Document ID: USCG-2007-0030-0214
Agency: uscg
Document Type: Rule
Title: FR:  Passenger Weight and Inspected Vessel Stability Requirements (Federal Register Publication)
Posted Date: 2010-12-14T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 239 (Tuesday, December 14, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 78064-78092]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30391]

[[Page 78063]]

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

Part IV

Department of Homeland Security

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

Coast Guard

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

46 CFR Parts 71, 114, et al.

Passenger Weight and Inspected Vessel Stability Requirements; Final 
Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 75 , No. 239 / Tuesday, December 14, 2010 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 78064]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

46 CFR Parts 71, 114, 115, 122, 170, 171, 172, 174, 175, 176, 178, 
179, and 185

[Docket No. USCG-2007-0030]
RIN 1625-AB20

Passenger Weight and Inspected Vessel Stability Requirements

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard amends its regulations governing the maximum 
weight and number of passengers that may safely be permitted on board a 
vessel and other stability regulations, including increasing the 
Assumed Average Weight per Person (AAWPP) to 185 lb. The Coast Guard 
determines the maximum number of persons permitted on a vessel by 
several factors, including an assumed average weight for each 
passenger, which is in need of an update because the average American 
weighs significantly more than the assumed weight per person utilized 
in current regulations. Updating regulations to more accurately reflect 
today's average weight per person will maintain intended safety levels 
by accounting for this weight increase. The Coast Guard is also taking 
this opportunity to improve and update intact stability and subdivision 
and damage stability regulations.

DATES: This final rule is effective March 14, 2011, except for the 
amendments to 46 CFR 170.120 and 178.210 that have not yet been 
approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The Coast Guard 
will publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the date 
when those amendments become effective. The incorporation by reference 
of certain publications listed in the rule is approved by the Director 
of the Federal Register as of March 14, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as 
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, 
are part of docket USCG-2007-0030 and are available for inspection or 
copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of 
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. You may also find this 
docket on the Internet by going to http://www.regulations.gov, 
inserting USCG-2007-0030 in the ``Keyword'' box, and then clicking 
``Search.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, 
call Mr. William Peters, U.S. Coast Guard, Office of Design and 
Engineering Standards, Naval Architecture Division (CG-5212), telephone 
202-372-1371. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee 
V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents for the Preamble

I. Abbreviations
II. List of Terms
III. Regulatory History
IV. Background
V. Discussion of Comments and Changes
VI. Incorporation by Reference
VII. Regulatory Analyses
    A. Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Small Entities
    C. Assistance for Small Entities
    D. Collection of Information
    E. Federalism
    F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    G. Taking of Private Property
    H. Civil Justice Reform
    I. Protection of Children
    J. Indian Tribal Governments
    K. Energy Effects
    L. Technical Standards
    M. Environment

I. Abbreviations

    2008 IS Code--International Code on Intact Stability, 2008
AAWPP--Assumed Average Weight per Person
ABS--American Bureau of Shipping
CDC--Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
CFR--Code of Federal Regulations
COI--Certificate of Inspection
DHS--Department of Homeland Security
DOT--Department of Transportation
EO--Executive Order
FAA--Federal Aviation Administration
FR--Federal Register
GM--Metacentric height
LBP--Length Between Perpendiculars
LCG--Longitudinal Center of Gravity
MARPOL--International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution 
from Ships
MSC--Marine Safety Center
MISLE--Marine Information for Safety and Law Enforcement
NAICS--North American Industry Classification System
NCHS--National Center for Health Statistics
NEPA--National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
NHANES--National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
NPRM--Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NTSB--National Transportation Safety Board
OCMI--Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection
OMB--Office of Management and Budget
PSSC--Passenger Ship Safety Certificate
PSST--Pontoon Simplified Stability Proof Test
SBA--United States Small Business Administration
SNAME--The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers
SOLAS--International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea
SST--Simplified Stability Proof Test
U.S.C.--United States Code
VCG--Vertical Center of Gravity

II. List of Terms

    The following definitions are intended only as an aid to readers of 
this rulemaking, and are not defined in regulations. They are not 
intended to replace or otherwise change regulatory provisions in any 
way. Readers who are unfamiliar with stability or marine inspection 
terms are encouraged to access the definitions contained in regulations 
at 46 CFR 170.055 and 175.400, which are available to the public on 
line from the National Archives and Records Administration at, 
respectively, http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2009/octqtr/pdf/46cfr170.055.pdf and http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2009/octqtr/pdf/46cfr175.400.pdf.
    Angle of heel means the angle from the upright to the vessel's 
centerline when the vessel is inclined.
    Deadweight survey: See lightweight survey.
    Freeboard means the vertical distance from the deck edge to the 
waterline.
    Heel is the degree to which a ship inclines transversely as a 
result of an applied force or moment.
    Heeling moment is the product of a force acting through a distance 
that causes a vessel to roll or heel to one side.
    Inclining or stability test is a methodical process that involves 
moving a series of known weights on a vessel and measuring the 
resulting change in the equilibrium heel angle to determine the 
vessel's stability characteristics.
    Intact stability generally means the stability properties of a 
vessel without any damage to its watertight buoyant envelope.
    Lightweight survey is a part of the stability test that is used to 
determine the lightship displacement and longitudinal center of gravity 
(LCG). Often referred to as a deadweight survey.
    Longitudinal center of gravity (LCG) means the location along the 
vessel's length at which the total weight of the vessel may be assumed 
to act.
    Operator means the person or business entity who provides 
operational instructions to and receives reports from the master of the 
vessel and is responsible for the vessel's

[[Page 78065]]

maintenance and repair, crewing, and other operations. An operator may 
also be a vessel's master.
    Owner means the person or entity holding title to the vessel.
    Passenger heel is the result of the heeling moment that occurs when 
passengers move to one side of the vessel's centerline, causing the 
vessel to heel.
    Pontoon vessel means any vessel having two or more watertight 
hulls, which are structurally independent from the vessel's deck or 
cross structure.
    Subdivision and damage stability means the stability 
characteristics of a vessel when damaged, generally focusing on 
flooding of watertight compartments.
    Vertical center of gravity (VCG) means the height above the keel at 
which the total weight of the vessel may be assumed to act.
    Vessel stability refers to the tendency of a ship to remain upright 
or return to upright when inclined by forces such as those caused by 
the action of waves, wind or passenger movement.
    Wind heel refers to the result of the wind acting on the lateral 
area of the vessel above the waterline, causing the vessel to heel.

III. Regulatory History

    On August 20, 2008, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPRM) entitled ``Passenger Weight and Inspected Vessel 
Stability Requirements'' in the Federal Register (73 FR 49243). The 
NPRM followed notices to the public, published in the Federal Register 
on April 26, 2006 (71 FR 24732) and November 2, 2006 (71 FR 64546), 
recommending voluntary interim measures for passenger vessel owners and 
operators to follow while the Coast Guard studied the issue of 
increased passenger weight. In summary, those voluntary measures 
advised owners and operators of pontoon vessels and other small 
passenger vessels to (1) more stringently monitor wind and wave 
conditions prior to departure, and (2) begin using 185 pounds as the 
new AAWPP when calculating passenger capacity. A discussion of how 185 
pounds was chosen is contained in the April 26, 2006 notice and in the 
discussion of Sec.  170.090 in this preamble.
    Approximately 108 commenters responded to those notices and 66 
commenters responded to the NPRM. All comments are posted for public 
view at http://www.regulations.gov under docket number USCG-2007-0030, 
and can be viewed by following the directions in the ADDRESSES section 
of this preamble. No public meeting was requested and none was held.
    The Coast Guard considered the comments submitted in response to 
the two 2006 notices in the drafting of both the NPRM and in this final 
rule. After publication of the NPRM, many of the comments on the 2006 
notices became moot. Those comments to the notices that remain 
pertinent are repeated by later comments on the NPRM and are addressed 
in the Discussion of Comments and Changes section of this preamble, 
although they are not included in the comment count for each section.

IV. Background

    A number of different design factors, including stability, limit 
the total number of persons permitted on a passenger vessel inspected 
and certificated under 46 CFR subchapters H, K, or T. Stability 
requirements include intact stability for almost all vessels, as well 
as subdivision and damage stability, generally, for any vessel carrying 
more than 49 passengers and all passenger vessels over 65 ft in length. 
We intend this rule to clarify and update both intact stability 
regulations and subdivision and damage stability regulations, primarily 
related to the carriage of passengers for hire, and to update the 
weight per person used for all vessels. Further, the intent of this 
rulemaking is to prevent passenger vessels from operating in overloaded 
conditions. Although this final rule will become effective 90 days from 
today on March 14, 2011, the new Assumed Average Weight per Person 
(AAWPP) of 185 lb will not become effective until December 1, 2011.
    A vessel's stability information, including any restrictions on 
route and the number of persons permitted, is provided to the vessel 
operator most often in the form of a stability letter issued by the 
Coast Guard's Marine Safety Center (MSC), and/or a Coast Guard 
Certificate of Inspection (COI) issued by the Officer in Charge, Marine 
Inspection (OCMI). When both are provided, the more conservative 
restrictions govern because, in that case, the regulations require the 
operator to comply with both (46 CFR 78.17-22, 122.315, 185.315). This 
stability information is issued after the vessel's stability has been 
evaluated.
    For vessels greater than 65 ft in length, stability is evaluated 
through detailed design calculations, which are submitted to the MSC 
and identify the vessel's stability-related limitations. This process, 
which takes into account the assumed total weight of persons on board, 
is described in 46 CFR, subchapter S, parts 170 and 171.
    Vessels not greater than 65 feet in length and carrying less than 
150 passengers normally undergo a performance test conducted in the 
presence of the Marine Inspector, instead of submitting design 
stability calculations to the MSC (46 CFR part 178). Vessels in this 
category consist of monohull vessels, powered catamarans carrying less 
than 49 passengers, and pontoon vessels operating on protected waters. 
This performance test, which also takes into account the assumed total 
weight of persons on board, is either a simplified stability proof test 
(SST) or, if the vessel is a pontoon vessel, a pontoon simplified 
stability proof test (PSST). The SST is used to evaluate the stability 
of monohull vessels and powered catamarans carrying less than 49 
passengers, and the PSST is used to evaluate the stability of pontoon 
vessels operating on protected waters. Further, simplified subdivision 
calculations may be necessary for some vessels not greater than 65 feet 
in length.
    Vessels to which these tests do not apply, or vessels that do not 
pass these tests, may need to be evaluated through design calculations 
to show that they meet minimum intact stability requirements. 
Alternatively, a vessel might satisfy stability requirements by 
complying with a standard acceptable to the Marine Safety Center. 
Finally, where stability may be safely assessed through other means, 
stability tests may be waived.
    Vessel stability calculations and stability proof tests employ a 
number of assumptions and approximations to account for factors ranging 
from uncertainties associated with calculation procedures to variations 
in operating conditions. When originally developed, regulatory 
stability standards included an inherent margin of safety to account 
for these uncertainties and the current safety record of the passenger 
vessel industry reflects the validity of this approach.
    The assumed weight of passengers is a component of stability 
calculations and stability proof tests and, as such, directly impacts 
the resulting margin of safety. Over time, as passenger weight 
increases, the inherent margin of safety decreases across all measures 
of stability, including vertical center of gravity, freeboard and 
passenger heeling moment, increasing the risk of stability problems. As 
described in the NPRM, the primary goal of the rule is to restore the 
margin of safety inherent in the vessel stability requirements that has

[[Page 78066]]

been eroded by increased passenger weight.
    Section 178.330 of Title 46 of the CFR currently specifies that the 
AAWPP is 160 pounds, except that vessels operating exclusively on 
protected waters and carrying a mix of men, women, and children may use 
an AAWPP of 140 pounds per person. Section 171.080 uses a weight of 75 
kilograms (165 pounds) per person for damage stability calculations. 
These weights were established in the 1960s, and have not been updated 
since.
    In a report issued in October 2004, the Centers for Disease Control 
and Prevention (CDC) concluded that the average weight of an individual 
in the United States has increased significantly in the last 40 years, 
with the greatest increase seen in adults.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The report, Advance Data From Vital Health Statistics Mean 
Body Weight, Height, and Body Mass Index, United States 1960-2002, 
No. 347, October 27, 2004, is available in the docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 20, 2004, the National Transportation Safety Board 
(NTSB) issued Safety Recommendation M-04-04 (available in the docket), 
which included findings that the current 140 pound per person weight 
allowance for operations on protected waters does not reflect actual 
loading conditions. The NTSB recommended that the Coast Guard revise 
its guidance to OCMIs for determining the maximum passenger capacity of 
small passenger pontoon vessels either by: Dividing the vessel's 
assumed total weight of persons on board (total test weight) by 174 lb 
per person; or, restricting the actual cumulative weight of passengers 
and crew to the vessel's total test weight. In correspondence to the 
NTSB dated April 7, 2005 (available in the docket), the Coast Guard 
concurred that the average weight per person used in SSTs needed to be 
updated, and noted that an internal Coast Guard study identified the 
same issue. That study, which is entitled Study of Effects on 
Commercial Passenger Vessels Due to Weight Standards, is available in 
the docket.
    Additionally, this rulemaking presents an opportunity to identify 
where corrections, clarifications, and updates need to be made to 
existing regulations. The Coast Guard discussed these changes, which 
include changes in international requirements, in the NPRM preamble, 
under ``Corrections, Clarifications, and Updates.''

V. Discussion of Comments and Changes

    The Coast Guard received no comments on the following sections of 
the proposed rule, and will adopt them as proposed in the NPRM: 
Sec. Sec.  71.75-1, 71.75-5, 115.112, 115.900, 115.910, 115.920, 
115.930, 170.070, 170.075, 170.080, 170.085, 170.093, 170.100, 170.105, 
170.120, 170.135, 170.160, 170.173, 170.175, 170.180, 170.185, 170.190, 
170.235, 171.060, 171.065, 171.075, 171.082, 172.020, 172.070, 176.112, 
176.900, 176.910, 176.920, 176.930, 178.115, and 179.220, as well as 
part 170 subpart E and part 171 subpart headings.

Section 71.25-50. Stability Verification Annual Stability Information 
Verification

    We received 27 comments concerning the proposed annual stability 
information verification in Sec. Sec.  71.25-50(a), 115.505(a), and 
176.505(a).
    A majority of commenters expressed concern that the proposed 
regulations would be too costly and unjustified by risk. Eight 
commenters felt that simple calculations or loading marks should be an 
option that could be used in lieu of stability testing for 
verification, but one commenter said that draft marks would be very 
unreliable for passenger vessels less than 65 feet in length. Two 
commenters opined that all passenger vessels without a stability letter 
or other similar guidance should have stability tests conducted. Many 
commenters strongly preferred a risk-based method of determining the 
need for stability verification instead of the proposed approach. One 
commenter viewed the proposed annual stability information verification 
and the 10-year verification as redundant, and one supported adoption 
of the changes as proposed.
    As we explained in the NPRM, the provisions in proposed Sec. Sec.  
71.25-50(a), 115.505(a) and 176.505(a) were intended to help ensure 
that the current assumed weight per person would be properly 
considered, and that vessels maintain safety levels after initial 
certification. Further, the provisions were intended to ensure not only 
that the proper weight standard had been applied to a particular 
vessel, but also that the Master is familiar with the stability-related 
operating restrictions, and has a reasonable means of determining if 
the vessel is in compliance at any given time.
    After additional consideration, however, we determined that 
additional regulatory authority in this area is unnecessary because 
existing 46 CFR 71.17-22, 122.315, and 185.315 require masters to 
ensure their vessels comply with all applicable stability requirements 
at all times necessary to assure the safety of the vessel.
    These existing sections provide the Coast Guard with the broad 
authority and necessary flexibility to verify vessel compliance with 
applicable stability requirements. Accordingly, we have removed 
proposed Sec. Sec.  71.25-50(a), 115.505(a), and 176.505(a) from the 
final rule.

Verification of 10-Year Lightship Stability

    We received 42 comments on the proposed 10-year stability 
verification in Sec. Sec.  71.25-50(b), 115.505(b) and 176.505(b). All 
commenters, except one, opposed this part of the proposed rule for 
several reasons: Commenters expected it to be prohibitively expensive 
in some cases; the verification was perceived to be redundant with the 
annual stability information verification; commenters believed there is 
low risk of stability casualties associated with increased vessel 
weight; and, no study has been performed that identifies the degree to 
which passenger vessels tend to get heavier over time.
    Five commenters suggested using load marks to verify that vessels 
are not overloaded and to check that the vessel's weight has not 
changed substantially. Fourteen commenters challenged the justification 
for the proposed requirement because of perceived low safety risk 
associated with vessel weight change. Sixteen commenters urged use of a 
risk-based process to trigger lightship verifications.
    We have observed that the lightweight of some passenger vessels has 
increased substantially since the initial lightship characteristics 
were determined at the time of construction. This undocumented weight 
growth, caused by unapproved additions and modifications to the vessel, 
or by carriage of additional deadweight, could cause a vessel to exceed 
its authorized draft when loaded with the authorized complement of 
passengers. However, no unbiased study has been performed of the U.S. 
flag inspected passenger vessel fleet to assess the degree to which the 
lightweight of these vessels has increased, or identify segments of the 
fleet, if any, which have experienced significant weight growth. For 
these reasons, the Coast Guard agrees that further study is necessary 
before determining whether promulgation of additional regulations 
applicable to the fleet is necessary and we have removed the 10-year 
lightship verification provisions in proposed Sec. Sec.  71.25-50, 
115.505, and 176.505 from this final rule.
    Baseline stability data, though, can and should be gathered as 
documenting this information will enable owners, operators and the 
Coast Guard to

[[Page 78067]]

monitor future growth in vessel weight. Accordingly, the Coast Guard 
intends to improve internal processes to accomplish this goal.

Section 71.50-1. Definitions Relating to Hull Examination

    One commenter inquired about the necessity of verifying draft marks 
at each drydock examination if the draft marks are already permanent 
and properly located.
    The datum used for draft marks is often the lowest navigational 
projection and may not have any relation to the drafts referred to in 
the stability information. The Coast Guard intends this part of the 
rule to ensure that draft marks, where used to verify compliance with 
stability requirements, were properly referenced in the stability 
guidance. Detailed marking drawings enable masters to properly 
associate draft marks with the draft or freeboard restrictions provided 
in the stability letter. The Coast Guard agrees that verification of 
draft marks does not need to be repeated at each drydock examination, 
and we revised Sec. Sec.  71.50-1, 115.610, and 176.610 accordingly. 
Further, because the stability verification sections contained in the 
NPRM have been removed from this final rule, we have removed the 
proposed requirement to confirm that draft marks correspond with 
approved stability guidance.

Section 114.400 Definitions of Terms Used in This Subchapter

    Although we received no comments on this section, we added a 
definition of ``variable load'' to improve its consistency and retain 
original intent.

