[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 198 (Friday, October 11, 2002)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 63331-63352]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-25462]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 154 and 155

[USCG-2001-8661]
RIN 2115-AG05


Vessel and Facility Response Plans for Oil: 2003 Removal 
Equipment Requirements and Alternative Technology Revisions

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes changes to its requirements for oil-
spill removal equipment under vessel response plans and marine 
transportation-related facility response plans. These changes would 
increase the minimum available spill removal equipment required for 
tank vessels and facilities, add requirements for new response 
technologies, and clarify methods and procedures for responding to oil 
spills in coastal waters.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Docket Management 
Facility on or before January 9, 2003. Comments sent to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) on collection of information must reach OMB 
on or before January 9, 2003.

ADDRESSES: To make sure that 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-2001-8661), 
U.S. Department of Transportation, room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (2) By 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. In choosing among these means, please 
give due regard to the recent difficulties with delivery of mail by the 
U.S. Postal Service to Federal facilities.
    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, 
would become part of this docket and would 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.
    You may inspect the material proposed for incorporation by 
reference at room 2100, U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second 
Street SW., Washington, DC 20593-0001 between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-
267-0448. Copies of the material are available as indicated in the 
``Incorporation by Reference'' section of this preamble.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed 
rulemaking, call or e-mail Mr. Robert Pond, G-MOR, Coast Guard, at 
telephone 202-267-6603, or [email protected]. If you have questions 
on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Dorothy Beard, 
Chief, Dockets, Department of Transportation, telephone 202-366-5149.

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-2001-
8661), 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 that they 
reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard 
or envelope. We would consider all comments and material received 
during the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of 
them.

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a 
request for one to the Docket Management Facility at the address under 
ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that 
one would aid this rulemaking, we would hold one at a time and place 
announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

    Under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90) (Pub. L. 101-380) and 
Executive Order 12777, the Coast Guard is authorized to issue 
regulations requiring the owners and operators of tank vessels and 
marine transportation-related (MTR) facilities to prepare and submit 
response plans. The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 amended the Federal Water 
Pollution Control Act to require the preparation and submission of oil 
spill response plans by the owners or operators of certain facilities 
and vessels. It also requires that these vessels and facilities be 
operated in compliance with their submitted response plans. Failure to 
have submitted a response plan, and to have received approval of that 
plan or authorization from the Coast Guard to operate according to the 
submitted plan, results in the prohibition of that vessel or facility 
from the handling, storing or transporting of oil. In 1996, the Coast 
Guard published final tank vessel response plan regulations (61 FR 
1052)

[[Page 63332]]

and final MTR facilities response plan regulations (61 FR 7890). These 
regulations contain minimum on-water oil removal equipment requirements 
that planholders transporting or transferring petroleum oil are 
required to meet in planning for an oil discharge. These regulations 
also state that the Coast Guard would periodically review the existing 
oil removal equipment requirements to determine if increases in 
mechanical recovery systems and additional requirements for new 
response technologies are practicable.
    On January 27, 1998, the Coast Guard published a Notice of Request 
for Comments (63 FR 3861) regarding our intent to conduct a review of 
response plan removal equipment requirements. In the notice we stated 
that the 1993 removal equipment requirements would remain in effect 
pending the results of that review, and that the removal equipment 
requirements increases as originally scheduled would not be implemented 
until the review was complete. On June 24, 1998, the Coast Guard 
published a Notice of Meetings (63 FR 34500) that announced three 
public workshops. They were set up to solicit comments on potential 
changes to removal equipment requirements within the response plan 
regulations (33 CFR parts 153, 154 and 155) for mechanical recovery, 
dispersants, and other spill removal technologies. Based on comments to 
the Federal Register Notice and the three Workshops, the Coast Guard 
commissioned an in-depth assessment of advances in oil spill response 
equipment since 1993. The Coast Guard completed the assessment in May 
1999.
    Based on the recommendations contained in the assessment (Summary 
Report of Public Workshop for Response Plan Equipment CAPs), the Coast 
Guard published a Notice of Decision (65 FR 710, January 6, 2000) that 
provided for a 25% increase for on-water mechanical recovery equipment 
for response plans of MTR facilities and tank vessels, effective April 
6, 2000. The Coast Guard also initiated a regulatory project to 
evaluate the potential for additional increases in mechanical on-water 
recovery and new requirements for other response technologies, which 
would, if practicable, become effective in 2003.
    To ensure that a broad range of environmental issues are adequately 
considered in the rulemaking, the Coast Guard is preparing a 
Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for revising the oil 
removal equipment requirements for tank vessels and MTR facilities 
response plans. On September 1, 2000, the Coast Guard published a 
Notice of Intent to prepare and circulate a draft PEIS (65 FR 53335). 
The Coast Guard requested input on environmental concerns of the public 
related to the alternatives for increasing spill removal equipment 
requirements for an oil discharge, and suggested analyses or 
methodologies for inclusion in the PEIS.

Discussion of Comments From Public Workshops

    We received 70 letters commenting on this proposed rulemaking from 
the three public workshops. In the following paragraphs, the Coast 
Guard discusses the comments received and explains any changes made to 
the proposed rulemaking. The Coast Guard first discusses general 
comments, and secondly discusses comments regarding specific sections 
of the rulemaking. The respondents offering comments included MTR 
facilities, Oil Spill Removal Organizations, the oil industry, tanker 
associations, Federal and State agencies, environmental and marine 
safety non-profit organizations, and private citizens.

General Comments

    Several respondents supported adoption of requirements (or credits 
against existing mechanical recovery equipment requirements) for 
establishment of dispersant and in-situ burning capabilities for a 
number of reasons including
    [sbull] These methods have been demonstrated to have higher 
effectiveness ratings, under certain conditions, than mechanical 
recovery;
    [sbull] Regional Response Teams (RRTs) around the country have pre-
authorized their use under certain conditions;
    [sbull] Adding dispersant and in-situ burning equipment 
requirements is more cost-effective because those response methods 
would result in greater mitigation of spill impacts than the addition 
of more mechanical recovery equipment; and
    [sbull] Having three response options provides greater opportunity 
for effective response regardless of environmental conditions at the 
time of a spill.
    Several respondents expressed concern regarding the use of 
dispersants and in-situ burning because, in their view-
    [sbull] The effectiveness and effects of these technologies have 
not been proven; and
    [sbull] These technologies do not remove the oil from the 
environment but only transfer it to the water column or the atmosphere.
    These options pose a greater potential for adverse environmental 
impacts than mechanical recovery methods. These technologies have been 
studied extensively. The conclusions and recommendations of the Summary 
Report of Public Workshop for Response Plan Equipment CAPs, as well as 
the requirements proposed in this rulemaking, address the concerns 
expressed in these comments.
    The Coast Guard believes that potential effectiveness and effects 
of dispersants and in-situ burning have been sufficiently documented, 
and that use of either or both of those options in certain 
circumstances would produce a net environmental benefit compared to 
reliance on mechanical methods alone. The Coast Guard also agrees with 
the conclusions of the 1989 National Academy of Sciences report ``Using 
Oil Spill Dispersant on the Sea'' which concludes that * * * 
``Sensitive inshore habitats, such as salt marshes, coral reefs, sea 
grasses and mangroves, are best protected by preventing oil from 
reaching them. Dispersion of oil at sea, before a slick reaches a 
sensitive habitat, generally will reduce overall and particularly the 
chronic impact of oil on many habitats.'' This study stimulated the 
adoption of dispersant and in-situ burning preauthorization agreements 
around the country, as well as a series of government-industry 
workshops dealing with comparative effects and effectiveness of various 
response countermeasures in the mid to late 1990's, the 1999 Summary 
Report of Public Workshop for Response Plan Equipment CAPs, and 
successful dispersant use in response to several spill incidents in the 
U.S. More detailed discussion of the comparative environmental impacts 
of response options (mechanical recovery, dispersant use and in-situ 
burning) will be included in the PEIS we are preparing for this 
rulemaking. Current dispersant and in situ burning pre-authorization/
expedited approval zones around the country generally extend seaward 
from .5 to 3 miles offshore in coastal waters. There are no pre-
authorizations/pre-approvals in estuarine or fresh water areas at this 
time, although, as required by the National Oil and Hazardous 
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan in 40 CFR 300.900, Regional 
Response Teams and Area Committees continue to give consideration to 
pre-approvals in those waters.
    Several respondents stated that they were in favor of the use of 
dispersants as a primary oil spill response tool.
    The Coast Guard agrees with this comment. Dispersants have been 
used

[[Page 63333]]

effectively in numerous oil spill responses both in the U.S., and 
abroad within the last several years. The National Oil and Hazardous 
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) states that all 
technologies that may minimize impact to the environment are potential 
primary response options. The use of all response technologies would be 
used in accordance with those strategies contained within the Area 
Contingency Plans (ACPs). The effects of dispersants on an ecosystem 
are discussed in the PEIS.
    Several respondents stated that both the dispersant and in-situ 
burning equipment requirements should offset mechanical recovery 
requirements, that is, reduce the amount of mechanical recovery 
equipment a planholder is required to have available.
    The Coast Guard disagrees with this comment regarding dispersants. 
The weather and sea state conditions for the two options are opposite. 
The calmer the seas and winds the more effective mechanical recovery 
would be and the less effective dispersants would be and vice versa. If 
mechanical recovery equipment requirements were reduced by 10,000 
barrels (bbls), there would be many spills that would not be 
compensated by the newly added dispersant equipment requirement because 
dispersant use would not fit the scenario. Thus, if mechanical recovery 
equipment requirements were reduced because dispersant equipment 
requirements are added, there could be an overall reduction in the 
nation's ability to mitigate effects of an oil spill. On the other 
hand, mechanical recovery and in-situ burning equipment work in nearly 
identical circumstances. Thus in pre-authorization areas, for most 
spills the two technologies are interchangeable so that a reduction of 
10,000 bbls of mechanical recovery capability is directly offset by the 
10,000 barrel increase in in-situ burning capability. Therefore, a 
limited offset is practicable for in-situ burning.
    Several respondents stated that the United States must develop a 
consistent national policy on the use of dispersants before adopting a 
mandatory requirement for a dispersant capability.
    National policy does exist and has been in place since the NCP (40 
CFR part 300) was first published in 1972. The NCP contains the 
national policy regarding decisions on the use of dispersants and in-
situ burning. The NCP details the procedures for establishing use 
criteria and deciding whether or not to use either dispersants or in-
situ burning in a specific incident. It requires that all pre-approval 
and incident specific approval decisions related to these response 
options be made with the consent of the Environmental Protection Agency 
and the affected state(s)--including State Representative(s) to the 
RRT--and in consultation with all affected Federal natural resource 
trustees. At the same time, certain baseline guidance, such as the 
Special Monitoring of Applied Response Technologies (SMART) protocol 
for monitoring dispersant effectiveness are being adopted on the 
national level where appropriate.
    It should also be emphasized that this proposed rulemaking does not 
require dispersants or in-situ burning to be used in any circumstance. 
It does not set national, regional, or local policy. This rulemaking is 
only intended to facilitate execution of those policies established in 
accordance with the NCP by requiring that the personnel and materials 
to accomplish those policies be ensured available if the local response 
community's criteria for use are met in a specific incident.
    Several respondents recommended that dispersant equipment 
requirements should be broad-based, that is, applied to all potential 
end-users including offshore oil production facilities. The respondents 
suggested that the Coast Guard work with the Minerals Management 
Service (MMS) to harmonize any dispersant requirements.
    The Coast Guard is currently working with MMS, EPA, and the Office 
of Pipeline Safety to keep them apprised of this effort and to ensure 
cooperation in developing and applying consistent requirements to all 
segments of the oil industry.
    Several respondents stated that a complete dispersant response 
system should include mobilization procedures, a dispersant stockpile, 
handling, transportation and staging plans, pre-identified staging 
areas with refueling and loading capabilities, a spotter aircraft, 
tracking capabilities, communication systems, application platforms, 
ground crews for loading, monitoring equipment, stockpiles, ground 
crews for maintenance, training and exercise programs, trained 
observers, and communications procedures.
    The Coast Guard believes that it is in the best interest of the 
response community to avoid regulations that are over-prescriptive. 
Therefore, this proposed rulemaking establishes a minimum quantity of 
oil to be treated with dispersant within certain time periods. It 
emphasizes the responsibility of the planholder to identify type and 
location of dispersant stockpiles, dispersant delivery platforms, 
maintenance, and loading responsibilities and procedures, 
communications, etc.
    Several respondents recommended that responders be capable of 
starting either dispersant application or in-situ burning operations at 
times ranging from 6 to 12 hours after the time a decision is made to 
use. Based on our evaluation of risk and capabilities and the 
development of mobilization factors, the Coast Guard is proposing that 
dispersant operations be planned to start within 7 hours and in-situ 
burning operations within 12 hours of the decision to use.
    Several respondents stated that dispersant capabilities should be 
available to treat a quantity of oil over time. The Coast Guard has 
opted to structure the proposed rulemaking slightly differently, 
specifying a minimum dispersant spraying capacity over time. Equipment 
requirements calculators in the proposed rulemaking are based on 
existing platform types and capabilities as documented in the Summary 
Report of Public Workshop for Response Plan Equipment CAPs. The 
requirements are based on a planning assumption of 5 gallons/acre (1:20 
dispersant to oil application ratio).
    The aforementioned planning assumption relies on the generally 
agreed upon estimate of the effectiveness of current dispersant 
formulations. If significant advances are made in dispersant 
effectiveness, through improvements in dispersant technology, the Coast 
Guard will consider a greater oil: dispersant ratio. Such consideration 
will be based on submission of credible peer review evidence that a 
higher ratio can be achieved over a range of oils and environmental 
conditions.
    Appendices B and C of the proposed rulemaking incorporate this 
methodology as Tables 7 and 8 and contain further procedures for 
calculating overall capability based on the locations and numbers of 
dispersant stock piles and delivery platforms. Proposed requirements 
represent flexible, operationally viable, and economically feasible 
tier 1 response amounts. These amounts are intended to allow use of a 
variety of regionally based assets in response to 99% of all spills for 
which dispersants are a viable option. Tiers 2 and 3 are designed to 
accommodate a cascade of assets from a central location.
    Several respondents said that oil spill response equipment 
requirements should not mandate a specific type of application 
platform, but allow planholders to choose one. We agree and are not 
requiring a specific type of application platform in this rulemaking.

