight of iron oxide: (1.7g/1000g) of Test 

Fluid C) = 1.7/1000 × 0.432 × 1000 × 0.734kg. 

19. In § 162.050–21—

a. In paragraph (b), add the words 

‘‘(Incorporated by reference, see 

§ 162.050–4)’’ immediately after the 

words ‘‘(dated April 8, 1976)’’. 

b. In paragraph (e), remove the words 

and figure ‘‘twenty-four (24)’’ and add, 

in their place, the figure ‘‘24’’. 

20. In § 162.050–23—

a. Remove paragraphs (a)(2), (c), (d), 

(e), (f), and (g); 

b. Redesignate paragraphs (a)(3) 

through (a)(13) as paragraphs (a)(2) 

through (a)(12); 

c. In newly designated paragraph 

(a)(11), remove the word and figure 

‘‘one (1)’’ and add, in their place, the 

figure ‘‘1’’ and, in newly designated 

paragraph (a)(12), following the words 

‘‘Test No. 5’’, remove the letter ‘‘S’’ and 

add, in its place, the letter ‘‘A’’; and 

d. Revise newly designated paragraph 

(a)(4) to read as set out below; and add 

new paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) to read 

as follows: 

§ 162.050–23 Separator: Approval tests. 

(a) * * * 

(4) The influent water used in each 

test must be clean fresh water or clean 

fresh water in solution with sodium 

chloride. In either case, the relative 

density of the water must be no greater 

than 1.015 at 20 °C. 

* * * * * 

(b) The following tests must be 

conducted using Test Fluid A: 

(1) Test No. 1A. The separator is filled 

with water and started. It is first fed 

with pure Test Fluid A for at least 5 

minutes and then with a mixture of Test 

Fluid A and water influent containing 

Fluid A content of between 5,000 and 

10,000 ppm until a steady flow rate 

occurs. After the flow rate is steady, the 

influent is fed to the separator for 30 

minutes. Samples of separated water 

effluent are taken after the first 10 and 

20 minutes. At the end of the 30-minute 

period, the air cock on the test rig is 

opened and, if necessary, the oil and 

water supply valves are closed to stop 

the flow of influent. A sample is then 

taken of the separated water effluent as 

the effluent flow ceases. 

(2) Test No. 2A. Repeat Test No. 1A 

in paragraph (b)(1) of this section using 

an influent containing approximately 25 

percent oil and 75 percent water. 

Percentage is on a by volume basis. 

(3) Test No. 3A. The separator is fed 

with 100 percent Test Fluid A until 

Fluid A is discharged at the oil 

discharge outlet of the separator at 

essentially the same rate that oil is being 

fed to the separator. The separator is 

then fed with 100 percent Test Fluid A 

for 5 additional minutes. If any oily 

mixture is discharged from the 

separated water outlet on the separator 

during the test, that observation is 

recorded. 

(4) Test No. 4A. The separator is fed 

with water for 15 minutes. Samples of 

the separated water effluent are taken at 

the beginning of the test and after the 

first 10 minutes. 

(5) Test No. 5A. The separator is 

operated automatically for 3 hours. 

During the test, the separator is 

continuously fed with an influent 

varying from water to a mixture of 25 

percent Test Fluid A in water and back 

to water every 15 minutes. The Test 

Fluid A concentration in the influent is 

varied in at least five equal increments 

during each 15-minute period and the 

time intervals between the incremental 

changes are equal. During the last hour, 

the separator must be inclined at an 

angle of 22.5 ° with the plane of its 

normal operating position. During the 

last time increment in which the unit is 

fed a 25 percent Fluid A mixture, a 

sample of the separated water effluent is 

taken. If the separator stops at any time 

during this test, that observation is 

recorded. 

(c) The following tests shall be 

conducted using Test Fluid B: 

(1) Test No. 1B: Repeat Test No. 1A 

in paragraph (b)(1) of this section using 

Test Fluid B; and 

(2) Test No. 2B: Repeat Test No. 2A 

in paragraph (b)(2) of this section using 

Test Fluid B. 

(d) The following tests shall be 

conducted using Test Fluid C: Test No. 

