[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 153 (Tuesday, August 8, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 48548-48564]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-19219]
[[Page 48547]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Department of Transportation
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Coast Guard
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
33 CFR Parts 151, 155, 157, 158
46 CFR Part 172
Pollution Prevention for Oceangoing Ships and Certain Vessels in
Domestic Service; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 8, 2000 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 48548]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Coast Guard
33 CFR Parts 151, 155, 157, and 158
46 CFR Part 172
[USCG 2000-7641]
RIN 2115-AF56
Pollution Prevention for Oceangoing Ships and Certain Vessels in
Domestic Service
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes amending U.S. regulations for
pollution prevention from ships. To align with international standards,
we propose amending the domestic regulations concerning oily-water
separators, operational discharges of oil, damage and intact stability
of tank vessels, International Oil Pollution Prevention Certificates,
garbage recordkeeping requirements, and placards for reception
facilities. To provide consistency with industry standards and
clarification in U.S. oil regulations, we propose changing oily mixture
discharge shore connection requirements for certain vessels and
redefining certain terms dealing with oil.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Docket Management
Facility on or before Ocotber 10, 2000. Comments sent to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) on collection of information must reach OMB
on or before October 10, 2000.
ADDRESSES: To make sure your comments and related material are not
entered more than once in the docket, please submit them by only one of
the following means:
(1) By mail to the Docket Management Facility (USCG-2000-7641),
U.S. Department of Transportation, room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20590-0001.
(2) By hand delivery to room PL-401 on the Plaza level of the
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
telephone number is 202-366-9329.
(3) By fax to the Docket Management Facility at 202-493-2251.
(4) Electronically through the Web Site for the Docket Management
System at http://dms.dot.gov.
You must also mail comments on collection of information to the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, ATTN: Desk Officer,
U.S. Coast Guard.
The Docket Management Facility maintains the public docket for this
rulemaking. Comments and material received from the public, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket,
will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or
copying at room PL-401 on the Plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400
Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays. You may also find this docket
on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning this
proposed rule, contact Lieutenant Commander Michael Jendrossek, Vessel
and Facility Operating Standards Division, 202-267-1181. For questions
on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Dorothy Beard,
Chief, Dockets, Department of Transportation, telephone 202-366-9329.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG-2000-
7641), indicate the specific section of this document to which each
comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. You may submit
your comments and material by mail, hand delivery, fax, or electronic
means to the Docket Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES;
but please submit your comments and material by only one means. If you
submit them by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format,
no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic
filing. If you submit them by mail and would like to know they reached
the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during
the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them.
Public Meeting
We currently do not plan to hold a public meeting. But you may
submit a request for one to the Docket Management Facility at the
address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we
determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will announce the time
and place in a later notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
This proposed rule would amend U.S. regulations for pollution
prevention from oceangoing ships and certain vessels in domestic
service. Most amendments are ones adopted by the Marine Environment
Protection Committee (MEPC) of the International Maritime Organization
(IMO) during several sessions. MEPC adopted amendments to Annex I of
the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from
Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 (MARPOL 73/78) during
its 32nd session (MEPC 32, March 6, 1992) and 40th session (MEPC 40,
September 25, 1997). The MEPC also adopted amendments to Annex V in its
37th session (MEPC 37, September 14, 1995). Additional proposed
amendments include allowing certain vessels in domestic service to use
quick-connect fittings rather than international-type shore
connections, and redefining for clarity certain terms dealing with oil
in the domestic regulations.
Aligning Coast Guard regulations with international standards. By
aligning the domestic regulations with international standards,
compliant U.S. ships would encounter fewer difficulties while engaged
in international trade. Under 33 U.S.C. 1902, the Coast Guard is
authorized to prescribe or amend regulations necessary to implement any
changes to the standards of MARPOL 73/78. Changes to MARPOL 73/78,
Annex I, are described in a Federal Register notice published on
November 12, 1993 (58 FR 60080). They established more stringent
criteria for controlling the discharge of oil and oily water from the
machinery space bilges and cargo tanks of certain vessels. Changes to
MARPOL 73/78, Annex V, added Regulation 9 that requires ships to carry
garbage recordkeeping books and reception facilities to post placards.
Regulation 9 was effective July 1, 1998. We propose aligning the U.S.
regulations with the recent amendments in MARPOL 73/78 Annex I and
Annex V, Regulation 9.
Allowing certain ships in domestic service to use quick-connect
fittings rather than international-type shore connections. Allowing
certain ships to use quick-connect fittings compatible with domestic
reception facilities for discharging oily mixtures ensures that these
ships are in compliance with U.S. regulations without imposing
unnecessary costs to the ship owners and operators.
During voluntary dockside examinations of uninspected towing
vessels in the Coast Guard's 5th District,
[[Page 48549]]
inspectors found that many of these vessels did not have the required
shore connections. Instead, the vessels had quick-connect fittings
compatible with the shoreside reception facilities used in U.S. ports.
The requirement is intended to standardize the means of transferring
oily wastes for ships on international routes. However, ships operating
only in domestic service do not need this standardization. We propose
revising 33 CFR 155.410 and 155.420 to change the requirements for
shore connections on certain ships with domestic routes.
Redefining certain terms dealing with oil. Redefining the
terminology dealing with oil throughout the U.S. regulations provides
consistency and clarity. We would redefine or clarify terms, such as
``oily mixtures,'' ``oil,'' ``oil cargo residues,'' and ``oil
residues,'' throughout 33 CFR parts 151, 155, 157, and 158. We would
also remove conflicting and duplicating terms.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed amendments regarding the alignment of U.S. regulations
with MARPOL 73/78 standards are discussed as follows:
1. Rate of discharge of oil into the sea. This proposed change
would reduce the maximum allowable rate of discharge of oil and oily
mixtures. At present, 33 CFR 157.37(a)(3) allows tank vessels of 150
gross tons and above carrying crude oil or products in bulk as cargo to
discharge an oily mixture into the sea from a cargo tank, a slop tank,
or the bilges of a cargo pump room if the instantaneous rate of oil
discharge does not exceed 60 liters per nautical mile. However, the
discharge rate under MARPOL 73/78 was reduced from 60 liters per
nautical mile to 30 liters per nautical mile. To align with
international standards, we propose reducing the allowable rate
specified in Sec. 157.37(a)(3) to 30 liters per nautical mile.
2. Oil content of the effluent discharged. This proposed change
would reduce the allowable oil content in effluent from oil tanker
bilges and other ships 400 gross tons and above. This change would
affect the requirements regarding the effluent from machinery-space
bilges of oil tankers (excluding effluent from cargo pump room bilges
unless mixed with oil cargo residue) and from other ships of 400 gross
tons and above. MARPOL 73/78 reduced the parts per million (ppm) oil
content allowances from 100 ppm to 15 ppm. To meet the international
standard, we propose reducing the allowable content to 15 ppm in 33 CFR
151.10(a)(5), 155.360(a), 155.370(a), and 157.39(b)(3) (redesignated as
(b)(2)).
3. Means for automatically stopping a discharge. This proposed
amendment would require certain ships to install a means for
automatically stopping oil or oily water discharges when the oil
content in the effluent exceeds the required allowance. MARPOL 73/78
requires ships of 10,000 gross tons and above to install a means of
automatically stopping oily mixture discharges when the oil content in
the effluent exceeds 15 ppm. This requirement also applies to ships of
400 gross tons and above that carry ballast water in their fuel oil
tanks. To align with MARPOL 73/78 standards, we propose revising 33 CFR
155.370(a) to require a means of automatically stopping discharges
exceeding 15 ppm for ships of 400 gross tons to less than 10,000 gross
tons that carry ballast water in their fuel oil tanks and for ships of
10,000 gross tons and above.
4. Oil filtering equipment, alarms, and automatic stop requirements
for ships delivered before July 6, 1993. This proposed amendment
requires all ships delivered before July 6, 1993, to comply with the
discharge equipment requirements for oil filtering, alarms, and
automatic stops when we publish a final rule. MARPOL 73/78 did not
require ships delivered before July 6, 1993, to comply until July 6,
1998, or until the date the ship was fitted with this equipment,
whichever was earlier. Until that date, all oil or oily mixture
discharges from machinery space bilges were prohibited, unless certain
specified conditions were met. Since the international compliance date
has passed, we propose revising 33 CFR 155.370(a) to require all ships
to comply with the oil filtering equipment, alarms, and automatic stop
requirements by the effective date of this rulemaking.