[[Page 63334]]

    Several respondents believe that dispersant exercise requirements 
should be handled through the Preparedness for Response Exercise 
Program (PREP). We agree and have proposed changes to the PREP 
Guidelines to include both a dispersant and where appropriate an in-
situ burning equipment exercise requirement.
    Several respondents stated that the ability to track oil has 
improved tremendously with the development of tracking buoys, Global 
Positioning Systems, and satellite and aerial imaging systems. This 
allows for much better employment of resources than was possible in 
1993.
    The Coast Guard agrees that continuous improvement has occurred in 
these areas of oil tracking. However, these technologies need further 
development and are not practical at this time.
    At least one respondent suggested that the Coast Guard should 
consider requiring industry to stockpile equipment and materials for 
use of bioremediation in addition to dispersants and in-situ burning.
    Bioremediation agents are intended to enhance the natural 
biodegradation of oil. One bioremediation product is essentially a 
fertilizer, providing nutrients that act to stimulate rapid growth of 
naturally occurring, oil-eating bacteria. A second type of bioremediant 
is a microbiological culture (an actual oil-eating bacteria) that can 
be introduced into the spilled oil. Both types act over weeks or months 
in removing oil from the environment.
    This alternative has received widespread consideration for use at 
the national, regional, and local area levels in many parts of the 
country, similar to the attention paid to chemical dispersants and in-
situ burning. To date, response decision-makers have concluded that 
bioremediants are most useful as a ``polishing tool,'' that is, being 
applied to oil remaining on shoreline beaches and marsh areas after all 
visible and accessible oil has been removed. Thus, decisions whether, 
when, and how to use a bioremediant are typically made once the oil has 
been stabilized in place on shore. No pre-approvals have been developed 
in part because there is time and opportunity to locate and acquire 
suitable bioremediants as the response moves from the emergency to the 
remediation phase.
    On the other hand on-water mechanical recovery, dispersant use, and 
in-situ burning use decisions must be made quickly during a spill 
because a primary objective with each of these options is to intercept 
and remove or divert the spilled oil from the water before it affects 
highly sensitive nearshore and onshore environments. This short window 
of opportunity for use makes it imperative that necessary materials and 
equipment be readily available at the start of an incident. Therefore, 
it is appropriate to require industry to arrange for their use in 
advance.
    There were several comments made regarding the effects dispersants 
have on the environment. These comments will be addressed in the PEIS.

Discussion of Comments From the Federal Government-Oil Spill Response 
Industry Partnership Action Team

    The Federal Government-Oil Spill Response Industry Partnership 
Action Team recommended that the Coast Guard consider regulations to 
target tier response based on historical spill data. Historically, the 
Gulf of Mexico region is the area of most intense activity including 
tank vessel transits, offshore oil production, and underwater oil 
pipelines. As a consequence of the high volume of these activities, the 
area also has the highest incidence of large volume oil spills as well. 
Therefore, the Gulf of Mexico region should have a larger Tier 1 
dispersant equipment requirement than other regions of the country.
    The Coast Guard agrees and the proposed dispersant tiers reflect 
the historical differences in incidence and volume between the Gulf and 
other areas of the country.
    The Federal Government-Oil Spill Response Industry Partnership 
Action Team recommended that industry be required to maintain all 
dispersant stockpiles and equipment as well as the tier 1 delivery 
capability. According to the team, Tier 2 and 3 equipment requirements 
would have to be provided by large aircraft and, therefore, the Federal 
government should provide delivery capability for those two tiers.
    The Coast Guard acknowledges that high-volume oil spills are 
extremely rare events, that there are currently few commercially 
available large dispersant-capable aircraft, and that the cost of 
acquiring and maintaining such aircraft in every region of the country 
could be substantial. The Coast Guard does not agree that the solution 
to these problems is to assign responsibility for providing such 
aircraft to the Federal government for the following reasons:
    [sbull] The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, Clean Water Act, 
and Oil Pollution Act of 1990 have consistently assigned responsibility 
for maintaining large incident response capabilities to the private 
sector regardless of the cost of establishing and maintaining those 
capabilities to within practicable limits. The industry is currently 
required to maintain extensive mechanical recovery capabilities in all 
offshore areas of the U.S., including large skimmers, temporary storage 
vessels, offshore containment booms, and other oil spill response 
vessels, for the sake of preparedness for response to an extremely rare 
event.
    [sbull] The Coast Guard has made every effort in this regulation 
not to be overly prescriptive in terms of types and quantities of 
equipment that would be required to meet the proposed response tiers. 
No particular platform is specifically required, not even large 
aircraft for any response tier.
    [sbull] The use of government aircraft is not specifically 
prohibited by the regulation and would be evaluated similarly to the 
way any other proposed commercial resource would be evaluated. That is, 
the resource would have to be guaranteed available by the providing 
source (through some form of written agreement with the planholder) to 
meet the response delivery capabilities within the prescribed 
timeframes. In general however, because government aircraft are multi-
mission assets with other higher priority operational missions, it is 
unlikely that government resources will be able to satisfy the 
guaranteed availability criteria.
    The Action Team stated that the Federal government is tasked in the 
OPA 90 to direct response to spills that present an imminent and 
substantial threat to the public health and welfare. They suggested 
that tasking implies a requirement for the government to have 
government-owned spill response assets capable of large volume incident 
response and available in the event industry fails to respond 
adequately. They point to the Coast Guard owned, pre-positioned 
response equipment around the country, Navy response assets, and the 
long-standing specialized expertise of the National Strike Force (NSF) 
as evidence to support this contention.
    The Coast Guard believes the responsibility to direct all public 
and private response to certain spills in no way implies or suggests 
that the government establish and maintain its own large incident 
response capability.
    Further, OPA 90 clearly requires planholders to identify and ensure 
by contract the availability of private resources sufficient to remove 
a worst-case discharge. If private-sector resources are required to be 
available everywhere around the country, it is not reasonable or 
practicable for the

[[Page 63335]]

government to duplicate those private-sector capabilities using public 
resources. Thus, in the absence of an identified or cooperative 
responsible party, the government typically relies on basic ordering 
agreements with private-sector oil spill response organizations to 
ensure availability of adequate response resources, rather than 
maintaining its own suite of government response assets.
    The Coast Guard's pre-positioned response resources are intended as 
a ``first response'' capability to assist in initial containment and 
recovery until the full complement of private-sector response resources 
can be brought to bear. The Navy-owned resources are intended primarily 
for use in responding to incidents on or near Navy facilities or 
vessels. The NSF primarily provides operational advice and tactical and 
logistics management support. The NSF does have a limited amount of 
specialized lightering and containment equipment that is typically only 
employed until suitable private sector equipment can be brought to 
bear.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The proposed rulemaking would revise 33 CFR 154.1020, 154.1045, 
155.1020, and 155.1050; part 154, appendix C; and part 155, appendix B. 
The following is a summary of the proposed revisions:

1. On-Water Mechanical Recovery

    Based on the conclusions in the Caps Report and the Regulatory 
Analysis for this rule, the Coast Guard is not proposing an increase in 
the mechanical response equipment requirements levels. Specifically, 
given the rate at which oil spreads on the water, and the current 
technological limitations in the ability to contain oil for recovery in 
an open water environment, it would not be practicable to require such 
an increase at this time.

2. Dispersants

    This proposed rulemaking would require planholders to have pre-
spill planning arrangements to use dispersants. This capability would 
not result in an offset in the mechanical recovery capability. As such, 
the mandatory requirements for dispersants would replace the existing 
credit provisions for dispersants. Therefore, the credit provisions 
would be removed from the existing regulations. The regulatory 
assessment would include the costs and benefits of this requirement. 
Planholders carrying Groups II, III, and IV cargoes, operating in 
inland, nearshore, offshore and open ocean areas, in waters where a 
dispersant pre-approval or expedited approval agreement exists, would 
be required to maintain a dispersant stockpile.
    For the purpose of analysis, we propose that planholders should be 
able to supply two levels of dispersants, one level for the Gulf of 
Mexico (Gulf Coast) and one level for the rest of the United States. 
See proposed Table 155.1050(l) for an illustration of the required 
daily capability. The proposed rulemaking would allow planholders to 
employ a mix of vessels, rotary and fixed-wing aircraft in meeting this 
requirement, however, fixed-wing aircraft should provide at least 50 
percent of every planholder's dispersant delivery capability. For 
implementation, planholders would be required to have dispersant 
delivery equipment sufficient to commence application within 7 hours of 
incident-specific dispersant approval.
    Planholders would have 8 months after the final rule is published 
to come into compliance.

3. In-Situ Burning

    There would be no proposed requirements for in-situ burning; 
however, planholders would receive credit for establishing and 
maintaining in-situ burn equipment if they are--
    [sbull] Carrying Groups II, III, and IV cargoes; and
    [sbull] Operating in inland, nearshore, offshore and open ocean 
areas in waters where an in-situ burn pre-approval or expedited 
approval agreement exists.
    Adding and maintaining an in-situ burn capability will be 
encouraged by allowing an offset to mechanical recovery requirements of 
up to 10,000 bbls for planholders who establish and maintain an in-situ 
burn capability as follows:
    [sbull] 5,000 BPD at tier 1.
    [sbull] 10,000 BPD at tier 2.
    [sbull] 10,000 BPD at tier 3 (The credit is held at 10,000 bpd for 
tier 3 because of the limited window of opportunity for use after 72 
hours).
    Tier timeframes would correspond with the tier response times for 
mechanical recovery requirements, including the shorter response times 
established for high-volume ports.
    With the current state of technology for in-situ burn-boom, an 
individual boom package would be expected to survive for one 8 to 10-
hour day. To meet the three tier requirements, a planholder would have 
to arrange by contract or other approved means for five fire-resistant 
burn-boom packages. If stainless steel and water-cooled technologies 
are perfected, burn-boom service life could be extended, thereby 
reducing the planholder's contracting requirements.
    Tying a credit to existing pre-authorization agreements targets 
those areas where the technique is most likely to be used, and areas of 
most probable use are automatically targeted. These credits would 
provide incentive for RRTs to finalize policies for pre-authorization 
and expedited approval. They would also provide an incentive to vessel 
and facility planholders to further develop in-situ burn capabilities 
while maintaining a balanced response capability consisting of 
mechanical recovery, dispersants, and in-situ burn resources as 
applicable. Proposed Table 154.1050(k) illustrates the maximum 
allowable tiers for effective daily burn capability.
    Planholders would have 8 months after the final rule is published 
to come into compliance.

4. Oil Spill Aerial Tracking

    Currently there are no requirements for planholders to visually 
monitor oil spills from aircraft. Visual monitoring has been proven 
both practicable and effective in directing on-water mechanical 
recovery systems, dispersant operations, and in-situ burning to the 
thickest portions of an oil slick. Therefore, this proposed rulemaking 
would require planholders to have the ability to conduct visual 
monitoring from aircraft. The regulatory assessment will contain the 
costs and benefits of this proposed measure.
    All planholders would be required to have available by contract or 
other approved means sufficient suitable aircraft and trained personnel 
to maintain visual observation of spill response operations up to 50 
nautical miles from shore and in remote inland, Great Lakes, and river 
areas. Required aircraft should be capable of sustained operations 
during daylight hours up to 50 nautical miles from shore. Aerial oil 
tracking resources must be capable of supporting oil spill removal 
operations for three, 10-hour operational periods during the initial 72 
hours of the discharge. The aircraft providing the initial surveillance 
and observation of a discharge would be required to arrive at the 
discharge site within 3 hours from the time of discovery of the 
discharge (based on 2 hours of recall/preparation time and 1 hour of 
flight time). Observation personnel should be separate from aircraft 
operations personnel. Observation personnel should be able to maintain 
continuous communications with command and control personnel on the 
ground and with on-water response resources. Observation personnel must 
be trained

[[Page 63336]]

in the protocols of oil spill reporting and assessment, including 
estimation of slick size, thickness, and quantity. Observation 
personnel should be fully trained in the use of assessment techniques 
as outlined in the American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM) 
standard [ASTM F 1779-97], ``Standard Practice for Reporting Visual 
Observations of Oil on Water.'' Observation personnel should also be 
familiar with the use of other guides such as the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA's) ``Open Water Oil Identification 
Job Aid for Aerial Observation'' and NOAA's ``Characteristic Coastal 
Habitats'' Guide.

Incorporation by Reference

    Material proposed for incorporation by reference appears in 
Sec. Sec.  154.106 and 155.140. You may inspect this material at U.S. 
Coast Guard Headquarters where indicated under ADDRESSES. Copies of the 
material are available from the sources listed in Sec. Sec.  154.106 
and 155.140.
    Before publishing a binding rule, we will submit this material to 
the Director of the Federal Register for approval of the incorporation 
by reference.

