[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 150 (Thursday, August 5, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47378-47384]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-17742]



[[Page 47378]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

46 CFR Parts 71, 114, 115, 125, 126, 167, 169, 175, and 176

[USCG-2000-6858]
RIN 1625-AA57


Alternate Hull Examinations Program for Certain Passenger 
Vessels, and Underwater Surveys for Nautical School, Offshore Supply, 
Passenger and Sailing School Vessels

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing an alternative hull 
examination program for certain passenger vessels, and giving nautical 
school, offshore supply, passenger and sailing school vessels the 
option of having alternating drydock examinations with underwater 
surveys. It is also establishing examination processes, which give 
industry additional latitude in scheduling inspections and will create 
parity between passenger vessels and all other Coast Guard-inspected 
vessels.

DATES: This final rule is effective September 7, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as 
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, 
are part of docket USCG-2000-6858 and are available for inspection or 
copying at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, room PL-401, 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. Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all 
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual 
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf 
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's 
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on 
April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit 
http://dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, 
call LCDR Martin Walker, Office of Compliance (G-MOC) Coast Guard, 
telephone 202-267-1047. If you have questions on viewing the docket, 
call Dorothy Beard, Chief, Dockets, Department of Transportation, 
telephone 202-366-5149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory History

    The project was originally part of a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) entitled ``Frequency of Inspection, Alternate Hull Examination 
Program for Certain Passenger Vessels, and Underwater Surveys for 
Passenger, Nautical School, and Sailing School Vessels'' that was 
published on November 15, 1999, in the Federal Register [64 FR 62018]. 
A final rule, dealing only with ``Frequency of Inspection'' 
regulations, was published on February 9, 2000 [65 FR 6494], so that we 
could meet the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 
1974 (SOLAS), and the International Convention on Load Lines compliance 
date of February 3, 2000. This allowed us to analyze the large number 
of comments on the Alternate Hull Examination and Underwater Survey 
portions of the NPRM independently from the comments addressing the 
``Frequency of Inspections'' regulations.
    On April 29, 2002, we published an interim rule with request for 
comments entitled ``Alternate Hull Examinations Program for Certain 
Passenger Vessels, and Underwater Surveys for Nautical School, Offshore 
Supply, Passenger and Sailing School Vessels'' in the Federal Register 
[67 FR 21062]. We received 51 comments on the interim rule.

Background and Purpose

Alternative Hull Examination (AHE) Program

    Based on the results of an underwater survey demonstration 
performed in May 1997, the Coast Guard created a pilot program that 
allows owners or operators of qualified vessels to undergo an 
alternative hull examination process. This examination process includes 
an underwater survey and an internal structural examination along with 
annual condition assessments and scheduled preventative maintenance. 
The program allows owners and operators of qualified vessels to receive 
a credit hull exam of up to five years depending on the chosen method 
of hull examination.

Underwater Survey in Lieu of Drydocking (UWILD)

    Inspected U.S. passenger vessels, nautical school ships (public and 
civilian), off-shore supply vessels (OSVs) under 46 CFR chapter I, 
subchapter L, and sailing school vessels lacked the regulatory option 
of alternating drydock examinations with underwater surveys before the 
interim rule [67 FR 21062] was published in the Federal Register on 
April 29, 2002.
    This rule, which adopts guidance from Navigation and Vessel 
Inspection Circular (NVIC) 1-89, allows owners or operators of U.S. 
passenger vessels, nautical school ships, OSVs, and sailing school 
vessels with steel or aluminum hulls the voluntary option of 
alternating underwater hull surveys with drydock examinations.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    The Coast Guard received 51 comments in response to the interim 
rule with request for comment on the ``Alternate Hull Examination 
Program for Certain Passenger, and Underwater Surveys for Nautical 
School, Offshore Supply, Passenger and Sailing School Vessels'' 
published April 29, 2002, in the Federal Register [67 FR 21062]. All 
changes in this Final Rule have been made in response to comments. 
These changes are noted in the discussion of comments.

Public Meetings

    Three commenters requested public meetings be held to discuss 
various aspects of Alternative Hull Examinations (AHE). We extended the 
original comment period by publishing the interim rule, rather than a 
final rule. We further stated that if the public felt that a public 
meeting was still necessary, it should submit a comment explaining why 
there should be a meeting. The relatively low number of comments we 
received did not state compelling reasons to hold a public meeting. 
Therefore, we believe that the public has been afforded ample 
opportunity to comment and that a public meeting is unnecessary.