5. Term of validity for International Oil Pollution Prevention
(IOPP) Certificates. This proposed change would set the maximum term of
validity for IOPP Certificates at 5 years. Currently, 33 CFR 151.19(e)
states that IOPP Certificates for U.S. inspected ships are valid for a
maximum period of 4 years from the date of issuance. For U.S.
uninspected ships, IOPP Certificates are valid for a maximum period of
5 years. The International Maritime Organization's (IMO's) Harmonized
System of Surveys and Certification and MARPOL 73/78 set the term of
validity for IOPP Certificates at a maximum period of 5 years. Until
now, the U.S. used a 4-year maximum term of validity because it was
compatible with the 2-year cycle for U.S. Certificates of Inspection
(COI). On February 2, 2000 we published a final rule (65 FR 6493)
introducing a five year Certificate of Inspection cycle in accordance
with the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 1996. The change to a five
year term of validity on IOPP certificates would reflect this new
inspection cycle, help reduce the paperwork burden for vessel owners
and operators, and harmonize our IOPP certificate term of validity with
the rest of the world's fleet who already have 5-year certificates. To
align the U.S. regulations with international standards, we propose
setting the term of validity for IOPP Certificates at a maximum of 5
years for both inspected and uninspected vessels. This regulatory
change would occur in 33 CFR 151.19(e).
6. Damage stability of tank vessels. This proposed amendment would
incorporate new damage assumptions to consider when calculating the
potential penetration to tank vessel hulls for raking damage. These new
damage assumptions should help prevent loss of stability from bottom-
raking damage on double-hull tank vessels. Unlike single-hull tank
vessels, double-hull tank vessels have large void or ballast spaces
surrounding the cargo tanks. Changing the requirement would prevent the
loss of stability of double-hull tank vessels when some void spaces are
flooded from long, relatively shallow extents of damage characterized
by certain types of bottom-raking damage. Though the number of raking
damage incidents is relatively low, the possible consequences make
raking damage risks significant enough to take preventive measures.
As the U.S. representative at the 1992 IMO meeting of the Sub-
Committee on Stability and Load Lines and on Fishing Vessels Safety
(SLF), we supported IMO's suggested damage stability standards for
double-hull tank vessels. We supported the assertion that double-hull
tank vessels should be designed to sustain certain forms of raking
damage and still meet the minimum damage stability requirements.
Working with the U.S. tank vessel industry, we submitted several
studies to IMO demonstrating the need for these proposed standards and
the feasibility for new double-hull designs. As a result of these and
other studies, IMO adopted these design standards enabling tank vessels
to sustain a certain amount of damage without capsizing or sinking. The
IMO document adopting these standards is in Resolution MEPC.52(32)
adopted on March 6, 1992.
Current U.S. regulations 33 CFR 157.21 and 46 CFR 172.065 require
designing all tank vessels to survive certain types of damage without
capsizing or sinking. To meet MARPOL
[[Page 48550]]
73/78 standards, we propose requiring that oil tankers of 20,000
deadweight tons (DWT) and above be designed to survive potential raking
damage caused by grounding of the ship. This change would occur in 33
CFR part 157, appendix B, and 46 CFR 172.065, table 172.065(a), and
would become effective on the effective date of this rulemaking.
7. Intact stability of tankships. This proposed rule would add new
regulations for design-based intact stability. The new regulations
would help eliminate incidents of lolling (the uncontrolled heeling of
tankships due to loss of initial intact stability) during simultaneous
ballast and cargo operations by requiring tankship designs that provide
adequate intact stability. We also propose excluding tank barges from
the proposed intact stability requirement. Ballast tanks on tank barges
are typically used as void spaces. Thus, it is highly unlikely for
barges to conduct simultaneous ballast and cargo operations.
Before 1993, there were no mandatory international standards for
intact stability for tankships. Single-hull tankships in the intact
condition were considered relatively stable, so mandatory intact
stability regulations were not necessary. However, certain double-hull
tankship designs are considered less stable than single-hull tankships
and require intact stability regulations. For example, some double-hull
designs develop large free-surfaces during simultaneous cargo and
ballast operations that can lead to lolling. In 1993, IMO re-issued
intact stability standards for various ship types by issuing the Code
on Intact Stability, adopted by IMO Resolution A.749(18), which can be
applied to double-hull tankship designs. However, compliance with the
Code was not mandatory.
While lolling does not occur often, one 1993 case documented by the
Coast Guard demonstrated that lolling could cause damage to property,
with the potential for loss of life, personnel injury, and
environmental pollution. Based on the potential dangers of lolling and
because the IMO Code on Intact Stability was not mandatory, we
determined that double-hull tankships should have intact stability
requirements.
We determined two regulatory approaches for solving the problem.
One approach, the ``design approach,'' would eliminate lolling through
tanker designs. The second approach, the ``operations approach,'' would
eliminate lolling by restricting operations.
At the 1997 IMO meeting of the Marine Environment Protection
Committee, representatives of the United States, other nations, and the
Oil Companies International Marine Forum advocated the design approach.
Despite advocating the operations approach, other countries and
organizations, including Japan and the International Association of
Independent Tanker Owners, agreed that the design approach was
preferable. After extended debate, IMO adopted the design approach,
limiting exceptions to combination carriers. IMO was concerned that a
tankship's master and cargo officer would find themselves too
preoccupied with the complicated and often time-sensitive loading and
unloading process to properly implement the operations approach to
prevent lolling. The IMO document adopting the design approach is
Resolution MEPC.75(40), adopted on September 25, 1997.
We propose adding the new regulations 33 CFR 157.22 and 46 CFR
172.070 requiring all tankships of 5,000 DWT and above contracted for
after the effective date of this rulemaking, to comply with the
international intact stability design standards of MARPOL 73/78. The
proposed 33 CFR 157.22 and 46 CFR 172.070 specifically address the
problem of tankships lolling during loading and unloading. These new
sections would require that tankships of 5,000 DWT and above contracted
after the effective date of this rulemaking be designed to prevent
lolling.
8. Garbage discharge records. This proposed amendment would change
the requirements regarding which ships are required by law to maintain
garbage discharge records. MARPOL 73/78 provides the requirements for
every ship of 400 gross tons and above to carry garbage discharge
records. To align more closely with MARPOL 73/78, we propose changing
33 CFR 151.55 by removing the requirements for manned oceangoing ships
of 12.2 meters (approximately 40 feet) and above in length and engaged
in commerce. Instead, we would require every manned oceangoing ship of
400 gross tons and above engaged in commerce to carry garbage discharge
records. Additionally, we would require every manned ship engaged in an
international voyage that is certified to carry 15 passengers or more
to carry garbage discharge records according to MARPOL 73/78, Annex V,
regulation 9(3).
9. Placards for reception facilities. This proposed amendment would
require ports and terminals to display a placard or placards notifying
users to report inadequacies to the local U.S. Coast Guard Captain of
the Port (COTP). This proposal is a requirement of 33 U.S.C. 1905.
Requirements for adequate reception facilities already exist under 33
CFR part 158, however this proposal requires port and terminal users
with an avenue to report inadequacies. The placards would instruct port
users to report any inadequacy, such as inability to receive medical or
hazardous waste or inability to receive waste within 24 hours notice,
to the proper authority. Proposed 33 CFR 158.415 specifies the wording
for reception facility placards.
10. Equivalent shore connections for the discharge of oily
mixtures. This proposed amendment would change the shore connection
requirement for certain U.S.-flag ships operating only in domestic
service. Currently, 33 CFR 155.410 and 155.420 specify the requirements
for shore connections on non-oceangoing ships of 100 gross tons and
above and oceangoing ships of 100 gross tons to less than 400 gross
tons. On these ships, the connections for discharging oily mixtures to
shoreside reception facilities are required to meet the international-
type standard specified in 33 CFR 155.430. We propose amending 33 CFR
155.410 and 155.420 to allow the specified ships operating only in
domestic service to use any shore connection compatible with U.S.
reception facilities, rather than an international-type connection.
11. Definitions of the terms ``fuel oil,'' ``oily mixtures,''
``oil,'' ``petroleum oil,'' ``oil cargo residue,'' ``oily rags,'' and
``oil residue.'' These proposed amendments would redefine for clarity
those words in the regulations dealing with oil. Section 151.10(c) of
33 CFR addresses the control of discharge of ``cargo related oil
residue.'' Recently, this term was judged as too vague to criminally
charge a person with illegally discharging muck or paraffin from the
crude oil cargo tanks of a vessel. To eliminate any future
misinterpretations, we propose re-defining ``oil,'' ``petroleum oil,''
and ``oily mixtures.'' We eliminated ``mineral oil'' from the examples
in the definition of ``petroleum oil'' because it is a petroleum-based
oil component regulated under Annex I of MARPOL. The deletion is not
intended to imply that ``mineral oil'' is not a regulated substance but
that it does not need to be separately stated as an example in the
definition. We also propose adding definitions for ``fuel oil,'' ``oil
residue,'' ``oily rags,'' and ``oil cargo residue'' and incorporating
industry standard terms into these definitions. The definitions of
``fuel oil'' and ``oil cargo residue'' also list synonyms of the terms
(i.e., ``oil fuel'' and ``cargo oil residue,'' respectively). We would
use these terms and definitions consistently throughout
[[Page 48551]]
33 CFR parts 151, 155, 157, and 158 to eliminate ambiguity.
The following table, Table 1, provides the:
Proposed amendments for NPRM;
MARPOL 73/78 cites dictating regulatory changes;
33 and 46 CFR cites affected; and
Brief descriptions of the proposed regulatory changes to
the U.S. regulations.
