[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 16, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 76295-76318]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-29698]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 160, 161, 164, and 165

[USCG-2005-21869]
RIN 1625-AA99


Vessel Requirements for Notices of Arrival and Departure, and 
Automatic Identification System

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to expand the applicability of 
notice of arrival and departure (NOAD) and automatic identification 
system (AIS) requirements to more commercial vessels. This proposed 
rule would expand the applicability of notice of arrival (NOA) 
requirements to additional vessels, establish a separate requirement 
for certain vessels to submit notices of departure (NOD), set forth a 
mandatory method for electronic submission of NOA and NOD, and modify 
related reporting content, timeframes, and procedures. This proposed 
rule would also expand the applicability of AIS requirements, beyond 
Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) areas, to all U.S. navigable waters and 
require AIS carriage for additional commercial vessels. These proposed 
changes would improve navigation safety, enhance the Coast Guard's 
ability to identify and track vessels, heighten our overall maritime 
domain awareness, and thus help us address threats to maritime 
transportation safety and security and mitigate the possible harm from 
such threats.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Docket Management 
Facility on or before April 15, 2009. Comments sent to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) on collection of information must reach OMB 
on or before April 15, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket 
number USCG-2005-21869 to the Docket Management Facility at the U.S. 
Department of Transportation. To avoid duplication, please use only one 
of the following methods:
    Online: http://www.regulations.gov.
    Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of 
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone 
number is 202-366-9329.
    Fax: 202-493-2251.
    You must also send comments on collection of information discussed 
in the Paperwork Reduction Act section of this NPRM (VI. D.) to the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and 
Budget. To ensure that the comments are received on time, the preferred 
method is by e-mail [email protected] (the subject line of 
the e-mail must include the docket number and Attention: Desk Officer 
for Coast Guard, DHS) or by fax at 202-395-6566. An alternate, though 
slower, method is by U.S. mail 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.
    You may inspect the material proposed for incorporation by 
reference at room 1409, 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 
202-372-1563. 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 the NOAD 
portion of this proposed rule, contact Lieutenant Sharmine Jones, 
Office of Vessel Activities (CG-543), Coast Guard, 
[email protected], telephone 202-372-1234. If you have 
questions on the AIS portion of this proposed rule, contact Mr. Jorge 
Arroyo, Office of Navigation Systems (CG-5413), Coast Guard, 
[email protected], telephone 202-372-1563. If you have questions on 
viewing material in the docket, call Ms. Renee V. Wright, Program 
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents for Preamble

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments
    A. Submitting Comments
    B. Viewing Comments and Documents
    C. Privacy Act
    D. Public Meeting
II. Background and Purpose
    A. Threat to the Marine Transportation System
    B. Notice of Arrival and Departure
    C. Automatic Identification System
    D. AIS Displays and Integration
    E. Maritime Domain Awareness
    F. Nationwide AIS
III. Regulatory History
    A. Notice of Arrival
    B. Automatic Identification System
    C. Expansion of AIS Carriage
IV. Discussion of Comments Received on Expansion of AIS Carriage
    A. Need for AIS and Scope of Availability
    B. Reason AIS Requirement Was Not Expanded to All Vessels
    C. Use of AIS Class B Devices
    D. Deviation From AIS Requirements
    E. Relation of Coast Guard AIS Receiving Infrastructure to 
Requirement for AIS in All Waters
V. Discussion of Proposed Rule
    A. NOAD Revisions
    B. AIS Revisions
    C. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Regulatory Analysis
    A. Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Small Entities
    C. Assistance for Small Entities
    D. Collection of Information
    E. Federalism
    F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    G. Taking of Private Property
    H. Civil Justice Reform
    I. Protection of Children
    J. Indian Tribal Governments
    K. Energy Effects
    L. Technical Standards
    M. Environment

Table of Abbreviations and Acronyms

AC Alternating Current
AIS Automatic Identification System
AOR Area of Responsibility
API American Petroleum Institute
APIS Advance Passenger Information System
ARPA Advanced Radar Plotting Aid
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
CBP U.S. Customs and Border Protection
CDC Certain Dangerous Cargo
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COP Common Operating Picture
COTP Captain of the Port
CSTDMA Carrier-sense Time Division Multiple Access
DGPS Differential Global Positioning System