1C. The separator is fed with a mixture 

composed of 6 percent Test Fluid C and 

67080 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

94 percent water by volume such that 

the emulsified Test Fluid C content is 

approximately 3,000 ppm in the test 

water until a steady flow rate occurs. 

After the flow rate is steady, the influent 

containing the 6 percent Test Fluid C 

solution is fed to the separator operating 

automatically for 3 hours. Samples of 

separated water effluent are taken at 50 

minutes and 100 minutes. At the end of 

the 3-hour period, the air cock on the 

test rig is opened and, if necessary, the 

oil and water supply valves are closed 

to stop the flow of influent. A sample is 

then taken of the separated water 

effluent as the effluent flow ceases. 

21. In § 162.050–25—

a. In paragraph (c), add the words 

‘‘(Incorporated by reference, see 

§ 162.050–4)’’ immediately after the 

words ‘‘(dated April 8, 1976)’’. 

b. In paragraph (g), remove the word 

and figure ‘‘twenty (20)’’ and add, in 

their place, the figure ‘‘20’’. 

22. Revise § 162.050–27 to read as 

follows: 

§ 162.050–27 Cargo monitor: Approval 

tests. 

This section contains requirements 

that apply to cargo monitors. 

(a) Test conditions. (1) The tests and 

each step in the tests must be carried 

out in the order described in this 

section. Each test must be performed 

without time delay between steps in the 

test. 

(2) A test rig of the type described in 

§ 162.050–19 must be used in 

performing each test. 

(3) Each mixture used during the tests 

must be prepared by combining oil 

supplied from the oil injection pipe of 

the test rig and water supplied from the 

mixture tank of the test rig. However, if 

the flow of oil through the oil injection 

pipe becomes intermittent, oil and water 

may be combined in the mixture tank to 

form the mixture. 

(4) A mixture may be circulated 

through a monitor only once during 

testing. 

(5) Unless otherwise provided in a 

specific test, the water used in each test 

must be clean, fresh water. 

(6) The oil used in each test, except 

Test No. 2CM in paragraph (c) of this 

section, must be Arabian light crude oil. 

(7) Each test must be performed at an 

ambient temperature of between 10 °C 

and 30 °C. 

(8) Unless otherwise provided in a 

specific test, each test must be 

performed at the maximum mixture 

pressure, the maximum flow rate, and 

the power supply ratings at which the 

monitor is designed to operate. 

(9) The particulate contaminant 

described in Test No. 5CM in paragraph 

(f) of this section, if not attapulgite, 

must be of a type that does not lose 

more than three percent of its weight 

after ignition and must be insoluble in 

a 500 ppm mixture. 

(10) In each test the monitor must be 

operated in accordance with the 

procedures described in its instructions 

manual. 

(11) Unless otherwise provided in a 

specific test, the centrifugal pump 

shown in Figure 162.050–19 in 

§ 162.050–19 must be operated at 1,000 

revolutions per minute or more in each 

test. 

(12) Whenever the oil content of a 

mixture is recorded, a sample of the 

mixture must also be taken. The oil 

content of the sample must be measured 

using the method described in 

§ 162.050–39. 

(13) A one-liter sample of each oil to 

be used in testing must be taken and 

provided for use in the sample analysis 

required by § 162.050–39. 

(b) Test No. 1CM Calibration and Zero 

Test. The cargo monitor is calibrated 

and zeroed to manufacturer’s 

instructions. It is then fed with water for 

15 minutes and then with mixtures in 

the following concentrations: 15 ppm, 

50 ppm, 100 ppm, and each additional 

concentration, in increments of 50 ppm 

up to the highest oil concentration that 

can be read on the monitor. Each 

mixture is fed to the monitor in the 

order listed in Table 162.050–27(c) for 

15 minutes. Water is fed to the monitor 

for a 15-minute period between each 

mixture. At the end of each 15-minute 

period, an oil content reading is 

obtained and recorded. 

(c) Test No. 2CM Response to 

Different Oil Types Test. (1) If the cargo 

monitor is designed for use with crude 

oils, it is fed with a mixture of water and 

the first oil listed in Table 162.050–27(c) 

at the following concentrations: 15 ppm, 

100 ppm, and a concentration that is 90 

percent of the highest oil concentration 

in water that can be read on the 

monitor. Each concentration is fed to 

the monitor in the order listed until a 

steady reading occurs and is recorded. 

