[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 59 (Tuesday, March 26, 1996)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 13123-13125] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 96-7304] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 33 CFR Part 183 [CGD 95-041] Propeller Injury Prevention Aboard Rental Boats AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT. ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The purpose of this Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) is to gather current, specific, and accurate information about the injuries involving propeller strikes and rented boats. In a request for comments published May 11, 1995, the Coast Guard solicited comments from all segments of the marine community and other interested persons on various aspects of propeller accident avoidance aboard houseboats and other displacement type recreational vessels. The information received was voluminous, but was too general to be helpful. Consistent with the President's Regulatory Reinvention Initiative, the Coast Guard is interested in obtaining maximum public involvement before it makes any decision that would impose a new burden on the regulated community. Information gathered in response to this ANPRM will supplement that which the Coast Guard received in response to the request for comments and will be used to determine the appropriate Federal and State roles in reducing propeller-strike incidents, whether governmental intervention is appropriate and, if so, whether it should be directed at the vessels, their manufacturers, their operators or owners, or the companies leasing such vessels. This ANPRM also announces one public meeting at Coast Guard Headquarters at which individuals and interested parties may make oral presentations about the propeller strike avoidance issue. The Coast Guard has also arranged four other opportunities, throughout the country, for those interested in this subject to express their views. DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 1, 1996. ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to the Executive Secretary, Marine Safety Council (G-LRA/3406)(CGD95-041), [[Page 13124]] U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second Street SW., Washington, DC 20593-0001, or may be delivered to room 3406 at the above address between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is (202) 267-1477. The Executive Secretary maintains the public docket for this notice. Comments will become a part of this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at room 3406, U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Randolph Doubt, Project Manager, Recreational Boating Product Assurance Division, (202) 267-0984. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Request for Comments The Coast Guard encourages interested persons to submit written data, views or arguments. Persons submitting comments should include their names and addresses and identify this notice (CGD 95-041). Please submit two copies of all comments and attachments in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. Persons wanting acknowledgment of receipt of comments should enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. The Coast Guard will consider all comments received during the comment period. Background Information The Coast Guard published a request for comments on propeller accidents involving houseboats and other displacement type recreational vessels on May 11, 1995 [60 FR 25191]. In a second Federal Register notice published August 9, 1995, the Coast Guard reopened and extended the comment period until November 7, 1995. The Coast Guard received 1,994 responses. More than 1,800 of these were form letters from individuals who support the development of regulations to require the use of propeller guard technology or pump jet propulsion on vessels used in the rental houseboat industry. An additional 69 comments supporting the development of regulations to prevent the incidence of propeller-strike accidents were received from accident victims and their relatives, attorneys, physicians, State law enforcement agencies, manufacturers of devices designed to prevent propeller-strike accidents, and other individuals. Comments opposing regulations were received from 57 boaters, nine houseboat livery operators and marinas, members of 10 associations, committees, or councils, 13 boat and engine manufacturers, and six naval architects or marine consultants. Solicitation of Views While available data in the Coast Guard's regulatory docket on this subject does not fully support the costs or burdens that would be imposed by Federal regulation, the number of responses received to the request for comments indicates a great deal of public interest in whether and how the Federal Government should act to prevent propeller- strike accidents. Persons submitting comments should do as directed under Request for comments above, and reply to the following specific questions. Form letters simply citing anecdotal evidence or stating support for, or opposition to regulations, without providing substantive data or arguments do not supply support for regulations. 1. The Coast Guard is making an effort to improve its database of recreational boating accidents resulting in injuries which require medical treatment beyond first aid. Part of that effort consists in trying to determine the extent to which accidents involving propeller strikes by rented boats are a problem. What information is available regarding the incidence of propeller-strike injuries or fatalities involving individuals who rent boats, and what trends, if any, do the data indicate? 2. To what extent are data available to indicate whether the type of propulsion (e.g., outboard motor, inboard engine or inboard-outboard engine) contributes to the incidence of propeller-strike accidents involving rental boats? 3. In two fatal accidents during the last several years, one on Lake Shasta and one on Lake Havasu, the victim was in the water and was struck by the propeller when a rental houseboat was put in reverse and backed into them. Several other houseboat accidents have resulted in injuries. The Coast Guard is interested in determining whether accidents involving propeller strikes and rented houseboats occur nationwide, or are limited to a few States or bodies of water. If the latter is the case, do any particular hazardous local conditions contribute to the likelihood of such accidents? If so, the Coast Guard is interested in determining the nature and location of those conditions. 