Assessment

    This proposed rule is a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review. 
The Office of Management and Budget has reviewed it under that Order. 
It requires an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 
6(a)(3) of that Order. It is ``significant'' under the regulatory 
policies and procedures of the Department of Transportation (DOT)(44 FR 
11040, February 26, 1979). A draft Assessment is available in the 
docket as indicated under ADDRESSES. A summary of the Assessment 
follows:
    The Assessment addresses the economic impacts of changes that the 
Coast Guard is proposing to the regulations for Vessel Response Plans 
(VRPs) and Facility Response Plans (FRPs) (Title 33 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 154 and 155). Spill response 
requirements were originally established in a 1993 rulemaking as part 
of the OPA 90 and, at that time, were scheduled to increase by 25 
percent twice--once in 1998 and again in 2003. The increases were 
contingent on Coast Guard review of the industry and assessment of new 
requirements for other oil-removal technologies. A Notice of Decision 
(64 FR 710, January 6, 2000) implemented the 1998 increase. The purpose 
of the Assessment (in the public docket for this rule) is to assess the 
cost and benefit of the Coast Guard's proposed rulemaking for the 2003 
increase in response equipment requirements. The rulemaking would apply 
to vessels carrying oil in bulk and MTR oil facilities that are 
required to have an oil response plan under the current VRP and FRP 
rules. These planholders contract with Oil Spill Removal Organizations 
(OSROs) to ensure that response resources required by regulation are 
available in the case of a Worst Case Discharge (WCD) oil spill. 
Response resources include--
    [sbull] Mechanical recovery--physical removal of spilled oil from 
the water using equipment such as boom and skimmers;
    [sbull] Dispersants--diffusion of spilled oil into the water column 
through the application of chemicals;
    [sbull] In-situ burning--controlled ignition of the spilled oil; 
and
    [sbull] Aerial tracking of the oil spill--operations from aircraft 
that enhance on-water response operations.
    The Assessment analyzes the cost and benefit of five regulatory 
alternatives, including a ``no action'' alternative, that emphasize 
either mechanical or non-mechanical response assets. This spectrum of 
regulatory alternatives is illustrated in Figure 1. In addition to 
addressing different modes of oil-spill response, the alternatives have 
differing capabilities within each response mode. The five regulatory 
alternatives are as follows:

Alternative 1

    No Action: 2000 response requirements remain effective without 
further modification.

Alternative 2

    Mechanical recovery: Increase of 25 percent (over 2000 response-
requirement levels) for inland, nearshore, offshore, open ocean, Great 
Lakes, and river and canal operating areas of water.
    Dispersants: No response requirements established.
    In-situ burning credit: No response requirements established.
    Aerial tracking: Required to enhance on-water response 
capabilities.

Alternative 3

    Mechanical recovery: Increase of 25 percent (over 2000 response-
requirement levels) for inland, nearshore, offshore, open ocean, Great 
Lakes, and river and canal operating areas of water.
    Dispersants: New application capabilities for a given response 
time.
    In-situ burning: No response requirements, but credit offered (can 
offset the requirements for mechanical recovery).
    Aerial tracking: Required to enhance on-water response 
capabilities.

Alternative 4

    Mechanical recovery: Increase of 25 percent (over 2000 response-
requirement levels) for inland, Great Lakes, and river and canal 
operating areas of water.
    Dispersants: New application capabilities for a given response time 
that are more stringent than capabilities under Alternative 3.
    In-situ burning: No response requirements, but credit offered (can 
offset the requirements for mechanical recovery).
    Aerial tracking: Required to enhance on-water response 
capabilities.

Alternative 5

    Mechanical recovery: No increase of 2000 response-requirement 
levels.
    Dispersants: New application capabilities for a given response time 
that are more stringent than capabilities under Alternative 3 (same as 
Alternative 4).
    In-situ burning: No response requirements, but credit offered (can 
offset the requirements for mechanical recovery).
    Aerial tracking: Required to enhance on-water response capabilities

[[Page 63337]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11OC02.004

    The Coast Guard supports Alternative 5 as the preferred regulatory 
option. This alternative meets the objectives of the Coast Guard to 
protect the marine environment and promote maritime safety at 
reasonable cost, substantial benefit.
    The RA for this rule estimates the cost and benefit of the 
regulatory alternatives from 2001-2030. Cost and benefit are discounted 
at 7 percent to estimate the net present value (NPV) of the proposed 
rule. Cost of the proposed rule is expressed in 2001 constant dollars. 
Equipment and personnel costs were developed using information from 
OSRO representatives and the Coast Guard. Paperwork costs were based on 
previous regulatory analysis of paperwork requirements for the original 
vessel response plan rulemaking. We believe that the capital and annual 
costs incurred by OSROs will be, to the extent possible, passed on to 
vessel planholders through retainer fees or increased costs for 
services provided.
    Benefit is expressed in barrels of oil recovered from the marine 
environment (or treated in the marine environment if considering 
dispersants or in situ burning). We assessed the benefit of the 
proposed rule using a modeling tool developed for the Oil Pollution Act 
of 1990 Programmatic Regulatory Assessment (OPA 90 PRA). The PRA 
assessed the costs and benefits of 11 ``core group'' rules enacted 
under OPA 90. These included such rules as double hulls, financial 
responsibility, and the original vessel response plan rulemakings. The 
PRA assessed the overlapping effects (and therefore benefits) of these 
11 major rulemakings and avoided the double counting of barrels of oil 
not spilled. A copy of the OPA 90 PRA can be found in the Docket for 
this proposed rulemaking.
    The benefit analysis for the proposed rulemaking used the PRA 
modeling tool and adjusted estimates of effectiveness specific to this 
proposed rulemaking. Effectiveness factors (i.e., the quantified effect 
of the proposed rule) were developed through an expert panel.
    A cost effectiveness ratio compares cost and benefit and represents 
the value to society to recover (treat) a barrel of oil from the marine 
environment. Cost, benefit, and cost

[[Page 63338]]

effectiveness of the regulatory alternatives are presented in Table 1:

     Table 1.--NPV Cost, Benefit, and Cost Effectiveness by Regulatory Alternative (7 Percent Discount Rate,
                                          Assessment Period 2001-2030)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     NPV total       NPV total
                                                                     NPV total       national      national cost
                                                                   national cost      benefit      effectiveness
                                                                    ($Millions)      (Barrels)      ($/Barrel)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative 1...................................................              $0              $0              NA
Alternative 2...................................................          141.65           8,000        $17,700.
Alternative 3...................................................          254.53          22,100         11,500.
Alternative 4...................................................          240.57          22,300         10,800.
Alternative 5...................................................          223.46          22,300         10,000.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Alternative 5, the total NPV cost for the period 2001-2030 is 
$223.46 million (7 percent discount rate, 2001 dollars). Of this, 
$17.88 million ($15.62 million NPV) is for the initial acquisition of 
response equipment in 2003, when the proposed rule will become 
effective. An estimated $15.12 million ($13.21 million NPV) is for 
initial paperwork requirements in 2003 for response providers and 
planholders. This rule is estimated to cost $18.05 million annually 
(undiscounted) for operations, maintenance, and paperwork costs. This 
cost will first be incurred in 2004 and will be incurred through the 
assessment period (until 2030). Capital equipment initially acquired in 
2003 will be replaced at various times throughout the assessment 
period.
    Paperwork costs for planholders and equipment costs for OSROs drive 
the national cost of the proposed rule. While planholder paperwork 
costs are constant across all regulatory alternatives, OSROs must 
invest in different response equipment depending on the provisions of a 
specific alternative. Alternative 3 is the most expensive option 
because OSROs must purchase mechanical recovery equipment for all 
operating areas, ensure some dispersants capabilities, and provide 
aerial tracking capabilities. Alternative 2 is the least expensive of 
the change alternatives because it includes requirements for mechanical 
recovery and aerial tracking only.
    National benefit is driven by the effectiveness of dispersants 
application and aerial tracking. Our analysis found there is 
essentially no benefit from increasing response requirements for 
mechanical recovery over 2000 levels. It also found that planholders 
would not take advantage of the in-situ burning credit to reduce the 
need for mechanical recovery assets. Alternatives 4 and 5 are the most 
beneficial because they include rigorous requirements for dispersants 
application capability. Alternative 2 is the least beneficial because 
it includes increased mechanical recovery requirements, which yield no 
benefit, and aerial tracking requirements, which yield modest benefit.
    When cost is compared to benefit, Alternative 5 is the most cost-
effective regulatory alternative--$10,000/barrel. Alternative 2 is the 
least cost-effective--$17,700/barrel.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small 
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations 
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their 
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 
50,000.
    We do not believe this rulemaking will have a significant impact on 
a substantial number of small entities. Nevertheless, we prepared an 
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis discussing the impact of this 
proposed rule on small entities is available in the docket where 
indicated under ADDRESSES. Our analysis indicates that the proposed 
rulemaking would have a less-than-5-percent impact on annual revenues 
for small businesses in the first year. Annual costs would have a 
lesser impact on small businesses because costs following the first 
year decrease significantly.

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 Mr. Robert Pond, G-MOR, Coast 
Guard, telephone 202-267-6603 or email [email protected].
    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 an increase in an existing 
collection 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 are detailed in 
the chapter 8 of the Assessment in the docket. We found that the 
proposed rule would require 158,770 labor hours in the first year after 
implementation and 90,496 labor hours in subsequent years. 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.
    As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 
3507(d)), we have submitted a copy of this proposed rule and the 
Assessment to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for its review 
of the collection of information.

[[Page 63339]]

    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.
    You need not respond to a collection of information unless it 
displays a currently valid control number from OMB. Before the 
requirements for the collection of information become effective, we 
would publish notice in the Federal Register of OMB's decision to 
approve, modify, or disapprove the collection.

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local 
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial 
direct cost of compliance on them. For example, a rule has federalism 
implications under EO 13132, if it is intended to preempt a state from 
regulating the entities covered by the federal regulation. This 
proposed regulation is not intended to preempt state regulations on the 
same subject, unless the state's regulation actually conflicts with the 
requirements of this proposed regulation or would frustrate its 
purpose.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary 
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may 
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any 
one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an 
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this 
preamble.

Taking of Private Property

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

Civil Justice Reform

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

Protection of Children

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

Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under 
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on 
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
    To help the Coast Guard establish regular and meaningful 
consultation and collaboration with Indian and Alaskan Native tribes, 
we published a notice in the Federal Register (66 FR 36361, July 11, 
2001) requesting comments on how to best carry out the Order. We invite 
your comments on how this proposed rule might impact tribal 
governments, even if that impact may not constitute a ``tribal 
implication'' under the Order.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, 
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant 
energy action'' under that order, though it is a ``significant 
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866, and that it is not 
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, 
distribution, or use of energy. It has not been designated by the 
Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a 
significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement 
of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.

Environment

    We have considered the environmental impact of this proposed rule 
and concluded that preparation of a Programmatic Environmental Impact 
Statement (PEIS) is necessary. A PEIS will be prepared as announced 
September 1, 2000 (65 FR 53335, Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact 
Statement for Vessel and Facility Response Plans for Oil; On-Water 
Mechanical Recovery Capacity Increase for 2003 and Alternative Removal 
Technologies). The PEIS is considered necessary because the proposed 
rulemaking would require planholders to establish and maintain chemical 
dispersant stockpiles--and encourage establishing an in-situ burning 
capability--around the country. While dispersant and in-situ burning 
use are currently pre-authorized under certain conditions in most port 
areas, their use has been limited in the past, in part due to the lack 
of availability of those capabilities in the vicinity of the spill. 
Therefore, this regulation is likely to result in an increase in the 
number of dispersant and in-situ burning uses in spill response. A PEIS 
is necessary to ensure that any such effects are adequately considered 
because of public concern over the potential environmental effects of 
these technologies.

List of Subjects

33 CFR Part 154

    Facilities, Hazardous substances, Oil pollution.

33 CFR Part 155

    Hazardous substances, Oil pollution, Vessels.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes 
to amend 33 CFR parts 154 and 155 as follows:

PART 154--FACILITIES TRANSFERRING OIL OR HAZARDOUS MATERIAL IN BULK

    1. The authority citation for part 154 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231, 1321(j)(1)(c), (j)(5), (j)(6), and 
(m)(2); sec. 2, E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757; 49 CFR 1.46. Subpart F is 
also issued under 33 U.S.C. 2735.

    2. In Sec.  154.106(b), under ``American Society for Testing and 
Materials (ASTM)'', add, in numerical order, entries for ASTM F 1413-
92, ASTM F 1737-96, and ASTM F 1779-97 to read as follows:


Sec.  154.106  Incorporation by reference.

* * * * *

[[Page 63340]]

    (b) * * *
* * * * *

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)

* * * * *
ASTM F 1413-92, Standard Guide for Oil Spill Dispersant Application 
Equipment: Boom and Nozzle Systems--154.1045
ASTM F 1737-96, Standard Guide for Use of Oil Spill Dispersant 
Application Equipment During Spill Response: Boom and Nozzle Systems--
154.1045
ASTM F 1779-97, Standard Practice for Reporting Visual Observations of 
Oil on Water--154.1045
* * * * *
    3. In Sec.  154.1020, add definitions in alphabetical order to read 
as follows:


Sec.  154.1020  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Dispersant operations group supervisor means the person in charge 
of the dispersant operations under the operations section of the 
Incident Command System (ICS) organization.
    Dispersant monitor means a person responsible for monitoring the 
effectiveness of the dispersant operation through measures and 
guidelines established by the National Response Team, Regional Response 
Teams, and Area Committees.
    Dispersant spotter means the person who controls, guides, or lines 
up the dispersant-application platform over the spill target.
    Dispersant-application platform means the vessel or aircraft 
outfitted with the dispersant-application equipment acting as the 
delivery system for the dispersant onto the oil spill.
* * * * *
    Effective daily application capacity or EDAC means the estimated 
amount of dispersant that can be applied to a discharge by an 
application system given the availability of supporting dispersant 
stockpiles.
    Effective daily burn capacity or EDBC means the estimated amount of 
oil that can be effectively removed from the surface of the water by 
burning in one day.
* * * * *
    Fireproof boom means an oil containment boom constructed out of 
fireproof materials and designed to withstand prolonged periods of 
exposure to heat and flame during in-situ burning operations and have a 
demonstrated service life that extends through multiple days of burning 
operations. Stainless steel and water-cooled boom designs are examples 
of potential fireproof boom that may be credited with extended service 
lives if such durability can be properly demonstrated and documented.
    Fire-resistant boom means an oil containment boom constructed out 
of fire-retardant fabrics and reinforced internal strength members and 
designed to withstand exposure to heat and flame during in-situ burning 
operations. Fire resistant booms typically undergo material degradation 
when subjected to intense heat and flame for extended periods as is 
associated with the in-situ burning of oil. Fire resistant booms have a 
planning service life of one operational day.
* * * * *
    Gulf Coast means, for the purposes of dispersant-application 
requirements, the region encompassing the following Captain of the Port 
Zones:

(1) Corpus Christi, TX.
(2) Houston/Galveston, TX.
(3) Port Arthur, TX.
(4) Morgan City, LA.
(5) New Orleans, LA.
(6) Mobile, AL.
(7) Tampa, FL.
* * * * *
    In-situ burn operations group supervisor means the person in charge 
of the in-situ burn operations functional group under the operations 
section of the ICS organization.
* * * * *
    Operational effectiveness monitoring means monitoring concerned 
primarily with determining whether the dispersant was properly applied 
and how the dispersant is affecting the oil.
* * * * *
    Pre-authorization for dispersant use means an agreement, adopted by 
a Regional Response Team or an Area Committee, that authorizes the use 
of dispersants at the discretion of the Federal On-Scene Coordinator 
(in some cases in the context of the Unified Command) without the 
further approval of other Federal or State authorities. These pre-
authorization areas are generally limited to particular geographic 
areas within each region.
    Pre-authorization for in-situ burning means an agreement, adopted 
by a Regional Response Team and an Area Committee, that authorizes the 
in-situ burning of oil at the discretion of the Federal On-Scene 
Coordinator (in some cases in the context of the Unified Command) 
without the further approval of other Federal or State authorities. 
These pre-authorization areas are generally limited to particular 
geographic areas within each region.
    Primary dispersant staging site means a site designated within a 
Captain of the Port zone that has been identified as a forward staging 
area for dispersant application platforms and the loading of dispersant 
stockpiles. Primary staging sites are typically the planned locations 
where platforms load or reload dispersants before departing for 
application at the site of the discharge and may not be the locations 
where dispersant stockpiles are stored or application platforms are 
home based.
* * * * *
    Quick or expedited approval for dispersant use means an arrangement 
that limits the information the Federal On-Scene Coordinator must 
provide in order to obtain concurrence from a limited number of 
agencies, generally associated with a limited time in which a decision 
must be reached (typically less than two hours).
    Quick or expedited approval for in-situ burning means an 
arrangement that limits the information the Federal On-Scene 
Coordinator must provide in order to obtain concurrence from a limited 
number of agencies, generally associated with a limited time in which a 
decision must be reached (typically less than two hours).
* * * * *
    4. In Sec.  154.1035, revise paragraphs (b)(3)(iv) and (b)(3)(v), 
and add paragraphs (b)(3)(vi) through (b)(3)(ix) to read as follows:


Sec.  154.1035  Specific requirements for facilities that could 
reasonably be expected to cause significant and substantial harm to the 
environment.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (iv) This subsection must identify the oil spill removal 
organizations and the spill management team to be capable of providing 
the following resources:
    (A) Equipment and supplies to meet the requirements of Sec. Sec.  
154.1045, 154.1047 or subparts H or I of this part, as appropriate.
    (B) Trained personnel necessary to continue operation of the 
equipment and staff of the oil spill removal organization and spill 
management team for the first seven days of the response.
    (v) This subsection must include job descriptions for each spill 
management team member within the organizational structure described in 
paragraph (b)(3)(iii) of this section. These job descriptions should 
include the responsibilities and duties of each spill management team 
member in a response action.
    (vi) For facilities that handle, store, or transport Group II 
through Group IV petroleum oils (and that operate in waters where 
dispersant use pre-

[[Page 63341]]

authorization or expedited approval exists) this subsection must also 
separately list the resource providers and specific resources, 
including appropriately trained dispersant-application personnel, 
necessary to provide the dispersant capabilities required in this 
subpart. All resource providers and resources must be available by 
contract or other approved means as described in Sec.  154.1028(a). The 
dispersant resources to be listed within this section must include the 
following:
    (A) The identification of each primary dispersant staging site to 
be used by each dispersant-application platform to meet the 
requirements of this subpart.
    (B) The identification of the platform type, providing-resource 
organization, location, dispersant payload, and readiness/mobilization 
category (as provided for in Table 6 of appendix C to this part) for 
each dispersant-application platform identified. Location data must 
identify the distance between the platform's home base and the 
identified primary dispersant staging site for this section.
    (C) The identification of the dispersant product resource provider, 
location, and amount for each unit of dispersant stockpile required to 
support the required Effective Daily Application Capacity (EDAC) of 
each dispersant-application platform necessary to sustain each intended 
response tier of operation. Location data must include the stockpile's 
distance to the primary staging sites where the stockpile would be 
loaded onto the corresponding platforms.
    (D) If an oil spill removal organization is approved by the Coast 
Guard and its capability is equal to or exceeds the response capability 
needed by the owner or operator, the section may identify the oil spill 
removal organization only and not the information required in 
paragraphs (b)(3)(vi)(A) through (C) of this section.
    (vii) This subsection must also separately list the resource 
providers and specific resources necessary to provide, if appropriate, 
the in-situ burn capabilities as required in this subpart. The in-situ 
burn resources to be listed within this section must include the 
following:
    (A) The identification of the amount, type, resource provider, and 
location of in-situ burn boom.
    (B) The identification of the amount, type, resource providers, and 
location of support vessels to deploy, and if necessary, tow, the in-
situ burn boom during burning operations.
    (C) The identification of the amount, type, resource provider, and 
location for each ignition device required to support the required 
Effective Daily Burn Capacity (EDBC) of each in-situ burn package.
    (D) The identification of the amount, location, resource provider 
of trained personnel necessary to support the required EDBC of each in-
situ burn package.
    (E) If an oil spill removal organization has been approved by the 
Coast Guard and its capability is equal to or exceeds the response 
capability needed by the owner or operator for the credit level 
requested, the section may identify the oil spill removal organization 
and the level of in-situ-burn removal capability being provided, and 
not the information required in paragraphs(b)(3)(vii)(A)-(D).
    (viii) This subsection must also separately list the resource 
providers and specific resources necessary to provide oil tracking 
capabilities required in this subpart. The oil tracking resources to be 
listed within this section must include the following:
    (A) The identification of a resource provider.
    (B) Type and location of aerial surveillance aircraft that are 
ensured available, through contract or other approved means, to meet 
the oil tracking requirements of Sec.  154.1045(k).
    (ix) For mobile facilities that operate in more than one captain of 
the port zone, the plan must identify the oil spill removal 
organization and the spill management team in the applicable 
geographic-specific appendix. The oil spill removal organization(s) and 
the spill management team discussed in paragraph (b)(3)(iv) of this 
section must be included for each COTP zone in which the facility will 
handle, store, or transport oil in bulk.
* * * * *
    5. In Sec.  154.1045--
    a. Revise paragraph (i) as set forth below;
    b. Remove paragraph (n);
    c. Redesignate paragraphs (j), (k), (l), and (m) as paragraphs (l), 
(m), (n), and (o) respectively; and
    d. Add new paragraphs (j) and (k) to read as follows:


Sec.  154.1045  Response plan development and evaluation criteria for 
facilities that handle, store, or transport Group I through Group IV 
petroleum oils.

* * * * *
    (i) The owner or operator of a facility that handles, stores, or 
transports Groups II through IV petroleum oils within the inland, 
nearshore, or offshore area where pre-authorization or expedited 
approval for dispersant use exists must identify in their response 
plan, and ensure the availability of, through contract or other 
approved means, response resources capable of conducting dispersant 
operations within those areas.
    (1) Dispersant response resources must be capable of commencing 
dispersant-application operations at the site of a discharge within 7 
hours of the decision by the Federal On-Scene Coordinator to use 
dispersants.
    (2) Dispersant response resources must include the following:
    (i) Sufficient volumes of dispersants for application as required 
by paragraph (i)(3) of this section. Any dispersants identified in a 
response plan must be of a type listed on the National Oil and 
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan Product Schedule (40 
CFR part 300), as maintained by the Environmental Protection Agency.
    (ii) Dispersant-application platforms capable of delivering and 
applying the dispersant on a discharge in the amounts as required by 
paragraph (i)(3) of this section. At least 50 percent of each EDAC tier 
requirement must be achieved through the use of fixed-wing, aircraft-
based application platforms.
    (iii) Dispersant-application systems that are consistent in design 
with, and are capable of applying dispersant within the performance 
criteria in ASTM F 1413-92. For dispersant-application systems not 
fully covered by ASTM F 1413-92, such as fire monitor-type applicators, 
adequacy of performance criteria must be documented by presentation of 
independent evaluation materials (e.g., laboratory tests, field tests, 
and reports of actual use) that document the design of performance 
specifications.
    (iv) Dispersant-application personnel trained in and capable of 
applying dispersants according to the recommended procedures contained 
within ASTM F 1737-96.
    (3) Dispersant stockpiles, application platforms, and other 
supporting resources must be available in a quantity and type 
sufficient to treat a facility's worst case discharge (as determined by 
using the criteria in appendix B, section 8) or in quantities 
sufficient to meet the requirements in Table 154.1045(i) of this 
section, whichever is the lesser amount.

[[Page 63342]]



                      Table 154.1045(i).--Tiers for Effective Daily Application Capability
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Response time  Dispersant application--  Dispersant application--
                                               for completed   Dispersant: oil treated   Dispersant: oil treated
                    Tier                        application    in gallons (Gulf Coast)    in gallons (All other
                                                  (hours)                                         U.S.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tier 1......................................              12          8,250:165,000              4,125:82,500
Tier 2......................................              36         23,375:467,000            23,375:467,000
Tier 3......................................              60         23,375:467,000            23,375:467,000
                                             -----------------
    Total...................................              60       55,000:1,100,000         50,875:1,017,500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Gulf Coast Tier 1 is higher due to greater potential spill size and frequency in that area, and it is
  assumed that dispersant stockpiles would be centralized in the Gulf area. Also note the 1:20 dispersant-to-oil
  application ratio is a planning assumption which relies on the generally agreed upon estimate of the
  effectiveness of current dispersant formulations. Alternative application ratios may be considered based on
  submission to the Coast Guard (G-MOR) of peer-reviewed scientific evidence of improved capability.

    (j) The owner or operator of a facility that handles, stores, or 
transports Groups II through IV petroleum oil within any inland, 
nearshore, or offshore area with pre-authorization or expedited 
approval for in-situ burning may request credit that will count toward 
the facility's on-water mechanical recovery capability for worst case 
discharge response Tiers 2 and 3 up to the amounts identified in Table 
154.1045(j) of this section. No credit is available for Tier 1. To 
receive this credit, the vessel owner or operator must identify and 
ensure, through contract or other approved means, the availability of 
the necessary resources to sustain in-situ burning operations for the 
level of credit being requested.
    (1) In-situ burn response resources must be capable of commencing 
ignition of oil at the site of a discharge within 12 hours of the 
initial authorization of the Federal On-Scene Coordinator to conduct 
in-situ burning to receive credit against Tier 2 requirements.
    (2) In-situ burn response resources for all response tiers must 
include the following:
    (i) Sufficient in-situ burn boom.
    (ii) Vessel platforms capable of towing and tending in-situ burn 
boom in the operating environments where credit is requested.
    (iii) Sufficient ignition devices to support burning operations.
    (iv) Personnel trained in conducting in-situ burning operations.
    (v) All equipment ensured available as required in paragraphs 
(j)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section must be capable of sustained 
use in the operating environments for which credit is requested.

                                     Table 154.1045(j).--Maximum Allowable Tiers for Effective Daily Burn Capability
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  Cumulative equipment requirements
                                              Response time    Daily burn   ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Tier                      for completed     capacity       Fire proof    Fire resistant
                                               burning\1\    (EDBC) \2\ (in    boom (feet)     boom (feet)    Hand-held or     Heli-torch      Support
                                                (in hrs.)         bbls)            \3\             \3\           igniter       igniter \4\      vessel
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tier 1.....................................              24           5,000             500             500               4 or 1                       2
Tier 2.....................................              48          10,000           1,000           1,500              12 or 1                       4
Tier 3.....................................              72          10,000           1,000           2,500              20 or 1                      4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Tiered response times represent the maximum allowable time from the instant when in-situ burning is authorized for use by the Federal On-scene
  coordinator to the completion of the operational burn period for that tier.
\2\ EDBC amounts for Tiers 2 and 3 above may be applied against the corresponding tiers for on-water mechanical recovery (EDRC) as required to respond
  to an owner or operator's worst case discharge.
\3\ Assumes fireproof boom is reusable in all three tiers. The fire will consume fire-resistant boom, therefore, it will require a replacement at the
  start of each new operational period.
\4\ If a helitorch igniter system is identified and ensured available, one-time igniters are not required. Alternatives may be considered based on
  submission to the Coast Guard of peer-reviewed scientific evidence of improved capability.