Section 115.110. Routes Permitted

    We received two comments concerning proposed changes to ``Routes 
permitted.'' We proposed adding a new subparagraph to this section and 
Sec.  176.110 explicitly calling attention to the OCMI's prerogative to 
consider a vessel's suitability for use in all environmental 
conditions.
    One commenter stated that strong wind and waves challenge pontoon 
vessels to a greater degree than they do monohull vessels, and 
therefore the OCMI should place specific environmental limitations on 
certificates of inspection (COIs) for all such vessels. The Coast Guard 
disagrees. As we explained in the NPRM, it is not possible to 
accurately enumerate all combinations of safe environmental conditions 
on a given passenger vessel's COI. Further, limiting winds, speeds, and 
wave heights alone cannot adequately define a safe operating envelope 
for any vessel. This regulation, however, does not preclude the OCMI 
from placing specific restrictions on any vessel's COI if clearly 
warranted for that vessel and route. Ultimately, the master must be 
responsible for determining whether or not to embark upon or continue a 
voyage or to seek shelter based on consideration of all relevant 
factors including prevailing and forecasted environmental conditions.
    Another commenter recommended that OCMIs should have the option to 
consider the experience of the passengers being carried. In support of 
this suggestion, the commenter stated that his vessel does not carry 
school groups or tourists but rather boat owners and their guests, who 
are generally familiar with vessel operating characteristics. We do not 
agree because passenger experience can neither enhance nor compensate 
for a domestic passenger vessel's operating characteristics or design 
limitations in a given environment, nor does such experience relieve a 
master from the obligation to exercise due diligence in operational 
decisions.

Section 115.505. Stability Verification

    Please see the discussion of comments concerning the proposed 
annual stability information and ten year lightship verifications in 
Sec.  71.25-50 of this preamble.

Section 115.610. Scope of Drydock and Internal Structural Examinations

    Please see the discussion of comments concerning draft mark 
verification at drydock examinations in Sec.  71.50-1 of this preamble.

Section 122.304. Navigation Underway

    We received three comments concerning changes to the navigation 
underway regulations in this section and Sec.  185.304. The Coast Guard 
proposed adding forecasted visibility and weather conditions to the 
list of factors to which vessel masters should give special attention 
in both sections, and a requirement in Sec.  185.304 for vessels not 
greater than 65 feet in length to have means to obtain or monitor the 
latest marine broadcast.
    Two commenters stated that new regulations are not necessary 
because their companies have always taken additional safety precautions 
in the event of rough seas or inclement weather, and also because a 
vessel's master knows it is prudent to check weather forecasts. We 
agree that giving special attention to environmental conditions is part 
of the due diligence required of a master prior to beginning a voyage. 
The changes we are making to these sections are consistent with these 
responsibilities, and do not limit the exercise of a master's 
discretion in this area. Further, stating these responsibilities 
explicitly in regulations reinforces the need to monitor and give due 
consideration to forecasted conditions so appropriate decisions can be 
made in the face of changing environmental conditions.
    One commenter stated this part of the proposed rule is nothing more 
than good marine practice since it would require the operator only to 
obtain the latest marine weather forecast and plan voyages accordingly. 
While we agree this is good marine practice, codifying it here 
reinforces its importance.
    The same commenter also objected to continued use of ``reasonable 
operating conditions'' on a pontoon vessel's COI, instead of providing 
definitive operational guidance to each vessel's master by listing 
specific environmental limitations on the COI. The commenter believed 
this use of ``reasonable operating conditions'' may place passengers at 
unnecessary risk and recommended listing limiting environmental 
conditions on the vessel's COI.
    In support of this recommendation, the commenter referred to an 
April 28, 2005 study conducted by a team of Coast Guard members and 
entitled, Study on the U.S. Domestic Intact Stability and Subdivision 
Requirements for Twin Hull Pontoon Passenger Boats Less Than 65 Feet in 
Length. That study included a preliminary recommendation that the Coast 
Guard consider restricting pontoon vessels with a COI based on a 
pontoon simplified stability test to operating in wind conditions not 
greater than Beaufort force 4 (16 knots of wind), but acknowledged the 
ramifications of implementing such guidance were unknown.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Id. at p. 37.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After further consideration, and as we previously explained in 
response to comments on Sec. Sec.  115.110 and 176.110, limiting 
environmental conditions on a vessel's COI in the manner suggested 
would neither be practical nor likely to effectively improve vessel 
safety. We no longer believe that the recommendation contained in the 
2005 study is appropriate, because pontoon vessels come in all sizes, 
types and seakeeping abilities. An attempt to take a one-size-fits-all 
approach by specifying limiting environmental conditions for vessel 
operation, even if applied only to pontoon vessels, is fraught with 
difficulty and may well have unintended consequences. Many other 
conditions involving both the vessel and

[[Page 78068]]

its environment must be constantly observed, monitored, interpreted and 
responded to by the master in order to evaluate the advisability of 
embarking on a voyage, or of continuing on a voyage when conditions 
progressively deteriorate. Masters are, and remain, responsible for 
evaluating all relevant factors in order to operate their vessels 
safely at all times.

Section 122.315. Verification of Vessel Compliance With Applicable 
Stability Requirements

    We received nine comments on this proposed section, all of which 
related to draft and loading marks. Existing regulations require a 
vessel master to verify compliance with the stability letter and COI 
prior to departure. Operators have traditionally verified compliance 
with the COI by ensuring the count of passengers does not exceed that 
which is specified, rather than ensuring that the total permitted 
weight is not exceeded.
    To prevent overloading, this final rule requires a master to 
consider the total weight of passengers and all variable loads prior to 
getting underway. This can be accomplished through the verification of 
draft or load marks. Acceptable alternatives include adding the weights 
or estimated weights of each individual passenger, or multiplying the 
passenger count by the current AAWPP or another value accepted by the 
OCMI and representative of the weight of passengers and crew aboard the 
vessel.
    One comment suggested requiring a loading mark on the side of the 
vessel. The Coast Guard agrees that this is a viable method for many 
vessels, but also concurs with other commenters that due to 
inaccuracies involved in reading such marks, this method may only 
identify gross overloading situations, depending on the size of the 
vessel and the weather conditions. Because of these limitations, other 
options are also acceptable, as discussed above.
    One comment stated that small passenger vessel masters are not 
sufficiently trained for stability checks beyond ensuring the passenger 
count is within the limit on the COI, and that maximum drafts have not 
been exceeded. This level of training, however, does not preclude 
masters from complying with this regulation. Possible compliance 
options include checking draft marks or multiplying the passenger count 
by the current AAWPP, which are skills a small passenger vessel master 
should possess.
    Four comments objected to using draft marks because environmental 
factors and mooring arrangements often make the marks difficult to 
read, which may cause delays in departures. We disagree. Existing 
regulations take these difficulties into account and require 
alternative arrangements to determine vessel drafts. Both Sec. Sec.  
122.602 and 185.602 require certain vessels over 65 feet in length to 
be fitted with a reliable draft indicating system from which the bow 
and stern drafts can be determined where the draft marks are obscured 
due to operational constraints or by protrusions.
    Two comments expressed concern that small changes in draft could 
disproportionately affect passenger count, and movement of passengers 
during loading would make reading draft or loading marks difficult. The 
Coast Guard recognizes that movement of passengers may inhibit accurate 
draft or loading mark verification. In these circumstances, where 
vessels are nearing their maximum allowable drafts and concerns about 
accuracy exist, operators may wish to employ additional tools to verify 
compliance as previously discussed.
    One comment suggested that the Coast Guard consider options other 
than checking drafts that an operator may use to verify a vessel is not 
overloaded. As discussed in the preamble to the NPRM, the Coast Guard 
agrees. The commenter recommended various methods in three categories: 
Load marks, weight measurement, and weight estimation. The Coast Guard 
agrees, that use of the methods proposed by the commenter could satisfy 
this section of the rule.
    The same commenter also proposed the use of several physical 
methods to measure passenger weight prior to loading. These methods are 
described in detail in document number USCG-2007-0030-0208.1, which can 
be viewed; this document is available in the docket by following the 
directions under the ADDRESSES section of this preamble. OCMIs will 
generally consider physical methods that accurately measure or estimate 
passenger weight to be acceptable means for satisfying the requirements 
of this section.

Section 122.602. Hull Markings

    We received 12 comments on proposed requirements for vessels that 
comply with subchapter S to have loading marks or draft marks. This 
section expands existing applicability of the requirement to have draft 
marks to passenger vessels less than or equal to 65 ft in length if 
their stability compliance was determined in accordance with subchapter 
S instead of a simplified stability test.
    Two comments supported requiring loading marks as a means to verify 
compliance. For the reasons discussed below, we agree.
    One commenter stated that draft marks are impractical on smaller 
vessels and suggested viewing the boot stripe as a means to determine 
if a vessel is overloaded. The Coast Guard does not agree. In most 
cases, due to trim restrictions, a vessel's bootstripe is not a 
sufficiently accurate measure to verify compliance with stability 
criteria unless it is referenced as a loading mark on a stability 
letter.
    One commenter suggested that load marks be required where draft 
marks are not measured to a vessel's baseline. The Coast Guard 
partially agrees in that Sec. Sec.  115.610 and 176.610 now require any 
operating restrictions associated with stability information to 
correspond to draft or loading marks. Draft marks must be shown to be 
in compliance with those sections, but loading marks are also an 
acceptable option.
    Four comments objected to requiring draft marks because docking 
arrangements, wakes, and constant waves often make the marks difficult 
or impossible to read. The Coast Guard acknowledges these conditions 
often make the use of draft or loading marks difficult, but they do not 
prevent the need for a draft or loading mark requirement. Existing 
regulations take these difficulties into account, and permit 
alternative arrangements to determine vessel drafts. As we discussed in 
Sec.  122.315 of this preamble, Sec. Sec.  122.602 and 185.602 
currently require certain vessels over 65 feet in length to be fitted 
with a reliable draft indicating system from which the bow and stern 
drafts can be determined when the draft marks are obscured due to 
operational constraints or by protrusions.
    Four comments expressed concern over accuracy of draft marks when 
weight changes lead to draft changes of less than an inch. While use of 
draft marks or a draft indicating system may not always be the best way 
to satisfy the requirements and intent of Sec. Sec.  122.315 and 
185.315, it is a valuable tool to assist the master in determining 
compliance with draft and freeboard restrictions contained in the 
vessel's stability information. If there is concern about the accuracy 
of draft readings as a vessel approaches its maximum draft or full load 
of passengers, operators should employ additional tools to ensure 
vessels are not overloaded, such as ensuring their assumed weight per 
person is truly representative of the passengers and crew aboard.

[[Page 78069]]

Section 170.001. Applicability

    We received no comments on this section, but added the word 
``Either'' after paragraph (a)(1) to improve the clarity of the 
provision.

Section 170.015. Incorporation by Reference

    One commenter recommended leaving year designations out of 
citations to ASTM standards in this section and suggested the most 
current version of a standard should be used. The Coast Guard agrees in 
part and has revised the rule to remove year designations from 
provisions other than the centralized incorporation by reference (IBR) 
sections. However, the regulations covering IBR require that we provide 
the year of each standard incorporated in centralized IBR sections (1 
CFR part 51).
    Also, when we considered the options available for the 
incorporation by reference of the new SOLAS subdivision and damage 
stability requirements contained in chapter II-1, we realized that a 
consolidated SOLAS text that accurately contains these requirements is 
not available. Instead, reference to the IMO resolution that adopted 
the new requirements would be the most direct way to incorporate the 
new provisions in the final rule. As a result, the incorporation by 
reference sections and the sections incorporating the new SOLAS 
requirements have been changed to refer to IMO Resolution MSC.216(82), 
which contains the full text of SOLAS chapter II-1, parts A, B, B-1, B-
2, B-3, and B-4 (sections 170.015, 170.140, 170.248, 171.001, 171.012, 
171.080, 174.007, 174.360, 179.15, and 179.212).

Section 170.055. Definitions Concerning a Vessel

    This section has been modified to include a definition of Assumed 
Average Weight Per Person (AAWPP), which is discussed in Sec.  170.090, 
and to correct a deficiency in the definition of ``lightweight''. When 
the Coast Guard proposed the creation of subchapter S in 1982, the NPRM 
indicated the definition of ``lightweight'' was to be the same as that 
in 33 CFR 157.03.\3\ However, the words ``the displacement of a 
vessel'' were inadvertently omitted from the definition in the final 
rule.\4\ Because the definition of this term should be the same in both 
titles of the CFR, this final rule corrects the earlier omission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 47 FR 35090 at 35092 (Aug. 12, 1982).
    \4\ 48 FR 50996 at 51011 (Nov. 4, 1983).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since the Coast Guard received no comments on this section as 
published in the NPRM, the proposed definition of ``constructed'' has 
been adopted in this final rule.

Section 170.090. Calculations

    Discussion of comments in this section has been divided into 
subsections on the increase in the AAWPP, the new AAWPP effective date, 
the process for documenting compliance, and updates to the AAWPP.

Increased Assumed Weight per Person

    The Coast Guard received 55 comments on the proposal to increase 
the assumed weight per person to 185 lb. Of those, 40 supported using 
185 lb as the new Assumed Average Weight per Person (AAWPP). We agree, 
and this final rule contains an AAWPP of 185 lb.
    Two commenters advocated an AAWPP of 187 lb because the most recent 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) report, which was 
issued after publication of the NPRM, showed an increase in average 
American weight of approximately two lb since the previous report. 
Using the AAWPP proposed in the NPRM, however, is strongly preferred 
for the following reasons:
    The Coast Guard understands the passenger vessel industry has been, 
and is, planning for implementation of a 185 lb AAWPP, and increasing 
that number at this time would disrupt implementation of what is 
already a challenging transition. If the marginal safety improvement to 
be realized from a further two lb increase was significant, the cost-
benefit analysis of these alternatives might be different. But it is 
not--a two lb increase from 185 is approximately 1%, which would 
produce a negligible draft change even on a small vessel. This very 
small additional improvement in stability is an insufficient reason to 
disrupt business plans and vessel modifications essential to the 
implementation of this final rule. Public safety is not enhanced when 
implementation of the change from the obsolete assumed weight of 140 lb 
to a weight closely approximating the actual average American weight is 
delayed by moving the target at this late date to incorporate 
relatively insignificant changes.
    Additionally, as is also discussed under AAWPP updates, the AAWPP 
will not be updated until the procedure in Sec.  170.090 produces a 
value at least 10 lb greater than the effective AAWPP. If current 
trends in the growth of Americans' weight continue, the next increase 
in the AAWPP would occur sooner if 185 lb is used in the regulation at 
this point than it would if 187 lb is used. Although a minor difference 
exists between the new AAWPP and the body weight data in the most 
current NHANES report, that difference will be eliminated when the 10 
lb stability risk threshold is met and the AAWPP is next updated.
    Several commenters also questioned why the Coast Guard did not 
include different AAWPPs for protected and unprotected waters in the 
regulation. Many were also concerned that a single AAWPP would not 
adequately account for passenger groups with a high percentage of 
children. Others recommended that stability guidance simply refer to 
the total weight of people a vessel would be permitted to carry and 
that the master would then have the responsibility to limit loading to 
that number by weighing everyone on board, using load lines or a draft 
indicating system or, as is possible with amphibious craft, weighing 
the vessel.
    Several of these commenters also recommended that OCMIs be vested 
with authority to take route, passenger group composition, and other 
relevant circumstances into account when assessing vessel stability. 
The Coast Guard agrees, and notes that OCMIs currently have the 
authority and responsibility to take all relevant factors into account 
when evaluating vessel stability.
    With regard to the question of preserving a separate, lower AAWPP 
for vessels operating exclusively on protected waters, and carrying a 
passenger load consisting of men, women and children, the Coast Guard 
does not concur. The weight of an average American is independent of 
the route, and existing regulations already include reduced stability 
requirements for protected routes. Additionally, as explained in the 
NPRM, this rule incorporates provisions that allow the OCMI to consider 
and approve another assumed weight per person based on an alternative 
mix of passengers.
    One of the more important parts of this rule is the principle, 
embodied in Sec.  170.090(c), that ``[t]he assumed weight per person 
for calculations showing compliance with this subchapter must be 
representative of the passengers and crew aboard the vessel while 
engaged in the service intended.'' Although 185 lb will be the minimum 
default AAWPP until later updated, the Coast Guard emphasizes that the 
same paragraph also provides the OCMI the authority to permit the use 
of other values when deemed appropriate.
    This principle, and the authority explicitly granted to OCMIs to 
assure passenger vessel stability in accordance with that principle 
rather than by rigidly applying a single AAWPP

[[Page 78070]]

regardless of circumstances, should result in reasonable assumptions 
regarding the average weight of people aboard each vessel. Where an 
owner or operator has a passenger group with a large number of 
children, or can show some other reason that applying the AAWPP does 
not result in a load limit representative of the passengers and crew 
aboard the vessel while engaged in the service intended, the OCMI has 
the authority to approve use of an average weight less than the AAWPP 
that more accurately represents the actual passenger load on a case-by-
case basis.
    Three commenters stated that increasing the AAWPP to more closely 
match the average American's weight will produce no improvement in 
safety. We disagree. The 45-lb difference between the current AAWPP for 
vessels operating on protected waters with a mixed passenger load and 
the weight of an average American is likely to result in a 24% 
underestimation of passenger load. Using an AAWPP that is as close as 
practicable to the actual average passenger weight is the most 
effective way to protect against vessel overloading and to restore the 
margin of safety intended in existing stability criteria.
    One commenter was concerned that the proposed increase in the AAWPP 
might be inconsistent with the International Maritime Organization's 
(IMO) standard assumed passenger weight. The 1974 International 
Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) used an assumed weight 
per person, set in 1990, of at least 75 kg (approximately 165 lb) for 
damage stability calculations.\5\ Additionally, the IMO Intact 
Stability Code uses an assumed passenger weight, established in 1963, 
of at least 75 kg for intact stability calculations.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ SOLAS, Ch. II-1, Regulation 7-2, para. 4.1.1; International 
Maritime Organization (IMO) Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) 
Resolution MSC.194(80), Annex 2.
    \6\ International Code on Intact Stability (IS Code), para. 
3.1.1.1; IMO MSC Resolution MSC.267(85), Annex 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although this final rule establishes an AAWPP greater than the 
minimum international requirements, the higher AAWPP used in loading 
calculations is necessary for safety reasons because the AAWPP more 
closely approximates the actual average American weight. While the 
AAWPP is based on recent CDC studies of the US population, the current 
international standards were set in 1990 and 1963 respectively and 
based on worldwide data not representative of the U.S. population. 
Rather than being inconsistent with international standards, the AAWPP 
complies with those standards by exceeding their minimum requirements.
    One commenter stated the NPRM's use of a single AAWPP would be 
inconsistent with an assumption in the U.S. Coast Guard Study of 
Effects on Commercial Passenger Vessels Due to Increasing Passenger 
Weight Standards in the Code of Federal Regulations, dated May 19, 
2005. The Coast Guard disagrees. The study was conducted based on the 
assumption, among others, that ``[t]he current method of reducing 
passenger weight for vessels operating on protected waters and carrying 
men, women and children was not used.'' Further, the study was not 
referring to the NPRM, which post-dated the study.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Id. at p. 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The same commenter pointed out that the study recommended ``the 
Coast Guard should investigate whether vessels that operate solely on 
protected waters should be subject to a reduction factor based on 
operational constraints which may be stipulated in the Certificate of 
Inspection.'' \8\ As the study itself stated, ``[t]he results of this 
initial analysis are preliminary* * *.'' Additionally, after further 
consideration, the Coast Guard concluded that passenger vessel 
stability assessments would be conducted more efficiently and 
accurately by adopting a single AAWPP and relying to an extent, as we 
have in the past, on OCMIs to take varying factors into account, 
instead of complicating the regulations with exceptions that may be 
overly broad or not well tailored to realities in the field.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Id. at p. 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One commenter questioned the basis for a clothing allowance of 7.5 
lb, particularly in view of seasonal differences. Although we recognize 
seasonal and regional variations in clothing weight, we determined that 
7.5 lb is a reasonable approximation of the average weight of clothing 
based on the FAA Advisory Circular 120-27E, paragraph 210, dated June 
10, 2005.
    Two commenters supported an increase in the AAWPP, but expected the 
increase to cause an adverse financial impact. Please see the 
Regulatory Assessment in part VI of this preamble for a discussion of 
the expected costs associated with this rule. Although the rule will 
have some economic impact on some vessels, use of a realistic AAWPP is 
essential to prevent overloading and protect the public.
    One comment pointed out that in proposed Sec.  178.330(b), in the 
formula for Mp, units for the term ``W'' should be in pounds 
(kilograms). We agree and have corrected the final rule.