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
[[Page 48552]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU00.000
[[Page 48553]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU00.001
[[Page 48554]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU00.002
BILLING CODE 4910-15-C
[[Page 48555]]
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and does not require an
assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of
that order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed this
regulatory evaluation under that order. Also, this proposed rulemaking
is not ``significant'' under the regulatory policies and procedures of
the Department of Transportation (DOT) (44 FR 11040; February 26,
1979). We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be
minimal, and a full Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 10e of the
regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is not necessary. However, we
have prepared a regulatory evaluation to clarify the potential cost and
benefit impact from this proposed rule.
a. General Assumptions
1. The cost of this rulemaking is calculated for a 10-year period
beginning in 2001 and ending on 2010.
2. In accordance with current Office of Budget and Management (OMB)
guidance, program costs and benefits are discounted at 7 percent
present value in year 2000 dollars.
3. Annual populations for the cost requirements are based on trend
data from 1992 through 1996 contained in the Coast Guard Marine Safety
Management System (MSMS) for U.S-flag vessels.
4. Tank vessels are currently practicing the policies established
in Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular (NVIC) No. 6-94,
``Guidance for Issuing International Oil Pollution Prevention (IOPP)
Certificates Under Annex I of the International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as Modified by the Protocol
of 1978 Relating Thereto (MARPOL 73/78).'' These policies resulted, in
part, from amendments to MARPOL 73/78 that required each tanker of 150
gross tons and above and each ship of 400 gross tons and above that
engages in a voyage between countries party to MARPOL 73/78 to be
surveyed and to have an IOPP Certificate. Also, NVIC No. 6-94 updated
and corrected former NVIC No. 9-86 to account for U.S. policy
determinations made since NVIC No. 9-86 was issued and for the
following actions taken by the International Maritime Organization
(IMO):
Acceptance and entering into force of requirements dealing
with the design of new tankers built on or after July 6, 1993.
Measures for existing tankers.
New oil discharge criteria for filtering equipment and
control systems including instantaneous rate to discharge oily cargo
mixtures.
This rulemaking proposes to incorporate these policies into our
regulations to ensure that all U.S. vessels subject to these
requirements meet the international standards approved by the IMO and
required by MARPOL 73/78.
b. Costs
1. Industry Costs. The total present value costs for this proposed
rule for the 10-year period would approximate $2,399,960. The costs are
distributed as follows:
i. Oily-water or bilge monitors, $3,037.
ii. Implementation and maintenance of placards for reception
facilities, $2,396,923.
Oily-water or bilge monitors. Based on the policies
established in NVIC No. 6-94, we estimated that at least 90 percent of
the 131 tank vessel affected population is currently operating within
policy guidelines by automatically or manually setting the oil or oily
water discharge rate to not exceed 30 liters per nautical mile. The
other 10 percent would simply upgrade their existing monitoring systems
with new components that meet the new requirement. The estimated
equipment costs to upgrade the components of an existing bilge monitor
averages 250 dollars, making the one time cost of this proposed change
approximately $3,250. When present valued in 2000 dollars, the cost
would be $3,037.
Oil filtering equipment. We estimate that the proposed
requirement would affected 650 vessels, all of which are currently
practicing the policies established in NVIC No. 6-94 and currently have
oil filtering equipment that complies with the 15 ppm oil content of
the effluent discharged. Therefore, this proposed requirement would not
impose additional costs.
Automatic shut-off device/alarm. We estimate that he
proposed requirement would affect 396 ships, all of which already
practice the policies established in NVIC No. 6-94. Therefore, this
proposed requirement would not impose additional costs.
Damage stability for tank vessels. We estimate that the
proposed requirement would affect 650 vessels. Based on trend data from
the MSMS database (1992-1996), we estimate that 13 U.S.-flag tank
vessels 20,000 DWT and above would be built each year. For every
single-hull tank vessel that is phased-out before 2015, a double-hull
tank vessel may be built as its replacement. Currently, 54 single-hull
tankships and 160 single-hull tank barges will be phased out over the
next 16 years. For the 10-year period of costs for this rulemaking,
approximately 3 tankships and 10 tank barges will be built annually to
meet demand and to replace phased-out tank vessels (130 tank vessels
over the 10-year period).
We expect the affected tank vessel fleet to incur minimal costs to
comply with the damage stability requirements proposed in this rule.
The U.S. international fleet currently complies with the damage
stability requirements in MARPOL 73/78. Also, vessels in the U.S.
domestic fleet that hold IOPP Certificates currently meet the
additional design and engineering calculation requirements for design
stability.
Moreover, under section 4115(a) of the Oil Pollution Act of 90 (OPA
90), these single-hull tank vessels are required to be retrofitted with
double hulls or phased out of service by the year 2015. For vessels
being retrofitted, there would be nominal additional costs during the
design process for additional stability analyses. The proposed
requirements would entail fitting the vessel with U-shaped ballast
tanks, instead of J-shaped (or other) ballast tanks, and relocating
cargo tank boundaries.
Intact stability for tank vessels. We assume that all tank
vessels of 5,000 DWT and above will be constructed so that they are
capable of engaging in international commerce. Therefore, we assume
that, in order to participate in international commerce, all currently
operating tank vessels affected by this rulemaking already meet the
intact stability requirements in MARPOL 73/78. Additionally, we assume
that, in order to engage in international commerce, all tank vessels
currently under construction and those constructed subsequent to this
rulemaking will also be constructed in accordance with the requirements
of MARPOL 73/78. Therefore, since all current and future tank vessels
affected by this rulemaking must already meet the requirements of
MARPOL 73/78 in order to engage in trade with other countries signatory
to MARPOL, there are no additional costs incurred by the intact
stability requirement.
Implementation and maintenance of placards for reception
facilities. There are 11,391 reception facilities that would be
affected by the proposed change. We estimate that the average facility
would need to post three placards to adequately cover the entrances and
place of business that are
[[Page 48556]]
clearly visible for port and terminal users. Therefore, each facility
would post approximately three placards, which are estimated to cost
$50 each. This is a standardized cost for placards or signs approved by
the Coast Guard. The onetime cost for implementation of this proposed
requirement is approximately $1,708,650. When present valued in 2000
dollars, the cost would be $1,596,869.
The display of placards also implies that the placards be
maintained by the ports or terminals. This maintenance constitutes a
collection of information and recordkeeping requirement under the
Paperwork Reduction Act. The total annual cost (burden) of $113,910 for
this information-collection would be added to a revised OMB collection
2115-0543. The affected population and hour burden is explained in the
``Collection of Information'' section. The accumulated present value
for the 10-year period of this burden is $800,054. Therefore the total
present value cost (burden) of this requirement is $2,396,923.
The definitions of the terms ``ports'' and ``terminals'' under 33
CFR 158.120 include virtually all ports and terminals. It is easier to
describe those terminals that are not required to provide reception
facilities for garbage. They are recreational boating facilities that
can provide wharfage or other services for less than 10 recreational
vessels at the same time and locations and facilities containing only
an unattended launching ramp. All other waterfront facilities, where
vessels can tie up in the navigable waters or waters subject to the
jurisdiction of the U.S. out to the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and
where the owner or operator of the facility is conducting business with
ships, must be capable of receiving garbage from visiting ships. These
facilities include fishing terminals, fixed or floating facilities
supplying petroleum products or other services, waterfront facilities
servicing the offshore oil industry, recreational boating facilities
that are capable of providing wharfage or other services for 10 or more
vessels at the same time, waterfront facilities servicing commercial
ships, and offshore structures that receive ships such as deepwater
ports.
Equivalent shore connections. For the purposes of this
proposed rulemaking, we consider any shore connection compatible with
U.S. reception facilities as equivalent to each other. All ships that
would be subject to this requirement currently have shore connections
that are compatible with U.S. reception facility connections.
This proposed rule would allow the specified ships to use any shore
connection that is compatible with U.S. reception facilities when
operating only on domestic voyages, rather than a connection that meets
the international-type standard. Although the ships would not comply
with the international-type standard, they would meet the intent of the
standard by having a connector that is compatible with discharge
facilities in their area of operation. Because these ships currently
have connections that are compatible with the facilities used, this
requirement would not impose an additional cost (or benefit) on these
ships.
2. Government costs. We expect that government costs under this
rule would be negligible. The information-collection requirements
contained in this rule are minor additions to information-collection
requirements imposed by other Coast Guard regulations.
c. Benefits
1. Industry Benefits. The total present value of industry benefits
for this proposed rule for the 10-year period would be approximately
$164.1 million. The industry benefits for this proposed rulemaking are
distributed as follows:
i. IOPP certificates: $3,715.
ii. Garbage discharge records: $163.5 million.
iii. International oil discharge compliance: $632,122.