General

    One commenter said the frequency of internal exams of water ballast 
tanks is not mentioned in the interim rule. We disagree. The definition 
of ``internal structural exam'' includes ballast tanks, and Sec.  
71.50-3 discusses the intervals for conducting internal structural 
exams.
    One commenter stated the phrase ``at alternate intervals'' should 
be deleted from the first sentence in Sec.  71.50-5(c). We disagree. 
The wording was designed to be the same as found in existing Underwater 
Survey in Lieu of Drydocking (UWILD) regulations for other vessel 
types. Further, we believe that the meaning is clear when taken in 
context with the rest of the sentence, which discusses alternating 
underwater surveys and drydock exams.
    One commenter stated it should be clarified in Sec. Sec.  71.50-15, 
115.620, and

[[Page 47379]]

176.620 that all four steps for entering or re-entering the AHE program 
are needed when only divers are used for the examinations. We agree and 
have changed the wording accordingly.
    One commenter stated filing a report on underwater cleanliness 
prior to an exam would unnecessarily increase the expense of a survey. 
We agree, and have changed Sec. Sec.  71.50-19(d), 115.630(d), and 
176.630(d) accordingly.
    Two commenters made suggestions in regard to wording. One commenter 
stated the phrase ``drydock extension'' in Sec. Sec.  71.50-29(a), 
115.655(d), and 176.655 should instead be ``drydock credit.'' We agree 
and have changed the wording.
    One commenter said the impact on small businesses, a cost 
assessment, or potential takings were not discussed in the interim 
rule. We disagree. Both the interim rule and this final rule include 
sections on impacts to small businesses, costs, and potential takings. 
The Coast Guard stands by its analyses of these issues.
    One commenter stated that the interim rule is overly prescriptive. 
We disagree. The interim rule contains a level of direction and detail 
that we believe is necessary to preserve vessel safety while maximizing 
owner flexibility in the inspection of vessels.

Definition: Adequate Hull Protection System

    Three commenters suggested changes in the definition for ``adequate 
hull protection system'' in Sec. Sec.  71.50-1, 114.400, and 175.400. 
Of those, two said the phrase ``sacrificial anodes'' should be used 
instead of the word ``zinc''. One commenter asked that the word 
``magnesium'' be included in the definition. We agree, and have changed 
the definition to read ``sacrificial anodes'' versus ``zinc anodes''. 
This new definition will allow for the inclusion of zinc or magnesium 
anodes.

Double Inspections

    Two commenters stated there is no need for inspections to be done 
by both the Coast Guard and the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS). We 
disagree. The delegation of Coast Guard inspection authority is outside 
the scope of this rulemaking.

G-MOC Policy Letter 3-98

    Two commenters stated that the G-MOC Policy Letter 3-98 should be 
used as guidance in regard to hull marking instead of the language 
included in the interim rule. We agree and have changed Sec. Sec.  
71.50-27(a)(2), 115.650(a)(2), and 176.650(a)(2) to read similar to the 
policy letter.

Hull Gauging

    Three commenters responded to the gauging of a vessel's hull. Of 
those, one stated multiple belts should be allowed as an alternative to 
five random shots per plate. We disagree. Belt gaugings are already 
required. The intent of the additional gaugings is to provide a greater 
probability of detecting thinning areas in the hull plating. We do not 
believe that gaugings taken 10 feet apart at the grid cables provide 
the same level of inspection as five readings per plate.
    One commenter said there should be a minimum of five gaugings per 
plate, but that the third party examiner should be allowed to take the 
readings at any location. We disagree. The commenter said that some 
vessels do not have shell expansion diagrams, and that it is difficult 
to determine where to gauge these vessels. We acknowledge that spacing 
may not be easy, but believe that every effort should be made to spread 
the gaugings out as intended.
    One commenter stated it is unclear in Sec. Sec.  71.50-31(a), 
115.660(a), and 176.660(a), who will do the audio gauging and conduct 
the internal exams for the annual hull condition assessment. We agree 
and have changed the wording to specify that vessel operators must do 
the audio gauging and conduct the internal exams during the hull 
condition assessment.

Hull Inspections

    One commenter disagrees with the Coast Guard's assessment that 
there is a ``significant limitation'' in a diver's ability to inspect 
an entire hull. We disagree and believe that in anything other than 
ideal conditions, the diver will have some degree of difficulty seeing 
the surface, determining the exact location of a problem, and relaying 
it back to the third party examiner. The remotely operated vehicle 
(ROV) is able to overcome these difficulties to a greater degree.