[[Page 76296]]

DHS U.S. Department of Homeland Security
ECDIS Electronic Chart Display and Information System
ECS Electronic Chart System
eNOAD Electronic Notice of Arrival and Departure
FCC Federal Communications Commission
GPS Global Positioning System
GT Gross Registered Tons
IEC International Electrotechnical Commission
IMO International Maritime Organization
IRVMC Inland River Vessel Movement Center
ISM International Safety Management
ISPS International Ship and Port Facility Security
ISSC International Ship Security Certificate
ITU International Telecommunications Union
MDA Maritime Domain Awareness
MISLE Marine Information for Safety and Law Enforcement
MKD Minimal Keyboard Display
MMSI Maritime Mobile Service Identity
MTS Marine Transportation System
MTSA Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NAIS Nationwide Automatic Identification System
NARA National Archives and Records Administration
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
NOA Notice of Arrival
NOAD Notice of Arrival and Departure
NOD Notice of Departure
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
NVMC National Vessel Movement Center
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OSRV Oil Spill Response Vessel
PV Present Value
PWSA Ports and Waterways Safety Act
RA Regulatory Assessment
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RTCM Radio Technical Commission for Maritime Services
SBA Small Business Administration
SCC Sector Command Center
SOLAS International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea
U.S.C. United States Code
USCS United States Customs Service
VSL Value of Statistical Life
VTC Vessel Traffic Center
VTS Vessel Traffic Service

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted, 
without change, to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any 
personal information you have provided. We have an agreement with the 
Department of Transportation to use the Docket Management Facility.

A. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking (USCG-2005-21869), indicate the specific section of this 
document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each 
comment. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, 
an e-mail address, or a phone number in the body of your document so 
that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission. 
You may submit your comments and material by electronic means, mail, 
fax, or delivery 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 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 will consider all comments and 
material received during the comment period. We may change this 
proposed rule in view of them.

B. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble 
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov at 
any time, click on ``Search for Dockets,'' and enter the docket number 
for this rulemaking (USCG-2005-21869) in the Docket ID box, and click 
enter. If you do not have access to the internet, you may view the 
docket online by visiting the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-
140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West 
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

C. Privacy Act

    Anyone can 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 a Privacy Act, system of 
records notice regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008 
issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

D. Public Meeting

    We plan to hold one public meeting in Washington, DC. The date, 
time, and location will be announced by a later notice in the Federal 
Register. You may submit a request for additional public meetings under 
ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that 
additional public meetings would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one 
or more at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal 
Register.

II. Background and Purpose

    This section discusses threats to the maritime transportation 
system, and provides background information on the elements of notice 
of arrival and departure (NOAD) and the automatic identification system 
(AIS). This section also discusses maritime domain awareness, the 
Nationwide AIS project, and the role NOAD and AIS will play in 
increasing our understanding of the maritime domain.

A. Threat to the Marine Transportation System

    A terrorist attack against the U.S. marine transportation system 
(MTS) has the potential to inflict a disastrous impact on global 
shipping, international trade, and the world economy. Waterborne 
commerce enters the United States through more than 360 ports, 
transiting over 26,000 miles of commercially navigable waterways, 
carried by more than 8,000 foreign vessels, making more than 50,000 
port calls a year. Over six million cruise ship passengers travel 
annually from U.S. ports, and domestic ferries transport over 180 
million passengers annually. At any given time, we estimate that over 
5,000 commercial vessels are within 2,000 nautical miles or 96 hours of 
our shores.
    Threats to our MTS can come from a variety of scenarios. Use of 
explosive-laden small boats to attack larger vessels to cause injury 
and loss of life has already been demonstrated in the cases of the USS 
COLE and the MT LIMBURG. The use of an explosive device on a commercial 
ferry was also demonstrated when, in August 2005, several persons were 
killed and dozens of others were injured after a bomb exploded on the 
M/V DONA RAMONA in the Philippines. Other possible terrorist scenarios 
include use of maritime transportation routes to smuggle weapons of 
mass destruction or terrorists into the United States. In December 
1999, a person planning to bomb the Los Angeles International Airport 
was arrested at Port Angeles, WA, after he got off a ferry arriving 
from Canada and customs agents discovered explosives in the trunk of 
his car. The large geographic area that is occupied by U.S. waterways, 
combined with the high volume of commercial and recreational