After each steady reading is recorded, 

the monitor is fed with water for 15 

minutes. At the end of each 15-minute 

period of feeding the monitor with 

water, an oil content reading is again 

obtained and recorded. 

(2) The steps described in paragraph 

(c)(1) of this section are repeated using 

each of the other oils listed in Table 

162.050–27(c). 

TABLE 162.050–27(C).—OIL TYPE AND CHARACTERISTICS

Oil type Characteristics 

Sahara blend crude oil ............................................................................. Density—low. 

Viscosity—low. 

Pour point—very low. 

Producing country—Algeria. 

General description—mixed base. 

Arabian light crude oil ............................................................................... Density—medium. 

Viscosity—medium. 

Pour point—low. 

Producing country—Saudi Arabia. 

General description—mixed base. 

Nigerian medium crude oil ....................................................................... Density—high. 

Viscosity—medium. 

Pour point—low. 

Producing country—Nigeria. 

General description—naphthenic base. 

Bachaquero 17 crude oil .......................................................................... Density—very high. 

Viscosity—very high. 

Pour point—low. 

Producing country—Venezuela. 

General description—asphaltic base. 

Minas crude oil ......................................................................................... Density—medium. 

Viscosity—high. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Proposed Rules 67081 

TABLE 162.050–27(C).—OIL TYPE AND CHARACTERISTICS—Continued 

Oil type Characteristics 

Pour point—very high. 

Producing country—Indonesia. 

General description—paraffinic base. 

Residual fuel oil ........................................................................................ Bunker C or No. 6 Fuel Oil. 

(3) If any oil listed in Table 162.050–

27(c) is unavailable, an oil with similar 

properties may be substituted in testing. 

(4) If the monitor is to be used with 

refined oil products, the steps described 

in paragraph (c)(1) of this section are 

performed using each of the following: 

(i) Leaded regular grade automotive 

gasoline; 

(ii) Unleaded automotive gasoline; 

(iii) Kerosene; and 

(iv) Light diesel or No. 2 fuel oil. 

(5) If the monitor is to be used with 

category C and D oil-like noxious liquid 

substances to meet the requirements of 

33 CFR 151.41(b), the tests described in 

paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section are 

to be performed using the substances for 

which approval is sought. 

(d) Test No. 3CM Response Time Test. 

(1) The cargo monitor is fed with water, 

zeroed, and then fed with a 100 ppm 

mixture. The time at which the monitor 

first detects oil in the mixture, the times 

of reading 63 ppm and 90 ppm, and the 

time of reaching the highest steady 

reading of oil content are recorded. The 

oil content of the mixture at the highest 

steady reading is also recorded. 

(2) The metering pump is turned off 

and the time at which the highest 

reading starts to decrease, the times of 

reading 37 ppm and 10 ppm, and the 

time of returning to the lowest steady oil 

content reading are recorded. The oil 

content of the mixture at the lowest 

steady reading is also recorded. 

(3) The time interval between first 

detecting oil in the mixture and reading 

63 ppm, and the time interval between 

the first decrease in the highest reading 

and reading 37 ppm, are averaged and 

recorded as the response time for the 

monitor. 

(e) Test No. 4CM Oil Fouling and 

Calibration Shift Test. (1) The cargo 

monitor is fed with water, zeroed, and 

then fed with a mixture containing 10 

percent oil for one minute. The 

following times occurring during this 

procedure are recorded: 

(i) Time at which the monitor first 

detects oil; 

(ii) Time of reading 15 ppm; 

(iii) Time of reading 100 ppm; 

(iv) Time of exceeding the highest oil 

concentration that can be read on the 

monitor; 

(v) Time of returning to the highest oil 

concentration that can be read on the 

monitor; 

(vi) Time of returning to a reading of 

100 ppm; 

(vii) Time of returning to a reading of 

15 ppm; and 

(viii) Time of returning to the lowest 

steady oil content reading. 

(2) The oil content of the mixture at 

the lowest steady reading described in 

paragraph (e)(1)(viii) of this section is 

recorded. 