Inspection Intervals: Remotely Operated Vehicle (ROV) vs. Diver-only

    Six commenters questioned the difference in inspection intervals 
allowed for a predominately used ROV exam versus a diver-only exam. In 
addition, a Risk Based Decision Making (RBDM) study to assess the 
effectiveness of Policy Letter 3-98, Drydock Extensions For Certain 
Passenger Vessels, recommended that the interval be extended from 30 
months to five years. Some commenters stated that a diver is required 
for a portion of the ROV exam and that often the divers find problems 
in the areas that are examined by the ROV. One commenter stated that 
certain vessels on clear inland lakes have participated in a locally 
managed program with good success using the five-year interval for 
several years.
    We agree in part. With the technology currently available, we 
concur that divers must be used during a percentage of the exams, and 
that, under some specific circumstances, a diver-only exam may achieve 
a level comparable to that of an exam done predominately by a ROV. We, 
however, do not believe the diver-only exam is as comprehensive as a 
ROV exam. Furthermore, it is our belief that an inspection equivalent 
to a drydock exam may be attained using a combination of the two 
methods with the ROV covering at least 80 percent of the hull and the 
diver examining those areas that are inaccessible for the ROV.
    This is one of the reasons the authorized credit for the ROV exam 
is five years and the diver-only exam is three years, but not more than 
five years between exams.
    The difference in the intervals was also part of the interim rule's 
intent to allow the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) to 
grant a larger time frame between exams depending on the results. It is 
also why the regulations allow the OCMI to waive the annual hull 
condition assessment in cases where the results of the UWILD indicate 
that it would be reasonable to do so.
    We are adding a provision in Sec. Sec.  71.50-29(d), 115.655(d), 
and 176.655(d) to allow the OCMI to waive the mid-period exam and, in 
effect, grant the full five years of credit to a vessel when it is 
examined under ideal conditions, and it is safe to do. Owners seeking a 
waiver must submit a request at least 60 days before each scheduled 
underwater exam.
    One commenter said the word ``predominate'' is ambiguous in the 
definition for ``underwater survey portion conducted primarily by an 
approved underwater ROV'' in Sec.  71.50-1. We disagree. The note to 
Sec.  71.50-15 below the paragraph clearly states that the hull 
coverage for the ROV is at least 80 percent.

OCMI Responsibilities

    Three commenters submitted views in regard to the OCMI's 
responsibilities. Of those, two stated individual OCMIs should make the 
final decision on eligibility requirements. We agree that the OCMI must 
make the final decision on eligibility. The interim rule granted the 
OCMI discretion to allow a vessel, which does not meet the eligibility 
requirements, to participate when ``it is safe and reasonable to do 
so,'' based on the vessel's history of safe operation.

[[Page 47380]]

    One commenter stated OCMIs should make the decision on whether to 
require the preliminary exam. We disagree. The preliminary exam is 
necessary to ensure that the vessel is suitable for the program by 
surveying the underwater portion of the hull. This is not a requirement 
for a ROV exam, because we believe that an owner will take this step 
before contracting a ROV to perform the exam.

Operating Limits

    One commenter stated the limitations of operating 0.5 miles from 
shore and in shallow water should be eliminated from the regulations. 
We disagree. The interim rule was targeted at this group of vessels 
because they operate in a benign environment. The OCMI has the latitude 
to allow other vessels that operate beyond 0.5 miles into the program 
if it is safe and reasonable to do so.

Sea Valves

    Four commenters expressed views regarding sea valves. One commenter 
stated the requirements in Sec. Sec.  71.50-25(a)(3) should be 
broadened to allow for equivalent methods of inspection and testing, 
especially for vessels operating in fresh water areas. We believe that 
the regulations should remain as written, and will address inspection 
procedures in a future NVIC.
    One commenter said a clarification is needed that sea valves need 
to be examined only once every five years. We agree and are adding 
clarification to the regulations with regard to sea valve inspection 
intervals.
    One commenter stated that large diameter sea valves pose a greater 
flooding risk and inspection should be allowed with the valves in 
place. We agree that there is a flooding risk when examining sea 
valves, which is why the passengers must be removed from the vessel if 
the OCMI deems it necessary. These regulations are consistent with, and 
reflect the existing standard in 46 CFR 61, required for a traditional 
drydock exam, as well as existing guidance in NVIC 1-89. We recognize, 
however, that it is common practice under certain circumstances, for 
the OCMI to accept Alternative inspection methods when dealing with 
large sea valves or unusual piping installations. Therefore, we have 
revised this section to allow the owner to propose alternatives to the 
OCMI. The OCMI may approve alternatives on a case-by-case basis, as is 
the practice already.
    One commenter stated the OCMI should have the discretion to allow 
an alternative means of examining large sea valves. We agree, as stated 
above, the OCMI may approve alternatives on a case-by-case basis.