[[Page 76297]]

vessel traffic on those waterways, presents enormous challenges for 
preventing terrorist incidents.
    The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, along with maritime-
related terrorist events listed in the paragraph above, call attention 
to the vulnerability of the United States to potential terrorist 
attacks. U.S. waterways and ports present both vulnerable and 
attractive targets, as well as a means of transportation for 
terrorists. The Coast Guard, working with other international, 
national, State, and local agencies, has acted to identify and counter 
the threat to our MTS. In an effort to ensure that we make the most 
cost-effective use of our resources and funding, we have identified the 
need for a comprehensive knowledge and understanding of all activities 
in our maritime domain as key to preventing a terrorist attack.

B. Notice of Arrival and Departure

    Under 33 CFR part 160, owners, agents, masters, operators, or 
persons in charge of vessels must file notices of arrival (NOA) before 
such vessels enter a U.S. port. The Coast Guard's NOA requirements had 
been in effect for decades before the terrorist attacks of 9/11. 
Vessels over 300 gross tons submitted pre-arrival notices directly to 
the applicable arriving port only 24 hours in advance. On October 4, 
2001, the Coast Guard published a temporary final rule under the 
authority of the Ports and Waterways Safety Act (PWSA) (33 U.S.C. 1221-
1232), increasing the submission time for a notice of arrival (NOA) 
from 24 to 96 hours prior to arriving at a U.S. port or place; required 
centralized submissions of this information to the National Vessel 
Movement Center (NVMC); temporarily suspended exemptions from reporting 
requirements for some groups of vessels; and required submission of 
passenger, crew, and cargo information. See 66 FR 50565 (Oct. 4, 2001).
    The information in notices of arrival provides the Coast Guard with 
valuable data for screening vessels for safety and security purposes. 
We have no current regulation in place, however, to capture vessel, 
crew, passenger, or specific cargo information on vessels 300 gross 
tons or less intending to arrive at or depart from U.S. ports or places 
unless they are arriving with certain dangerous cargo (CDC) or are 
arriving at a port or place in the Seventh Coast Guard District--which 
includes South Carolina, most of Georgia and Florida, and the island 
possessions of the United States pertaining to Puerto Rico and the 
Virgin Islands. See 33 CFR 160.203(b)(1) and 160.210(c). This proposed 
rule would expand the applicability for NOADs to further enhance 
homeland security by increasing our awareness of vessels and people 
entering or departing U.S. ports or places.
    We propose to eliminate the current 300-gross-tons threshold 
exception and to require NOADs from all foreign commercial vessels 
departing to or coming from a port or place in the United States and 
all U.S. commercial vessels coming to a U.S. port or place from a 
foreign port. Requiring more vessels to report a NOAD will allow the 
Coast Guard to screen more vessels for safety and security purposes 
well in advance of an arrival, thereby enhancing the safety and 
security of our ports and waterways.

C. Automatic Identification System

    Section 102 of the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 
(MTSA), Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064, mandates that automatic 
identification systems (AIS) be installed and operating on most 
commercial vessels on navigable waters of the United States. See 46 
U.S.C. 70114.
    AIS automatically broadcasts dynamic, static, and voyage-related 
vessel information that is received by other AIS-equipped stations. AIS 
has achieved acceptance through worldwide adoption of performance and 
technical standards developed by diverse international bodies, such as 
the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the International 
Telecommunications Union (ITU), and the International Electrotechnical 
Commission (IEC), that ensure commonality, universality, and 
interoperability. Further, installation of such equipment is required 
on vessels subject to the International Convention for the Safety of 
Life at Sea, 1974, (SOLAS), as amended. See specifically SOLAS, Chapter 
V, regulation 19.2.4. http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/enav/ais/SOLAS.V.19.2.1-5.pdf.
    In ship-to-ship mode, AIS provides essential information to other 
vessels, such as name, position, course, and speed, that is not readily 
available on board vessels. In the ship-to-shore mode, AIS allows for 
the efficient exchange of vessel traffic information that previously 
was only available via voice communications with a VTS. In either mode, 
AIS enhances the mariner's situational awareness, makes possible the 
accurate exchange of navigational information, mitigates the risk of 
collision through reliable passing arrangements, facilitates vessel 
traffic management while simultaneously reducing voice radiotelephone 
transmissions, and enhances maritime domain awareness (MDA).
    For further information and background on AIS, see 68 FR 39353, 
39355 (July 1, 2003); 68 FR 60559, 60560 (Oct. 22, 2003); or visit 
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/enav.