(3) The monitor is fed with water, 

zeroed, and then fed with oil for 1 

minute after which the flow of water is 

resumed. The times described in 

paragraph (e)(1) of this section are 

recorded. 

(4) The monitor is fed with a 100 ppm 

mixture until a steady oil content 

reading is obtained and recorded. 

(f) Test No. 5CM Contaminant Test. 

(1) The monitor is fed with a 15 ppm 

mixture until a steady oil content 

reading is obtained and recorded. 

(2) The cargo monitor is fed with a 15 

ppm oil mixture of contaminated water 

consisting of not less than 270 ppm by 

weight of the clay mineral attapulgite, or 

similar contaminant that is stable in 

both fresh and salt water and 30 ppm by 

weight of iron oxides. The test 

contaminant should have a particle size 

distribution with about 30 percent of 10 

microns or less and a maximum particle 

size of 100 microns. The oil content 

reading, when steady, is recorded. 

(3) Each of the two contaminants will 

be mixed sequentially in the following 

manner: the mixing of attapulgite shall 

be for a period of not less than 15 

minutes so that a homogeneous 

suspension is formed; following, iron 

oxides will be added for an additional 

period of not less than 10 minutes. The 

mixing process should maintain the 

contaminants in suspension throughout 

the test period. 

(4) The test in paragraph (f)(2) of this 

section is repeated for 100 and 300 ppm 

oil mixtures in contaminated water. 

(g) Test No. 6CM Air Entrainment 

Test. (1) The cargo monitor is fed with 

a 15 ppm mixture until a steady oil 

content reading is obtained and 

recorded. 

(2) Air is injected into the cargo 

monitor test rig before the sample pump 

or, in the absence of such pump, 

immediately before any conditioning 

unit used to prepare the mixture for 

measurement. Injection must be by 

needle having an orifice dimension not 

exceeding 0.5 mm in diameter arranged 

in line with the sample flow. The 

quantity of air injected must be one 

percent of the designated flow rate of 

the sample pump or conditioning unit at 

the point of injection. 

(3) Air must be delivered to the 

system by direct injection or pump via 

a suitable measuring device designed to 

permit a constant controllable flow rate 

within ±10 percent of the required rate 

of injection for an uninterrupted 

effective test period of not less than 15 

minutes. 

(4) The oil content reading, when 

steady, is recorded. 

(h) Test No. 7CM Oil Particle Size—

Centrifugal Pump Test. (1) The cargo 

monitor is fed with a 100 ppm mixture 

until a steady oil content reading is 

obtained and recorded. 

(2) The monitor is fed with a 100 ppm 

mixture that has first passed through the 

centrifugal pump of the test rig. The 

pump is run at one-fourth of its design 

speed. The oil content reading, when 

steady, is recorded. 

(3) The steps described in paragraph 

(h)(2) of this section are repeated with 

the pump running at one-half of its 

design speed and then repeated at its 

design speed. 

(i) Test No. 8CM Temperature Test. 

(1) The steps described in paragraph 

(h)(1) of this section are repeated. 

(2) The temperature of the mixture is 

adjusted to 10 °C and the flow 

continued until a steady oil content 

reading is obtained and recorded. 

(3) The steps described in paragraph 

(i)(2) of this section are repeated with 

the temperature of the mixture at 65 °C 

or the highest mixture temperature at 

which the cargo monitor is designed to 

operate, whichever is lower. 

(j) Test No. 9CM Sample Pressure or 

Flow Test. (1) The steps described in 

paragraph (h)(1) of this section are 

repeated. 

(2) If the monitor has a positive 

displacement mixture pump, the 

mixture pressure is lowered to one-half 

of the monitor’s maximum design 

pressure. If the monitor has a centrifugal 

67082 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

mixture pump, or is not equipped with 

a mixture pump, the mixture flow rate 

is reduced to one-half of the monitor’s 

design flow rate. The reduced flow rate 

or mixture pressure is maintained until 

a steady oil content reading is obtained 

and recorded. 