Third Party Examiners

    Nine commenters responded in regard to third party examiners. Two 
commenters stated there is no need for third party examiners. We 
disagree. The third party examiner is required to direct the underwater 
portion of the survey, and may serve as a representative of the owner 
while the marine inspector conducts the internal exam of the vessel.
    Three commenters stated third party examiners should be required to 
take part in the examinations regardless of the method. We disagree. 
The third party examiner must participate in diver-only exams and 
during the diver portion of a predominate ROV exam. We do not believe 
that the third party examiner needs to be present when the ROV is 
operating. The third party examiner's main function is interpreting the 
results obtained by the diver, whereas the ROV data is immediately and 
graphically available to the marine inspector.
    Two commenters said third party examiners should be required to 
prepare reports from the examinations that include a recommendation of 
fitness for service. We agree. The written report is required by the 
regulations, and is the tool that the OCMI uses to evaluate the 
examination results. The third party examiner may make recommendations, 
provide assessments, and include opinions of the vessel's overall 
condition. It is, however, the marine inspector's responsibility to 
ensure that the exam has been conducted in accordance with the 
regulations, while it is the OCMI's responsibility to determine the 
vessel's suitability for continued service.
    One commenter stated better qualifications are needed for third 
party examiners. We disagree. The general qualification a third party 
examiner must possess is defined in the rule. We did not include a 
specific qualification, which would prevent someone who otherwise meets 
the requirements from acting as a third party examiner, potentially 
creating a large onus for small entities. The rule's approach will 
allow vessel owners the opportunity to act as a third party examiner on 
their own vessel, if they are acceptable to the OCMI.
    One commenter stated that third party examiners should allow a pre-
survey conference call in lieu of an on-site meeting. We agree and are 
modifying Sec. Sec.  71.50-23(c), 115.640(c), and 176.640(c) to allow 
teleconferences if agreed to by the OCMI in advance.

Videotaping Tactile Exams

    Three commenters stated videotaping the tactile examinations of the 
hull is excessive. We disagree because this is the only record 
available to the OCMI of the extent, scope, and results of the 
underwater portion of the exam. The video and audio recording of the 
survey and the conditions will help the OCMI determine whether the 
annual condition assessments and mid-period exam may be waived.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section 
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does 
not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not 
reviewed it under that Order. It is not ``significant'' under the 
regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland 
Security (DHS). A final Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory 
policies and procedures of DHS is available in the docket as indicated 
under ADDRESSES. A summary of the Regulatory Evaluation follows:

Alternative Hull Examination (AHE) Program

    Because the AHE Program is voluntary, no costs are associated with 
this component of the rulemaking. Each vessel owner is given the option 
to choose the most cost-effective hull examination process. We estimate 
that about 51 passenger vessels will take advantage of the increased 
flexibility of this rule.

Underwater Survey in Lieu of Drydocking (UWILD) Program

    The UWILD Program will provide increased flexibility to owners and 
operators for hull inspections of U.S. passenger vessels, nautical 
school ships, sailing school vessels, and offshore supply vessels. This 
program allows an underwater survey instead of a drydock examination on 
every other interval for the described vessels, and is currently 
available to most other classes of inspected vessels.
    There are no additional costs to the vessel owners or operators 
with this component of the rulemaking because the use of underwater 
survey is completely voluntary. We estimate that 6,224 vessels could 
take advantage of the increased flexibility of this rule.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act [5 U.S.C. 601-612], we 
considered whether this rule will have a significant

[[Page 47381]]

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.
    The regulatory options in both the AHE and UWILD programs will make 
it more cost-efficient and beneficial for small entities by greatly 
decreasing the amount of time and resources associated with traditional 
drydock inspections. Additionally, because both programs are voluntary, 
it is expected that small entities will only participate when it is 
beneficial for them to do so.
    Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that 
this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 [Pub. L. 104-121], we offered to assist small 
entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate 
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. The NPRM and the 
interim rule provided small businesses, organizations, or governmental 
jurisdictions a Coast Guard contact to ask questions concerning this 
rule's provisions or options for hull inspections.
    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 rule calls for a new collection of information under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 [44 U.S.C. 3501-3520]. We received no 
comments on the collection of information in our request for comments 
in the interim rule [67 FR 21062].
    As required by 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), we submitted a copy of this rule 
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for its review of the 
collection of information. OMB has approved the collection. The section 
numbers are (Sec. Sec.  ) 71.50-5(b), 71.50-23(b), 71.50-29(b), 71.50-
31(b), 71.50-31(c), 71.50-31(d)(1), 115.615(b), 115.630, 115.640(b), 
115.655(a), 115.655(b), 115.660(c), 115.660(d), 126.140(f), 
126.140(g)(1), 126.140(g)(3), 167.15-33(b), 167.15-33(c), 169.230(b), 
169.230(c), 176.615(b), 176.615(c), 176.630, 176.640(b), 176.655(a), 
176.660(b), 176.660(c), and 176.660(d)(1), and the corresponding 
approval number from OMB is OMB Control Number 1625-0032, which expires 
on June 30, 2005. A notice announcing the effective date for this 
collection of information was published on August 28, 2002 [67 FR 
55162].