D. AIS Displays and Integration

    Shipboard AIS devices are divided into two classes. AIS Class A 
devices come with a minimal keyboard display (MKD) that allows the user 
to input AIS information (e.g., vessel identity, dimensions, navigation 
status, and antenna location) and to access all information received 
from other devices. AIS Class B devices require this input to be pre-
programmed into the device. For further discussion of AIS Class A and 
Class B, their differences and similarities, see Section IV, Discussion 
of Comments below. Both types of shipboard AIS allow multiple input-
output and display (presentation) options that facilitate using or 
integrating AIS data on other navigational systems, such as radar, 
Advanced Radar Plotting Aid (ARPA), Electronic Chart Display and 
Information System (ECDIS), and Electronic Chart System (ECS).
    The greatest benefits of AIS will be achieved by its widest use, 
both by the number of vessels that use it and its integration and 
synergy with other shipboard systems. Although we encourage full 
integration of AIS with all navigation systems, this proposed rule 
would not require such integration because of the current limited 
availability of type-approved equipment that can readily and reliably 
integrate AIS and these other systems (e.g., ECDIS, ARPA, radar, and 
chart plotters). We caution mariners who seek to integrate the 
equipment on their own, particularly on non type-approved equipment. 
This view is also set forth in recommendations by the Transportation 
Research Board's ``Special Report 272, Shipboard Automatic 
Identification System: Meeting the Needs of the Mariners''; see http://fermat.nap.edu/catalog/10708.html.
    The Conference Report accompanying the Coast Guard and Maritime 
Transportation Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-293) states ``[we] should 
require the AIS system information to be integrated with the electronic 
chart display.'' See H. Conf. Rep. No. 108-617, at 82 (July 20, 2004). 
Section 410 of this Act mandates that electronic charts be installed 
and operational on basically the same vessel population mandated to 
have AIS under the MTSA. The Coast Guard expects to implement this 
electronic chart mandate and address

[[Page 76298]]

the display of AIS on electronic charts through a separate rulemaking.