IOPP Certificates. This rulemaking proposes to change the
term of the IOPP certificate from 4 to 5 years for both inspected and
uninspected vessels. The costs for this rulemaking are included under
the approved collection OMB 2115-0518. By aligning U.S. regulations
with international standards, the annual paperwork burden cost would be
reduced by $530. The 10-year accumulated present value of the recurring
benefit is approximately $3,715.
Refuse discharge. This proposed regulation would require
each oceangoing ship of 400 gross tons and above engaged in commerce
and documented under the laws of the United States or numbered by a
State, each vessel certified to carry 15 passengers or more on
international voyages, and each fixed or floating platform subject to
the jurisdiction of the United States to maintain garbage discharge
records on board. We use these records to determine how ship-generated
waste is handled (i.e., incinerated, discharged at sea, or off-loaded
at a shore reception facility). Since all of these vessels currently
maintain these records, this proposal would impose no additional
information-collection burden. It would create an annual benefit for
those vessels no longer required to maintain these records. The total
annual cost (burden) for this information-collection is estimated in
revised OMB collection 2115-0613 to be a total annual cost (burden) of
$2.6 million, and it would apply to 1,296 vessels. The previous
requirement imposed a cost (burden) of $25.9 million on 16,878 vessels.
The annual impact of the proposed rule would save industry $23.3
million. Therefore, the accumulated present value for the 10-year
period of this benefit is $163.5 million.
International oil discharge limitations compliance.
Implementing these proposed regulations would ensure that U.S. vessels
comply with the international oil discharge limitations, enabling them
to engage in international trade with minimal interruption. Vessels
that are not in compliance with this rulemaking could be denied entry
into ports of countries party to MARPOL 73/78 or could experience
detention in these ports. These actions would result in a substantial
monetary loss due to the vessel's inability to engage in trade.
Assuming non-compliance with the international oil discharge
limitations, and that one U.S. vessel would be detained each year, we
estimate the avoided-cost savings of complying with this rulemaking
would be $90,000 per year. The accumulated present value for the ten-
year period of this benefit would be $632,122.
Oily-water separating equipment. Based on the methodology
indicated in the IMO publication and the United States National Academy
of Sciences study, ``Petroleum in the Marine Environment'' (adopted in
1981), we identified that the 650 vessels equipped with oily-water
separating equipment for oil content allowances at 100 ppm currently
discharge approximately \1/10\ of their accumulated bilge oil to sea.
When applied to all of the vessels subject to this requirement, the
Coast Guard estimates indicate a potential reduction in the amount of
oily water discharged into the sea by approximately 396 tons (2,485
barrels) annually, if oily-water equipment has a discharge allowance of
15 ppm.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently
[[Page 48557]]
owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and
governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
There are two proposed requirements that would impose additional
costs to the small entities affected by this proposed rulemaking. The
proposed placards to be posted by reception facilities would add an
estimated cost of $150 per facility. Reception facilities would also be
required to maintain the proposed placards, and the annual maintenance
burden would be $10 per facility. The 10-year present value of the
maintenance cost imposed on each reception facility would be $75. We
assume that each facility would need to spend a half-hour maintaining
the placards on annual basis at a wage rate of $20 per hour. Combined,
the accumulated present value of the cost of placards and their
maintenance would be $225 for the analyzed 10-year period ($150 for
placards + $75 maintenance). We consider this cost to be minimal and
would not pose a substantial economic burden on the reception
facilities affected by this proposed requirement.
The proposed oily-water or bilge monitors requirement would impose
a $250 cost per tank vessel. This would be a one-time cost, and in our
view a very small additional cost to tank vessel owners, considering
that the cost of a tank vessel, depending on its size, may be
$100,000,000 or more.
In addition, we propose removing the requirement for garbage
discharge records for ships of 12.2 meters (40 ft) or more in length
and less than 400 gross tons. These ships are most likely to be owned
by the small entities in this industry and would no longer be required
to keep garbage disposal records. Therefore, the small entities that
own these vessels would benefit from the proposed change in the
regulation. We estimate that 15,582 oceangoing vessels would no longer
need to meet this requirement, and the average annual cost savings to
each vessel would be $1,494 ($23.3 million/15,582 vessels). The
accumulated present value of these cost savings for the 10-year period
of analysis would be $10,491 per vessel (163.5 million/15,582 vessels).
Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that
this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment to the Docket Management Facility at the
address under ADDRESSES. In your comment, explain why you think it
qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically
affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please consult Lieutenant Commander Michael
Jendrossek at 202-267-1181. We also maintain a small business
regulatory assistance Web Page at http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/regs/reghome.html that has current information on small entity issues and
proposed Coast Guard regulations.
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247).
Collection of Information
This proposed rule would call for three collections of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). As
defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(c), ``collection of information'' comprises
reporting, recordkeeping, monitoring, posting, labeling, and other,
similar actions. The title and description of the 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.
The information-collection requirements of this proposed rule are
addressed in the OMB collections 2115-0518, 2115-0543, and 2115-0613.
Refuse discharge. This proposed requirement would mandate that
every oceangoing ship 400 gross tons and above and all vessels
certified to carry 15 or more passengers engaged in international
voyages develop and maintain garbage discharge records on board.
Oceangoing vessels less than 400 gross tons would no longer be required
to carry garbage discharge records with the exception of vessels
certified to carry 15 passengers or more on international voyages. The
burden for this requirement would be included in a revised OMB
collection 2115-0613.
IOPP Certificates. This rulemaking proposes to change the term of
the IOPP certificate from 4 to 5 years. This proposed change would
decrease the information-collection burden on ship owners. The
information-collection burden of the IOPP certificate is included under
the previously approved OMB collection 2115-0518.
Placards for reception facilities. The proposal includes a
requirement for all U.S. reception facilities to post and maintain
placards that notify users that the facility is a waste reception
facility and that inadequacies shall be reported to the local Coast
Guard COTP. This information is required to comply with the MARPOL
Protocol. The information-collection costs associated with this
requirement, under OMB (5 CFR part 1320.3(c)(1)), would include only
the facilities' cost to keep records to maintain these placards. This
information-collection would be added in an amended OMB collection
2115-0543.
1. OMB Collection 2115-0518
Title: Requirements for the Installation and Use of Oil Discharge
Monitoring Equipment for Tank Vessels and International Oil Pollution
Prevention Certificates.
Summary of the Collection of Information: This collection concerns
the issuance of International Oil Pollution Prevention (IOPP)
Certificates and would be impacted by the proposed changes in 33 CFR
151.19.
Need for Information: Not applicable. This proposed rule would
amend a previously approved collection of information by changing the
term of a certificate. The need to collect this information (i.e., to
assist the Coast Guard in determining whether or not a ship complies
with MARPOL 73/78) is required by MARPOL.
Description of the Respondents: This collection would affect U.S.-
flag tank vessels of 150 gross tons and above, and other U.S.-flag
ships of 400 gross tons and above, that engage in voyages to ports or
offshore terminals under the jurisdiction of other parties to MARPOL
73/78.
Number of Respondents: According to Marine Safety Information
System (MSIS) records, the collection of information for approximately
1,062
[[Page 48558]]
vessels would be affected by the proposed changes.
Frequency of Response: An IOPP Certificate would be issued every 5
years, instead of every 4 years.
Burden of Response: The burden to respondents is approximately 20
minutes (0.33 hours) per response.
Estimated Total Burden: During a 3-year period, the total reporting
and recordkeeping burden would be 784 hours.
2. OMB Collection 2115-0543
New Title: Adequacy Certification, Advance Notice, and Placards for
Reception Facilities.
Summary of the Collection of Information: This collection would be
amended by the proposed maintenance requirement of placards in 33 CFR
158.415. The proposed requirement would direct the reception facility
to maintain placards describing their disposal requirements.
Need for Information: The maintenance of placards can ensure that
they are legible and accurate. Section 33 CFR 158.415 requires
facilities to maintain placards describing how and where to report
inadequacies.
Proposed Use of Information: This information would strengthen
enforcement efforts for discharge prohibitions of MARPOL 73/78 Annex I
(Oil), Annex II (NLS), and Annex V (Garbage) at reception facilities.
Description of Respondents: Ports or terminals that have reception
facilities.
Number of Respondents: 11,391 reception facilities during a 3-year
period.
Frequency of Response: Perform maintenance as needed.
Burden of Response: We estimate that it would take 30 minutes (0.5
hours) of management time to comply with the proposed requirement.
Estimated Total Annual Burden: The annual maintenance of placards
would be 5,696 hours.
3. OMB Collection 2115-0613
New Title: Waste Management Plans, Recordkeeping of Refuse
Discharge, and Letter of Instruction for Persons-in-Charge.