    (3) In areas that have ice-bound conditions throughout prolonged 
periods of the year, credit levels for Effective Daily Burn Capacity 
(EDBC) against on-water mechanical recovery requirements can be 
elevated, as deemed appropriate, by the respective Area Committee for 
the area where the extra credit is being considered. Extra EDBC levels 
are at the discretion of the Area Committee, however, it is not 
recommended that EDBC levels comprise more than 50 percent of the total 
on-water recovery capability for a planholder in any one particular 
Captain of the Port area.
    (k) The owner or operator of a facility handling Groups I through 
IV petroleum oil as a primary cargo must identify in the response plan, 
and ensure the availability of through contract or other approved 
means, response resources necessary to provide aerial oil tracking to 
support oil spill assessment and cleanup activities. Aerial oil 
tracking resources must--
    (1) Be capable of arriving at the site of a discharge within 3 
hours from the time of the initial notification of the discharge for a 
distance up to 50 nautical miles from shore;
    (2) Be capable of supporting oil spill removal operations 
continuously for three 10-hour operational periods during the initial 
72 hours of the discharge; and
    (3) Include the following:
    (i) Appropriately located aircraft and personnel capable of meeting 
the response time requirement for oil tracking from paragraph (k)(1) of 
this section.
    (ii) Sufficient numbers of aircraft, pilots, and trained 
observation personnel to support oil spill operations, commencing upon 
initial assessment, and capable of coordinating on-scene cleanup 
operations, including dispersant, in-situ burn, and mechanical recovery 
operations. Observation personnel must be trained in--

[[Page 63343]]

    (A) The protocols of oil spill reporting and assessment, including 
estimation of slick size, thickness, and quantity; and
    (B) The use of assessment techniques in ASTM F 1779-97, and 
familiar with the use of other guides, such as NOAA's ``Open Water Oil 
Identification Job Aid for Aerial Observation,'' (available at http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/order/jobaid.html) and NOAA's 
``Characteristic Coastal Habitats'' Guide (available at http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/oilaids/coastal/coastal.html).
* * * * *
    6. In appendix C to Part 154, revise section 8, and following Table 
5, add Tables 6, 7, and 8 to read as follows:

Appendix C to Part 154--Guidelines for Determining and Evaluating 
Required Response Resources for Facility Response Plans

* * * * *

8. Determining the Capability of High-Rate Response Methods 8.1 
Calculating Cumulative Dispersant-Application Capacity 
Requirements.

    8.1.1 A facility owner or operator should plan either for a 
dispersant capacity to respond to a facility's worst case discharge 
(WCD) of oil or for the amount of the dispersant resource cap as 
required by Sec.  154.1045(i)(3) of this part, whichever is the 
lesser amount. When planning for the cumulative application capacity 
that is required, the calculations should account for the loss of 
some oil to the environment due to natural dissipation causes 
(primarily evaporation). The following procedure should be used to 
determine the cumulative application requirements:
    8.1.2 Determine the WCD volume of oil in gallons and the 
appropriate cargo group for the type of petroleum oil (persistent 
Groups II, III, IV). For facilities with mixed petroleum oils, 
assume a total WCD volume using the group that constitutes the 
largest portion of the oil being handled or the group with the 
smallest natural dissipation factor.
    8.1.3 Multiply the total WCD amount in gallons by the natural 
dissipation factor for the appropriate cargo group as follows: Group 
II factor is 0.50; Group III is 0.30 and Group IV is 0.10 associated 
with the nearshore area for the cargo type carried. This represents 
the amount of oil that can be expected to be lost to natural 
dissipation. Subtract the oil amount lost to natural dissipation 
from the total WCD amount to determine the remaining oil cargo 
available for treatment by dispersant-application.
    8.1.4 Multiply the oil available for dispersant treatment by the 
dispersant to oil planning application ratio of 1 part dispersant to 
20 parts oil (0.05). The resultant number represents the cumulative 
total dispersant-application capability that should be ensured 
available within the first 60 hours.
    8.1.5 The following is an example of the procedure described 
above: A facility with a 1,000,000 gallon WCD of crude oil (specific 
gravity 0.87) is located in an area with pre-authorization for 
dispersant use in the nearshore environment on the U.S. East Coast.
    WCD: 1,000,000 gallons, Group III oil.
    Natural Dissipation Factor for Group III: 30%.
    General formula to determine oil available for dispersant 
treatment: (WCD) - [(WCD) x (natural dissipation factor)] = 
available oil.
    E.g., 1,000,000 gal - (1,000,000 gal x .30) = 700,000 gallons of 
available oil.
    Cumulative application capacity = Available oil x planning 
application ratio (1 gal disp/20 gals oil = 0.05), 700,000 gal oil x 
(0.05) = 35,000 gallons cumulative dispersant-application capacity.
    The requirements for cumulative dispersant-application capacity 
(35,000 gallons) for this facility's WCD is less than the overall 
dispersant capability for non-Gulf Coast waters as required by Sec.  
155.1045(i)(3) of this chapter. As such, this vessel would not need 
to meet the entire amount for Tier 3, but would be required to meet 
the following tier requirements (totaling 35,000 gallons 
application):

Tier 1 4,125 gallons--Completed in 12 hours
Tier 2 23,375 gallons--Completed in 36 hours
Tier 3 7,500 gallons--Completed in 60 hours

    8.2 Determining Effective Daily Application Capacities ``EDAC'' 
for Dispersant Response Systems.
    8.2.1 This section discusses methods to be used for the purposes 
of determining the EDAC of a dispersant response system. This 
methodology considers mobilization factors for dispersant platforms 
as well as dispersant stockpiles and platform application rates (as 
published in the 1999 Summary Report of Public Workshop for Response 
Plan Equipment CAPs. This report is available at http://www.uscg.mil/vrp/reg/caps.shtml).
    8.2.2 For each Captain of the Port zone where a dispersant 
response capability is required, the response plan should identify:
    [sbull] The type, number, and location of each dispersant-
application platform intended for use in meeting dispersant delivery 
requirements specified in Sec.  155.1050(j)(3) of this chapter.
    [sbull] The amount and location of available dispersant 
stockpiles to support each platform.
    [sbull] A primary staging site for each platform that will serve 
as its base of operations for the duration of the response.
    8.2.3 Using the readiness factors from Table 6 of this appendix 
and platform capability factors in Table 7 of this appendix, 
calculate mobilization times and dispersant delivery capabilities 
for each platform. For each aircraft platform--

MP = R + T + L

MP = Mobilization of platform
R = Recall time in hours (time it takes for dispersant operations 
personnel to arrive at the storage location and to prepare the 
dispersant-application system for transport)
T = Transit time (time it takes for dispersant-application system to 
be transported to the staging area mobilization)
L = 1 hour to load dispersant at staging site if platform is not 
preloaded. Total time for platform mobilization should be less than 
7 hours for Tier 1, less than 24 hours Tier 2, and less than 48 
hours Tier 3;

    For each stockpile--

MS = R + T + L

MS = Mobilization of Stockpile
R = Recall of loading personnel/transportation assets and loading 
dispersant for transport if applicable
T = Transit time to staging site
L = 1 hour for loading on delivery platform. The transit time to the 
spill site is included in delivery capability calculations for 
aircraft but not for vessels. Total time for stockpile mobilization 
should be less than 7 hours for Tier 1, less than 24 hours for Tier 
2, and less than 48 hours for Tier 3.
    Delivery capability for Tier 1 should be calculated as follows:

R/10 x 12--T

R = EDAC Rate (from Table 7)
10 = hours in operational period
12 = assumed hours of daylight for planning purposes
T = mobilization time (either for platform or stockpile time 
whichever is greater). Delivery capability for all Tier 1 platforms 
should at least equal amount specified for Tier 1 in Sec.  
155.1050(l)(3) of this chapter.

    For Tiers 2 and 3, delivery capability for each platform is the 
EDAC Rate in Table 7 of this appendix, which shows delivery 
capability for each resource assuming 10-hour operating period. 
Delivery capability for all Tier 2 and 3 platforms must at least 
equal amount specified for Tiers 2 and 3 in Sec.  155.1050(l)(3) of 
this chapter.
    For each vessel platform--

MP = R + T + S + L

MP = Mobilization of platform
R = Recall time in hours (time it takes for dispersant operations 
personnel to arrive at the storage location and to prepare the 
dispersant-application system for transport)
T = Transit time (time it takes for dispersant-application system to 
be transported to the staging area mobilization
S = Transit time from staging site or usual location of vessel to 
the spill site
L = 1 hour to load dispersant at staging site if platform is not 
preloaded. Total time for platform mobilization should be less than 
7 hours for Tier 1, less than 24 hours for Tier 2, and less than 48 
hours for Tier 3. Usual location of the vessel is the location where 
the vessel is typically employed when not engaged in dispersant-
application operations. Spill site is the location in the Captain of 
the Port zone up to 50 miles offshore furthest from the dispersant 
platform staging site or the usual location of the vessel.
MS = R + T

MS = Mobilization of Stockpile
R = Recall of loading personnel/transportation assets and loading 
dispersant for transport if applicable
T = Transit time to staging site. Total time for stockpile 
mobilization should be less

[[Page 63344]]

than 6 hours for Tier 1, less than 23 hours for Tier 2, and less 
than 47 hours Tier 3 to allow time for loading dispersant on 
delivery platform.

    Delivery capability for Tier 1 should be calculated as follows:
R/10 x 12-T

R = EDAC Rate (from Table 7 of this appendix)
10 = 10 hours in operational period
12 = assumed hours of daylight for planning purposes
T = mobilization time (either for platform or stockpile time 
whichever is greater)]. Delivery capability for all Tier 1 platforms 
must at least equal the amount specified for tier 1 in Sec.  
155.1050(l)(3) of this chapter.

    For Tiers 2 and 3, delivery capability for each platform is the 
EDAC Rate in Table 7 of this appendix, which shows delivery 
capability for each resource assuming 10-hour operating period. 
Delivery capability for all Tier 2 and 3 platforms must at least 
equal amount specified for Tiers 2 and 3 in Sec.  155.1050(l)(3) of 
this chapter.
    8.2.3.1 EDAC must be calculated for each platform and supporting 
stockpile, and added together as appropriate to meet the dispersant-
application tier requirements.
    8.2.3.2 The following is an example of the procedure described 
above: A plan lists a stockpile of 5,000 gallons of dispersant 
located 35 miles from a central staging site (e.g., a coastal 
airport) but not loaded for transport, and a DC-3 aircraft based at 
a facility approximately 75 miles from the staging site. The DC-3 is 
dedicated to dispersant spraying operations. The EDAC allowed toward 
tier 1 for this dispersant-application system can be calculated as 
follows:

Stockpile: Amount--5,000 gallons.
Stockpile Mobilization time: R = 4 hours, T = 35 miles/35 miles per 
hour or 1 hour, hours = 4 + 1 + 1 hour loading = 6 hours.
Platform Mobilization: R = 2 hours, T = 75 miles/150 miles per hour 
or 0.5 hours + 1 hour loading at staging site = 2 + 1.5 + 1 = 3.5 
hours.
Operational period ``OP'' = 12 hours daylight--5 hours (use longer 
of stockpile or platform mobilization time) = 7 hours (commencing 6 
hours after notification of approval and continuing until the end of 
the first 12 hour daylight period.)
Tier 1 delivery capability for this platform = (Table 7 of this 
appendix) EDAC rate = 5000 gallons/10 hours x 6 = 3000 gallons 
application capacity.

    8.2.3.3 Other platform types do exist, and additional platform 
types are expected to develop with time. The Coast Guard will review 
requests to establish EDAC rates for other platform types at its 
discretion. EDAC calculations for additional platforms use the same 
methodology as used to establish the existing rates already in Table 
7 of this appendix. Table 7 is based on average characteristics (for 
planning and review purposes) for most types of application 
platforms typically used for spraying dispersants.
    8.3 Determining Effective Daily Burn Capacities ``EDBC'' for In-
situ Burn Response Systems.
    8.3.1 For the purposes of determining the effective daily burn 
capacity of in-situ burn resources, the information within this 
section applies.
    8.3.2 For each Captain of the Port zone where an in-situ burn 
response capability is ensured available, the response plan should 
identify--
    [sbull] The type, location, and amount of in-situ burn boom 
available;
    [sbull] The amount and location of available ignition sources. 
If ignition system ensured available is a helitorch, a source of 
pilots trained in the use of the helitorch and suitable aircraft 
must be identified that can respond within the required response 
times; and
    [sbull] The identification of supporting vessels and trained 
operators capable of towing, deploying, and tending the fire boom.
    8.3.3 Using the readiness factors from Table 8 of this appendix, 
mobilization times are calculated for each in-situ burn system. The 
General Formula for calculating Tier 1 mobilization time is as 
follows:

T = (MB + MV) or (MH), whichever is greater (in hours).

T = Total Mobilization
MB = Mobilization of In-situ burn boom/hand held igniters

MB = R + L + T1

R = Recall of loading personnel/transportation assets
L = Loading to truck
T1 = Transit time to vessel staging site
MV = Mobilization of Support Vessels = L + T2
L = Boom loading to vessel
T2 = Transit time to spill site
MH = Mobilization of Helitorch = R + T1 + L + T2
R = Recall of personnel/platform
T1 = Transit time to staging site
L = Torch loading
T2 = Transit time to spill site

    8.3.4 The mobilization times are used to ensure that a full 12-
hour ``operational period'' or ``OP'' for in-situ burning is 
available for Tier 1. All operational period calculations assume 
approval for use is granted at zero hour, and that a maximum of 12 
hours is available to support oil collection and burning within the 
initial 24-hour period. The available time allowed to support in-
situ burning is slightly longer (12 hours) in comparison to 
dispersant operations (10 hours) as in-situ burning operations can 
continue for a limited period during darkness where dispersant 
spraying would be suspended due to decreased visibility. The 12-hour 
period is divided into four, 1-hour burning cycles, each preceded by 
a 2-hour oil containment and collection cycle.
    8.3.4.1 The general formula for calculating the tier 1 
operational period of a system is:
OP = Operational Period = 24 hours-(the mobilization time for the 
boom + platform or the mobilization time for the supporting 
helitorch igniter (if used, whichever is greater).
    8.3.5 For planning purposes, an in-situ burning system is 
comprised of the following minimum components that must be ensured 
available: Minimum 500 ft. fire boom, two support vessels to tend 
and tow the boom, and four hand-held igniters or one helitorch 
system. 500 ft. sections of fire resistant boom are credited with a 
5,000 bpd burning capacity and are also considered to have a service 
life of one operational period. For example, a second (Tier 2) and 
third (Tier 3) section of 500 ft. boom must be ensured available if 
the planholder desires to claim a 5,000 bpd credit for all three 
tiers.
    8.3.6 Planholders may request extensions of boom service lives 
beyond one operational period for ``fire-proof'' type boom, such as 
stainless steel, or water-cooled boom designs, when such boom has 
been tested and can be adequately documented as providing extended 
service capabilities. Planholders may receive credit for multiple 
operational periods using the same 500 ft. section of boom dependant 
upon the documentation presented to the Coast Guard for review and 
approval.
* * * * *

                                    Table 6.--Readiness/Mobilization Factors
                                           [All times listed in hours]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Recall
             Resource/status                 period       Transit to staging site    Transit to spill site ``S''
                                             ``R''               ``T'' \1\                       \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aircraft dedicated to dispersant                    2  D/150+1                       N/A
 response operations.
Aircraft dedicated to spraying                      3  D/150+1                       N/A
 operations.
Aircraft nondedicated...................            4  D/150+1                       N/A
Vessel dedicated (preloaded)............            2                0               D/5
Vessel dedicated (not loaded)...........            2  D/5+1                         D/5
Vessel non-dedicated (preloaded)........            4                0               D/5
Vessel non-dedicated (not loaded).......        \3\ 4  D/5+1                         D/5
Dispersant Stockpile (preloaded for                 2  D/35+1                        D/5
 transport to staging site).