E. Maritime Domain Awareness

    In October 2005, the National Security Council and Homeland 
Security Council jointly published ``The National Plan to Achieve 
Maritime Domain Awareness,'' (available at http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/HSPD_MDAPlan.pdf), a collaborative inter-agency effort in 
support of the National Strategy for Maritime Security. This plan 
defines MDA as the effective understanding of anything associated with 
the global maritime domain that could impact the security, safety, 
economy, or environment of the United States. The Plan also identifies 
MDA as a key component of an active, layered maritime defense in 
depth--expanding maritime boundaries.
    MDA involves both the process of receiving and analyzing data as 
well as the system of technology that facilitates this process. To 
maximize the employment of our resources, MDA, among other things, 
requires monitoring and tracking vessels, cargo, and people. Cold War 
legacy data collection capabilities must be integrated with current and 
emerging capabilities and systems to provide near real-time awareness 
of maritime threats.
    Our primary method for collecting AIS information will be the 
Nationwide Automatic Identification System (NAIS) network. These data 
will be used in conjunction with the national maritime common operating 
picture (COP). The COP is a near real-time information grid that will 
be shared by all U.S. Federal, State, and local agencies with maritime 
interests and responsibilities. COP data will be accessible to all 
users, except when limited by security restrictions, policy, or 
regulations.
    NOAD, NAIS, and AIS, when employed together, provide a major 
portion of the information needed for MDA. AIS provides real-time 
information on vessels that can be correlated with NOAD data to enable 
us to track vessel movements in or bound for U.S. waters via NAIS COP.
    Expanding NOAD and AIS applicability broadens our sources of 
information and enhances MDA. The combined NOAD and AIS information is 
one critical element in the overall MDA process, along with data 
collected from other various maritime and maritime-related sources. 
These data streams will form part of the COP and will also then be 
reviewed by analysts to identify vessels, persons, and activities that 
might be suspect through a process known as anomaly detection.
    Anomaly detection assists us in the early identification of 
possible terrorist or other suspicious activities, which in turn allows 
us to take appropriate preventive measures to protect public safety and 
economic security. This enhanced MDA would improve our ability to 
prevent and respond to terrorist attacks.
    The greater synergy of NOAD and AIS is realized when they are 
combined to provide a comprehensive picture of the maritime domain. The 
COP uses input from various sources to provide both a visual display of 
ship movements as well as a display of each vessel's accompanying 
information.
    The intent of the system is to allow the Coast Guard to review the 
different data elements against one another to detect anomalies. For 
example, a Coast Guard unit may identify a vessel prepared to enter a 
U.S. harbor. The Coast Guard unit could call up that vessel's 
information and review its destination. At that time, the Coast Guard 
would review the vessel's notice of arrival (NOA) and may observe that 
the vessel has reported it is bound for the container docks. Later, the 
AIS broadcast may indicate that the vessel did not maneuver to turn 
down the channel to the container docks as expected and is instead 
proceeding on a collision course with a major marine transportation 
infrastructure on the other side of the harbor. In this example, the 
comparison of different data sources would have allowed the Coast Guard 
to recognize this anomaly in reported data, to deploy the necessary 
resources, and to notify the surrounding infrastructure.
    This is just one of many scenarios that fuse NOAD and AIS data to 
ensure maritime traffic is being monitored and evaluated.

F. Nationwide AIS

    In response to a Congressional mandate in 46 U.S.C. 70113(a), 
emerging homeland security requirements, and the need to improve 
navigational safety, the Coast Guard initiated the Nationwide AIS 
(NAIS) project: a major Federal acquisition project to collect, 
aggregate, and share information concerning AIS equipped vessels 
operating on or bound for waters subject to the jurisdiction of the 
United States. NAIS will consist of an integrated system of AIS 
equipment (e.g., base station radios, antennas), data storage, 
processing, and networking infrastructure. NAIS will also be integrated 
with other systems for the purpose of sharing infrastructure and 
improving NAIS' overall performance.
    NAIS will process (e.g., validate and filter) and store AIS data 
and make these data available for use by other existing operational 
systems (e.g., COP, Sector Command Center (SCC), Marine Information for 
Safety and Law Enforcement (MISLE), and VTS). It is expected that these 
other systems will provide data processing functions (e.g., vessel 
tracking correlation, information processing, traffic analysis, and 
anomaly detection) and user interfaces necessary to take full advantage 
of AIS data exchange functionality. NAIS information will be displayed 
in the Coast Guard's national maritime COP and shared--along with 
correlated data and intelligence, as appropriate--with other entities. 
Access to these NAIS data by other authorized governmental entities is 
intended to enhance maritime safety and security and promote 
interagency cooperation. Portions of the COP will also be available to 
local port partners in support of local security and safety operations. 
Some users of NAIS capabilities (e.g., U.S. Coast Guard units, other 
governmental entities, and strategic port partners) may indirectly 
access AIS data via other systems. Having such near real-time 
information of vessels' identity, location, and cargo will be 
invaluable.
    NAIS will be deployed regionally and incrementally. As of the end 
of September 2008, AIS-receive coverage has been established in 58 
major ports and 16 critical coastal areas across the nation under 
Increment One of the NAIS project. All Coast Guard Sectors have at 
least one AIS receiver site within their Area of Responsibility (AOR) 
and also have the capability to view AIS vessel tracks outside their 
AOR (e.g., for an adjacent CG Sector or nationwide) via the maritime 
COP. Increment Two will expand our detection and surveillance 
nationwide and add AIS transmit capability out to 24 nautical miles. 
Finally, Increment Three will provide AIS detection and surveillance 
capability out to 2,000 nautical miles. NAIS full operational 
capability (i.e., AIS long range detection, system integration, data 
processing and sharing, etc.) is anticipated to be achieved by 2014.