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.
    It is well settled that States may not regulate in categories 
reserved for regulation by the Coast Guard. It is also well settled, 
now, that all of the categories covered in 46 U.S.C. 3306, 3703, 7101, 
and 8101 (design, construction, alteration, repair, maintenance, 
operation, equipping, personnel qualification, and manning of vessels), 
as well as the reporting of casualties and any other category in which 
Congress intended the Coast Guard to be the sole source of a vessel's 
obligations, are within the field foreclosed from regulation by the 
States. (See the decision of the Supreme Court in the consolidated 
cases of United States v. Locke and Intertanko v. Locke, 529 U.S. 89, 
120 S.Ct. 1135 (March 6, 2000).)
    This rule falls into the category of maintenance of vessels. 
Because the States may not regulate within this category, preemption 
under Executive Order 13132 is not an issue.

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 rule will not result in such an expenditure, we 
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

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

Civil Justice Reform

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

Protection of Children

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

Indian Tribal Governments

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

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant 
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to 
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use 
of energy. 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 rule and 
concluded that under section 6(a) of the ``Appendix to National 
Environmental Policy Act: Coast Guard Procedures for Categorical 
Exclusions, Notice of Final Agency Policy,'' [67 FR 48244 (July 23, 
2002)], this rule is categorically excluded from further environmental 
documentation. This final rule deals exclusively with changing 
inspection intervals and providing voluntary dry-docking alternatives 
for certain passenger vessels. A ``Categorical Exclusion 
Determination'' is available in

[[Page 47382]]

the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects

46 CFR Part 71

    Marine safety, Passenger vessels, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

46 CFR Part 114

    Incorporation by reference, Marine safety, Passenger vessels, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

46 CFR Part 115

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

46 CFR Part 125

    Administrative practice and procedure, Cargo vessels, Hazardous 
materials transportation, Marine safety, Seamen.

46 CFR Part 126

    Authority delegation, Hazardous materials transportation, Marine 
safety, Offshore supply vessels, Oil and gas exploration, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Vessels.

46 CFR Part 167

    Fire prevention, Marine safety, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Schools, Seamen, Vessels.

46 CFR Part 169

    Fire prevention, Marine safety, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Schools, Vessels.

46 CFR Part 175

    Marine safety, Passenger vessels, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

46 CFR Part 176

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

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the interim rule amending 46 
CFR parts 71, 114, 115, 125, 126, 167, 169, 175, and 176 which was 
published as 67 FR 21062 on April 29, 2002, is adopted as a final rule 
with the following changes:

PART 71--INSPECTION AND CERTIFICATION

0
1. Revise the authority citation for Part 71 to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(j); 46 U.S.C. 2113, 3205, 3306, 3307; 
E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277; E.O. 12777, 56 
FR 54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.

0
2. In Sec.  71.50-1, revise the definition for ``Adequate hull 
protection system'' to read as follows:


Sec.  71.50-1  Definitions relating to hull examinations.

* * * * *
    Adequate hull protection system means a method of protecting the 
vessel's hull from corrosion. It includes, as a minimum, either hull 
coatings and a cathodic protection (CP) system consisting of 
sacrificial anodes, or an impressed current CP system.
* * * * *

0
3. Revise Sec.  71.50-15 and the Note to Sec.  71.50-15 to read as 
follows:


Sec.  71.50-15  Description of the Alternative Hull Examination (AHE) 
Program for certain passenger vessels.

    The Alternative Hull Examination (AHE) Program provides you with an 
alternative to a drydock examination by allowing your vessel's hull to 
be examined while it remains afloat. If completed using only divers, 
this program has four steps: the application process, the preliminary 
examination, the pre-survey meeting, and the hull examination. If the 
vessel is already participating in the program or if a remotely 
operated vehicle (ROV) is used during the program, the preliminary exam 
step may be omitted. Once you complete these steps, the Officer in 
Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI), will evaluate the results and accept 
the examination as a credit hull exam if the vessel is in satisfactory 
condition. If only divers are used for the underwater survey portion of 
the examination process, you may receive credit for a period of time 
such that subsequent AHEs would be conducted at intervals of twice in 
every five years, with no more than three years between any two AHEs. 
The OCMI may waive an underwater survey in accordance with Sec.  71.50-
29(d) provided that the interval does not exceed five years between any 
two underwater surveys. If an underwater ROV is used as the predominate 
method to examine the vessel's underwater hull plating, you may receive 
credit up to five years. At the end of this period, you may apply for 
further participation under the AHE Program.