[[Page 63345]]

 
Dispersant Stockpile (not preloaded for         \3\ 4  D/35+1                        N/A
 transport to staging site).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Transit times to staging site for aircraft based on average speed of advance of 150 kts and ``D'' distance
  between aircraft home base and forward staging site for dispersant operations. Transit times for vessels from
  usual location of vessel to staging site based on average speed of advance of 5 kts and ``D'' is distance to
  spill site ``D''. Speed waivers for transit speeds may be granted based on actual performance of platform.
  Transit times for stockpile based on average speed of advance of 35 mph by truck and ``D'' distance from
  stockpile location to dispersant staging site, such as a coastal airport.
\2\ Transit times to spill site for aircraft is included in the calculations contained in Table 7 because of the
  relatively high speed of these platforms compared to vessels. Transit times for vessels to the spill site are
  calculated from the usual location of vessel to staging site based on average speed of advance of 5 kts and
  ``D'' is distance to spill site ``D''. Speed waivers for transit speeds may be granted based on actual
  performance of platform.
\3\ Assume 2 hours to load dispersant stockpiles on to trucks for transport to the staging site.
\4\ For a facility, the spill site is the facility location. For a vessel, the spill site in a particular pre-
  authorization or expedited approval zone is that point furthest from the stockpile location where the vessel
  typically operates, not to exceed 50 miles from shore.


Table 7.--Platform Capability for Oil Dispersant Delivery Over A 10-Hour
                                 Period
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    EDAC rate estimated
                                        Distance   dispersant applied in
              Platform                  out (N.              10
                                         miles)    hours[dagger][dagger]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Helicopter..........................           50          1,500.00
Air tractor.........................           50          8,000.00
DC-3................................           50          5,000.00
DC-4................................           50         17,495.38
DC-6................................           50         18,000.00
C-130...............................           50         32,972.28
P-3.................................           50         20,000.00
Fire Monitor-Equipped Vessel........           50          6,000.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                    Table 8.--Readiness/Mobilization Factors
                                           [All times listed in hours]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Recall period
           Resource/status              ``R'' + ``L''    Transit to staging site    Transit to spill site ``T2''
                                          load time               ``T1''
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In-situ Burn Boom/HH Igniters........       2 + 2 \1\   D/35 \4\                   N/A
Support Vessels......................     N/A + 2 \2\   N/A                        (10 or D/5) \3\
Aircraft/helitorch igniter...........           4 + 1   D/90                       D/90
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Loading Time for boom onto a truck would be zero if the boom is co-located at the same waterfront facility
  as the vessels used to ferry the boom to the spill.
\2\ Loading Time for in-situ boom onto a support vessel would be zero if the boom is already loaded onto a
  support vessel.
\3\ Transit times for support vessels based on average speed of advance of 5 kts and maximum distance from shore
  to spill site of fifty miles. Speed waivers for transit speeds may be granted based on actual performance of
  platform.
\4\ Transit times for in-situ boom from warehouse to vessel dock based on average speed of advance of 35 mph by
  truck and ``D'' distance from storage location to vessel staging site.
\5\ Transit times for aircraft/helitorch based on average speed of advance of 90 kts and combined distance ``D''
  between aircraft home base, forward staging site and spill location.
\6\ For a facility, the spill site is the facility location. For a vessel, the spill site in a particular pre-
  authorization or expedited approval zone is that point furthest from the stockpile location where the vessel
  typically operates, not to exceed 50 miles from shore.

PART 155--OIL OR HAZARDOUS MATERIAL POLLUTION PREVENTION 
REGULATIONS FOR VESSELS

    7. The authority citation for part 155 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231, 1321(j); 46 U.S.C. 3715; sec.2, E.O. 
12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p 351; 49 CFR 1.46. 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 Sec. Sec.  155.1110 through 155.1150 also issued 
under 33 U.S.C. 2735.

    Note: Additional requirements for vessels carrying oil or 
hazardous materials are contained in 46 CFR parts 30 through 36, 33 
CFR parts 150, 151, 153, and 157.

    8. In Sec.  155.140(b), under ``American Society for Testing and 
Materials (ASTM)'', add, in numerical order, entries for ASTM 1413-92, 
ASTM 1737-96, and ASTM 1779-97 to read as follows:
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
* * * * *

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)

* * * * *

ASTM F 1413-92, Standard Guide for Oil Spill Dispersant         155.1050
 Application Equipment: Boom and Nozzle Systems..............

[[Page 63346]]

 
ASTM F 1737-96, Standard Guide for Use of Oil Spill             155.1050
 Dispersant-Application Equipment During Spill Response: Boom
 and Nozzle Systems..........................................
ASTM F 1779-97, Standard Practice for Reporting Visual          155.1050
 Observations of Oil on Water................................
 

* * * * *
    9. In Sec.  155.1020, add definitions in alphabetical order to read 
as follows:


Sec.  155.1020  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Dispersant operations group supervisor means the person in charge 
of the dispersant operations under the operations section of the ICS 
organization.
    Dispersant monitor means a person who is responsible for monitoring 
the effectiveness of the dispersant operation through measures and 
guidelines established by the National Response Team, Regional Response 
Teams, and Area Committees.
    Dispersant-application platform means the vessel or aircraft 
outfitted with the dispersant-application equipment acting as the 
delivery system for the dispersant onto the oil spill.
    Dispersant spotter means the person who controls, guides, or lines 
up the dispersant-application platform over the spill target.
* * * * *
    Effective daily application capacity or EDAC means the estimated 
amount of dispersant that can be applied to a discharge by an 
application system given the availability of supporting dispersant 
stockpiles.
    Effective daily burn capacity or EDBC means the estimated amount of 
oil that can be effectively removed from the surface of the water by 
burning in one day.
* * * * *
    Fireproof boom means an oil containment boom constructed out of 
fireproof materials and designed to withstand prolonged periods of 
exposure to heat and flame during in-situ burning operations and have a 
demonstrated service life that extends through multiple days of burning 
operations. Stainless steel and water-cooled boom designs are examples 
of potential fireproof boom that may be credited with extended service 
lives if such durability can be properly demonstrated and documented.
    Fire-resistant boom means an oil containment boom constructed out 
of fire-retardant fabrics and reinforced internal strength members and 
designed to withstand exposure to heat and flame during in-situ burning 
operations. Fire resistant booms typically undergo material degradation 
when subjected to intense heat and flame for extended periods as is 
associated with the in-situ burning of oil. Fire resistant booms have a 
planning service life of one operational day.
* * * * *
    Gulf Coast means for the purposes of dispersant-application 
requirements, the region encompassing the following Captain of the Port 
Zones:
    (1) Corpus Christi, TX.
    (2) Houston/Galveston, TX.
    (3) Port Arthur, TX.
    (4) Morgan City, LA.
    (5) New Orleans, LA.
    (6) Mobile, AL.
    (7) Tampa, FL.
* * * * *
    In-situ burn operations group supervisor means the person in charge 
of the in-situ burn operations functional group under the operations 
section of the ICS organization.
* * * * *
    Operational effectiveness monitoring means monitoring concerned 
primarily with determining whether the dispersant was properly applied 
and how the dispersant is affecting the oil.
* * * * *
    Pre-authorization for dispersant use means an agreement, adopted by 
a Regional Response Team or an Area Committee, that authorizes the use 
of dispersants at the discretion of the Federal On-Scene Coordinator 
(in some cases in the context of the Unified Command) without the 
further approval of other Federal or State authorities. These pre-
authorization areas are generally limited to particular geographic 
areas within each region.
    Pre-authorization for in-situ burning means an agreement, adopted 
by a Regional Response Team or an Area Committee, that authorizes the 
in-situ burning of oil at the discretion of the Federal On-Scene 
Coordinator (in some cases in the context of the Unified Command) 
without the further approval of other Federal or State authorities. 
These pre-authorization areas are generally limited to particular 
geographic areas within each region.
    Primary dispersant staging site means a site designated within a 
Captain of the Port zone where identified as a forward staging area for 
dispersant-application platforms and the loading of dispersant 
stockpiles. Primary staging sites would normally be the planned 
location where the platform would load or reload dispersants prior to 
departing for application at the site of the discharge and may not be 
the location where dispersant stockpiles are stored or application 
platforms are home based.
* * * * *
    Quick or expedited approval for dispersant use means an arrangement 
that limits the information the Federal On-Scene Coordinator must 
provide in order to obtain concurrence from a limited number of 
agencies, generally associated with a limited time in which a decision 
must be reached (typically less than two hours).
    Quick or expedited approval for in-situ burning means an 
arrangement that limits the information the Federal On-Scene 
Coordinator must provide in order to obtain concurrence from a limited 
number of agencies, generally associated with a limited time in which a 
decision must be reached (typically less than two hours).
* * * * *
    10. In Sec.  155.1035, revise paragraph (i)(9) and add paragraphs 
(i)(10), (i)(11), and (i)(12) to read as follows:


Sec.  155.1035  Response plan requirements for manned vessels carrying 
oil as a primary cargo.

* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (9) For vessels that handle, store, or transport Group II through 
Group IV petroleum oils, the section must also separately list the 
resource providers identified to provide the salvage, vessel 
firefighting, and lightering capabilities required in this subpart.
    (10) For vessels that handle, store, or transport Group II through 
Group IV petroleum oils (and that operate in waters where dispersant 
use pre-authorization or expedited approval exists) this section must 
also separately list the resource providers and specific resources, 
including appropriately trained dispersant-application personnel, 
necessary to provide, if appropriate, the dispersant capabilities 
required in this subpart. All resource providers and resources must be 
available by contract or other approved means. The dispersant resources 
to be listed within this section must include the following:
    (i) The identification of each primary dispersant staging site to 
be used by each dispersant-application platform to meet the 
requirements of Sec.  155.1050(j).
    (ii) The identification of the platform type, resource provider, 
location, dispersant payload, and readiness/mobilization category (as 
provided for in Table 7 of appendix B to this part) for each 
dispersant-application platform identified. Location data should 
identify the distance between the platform's home base and the 
identified primary dispersant staging site(s) for this section.

[[Page 63347]]

    (iii) The identification of the dispersant product resource 
provider, location and amount for each unit of dispersant stockpile 
required to support the required Effective Daily Application Capacity 
(EDAC) of each dispersant-application platform necessary to sustain 
each intended response tier of operation. Location data should include 
the stockpile's distance to the primary staging sites where it would be 
loaded onto the corresponding platforms. If an oil spill removal 
organization has been evaluated by the Coast Guard and its capability 
has been determined to equal or exceed the response capability needed 
by the owner or operator, the section may identify the oil spill 
removal organization only, and not the information required in 
paragraphs (i)(10)(i) through (10)(iii) of this section.
    (11) This section must also separately list the resource providers 
and specific resources necessary to provide, if appropriate, the in-
situ burn capabilities as required in this subpart. The in-situ burn 
resources to be listed within this section must include the following:
    (i) The identification of the amount, type, providing-resource 
organization, and location of in-situ burn boom identified and ensured 
available.
    (ii) The identification of the amount, type, resource provider, and 
location of support vessels, identified and ensured available, to 
deploy, and if necessary, tow the in-situ burn boom during burning 
operations.
    (iii) The identification of the amount, type, resource provider, 
and location for each ignition device required to support the required 
Effective Daily Burn Capacity (EDBC) of each in-situ burn package.
    (iv) The identification of the amount, location, and resource 
provider of trained personnel necessary to support the required EDBC of 
each in-situ burn package.
    (v) If an oil spill removal organization has been evaluated by the 
Coast Guard and its capability has been determined to equal or exceed 
the response capability needed by the owner or operator for the credit 
level requested, the section may identify the oil spill removal 
organization and the level of in-situ burn removal capability being 
provided, and not the information required in paragraphs (i)(11)(i) 
through (11)(iv) of this section.
    (12) The section must also separately list the resource providers 
and specific resources necessary to provide oil-tracking capabilities 
required in this subpart. The oil tracking resources to be listed 
within this appendix must include the following:
    (i) The identification of a resource provider.
    (ii) Type and location of aerial surveillance aircraft that have 
been ensured available, through contract or other approved means, to 
meet the oil tracking requirements of Sec.  155.1050(k).
* * * * *
    11. In Sec.  155.1040, revise paragraph (j)(9) and add paragraphs 
(j)(10), (j)(11), and (j)(12) to read as follows:


Sec.  155.1040  Response plan requirements for unmanned tank barges 
carrying oil as a primary cargo.