III. Regulatory History

    Since the tragic events of September 11, 2001, the Coast Guard has 
modified the NOA requirements for vessels numerous times and 
implemented SOLAS AIS regulations and carriage requirements for AIS in 
VTS waters. The summary below describes this evolution of NOA and AIS 
regulations since 2001 and provides background intended to assist the 
reader as we later describe existing regulations we are seeking to 
revise through this proposed

[[Page 76299]]

rule. The summary compiles Federal Register citations in tables and 
presents them in chronological order to assist those who seek to review 
these past rulemaking documents or notices.

A. Notice of Arrival

    On October 4, 2001, we published a temporary final rule entitled 
``Temporary Requirements for Notification of Arrival in U.S. Ports'' in 
the Federal Register. See 66 FR 50565. As noted previously, that 
temporary rule increased the submission time for a NOA from 24 to 96 
hours prior to arriving at a U.S. port or place; required centralized 
submissions; temporarily suspended exemptions from reporting 
requirements for some groups of vessels; and required submission of 
passenger, crew, and cargo information. We extended the effective 
period of that temporary rule to allow us to complete a rulemaking for 
permanent changes. See 67 FR 37682 (May 30, 2002) and 67 FR 55115 (Aug. 
28, 2002).
    Following a notice of proposed rulemaking published June 19, 2002, 
we published a final rule on February 28, 2003, that replaced temporary 
regulations and revised NOA requirements in 33 CFR part 160 by 
consolidating the notice of departure (NOD) into the NOA, requiring 
electronic submission of cargo manifest information to the then United 
States Customs Service (USCS), and requiring additional crew and 
passenger information. See 67 FR 41659 and 68 FR 9537.
    On May 22, 2003, after consultation with U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP), we suspended the NOA requirement for electronic 
submission of cargo manifest information (Customs Form 1302) pending 
further CBP regulatory action under then-recent legislation, including 
the Trade Act of 2002. See 68 FR 27907.
    On August 18, 2004, we published a temporary final rule with 
request for comment that changed the definition of CDC to include 
ammonium nitrate and certain ammonium nitrate based fertilizers, in 
bulk, as well as propylene oxide, alone or mixed with ethylene oxide, 
in bulk. That temporary final rule also allowed vessels to submit 
notices of arrival electronically; in this rulemaking, we propose to 
make electronic methods of submission mandatory. See 69 FR 51176. On 
December 16, 2005, we published an interim rule with a request for 
comments that adopted the temporary final rule's definition of 
``certain dangerous cargo'' to include (1) ammonium nitrate, in bulk; 
(2) ammonium nitrate based fertilizers, in bulk; and (3) propylene 
oxide, alone or mixed with ethylene oxide, in bulk, as well as adding 
an option for vessels to submit notices of arrival electronically. See 
70 FR 74663. That interim rule is part of a separate rulemaking focused 
on CDC.
    Table 1 lists NOA rulemaking documents discussed above and 
associated corrections.