    Note to Sec.  71.50-15: The expected hull coverage when using an 
ROV must be at least 80 percent.


Sec.  71.50-19  [Amended]

0
4. In Sec.  71.50-19, in paragraph (d), following the word 
``cleanliness'', add the words ``(if known)''.

0
5. In Sec.  71.50-23, add paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  71.50-23  Pre-survey meeting.

* * * * *
    (c) The pre-survey meeting may be conducted by teleconference, if 
agreed to in advance by the OCMI.


Sec.  71.50-25  [Amended]

0
6. In Sec.  71.50-25, in paragraph (a)(3), following the words ``marine 
inspector'', add the words ``once every five years''.

0
7. In Sec.  71.50-27, revise paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:


Sec.  71-50.27  Alternative Hull Examination (AHE) program options: 
Divers or underwater remotely operated vehicles (ROV).

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (2) Provide permanent hull markings, a temporary grid system of 
wires or cables spaced not more than 10 feet apart and tagged at one-
foot intervals, or any other acoustic or electronic positioning system 
approved by the OCMI to identify the diver's location with respect to 
the hull, within one foot of accuracy;
* * * * *

0
8. In Sec.  71.50-29, revise paragraph (a) and add paragraph (d) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  71.50-29  Hull examination reports.

    (a) If you use only divers for the underwater survey portion of the 
Alternative Hull Examination (AHE), you must provide the Officer in 
Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI), with a written hull examination 
report. This report must include thickness gauging results, bearing 
clearances, a copy of the audio and video recordings, and any other 
information that will help the OCMI evaluate your vessel for a credit 
hull exam. The third party examiner must sign the report and confirm 
the validity of its contents.
* * * * *
    (d) At least 60 days prior to each scheduled underwater exam, the 
owner may request a waiver from the OCMI if:
    (1) A satisfactory exam has been completed within the last three 
years;
    (2) The conditions during the last exam allowed at least 80 percent 
of the bottom surface to be viewed and recorded; and
    (3) The results of the last exam indicated that an extended 
interval is safe and reasonable.

0
9. In Sec.  71.50-31, revise paragraphs (a) and (d)(1) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  71.50-31  Continued participation in the Alternative Hull 
Examination (AHE) Program.

    (a) To continue to participate in the AHE Program, vessel operators 
must conduct an annual hull condition

[[Page 47383]]

assessment. At a minimum, vessel operators must conduct an internal 
examination and take random hull gaugings internally during the hull 
condition assessment, unless waived by the Officer in Charge, Marine 
Inspection (OCMI). If the annual hull assessment reveals significant 
damage or corrosion, where temporary repairs have been made, or where 
other critical areas of concern have been identified, the OCMI may 
require an expanded examination to include an underwater hull 
examination using divers. If an underwater examination is required, the 
examination must focus on areas at higher risk of damage or corrosion 
and must include a representative sampling of hull gaugings.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) The owner may submit to the OCMI a plan for conducting the 
assessment, or a request for a waiver of this requirement, no fewer 
than 30 days before the scheduled assessment; and
* * * * *

PART 114--GENERAL PROVISIONS

0
10. Revise the authority citation for Part 114 to read as follows:

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 2103, 3306, 3703; Pub. L. 103-206, 107 
Stat. 2439; 49 U.S.C. App. 1804; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170; Sec.  114.900 also issued under 44 U.S.C. 3507.

0
11. In Sec.  114.400(b), revise the definition for ``Adequate hull 
protection system'' to read as follows:


Sec.  114.400  Definitions of terms used in this subchapter.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    Adequate hull protection system means a method of protecting the 
vessel's hull from corrosion. It includes, as a minimum, either hull 
coatings and a cathodic protection (CP) system consisting of 
sacrificial anodes, or an impressed current CP system.
* * * * *

PART 115--INSPECTION AND CERTIFICATION

0
12. Revise the authority citation for Part 115 to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(j); 46 U.S.C. 2103, 3205, 3306, 3307; 
49 U.S.C. App. 1804; E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR, 1971-1975 
Comp., p. 743; E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277; 
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.
0
13. Revise Sec.  115.620 and add the Note to Sec.  115.620 to read as 
follows:


Sec.  115.620  Description of the Alternative Hull Examination (AHE) 
Program for certain passenger vessels.