The Initial AAWPP Effective Date

    We received 31 comments on the length of a phase-in period for the 
AAWPP. This period would determine the date by which each vessel would 
have to comply with the final rule and subsequent AAWPP updates. As 
proposed in the NPRM, the new AAWPP would become effective 90 days 
after publication of the final rule, and vessel owners and operators 
would be required to demonstrate compliance at the next annual 
inspection. Only one commenter supported these proposals.
    Several commenters supported differing time periods for phasing in 
the requirement for existing vessels to comply with the new weight 
standard. Seventeen advocated five to five and a half years. One 
recommended a four year period. Two proposed a two year period, and 
three supported a one year phase-in, one of which suggested one 
operating season as an alternative. Several advocated using risk-based 
methods to address the highest risk vessels first. Nine comments did 
not propose a phase-in period, but agreed with the majority of other 
comments that it would be infeasible for all operators to assess 
stability and for the Coast Guard to revise stability letters or amend 
Certificates of Inspection associated with implementing a new AAWPP 
within a year after publication of the final rule.
    Several commenters made the point that business plans, booked 
charters, ticket prices, rate settings, and interactions with 
government agencies other than the Coast Guard can be affected by 
changes in passenger capacity. One commenter noted that group charters 
are reserved up to a year in advance. The Coast Guard agrees that the 
need to bring the AAWPP up to date must be balanced with the practical 
effects of implementing the change on vessel owners and operators. For 
this reason, the Coast Guard does not agree with the commenter who 
advocated implementing the new AAWPP immediately.
    Making the initial AAWPP effective on December 1, 2011 will provide 
owners and operators an operating season in which to plan, allocate 
revenues and costs, and prepare for the new requirements. Further, 
nearly all commenters on this subject emphasized that failure to afford 
a reasonable implementation period would cause them financial hardship. 
For these reasons, a period of approximately one year leading to the 
AAWPP effective date represents a necessary balance

[[Page 78071]]

between implementing a new AAWPP as quickly as possible to protect 
public safety, and providing a reasonable amount of time for owners and 
operators to adjust their operations. All subsequent AAWPP updates will 
become effective one calendar year after public notice.
    Many commenters also maintained that at least five years would be 
necessary to assess stability and accomplish the documentation 
associated with implementing a new AAWPP throughout the affected fleet 
because of an insufficient supply of naval architects and Coast Guard 
personnel. We agree that the rule, as proposed, would have required 
more than a year to fully implement. However, as discussed in Sec.  
71.25-50 of this preamble, provisions in the NPRM proposing annual 
stability information verifications have not been included in this 
final rule. Additionally, the Coast Guard's regulatory analysis and 
studies show that some vessels may only need an update or revision of 
their stability letters and COIs, and may not require a stability test 
as a result of this rule. Further, as we discuss in greater detail 
below in the section on documenting compliance, many owners and 
operators will be permitted to certify compliance with stability 
requirements for a total weight of passengers and crew associated with 
the new AAWPP and will not need new documentation before operating in 
accordance with this certification. Because we gave notice of our 
intent to update the average weight, and emphasized managing total 
weight in our April 2006 notice of voluntary compliance, owners and 
operators received sufficient time to prepare for the updated AAWPP. 
For these reasons, a period longer than approximately one year leading 
to the new AAWWPP's effective date is not warranted.
    Although the Coast Guard is unable to predict the amount of time 
necessary to revise stability letters or amend Certificates of 
Inspection, no commenter presented, and the Coast Guard is not aware 
of, any compelling reason for the effective date of the new AAWPP to be 
delayed until documentation is complete. However, the Coast Guard 
realizes the time needed to complete documentation for all vessels will 
likely exceed the approximate one year period prior to the effective 
date, and documentation will be completed as available resources 
permit.
    Accordingly, beginning December 1, 2011, passenger vessel owners 
and operators must ensure that the total weight of passengers, crew, 
and variable loads does not exceed the total weight for which stability 
has been satisfactorily evaluated. The total permitted weight is often 
based on a maximum number of persons in association with an AAWPP of 
185 lb or another weight approved in writing by an OCMI. It should be 
emphasized that, while this final rule will become effective 90 days 
from today on March 14, 2011, the 185 lb AAWPP will not become 
effective at the same time. Under Sec.  170.090 of this final rule, the 
initial AAWPP issued pursuant to the provisions of that section, which 
will be 185 lb, will become effective on December 1, 2011.
    Subsequent AAWPP updates will normally be issued as interpretive 
rules without further rulemaking procedures and will become effective 
one calendar year after publication of a notice in the Federal Register 
unless an earlier effective date is necessary for urgent public safety 
reasons. The Coast Guard reserves the authority, however, to update the 
AAWPP using notice and comment rulemaking procedures, and to delay or 
dispense with any update of the AAWPP. In the event the Coast Guard 
elects to dispense with or delay an update, the Coast Guard will inform 
the public of the decision and explain the reasons in a Federal 
Register notice.

Process for Documenting Compliance

    Beginning on December 1, 2011, each passenger vessel must be in 
compliance with stability criteria based on the new AAWPP of 185 lb or 
another weight approved in writing by the cognizant OCMI. If the Coast 
Guard has not issued a stability letter associated with the new AAWPP 
or greater average weight, or the Coast Guard has not confirmed that 
existing stability guidance is acceptable relative to the new AAWPP, 
then the owner or operator must certify to the OCMI that the vessel 
complies with applicable stability requirements. Certification of 
stability compliance by an owner or operator means that-
    (1) The owner or operator has provided a written statement to the 
OCMI together with documentation clearly supporting the total weight 
and number of passengers and crew permitted to be carried at the new 
AAWPP; and
    (2) A copy of this information has been provided to the MSC if the 
vessel is a pontoon vessel or demonstrates compliance with the 
provisions of subchapter S.
    In each case, a copy of the vessel's current stability letter 
should be included with the documentation.
    Owners and operators must provide the documentation referred to in 
paragraph 1 above to the OCMI, in writing, not later than December 1, 
2011. Pending the effective date of this regulation, owners and 
operators are encouraged to voluntarily comply with the new AAWPP as 
soon as practicable.
    A number of options exist for this certification, including but not 
limited to the following:
    (1) Weight ratio. The simplest method for demonstrating compliance 
with the new AAWPP requirement is to reduce the total passengers and 
crew permitted by existing stability guidance to a number not greater 
than the former passenger and crew capacity multiplied by the ratio of 
the old assumed weight per person (the assumed weight per person the 
current stability guidance was based on) to the new AAWPP. If 
documentation of the old assumed weight per person is not available, 
the most conservative existing weight per person commensurate with the 
vessel's service should be assumed.
    In formula, this means:
    New passenger and crew capacity = existing passenger and crew 
capacity x old assumed weight per person/new AAWPP.
    (2) Weight compensation. A method to demonstrate compliance with 
the new AAWPP requirement available to vessels carrying either deck or 
vehicular cargo in addition to passengers is to reduce the cargo weight 
carried by an amount equal to the difference between the total 
permitted weight of passengers and crew associated with the new and old 
AAWPPs. Owners or operators who opt to proportionally reduce cargo 
capacity would see no reduction in passenger capacity.
    (3) Direct verification. The owner or operator ensures that the 
total weight of persons loaded aboard the vessel does not exceed the 
total permitted weight of persons associated with the existing 
stability guidance. For vessels that have undergone an SST, this is the 
total test weight. The method by which the owner or operator ensures 
the total weight does not exceed the limiting value may include 
weighing of all persons on board or another method accepted in writing 
by the cognizant OCMI.
    (4) Stability calculations. The owner or operator may prepare or 
have prepared revised stability calculations demonstrating that the 
vessel complies with applicable stability requirements when loaded with 
persons at the new AAWPP. These calculations may use the results of 
previous or new stability tests. New stability tests associated with 
revised stability calculations must be conducted in the presence of a 
Coast Guard Marine Inspector.
    (5) New stability proof tests. The owner or operator may choose to 
conduct a new SST or PSST to

[[Page 78072]]

demonstrate compliance with the same number of passengers and crew at 
the new AAWPP. New SSTs must be conducted in the presence of a Coast 
Guard Marine Inspector.
    The number of passengers permitted aboard small passenger vessels 
is also limited by the criteria listed in Sec. Sec.  115.113 and 
176.113: Length of rail, deck area, or fixed seating. As the total test 
weight for these vessels is typically determined with consideration of 
that restriction, it may be possible for a vessel to continue to carry 
close to, if not the same, number of passengers at the new AAWPP. 
Adequate stability in this regard will, however, still need to be 
determined by either method (4) or (5). Vessels for which the 
Certificate of Inspection restricts the number of passengers carried to 
a number significantly less than that indicated in the stability 
guidance may have little or no reduction in passenger capacity.
    Owners and operators who determine that their vessel will incur no 
reduction in the total number of passengers and crew permitted still 
must certify to the OCMI that there will be no impact on the total 
passenger and crew capacity, and must develop sufficient documentation 
to support their findings.
    The Coast Guard will verify the owner or operator's certification 
that the vessel meets stability requirements based on a total weight at 
the new AAWPP no later than the vessel's next annual inspection 
following December 1, 2011. Stability letters will be revised and 
Certificates of Inspection will be amended as needed and as Coast Guard 
resources permit. Owners and operators of vessels with stability 
letters issued by the MSC or a Coast Guard District must submit this 
certification information to the MSC, with a copy to the OCMI, who will 
review and issue a new stability letter as appropriate. Pending 
revision of these documents, owners and operators must still comply 
with the provisions of this regulation and ensure that their vessels 
are not overloaded.
    Owners and operators should keep appropriate copies of this 
documentation aboard their vessels as evidence of compliance after the 
new AAWPP becomes effective, pending receipt of revised stability 
letters. Additional information and or tests as appropriate may be 
required by the OCMI or Commanding Officer, Marine Safety Center if the 
OCMI questions the vessel's stability.

Subsequent AAWPP Updates

    We received 36 comments addressing the subject of how the AAWPP 
would be updated. Instead of promulgating future updates without 
further rulemaking procedures, as proposed, 23 commenters advocated 
updating the average weight only when a threshold corresponding with 
significantly increased safety risk is met. One commenter suggested a 
threshold of 3% of the current assumed weight, another supported a 
value between 3 and 5%, and another recommended 5% or more. Fourteen 
commenters felt this matter should be re-addressed in a supplemental 
rulemaking entirely, and ten commenters believed that updates should 
only occur through notice and comment rulemakings. Only one commenter 
supported this part of the proposed rule as written.
    As noted above in the discussion of this section, 55 comments were 
submitted on the proposal to increase the AAWPP and 40 of those 
supported the proposed change. As we explained in the NPRM, and as a 
substantial majority of commenters agreed, the AAWPP must be increased 
because it is no longer consistent with the average American passenger 
weight, and a significant risk of overloading passenger vessels exists 
without an increase.
    The same reasons strongly support inclusion of a mechanism in 
regulation that maintains an up-to-date AAWPP over time. With such a 
mechanism, the AAWPP will be updated to reflect changes in the American 
population's weight in the most efficient manner practicable. The 
current disparity between the AAWPP prescribed in regulations and the 
average American weight would have been much less likely to develop if 
an updating mechanism had been previously included in regulations. 
Advantages in public safety and use of Coast Guard resources make 
inclusion of such a mechanism the better choice.
    Additionally, use of such a mechanism to update objective numerical 
values based upon data issued by an authoritative source is not 
unusual. As one example, Federal agencies, including the Coast Guard, 
commonly keep their regulations consistent with the current consumer 
price index using similar methods. In those cases and in this 
rulemaking, the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the National Center for 
Health Statistics are widely recognized as the leading authoritative 
sources of statistics in their respective fields.
    Under these circumstances, and in light of the strong public policy 
interests served by keeping the AAWPP current, notice and comment 
rulemaking procedures are not expected to be required by law for every 
update. In the future, the Coast Guard anticipates it will periodically 
update the AAWPP for purposes of 46 CFR 170.090 by interpreting the 
term to keep it consistent with the current average American weight as 
reported by NHANES. The Coast Guard will justify an interpretive rule 
each time it is published in the Federal Register, and conduct a notice 
and comment rulemaking if a particular update would not qualify as 
interpretive because of future circumstances.
    At the same time, the Coast Guard recognizes the need of vessel 
owners and operators for a reasonable degree of predictability in the 
rate of change to the AAWPP, and agrees with commenters who advocated 
that future updates should be tied to a risk-based threshold. For these 
reasons, the Coast Guard added a provision to this final rule that 
permits an increase in the AAWPP through an interpretive rule only when 
CDC data yield an AAWPP that differs by at least 10 lb from the AAWPP 
then in effect. The rule also permits the Coast Guard to conduct 
rulemaking procedures at any time.
    The Marine Safety Manual and the International Code on Intact 
Stability, 2008 (2008 IS Code) require stability testing when a 
vessel's lightship displacement changes more than 2 percent.\9\ 
Although these standards address changes in lightship displacement as a 
threshold for conducting stability evaluations, this concept is also 
useful in this context when applied to changes in total displacement. A 
10-lb threshold on AAWPP changes corresponds to 5 percent of the new 
185-lb AAWPP. Considering that passenger weight is only a portion of a 
passenger vessel's displacement, however, a 5 percent change in the 
passenger loads typical of many small passenger vessels results in a 
total displacement change of approximately 2 percent. For this reason, 
a 10-lb threshold for AAWPP updates is a reasonable approximation of an 
established risk threshold. Although future changes in average American 
weight are unknown, a 10-lb threshold is likely to provide vessel 
owners and operators a more stable AAWPP than provisions proposed in 
the NPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ COMDTINST M16000.9, Marine Safety Manual, Vol IV, Sec.  
6.D.4; Marine Safety Center Technical Note, Lightship Change 
Determination, Weight-Moment Calculation vs. Deadweight Survey vs. 
Full Stability Test, 11 May 1995; and, 2008 IS Code, para. B/8.1.5, 
IMO MSC Resolution MSC.267(85), Annex 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Coast Guard recognizes that unforeseen events may 
make implementation of an AAWPP update without further rulemaking

[[Page 78073]]

procedures contrary to public interest. To preclude the possibility of 
such an update proceeding automatically, a provision has been added 
preserving the Coast Guard's flexibility to dispense with or delay any 
update that would otherwise issue as an interpretive rule without 
further rulemaking procedures. Similarly, a provision has been added to 
explicitly maintain the Coast Guard's prerogative to conduct a 
rulemaking at any time to amend the AAWPP or any other part of CFR 
Title 46. With these provisions, the Coast Guard will ensure that AAWPP 
updates issued as interpretive rules without further rulemaking 
procedures are reasonable in light of circumstances existing at the 
time and will protect the public.
    Two commenters suggested tying future updates to a fixed time 
period such as 10 or 20 years. We disagree. Although an update every 
ten years would likely be appropriate if past trends continue, there is 
no assurance that Americans' weight will continue to increase at the 
same rate in the future. Updating the AAWPP when reliable data show 
average weight has changed significantly will result in a more accurate 
AAWPP over time.
    One commenter pointed out that proposed Sec.  170.090(e) used the 
mean weights of adults ``20 years and over'' to calculate the AAWPP, 
while the discussion of this subject in the NPRM preamble used the 
weights of adults ``between 20 and 74 years old.'' This commenter also 
advocated using the latter age range because the commenter expected 
that using the former would bias the AAWPP downward.
    The CDC changed the reporting of American weight data after 
publication of the NPRM, and mean weights of adults aged 20 to 74 years 
are no longer provided in NCHS reports. Further, in the absence of any 
data showing that inclusion of those over 75 would produce a less 
accurate AAWPP, it is not clear that doing so would bias the standard. 
The different age ranges in the NPRM preamble and regulatory text 
resulted from that change in CDC reporting.
    One commenter observed that the update procedures described in the 
NPRM represented a zero risk approach and would greatly limit the Coast 
Guard's flexibility in updating the AAWPP. We agree, and therefore have 
added a provision explicitly maintaining the Coast Guard's prerogative 
to conduct a rulemaking in this area at any time. The CDC will publish 
data, which will be used according to the procedure in Sec.  170.090 to 
produce an AAWPP as close as reasonably practicable to the actual 
average American passenger weight. An AAWPP differing at least 10 lb 
from that in effect at the time will become effective pursuant to the 
provisions of this final rule unless the Coast Guard decides to 
postpone or delay the update or to conduct further rulemaking 
procedures.

Section 170.140. Applicability

    See the discussion of changes in Sec.  170.015 of this preamble.

Section 170.165. International Code on Intact Stability

    We received no comments on this section of the NPRM. After further 
consideration, however, the Coast Guard determined that the proposed 
provisions in Sec. Sec.  170.248, 171.001 and 179.212 would 
inadvertently terminate acceptance by the Coast Guard of compliance by 
certain vessels with 46 CFR, subchapter T, in lieu of the stability 
requirements of SOLAS Chapter II-1. Because the Coast Guard did not 
intend such termination, we revised Sec. Sec.  170.165, 170.248, 
171.001, 171.070, and 179.212 of this final rule to preserve the 
existing equivalence for certain small passenger vessels operating on 
international voyages 20 miles or less from the nearest land.