* * * * *
    (j) * * *
    (9) The section must also separately list the resource providers 
identified to provide the salvage, vessel firefighting, and lightering 
capabilities required in this subpart.
    (10) The section must also separately list the resource providers 
and specific resources necessary to provide, if appropriate, the 
dispersant capabilities required in this subpart. The dispersant 
resources to be listed within this section must include the following:
    (i) The identification of a primary dispersant staging site or 
sites to be used by each dispersant-application platform that is 
ensured available, through contract or other approved means, to meet 
the requirements of Sec.  155.1050(j).
    (ii) The identification of the type, resource provider, location, 
dispersant payload, and readiness/mobilization category (as provided 
for in Table 7 of appendix B to this part) for each dispersant-
application platform identified and ensured available. Location data 
should identify the distance between the platform's home base and the 
identified primary dispersant staging sites for this section.
    (iii) The identification of the resource provider, location and 
amount for each unit of stockpile required to support the required 
Effective Daily Application Capacity of each dispersant-application 
platform, as necessary to sustain each intended response tier of 
operation. Location data should include the stockpile's distance to the 
primary staging sites where it will be loaded onto the corresponding 
platforms. If an oil spill removal organization has been evaluated by 
the Coast Guard and its capability has been determined to equal or 
exceed the response capability needed by the owner or operator, the 
section may identify the oil spill removal organization only, and not 
the information required in paragraphs (j)(10)(i) through (10)(iii) of 
this section.
    (11) This section must also separately list the resource providers 
and specific resources necessary to provide, if appropriate, the in-
situ burn capabilities as required in this subpart. The in-situ burn 
resources to be listed within this section must include the following:
    (i) The identification of the amount, type, resource provider, and 
location of in-situ burn boom identified and ensured available.
    (ii) The identification of the amount, type, resource provider, and 
location of support vessels, identified and ensured available, to 
deploy, and if necessary, tow the in-situ burn boom during burning 
operations.
    (iii) The identification of the amount, type, resource provider, 
and location for each ignition device required to support the required 
Effective Daily Burn Capacity (EDBC) of each in-situ burn package.
    (iv) The identification of the amount, location, and resource 
provider of trained personnel necessary to support the required EDBC of 
each in-situ burn package.
    (v) If an oil spill removal organization has been approved by the 
Coast Guard and its capability is equal to or exceeds the response 
capability needed by the owner or operator for the credit level 
requested, the section may identify the oil spill removal organization 
and the level of in-situ burn removal capability being provided, and 
not the information required in paragraphs (j)(11)(i) through (11)(iv) 
of this section.
    (12) The section must also separately list the resource providers 
and specific resources necessary to provide oil-tracking capabilities 
required in this subpart. The oil tracking resources to be listed 
within this section must include the following:
    (i) The identification of resource provider.
    (ii) Type and location of aerial surveillance aircraft that have 
been ensured available, through contract or other approved means, to 
meet the oil tracking requirements of Sec.  155.1050(k).
* * * * *
    12. In Sec.  155.1050--
    a. Remove and reserve paragraph (j);
    b. Redesignate paragraphs (l), (m), (n), (o), and (p), as 
paragraphs (o), (p), (q), (r), and (s) respectively; and
    c. Add new paragraphs (l), (m), and (n) to read as follows:


Sec.  155.1050  Response plan development and evaluation criteria for 
vessels carrying groups I through IV petroleum oil as a primary cargo.

* * * * *
    (l) The owner or operator of a vessel carrying Groups II through IV 
petroleum oil as a primary cargo that operates in any inland, 
nearshore, or offshore area with pre-authorization or expedited

[[Page 63348]]

approval for dispersant use must identify in their response plan, and 
ensure the availability of, through contract or other approved means, 
response resources capable of conducting dispersant operations within 
those areas.
    (1) Dispersant response resources must be capable of commencing 
dispersant-application operations at the site of a discharge within 7 
hours of the decision by the Federal On-Scene Coordinator to use 
dispersants.
    (2) Dispersant response resources must include the following:
    (i) Sufficient dispersant capability for application as required by 
paragraph (l)(3) of this section. Any dispersants identified in a 
response plan must be of a type listed on the National Oil and 
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan Product Schedule (40 
CFR part 300) as maintained by the Environmental Protection Agency.
    (ii) Dispersant-application platforms capable of delivering and 
applying the dispersant on a discharge in the amounts as required by 
paragraph (l)(3) of this section. At least 50 percent of each effective 
daily application capacity (EDAC) tier requirement must be achieved 
through the use of fixed wing aircraft-based application platforms.
    (iii) Dispersant-application personnel trained in and capable of 
applying dispersant within the performance criteria as outlined in ASTM 
F 1413-92. For dispersant-application systems not fully covered by ASTM 
F 1413-92, such as fire monitor-type applicators, adequacy of 
performance criteria must be documented by presentation of independent 
evaluation materials (e.g. laboratory tests field tests, reports of 
actual use, etc.) which document the design and performance 
specifications.
    (iv) Dispersant-application systems ensured available, including 
trained personnel, that are capable of applying dispersants in 
accordance with the recommended procedures contained within ASTM F 
1737-96.
    (3) Dispersant stockpiles, application platforms, and other 
supporting resources must be ensured available in a quantity and type 
sufficient to treat a vessel's worst case discharge (as determined by 
using the criteria in Section 8 of appendix B to this part), or in 
quantities sufficient to meet the requirements in Table 155.1050(l), 
whichever is the lesser amount.

                       Table 155.1050(l).--Tiers for Effective Daily Application Capability
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Response time   Dispersant application--
                                   for completed    Dispersant: oil treated  Dispersant application--Dispersant:
                                    application     in gallons (Gulf Coast)   oil treated in gallons (All Other
                                      (hours)                                               U.S.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tier 1..........................              12           8,250:165,000                  4,125:82,500
Tier 2..........................              36          23,375:467,000                 23,375:467,000
Tier 3..........................              60          23,375:467,000                 23,375:467,000
                                 ------------------
        Total...................              60        55,000:1,100,000                 50,875:1,017,500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Note: Gulf Coast Tier 1 is higher due to greater potential spill 
size and frequency in that area, and it is assumed that dispersant 
stockpiles would be centralized in the Gulf area. Alternative 
application ratios may be considered based on submission to the 
Coast Guard (G-MOR) of peer-reviewed scientific evidence of improved 
capability.

    (m) The owner or operator of a vessel carrying Groups II, IV 
petroleum oil as a primary cargo that operates in any inland, 
nearshore, or offshore area with pre-authorization or expedited 
approval for in-situ burning may request credit which will count toward 
his or her on-water mechanical recovery capability for worst case 
discharge response Tiers 2 and 3 up to the amounts identified in 
paragraph (m)(2) of this section. No credit is available for Tier 1. To 
receive this credit, the vessel owner or operator must identify and 
ensure, through contract or other approved means the availability of 
the necessary resources to sustain in-situ burning operations for the 
level of credit being requested.
    (1) In-situ burn response resources must be capable of commencing 
ignition of oil at the site of a discharge within 12 hours of the 
initial authorization of the Federal On-Scene Coordinator to conduct 
in-situ burning to receive credit against Tier 1 requirements.
    (2) In-situ burn response resources for all response tiers must 
include the following:
    (i) Sufficient in-situ burn boom.
    (ii) Vessel platforms capable of towing and tending in-situ burn 
boom in the operating environments where credit is requested.
    (iii) Sufficient ignition devices to support burning operations.
    (iv) Personnel trained in conducting in-situ burning operations.
    (v) All equipment ensured available as required in paragraphs 
(m)(2)(i) through (m)(2)(iii) of this section must be capable of 
sustained use in the operating environments for which credit is 
requested.

                                     Table 155.1050(m).--Maximum Allowable Tiers For Effective Daily Burn Capability
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                         Cumulative equipment requirements
                                                                   Response    Daily burn --------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   time for     capacity                    Fire
                                                                  completed    (EDBC) \2\   Fireproof    resistant    Hand-held    Heli-torch   Support
                                                                 burning \1\     (bbls)    boom (feet)  boom (feet)    igniter    igniter \4\   vessels
                                                                   (hours)                     \3\          \3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tier 1.........................................................           24        5,000          500          500            4            1          2
Tier 2.........................................................           48       10,000        1,000        1,500           12            1          4
Tier 3.........................................................           72       10,000        1,000        2,500           20            1         4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Tiered response times represent the maximum allowable time from the instant when in-situ burning is authorized for use by the Federal On-scene
  coordinator to the completion of the operational burn period for that tier.
\2\ EDBC amounts for Tiers 2 and 3 above may be applied against the corresponding tiers for on-water mechanical recovery (EDRC) as required to respond
  to an owner or operator's worst case discharge.
\3\ Assumes fireproof boom is reusable for all three tiers. Fire resistant boom will be consumed by the fire and therefore, require replacement at the
  start of each new operational period.

[[Page 63349]]

 
\4\ If a helitorch igniter system is identified and ensured available, one-time igniters are not required. Alternative application ratios may be
  considered based on submission to the Coast Guard (G-MOR) of peer-reviewed scientific evidence of improved capability.

    (3) In areas that have ice-bound conditions throughout prolonged 
periods of the year, credit levels for EDBC against on-water mechanical 
recovery requirements can be elevated, as deemed appropriate, by the 
respective Area Committee for the area where the extra credit is being 
considered. Extra EDBC levels are at the discretion of the Area 
Committee, however, it is not recommended that EDBC levels comprise 
more than 50 percent of the total on-water recovery capability for a 
planholder in any one particular Captain of the Port area.
    (n) The owner or operator of a vessel carrying Groups I through IV 
petroleum oil as a primary cargo must identify in the response plan, 
and ensure the availability of, through contract or other approved 
means, response resources necessary to provide aerial oil tracking to 
support oil spill assessment and cleanup activities.
    (1) Aerial oil tracking resources must be capable of arriving at 
the site of a discharge within three hours from the time of the initial 
notification of the discharge for a distance up to 50 nautical miles 
from shore. Aerial oil tracking resources should plan on a minimum of 
two hours for a recall period and one hour of flight time to arrive on-
scene.
    (2) Aerial oil tracking must include the following resources:
    (i) Appropriately located aircraft and personnel capable of meeting 
the response time requirement for oil tracking in paragraph (n)(1) of 
this section.
    (ii) Sufficient numbers of aircraft, pilots, and trained 
observation personnel to support oil spill operations, commencing upon 
initial assessment, and capable of coordinating on-scene cleanup 
operations, including dispersant, in-situ burn, and mechanical recovery 
operations.
    (iii) Observation personnel must be trained in the protocols of oil 
spill reporting and assessment, including estimation of slick size, 
thickness, and quantity. Observation personnel must be trained in the 
use of assessment techniques as outlined in ASTM F 1779-97, and 
familiar with the use of other guides, such as NOAA's ``Open Water Oil 
Identification Job Aid for Aerial Observation,'' and NOAA's 
``Characteristic Coastal Habitats'' Guide.
    (iv) Aerial oil tracking resources must be capable of supporting 
oil spill removal operations continuously for three ten-hour 
operational periods during the initial seventy-two hours of the 
discharge.
* * * * *
    13. In appendix B to part 155, revise section 8, and following 
Table 6, add Tables 7, 8, and 9 to read as follows:

Appendix B to Part 155--Determining and Evaluating Required Response 
Resources for Vessel Response Plans

* * * * *

8. Determining the Capability of High-Rate Response Methods

    8.1 Calculating Cumulative Dispersant-Application Capacity 
Requirements.
    8.1.1. A vessel owner or operator should plan either for a 
dispersant capacity to respond to a vessel's worst case discharge 
(WCD) of oil, or for the amount of the dispersant resource 
capability as required by Sec.  155.1050(l)(3) of this part, 
whichever is the lesser amount. When planning for the cumulative 
application capacity that is required, the calculations should 
account for the loss of some oil to the environment due to natural 
dissipation causes (primarily evaporation). The following procedure 
should be used to determine the cumulative application requirements:
    8.1.2. Determine the volume of oil carried in gallons, and the 
appropriate cargo group for the type of petroleum oil carried 
(Groups II, III, IV). For vessels carrying mixed cargoes, assume a 
total cargo volume using the cargo group that constitutes the 
largest portion of the oil being carried, or the cargo group with 
the smallest natural dissipation factor.
    8.1.3. Multiply the total cargo amount in gallons by the natural 
dissipation factor for the appropriate cargo group as follows: Group 
II factor is 0.50; Group III factor is 0.30, and Group IV factor is 
0.10. This represents the amount of cargo that can be expected to be 
lost to natural dissipation. Subtract the cargo amount lost to 
natural dissipation from the total cargo amount carried to determine 
the remaining oil cargo available for treatment by dispersant-
application.
    8.1.4. Multiply the cargo available for dispersant treatment by 
the dispersant to oil planning application ratio of 1 part 
dispersant to 20 parts oil (0.05). The resultant number represents 
the cumulative total dispersant-application capability that must be 
ensured available within the first 60 hours.
    8.1.5. The following is an example of the procedure described 
above: A vessel with a 1,000,000 gallons capacity of crude oil 
(specific gravity 0.87) will transit through an area with pre-
authorization for dispersant use in the nearshore environment on the 
U.S. East Coast.
    Cargo carried: 1,000,000 gallons, Group III oil.
    Natural Dissipation Factor for Group III: 30%
    General formula to determine oil available for dispersant 
treatment: ((WCD)--[(WCD) x (natural dissipation factor)] = 
available oil.
    E.g., 1,000,000 gal--(1,000,000 gal x 0.30) = 700,000 gallons 
available oil.
    Cumulative application capacity = Available oil x planning 
application ratio (1 gal dispersant to 20 gals oil = 0.05), 700,000 
gal oil x (0.05) = 35,000 gallons cumulative dispersant-application 
capacity.
    The requirements for cumulative dispersant-application capacity 
(35,000) for this vessel's WCD is less than the overall dispersant 
capability cap for non-Gulf Coast waters as required by Sec.  
155.1050(l)(3) of this part. As such, this vessel would not need to 
meet the entire amount for Tier 3, but would be required to meet the 
following tier requirements (totaling 35,000 gallons application):

Tier 1 4,125 gallons
    Completed in 12 hours
Tier 2 23,375 gallons
    Completed in 36 hours
Tier 3 7,500 gallons
    Completed in 60 hours

    8.2 Determining Effective Daily Application Capacities ``EDAC'' 
for Dispersant Response Systems.
    8.2.1. This section discusses methods to be used for the 
purposes of determining the effective daily application capacity of 
a dispersant response system. This methodology considers 
mobilization factors for dispersant platforms as well as dispersant 
stockpiles and platform application rates (as published in the 1999 
Summary Report of Public Workshop for Response Plan Equipment CAPs).
    8.2.2. For each Captain of the Port Zone where a dispersant 
response capability is required, the response plan must identify the 
following:
    [sbull] The type, number, and location of each dispersant-
application platform intended for use in meeting dispersant delivery 
requirements specified in Sec.  155.1050(l)(3) of this part.
    [sbull] The amount and location of available dispersant 
stockpiles to support each platform.
    [sbull] A primary staging site for each platform that will serve 
as its base of operations for the duration of the response.
    8.2.3. Using the readiness factors from Table 7 of this appendix 
and platform capability factors in Table 8 of this appendix, 
calculate mobilization times and dispersant delivery capabilities 
for each platform. For each aircraft platform--

MP = R + T + L
MP = Mobilization of platform
R = Recall time in hours (time it takes for dispersant operations 
personnel to arrive at the storage location and to prepare the 
dispersant application system for transport)
T = Transit time it takes for dispersant-application system to be 
transported to the staging area mobilization (in hours)
L = 1 hour to load dispersant at the staging site if platform is not 
preloaded. Total time for platform mobilization should be less than 
7 hours for Tier 1, less than 24 hours

[[Page 63350]]

for Tier 2, and less than 48 hours for Tier 3.