(3) If the monitor has a positive 

displacement mixture pump, the 

mixture pressure is increased to twice 

the monitor’s design pressure. If the 

monitor has a centrifugal mixture pump 

or does not have a mixture pump, the 

mixture flow rate is increased to twice 

the monitor’s maximum design flow 

rate. The increased flow rate or mixture 

pressure is maintained until a steady oil 

content reading is obtained and 

recorded. 

(k) Test No. 10CM Shut-off Test. (1) 

The steps described in paragraph (h)(1) 

of this section are repeated. 

(2) The water and metering pumps on 

the test rig are stopped for 8 hours after 

which the steps described in paragraph 

(h)(1) of this section are repeated. 

(l) Test No. 11CM Supply Voltage 

Variation Test. (1) The supply voltage to 

the cargo monitor is increased to 110 

percent of its design supply voltage. The 

monitor is then fed a 100 ppm mixture 

for one hour. At the end of the 1-hour 

period, an oil content reading is 

obtained and recorded. 

(2) The steps described in paragraph 

(l)(1) of this section are repeated with 

the supply voltage to the monitor 

lowered to 90 percent of its design 

supply voltage. 

(3) Upon completing the steps 

described in paragraph (l)(2) of this 

section, the supply voltage to the 

monitor is returned to the design rating. 

(4) The steps described in paragraphs 

(l)(1) through (l)(3) of this section are 

repeated varying each power supply to 

the monitor in the manner prescribed in 

those steps for supply voltage. 

(m) Test No. 12CM Calibration and 

Zero Drift Test. (1) The monitor is 

calibrated and zeroed. 

(2) The steps described in paragraph 

(h)(1) of this section are repeated. 

(3) A 100 ppm mixture is fed to the 

monitor for 8 hours. At the end of the 

8-hour period, an oil content reading is 

obtained and recorded. 

(4) The monitor is fed with water 

until a steady oil content reading is 

obtained and recorded. 

(n) Test No. 13CM Shut-down and 

Restart Test. (1) All power to the 

monitor is shut off for one week. After 

1 week the monitor is started, zeroed, 

and calibrated. 

(2) The monitor is fed with a 100 ppm 

mixture for 1 hour. An oil content 

reading is then obtained and recorded. 

(3) The monitor is fed with water for 

1 hour. An oil content reading is then 

obtained and recorded. 

(4) The steps described in paragraphs 

(n)(2) and (n)(3) of this section are 

repeated three additional times. During 

the last hour in which the monitor is fed 

with a 100 ppm mixture, the monitor is 

inclined at an angle of 22.5 ° with the 

plane of its normal operating position. 

§ 162.050–29 [Removed] 

23. Remove § 162.050–29. 

§ 162.050–31 [Removed] 

24. Remove § 162.050–31. 

25. In § 162.050–33, in paragraph (b), 

remove the paragraph designator ‘‘(g)’’

and add, in its place, the paragraph 

designator ‘‘(f)’’; in paragraph (c)(1), 

remove the abbreviation ‘‘p.p.m’’, and 

add, in its place, the letters ‘‘ppm’’; and 

add new paragraphs (d), (e), (f), (g), and 

(h) to read as follows: 

§ 162.050–33 Bilge alarm: Design 

specification. 

* * * * * 

(d) Each bilge alarm must have a ppm 

display. Emulsions and/or the type of 

oil must not affect the ppm display. 

Calibrating the bilge alarm must not be 

necessary once installed on board the 

vessel, however, on board testing in 

accordance with the manufacturer’s 

instructions is permitted. The accuracy 

of the readings must at all times remain 

within the limits described in paragraph 

(c)(1) of this section. 

(e) Each bilge alarm must be designed 

so that it displays each change in oil 

content of the mixture it is measuring 

within 5 seconds after the change 

occurs. 

(f) Access to the bilge alarm beyond 

checking instrument drift must be 

limited; repeatability of the instrument 

reading and the ability to re-zero the 

instrument must require the breaking of 

a seal. 

(g) Each bilge alarm must activate its 

alarm whenever clean water is used for 

cleaning or zeroing purposes. 

(h) The bilge alarm must record date, 

time, alarm status, and operating status 

of the 15 ppm bilge separator. The 

recording device must also store data for 

at least 18 months and be able to display 

or print a protocol. In the event the 15 

ppm bilge alarm is replaced, means 

must be provided to ensure the data 

recorded remains available on board for 

18 months. 