Section 170.170. Weather Criteria

    Eight comments were received concerning reformulation of the wind 
and passenger heeling requirements contained in Sec. Sec.  170.170 and 
171.050. Four commenters believed these proposed changes were beyond 
the appropriate scope of a rulemaking focused on passenger weight, 
regardless of their merit, and suggested this matter be dealt with in a 
separate rulemaking. One commenter suggested the proposed rule change 
be applied only to vessels built after the rule takes effect, while 
existing criteria would continue to apply to vessels built prior to the 
effective date. One commenter cautioned that the changes to Sec.  
170.170 would affect all inspected vessels, all load lined uninspected 
vessels and, potentially, existing vessels that comply with current 
criteria. One commenter supported the proposed change to the criteria 
and explained that assessment of compliance based on a calculated 
equilibrium heel angle is more accurate than the existing, simplified 
calculation based on upright metacentric height (GM) (e.g., at zero 
heel angle).
    While the Coast Guard agrees that the assessment of compliance 
based on a calculated equilibrium heel angle is more accurate than the 
existing, simplified calculation, we also concur that additional study 
of the effects of the proposed changes to Sec.  170.170 on the existing 
fleet is required prior to implementing these criteria. Accordingly, we 
have removed the proposed changes to Sec.  170.170 from the final rule.
    However, for the reasons discussed in the NPRM, we have modified 
Sec.  170.170 to clearly indicate the limitation of the existing 
criteria to those conditions for which the formula is valid and reflect 
the requirement for additional calculations--generally addressed by 
demonstrating compliance with Sec.  170.173--for vessels of unusual 
proportion and form.
    One commenter pointed to a typographical error in the proposed rule 
for Sec.  170.170(a)(2). While we agree, modifications to this section 
have been removed from the final rule.

Section 170.248. Applicability

    See the discussion of changes in Sec. Sec.  170.015 and 170.165 of 
this preamble.

Section 171.001. Applicability

    See the discussion of changes in Sec. Sec.  170.015 and 170.165 of 
this preamble.

Section 171.045. Weight of Passengers and Crew

    See the discussion of changes to the AAWPP in Sec.  170.090 of this 
preamble.

Section 171.050. Passenger Heel Requirements for a Mechanically 
Propelled or a Non-Self Propelled Vessel

    Eight comments were received concerning reformulation of the wind 
and passenger heeling requirements contained in this section. Four 
commenters believed these proposed changes were beyond the appropriate 
scope of a rulemaking focused on passenger weight, regardless of their 
merit, and suggested this matter be dealt with in a separate 
rulemaking. With respect to proposed changes to Sec.  171.050 and the 
proposed new section on passenger crowding in Sec.  171.052, one 
commenter suggested that it would be more precise and simpler to 
develop a single passenger heel criteria by combining the two sections. 
This commenter advocated criteria based on a vessel's actual stability 
performance, use of an appropriate passenger loading density, and 
residual righting energy margins. The Coast Guard concurs; however 
additional study of the effects of passenger loading densities and 
residual righting energy margins is required prior to implementing 
performance-based criteria for non-pontoon vessels and possibly 
combining Sec.  171.050 and Sec.  171.052. Accordingly,

[[Page 78074]]

we have removed the proposed provisions in this section of the final 
rule.
    Instead, this section of the final rule retains provisions in 
existing regulations concerning simplified calculation of metacentric 
height and the proposed provisions concerning the 2008 IS Code.
    For the reasons explained in Sec.  170.170 of this preamble and in 
the NPRM, we have also modified Sec.  171.050 to clearly indicate the 
limitation of the existing criteria to those conditions for which the 
formula is valid and reflect the requirement for additional 
calculations--generally addressed by demonstrating compliance with 
Sec.  170.173--for vessels of unusual proportion and form.

Section 171.052. Passenger Heel Requirements for Pontoon Vessels

    Ten comments were received on the proposal for passenger crowding 
criteria. While acknowledging the motivation for this proposal, no 
commenter supported the proposal as written in the NPRM. All commenters 
advocated withdrawing the proposal to permit further investigation, and 
urged a careful approach to resolving this apparent safety gap.
    Four commenters indicated that the passenger crowding study on 
which the proposed regulation was based only considered small vessels 
and was not sufficiently rigorous to serve as a basis for regulations 
applying to larger vessels. Two commenters questioned the use of 
passenger fraction as a basis for application of passenger crowding 
criteria. Those commenters also argued that the results of the pontoon 
study support the conclusion that the passenger crowding issue appears 
to be generally limited to small light vessels, such as pontoon 
vessels. Further, the commenters pointed out that the study did not 
assess the degree to which application of passenger crowding criteria 
would affect larger, heavier vessels, which make up most of the 
remainder of the fleet. One commenter indicated that, based on service 
and configuration, the proposed passenger crowding standard would also 
inappropriately penalize certain small vessels. Three commenters 
identified monohull vessels for which the SST was not conservative when 
compared to the proposed passenger crowding standards. In those cases, 
the proposed standard would result in reductions of up to 45 percent of 
the passenger capacity permitted by the SST.
    The Coast Guard agrees that, for vessels other than pontoon 
vessels, further research is required to determine the risk associated 
with passenger crowding. Accordingly, we have limited the applicability 
of Sec.  171.052 to pontoon vessels.

Section 171.070. Subdivision Requirements--Type II

    See the discussion of changes in Sec.  170.165 of this preamble.

Section 171.080. Damage Stability Standards for Vessels With Type I or 
Type II Subdivision

    See the discussion of changes to the AAWPP under Sec.  170.090, and 
of the IBR in Sec.  170.015, of this preamble.

Section 174.007. Incorporation by Reference

    One commenter recommended leaving year designations out of 
citations to ASTM standards in this section and suggested the most 
current version of a standard should be used. The Coast Guard agrees in 
part and has revised the rule to remove year designations from 
provisions other than the centralized IBR sections. In addition, see 
the discussion of changes in Sec.  170.015 of this preamble.

Section 174.360. Calculations

    See the discussion of changes in Sec.  170.015 of this preamble.

Section 175.400. Definitions of Terms Used in This Subchapter

    Although we received no comments on this section, the definition of 
``variable load'' has been modified to improve clarity. We also added a 
definition of ``pontoon vessel'' to section 175.400 because that term 
is used frequently in part 178.

Section 176.110. Routes Permitted

    Please see the discussion of comments on routes permitted in Sec.  
115.110 of this preamble.

Section 176.505. Stability Verification

    Please see the discussion of comments concerning the proposed 
annual stability information and ten-year lightship verifications in 
Sec.  71.25-50 of this preamble.

Section 176.610. Scope of Drydock and Internal Structural Examinations

    Please see the discussion of comments concerning draft mark 
verification in Sec.  71.50-1 of this preamble.

Section 178.210. Stability Information

    Four comments were submitted on the proposed changes in this 
section and Sec. Sec.  178.320(b) and 178.340 associated with PSSTs. 
One commenter opposed allowing simplified stability tests for pontoon 
vessels. Another commenter expressed disbelief that the safety of 
pontoon passenger vessels would be enhanced by the Marine Safety Center 
issuing stability letters for vessels that undergo a PSST.
    One commenter urged that future regulations prohibit OCMIs from 
dispensing with the requirement for a simplified stability test on a 
pontoon passenger vessel. The commenter also opined that proposed 
changes to the PSST would introduce inconsistencies between the PSST 
and the SST used for monohulls, and could reduce safety margins for 
pontoon vessels. In addition, the commenter objected to the proposed 
regulatory requirement of a minimum passenger and crew heeling moment 
because the required heeling moment would be reduced from the guidance 
provided. Finally, this commenter advocated inclusion of a specific 
pontoon vessel dynamic stability standard.
    One commenter was concerned about the large passenger capacity 
reduction on a pontoon passenger vessel due to changes in the average 
weight per person and the perceived rigor of the proposed pontoon 
vessel stability evaluation.
    Over the past four years, the U.S. Coast Guard MSC reviewed records 
of PSSTs of all certificated pontoon type passenger vessels and found 
that pontoon vessel stability calculations and results are 
hypersensitive to even minor errors made in the conduct of the PSST. 
Because of this hypersensitivity, the Coast Guard has determined that 
centralized review of PSST results and pontoon vessel stability 
calculations is necessary to ensure compliance with applicable 
stability standards. This is the basis for the proposed rule's addition 
of 46 CFR 178.210(d), which requires that each pontoon passenger vessel 
be issued a stability letter by the MSC. Because the Coast Guard 
recognizes a small number of stability letters will not need revision, 
Sec.  178.210(d) will apply only to stability letters issued after the 
effective date of this rule.
    MSC's review of the PSST data also revealed significant 
discrepancies in how the simulated load was relocated to the ``extreme 
outboard position of the deck,'' as required by existing 46 CFR 
178.340. The PSST guidance, in G-MOC policy letter 10-04, Evaluation of 
Stability and Subdivision Requirements for Small Passenger Vessels 
Inspected Under 46 CFR Subchapter T,\10\

[[Page 78075]]

suggested that the heeling moment be based on the entire simulated 
load, which would be centered at the extreme outboard edge of the deck 
and require some of the simulated load to be placed further outboard 
than the outboard edge of the deck--a difficult condition to achieve in 
practice. To correct this, a minimum heeling moment is specified in the 
final rule that requires the simulated load to be centered not more 
than one foot inboard from the extreme outboard edge of the deck 
available to passengers. This requirement would correct previous 
guidance and otherwise increase the conservatism and consistency of the 
PSST from previous practice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Coast Guard Office of Vessel Activities was previously 
designated G-MOC, and is now designated Commandant (CG-543). This 
policy letter is available in the docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    MSC field guidance requires tanks to be either 100 percent full or 
empty, whichever is more conservative, for the conduct of PSSTs. Rather 
than the current requirement of 75 percent, the trim and immersion 
difference caused by these tank conditions typically reduce a pontoon 
vessel's stability by a greater amount than the free surface effect 
resulting from 75 percent full tanks required in the SST. To maintain 
the conservatism of the PSST, the proposed requirement is incorporated 
into this final rule in Sec.  178.340. In other considerations, the new 
rule maintains consistency in the loading conditions between the SST 
and the PSST.
    This final rule formalizes the MSC's prerogative to dispense with 
the requirement of a PSST if the vessel's stability can be adequately 
assessed by alternate means, which include, but are not limited to, the 
form, arrangement, construction, number of decks, route, and operating 
restrictions of the vessel. In the case of a pontoon vessel, the Coast 
Guard will rely on the expertise of the MSC, which will issue the 
stability letter. Doing so will help ensure that a PSST would only be 
dispensed with when compliance with minimum stability standards can be 
assured without testing.
    With respect to dynamic stability for pontoon vessels, the Coast 
Guard does not agree on the viability of or need for such criteria for 
several reasons. First, to our knowledge, dynamic intact stability 
criteria based on state-of-the-art methodologies are presently under 
development for monohulls and have not yet been adopted for any vessel 
type anywhere in the world, except a guide for the assessment of 
parametric roll resonance in the design of container vessels. Because 
of the unique hull characteristics of a pontoon vessel and general lack 
of comprehensive research in pontoon vessel dynamic stability, 
development of dynamic stability criteria for this vessel type using 
state-of-the-art methodologies is premature.
    Second, existing intact stability criteria contained in 46 CFR 
170.173 include righting energy or the work done in heeling a vessel to 
a given angle of heel, which is a traditional consideration of dynamic 
stability. The use of righting energy criteria is a time-proven, 
internationally accepted method of evaluating quantities known to be 
related to dynamic stability, including the stability of vessels 
spanning a broad spectrum of hull forms and operating routes. 
Application of these standards provides an indication of the vessel's 
ability to safely operate under the loading scenarios and environmental 
conditions the vessel is anticipated to encounter in service. Because 
most pontoon vessels demonstrate compliance by satisfactory performance 
of a PSST, we have verified that a satisfactory PSST performed 
according to 46 CFR 178.340 ensures compliance with 46 CFR 170.173--
frequently with large margins.

Section 178.215. Weight of Passengers and Crew

    See the discussion of comments on changes to the AAWPP in Sec.  
170.090 of this preamble.

Section 178.230. Stability Letter or Certificate of Inspection 
Stability Details

    Two comments were received addressing issues associated with 
stability letters. One commenter requested that this rulemaking clarify 
how second deck passenger capacity should be reflected in a stability 
letter based on the performance of a simplified stability test (SST). 
While the Coast Guard agrees that calculation methods should be 
examined for clarity, and additional guidance issued as necessary, the 
information required in the proposed regulation is adequate.
    Another commenter recommended that draft and freeboard information 
from SSTs be clearly identified on stability letters. The Coast Guard 
agrees that providing such information to a vessel's master would 
improve awareness of vessel stability limitations. Accordingly, the 
Coast Guard will consider issuing additional guidance regarding the 
information required in stability letters issued for vessels that have 
undergone SSTs. Because this information is already required to be 
recorded during the SST, however, the proposed regulation does not need 
revision on this subject.

Section 178.310. Intact Stability Requirements--General

    Six comments were submitted on the proposal to reorganize and 
clarify the intact stability requirements applicable to Subchapter T 
passenger vessels.
    One commenter indicated the proposed rules have ``little potential 
for clarifying'' applicable standards and are ``difficult to follow, in 
large part because of the multitude of cross-references.'' The Coast 
Guard agrees and has re-written Sec. Sec.  178.310, 178.320 and 178.325 
to minimize cross-references.
    One commenter indicated that, while the newly introduced flowchart 
and table were welcome additions, they were ``job assistants'', helpful 
in determining regulatory applicability, rather than regulatory 
requirements and would be more appropriately published as guidance. The 
Coast Guard agrees and has removed the flowchart and table from the 
regulations.
    One commenter urged the Coast Guard to require a 50 percent full 
load submergence criterion, in addition to the nine criteria already 
proposed, for governing application of the PSST. The Coast Guard does 
not agree. The new cross sectional area requirement effectively imposes 
the 50 percent submergence limit to any case with greater submergence. 
Consequently, compliance with the performance safety standard detailed 
in the PSST can be achieved by certain pontoon vessels which are loaded 
beyond the 50 percent pontoon submergence level, and an arbitrary 
submergence limitation of these vessels would be inappropriate and 
superfluous.
    One commenter advocated eliminating SSTs, especially for sailing 
vessels, while another commenter lauded the inclusion of flush deck 
catamaran vessels in those eligible for an SST. Another commenter 
questioned the immersion standard for the SST, and questioned whether a 
``more reasonable number for the Passenger Heeling Moment'' may be 
determined considering the construction, service, and route of the 
vessel.
    The Coast Guard intends to study the SST requirements to ensure 
that they remain conservative with respect to currently applicable 
stability requirements. Pending the results of such a study, however, 
no action beyond that proposed in the NPRM will be taken to modify the 
SST requirements or applicability.

Section 178.320. Intact Stability Requirements--Non-Sailing Vessels

    See the discussion of comments on changes concerning pontoon 
passenger

[[Page 78076]]

vessel simplified stability proof tests in Sec.  178.210, and on 
revisions to the intact stability requirements for Subchapter T vessels 
in Sec.  178.310 of this preamble.

Section 178.325. Intact Stability Requirements--Monohull Sailing 
Vessels

    See the discussion of comments on changes to the intact stability 
requirements for Subchapter T vessels in Sec.  178.310 of this 
preamble.

Section 178.330. Simplified Stability Proof Test (SST)

    See the discussion of comments on changes to the AAWPP in Sec.  
170.090 of this preamble.

Section 178.340. Stability Standards for Pontoon Vessels on Protected 
Waters

    Although no commenter suggested it, we corrected paragraph (c) by 
removing the words ``without consideration of the cross-structure area 
on that side,'' and the definition of ``Area'' in paragraph (b) by 
removing the words ``masts'' and ``but not protruding fixed objects 
such as antennas or running rigging'' to align those provisions with 
the commonly accepted definition of ``area'' in that context. 
Additionally, see the discussion of comments on revisions concerning 
pontoon passenger vessel simplified stability proof tests in Sec.  
178.210 of this preamble.

Section 179.15. Incorporation by Reference

    See the discussion of changes in Sec.  170.015 of this preamble.

Section 179.212. Watertight Bulkheads for Subdivision and Damage 
Stability

    We received one comment on proposed changes to this section. The 
commenter objected to limiting the use of the simplified subdivision 
requirements of part 179 to vessels that use the simplified intact 
stability requirements of part 178, and vice versa. The commenter 
maintained that the two simplified rules are not related and the 
simplified subdivision provides a level of transverse subdivision that 
is equal or greater than that permitted by the Type II subdivision 
calculations required in 46 CFR 171.070.
    The proposed clarification of the linkage between simplified 
subdivision and the simplified stability proof test did not constitute 
the introduction of a new requirement, and that linkage cannot be 
removed without further study. This final rule contains revisions to 
this section in a further effort to improve its organization and 
readability. For more information, see the discussion of changes in 
Sec.  170.165 of this preamble.
    We revised this section to preserve the equivalence of Subchapter T 
to SOLAS Chapters II-1, II-2, and III for certain small passenger 
vessels operating on international voyages 20 miles or less from the 
nearest land. No other substantive changes have been made to the 
provisions of this section as proposed in the NPRM. For a discussion of 
minor changes to the incorporation by reference, see Sec.  170.015 of 
this preamble.

Section 179.230. Damage Stability Requirements

    This section has been removed because its requirements have been 
incorporated into revised Sec.  179.212.

Section 185.304. Navigation Underway

    See the discussion of comments on regulations concerning navigation 
underway in Sec.  122.304 of this preamble.

Section 185.315. Verification of Vessel Compliance With Applicable 
Stability Requirements

    See the discussion of comments on verification of compliance with 
stability information in Sec.  122.315 of this preamble.

Section 185.602. Hull Markings

    See the discussion of comments on requirements for vessels 
demonstrating compliance with Subchapter S to have draft marks in Sec.  
122.602 of this preamble.