Summary of the Collection of Information: This collection addresses
the refuse discharge records as would be affected by the proposed rule
in 33 CFR 151.55. As a result, we would amend and incorporate the
following approved OMB Collections into one:
OMB 2115-0120 ``Transfer Procedures and Waste Management
Plans.'' Only the Waste Management Plans portion of this collection is
being combined into this submission.
OMB 2115-0613 previously titled ``Recordkeeping of Refuse
Discharges from Ships.''
OMB 2115-0634 previously titled ``Letter of Instruction
for Persons-in-Charge (PIC) on Uninspected Vessels.''
Need for Information: The proposed 33 CFR 151.55 would require U.S.
ships to maintain records of discharge and disposal operations
(incineration, legal discharge at sea, off-loading to a port reception
facility, etc.) to determine how ship-generated waste is handled.
Proposed Use of Information: This information would ensure that the
designated vessel meets a particular pollution prevention standard that
promotes the safety of life, environment, and property in marine
transportation.
Description of Respondents: The proposed rule would affect
operators of U.S.-flag oceangoing vessels of 400 gross tons and above
and all vessels certified to carry 15 passengers or more engaged in
international voyages. Vessel operators would maintain documentation on
garbage discharge. Current collection requirements on Manned Fixed or
MODUs would not be impacted by the proposed changes.
Number of Respondents: The proposed regulation would require 1,296
vessel operators to maintain records.
Frequency of Response: Every time garbage is disposed, it must be
documented.
Burden of Response: Each record entry is estimated to take 5
minutes.
Estimated Total Annual Burden: The refusal discharge requirement
would pose a burden of 52,569 hours for the affected vessels in this
proposed rulemaking. The Office of Management and Budget has already
approved the collection requirement. The effect this proposed rule
would have on the collection of information is to reduce the affected
population as it relates to refuse discharge records.
Public Comment on the Collections of Information: As required by
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), we have
submitted a copy of this proposed rule to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for its review of the collection of information.
We ask for public comment on the proposed collection of information
to help us determine how useful the information is; whether it can help
us perform our functions better; whether it is readily available
elsewhere; how accurate our estimate of the burden of collection is;
how valid our methods for determining burden are; how we can improve
the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information; and how we can
minimize the burden of collection.
If you submit comments on the collection of information, submit
them both to OMB and to the Docket Management Facility where indicated
under ADDRESSES, by the date under DATES.
Before the requirements for this collection of information become
effective, we will publish notice in the Federal Register of OMB's
decision to approve, modify, or disapprove the collection.
Federalism
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism under that order.
Section 3(b) of the order allows Federal agencies to take a
national action that limits the policymaking discretion of the States
if there is constitutional and statutory authority for the action and
if the action is appropriate in light of the presence of a problem of
national significance. With the decision of the Supreme Court in the
consolidated cases of United States v. Locke (number 98-1701) and
Intertanko v. Locke (number 1706) on March 6, 2000, (120 S.Ct. 1135
(1999)) the States are precluded from regulating any of the categories
covered by 46 U.S.C. 3703(a): design, construction, alteration, repair,
maintenance, operation, equipping, personnel qualification, and manning
of tank vessels.
This proposed rule concerns requirements for the construction
(damage and intact stability), operation (operational discharges of
oil, International Oil Pollution Prevention Certificates, and garbage
recordkeeping requirements), and equipping (oily-water separators) for
tank vessels or other oceangoing vessels. It also would implement the
statutory mandate (33 U.S.C. 1905(f)(2)) for placards at reception
facilities under MARPOL 73/7 and allow the use of an optional type of
shore connection equipment for domestic vessels discharging oily
mixtures at shoreside facilities. This entire proposed rule falls
within the preempted categories listed above, which, as we have long
held, apply to both inspected vessels as well as tank vessels. For this
reason, preemption is not an issue in this rulemaking.
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 regulatory
actions not specifically required by law. In particular, the Act
[[Page 48559]]
addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local,
or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would
not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this
rule elsewhere in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not effect a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and does not
concern an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
Environment
We considered the environmental impact of this proposed rule and
concluded that, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(d) and (34)(e), of
Commandant Instruction M16475.1C, this proposed rule is categorically
excluded from further environmental documentation.
The proposed rule would align U.S. regulations concerning IOPP
Certificates, oily-water separators, operational discharge of oil, and
damage and intact stability of tank vessels with the international
standards, meeting the recent amendments to MARPOL 73/78. This
rulemaking would also require vessels of 20,000 deadweight tons (DWT)
and above to comply with the MARPOL 73/78 damage stability provisions
and vessels of 5,000 DWT and above to comply with the MARPOL 73/78
intact stability provisions. In addition, this rulemaking would amend
requirements regarding the use of domestic shore connections,
recordkeeping requirements for the discharge of garbage, and placards
telling how to report deficiencies at reception facilities. This rule
would only relax the reporting requirements on garbage disposal
records. It does not relax the manner in which garbage is treated.
Therefore this rule is categorically excluded from further
environmental documentation. A ``Categorical Exclusion Determination''
is available in the docket for inspection or copying where indicated
under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects
33 CFR Part 151
Administrative practice and procedure, Oil pollution, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Water pollution control.
33 CFR Part 155
Hazardous substances, Incorporation by references, Oil pollution,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
33 CFR Part 157
Cargo vessels, Oil pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
33 CFR Part 158
Administrative practice and procedure, Harbors, Oil pollution,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Water pollution
control.
46 CFR Part 172
Cargo vessels, Hazardous materials transportation, Incorporation by
reference, Marine safety.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR parts 151, 155, 157, and 158 and 46 CFR part 172 as
follows:
33 CFR PART 151--VESSELS CARRYING OIL, NOXIOUS LIQUID SUBSTANCES,
GARBAGE, MUNICIPAL OR COMMERCIAL WASTE, AND BALLAST WATER
1. The authority citation for part 151, subpart A, continues to
read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321 and 1903; Pub. L. 104-227 (110 Stat.
3034), E.O. 12777, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp. p. 351; 49 CFR 1.46.
Sec. 151.01 [Amended]
2. In Sec. 151.01, remove the note.
3. In Sec. 151.05, revise the definition of the terms ``MARPOL 73/
78'', ``oil'', ``oily mixture'' and ``operational waste'' and add, in
alphabetical order, the definitions of ``fuel oil'' ``oil cargo
residue'' and ``oily rags'' to read as follows:
Sec. 151.05 Definitions.
* * * * *
Fuel oil means any oil used to fuel the propulsion and auxiliary
machinery of the ship carrying the fuel. The term ``fuel oil'' is also
known as ``oil fuel.''
* * * * *
MARPOL 73/78 means the International Convention for the Prevention
of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978
relating to that Convention. A copy of MARPOL 73/78 is available from
the International Maritime Organization, 4 Albert Embankment, London,
SE1 7SR, England.
* * * * *
Oil means petroleum whether in solid, semi-solid, emulsified, or
liquid form, including but not limited to, crude oil, fuel oil, sludge,
oil refuse, oil residue, and refined products, and, without limiting
the generality of the foregoing, includes the substances listed in
Appendix I of Annex I of MARPOL 73/78. ``Oil'' does not include animal
and vegetable based oil or noxious liquid substances (NLS) designated
under Annex II of MARPOL 73/78.
Oil cargo residue means any residue of oil cargo whether in solid,
semi-solid, emulsified, or liquid form from cargo tanks and cargo pump
room bilges, including but not limited to, drainages, leakages,
exhausted oil, muck, clingage, sludge, bottoms, paraffin (wax), and any
constituent component of oil. The term ``oil cargo residue'' is also
known as ``cargo oil residue.''
Oil residue means--
(1) Oil cargo residue; and
(2) Other residue of oil whether in solid, semi-solid, emulsified,
or liquid form, resulting from drainages, leakages, exhausted oil, and
other similar occurrences from machinery spaces.
Oily mixture means a mixture, in any form, with any oil content.
``Oily mixture'' includes, but is not limited to--
(1) Slops from bilges;
(2) Slops from oil cargoes (such as cargo tank washings, oily
waste, and oily refuse);
(3) Oil residue; and
(4) Oily ballast water from cargo or fuel oil tanks.
Oily rags means rags soaked with oil.
Operational waste means all cargo-associated waste, maintenance
waste, and cargo residues other than oil residues and NLS cargo
residues. ``Operational wastes'' includes ashes and clinkers (i.e., a
mass of incombustible matter fused together by heat) from shipboard
incinerators and coal burning boilers but does not include plastic
clinkers, which are treated as an Annex V waste, or oily
[[Page 48560]]
rags, which are treated as an Annex I waste.
* * * * *
Sec. 151.08 [Amended]
4. In Sec. 151.08(a), remove the words ``oil or oily residues and
mixtures'' and add, in their place, the words ``oil, oil residue, or
oily mixtures''.