26. Revise § 162.050–35 to read as 

follows: 

§ 162.050–35 Bilge alarm: Approval tests. 

This section contains requirements 

that apply to bilge alarms. 

(a) Test conditions. (1) Each test must 

be conducted under the conditions 

prescribed for cargo monitors in 

§§ 162.050–27(a)(1) through (a)(5), 

(a)(7), (a)(8), (a)(10), (a)(11), and (a)(13). 

(2) The tests in this section shall be 

performed using test fluids described in 

§ 162.050–20. 

(3) The oil content of each sample 

must be measured using the method 

described in § 162.050–39. 

(b) Test No. 1A Calibration and Zero 

Test. (1) The bilge alarm is calibrated 

and zeroed to manufacturer’s 

instructions. 

(2) It is then fed with water for 15 

minutes and then with a mixture of Test 

Fluid A and water in the following 

concentrations: 0 ppm, 15 ppm, and the 

highest oil concentration that can be 

read on the monitor. A sample of the 

mixture causing actuation of the alarm 

is taken. The alarm is then fed with 

water for 15 minutes. 

(3) Repeat steps in paragraphs (b)(1) 

and (2) of this section first using Test 

Fluid B and then again with Test Fluid 

C. Collect samples as required in the test 

for each run of Test Fluid B and Test 

Fluid C. 

(4) If the bilge alarm must be 

calibrated and re-zeroed between test 

fluids, this shall be noted in the test 

report. 

(c) Test No. 2A Contaminant Test. (1) 

The bilge alarm is fed for 5 minutes 

with a 10 ppm mixture of Test Fluid B 

and water. At the end of the 5-minute 

period an oil content reading is obtained 

and recorded. 

(2) The bilge alarm is then fed for 5 

minutes with a 10 ppm mixture of Test 

Fluid B and water contaminated with a 

10 ppm concentration of iron oxide. 

Any change in the bilge alarm reading 

during the 5 minutes is recorded. 

(3) Repeat steps in paragraphs (c)(1) 

and (2) of this section using iron oxide 

concentrations of 50 ppm and 100 ppm. 

(4) The bilge alarm is then fed for 5 

minutes with a 10 ppm mixture of Test 

Fluid B and water. At the end of the 5- 

minute period an oil content reading is 

obtained and recorded. 

(5) The bilge alarm is fed for 5 

minutes with a 10 ppm mixture of Test 

Fluid B and fresh water with 6 percent 

sodium chloride. Any change in the 

bilge alarm reading is recorded. 

(d) Test No. 3A Sample Pressure or 

Flow Test. (1) The bilge alarm is fed 

with a mixture of Test Fluid B and 

water and the test fluid content of the 

mixture is increased until the bilge 

alarm actuates. The ppm display is 

recorded and a sample of the mixture 

causing actuation of the alarm is taken. 

(2) If the alarm has a positive 

displacement mixture pump, the 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Proposed Rules 67083 

mixture pressure is reduced to one-half 

of the alarm’s maximum design 

pressure. If the alarm has a centrifugal 

mixture pump or is not equipped with 

a mixture pump, the mixture flow rate 

is reduced to one-half of the alarm’s 

maximum design flow rate. After 

reduction of pressure or flow rate, the 

oil content in the mixture is increased 

until the alarm actuates. The ppm 

display is recorded and a sample of the 

mixture causing actuation of the alarm 

is taken. 

(3) If the alarm has a positive 

displacement mixture pump, the 

influent pressure is increased to twice 

the alarm’s minimum design pressure. If 

the alarm has a centrifugal mixture 

pump or if the alarm is not equipped 

with a mixture pump, the influent flow 

rate is increased to twice the alarm’s 

maximum design flow rate. After 

increasing the pressure or flow rate, the 

oil content in the mixture is increased 

until the alarm actuates. The ppm 

display is recorded and a sample of the 

mixture causing actuation is taken. 

(e) Test No. 4A Shut-off Test. (1) The 

steps described in paragraph (d)(1) of 

this section are repeated. 

(2) The metering and water pumps of 

the test rig are stopped for 8 hours with 

the bilge alarm left turned on with no 

other changes made. 