General Comments

    Some commenters agreed with the Society of Naval Architects and 
Marine Engineers (SNAME) Ad Hoc Panel No. 15's recommendations for a 
risk-based approach, and objected that these recommendations had not 
been incorporated into the proposed rule. One commenter stated that 
SNAME is the organization most qualified to assist with the technical 
aspects of this rulemaking. Another asserted that using SNAME's 
recommendations would constitute an unspecified conflict of interest.
    The Coast Guard is grateful for the significant time and effort 
that members of SNAME's Ad Hoc Panel No. 15 expended. Its 
recommendations, together with other comments received from the public, 
have been considered in the development of both the proposed rule and 
this final rule. The Coast Guard is unaware of any conflict of interest 
involved in doing so, particularly in view of the fact that SNAME's 
activities and recommendations in this rulemaking have been completely 
disclosed and subject to public comment.
    One commenter pointed out that angle of heel is measured from the 
upright to the vessel's centerline, not from the centerline to the 
upright. We agree, and have corrected the definition in the List of 
Terms.
    Forty-three commenters offered suggestions on how the rule should 
be configured or how the rulemaking should proceed. There were 24 
commenters who concurred that the AAWPP should be updated by a final 
rule as soon as possible, while all other elements of the NPRM should 
be deferred to a supplemental NPRM. Seven commenters requested a risk-
based decision making process be used as a general approach. Four 
commenters felt that no rulemaking was required at all because they 
believed casualty history was not related to passenger weight. Three 
commenters objected to parts of the proposed rule that might require 
new stability tests because, in the commenters' views, the provisions 
were overly conservative and did not properly account for the safety 
margins included in existing stability regulations. For answers to 
these comments, see discussion of the proposed increase in the AAWPP, 
the annual stability information verification, and the ten year 
stability verification in Sec. Sec.  71.25-50 and 170.090 of this 
preamble.
    Two commenters acknowledged the need to examine pontoon vessels 
more closely. They emphasized, however, that pre-sailing stability 
checks should consist of no more than ensuring the passenger count 
doesn't exceed limits, checking the draft and, where appropriate, the 
number of passengers on an upper deck. We agree that checking the 
passenger count and draft marks are acceptable methods of verifying 
stability compliance in many situations. As discussed in Sec. Sec.  
122.315 and 185.315 of this preamble, though, other means may be more 
appropriate. Regardless of the means used, the master of a vessel must 
take into account the total weight of passengers, crew and variable 
loads.
    One commenter recommended that the proposed rule take into account 
the characteristics and safety record of various types of vessels, such 
as pontoon vessels, amphibious vehicles (e.g., DUKWs), and small ferry 
boats. Because the safety of amphibious vehicles and small ferries 
generally has been addressed through added guidance to existing 
regulations, the final rule does not specifically address each of those 
types of vessels.

[[Page 78077]]

    Another commenter stated the ``one size fits all'' approach of the 
proposed rule is flawed and arbitrary because it attempts to apply 
standards across the board from small pontoon boats to large passenger 
ferries, and to do so retroactively when there is no data to support 
the imposition of such standards on large vessels. The Coast Guard 
disagrees. The AAWPP for all passenger vessels must be consistent with 
the actual average American weight to protect the public, as the vast 
majority of commenters agreed.
    Another commenter stated the proposed rule was complicated by the 
addition of too many ``housekeeping'' items, re-definitions, updates 
and corrections. We disagree that these changes complicate or otherwise 
negatively affect other provisions of the final rule. Other changes are 
necessary to fulfill obligations under the SOLAS and International Load 
Line conventions.
    One commenter complained the proposed rule would unfairly burden 
the operator with the responsibility to retrieve stability records for 
the vessel, and that the Coast Guard should maintain stability records 
for all passenger vessels. We disagree that requiring vessel owners and 
operators to maintain stability information for their vessels is, in 
any way, unfair. Owners and operators of other types of vehicles 
engaged in the business of public transportation--such as commercial 
aircraft and buses--have long been required to maintain their vehicles 
in a safe condition together with related documentation.
    One commenter supported the Coast Guard's efforts to thoroughly 
review stability regulations. The commenter also approved of 
harmonizing United States regulations with international standards, and 
minimizing discrepancies and loopholes that can develop when a piece-
meal approach is taken to regulatory development. This commenter 
believed regulatory changes should address risks inherent in smaller 
passenger vessel designs, namely lower freeboards, higher wind area/
draft ratios, and smaller righting moment values. We generally agree 
for reasons discussed in previous sections of this preamble under 
Sec. Sec.  170.170, 171.050, 171.052, 178.210, and 178.310.
    Two commenters inquired about whether the Coast Guard intends to 
issue regulations in the future concerning seat size and spacing, 
window and aisle width, life jackets and life rafts. We have not 
determined what, if any, additional regulations are necessary in those 
areas.
    One commenter suggested the Coast Guard require certification of 
all passenger vessels in the United States. The Coast Guard regulates 
only those vessels for which it has statutory authority.
    Additionally, after further consideration, we removed unnecessary 
commentary from several terms listed in section II of this preamble. We 
also removed ``length between perpendiculars'' and ``waterplane'' 
because these terms are not used, and corrected and clarified the 
following terms: ``heeling moment''; ``intact stability''; ``master''; 
``passenger heel''; ``pontoon vessel''; ``protected waters''; and 
``wind heel''.

VI. Incorporation by Reference

    The Director of the Federal Register has approved the material in 
Sec. Sec.  170.015, 171.012, 172.020, 174.007 and 179.15 for 
incorporation by reference under 5 U.S.C. 552 and 1 CFR part 51. Copies 
of the material are available from the sources listed in those 
sections.

VII. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and 
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses 
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) 
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review. The Office of 
Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order.
    A combined Regulatory Analysis and Final Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis report (``regulatory analysis'') is available in the docket as 
indicated under ADDRESSES. In this regulatory analysis, we evaluated 
public comments on the regulatory analysis supporting the NPRM and 
revised the estimates of impacts for this final rule. A summary of the 
regulatory analysis follows:
    Since the publication of the NPRM in 2008, public comments led us 
to reconsider the cost impacts of the rule. We received several 
comments that the unit costs for stability tests were too low. We have 
amended the cost estimates of the rulemaking to include the higher unit 
costs for stability tests based on data and information provided by 
public comments. We have also amended the cost estimates for lost 
revenues from passengers to include revenue loss from concessions on 
board vessels based on information provided by public comments. In 
addition, we have updated the number of passenger trips per year for 
small passenger vessels. These changes are summarized below.
Stability Test Costs
    We received 31 comments on the cost of stability tests. Commenters 
stated the Coast Guard's estimates of these tests were low. The 
comments also suggested that the costs of stability tests vary and 
depend upon many factors unique to vessel type and size. In response to 
these comments, we updated these costs by including a range of cost 
estimates for stability tests. We revised the final regulatory analysis 
to include low and high cost estimates. The low cost estimates per 
affected vessel are $200 for a simplified stability test, $2,500 for a 
lightweight survey, and $5,000 for an inclining test. The high cost 
estimates per affected vessel are about $2,000 for a simplified 
stability test, $7,500 for a lightweight survey, and $15,000 for an 
inclining test.
Revenue Loss Due to Concessions
    We received three comments that our revenue estimates did not 
include concessions of the vessel. We received some estimates that 
concessions may represent twenty percent of passenger revenue for 
certain vessel operations. We have adjusted our costs to include 
concessions-related revenue loss for vessels in the excursion, ferry, 
general, harbor, and river cruise categories. Our original estimates 
for many vessel categories, such as gaming and party boats, included 
the estimate of all revenues--not just ticket revenue. We did not 
adjust revenue loss related to these estimates.
Revenue Loss Due to Reduced Passenger Capacity
    We received 26 comments relating to the amount of lost revenue due 
to the reduction in passenger capacity. Several commenters told us that 
a percent reduction in passenger capacity would result in an equivalent 
percent reduction in revenues (i.e., a reduction in vessel passenger 
capacity of 15 percent would result in a total revenue loss of 15 
percent). In order for this condition to be true, all vessel trips 
would have to currently be operating in a fully loaded (full passenger 
capacity) condition on every trip. We did not find any industry data to 
support that all passenger vessel trips operate on a fully loaded 
basis. Also, some commenters provided revenue loss if one passenger per 
trip is lost based on the assumption that all trips are fully loaded. 
We do not believe that this is a reasonable assumption and the 
assumption is not supported by average passenger loading

[[Page 78078]]

data. According to data from the BMT Group report presented in the 
regulatory analysis (available in the docket), small passenger vessels 
have an average passenger load of between 50 to 60 percent. Coast Guard 
recognizes that some portion of vessel trips would indeed face full or 
near full loads under some conditions and would therefore incur a 
reduction in the number of passengers carried with a corresponding 
reduction in revenue for some trips. Several commenters noted that full 
or near full loads occur during peak season, usually the summer months.
    In the regulatory analysis supporting the NPRM, we estimated the 
fraction of vessel trips per year that would have full or near full 
loads and experience a reduction in passengers to be approximately 3 to 
6 percent. We based these estimates on the average passengers per trip 
and vessel capacity data from the BMT Group report and the assumption 
that the number of passengers per trip is normally distributed. Several 
commenters stated that the normal distribution assumption 
underestimates the number of trips subject to passenger loss since 
demand can be concentrated in peak (seasonal) months. However, none of 
the commenters provided specific data or estimates of the fraction of 
annual trips that operate at or near capacity. We understand that 
vessel operations vary considerably by vessel service, demand, season, 
and location leading to considerable uncertainty in the occurrence of 
fully loaded vessels and passengers lost. Due to this variation in 
operations and the lack of specific data, we acknowledge that some 
vessels may experience greater than estimated loss of passengers and 
revenues under some conditions, but we are unable to provide a revised 
estimate based on the lack of available data. We do provide additional 
discussion of the uncertainty related to revenue loss in the regulatory 
analysis available in the docket. In addition, we also note that the 
subject passenger and revenue loss is related to unsafe operations. 
This rule mitigates these unsafe operations through the restoration of 
the original regulatory margin of safety for vessel stability (see 
``Risk basis of rulemaking'' section below for additional discussion).
Number of Passengers
    Several commenters noted that the estimate for the number of 
passengers per year is underestimated. Coast Guard concurs that the 
total number of 655,000 passengers per year cited in the Benefits 
section of the regulatory analysis supporting the NPRM is in error. The 
figure of 655,000 is actually an estimate of the number of available 
passenger vessel seats and was incorrectly characterized as the number 
of passenger trips per year for small passenger vessels. Supported by 
public comments, we revised the regulatory analysis to reflect an 
estimate of the total number of passenger trips per year which is 
considerably higher at 125 million passengers per year.
Risk Basis of Rulemaking
    We received nine comments on the NPRM regarding the justification 
for the rule in terms of safety. Several commenters noted the findings 
in a 2005 Coast Guard study (available on the docket) that no 
casualties have been directly attributable to increased passenger 
weight and conclude from this that there is no identifiable safety risk 
or that no lives have been put at risk as a result of the increased 
passenger weight. We disagree with the premise that there is no risk 
related to increased passenger weight. The lack of casualties directly 
attributable to increased passenger weight does not equate to no risk. 
Vessel casualties are often complicated events with multiple factors 
contributing to the accident. It is not surprising that passenger 
weight cannot be identified as the sole causal factor for an incident 
and has, in fact, been identified as a potential contributory factor 
for two recent casualties with multiple loss of life: The Lady D (2004) 
and the Ethan Allen (2005).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See the USCG Lady D Marine Board report, conclusions 3 and 
8, and recommendation 3 (http://marinecasualty.com/documents/ladyd.pdf). See the NTSB Report on the Ethan Allen capsizing, pages 
40, 44, 48 [Finding 11], and 49 [Probable Cause] (http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2006/MAR0603.pdf). Note that the Ethan Allen 
was not a Coast Guard inspected vessel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, as described in the NPRM, the primary goal of the rule is 
to restore the margin of safety that had been built into vessel 
stability engineering calculations and has been eroded by increased 
passenger weight, increasing the risk of stability problems. When 
originally developed, stability standards included a margin of safety 
to allow for the safe operation of vessels even under adverse operating 
conditions. The average weight of passengers was a component of the 
stability calculations and resulting margin of safety. As passenger 
weight increases, the margin of safety decreases across all measures of 
stability, including vertical center of gravity, freeboard and 
passenger healing moment.
Summary of Rule Impacts: Affected Population, Costs and Benefits
    Based on Coast Guard data, we estimate this rule will affect 6,073 
inspected passenger vessels. For the purpose of the regulatory 
analysis, we assumed that all vessels will be required to have updated 
stability letters. Of these vessels, 1,140, or 19% of all vessels, 
would require both a new stability test and a reduction in maximum 
passenger load to obtain an updated stability letter. Additionally, 
3,542 vessels, or 58% of all vessels, would require compliance through 
either a new stability test and/or stability calculations, but would 
not need to reduce maximum passenger load. Finally, 1,391 vessels, or 
23% of all vessels, would require no additional stability test and/or 
stability calculations and no reduction in passenger load in order to 
receive an updated stability letter.
    As previously discussed, we revised the total costs of this 
rulemaking after consideration of the comments on the NPRM. These 
changes resulted in an increase in costs. We estimate the undiscounted 
first-year cost of the rule to range from $10 million to $27.6 million 
(average of $18.8 million). We estimate the total present value 10-year 
cost of this rule to range from $24.6 to $44.2 million at a 7% discount 
rate. The following table summarizes regulatory costs for the NPRM and 
the final rule.

                             Table 1--Summary of Cost Estimates: NPRM and Final Rule
                                                  [$ Million] *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Cost                  NPRM                                  Final rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Year Costs                      $10   Range of $10-$27.6 (Average of $18.8).
 (Undiscounted).
Annual Recurring Costs                2.5   Range of $2.5-$3 (Average of $2.75).
 (Undiscounted).
10-Year Present Value Costs          24.6   Range of $24.6-$44.2 (Average of $34.4).
 (7% discount rate).

[[Page 78079]]

 
Annualized Costs (10 year; 7%         3.5   Range of $3.5-$6.3 (Average of $4.9).
 discount rate).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* See the ``Regulatory Analysis and Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis'' for additional information on costs,
  including cost ranges, uncertainties, and estimates at different discount rates.

    The primary benefit of the rule is the increased safety and reduced 
risk of casualties through the restoration of the margin of safety for 
vessel stability. An increase in passenger and crew weight has an 
adverse effect on the stability of passenger vessels due to several 
factors, including increased vertical center of gravity, reduced 
freeboard and increased passenger healing moment. As previously 
discussed, in 2004 the CDC found that the average mean body weight for 
men and women had increased by 24 pounds since the 1960s. A subsequent 
2008 CDC report confirms that the average weight continues to rise. 
Passenger vessel owners and operators may not be aware of the increased 
total passenger weight being carried on their vessels and the resulting 
erosion of the margin of safety that can occur with increased passenger 
weight.
    Without the restoration of the margin of safety from the revised 
weight standard, an increased casualty risk remains under certain 
conditions. The public places a value on reducing even small risks of 
transportation accidents, particularly those involving fatalities and 
injuries. For example, DHS agencies (including Coast Guard) have used a 
value per statistical life (VSL) of $6.3 as an average measure of the 
public's willingness to pay to reduce the risk of a fatality by 1 in a 
million, $0.63 to reduce risk by 1 in 10 million, and $.063 to reduce 
risk by 1 in 100 million.\12\ As passenger vessels carry millions of 
passengers each year, very small reductions in risk can result in a 
fairly large aggregate willingness to pay for that risk reduction. In 
response to comments received, we revised our estimate of the number of 
passengers carried on small passenger vessels each year to 
approximately 125 million passenger trips per year. Therefore, as an 
example based on 125 million trips per year, passengers would be 
willing to pay $7.875 million to reduce the risk of a fatality by 1 in 
100 million (125 million x $0.063). Thus, the risk of fatalities from 
passenger vessels and the amount of risk reduced by the rule need to be 
very small (about 1 in 100 million risk reduction) for the rule to 
reach a breakeven point where costs equal benefits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ ``Valuing Mortality Risk Reductions in Homeland Security 
Regulatory Analyses'', DHS/CBP, June 2008, (see http://www.regulations.gov, docket entry  USCG-2005-21869-003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this rule will have a significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities'' 
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are 
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, 
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    A Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) discussing the 
impact of this rule on small entities is available in the docket where 
indicated under ADDRESSES.
    As previously discussed, we revised our regulatory analysis of the 
rule as a result of public comments on stability test costs, the 
uncertainties of revenue loss, and the impacts on certain operators as 
a result of revenue loss. We estimate that approximately 5,760 entities 
are regulated by this rule and 17.3 percent (approximately 1,000 
entities) are small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. 
Given these revisions, we determined that 20 percent or more of the 
small entities affected by this rule will incur an annual cost impact 
on revenue of more than 1 percent.
    Therefore, we have determined that this rule will have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

C. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small 
entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate 
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. In accordance 
with section 212 of the Act, the Coast Guard prepared a Small Entity 
Compliance Guide, which will be available on a Coast Guard web site, to 
assist small entities comply with this final rule.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal 
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal 
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory 
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory 
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and 
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to 
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR 
(1-888-734-3247). 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.

D. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for a collection of information under the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The title and description 
of the information collections, a description of those who must collect 
the information, and an estimate of the total annual burden follow. The 
estimate covers the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing 
sources of data, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and 
completing and reviewing the collection.
    This rule will call for revisions of two collections of information 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). 46 CFR 
170.120 and 178.210 require the collection of information. The updated 
average weight per person will require revisions of the existing OMB-
approved collections of information.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0064.
    Title: Plan Approval and Records for Subdivision and Stability 
Regulations--Title 46 CFR Subchapter S.
    Summary of the Collection of Information: This collection of 
information requires owners, operators, or masters of certain inspected 
vessels to obtain and/or post various documents as part of the Coast 
Guard commercial vessel safety program. The collection also requires 
the reporting of certain information.
    Need for Information: The Coast Guard needs this information to 
determine whether an entity meets the statutory requirements.