5. In Sec. 151.10-
a. In paragraph (a)(5), remove the number ``100'' and add, in its
place, the number ``15'';
b. In the note at the end of paragraph (f)(2)(iii), remove the
words ``the residues and mixtures containing oil'' and add, in their
place, the words ``oil residues and oily mixtures''; and
c. Revise paragraph (c), paragraph (f) introductory text, and
paragraphs (f)(2)(i) through (f)(2)(iii) to read as follows:
Sec. 151.10 Control of oil discharges.
* * * * *
(c) The overboard discharge of any oil cargo residues and oily
mixtures that include oil cargo residues from an oil tanker is
prohibited, unless discharged in compliance with part 157 of this
chapter.
* * * * *
(f) The person in charge of an oceangoing ship that cannot
discharge oily mixtures into the sea in compliance with paragraphs (a),
(b), (c), or (d) of this section must ensure that those oily mixtures
are--
* * * * *
(2) * * *
(i) The estimated time of day the ship will discharge oily
mixtures;
(ii) The type of oily mixtures to be discharged; and
(iii) The volume of oily mixtures to be discharged.
* * * * *
6. In Sec. 151.13, revise paragraph (b)(3) to read as set forth
below and, in paragraph (f), remove the words ``oil residues'' and add,
in their place, the words ``oily mixtures'':
Sec. 151.13 Special areas for Annex I of MARPOL 73/78.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) All ships operating in the Antarctic area must have on board a
tank or tanks of sufficient capacity to retain all oily mixtures while
operating in the area and arrangements made to discharge oily mixtures
at a reception facility outside the Antarctic area.
* * * * *
7. In Sec. 151.19, revise paragraph (e) introductory text to read
as follows:
Sec. 151.19 International Oil Pollution Prevention (IOPP)
Certificates.
* * * * *
(e) The IOPP Certificate for each inspected or uninspected ship is
valid for a maximum period of 5 years from the date of issue, except as
follows:
* * * * *
Sec. 151.25 [Amended]
8. In Sec. 151.25--
a. In paragraph (d)(2), remove the words ``dirty ballast'' and add,
in their place, the words ``ballast containing an oily mixture'';
b. In paragraph (d)(3), remove the words ``oily residues (sludge)''
and add, in their place, the words ``oil residue''; and
c. In paragraph (e)(10), remove the word ``residues'' and add, in
its place, the words ``oil residue''.
Sec. 151.26 [Amended]
9. In Sec. 151.26--
a. In paragraphs (b)(3)(i)(A) and (b)(3)(i)(B), after the words ``A
discharge of oil'', add the words ``or oily mixture''; and
b. In paragraph (b)(3)(iii)(B), after the words ``For actual or
probable discharges of oil'', add the words ``or oily mixtures''.
10. In Sec. 151.55, revise paragraphs(a)(1) and (a)(2) and add a
new paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 151.55 Recordkeeping requirements.
(a) * * *
(1) Every manned oceangoing ship (other than a fixed or floating
platform) of 400 gross tons and above that is engaged in commerce and
that is documented under the laws of the United States or numbered by a
State.
(2) Every manned fixed or floating platform subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States.
(3) Every manned ship that is certified to carry 15 passengers or
more engaged in international voyages.
* * * * *
PART 155--OIL OR HAZARDOUS MATERIAL POLLUTION PREVENTION
REGULATIONS FOR VESSELS
11. The authority citation for part 155 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231, 1321(j); 46 U.S.C. 3715, 3719; sec.
2, E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; 49 CFR 1.46,
1.46(iii). Sections 155.100 through 155.130, 155.350 through
155.400, 155.430, 155.440, 155.470, 155.1030(j) and (k), and
155.1065(g) also issued under 33 U.S.C. 1903(b); and Secs. 155.1110
through 155.1150 also issued under 33 U.S.C. 2735.
Sec. 155.330 [Amended]
12. In Sec. 155.330, in the section heading, remove the words
``Bilge slops/fuel oil'' and add, in their place, the words ``Oily
mixture (bilge slops)/fuel oil'' and, in paragraph (b), remove the
words ``oily residue'' and add, in their place, the words ``oil
residue''.
13. In Sec. 155.350, revise the section heading and paragraph
(a)(2) to read as follows and, in paragraph (b), remove the words
``oily residue'' and add, in their place, the words ``oil residue'':
Sec. 155.350 Oily mixture (Bilge slops)/fuel oil tank ballast water
discharges on oceangoing ships of less than 400 gross tons.
(a) * * *
(2) Has approved oily-water separating equipment for processing
oily mixtures from bilges or fuel oil tank ballast and discharges into
the sea according to Sec. 151.10 of this chapter.
* * * * *
14. In Sec. 155.360--
a. In the section heading, remove the words ``Bilge slops'' and
add, in their place, the words ``Oily mixture (Bilge slops)'';
b. In paragraph (a), remove the number ``100'' and add, in its
place, the number ``15'' and remove the words ``oily bilge slops or
oily'' and add, in their place, the words ``oily mixtures from bilges
or'';
c. In paragraph (b), remove the words ``oily residues (sludges)''
and add, in their place, the words ``oil residue'';
d. In paragraph (b)(2), remove the words ``oily wastes'' and add,
in their place, the words ``oily mixtures''; and
e. Revise paragraph (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 155.360 Oily Mixtures (Bilge slops) discharges on oceangoing
ships of 400 gross tons and above but less than 10,000 gross tons,
excluding ships that carry ballast water in their fuel oil tanks.
* * * * *
(e) This section does not apply to a fixed or floating drilling rig
or other platform, except as specified in Sec. 155.400(a)(2).
15. In Sec. 155.370--
a. Revise the section heading and paragraph (a) to read as set
forth below;
b. In paragraph (b) introductory text, remove the words ``oily
residues (sludges)'' and add, in their place, the words ``oil
residue'';
c. In paragraph (b)(1), remove the words ``oily residues'' and add,
in their place, the words ``oil residue'';
d. In paragraph (b)(2), remove the words ``oily wastes'' and add,
in their place, the words ``oily mixtures'';
e. Remove paragraph (d);
[[Page 48561]]
f. Redesignate paragraphs (e) and (f) as paragraphs (d) and (e),
respectively; and
g. Revise new paragraph (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 155.370 Oily mixture (bilge slops)/fuel oil tank ballast water
discharges on oceangoing ships of 10,000 gross tons and above and
oceangoing ships of 400 gross tons and above that carry ballast water
in their fuel oil tanks.
(a) No person may operate an oceangoing ship of 10,000 gross tons
and above, or any oceangoing ship of 400 gross tons and above, that
carries ballast water in its fuel oil tanks, unless it has--
(1) Approved 15 ppm oily-water separating equipment for the
processing of oily mixtures from bilges or fuel oil tank ballast;
(2) A bilge alarm; and
(3) A means for automatically stopping any discharge of oily
mixture when the oil content in the effluent exceeds 15 ppm.
* * * * *
(e) This section does not apply to a fixed or floating drilling rig
or other platform, except as specified in Sec. 155.400(a)(2).
Sec. 155.380 [Amended]
16. In Sec. 155.380, remove paragraph (c) and redesignate paragraph
(d) as paragraph (c).
17. In Sec. 155.410, revise paragraph (a)(3) to read as set forth
below and, in paragraph (b), remove the words ``oily bilge slops or
oily'' and add, in their place, the words ``oily mixtures from bilges
or'':
Sec. 155.410 Pumping, piping, and discharge requirements for non-
oceangoing ships of 100 gross tons and above.
(a) * * *
(3) Each outlet required by this section has a shore connection
that is compatible with reception facilities in the ship's area of
operation; and
* * * * *
18. In Sec. 155.420--
a. In paragraph (a)(3), remove the words ``The outlet'' and add, in
their place, the words ``For a ship on an international voyage, the
outlet'';
b. Redesignate paragraphs (a)(4) and (a)(5) as paragraphs (a)(5)
and (a)(6), respectively;
c. Add new paragraph (a)(4) to read as set forth below;
d. In newly designated paragraph (a)(5), remove the word ``wastes''
and add, in its place, the word ``mixtures''; and
e. In paragraph (b), remove the words ``oily bilge slops or oily''
and add, in their place, the words ``oily mixtures from bilges or'':
Sec. 155.420 Pumping, piping, and discharge requirements for
oceangoing ships of 100 gross tons and above but less than 400 gross
tons.
(a) * * *
(4) For a ship not on an international voyage, the outlet required
by this section has a shore connection that is compatible with
reception facilities in the ship's area of operation;
* * * * *
19. In Sec. 155.430, revise paragraph (a) introductory text to read
as set forth below and, in paragraph (b), remove the word ``wastes''
and add, in its place, the word ``mixtures'':
Sec. 155.430 Standard discharge connections for oceangoing ships of
400 gross tons and above.