(3) The metering and water pumps are 

started and the Test Fluid B content of 

the mixture is increased until the bilge 

alarm actuates. A sample of the mixture 

causing actuation is taken. The bilge 

alarm ppm display readings before and 

after the 8-hour period will be recorded. 

(f) Test No. 5A Supply Voltage 

Variation Test. (1) The supply voltage to 

the bilge alarm is raised to 110 percent 

of its design supply voltage. The bilge 

alarm is fed with a mixture of Test Fluid 

B and water and the test fluid content 

of the mixture is increased until the 

bilge alarm actuates. The ppm display is 

recorded and a sample of the mixture 

causing actuation is taken. 

(2) The supply voltage to the alarm is 

lowered to 90 percent of its design 

supply voltage. The bilge alarm is fed 

with a mixture of Test Fluid B and 

water and the test fluid content of the 

mixture is increased until the bilge 

alarm actuates. The ppm display is 

recorded and a sample of the mixture 

causing actuation is taken. 

(3) Upon completion of the steps 

described in paragraph (f)(2) of this 

section, the supply voltage to the alarm 

is returned to its design value. 

(4) The steps described in paragraphs 

(f)(1) through (f)(3) of this section are 

repeated varying each other power 

supply to the alarm in the manner 

prescribed in those steps for supply 

voltage. 

(g) Test No. 6A Calibration and Zero 

Test. (1) The steps described in 

paragraph (b)(1) of this section are 

repeated and then the steps in 

paragraph (d)(1) of this section are 

repeated. 

(2) The bilge alarm is fed with a 15 

ppm mixture of Test Fluid B and water 

for eight hours and any calibration drift 

is recorded. Samples of the mixture 

must be taken at the beginning of the 

test and at 2-hour intervals until the 

completion of the 8-hour period. 

(3) The steps in paragraph (g)(2) of 

this section are repeated using clean, 

oil-free water only. Any zero drift is 

recorded. 

(h) Test No. 7A Response Time Test. 

(1) The bilge alarm is fed with a 40 ppm 

mixture of Test Fluid B and water until 

the bilge alarm actuates. The time of 

turning on the metering pump of the test 

rig and the time of alarm actuation are 

recorded. The flow rate on the flow 

meter of the test rig is also recorded. 

(i) Test No. 8A Shut Down and Restart Test. (1) All power to the bilge 

alarm is shut off for 1 week. After 1 

week the alarm is then started, zeroed, 

and calibrated. 

(2) The steps described in paragraph 

(d)(1) of this section are repeated. Water 

is then fed to the monitor for 1 hour. 

(3) The steps described in paragraph 

(i)(2) of this section are repeated seven 

additional times. During the last hour, 

the alarm must be inclined at an angle 

of 22.5 ° with the plane of its normal 

operating position. 

27. In § 162.050–37, in paragraph (b), 

remove the figure ‘‘4’’ and add, in its 

place, the word ‘‘2’’; redesignate 

paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) as 

paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (iii); 

redesignate paragraph (b) introductory 

text as (b)(1) and designate the 

undesignated paragraph as (b)(2); and 

add paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 162.050–37 Vibration test. 

* * * * * 

(c) After completion of the test 

described in paragraph (b) of this 

section, the test must be repeated and 

any significant change in the vibration 

pattern will be noted in the test report. 

28. Revise § 162.050–39 to read as 

follows: 

§ 162.050–39 Measurement of oil content. 

(a) The collection and testing of all 

samples of oil in water from the 

required test will be accomplished in 

accordance with ISO 9377–2 (2000), 

Water Quality—Determination of 

hydrocarbon oil index—Part 2: Method 

Using solvent extraction and Gas 

Chromatography (Incorporated by 

reference, see § 162.050–4). 

(b) Testing facilities may continue to 

use the infrared spectrophotometer 

assay in lieu of ISO 9377–2, so long as 

supplies of reagents necessary for the 

testing are available. 

Dated: October 24, 2005. 

T.H. Gilmour, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant 

Commandant for Marine Safety, Security and 

Environmental Protection. 

[FR Doc. 05–21573 Filed 11–2–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P