[[Page 78080]]

    Proposed Use of Information: The Coast Guard will use this 
information to determine whether an entity meets the statutory 
requirements.
    Description of the Respondents: Owners, operators, and/or masters 
of passenger vessels.
    Burden of Response: The burden of this collection of information is 
the provision of documentation of stability analysis and posting of a 
stability letter. During this period, we estimate the total number of 
respondents is 1,388.
    Estimate of Total Annual Burden: The existing OMB-approved total 
annual burden is 4,539 hours. The revision includes a one-time annual 
burden of approximately 5,791 hours.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0057.
    Title: Small Passenger Vessels--Title 46 Subchapters K and T.
    Summary of the Collection Of Information: This collection of 
information requires information necessary for the proper 
administration and enforcement of the program on safety of commercial 
vessels as it affects small passenger vessels.
    Need for Information: The Coast Guard needs this information to 
determine whether an entity meets the statutory requirements.
    Proposed Use of Information: The Coast Guard will use this 
information to determine whether an entity meets the statutory 
requirements.
    Description of Respondents: Owners, operators, and/or masters of 
small passenger vessels.
    Burden of Response: The burden of this rule for this collection of 
information is the posting of a stability letter, as required by 46 CFR 
115.306 (subchapter K) or 46 CFR 176.306 (subchapter T). Of the 5,487 
respondents, there are 3,669 vessels inspected under 46 CFR subchapters 
K or T that will need to post a new stability letter.
    Estimate of Total Annual Burden: The existing OMB-approved annual 
burden, related to the posting of a stability letter, is 11 hours. The 
revision includes a one-time increase in the annual burden of 
approximately 305 hours to post the new stability letter.
    As required by 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), we submitted a copy of this rule 
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for its review of the 
collection of information. OMB has not yet completed its review of this 
collection, and the reporting and recordkeeping requirements of this 
rule will not be enforced until this collection is approved by OMB. We 
will publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing the effective 
date of those requirements after OMB approves the collection.
    You are not required to respond to a collection of information 
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

E. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local 
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial 
direct cost of compliance on them.
    Title 46 U.S.C. 3301 subjects passenger vessels to Coast Guard 
inspection, and 46 U.S.C. 3306 provides the Coast Guard with clear 
authority to establish safety regulations for such vessels. This rule 
revises and updates stability standards for passenger vessels in 46 CFR 
subchapters H, K and T, which are issued pursuant to authority in 46 
U.S.C chapter 33.
    The U.S. Supreme Court has long recognized the field preemptive 
impact of the Federal regulatory regime for inspected vessels. See, 
e.g., Kelly v. Washington ex rel Foss, 302 U.S. 1 (1937) and the 
consolidated cases of United States v. Locke and Intertanko v. Locke, 
529 U.S. 89, 113-116 (2000). Therefore the Coast Guard's view is that 
regulations issued under the authority of 46 U.S.C. 3306 in the areas 
of design, construction, alteration, repair, operation, 
superstructures, hulls, fittings, equipment, appliances, propulsion 
machinery, auxiliary machinery, boilers, unfired pressure vessels, 
piping, electric installations, accommodations for passengers and crew, 
sailing school instructors, sailing school students, lifesaving 
equipment and its use, firefighting equipment, its use and 
precautionary measures to guard against fire, inspections and tests 
related to these areas and the use of vessel stores and other supplies 
of a dangerous nature have preemptive effect over state regulation in 
these fields, regardless of whether the Coast Guard has issued 
regulations on the subject or not, and regardless of the existence of 
conflict between the state and Coast Guard regulation.
    While it is well settled that States may not regulate in categories 
in which Congress intended the Coast Guard to be the sole source of a 
vessel's obligations, as these categories are within a field foreclosed 
from regulation by the States (see U.S. v. Locke, above), the Coast 
Guard recognizes the key role state and local governments may have in 
making regulatory determinations. Additionally, Sections 4 and 6 of 
Executive Order 13132 require that for any rules with preemptive 
effect, the Coast Guard shall provide elected officials of affected 
state and local governments and their representative national 
organizations the notice and opportunity for appropriate participation 
in any rulemaking proceedings, and to consult with such officials early 
in the rulemaking process. The Coast Guard received no comments from 
state or local governments, or their representative national 
organizations, in response to the NPRM.

F. 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 (adjusted for 
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in 
such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in 
this preamble.

G. Taking of Private Property

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

H. Civil Justice Reform

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

I. Protection of Children

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

J. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, 
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more 
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and 
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. As described in the 
NPRM, we made a preliminary determination that this rule does not have 
tribal implications under

[[Page 78081]]

Executive Order 13175. We received neither any comments on this 
subject, nor any other information contradicting that determination.

K. Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant 
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to 
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use 
of energy. 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.

L. Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards 
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, 
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why 
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or 
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management 
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus 
standards bodies.
    This rule uses the following voluntary consensus standards: 
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and Military 
Specification, Naval Publications and Forms Center, Code 1052. The 
sections that reference these standards and the locations where these 
standards are available are listed in Sec. Sec.  170.015, 170.270, 
174.007 and 174.100.

M. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security 
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which 
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded 
that this action is one of a category of actions which do not 
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human 
environment. This rule is categorically excluded under section 2.B.2, 
figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(d) of the Instruction, and under section 
6(a) of the ``Appendix to National Environmental Policy Act: Coast 
Guard Procedures for Categorical Exclusions, Notice of Final Agency 
Policy'' (67 FR 48244, July 23, 2002).'' This rule amends regulations 
concerning inspection and documentation of vessels, and particularly 
those governing the stability of passenger vessels and the maximum 
number of people that may safely be permitted on board. An 
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion 
determination are available in the docket where indicated under 
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects

46 CFR Parts 71, 114, 175, 185

    Marine safety, Passenger vessels, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

46 CFR Parts 115 and 176

    Fire prevention, Marine safety, Passenger vessels, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

46 CFR Part 122

    Marine safety, Passenger vessels, Penalties, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

46 CFR Parts 170 and 174

    Marine safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels, 
Incorporation by reference.

46 CFR Parts 171 and 179

    Marine safety, Passenger vessels, Incorporation by reference.

46 CFR Part 172

    Cargo vessels, Hazardous materials transportation Marine safety, 
Incorporation by reference.

46 CFR Part 178

    Marine safety, Passenger vessels.

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 46 
CFR parts 71, 114, 115, 122, 170, 171, 172, 174, 175, 176, 178, 179, 
and 185 as follows:

PART 71--INSPECTION AND CERTIFICATION

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(j); 46 U.S.C. 2113, 3205, 3306, 3307; 
E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 351; Department of 
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

Sec.  71.50-1  [Amended]

0
2. In Sec.  71.50-1, in the definition for ``Drydock examination'', 
after the words ``and appurtenances'', add the words ``, including 
verification of the accuracy of draft marks if not already verified at 
a previous drydock examination.''
0
3. Revise the heading to subpart 71.75 to read as follows:

Subpart 71.75--Certificates Under the International Convention for 
Safety of Life at Sea, 1974

Sec.  71.75-1  [Amended]

0
4. In Sec.  71.75-1(a), after the word ``on'', add the words ``or 
certificated for''.

Sec.  71.75-5  [Amended]

0
5. In Sec.  71.75-5--
0
a. In paragraph (a), after the word ``on'', add the words ``or 
certificated for'', and immediately before the word ``Passenger'', add 
the word ``SOLAS'';
0
b. In paragraph (b), after the words ``vessels on'', add the words ``or 
certificated for''; and after the words ``international voyage'', add 
the words ``in addition to the applicable requirements of SOLAS.''

PART 114--GENERAL PROVISIONS

0
6. Revise the authority citation for part 114 to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 2103, 3306, 3703; Pub. L. 103-206, 107 
Stat. 2439; 49 U.S.C. App. 1804; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.1; Sec.  114.900 also issued under 44 U.S.C. 
3507.

0
7. In Sec.  114.400(b)--
0
a. Remove ``; or'' from the end of paragraph (2) of the definition of 
``Length'' and add a period in its place;
0
b. Remove paragraph (3) from the definition of ``Length''; and
0
c. Add, in alphabetical order, a definition for ``Variable load'' to 
read as follows:

Sec.  114.400  Definition of terms used in this subchapter.

* * * * *
    Variable load means the weight of all items brought on board a 
vessel for which explicit account is not made in approved stability 
calculations, including but not limited to, personal effects, carry-on 
items, luggage, and equipment of any kind.
* * * * *

PART 115--INSPECTION AND CERTIFICATION

0
8. Revise the authority citation for part 115 to read as follows:

[[Page 78082]]

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1321(j); 46 U.S.C. 2103, 3205, 3306, 3307; 
49 U.S.C. App. 1804; E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR, 1971-1975 
Comp., p. 277; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 
0170.1.

0
9. In Sec.  115.110, revise paragraphs (d)(2) and (d)(3), and add new 
paragraph (d)(4) to read as follows:

Sec.  115.110  Routes permitted.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) The performance capabilities of the vessel based on design, 
scantlings, stability, subdivision, propulsion, speed, operating modes, 
maneuverability, and other characteristics;
    (3) The suitability of the vessel for night-time operations; and
    (4) The suitability of the vessel for use in all environmental 
conditions.

0
10. Revise Sec.  115.112 to read as follows:

Sec.  115.112  Total persons permitted.

    The cognizant Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) 
determines the total number of persons permitted to be carried on a 
vessel. In determining the total number of persons, the OCMI may 
consider the total weight of passengers, crew, and variable loads; 
stability restrictions and subdivision requirements of the vessel; the 
vessel's route, general arrangement, means of escape, and lifesaving 
equipment; minimum manning requirements; and the maximum number of 
passengers permitted in accordance with Sec.  115.113 of this subpart.

0
11. In Sec.  115.610(a), add a sentence at the end of the paragraph to 
read as follows:

Sec.  115.610  Scope of drydock and internal structural examinations.

    (a) * * * The accuracy of draft or loading marks, if required by 
Sec.  122.602 of this subpart, must be verified if not already verified 
at construction or a previous drydock examination.
* * * * *

Sec.  115.900  [Amended]

0
12. In Sec.  115.900(a), after the word ``which'', add the words ``is 
certificated for or''; remove the word ``an''; and remove the word 
``voyage'' and add, in its place, the word ``voyages''.

Sec.  115.910  [Amended]

0
13. In Sec.  115.910(a), in the second sentence, remove the word 
``issues'' and add, in its place, the words ``authorizes the cognizant 
Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) to issue''; and in the last 
sentence, after the word ``will'', add the words ``authorize the 
cognizant OCMI to''.

Sec.  115.920  [Amended]

0
14. In Sec.  115.920(d), in the first sentence, after the word 
``will'', add the words ``authorize the cognizant OCMI to'', and in the 
second sentence, after the word ``Commandant'', remove the word 
``shall'' and add the words ``will authorize the cognizant OCMI to''.

Sec.  115.930  [Amended]

0
15. In Sec.  115.930, in the last sentence, remove the words 
``Commandant will indicate the'' and after the word ``equivalent'', add 
the words ``must be indicated''.

PART 122--OPERATIONS

0
16. The authority citation for part 122 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 2103, 3306, 6101; E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 
3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
17. In Sec.  122.304, revise paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows:

Sec.  122.304  Navigation underway.

    (a) * * *
    (3) Prevailing and forecasted visibility and environmental 
conditions, including wind and waves;
* * * * *

0
18. In Sec.  122.315, designate the existing paragraph as paragraph 
(a), and add paragraph (b) to read as follows:

Sec.  122.315  Verification of vessel compliance with applicable 
stability requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) In order to fulfill the requirements of paragraph (a) of this 
section and avoid overloading the vessel, the master must take into 
account the total weight of passengers, crew, and variable loads.

Sec.  122.602  [Amended]

0
19. In Sec.  122.602--
0
a. In paragraph (c), remove the words ``that complies with the 
stability requirements of Sec. Sec.  170.170, 170.173, 171.050, 
171.055, and 171.057 of this chapter or with Sec.  178.310 of this 
chapter'';
0
b. Remove paragraph (b); and
0
c. Redesignate paragraphs (c) through (g) as paragraphs (b) through 
(f).

PART 170--STABILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL INSPECTED VESSELS

0
20. The authority citation for part 170 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  43 U.S.C. 1333; 46 U.S.C. 2103, 3306, 3703; E.O. 
12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277; Department of 
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
21. Revise Sec.  170.001(a) to read as follows:

Sec.  170.001  Applicability.

    (a) This subchapter applies to each vessel that is--
    (1) Contracted for on or after March 11, 1996, except where 
specifically stated otherwise; and
    (2) Either--
    (i) Inspected under another subchapter of this chapter, or is a 
foreign vessel that must comply with the requirements in subchapter O 
of this chapter; or
    (ii) Required by either subchapter C or subchapter E of this 
chapter to meet applicable requirements contained in this subchapter.
* * * * *

0
22. Revise Sec.  170.015 to read as follows:

Sec.  170.015  Incorporation by reference.

    (a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this part 
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 this section, the Coast Guard must publish a 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. It is also available for inspection at 
the Coast Guard, Office of Design and Engineering Standards (CG-521), 
2100 2nd St., SW., Stop 7126, Washington, DC 20593-7126, and is 
available from the sources listed below.
    (b) American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), 100 Barr 
Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.
    (1) ASTM F 1196-00, Standard Specification for Sliding Watertight 
Door Assemblies, 2008, incorporation by reference (IBR) approved for 
Sec.  170.270.
    (2) ASTM F 1197-00, Standard Specification for Sliding Watertight 
Door Control Systems, 2007, IBR approved for Sec.  170.270.
    (c) Naval Publications and Forms Center, Code 1052, 5801 Tabor 
Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19120.
    (1) MIL-P-21929B, Military Specification, Plastic Material, 
Cellular

[[Page 78083]]

Polyurethane, Foam-in-Place, Rigid (2 Pounds per Cubic Foot), 15 
January 1991, IBR approved for Sec.  170.245.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (d) International Maritime Organization (IMO), Publications 
Section, 4 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7SR, United Kingdom, +44 (0)20 
7735 7611, http://www.imo.org/.
    (1) Resolution MSC.216(82), Adoption of Amendments to the 
International Convention for the Safety of Life At Sea, 1974, As 
Amended (IMO Res. MSC.216(82), Adopted on 8 December 2006, IBR approved 
for Sec. Sec.  170.140 and 170.248.
    (2) Resolution MSC 267(85), Adoption of the International Code on 
Intact Stability, 2008 (2008 IS Code), Adopted on 4 December 2008, IBR 
approved for Sec.  170.165.

0
23. In Sec.  170.055--
0
a. Redesignate paragraphs (e) through (w) as paragraphs (g) through 
(y), respectively, and redesignate paragraphs (a) through (d) as 
paragraphs (b) through (e), respectively, and;
0
b. Add new paragraphs (a) and (f); and
0
c. Revise redesignated paragraph (k) to read as follows:

Sec.  170.055  Definitions concerning a vessel.

    (a) Assumed average weight per person means the weight calculated 
in accordance with Sec.  170.090 of this part.
* * * * *
    (f) Constructed means the date--
    (1) The vessel's keel was laid; or
    (2) Construction identifiable with the vessel began and assembly of 
that vessel commenced comprising of 50 metric tons or at least 1 
percent of the estimated mass of all structural material, whichever is 
less.
* * * * *
    (k) Lightweight means the displacement of a vessel with fixed 
ballast and with machinery liquids at operating levels but without any 
cargo, stores, consumable liquids, water ballast, or persons and their 
effects.
* * * * *

Sec.  170.070  [Amended]

0
24. In Sec.  170.070(b) introductory text, after the word ``OCMI'', add 
the words ``, or regulations by which the vessel is inspected require 
their application:''.

Sec.  170.075  [Amended]

0
25. In Sec.  170.075(a), remove the words ``or four copies for plan 
review being conducted by the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS)''.

Sec.  170.080  [Amended]

0
26. In Sec.  170.080, remove the words ``or four copies for plan review 
being conducted by the ABS.''.

Sec.  170.085  [Amended]

0
27. In Sec.  170.085, remove the words ``or the ABS''.
0
28. In Sec.  170.090, revise paragraph (a), and add paragraphs (c), 
(d), (e), (f), and (g) to read as follows:

Sec.  170.090  Calculations.

    (a) All calculations required by this subchapter must be submitted 
with the plans required by Sec.  170.075 of this subpart. Calculations 
must account for the weight of all loads carried aboard the vessel.
* * * * *
    (c) The assumed weight per person for calculations showing 
compliance with the regulations of this subchapter must be 
representative of the passengers and crew aboard the vessel while 
engaged in the service intended. Unless the Officer in Charge, Marine 
Inspection (OCMI) permits or requires the use of other values in 
writing, the assumed weight per person of passengers and crew must not 
be less than that the Assumed Average Weight per Person (AAWPP) 
calculated in accordance with paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section.
    (d)(1) The AAWPP is 185 lb from December 1, 2011 until the AAWPP is 
first updated pursuant to the provisions of this section. As of the 
effective date of the first AAWPP update after December 1, 2011, this 
paragraph (d)(1) will be superseded and cease to be effective.
    (2) The formula in paragraph (e) of this section will be used to 
determine an update to the AAWPP. It requires the use of data in the 
most recent report released by the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention (CDC) through the National Center for Health Statistics 
(NCHS), or any successors to those centers. This report can be found on 
the CDC's Web site.
    (3) Each time the CDC releases a report containing mean weights of 
United States adult males and females, the Coast Guard will apply the 
formula in paragraph (e) of this section to that data. The resulting 
value will become the new AAWPP only if the sum equals or exceeds 10 
pounds more than the AAWPP then in effect. The Coast Guard will notify 
the public of the new AAWPP in the Federal Register and other 
appropriate media.
    (4) Updates to the AAWPP used in calculations showing compliance 
with this subchapter will be promulgated as interpretive rules and 
become effective in accordance with the provisions of this section 
without further rulemaking procedures.
    (5) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section, the Coast 
Guard may choose, in its discretion, to conduct further rulemaking 
procedures at any time to amend this subchapter, including updates of 
the AAWPP.
    (6) Updates to the AAWPP used in calculations showing compliance 
with this subchapter will be published in a separate Federal Register 
notice and other appropriate media, except when the Coast Guard 
conducts further rulemaking procedures under paragraph (d)(5) of this 
section.
    (7) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section, the Coast 
Guard may choose, in its discretion, to delay or dispense with any 
update of the AAWPP. In the event the Coast Guard elects to dispense 
with or delay an update that would otherwise issue as an interpretive 
rule pursuant to the provisions of this section, the Coast Guard will 
inform the public of the decision and explain the reasons in a Federal 
Register notice.
    (e) To obtain an AAWPP update, add the mean weight of all U.S. 
males aged 20 years and older to the mean weight of all U.S. females 
aged 20 years and older, and divide the sum by 2. To this average of 
the mean weights, add 7.5 pounds of assumed clothing weight, and round 
the resulting sum to the nearest whole number in pounds.
    (f) Updates to the AAWPP will become effective beginning one 
calendar year after publication in the Federal Register of a notice 
described in paragraphs (d)(3) and (d)(6) of this section, except the 
initial AAWPP issued pursuant to paragraph (d)(1) of this section will 
become effective on December 1, 2011. Notwithstanding any other 
provisions of this title, the Coast Guard may implement updates to the 
AAWPP at any time with less than one year of public notice when 
required for public safety reasons.
    (g) The most recent Federal Register notice that publishes the 
AAWPP as determined by this section is also on file at the U.S. Coast 
Guard, Office of Design and Engineering Standards (CG-521), 2100 2nd 
St., SW., Stop 7126, Washington DC 20593-7126, or go to: http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/cg5212.asp.

Sec.  170.093  [Amended]

0
29. In Sec.  170.093, remove the last sentence.

Sec.  170.100  [Amended]

0
30. In Sec.  170.100, remove paragraphs (c) and (d).

[[Page 78084]]

0
31. Add Sec.  170.105(b)(5) to read as follows:

Sec.  170.105  Applicability.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (5) A small passenger vessel inspected under subchapter T of this 
chapter if Sec.  178.210(c) of this chapter is applicable.

Sec.  170.110  [Amended]

0
32. In Sec.  170.110(b), remove the words ``or the ABS''.

Sec.  170.120  [Amended]

0
33. In Sec.  170.120(a), remove the words ``or the ABS''.

Sec.  170.135  [Removed and Reserved]

0
34. Remove and reserve Sec.  170.135.
0
35. Add Sec.  170.140 to subpart D to read as follows:

Sec.  170.140  Operating information for a vessel constructed on or 
after January 1, 2009 and issued a SOLAS safety certificate.

