[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 150 (Friday, August 5, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-18790]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: August 5, 1994]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 26 and 162

[CGD 93-072]
RIN 2115-AE66

 

Vessel Bridge-to-Bridge Radiotelephone Regulations: Inland 
Waterways Navigation Regulations

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is amending the Vessel Bridge-to-Bridge 
Radiotelephone Regulations to correct an inconsistency between the 
statutory and regulatory language; and amending the Inland Waterways 
Navigation Regulations to remove regulatory language that contradicts 
the Inland Navigation Rules.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 4, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Unless otherwise indicated, documents referred to in this 
preamble are available for inspection or copying at the office of the 
Executive Secretary, Marine Safety Council (G-LRA/3406), U.S. Coast 
Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second Street SW., room 3406, Washington, DC 
20593-0001 between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 
Federal holidays. The telephone number is (202) 267-1477.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Jonathan Epstein, Navigation Rules and Information Branch, Office 
of Navigation Safety and Waterway Services, (202) 267-0352 or (202) 
267-0357.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Drafting Information

    The principal persons involved in drafting this document are 
Jonathan Epstein, Project Manager, Office of Navigation Safety and 
Waterway Services, and LT Ralph L. Hetzel, Project Counsel, Office of 
Chief Counsel.

Regulatory History

    On April 8, 1994, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed 
rulemaking entitled ``Vessel Bridge-to-Bridge Radiotelephone 
Regulations: Inland Waterways Navigation Regulations'' in the Federal 
Register (59 FR 16780). The Coast Guard received one letter commenting 
on the proposal. No public hearing was requested, and none was held.

Background and Purpose

    This rule corrects two conflicts between statutory law and existing 
navigation safety regulations.

1. Vessel Bridge-to-Bridge Radiotelephone Regulations

    This rule makes Vessel Bridge-to-Bridge Radiotelephone Regulations, 
specifically 33 CFR 26.05, consistent with the corresponding statutory 
authority, the Vessel Bridge-to-Bridge Radiotelephone Act, 1972, (33 
U.S.C. 1204). The particular statutory language is important because it 
determines who may maintain the watch on the designated bridge-to-
bridge calling channel (VHF-FM Channel 13 in U.S. territorial waters, 
except in the approaches to the lower Mississippi River where VHF-FM 
Channel 67 is the designated channel).

2. Inland Waterways Navigation Regulations

    This rulemaking removes 33 CFR 162.65(b)(3)(iv) because it 
contradicts statutory provisions in the Inland Navigation Rules Act. 
Specifically it provided that a vessel being overtaken by another shall 
slacken speed sufficiently to permit the passage to be effected with 
safety to both vessels. This directly conflicted with Inland Navigation 
Rule 13 which places the responsibility for keeping clear on the 
overtaking vessel and Inland Rule 17 which requires the overtaken 
vessel to maintain course and speed.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    The Coast Guard received only one comment in response to the notice 
of proposed rulemaking. This comment strongly endorsed the correction 
to the bridge-to-bridge radiotelephone regulations, noting that one of 
the key elements of Bridge Resource Management is clear delegation of 
duties; and that only the master or conning officer should have 
authority to communicate intended ship movements to other vessels.
    Because the only comment was positive no changes from the proposed 
language have been made.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) 
of Executive Order 12866 and does not require an assessment of 
potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that order. It 
has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget under that 
order. It is not significant under the regulatory policies and 
procedures of the Department of Transportation (DOT) (44 FR 11040; 
February 26, 1979).
    The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this proposal to be 
so minimal that a Full Regulatory Assessment is unnecessary. Since this 
rulemaking basically corrects inconsistencies and places no new 
requirements on the maritime community further Regulatory Evaluation 
was deemed unnecessary.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the 
Coast Guard considered whether this rulemaking would have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. ``Small 
entities'' include independently owned and operated businesses that are 
not dominant in their field and that otherwise qualify as ``small 
business concerns'' under section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 
U.S.C. 632).
    Because it expects the impact of this rule to be minimal, the Coast 
Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Collection of Information

    This proposal contains no collection-of-information requirements 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

Federalism

    The Coast Guard has analyzed this rule under the principles and 
criteria contained in Executive Order 12612 and has determined that 
this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant 
the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. Under Federal law, 
authority to issue regulations to amend the Inland Waterways Navigation 
Regulations and the Vessel Bridge-to-Bridge Radiotelephone Regulations 
is vested in the Secretary of Transportation and delegated to the Coast 
Guard. Therefore, the Coast Guard intends it to preempt State action 
addressing this subject matter.

Environment

    The Coast Guard considered the environmental impact of this rule 
and concluded that, under section 2.B.2 of Commandant Instruction 
M16475.1B, this rulemaking is categorically excluded from further 
environmental documentation as this administrative action clearly has 
no environmental effect. A Categorical Exclusion Determination is 
available in the docket for inspection or copying where indicated under 
``ADDRESSES.''

List of Subjects

33 CFR Part 26

    Communications equipment, Navigation (water), Marine safety, Radio, 
Telephone, Vessels.

33 CFR Part 162

    Navigation (water), Waterways.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 
CFR part 26 as follows:

PART 26--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 26 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1207; 49 CFR 1.46.

    2. Section 26.05 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 26.05  Use of radiotelephone.

    Section 5 of the Act states that the radiotelephone required by 
this Act is for the exclusive use of the master or person in charge of 
the vessel, or the person designated by the master or person in charge 
to pilot or direct the movement of the vessel, who shall maintain a 
listening watch on the designated frequency. Nothing herein shall be 
interpreted as precluding the use of portable radiotelephone equipment 
to satisfy the requirements of this act.

PART 162--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 162 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 49 CFR 1.46.


Sec. 162.65  [Amended]

    2. Section 162.65(b)(3)(iv) is removed.

    Dated: July 12, 1994.
G.A. Penington,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Office of Navigation Safety and 
Waterway Services.
[FR Doc. 94-18790 Filed 8-4-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-14-M