(a) All oceangoing ships of 400 gross tons and above must have a
standard shore connection for reception facilities to discharge oily
mixtures from machinery space bilges or ballast water containing an
oily mixture from fuel oil tanks. The discharge connection must have
the following dimensions:
* * * * *
Sec. 155.440 [Amended]
20. In Sec. 155.440, in the section heading, remove the words
``water ballast'' and add, in their place, the words ``ballast water''.
21. Revise Sec. 155.810 to read as follows:
Sec. 155.810 Tank vessel security.
Operators of tank vessels carrying more oil cargo residue than
normal in any cargo tank must assign a surveillance person or persons
responsible for maintaining standard vessel security.
Sec. 155.1015 [Amended]
22. In Sec. 155.1015, in paragraphs (a) introductory text and
(c)(2), before the words ``cargo residue'', add the word ``oil''.
23. In Sec. 155.1020, revise the definition of ``petroleum oil'' to
read as follows:
Sec. 155.1020 Definitions.
* * * * *
Petroleum oil means petroleum in any form including, but not
limited to, crude oil, fuel oil, sludge, oil residue, and refined
products.
* * * * *
PART 157--RULES FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT
RELATING TO TANK VESSELS CARRYING OIL IN BULK
24. The authority citation for part 157 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1903; 46 U.S.C. 3703, 3703a (note); 49 CFR
1.46. Subparts G, H, and I are also issued under section 4115(b),
Pub. L. 101-380, 104 Stat. 520; Pub. L. 104-55, 109 Stat. 546.
25. In Sec. 157.03:
a. In the definitions of ``lightweight'', ``oil fuel'', and
``segregated ballast'' remove the words ``oil fuel'' and add, in their
place, the words ``fuel oil'';
b. In the definition of ``slop tank'', remove the words ``oil
mixtures'' and add, in their place, the words ``oily mixtures'';
c. Add, in alphabetical order, the definitions of the terms
``MARPOL 73/78'', ``oil cargo residue'', and ``oil residue'';
d. Remove the definition of ``MARPOL Protocol''; and
e. Revise the definitions of ``oily mixture'' and ``petroleum oil''
to read as follows:
Sec. 157.03 Definitions.
* * * * *
MARPOL 73/78 means the International Convention for the Prevention
of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978
relating to that Convention. A copy of MARPOL 73/78 is available from
the International Maritime Organization, 4 Albert Embankment, London,
SE1 7SR, England.
* * * * *
Oil cargo residue means any residue of oil cargo whether in solid,
semi-solid, emulsified, or liquid form from cargo tanks and cargo pump
room bilges, including but not limited to, drainages, leakages,
exhausted oil, muck, clingage, sludge, bottoms, paraffin (wax), and any
constituent component of oil. The term ``oil cargo residue'' is also
known as ``cargo oil residue.''
Oil residue means--
(1) Oil cargo residue; and
(2) Other residue of oil whether in solid, semi-solid, emulsified,
or liquid form, resulting from drainages, leakages, exhausted oil, and
other similar occurrences from machinery spaces.
Oily mixture means a mixture, in any form, with any oil content.
``Oily mixture'' includes, but is not limited to--
(1) Slops from bilges;
(2) Slops from oil cargoes (such as cargo tank washings, oily
waste, and oily refuse);
(3) Oil residue; and
(4) Oily ballast water from cargo or fuel oil tanks, including any
oil cargo residue.
* * * * *
Petroleum oil means petroleum in any form including, but not
limited to, crude
[[Page 48562]]
oil, fuel oil, sludge, oil residue, and refined products.
* * * * *
Sec. 157.04 [Amended]
26. In Sec. 157.04(b), remove the words ``MARPOL Protocol'' and
add, in their place, the words ``MARPOL 73/78''.
Sec. 157.07 [Amended]
27. In Sec. 157.07, remove the words ``MARPOL Protocol'' and add,
in their place, the words ``MARPOL 73/78''.
Sec. 157.11 [Amended]
28. In Sec. 157.11(a), remove the words ``cargo residues and
other''.
Sec. 157.12 [Amended]
29. In Sec. 157.12(b)(2), remove the words ``MARPOL Protocol'' and
add, in their place, the words ``MARPOL 73/78''.
30. Revise Sec. 157.15(b) introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 157.15 Slop tanks in tank vessels.
* * * * *
(b) Capacity. Slop tanks must have the total capacity to retain
oily mixtures from cargo tank washings, oil residue, and ballast water
containing an oily mixture of 3 percent or more of the oil carrying
capacity. Two percent capacity is allowed if there are--
* * * * *
Sec. 157.17 [Amended]
31. In Sec. 157.17--
a. In the section heading and in paragraphs (b) and (c), remove the
words ``oily residue'' and add, in their place, the words ``oil residue
(sludge)''; and
b. In paragraph (a), remove the words ``oily residue'' and add, in
their place, the words ``oil residue''.
32. Add Sec. 157.22 to read as follows:
Sec. 157.22 Intact stability requirements.
All tank ships of 5,000 DWT and above contracted after [Insert the
effective date of this rulemaking] must comply with the intact
stability requirements of Regulation 25A, Annex I MARPOL 73/78.
Sec. 157.24 [Amended]
33. In Sec. 157.24(c)(2), remove the words ``MARPOL Protocol'' and
add, in their place, the words ``MARPOL 73/78''.
Sec. 157.24a [Amended]
34. In Sec. 157.24a(b)(2), remove the words ``MARPOL Protocol'' and
add, in their place, the words ``MARPOL 73/78''.
Sec. 157.33 [Amended]
35. In Sec. 157.33, remove the words ``oil fuel'' and add, in their
place, the words ``fuel oil''.
36. In Sec. 157.37--
a. In paragraph (a)(3), remove the number ``60'' and add, in its
place, the number ``30'';
b. In paragraph (a)(7), remove the words ``MARPOL Protocol'' and
add, in their place, the words ``MARPOL 73/78'';
c. In paragraph (b), remove the word ``residues'' and add, in its
place, the words ``oil cargo residues''; and
d. Revise the section heading and paragraph (e) introductory text
to read as follows:
Sec. 157.37 Discharge of oily mixtures from oil cargoes.
* * * * *
(e) Ballast water containing an oily mixture may be discharged
below the waterline at sea by gravity if--
* * * * *
Sec. 157.39 [Amended]
37. In Sec. 157.39--
a. In paragraph (a) and the introductory text of paragraph (b),
remove the words ``oil cargo mixture'' and add, in their place, the
words ``oil cargo residue'';
b. Remove paragraph (b)(1);
c. Redesignate paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(3), and (b)(4) as paragraphs
(b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3), respectively;
d. In newly designated paragraph (b)(2), remove the number ``100''
and add, in its place, the number ``15''.
Sec. 157.43 [Amended]
38. In Sec. 157.43(b) introductory text, remove the words ``oil
mixture'' and add, in their place, the words ``oily mixture''.
Sec. 157.118 [Amended]
39. In Sec. 157.118(a) (1)(ii) and (a)(2)(i), remove the words
``MARPOL Protocol'' and add, in their place, the words ``MARPOL 73/
78''.
Sec. 157.138 [Amended]
40. In Sec. 157.138(a)(1), remove the words ``MARPOL Protocol'' and
add, in their place, the words ``MARPOL 73/78''.
Sec. 157.140 [Amended]
41. In Sec. 157.140(a)(1), remove the words ``oil clingage or
deposits of oil, or both'' and add, in their place, the words ``oil
residues''.
Sec. 157.160 [Amended]
42. In Sec. 157.160 (a)(2) and (b)(3), remove the word ``sludge''
and add, in its place, the words ``oil cargo residue''.
Sec. 157.216 [Amended]
43. In Sec. 157.216 (a)(1)(ii) and (a)(2)(i), remove the words
``MARPOL Protocol'' and add, in their place, the words ``MARPOL 73/
78''.
Sec. 157.224 [Amended]
44. In Sec. 157.224(a), remove the words ``MARPOL Protocol'' and
add, in their place, the words ``MARPOL 73/78''.
Sec. 157.302 [Amended]
45. In Sec. 157.302, paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(6), remove the words
``cargo residues'' and add, in their place, the words ``oil cargo
residues''.
Sec. 157.304 [Amended]
46. In Sec. 157.304(a), remove the words ``cargo residues'' and
add, in their place, the words ``oil cargo residues''.
Sec. 157.310 [Amended]
47. In Sec. 157.310(c), remove the words ``cargo residues'' and
add, in their place, the words ``oil cargo residues''.
Sec. 157.400 [Amended]
48. In Sec. 157.400(b)(2), remove the words ``cargo residue'' and
add, in their place, the words ``oil cargo residue''.
49. In part 157, appendix B, add paragraph 3(f) to read as follows:
Appendix B--Subdivision and Stability Assumptions
* * * * *
3. * * *
(f) For oil tankers of 20,000 tons deadweight and above, the
damage assumptions must be supplemented by the following assumed
bottom raking damage:
(1) Longitudinal extent:
(i) For ships of 75,000 tons deadweight and above, 0.6L measured
from the forward perpendicular.