4. To what extent are data available on the relationship between the consumption of alcohol or the use of controlled substances and propeller-strike accidents involving rental boats? 5. Some States have laws requiring boat operators to complete a boating safety course. a. To what extent do available data indicate whether boater behavior patterns, a lack of boating education, or a lack of boating law enforcement contribute to the incidence of propeller-strike accidents involving rental boats? b. Do data indicate whether mandatory boating education for individuals renting boats with propellers significantly contribute to a reduction in the number of propeller-strike accidents? c. If so, do data indicate what type of boating education would be the most effective? d. What other vessel operator-oriented requirements might reduce the incidence of propeller-strike accidents involving rental boats? e. What economic or other burdens would be imposed on companies leasing recreational boats if either the Federal or State Government was to require education of individuals renting propeller-driven boats? 6. The two fatal accidents mentioned above occurred when individuals were in the water astern of the vessels and the vessels were put in reverse. While limited operator visibility astern may have contributed to the accidents, the transom is also the usual location for swim platforms and boarding ladders for swimmers. Do available data indicate whether vessel design features contribute to the incidence of propeller-strike accidents involving rental boats? If so, what vessel design features might reduce the incidence of propeller-strike accidents involving rental boats? 7. Are there any proven technologies that would help reduce the risk of propeller-strike accidents involving rented boats? What technologies are unacceptable, and for what reasons? 8. The two fatal accidents mentioned above involved rental houseboats. If the Coast Guard developed regulations in this area, how should it define the term, ``houseboat?'' Are there any other vessel types the Coast Guard should consider regulating? If so, what vessels, if any, should be excepted from such regulations? 9. What, if any, types of information should be displayed on boats and/or motors leased, rented or chartered for noncommercial use for the purpose of alerting operators or passengers to the dangers of a propeller strike? 10. What are the economic and other impacts on companies renting boats or other entities if the Coast Guard were to require companies to retrofit such vessels with devices or methods of propulsion designed to reduce the [[Page 13125]] incidence of propeller-strike accidents? In considering regulations, the Coast Guard must assess the potential adverse impacts on small business entities. To what extent are small entities engaged in leasing recreational boats? 11. a. How many companies are currently leasing propeller-driven boats for bareboat charters by the recreational boating public? How many vessels are involved and on which bodies of water? b. How many companies are currently offering propeller-driven uninspected boats for charter by the recreational boating public? How many vessels are involved and on which bodies of water? 12. What adverse impacts might result from a regulation requiring livery companies to verbally brief individuals renting propeller-driven boats about the dangers of propeller-strike accidents, and requiring individuals chartering such vessels to acknowledge receiving the information? 13. Under current Federal statutes (46 U.S.C. 4306), the States do not have the authority to establish carriage requirements for associated equipment, such as a mechanical means for preventing propeller strikes, on vessels operated on waters where both the Coast Guard and the State have jurisdiction. However, a State may impose more stringent requirements on vessels such as rental boats on waters subject to the State's exclusive jurisdiction, so long as such a requirement is not imposed upon vessel manufacturers. What is the proper role for the States in reducing propeller-strike accidents involving rented boats? If the Coast Guard allowed the States to regulate the equipment carried, or the use of rental boats, how would interstate commerce be affected? Open Meetings A subcommittee of the National Boating Safety Advisory Council, and the National Association of State Boating Law Administrators are studying the propeller injury prevention issue. The Coast Guard invites interested parties and the public to make brief oral presentations about the propeller injury prevention issue during the following meetings or events: From 5 to 7 p.m., Monday, April 22, 1996 at the National Water Safety Congress Professional Development Seminar at the Boardwalk Resort in Panama City, FL, (April 23-25, 1996). From 3 to 5 p.m., Monday April 29, 1996 at the National Boating Safety Advisory Council Meeting at the Parc Fifty-Five Hotel in San Francisco, CA (April 27-29, 1996). From 8:30 to 10:30 a.m., Wednesday May 1, 1996 at the Northeastern States Boating Law Administrators Conference in the Camden Room at the Samoset Resort in Rockland, ME (April 29-30, 1996). From 1 to 4 p.m., Monday, May 6, 1996 in Room 2415 of Coast Guard Headquarters in Washington, DC. From 10 a.m. to 12 p.m., Sunday, May 19, 1996 at the Southern States Boating Law Administrator Conference at the Royal Sonesta Hotel in New Orleans, LA (May 18-22, 1996). Those wishing to give an oral presentation should submit their name, address, and organization represented (if any) at least seven days prior to the particular meeting or event, to COMMANDANT (G-NAB-6), room 1505, U.S. Coat Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second Street SW., Washington, DC 20593-0001, Attn: Mr. Jay Doubt. Individuals wishing to give an oral presentation who fail to notify the Coast Guard within seven days of a particular meeting or event will be allowed to do so if time permits. Those giving oral presentations are reminded of the necessity to also furnish written comments, if those comments are intended for inclusion in the regulatory docket. The Coast Guard will consider all relevant comments in determining what action may be necessary to address propeller accidents involving rented propeller-driven vessels. Dated: March 15, 1996. Rudy K. Peschel, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Office of Navigation Safety and Waterway Services. [FR Doc. 96-7304 Filed 3-25-96; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-14-M