    (a) This section applies to each vessel that is--
    (1) Constructed on or after January 1, 2009; and
    (2) Issued either a SOLAS Passenger Ship Safety Certificate or a 
SOLAS Cargo Ship Safety Construction Certificate.
    (b) In addition to the information required in Sec.  170.110 of 
this part, the stability booklet of each vessel to which this section 
applies must contain the information required by applicable regulations 
of IMO Res. MSC.216(82) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  170.015).
    (c) As used in SOLAS chapter II-1, Administration means the 
Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard.

0
36. Revise the heading of subpart E to read as follows:

Subpart E--Intact Stability Criteria

0
37. In Sec.  170.160, revise paragraphs (a) and (c)(3) and add 
paragraph (d) to read as follows:

Sec.  170.160  Specific applicability.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) through (d) of this 
section, this subpart applies to each vessel.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) A vessel that performs one of the simplified stability proof 
tests described in subpart C of part 178 of this chapter.
    (d) A vessel that complies with Sec.  170.165 of this part need not 
comply with Sec. Sec.  170.170 and 170.173 of this part.

0
38. Add Sec.  170.165 to read as follows:

Sec.  170.165  International Code on Intact Stability.

    (a) Each vessel issued one or more of the certificates listed in 
paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section, must comply with the 
Introduction and Part A of the International Code on Intact Stability, 
2008 (2008 IS Code), unless permitted otherwise (incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  170.015).
    (1) International Load Line Certificate.
    (2) SOLAS Passenger Ship Safety Certificate.
    (3) SOLAS Cargo Ship Safety Construction Certificate.
    (4) High-speed Craft Safety Certificate.
    (b) A vessel not subject to the requirements of paragraph (a) of 
this section is permitted to comply with the applicable criteria 
contained in the 2008 IS Code as an alternative to the requirements of 
Sec. Sec.  170.170 and 170.173 of this part.

0
39. In Sec.  170.170:
0
a. Revise the section heading to read as set forth below;
0
b. In the first sentence of paragraph (d), add the words ``the 
conditions of loading and operation of'' after the words ``application 
to'';
0
c. In the first sentence of paragraph (d), remove the words ``that 
carry cargo below the main deck'' and add, in their place, ``for which 
the righting arm (GZ) at the angle (T), calculated after the vessel is 
permitted to trim free until the trimming moment is zero, is not less 
than the minimum metacentric height (GM) calculated in paragraph (a) of 
this section multiplied by sin(T)''; and
0
d. In the second sentence of paragraph (d), remove the words ``or the 
ABS''.

Sec.  170.170  Weather criteria.

* * * * *

Sec.  170.173  [Amended]

0
40. In Sec.  170.173(a) introductory text, remove the words ``or the 
ABS''.

Sec.  170.175  [Amended]

0
41. In Sec.  170.175:
0
a. In paragraph (b) remove the words ``or ABS''; and
0
b. In paragraphs (c) and (d) remove the words ``or the ABS''.

Sec.  170.180  [Amended]

0
42. In Sec.  170.180 introductory text, remove the words ``or ABS'' in 
both places where it appears.

Sec.  170.185  [Amended]

0
43. In Sec.  170.185(b), remove the words ``or the ABS''.

Sec.  170.190  [Amended]

0
44. In Sec.  170.190, remove the words ``or ABS''.

Sec.  170.235  [Amended]

0
45. In Sec.  170.235(b), remove the words ``or the ABS''.

0
46. In Sec.  170.248, revise paragraph (a) and add paragraph (d) to 
read as follows:

Sec.  170.248  Applicability.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) through (d) of this 
section, this subpart applies to vessels with watertight doors in 
bulkheads that have been made watertight to comply with the flooding or 
damage stability regulations in this subchapter.
* * * * *
    (d) Unless permitted otherwise, each vessel constructed on or after 
January 1, 2009 and issued a SOLAS Passenger Ship Safety Certificate or 
a SOLAS Cargo Ship Safety Construction Certificate must comply with the 
applicable regulations of IMO Res. MSC.216(82) in addition to the 
requirements of this subpart (IMO Res. MSC.216(82) incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  170.015).

PART 171--SPECIAL RULES PERTAINING TO VESSELS CARRYING PASSENGERS

0
47. The authority citation for part 171 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 2103, 3306; E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 
CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277; Department of Homeland Security Delegation 
No. 0170.1.

0
48. In Sec.  171.001, revise paragraph (a), and add paragraphs (c) and 
(d) to read as follows:

Sec.  171.001  Applicability.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, this part 
applies to passenger vessels inspected under subchapter K or H of this 
chapter, or a passenger vessel the stability of which is questioned by 
the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI).
* * * * *
    (c) Specific sections of this part may also apply to a small 
passenger vessel inspected under subchapter T of this chapter. The 
specific sections are listed in subparts B and C of part 178 of this 
chapter and in subpart B of part 179 of this chapter.
    (d) Unless permitted otherwise, a passenger vessel constructed on 
or after January 1, 2009, and issued a SOLAS Passenger Ship Safety 
Certificate must meet the applicable requirements of IMO Res. 
MSC.216(82) (incorporated by

[[Page 78085]]

reference, see Sec.  171.012), instead of the requirements of this 
part. For the purposes of this section, the applicable requirements of 
IMO Res. MSC.216(82) are equivalent to the requirements of this part 
when applied to such vessels.

0
49. Add new Sec.  171.012 to read as follows:

Sec.  171.012  Incorporation by reference.

    (a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this part 
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 this section, the Coast Guard must publish a 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. It is also available for inspection at 
the Coast Guard, Office of Design and Engineering Standards, Naval 
Architecture Division (CG-5212), 2100 2nd St., SW., Stop 7126, 
Washington, DC 20593-7126, and is available from the sources listed 
below.
    (b) International Maritime Organization (IMO), Publications 
Section, 4 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7SR, United Kingdom, +44 (0)20 
7735 7611, http://www.imo.org/.
    (1) Resolution MSC.216(82), Amendments to the International 
Convention for the Safety of Life At Sea, 1974, As Amended (IMO Res. 
MSC.216(82), Adopted on 8 December 2006, incorporation by reference 
(IBR) approved for Sec. Sec.  171.001 and 171.080.
    (2) Resolution MSC 267(85), Adoption of the International Code on 
Intact Stability, 2008 (2008 IS Code), Adopted on 4 December 2008, IBR 
approved for Sec.  171.050.

0
50. Add the heading of subpart B to read as follows:

Subpart B--Intact Stability

Subpart C--[Amended]

0
51. Remove the heading for subpart C and transfer Sec. Sec.  171.045, 
171.050, 171.055, and 171.057 to subpart B.

0
52. Revise Sec.  171.045 to read as follows:

Sec.  171.045  Weight of passengers and crew.

    (a) This section applies to each vessel, regardless of when 
constructed.
    (b) Compliance with the intact stability requirements applicable to 
each vessel, using a total weight of passengers and crew carried, is 
based upon an Assumed Average Weight per Person, which is determined in 
accordance with Sec.  170.090 of this chapter.

0
53. Revise Sec.  171.050 to read as follows:

Sec.  171.050  Passenger heel requirements for a mechanically propelled 
or a non-self propelled vessel.

    (a) Each mechanically propelled or non-self propelled vessel other 
than a pontoon vessel must be shown by design calculations, in each 
condition of loading and operation, to have a metacentric height (GM) 
in feet (meters) of not less than the value given by the following 
equation:

GM = [(W/[Delta])(\2/3\)(b)]/(tan(T))

Where--
[Delta] = displacement of the vessel in long (metric) tons.
W = total weight in long (metric) tons of persons other than 
required crew, including personal effects of those persons expected 
to be carried on the vessel.
T = 14 degrees or the angle of heel at which the deck edge is first 
submerged, whichever is less; and
b = distance in feet (meters) from the centerline of the vessel to 
the geometric center of the passenger deck on one side of the 
centerline.

    (b) The criteria specified in paragraph (a) of this section are 
limited in application to the conditions of loading and operation of 
vessels for which the righting arm (GZ) at the angle (T), calculated 
after the vessel is permitted to trim free until the trimming moment is 
zero, is not less than the minimum metacentric height (GM) calculated 
in paragraph (a) of this section multiplied by sin(T). In conditions 
not meeting this requirement, the Coast Guard Marine Safety Center 
requires calculations in addition to those in this section.
    (c) A vessel that complies with the requirements for passenger 
ships contained in the International Code of Intact Stability, 2008 
(2008 IS Code) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  171.012) need not 
comply with paragraphs (a) or (b) of this section. Vessels complying 
with the 2008 IS Code must use the Assumed Average Weight per Person 
obtained according to Sec.  170.090 of this title to be exempt from the 
other requirements of this section.

0
54. Add new Sec.  171.052 to subpart B to read as follows:

Sec.  171.052  Passenger heel requirements for pontoon vessels.

    (a) Each pontoon vessel, in each condition of loading and 
operation, must have an area under the righting arm curve from the 
angle of equilibrium to an angle of 40 degrees, the downflooding angle, 
or the angle of the maximum righting arm, whichever is less, of at 
least:
    (1) For operation on exposed or partially protected waters--
    (i) 10 foot-degrees with a crowding density of 5 square feet per 
person (2.15 persons per square meter); and
    (ii) 7 foot-degrees with a crowding density of 2 square feet per 
person (5.38 persons per square meter); and
    (2) For operation on protected waters--
    (i) 5 foot-degrees with a crowding density of 5 square feet per 
person (2.15 persons per square meter); and
    (ii) 2 foot-degrees with a crowding density of 2 square feet per 
person (5.38 persons per square meter).
    (b) When assessing compliance with the criteria of this section, 
passengers are assumed to be distributed in all areas accessible to 
passengers so as to produce the most unfavorable combination of heel 
and trim.

0
55. Add a new heading for subpart C, above Sec.  171.060, to read as 
follows:

Subpart C--Subdivision and Damage Stability

Sec.  171.060  [Amended]

0
56. In Sec.  171.060(a) introductory text, remove the words ``or Sec.  
171.075 for Type III subdivision''.

Sec.  171.065  [Amended]

0
57. In Sec.  171.065(b)(2), remove the second equation, ``Y = (M + 2P)/
(V + P1-P)'' and add, in its place, the equation ``Y = (M + 2P1)/(V + 
P1-P)''.

Sec.  171.070  [Amended]

0
58. In Sec.  171.070 revise the introductory text of paragraph (e)(1) 
to read as follows:

Sec.  171.070  Subdivision requirements--Type II.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) Unless otherwise permitted, if the LBP of the vessel is 143 
feet (43.5 meters) or more, or the vessel makes international voyages, 
each main transverse watertight bulkhead must be at least 10 feet (3 
meters) plus 3 percent of the vessel's LBP from--
* * * * *

Sec.  171.075  [Removed and Reserved]

0
59. Remove and reserve Sec.  171.075.

Sec.  171.080  [Amended]

0
60. In Sec.  171.080--
0
a. In paragraph (f)(4)(i), remove ``w = passenger weight = 75 
kilograms,'' and

[[Page 78086]]

add, in its place, ``w = passenger weight used for calculations as 
determined in accordance with Sec.  170.090(c) of this chapter'';
0
b. Revise paragraph (f)(4)(ii)(A) to read as set forth below; and
0
c. In the heading to paragraph (g), after the word ``vessels'', add the 
words ``constructed before January 1 2009'', and in paragraph (g) text, 
remove the words ``chapter II-1, part B, regulation 8'' and, in their 
place, add the words ``the applicable regulations of IMO Res. 
MSC.216(82) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  171.012)''.

Sec.  171.080  Damage stability standards for vessels with Type I or 
Type II subdivision.

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (A) The weight of each passenger is the weight used for 
calculations as determined in accordance with Sec.  170.090(c) of this 
chapter;
* * * * *

Sec.  171.082  [Removed]

0
61. Remove Sec.  171.082.

PART 172--SPECIAL RULES PERTAINING TO BULK CARGOES

0
62. The authority citation for part 172 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 3306, 3703, 5115; E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 
3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
63. Revise Sec.  172.020 to read as follows:

Sec.  172.020  Incorporation by reference.

    (a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this part 
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 this section, the Coast Guard must publish a 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. It is also available for inspection at 
the Coast Guard, Office of Design and Engineering Standards, Naval 
Architecture Division (CG-5212), 2100 2nd St., SW., Stop 7126, 
Washington, DC 20593-7126, and is available from the sources listed 
below.
    (b) International Maritime Organization (IMO), Publications 
Section, 4 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7SR, United Kingdom, +44 (0)20 
7735 7611, http://www.imo.org/.
    (1) Amendment to Chapter VI of the International Convention for the 
Safety of Life at Sea, 1960, Resolution A.264(VIII), incorporation by 
reference (IBR) approved for Sec.  172.015.
    (2) Publication No. 240-E, International Code for the Safe Carriage 
of Grain in Bulk, IBR approved for Sec.  172.015.
    (3) Resolution MEPC.117(52), Amendments to the Annex of the 
Protocol of 1978 Relating to the International Convention for the 
Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973 (IMO Res. MEPC.117(52)), 
Adopted on 15 October 2004, IBR approved for Sec.  172.070.

0
64. Revise Sec.  172.070 to read as follows:

Sec.  172.070  Intact stability.

    All tank vessels of 5,000 deadweight tons (DWT) and above, 
contracted after December 3, 2001, must comply with the intact 
stability requirements of IMO Res. MEPC.117(52) (incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  172.020).

PART 174--SPECIAL RULES PERTAINING TO SPECIFIC VESSEL TYPES

0
65. The authority citation for part 174 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 9118, 9119, 9153; 43 U.S.C. 1333; 46 
U.S.C. 3306, 3703; E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 
277; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
66. Revise Sec.  174.007 to read as follows:

Sec.  174.007  Incorporation by reference.

    (a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this part 
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 this section, the Coast Guard must publish a 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. It is also available for inspection at 
the Coast Guard, Office of Design and Engineering Standards, Naval 
Architecture Division (CG-5212), 2100 2nd St. SW., Stop 7126, 
Washington, DC 20593-7126, and is available from the sources listed 
below.
    (b) American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) 100 Barr 
Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.
    (1) ASTM F 1196-00, Standard Specification for Sliding Watertight 
Door Assemblies, 2008, incorporation by reference (IBR) approved for 
Sec.  174.100.
    (2) ASTM F 1197-00, Standard Specification for Sliding Watertight 
Door Control Systems, 2007, IBR approved for Sec.  174.100.
    (c) International Maritime Organization (IMO), Publications 
Section, 4 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7SR, United Kingdom, +44 (0)20 
7735 7611, http://www.imo.org/.
    (1) Resolution MSC.216(82), Adoption of Amendments to the 
International Convention for the Safety of Life At Sea, 1974, As 
Amended (IMO Res. MSC.216(82)), Adopted on 8 December 2006, IBR 
approved for Sec.  174.360.
    (2) [Reserved]

0
67. Revise Sec.  174.360 to read as follows:

Sec.  174.360  Calculations.

    Each ship to which this subpart applies must comply with the 
minimum standard of subdivision and damage stability applicable to that 
ship under IMO Res. MSC.216(82), (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  
174.007). Compliance with the applicable requirements must be 
demonstrated by calculations and reflected in information on loading 
restrictions, such as a maximum height of the center of gravity (KG) or 
minimum metacentric height (GM) curve, that is part of the stability 
information required by Sec.  170.110 of this chapter.

PART 175--GENERAL PROVISIONS

0
68. Revise the authority citation for part 175 to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 2103, 3205, 3306, 3703; Pub. L. 103-206, 
107 Stat. 2439; 49 U.S.C. App. 1804; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.1; Sec.  175.900 also issued under 44 U.S.C. 
3507.

0
69. In Sec.  175.400, add new definitions for ``Pontoon vessel'', 
``Total test weight'' and ``Variable load'' in alphabetical order to 
read as follows:

Sec.  175.400  Definition of terms used in this subchapter.

* * * * *
    Pontoon vessel means any vessel having two or more watertight 
hulls, which are structurally independent from the vessel's deck or 
cross structure.
* * * * *

[[Page 78087]]

    Total test weight means the weight used to simulate heeling and 
trimming moments when a simplified stability test is performed in 
accordance with Sec.  178.330 or Sec.  178.340 of this subchapter.
* * * * *
    Variable load means the weight of all items brought on board a 
vessel for which explicit account is not made in approved stability 
calculations, including but not limited to, personal effects, carry-on 
items, luggage, and equipment of any kind.
* * * * *

PART 176--INSPECTION AND CERTIFICATION

0
70. The authority citation for part 176 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1321(j); 46 U.S.C. 2103, 3205, 3306, 3307; 
49 U.S.C. App. 1804; E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR, 1971-1975 
Comp., p. 743; E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277; 
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
71. In Sec.  176.110, revise paragraphs (d)(2) and (d)(3), and add 
paragraph (d)(4) to read as follows:

Sec.  176.110  Routes permitted.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) The performance capabilities of the vessel based on design, 
scantlings, stability, subdivision, propulsion, speed, operating modes, 
maneuverability, and other characteristics;
    (3) The suitability of the vessel for nighttime operations; and
    (4) The suitability of the vessel for all environmental conditions.

0
72. Revise Sec.  176.112 to read as follows:

Sec.  176.112  Total persons permitted.

    The cognizant Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) 
determines the total number of persons permitted to be carried on a 
vessel. In determining the total number of persons, the OCMI may 
consider the total weight of passengers, crew, and variable loads; 
stability restrictions and subdivision requirements of the vessel; the 
vessel's route, general arrangement, means of escape, and lifesaving 
equipment; minimum manning requirements; and the maximum number of 
passengers permitted in accordance with Sec.  176.113 of this part.

Sec.  176.610  [Amended]

0
73. In Sec.  176.610, add a sentence to the end of paragraph (a) to 
read as follows:

Sec.  176.610  Scope of drydock and internal structural examinations.

    (a) * * * The accuracy of draft or loading marks, if required by 
Sec.  185.602 of this chapter, must be verified if not verified at a 
previous drydock examination.
* * * * *

Sec.  176.900  [Amended]

0
74. In Sec.  176.900(a)--
0
a. Add the words ``is certificated for or'' after the word ``which'';
0
b. Remove the word ``an''; and
0
c. Remove the word ``voyage'' and add, in its place, the word 
``voyages''.

Sec.  176.910  [Amended]

0
75. In Sec.  176.910(a)--
0
a. Remove the word ``issues'' in the second sentence and add, in its 
place, the words ``authorizes the cognizant OCMI to issue''; and
0
b. In the last sentence, after the word ``will'', add the words 
``authorize the cognizant OCMI to''.

Sec.  176.920  [Amended]

0
76. In Sec.  176.920(d), after the word ``will'' in the first and 
second sentences, add the words ``authorize the cognizant OCMI to''.

Sec.  176.930  [Amended]

0
77. In Sec.  176.930, in the last sentence, remove the words 
``Commandant will indicate the'' and after the word ``equivalent'', add 
the words ``must be indicated''.

PART 178--INTACT STABILITY AND SEAWORTHINESS

0
78. The authority citation for part 178 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  43 U.S.C. 1333; 46 U.S.C. 2103, 3306, 3703; E.O. 
12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277; Department of 
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

Sec.  178.115  [Amended]

0
79. In Sec.  178.115, remove the word ``An'' and add in its place 
``an'', and at the beginning of the paragraph, add the words ``Except 
where specifically stated otherwise,''.