(ii) For ships of less than 75,000 tons deadweight, 0.4L
measured from the forward perpendicular.
(2) Transverse extent: B/3 anywhere in the bottom.
(3) Vertical extent: Breach of the outer hull.
* * * * *
Appendix D--[Amended]
50. In part 157, appendix D, paragraph 2(a)(1), remove the word
``slop'' and add, in its place, the words ``oily mixtures''.
PART 158--RECEPTION FACILITIES FOR OIL, NOXIOUS LIQUID SUBSTANCES,
AND GARBAGE
51. The authority citation for part 158 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1903(b); 49 CFR 1.46.
Sec. 158.100 [Amended]
52. In Sec. 158.100(b)(1), remove the words ``Residues and mixtures
[[Page 48563]]
containing oil'' and add, in their place, the words ``Oily mixtures''.
Sec. 158.110 [Amended]
53. In Sec. 158.110(a)(1), remove the words ``residues and mixtures
containing oil'' and add, in their place, the words ``oily mixtures''.
54. In Sec. 158.120--
a. Revise the section heading;
b. Remove the definition of ``MARPOL Protocol'';
c. Revise the definition of ``oil'';
d. In the definition of ``reception facility'', remove the words
``residues and mixtures containing oil'' and add, in their place, the
words ``oily mixtures''; and
e. Add, in alphabetical order, the definitions of the terms
``MARPOL 73/78'', ``oil cargo residue'', ``oil residue'', and ``oily
mixtures'' to read as follows:
Sec. 158.120 Definitions.
* * * * *
MARPOL 73/78 means the International Convention for the Prevention
of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978
relating to that Convention. A copy of MARPOL 73/78 is available from
the International Maritime Organization, 4 Albert Embankment, London,
SE1 7SR, England.
* * * * *
Oil means petroleum whether in solid, semi-solid, emulsified, or
liquid form, including but not limited to, crude oil, fuel oil, sludge,
oil refuse, oil residue, and refined products, and, without limiting
the generality of the foregoing, includes the substances listed in
Appendix I of Annex I of MARPOL 73/78. ``Oil'' does not include animal
and vegetable based oil or noxious liquid substances (NLS) designated
under Annex II of MARPOL 73/78.
Oil cargo residue means any residue of oil cargo whether in solid,
semi-solid, emulsified, or liquid form from cargo tanks and cargo pump
room bilges, including but not limited to, drainages, leakages,
exhausted oil, muck, clingage, sludge, bottoms, paraffin (wax), and any
constituent component of oil. The term ``oil cargo residue'' is also
known as ``cargo oil residue.''
Oil residue means--
(1) Oil cargo residue; and
(2) Other residue of oil resulting from drainages, leakages,
exhausted oil, and other similar occurrences from machinery spaces.
Oily mixture means a mixture, in any form, with any oil content.
``Oily mixture'' includes, but is not limited to--
(1) Slops from bilges;
(2) Slops from oil cargoes (such as cargo tank washings, oily
waste, and oily refuse);
(3) Oil residue; and
(4) Oily ballast water from cargo or fuel oil tanks.
* * * * *
Sec. 158.133 [Amended]
55. In Sec. 158.133(a), remove the words ``residues and mixtures
containing oil'' and add, in their place, the words ``oily mixtures''.
Sec. 158.135 [Amended]
56. In Sec. 158.135(a), remove the words ``residues and mixtures
containing oil'' and add, in their place, the words ``oily mixtures''.
Subpart B--[Amended]
57. Revise the heading of subpart B to read as follows:
Subpart B--Criteria for Reception Facilities: Oily Mixtures
Sec. 158.200 [Amended]
58. In Sec. 158.200(a)(2), (a)(3)(i), (a)(3)(iii), and (b), remove
the words ``residues and mixtures containing oil'' and add, in their
place, the words ``oily mixtures''; and, in (a)(3)(ii), remove the
words ``oily ballast'' and add, in their place, the words ``ballast
water containing oily mixtures''.
Sec. 158.210 [Amended]
59. In Sec. 158.210--
a. In paragraph (a), remove the word ``Sludge'' and add, in its
place, the words ``Oil residue'';
b. In paragraph (b), remove the words ``Oily bilge water'' and add,
in their place, the words ``Bilge water containing oily mixtures''; and
c. In paragraph (c), remove the words ``Oily ballast'' and add, in
their place, the words ``Ballast water containing oily mixtures''.
Sec. 158.220 [Amended]
60. In Sec. 158.220--
a. In paragraph (a), remove the word ``Sludge'' and add, in its
place, the words ``Oil residue'';
b. In paragraph (b), remove the words ``Oily bilge water'' and add,
in their place, the words ``Bilge water containing oily mixtures'';
c. In paragraph (c), remove the words ``Oily ballast'' and add, in
their place, the words ``Ballast water containing oily mixtures''; and
d. In paragraph (d), remove the words ``Cargo residue'' and add, in
their place, the words ``Oil cargo residue''.
Sec. 158.230 [Amended]
61. In Sec. 158.230--
a. In paragraph (a), remove the word ``Sludge'' and add, in its
place, the words ``Oil residue''; and
b. In paragraph (b), remove the words ``Oily bilge water'' and add,
in their place, the words ``Bilge water containing oily mixtures''.
62. In Sec. 158.240, revise paragraphs (a) and (b) and the
introductory text to paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 158.240 Ship repair yards.
* * * * *
(a) An amount of ballast from bunker tanks, and the wash water and
oil residue from the cleaning of bunker tanks and oil residue (sludge)
tanks, equal to 8% of the bunker capacity of the largest oceangoing
ship serviced;
(b) An amount of solid oil cargo residues from cargo tanks equal to
0.1% of the deadweight tonnage of the largest oceangoing tanker
serviced;
(c) An amount of ballast water containing oily mixtures and wash
water from in-port tank washing equal to--
* * * * *
(d) An amount of liquid oil cargo residue based on the following
percentages of deadweight tonnage of the largest oceangoing tanker
serviced:
* * * * *
Sec. 158.250 [Amended]
63. In Sec. 158.250, remove the words ``oily bilge water'' wherever
they appear and add, in their place, the words ``bilge water containing
oily mixtures''.
64. Add Sec. 158.415 to read as follows:
Sec. 158.415 Placards for waste reception facilities.
(a) A person in charge of a port or terminal must post one or more
placards in prominent locations and in sufficient numbers so that port
and terminal users can read them. The locations of placards may include
entranceways, site of reception facility, and along the pier or wharf.
If the Captain of the Port determines that the number or location of
the placards is insufficient, he or she may require additional placards
and specify their locations.
(b) The placard must include at least the following words:
(1) ``Waste Reception Facility--which receives (Insert type of
waste) under the requirements of Code of Federal Regulations Title 33,
Part 158. Please report any reception facility inadequacy to the local
U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the Port at (Insert the local Captain of
Port's phone number).''
(2) In paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the words ``Waste
Reception Facility'' must appear in at least 1 inch letters and all
other words in this paragraph must appear in at least \1/2\ inch
letters.
[[Page 48564]]
(3) Each placard must be at least 12 inches high and 11 inches wide
and made of durable material.
46 CFR PART 172--SPECIAL RULES PERTAINING TO BULK CARGOES
65. 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; 49 CFR 1.46.
66. Add Sec. 172.048 to read as follows:
Sec. 172.048 Definitions.
As used in this subpart--
MARPOL 73/38 means the International Convention for the Prevention
of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978
relating to that Convention. A copy of MARPOL 73/78 is available from
the International Maritime Organization, 4 Albert Embankment, London,
SE1 7SR, England.
67. In Sec. 172.065, in table 172.065(a), at the end of the table
before note 1, add a new entry to read as follows:
Sec. 172.065 Damage stability.
* * * * *
Table 172.065(a)--Extent of Damage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * *
* * *
GROUNDING PENETRATION FOR RAKING DAMAGE
For tank vessels of 20,000 tons deadweight and above, the following
assumed bottom raking damage must supplement the damage assumptions:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Longitudinal extent...... For vessels of 75,000 tons deadweight and
above, 0.6L measured from the forward
perpendicular.
For vessels of less than 75,000 tons
deadweight, 0.4L measured from the
forward perpendicular.
Transverse extent........ B/3 anywhere in the bottom.
Vertical extent.......... Breach of the outer hull.
* * * *
* * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
68. Add Sec. 172.070 to Subpart D to read as follows:
Sec. 172.070 Intact stability.
All tank vessels of 5,000 DWT and above contracted after the
effective date of this rulemaking must comply with the intact stability
requirements of Regulation 25A, Annex I of MARPOL 73/78.
Dated: July 14, 2000.
R.C. North,
Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety and Environmental Safety
Protection.
[FR Doc. 00-19219 Filed 8-7-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P