    For each stockpile--

MS= R + T + L
MS = Mobilization of Stockpile
R = Recall of loading personnel/transportation assets and loading 
dispersant for transport if applicable
T = Transit time to staging site
L = 1 hour for loading on delivery platform. Note that transit time 
to the spill site is included in delivery capability calculations 
for aircraft but not for vessels. Total time for stockpile 
mobilization should be less than 7 hours for Tier 1, less than 24 
hours for Tier 2, and less than 48 hours for Tier 3;

    Delivery capability for Tier 1 should be calculated as follows:

R/10 x 12--T
R = EDAC Rate (from Table 8)
10 = 10 hours in operational period
12 = assumed hours of daylight for planning purposes
T = mobilization time (either for platform or stockpile time 
whichever is greater). Delivery capability for all Tier 1 platforms 
should at least equal amount specified for Tier 1 in Sec.  
155.1050(l)(3) of this part; and

    For Tiers 2 and 3, delivery capability for each platform is the 
EDAC Rate in Table 8 of this appendix, which shows delivery 
capability for each resource assuming 10-hour operating period. 
Delivery capability for all Tier 2 and 3 platforms must at least 
equal amount specified for Tiers 2 and 3 in Sec.  155.1050(l)(3) of 
this part.
    For each vessel platform--

MP = R + T + L
MP = Mobilization of platform
R = Recall time in hours (time it takes for dispersant operations 
personnel to arrive at the storage location and to prepare the 
dispersant-application system for transport
T = Transit time (time it takes for dispersant application system to 
be transported to the staging area mobilization Transit time from 
staging site or usual location of facility to the spill site
L = 1 hour to load dispersant at staging site if platform is not 
preloaded. Total time for platform mobilization should be less than 
7 hours for Tier 1, less than 24 hours for Tier 2, and less than 48 
hours for Tier 3. Usual location of the vessel is the location where 
the vessel is typically employed when not engaged in dispersant-
application operations. Spill site is the location in the Captain of 
the Port zone furthest from the dispersant platform staging site or 
the usual location of the vessel.
MS = R + T
MS = Mobilization of Stockpile
R = Recall of loading personnel/transportation assets and loading 
dispersant for transport if applicable
T = Transit time to staging site. Total time for stockpile 
mobilization should be less than 6 hours for Tier 1, less than 23 
for hours Tier 2, and less than 47 hours for Tier 3 to allow time 
for loading dispersant on delivery platform.

    Delivery capability for tier 1 should be calculated as follows:

R/10 x 12--T
R = EDAC Rate (from Table 8 of this appendix)
10 = 10 hours in operational period
12 = assumed hours of daylight for planning purposes
T = mobilization time either for platform or stockpile time 
whichever is greater. Delivery capability for all Tier 1 platforms 
should be at least equal the amount specified for Tier 1 in Sec.  
155.1050(l)(3) of this part.

    For Tiers 2 and 3, delivery capability for each platform is the 
EDAC Rate in Table 8 of this appendix, which shows delivery 
capability for each resource assuming 10-hour operating period. 
Delivery capability for all Tier 2 and 3 platforms must at least 
equal amount specified for Tiers 2 and 3 in Sec.  155.1050(l)(3) of 
this part.
    8.2.3.1 EDAC must be calculated for each platform and supporting 
stockpile, and added together as appropriate to meet the dispersant-
application tier requirements.
    8.2.3.2 The following is an example of the procedure described 
above: A plan lists a stockpile of 5,000 gallons of dispersant 
located 35 miles from a central staging site (a coastal airport) but 
not loaded for transport, and a DC-3 aircraft based at a facility 
approximately 75 miles from the staging site. The DC-3 is dedicated 
to dispersant spraying operations. The EDAC allowed toward Tier 1 
for this dispersant-application system can be calculated as follows:
    Stockpile: Amount-5000 gallons.
    Stockpile Mobilization time: R = 4 hours, T = 35 miles/35 miles 
per hour or 1 hour, hours = 4 + 1 + 1 hour loading = 6 hours.
    Platform Mobilization: R = 2 hours, T = 75 miles/150 miles per 
hour or 0.5 hours + 1 hour loading at staging site = 2 + 1.5 + 1 = 
3.5 hours.
    Operational period ``OP'' = 12 hours daylight--5 hours (use 
longer of stockpile or platform mobilization time) = 7 hours (i.e., 
commencing 6 hours after notification of approval and continuing 
until the end of the first 12 hour daylight period).
    Tier 1 delivery capability for this platform = (Table 8) EDAC 
rate = 5000 gallons/10 hours x 6 = 3000 gallons application 
capacity.
    8.2.3.3 Table 8 of this appendix is based on average 
characteristics (for planning and review purposes) for most types of 
application platforms typically used for spraying dispersants. 
However, other platform types do exist, and additional platform 
types are expected to develop with time. The Coast Guard will review 
requests to establish EDAC rates for other platform types at their 
discretion. EDAC calculations for additional platforms will use the 
same methodology as used to establish the existing rates already 
contained within Table 8 of this appendix.
    8.3 Determining Effective Daily Burn Capacities ``EDBC'' for In-
situ Burn Response Systems.
    8.3.1 For the purposes of determining the effective daily 
application capacity of in-situ burn resources, the information 
within this section applies.
    8.3.2 For each Captain of the Port zone where an in-situ burn 
response capability is ensured available, the response plan must 
identify the following:
    [sbull] The type, location, and amount of in-situ burn boom 
available.
    [sbull] The amount and location of available ignition sources. 
If ignition system ensured available is a helitorch, a source of 
pilots trained in the use of the helitorch and suitable aircraft 
must be identified that can respond within the required response 
times.
    [sbull] The identification of supporting vessels and trained 
operators capable of towing, deploying, and tending the fire boom.
    8.3.3 Using the readiness factors from Table 9, mobilization 
times are calculated for each in-situ burn system. The General 
Formula for calculating Tier 1 mobilization time is as follows:

T = (MB + MV) or (MH), whichever is greater (in hours)

T = Total Mobilization
MB = Mobilization of In-situ burn boom/hand held igniters

MB = R + L + T1

R = Recall of loading personnel/transportation assets
L = Loading to truck
T1 = Transit time to vessel staging site

MV = Mobilization of Support Vessels = L + T2

L = Boom loading to vessel
T2 = Transit time to spill site
MH = Mobilization of Helitorch = R + T1 + L + T2
R = Recall of personnel/platform +
T1 = Transit time to staging site
L = Torch loading
T2 = Transit time to spill site

    8.3.4 The mobilization times are used to ensure that a full 12 
hour ``operational period'' or ``OP'' for in-situ burning is 
available for Tier 1. All operational period calculations assume 
approval for use is granted at zero hour, and that a maximum of 12 
hours is available to support oil collection and burning within the 
initial 24-hour period. The available time allowed to support in-
situ burning is slightly longer (12 hours) in comparison to 
dispersant operations (10 hours) as in-situ burning operations can 
continue on for a limited period during darkness where dispersant 
spraying would be suspended due to decreased visibility. The 12-hour 
period is divided into four 1-hour burning cycles, each preceded by 
a 2-hour oil containment and collection cycle.
    8.3.4.1 The general formula for calculating the tier 1 
operational period of a system is: Operational Period ``OP'' = 24 
hours--(the mobilization time for the boom + platform or the 
mobilization time for the supporting helitorch igniter (if used), 
whichever is greater.
    8.3.5 For planning purposes, an in-situ burning system is 
comprised of the following minimum components that must be ensured 
available: minimum 500 ft. fire boom, two support vessels to tend 
and tow the boom, and four hand-held igniters or one helitorch 
system. 500 ft. sections of fire resistant boom are credited with a 
5,000 bpd burning capacity, and are also considered to have a 
service life of one operational period. For example, a second (Tier 
2) and third (Tier 3) section of 500 ft. boom must be ensured

[[Page 63351]]

available if the planholder desires to claim a 5,000 bpd credit for 
all three tiers.
    8.3.6 Planholders may request extensions of boom service lives 
beyond one operational period for ``fire-proof'' type boom, such as 
stainless steel, or water-cooled boom designs, when such boom has 
been tested and can be adequately documented as providing extended 
service capabilities. Planholders may receive credit for multiple 
operational periods using the same 500 ft. section of boom dependent 
upon the documentation presented to the Coast Guard for review and 
approval.
* * * * *

                                    Table 7.--Readiness/Mobilization Factors
                                           [All times listed in hours]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Recall
             Resource/status                 period       Transit to staging Site    Transit to Spill Site ``S''
                                             ``R''               ``T'' \1\                       \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aircraft dedicated to dispersant                    2  D/150+1                       N/A
 response operations.
Aircraft dedicated to spraying                      3  D/150+1                       N/A
 operations.
Aircraft nondedicated...................            4  D/150+1                       N/A
Vessel dedicated (preloaded)............            2  0                             D/5
Vessel dedicated (not loaded)...........            2  D/5+1                         D/5
Vessel non-dedicated (preloaded)........            4  0                             D/5
Vessel non-dedicated (not loaded).......            4  D/5+1
Dispersant Stockpile (preloaded for                 2  D/35                          D/5
 transport to staging site).
Dispersant Stockpile (not preloaded for         \3\ 4  D/35                          N/A
 transport to staging site).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Transit times to staging site for aircraft based on average speed of advance of 150 kts and ``D'' distance
  between aircraft home base and forward staging site for dispersant operations. Transit times for vessels from
  usual location of vessel to staging site based on average speed of advance of 5 kts and ``D'' is distance to
  spill site ``D''. Speed waivers for transit speeds may be granted based on actual performance of platform.
  Transit times for stockpile based on average speed of advance of 35 mph by truck and ``D'' distance from
  stockpile location to dispersant staging site, such as a coastal airport.
\2\ Transit times to spill site for aircraft is included in the calculations contained in table 8 because of the
  relatively high speed of these platforms compared to vessels. Transit times for vessels to the spill site are
  calculated from the usual location of vessel to staging site based on average speed of advance of 5 kts and
  ``D'' is distance to spill site ``D''. Speed waivers for transit speeds may be granted based on actual
  performance of platform.
\3\ Assume 2 hours to load dispersant stockpiles on to trucks for transport to the staging site.
\4\ For a facility, the spill site is the facility location. For a vessel, the spill site in a particular pre-
  authorization or expedited approval zone is that point furthest from the stockpile location where the vessel
  typically operates, not to exceed 50 miles from shore.


Table 8.--Platform Capability for Oil Dispersant Delivery Over a 10-Hour
                                 Period
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             EDAC Rate
                                                             estimated
                Platform                   Distance out     dispersant
                                          (N. Miles) \1\  applied in  10
                                                               Hours
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Helicopter..............................              50        1,500.00
Air tractor.............................              50        8,000.00
DC-3....................................              50        5,000.00
DC-4....................................              50       17,495.38
DC-6....................................              50       18,000.00
C-130...................................              50       32,972.28
P-3.....................................              50       20,000.00
Fire Monitor-Equipped Vessel............              50        6,000.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                    Table 9.--Readiness/Mobilization Factors
                                           [All times listed in hours]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Recall Period
           Resource/status              ``R'' + ``L''    Transit to staging site    Transit to Spill Site ``T2''
                                          load time               ``T1''
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In-situ Burn Boom/HH Igniters to            2 + 2 \1\   D/35 \4\                   N/A
 staging sites (MB).
Support Vessels (MV).................      NA + 2 \2\   N/A                        (10 or D/5) \3\
Aircraft/helitorch igniter (MH)......           4 + 1   D/90 \5\                   D/90
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Loading Time for in-situ boom onto a truck would be zero if the boom is co-located at the same waterfront
  facility as the vessels used to ferry the boom to the spill.
\2\ Loading Time for in-situ boom onto a support vessel would be zero if the boom is already loaded onto a
  support vessel.
\3\ Transit times for support vessels based on average speed of advance of 5 kts and maximum distance from shore
  to spill site of fifty miles. Speed waivers for transit speeds may be granted based on actual performance of
  platform.
\4\ Transit times for in-situ boom from warehouse to vessel dock based on average speed of advance of 35 mph by
  truck and ``D'' distance from storage location to vessel staging site.
\5\ Transit times for aircraft/helitorch based on average speed of advance of 90 kts and combined distance ``D''
  between aircraft home base, forward staging site and spill location.
\6\ For a facility, the spill site is the facility location. For a vessel, the spill site in a particular pre-
  authorization or expedited approval zone is that point furthest from the stockpile location where the vessel
  typically operates, not to exceed 50 miles from shore.



[[Page 63352]]

    Dated: April 12, 2002.
Paul J. Pluta,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety, 
Security and Environmental Protection.

[FR Doc. 02-25462 Filed 10-10-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P