    The Alternative Hull Examination (AHE) Program provides you with an 
alternative to a drydock examination by allowing your vessel's hull to 
be examined while it remains afloat. If completed using only divers, 
this program has four steps: the application process, the preliminary 
examination, the pre-survey meeting, and the hull examination. If the 
vessel is already participating in the program or if a remotely 
operated vehicle (ROV) is used during the program, the preliminary exam 
step may be omitted. Once you complete these steps, the Officer in 
Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI), will evaluate the results and accept 
the examination as a credit hull exam if the vessel is in satisfactory 
condition. If only divers are used for the underwater survey portion of 
the examination process, you may receive credit for a period of time 
such that subsequent AHEs would be conducted at intervals of twice in 
every five years, with no more than three years between any two AHEs. 
The OCMI may waive an underwater survey in accordance with Sec.  
115.655(d) provided that the interval does not exceed five years 
between any two underwater surveys. If an underwater ROV is used as the 
predominate method to examine the vessel's underwater hull plating, you 
may receive credit up to five years. At the end of this period, you may 
apply for further participation under the AHE Program.

    Note to Sec.  115.620: The expected hull coverage when using an 
ROV must be at least 80 percent.


Sec.  115.630  [Amended]

0
14. In Sec.  115.630, in paragraph (d), following the word 
``cleanliness'', add the words ``(if known)''.

0
15. In Sec.  115.640, add paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  115.640  Pre-survey meeting.

* * * * *
    (c) The pre-survey meeting may be conducted by teleconference, if 
agreed to in advance by the OCMI.


Sec.  115.645  [Amended]

0
16. In Sec.  115.645, in paragraph (a)(3), following the words ``marine 
inspector'', add the words ``once every five years''.

0
17. In Sec.  115.650, revise paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:


Sec.  115.650  Alternative Hull Examination (AHE) Program options: 
Divers or underwater ROV.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (2) Provide permanent hull markings, a temporary grid system of 
wires or cables spaced not more than 10 feet apart and tagged at one-
foot intervals, or any other acoustic or electronic positioning system 
approved by the OCMI to identify the diver's location with respect to 
the hull, within one foot of accuracy;
* * * * *

0
18. In Sec.  115.655, revise paragraph (a) and add paragraph (d) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  115.655  Hull examination reports.

    (a) If you use only divers for the underwater survey portion of the 
Alternative Hull Examination (AHE), you must provide the Officer in 
Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI), with a written hull examination 
report. This report must include thickness gauging results, bearing 
clearances, a copy of the audio and video recordings, and any other 
information that will help the OCMI evaluate your vessel for a credit 
hull exam. The third party examiner must sign the report and confirm 
the validity of its contents.
* * * * *
    (d) At least 60 days prior to each scheduled underwater exam, the 
owner may request a waiver from the OCMI if:
    (1) A satisfactory exam has been completed within the last three 
years;
    (2) The conditions during the last exam allowed at least 80 percent 
of the bottom surface to be viewed and recorded; and
    (3) The results of the last exam indicated that an extended 
interval is safe and reasonable.

0
19. In Sec.  115.660, revise paragraphs (a) and (d)(1) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  115.660  Continued participation in the Alternative Hull 
Examination (AHE) Program.

    (a) To continue to participate in the AHE Program, vessel operators 
must conduct an annual hull condition assessment. At a minimum, vessel 
operators must conduct an internal examination and take random hull 
gaugings internally during the hull condition assessment, unless waived 
by the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI). If the annual hull 
assessment reveals significant damage or corrosion, where temporary 
repairs have been made, or where other critical areas of concern have 
been identified, the OCMI may require an expanded examination to 
include an underwater hull examination using divers. If an underwater 
examination is required, the examination must focus on areas at higher 
risk of damage or corrosion and

[[Page 47384]]

must include a representative sampling of hull gaugings.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) The owner may submit to the OCMI a plan for conducting the 
assessment, or a request for a waiver of this requirement, no fewer 
than 30 days before the scheduled assessment; and
* * * * *

PART 175--GENERAL PROVISIONS

0
20. Revise the authority citation for Part 175 to read as follows:

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 2103, 3205, 3306, 3703; Pub. L. 103-206, 
107 Stat. 2439; 49 U.S.C. App. 1804; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170; Sec.  175.900 also issued under authority of 44 
U.S.C. 3507.

0
21. In Sec.  175.400, revise the definition for ``Adequate hull 
protection system'' to read as follows:


Sec.  175.400  Definitions of terms used in this subchapter.