0
80. In Sec.  178.210, revise the first sentence of paragraphs (a) and 
(b), revise paragraph (c), and add paragraph (d) to read as follows:

Sec.  178.210  Stability information.

    (a) Stability information (stability details indicated on the 
Certificate of Inspection, a stability letter, or a stability booklet), 
is required on certain vessels by paragraphs (b), (c), or (d) of this 
section. * * *
    (b) A vessel which, under Sec.  178.310 of this part, complies with 
requirements in subchapter S of this chapter, must have stability 
details on the vessel's Certificate of Inspection, a stability letter 
issued by the cognizant Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) or 
the Commanding Officer, Marine Safety Center, or an approved stability 
booklet. * * *
    (c) When necessary for safe operation, the cognizant OCMI may place 
specific stability restrictions in a stability letter or on the 
Certificate of Inspection of a vessel not more than 65 feet (19.8 
meters) in length, which, under Sec.  178.310 of this part, complies 
with the requirements of Sec.  178.320 of this part.
    (d) Each pontoon vessel must have a stability letter and each 
stability letter issued after March 14, 2011 must be issued by the 
Commanding Officer, Marine Safety Center.

0
81. Add new Sec.  178.215 to read as follows:

Sec.  178.215  Weight of passengers and crew.

    (a) This section applies to each vessel, regardless of when 
constructed, for which stability information is based on the results of 
a simplified stability proof test.
    (b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, and if not 
provided in the stability information required, the owner of each 
vessel must provide the master with the total test weight used in the 
simplified stability proof test and the number of passengers and crew 
included in the total test weight. Owners and masters must use a total 
weight of passengers and crew carried that is based upon an assumed 
weight per person, which is determined in accordance with Sec.  170.090 
of this chapter.
    (c) The information specified in paragraph (b) of this section need 
not be provided if the owner attests that the vessel complies with 
applicable intact stability requirements when carrying the number of 
passengers and crew permitted by the Certificate of Inspection with an 
assumed weight per person determined in accordance with Sec.  170.090 
of this chapter.

0
82. In Sec.  178.230, revise paragraphs (b) introductory text and 
(b)(1), and add paragraph (c) to read as follows:

Sec.  178.230  Stability letter or Certificate of Inspection stability 
details.

* * * * *
    (b) If Sec.  178.210(b) of this part applies, the applicable 
information described in subpart C of part 170 of this title, and the 
calculations used to determine that information, must be submitted in 
addition to the applicable information listed in paragraph (b) of this 
section.

[[Page 78088]]

    (1) Allowable weight and number of passengers and crew on each 
deck;
* * * * *
    (c) If Sec.  178.210(c) of this part applies, the allowable weight 
and number of passengers and crew on each deck, and the necessary 
calculations used to determine that information, must be submitted in 
accordance with paragraph (a) of this section.

0
83. Revise Sec.  178.310 to read as follows:

Sec.  178.310  Intact stability requirements--general.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, each 
vessel must, in each condition of loading and operation, comply with 
the applicable requirements of--
    (1) Part 170 of this chapter, except subparts G and H; and
    (2) Part 171 of this chapter, subparts A and B.
    (b) Sailing vessels must meet the appropriate requirements of Sec.  
171.055 or Sec.  171.057 in subchapter S in this chapter while under 
sail, as well as the requirements of Sec.  170.170 in subchapter S in 
this chapter while under bare poles (if an auxiliary sailing vessel as 
defined in Sec.  170.055(a) of this chapter) and with storm sails set 
and trimmed flat (if a sailing vessel as defined in Sec.  170.055(n) of 
this chapter).
    (c) As an alternative to meeting the requirements of paragraphs (a) 
and (b) of this section, a vessel may demonstrate compliance with an 
appropriate standard set forth in either Sec.  178.320 of this part for 
non-sailing vessels or Sec.  178.325 of this part for monohull sailing 
vessels if all of the following criteria are satisfied:
    (1) The length is not more than 19.8 meters (65 feet) in length;
    (2) The vessel does not carry more than 12 passengers on an 
international voyage;
    (3) The vessel either does not have more than one deck above the 
bulkhead deck or, if without a bulkhead deck, does not have more than 
one deck above the deck from which freeboard is measured excluding a 
pilot house; and
    (4) The vessel's stability has not been questioned by the cognizant 
Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI).
    (d) In lieu of the requirements in paragraphs (a) through (c) of 
this section, a vessel may meet another stability standard approved by 
the Commanding Officer, Marine Safety Center.

0
84. Revise Sec.  178.320 to read as follows:

Sec.  178.320  Intact stability requirements--non-sailing vessels.

    (a) As permitted by Sec.  178.310(c) of this part, the following 
vessels may undergo the simplified stability proof test detailed in 
Sec.  178.330 of this part, in the presence of a Coast Guard marine 
inspector, if they do not have tumblehome at the deck, measured 
amidships, that exceeds 2 percent of the beam:
    (1) Monohull vessels; and
    (2) Flush deck catamaran vessels which are not pontoon vessels and 
carry not more than 49 passengers.
    (b) As permitted by Sec.  178.310(c) of this part, a self-propelled 
pontoon vessel may undergo the pontoon simplified stability proof test 
detailed in Sec.  178.340 of this part, in the presence of a Coast 
Guard marine inspector, if it satisfies all of the following 
requirements:
    (1) The vessel carries not more than 49 passengers and does not 
make international voyages;
    (2) The vessel operates on Protected Waters only;
    (3) The vessel is constructed with only one deck;
    (4) The buoyant hull volume consists of two symmetric, fully 
enclosed hulls;
    (5) The cross section of each hull is circular or of wall-sided 
construction without tumblehome, and constant for at least 90 percent 
of the length of the hull;
    (6) The hulls contain no machinery or tanks;
    (7) The portion of the deck accessible to passengers does not 
extend beyond--
    (i) The outboard edge of the hulls, and
    (ii) The forward or the aft end of the hulls;
    (8) There is no deck more than 0.15 meters (6 inches) above any 
point on any of the buoyant hulls;
    (9) The distance between the centerlines of the hulls is not less 
than 1.83 meters (6 feet); and
    (10) Each hull has a beam or diameter, as applicable, of not less 
than 0.61 meters (2 feet).
    (c) For a vessel that carries not more than 49 passengers, carries 
no deck cargo, and is otherwise eligible to undergo the simplified 
stability proof test detailed in Sec. Sec.  178.330 or 178.340 of this 
part, the authority issuing the stability letter may--
    (1) Dispense with the requirements of the simplified stability 
proof test in Sec. Sec.  178.330 or Sec.  178.340 of this part when the 
vessel's stability can be adequately assessed by alternate means giving 
due consideration to each item that impacts a vessel's stability 
characteristics which include, but are not limited to, the form, 
arrangement, construction, number of decks, route, and operating 
restrictions of the vessel; or
    (2) Authorize a change in the requirements of the simplified 
stability proof test in either Sec. Sec.  178.330 or 178.340 of this 
part, when necessary to adequately assess the vessel's stability.

0
85. Revise Sec.  178.325 to read as follows:

Sec.  178.325  Intact stability requirements--monohull sailing vessels.

    (a) As permitted by Sec.  178.310(c) of this part, a monohull 
sailing vessel may demonstrate compliance with paragraphs (b) or (c) of 
this section if it satisfies all of the following requirements:
    (1) It does not operate on exposed waters;
    (2) It only operates during the daylight hours;
    (3) It is of the usual type, rig, and hull form, excluding vessels 
without a weathertight deck, such as open boats;
    (4) It carries not more than 49 passengers;
    (5) It is not a sailing school vessel that carries a combined total 
of six or more sailing school students and instructors;
    (6) Its minimum downflooding angle is greater than 60 degrees;
    (7) It does not have a cockpit greater than 20 percent of the 
Length Over Deck; and
    (8) If equipped with a cockpit and operating on Partially Protected 
Waters, the cockpit must be self-bailing.
    (b) The vessel may undergo the simplified stability proof test 
detailed in Sec.  178.330 of this part, in the presence of a Coast 
Guard marine inspector, if it does not have tumblehome at the deck, 
measured amidships, that exceeds 2 percent of the beam.
    (c) The cognizant Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) may 
perform operational tests to determine whether the vessel has adequate 
stability and satisfactory handling characteristics under sail for 
protected waters or partially protected waters.
    (d) The Commanding Officer, Marine Safety Center, may prescribe 
additional or different stability requirements for a broad, shallow 
draft vessel with little or no ballast outside the hull.

0
86. In Sec.  178.330, revise the section heading, paragraphs (a), (b), 
and (d)(6), and add paragraph (d)(7) to read as follows:

Sec.  178.330  Simplified stability proof test (SST).

    (a) A vessel must be in the condition specified in this paragraph 
when a simplified stability proof test is performed.

[[Page 78089]]

    (1) The construction of the vessel is complete in all respects.
    (2) Ballast, if necessary, is in compliance with Sec.  178.510 of 
this part and is on board and in place.
    (3) Each fuel and water tank is approximately three-quarters full. 
Any sewage tank should be either empty or full.
    (4) A weight equal to the total weight of all passengers, crew, and 
variable loads permitted on the vessel is on board and distributed so 
as to provide normal operating trim and to simulate the vertical center 
of gravity, causing the least stable condition that is likely to occur 
in service. The assumed weight per person of passengers and crew must 
be representative of the passengers and crew on board the vessel while 
engaged in the service intended. Unless the cognizant Officer in 
Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) permits or requires the use of other 
values in writing, weight and vertical center of gravity are to be 
assumed as follows:
    (i) The weight of primary lifesaving equipment should be simulated 
at its normal location, if not on board at the time of the test.
    (ii) The assumed weight per person is determined as provided by 
Sec.  170.090 of this chapter.
    (iii) The weight and associated vertical center of gravity of 
variable loads must be included as appropriate for the service intended 
and documented in the stability information required by subpart B of 
this part.
    (iv) The vertical center for the total test weight must be at least 
30 inches (760 millimeters) above the deck for seated passengers, and 
at least 39 inches (1.0 meter) above the deck for standing passengers.
    (v) If the vessel carries passengers on diving excursions, the 
total weight of diving gear must be included in the loaded condition 
and placed in its stowed position. Not less than 80 pounds (36.3 
kilograms) should be assumed for each person for whom diving gear is 
provided.
    (vi) On vessels having one upper deck available to passengers above 
the main deck, the weight distribution must not be less severe than the 
following:
Total Test Weight (W) = --------
Passenger Capacity of Upper Deck:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Weight on Upper Deck = (Number of Passengers on Upper Deck) * (Wt per 
Passenger) * 1.33
Weight on Main Deck = Total Test Weight-Weight on Upper Deck.
    (5) All non-return closures on cockpit scuppers or on weather deck 
drains must be kept open during the test.
    (b) A vessel must not exceed the limitations in paragraph (d) of 
this section, when subjected to the greater of the following heeling 
moments:
Mp = (W) (Bp)/6; or
Mw = (P) (A) (H)

Where:
Mp = passenger heeling moment in foot-pounds (kilogram-
meters);
Mw = Wind heeling moment in foot-pounds (kilogram-meters)
W = the total weight of persons other than required crew, plus the 
personal effects of those persons expected to be carried while 
aboard the vessel (total test weight) in pounds (meters);
Bp = the maximum transverse distance in feet (meters) of 
a deck that is accessible to passengers;
A = Area, in square feet (square meters), of the projected lateral 
surface of the vessel above the waterline (including each projected 
area of the hull, superstructure, cargo, masts, area bounded by 
railings and canopies, but not protruding fixed objects such as 
antennas or running rigging).

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (6) On a non-sailing flush deck catamaran that is propelled by 
mechanical means, not more than one-third of the freeboard or one-third 
of the draft, whichever is less, may be immersed.
    (7) In no case may the angle of heel exceed 14 degrees.
* * * * *

0
87. Revise Sec.  178.340 to read as follows:

Sec.  178.340  Stability standards for pontoon vessels on protected 
waters.

    (a) A pontoon vessel meeting the applicability requirements of 
Sec.  178.320 of this part must be in the condition described in Sec.  
178.330(a) of this part when the PSST is performed, except that fuel, 
water and sewage tanks should either be empty or filled to 100 percent 
capacity, whichever is more conservative.
    (b) A pontoon vessel must not exceed the limitations in paragraph 
(c) of this section when subjected to the greater of the following 
heeling moments:
Mpc = [(W)(Bp-K)]/2; or
Mw = (P) (A) (H)

Where:
Mpc = passenger and crew heeling moment in foot-pounds 
(kilogram-meters);
W = the total weight of passengers and crew aboard (total test 
weight) in pounds (kilograms);
Bp = the maximum transverse distance of the deck 
accessible to passengers in feet (meters);
K = 2.0 feet (0.61 meters);
Mw = Wind heeling moment in foot-pounds (kilogram-meters)
P = Wind pressure of 7.5 pounds/square foot (36.6 kilograms/square 
meter);
A = Area, in square feet (square meters), of the projected lateral 
surface of the vessel above the waterline (including each projected 
area of the pontoons, superstructure and area bounded by railings 
and structural canopies); and
H = Height, in feet (meters), of the center of area (A) above the 
waterline, measured up from the waterline.

    (c) With the appropriate heeling moment applied to the most 
adversely affected side of the vessel, the remaining exposed cross-
sectional area of the pontoon must be equal to or greater than both--
    (1) The cross-sectional area submerged due to the load shift (for 
an example, see Figure 178.340(c)(1) of this section); and

[[Page 78090]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR14DE10.006

    (2) One-quarter of the cross-sectional area on one pontoon.
    (d) A pontoon vessel must also be tested to determine whether 
trimming moments will submerge the bow or stern of the buoyant hull. 
The top of any pontoon must not be submerged at any location, as 
indicated in Figure 178.340(d) of this section, with the total test 
weight (W) located on the centerline and positioned as far forward or 
aft on the deck as practicable, whichever position results in the least 
freeboard.

[[Page 78091]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR14DE10.007

PART 179--SUBDIVISION, DAMAGE STABILITY, AND WATERTIGHT INTEGRITY

0
88. The authority citation for part 179 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  43 U.S.C. 1333; 46 U.S.C. 2103, 3306, 3703; E.O. 
12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277; Department of 
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
89. Add new Sec.  179.15 to subpart A to read as follows:

Sec.  179.15  Incorporation by reference.

    (a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this part 
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 this section, the Coast Guard must publish a 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. It is also available for inspection at 
the Coast Guard, Office of Design and Engineering Standards, Naval 
Architecture Division (CG-5212), 2100 2nd St., SW., Stop 7126, 
Washington, DC 20593-7126, and is available from the sources listed in 
paragraph (b) of this section.
    (b) International Maritime Organization (IMO), Publications 
Section, 4 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7SR, United Kingdom, +44 (0)20 
7735 7611, http://www.imo.org/.
    (1) Resolution MSC.216(82), Adoption of Amendments to the 
International Convention for the Safety of Life At Sea, 1974, As 
Amended (IMO Res. MSC.216(82)), Adopted on 8 December 2006, IBR 
approved for Sec.  179.212.
    (2) [Reserved]

0
90. Revise Sec.  179.212 to read as follows:

Sec.  179.212  Watertight bulkheads for subdivision and damage 
stability.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, each 
vessel must comply with the Type II subdivision and damage stability 
requirements of Sec. Sec.  171.070 through 171.073 and 171.080 of this 
chapter if it meets one or more of the following criteria:
    (1) Is more than 19.8 meters (65 feet) in length;
    (2) Carries more than 49 passengers;
    (3) Is constructed of wood on or after March 11, 2001, and operates 
in cold water; or
    (4) Is constructed before January 1, 2009 and carries more than 12 
passengers on an international voyage.
    (b) Vessels constructed on or after January 1, 2009 and carrying 
more than 12 passengers on an international voyage must comply with the 
applicable requirements of IMO Res. MSC.216(82) (incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  179.15) unless permitted otherwise.
    (c) As an alternative to complying with the Type II subdivision and 
damage stability requirements of Sec. Sec.  171.070 through 171.073 and 
171.080 of this chapter, a monohull vessel which undergoes a simplified 
stability proof test in accordance with Sec.  178.330 of this chapter 
may comply with Sec.  179.220 of this part.
    (d) For the purpose of demonstrating compliance with the Type II 
subdivision and damage stability requirements of Sec. Sec.  171.070 
through 171.073 and 171.080 of this chapter, the requirements of IMO 
Res. MSC.216(82) may be considered equivalent.

[[Page 78092]]

0
91. In Sec.  179.220--
0
a. In Table 179.220(a) remove the term ``d/L'' and in its place, add 
the term ``x/L''
0
b. In note 1 to Table 179.220(a), remove the term ``d = distance'', and 
in its place, add the term ``x = distance''; and
0
c. Add paragraph (c) to read as follows:

Sec.  179.220  Location of watertight bulkheads for subdivision.

* * * * *
    (c) Calculations needed to demonstrate compliance with paragraphs 
(a) and (b) of this section must be submitted to, and approved by, the 
Commanding Officer, Marine Safety Center.

Sec.  179.230  [Removed and reserved]

0
92. Remove and reserve Sec.  179.230.

PART 185--OPERATIONS

0
93. The authority citation for part 185 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 2103, 3306, 6101; E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 
3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
94. In Sec.  185.304, revise paragraph (a)(3) and add paragraph (b) to 
read as follows:

Sec.  185.304  Navigation underway.

    (a) * * *
    (3) Prevailing and forecasted visibility and environmental 
conditions, including wind and waves;
* * * * *
    (b) Masters of vessels not greater than 65 ft (19.8 m) in length 
must have means available, satisfactory to the Officer in Charge, 
Marine Inspection (OCMI), to obtain or monitor the latest marine 
broadcast in order to comply with the requirements of paragraph (a) of 
this section.

0
95. In Sec.  185.315, designate the existing paragraph as paragraph (a) 
and add paragraph (b) to read as follows:

Sec.  185.315  Verification of vessel compliance with applicable 
stability requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) In order to fulfill the requirements of paragraph (a) of this 
section and avoid overloading the vessel, the master must take into 
account the total weight of passengers, crew, and variable loads.

Sec.  185.602  [Amended]

0
96. In Sec.  185.602--
0
a. In paragraph (b) introductory text, remove the words ``that fits 
into any one of the following categories:'' and add, in their place, 
the words ``that does not demonstrate compliance in accordance with 
Sec.  178.310(c) of this chapter.'';
0
b. Remove paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(3); and
0
c. In paragraph (c), remove the words ``that complies with the 
stability requirements of Sec. Sec.  170.170, 170.173, 171.050, 
171.055, and 171.057 of this chapter or in accordance with Sec.  
178.310 of this chapter,''.

    Dated: November 17, 2010.
J.G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2010-30391 Filed 12-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P