* * * * *
    Adequate hull protection system means a method of protecting the 
vessel's hull from corrosion. It includes, as a minimum, either hull 
coatings and a cathodic protection (CP) system consisting of 
sacrificial anodes, or an impressed current CP system.
* * * * *

PART 176--INSPECTION AND CERTIFICATION

0
22. Revise the authority citation for Part 176 to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(j); 46 U.S.C. 2103, 3205, 3306, 3307; 
49 U.S.C. App. 1804; E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR, 1971-1975 
Comp., p. 743; E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277; 
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.

0
23. Revise Sec.  176.620 and the Note to Sec.  176.620 to read as 
follows:


Sec.  176.620  Description of the Alternative Hull Examination (AHE) 
Program for certain passenger vessels.

    The Alternative Hull Examination (AHE) Program provides you with an 
alternative to a drydock examination by allowing your vessel's hull to 
be examined while it remains afloat. If completed using only divers, 
this program has four steps: the application process, the preliminary 
examination, the pre-survey meeting, and the hull examination. If the 
vessel is already participating in the program, or if a remotely 
operated vehicle (ROV) is used during the program, the preliminary exam 
step may be omitted. Once you complete these steps, the Officer in 
Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI), will evaluate the results and accept 
the examination as a credit hull exam if the vessel is in satisfactory 
condition. If only divers are used for the underwater survey portion of 
the examination process, you may receive credit for a period of time 
such that subsequent AHEs would be conducted at intervals of twice in 
every five years, with no more than three years between any two AHEs. 
The OCMI may waive an underwater survey in accordance with Sec.  
176.655(d) provided that the interval does not exceed five years 
between any two underwater surveys. If an underwater ROV is used as the 
predominate method to examine the vessel's underwater hull plating, you 
may receive credit up to five years. At the end of this period, you may 
apply for further participation under the AHE Program.

    Note to Sec.  176.620: The expected hull coverage when using an 
ROV must be at least 80 percent.


Sec.  176.630  [Amended]

0
24. In Sec.  176.630, in paragraph (d), following the word 
``cleanliness'', add the words ``(if known)''.

0
25. In Sec.  176.640, add paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  176.640  Pre-survey meeting.

* * * * *
    (c) The pre-survey meeting may be conducted by teleconference, if 
agreed to in advance by the OCMI.


Sec.  176.645  [Amended]

0
26. In Sec.  176.645, in paragraph (a)(3), following the words ``marine 
inspector'', add the words ``once every five years''.

0
27. In Sec.  176.650, revise paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:


Sec.  176.650  Alternative Hull Examination Program options: Divers or 
underwater ROV.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (2) Provide permanent hull markings, a temporary grid system of 
wires or cables spaced not more than 10 feet apart and tagged at one-
foot intervals, or any other acoustic or electronic positioning system 
approved by the OCMI to identify the diver's location with respect to 
the hull, within one foot of accuracy;
* * * * *

0
28. In Sec.  176.655, revise paragraph (a) and add paragraph (d) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  176.655  Hull examination reports.

    (a) If you use only divers for the underwater survey portion of the 
Alternative Hull Examination (AHE), you must provide the Officer in 
Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI), with a written hull examination 
report. This report must include thickness gauging results, bearing 
clearances, a copy of the audio and video recordings, and any other 
information that will help the OCMI evaluate your vessel for a credit 
hull exam. The third party examiner must sign the report and confirm 
the validity of its contents.
* * * * *
    (d) At least 60 days prior to each scheduled underwater exam, the 
owner may request a waiver from the OCMI if:
    (1) A satisfactory exam has been completed within the last three 
years;
    (2) The conditions during the last exam allowed at least 80 percent 
of the bottom surface to be viewed and recorded; and
    (3) The results of the last exam indicated that an extended 
interval is safe and reasonable.

0
29. In Sec.  176.660, revise paragraph (a) and (d)(1) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  176.660  Continued participation in the Alternative Hull 
Examination (AHE) Program.

    (a) To continue to participate in the AHE Program, vessel operators 
must conduct an annual hull condition assessment. At a minimum, vessel 
operators must conduct an internal examination and take random hull 
gaugings internally during the hull condition assessment, unless waived 
by the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI). If the annual hull 
assessment reveals significant damage or corrosion, where temporary 
repairs have been made, or where other critical areas of concern have 
been identified, the OCMI may require an expanded examination to 
include an underwater hull examination using divers. If an underwater 
examination is required, the examination must focus on areas at higher 
risk of damage or corrosion and must include a representative sampling 
of hull gaugings.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) The owner may submit to the OCMI a plan for conducting the 
assessment, or a request for a waiver of this requirement, no fewer 
than 30 days before the scheduled assessment; and
* * * * *

    Dated: June 25, 2004.
T.H. Gilmour,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety, 
Security and Environmental Protection.
[FR Doc. 04-17742 Filed 8-4-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P