                                            Table 1--NOA Rulemakings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Date                          Action                 FR cite         Title of rule  [Docket No.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10/04/2001.......................  Temporary final rule.....  66 FR 50565........  Temporary Requirements for
                                                                                    Notification of Arrival in
                                                                                    U.S. Ports [USCG-2001-
                                                                                    10689].
11/19/2001.......................  Temporary final rule;      66 FR 57877........  Do.
                                    request for comments;
                                    correction.
01/18/2002.......................  Temporary final rule;      67 FR 2571.........  Do.
                                    request for comments;
                                    correction.
05/30/2002.......................  Temporary rule; change of  67 FR 37682........  Do.
                                    effective date.
06/19/2002.......................  Notice of proposed         67 FR 41659........  Notification of Arrival in
                                    rulemaking.                                     U.S. Ports [USCG-2001-
                                                                                    11865].
08/28/2002.......................  Temporary rule; change of  67 FR 55115........  Temporary Requirements for
                                    effective date.                                 Notification of Arrival in
                                                                                    U.S. Ports [USCG-2001-
                                                                                    10689].
02/28/2003.......................  Final rule...............  68 FR 9537.........  Notification of Arrival in
                                                                                    U.S. Ports [USCG-2002-
                                                                                    11865].
05/22/2003.......................  Final rule; partial        68 FR 27907........  Do.
                                    suspension of regulation.
08/18/2004.......................  Temporary final rule;      69 FR 51176........  Notification of Arrival in
                                    request for comments.                           U.S. Ports; Certain
                                                                                    Dangerous Cargoes;
                                                                                    Electronic Submission [USCG-
                                                                                    2003-16688].
12/16/2005.......................  Interim rule; request for  70 FR 74663........  Notification of Arrival in
                                    comments.                                       U.S. Ports; Certain
                                                                                    Dangerous Cargoes;
                                                                                    Electronic Submission [USCG-
                                                                                    2005-19963].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Automatic Identification System

    On July 1, 2003, we published a temporary interim rule with a 
request for comments and notice of public meeting titled ``Automatic 
Identification System; Vessel Carriage Requirement'' in the Federal 
Register. See 68 FR 39353. That temporary interim rule was one of six 
Coast Guard maritime security rules published July 1, 2003, in response 
to the MTSA. The interim rule implemented AIS requirements under MTSA 
and SOLAS, and required AIS on all vessels subject to SOLAS AIS 
provisions, Vessel Traffic Service Users and certain other commercial 
vessels identified in the MTSA.
    On October 22, 2003, we published a final rule which adopted, with 
changes, the requirements of the AIS temporary interim rule. The major 
changes were to adopt a uniform U.S. implementation date of December 
31, 2004, and to not require AIS on certain fishing and passenger 
vessels. See 68 FR 60559 and 60562.
    Table 2 lists the two AIS rulemaking documents discussed above and 
a correction document.

  Table 2--Automatic Identification System; Vessel Carriage Requirement
                            [USCG-2003-14757]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Date                     Action                FR cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
07/01/2003..................  Temporary interim     68 FR 39353.
                               rule with request
                               for comments and
                               notice of meeting.

[[Page 76300]]

 
07/16/2003..................  Correcting            68 FR 41913.
                               amendments.
10/22/2003..................  Final rule..........  68 FR 6055.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Expansion of AIS Carriage

    On the same date the AIS temporary interim rule was published, we 
published a notice in the Federal Register posing eight questions and 
requesting comments on how best to address implementation beyond the 
then-published AIS regulations. See 68 FR 39369 (July 1, 2003). We held 
public meetings and extended the comment period to January 5, 2004, to 
allow the public and, specifically, the fishing and small passenger 
vessel industry, the opportunity to submit comments after they had seen 
the final rule published October 22, 2003. See 68 FR 55643 (Sept. 26, 
2003) and 68 FR 61818 (Oct. 30, 2003). In Section IV, below, we discuss 
the many comments we received and note proposed changes from the 2003 
final rule based on these comments.
    Table 3 lists the three documents we published requesting comments 
on AIS expansion discussed above.

     Table 3--Automatic Identification System; Expansion of Carriage
             Requirements for U.S. Waters [USCG-2003-14878]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Date                     Action                FR cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
07/01/2003..................  Notice; request for   68 FR 39369.
                               comments.
09/26/2003..................  Notice; request for   68 FR 55643.
                               comments; extension
                               of comment period;
                               notice of public
                               meetings.
10/30/2003..................  Notice; request for   68 FR 61818.
                               comments; notice of
                               public meetings.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Discussion of Comments Received on Expansion of AIS Carriage

    We thank the more than 180 persons or organizations who responded 
to our request for comments and participated in our public meetings on 
the expansion of AIS requirements [see docket USCG-2003-14878]. Their 
answers to our original eight questions (68 FR 39369) and subsequent 
two questions (68 FR 61818) posed in 2003 assisted us in crafting or 
amending various provisions of the AIS portion of this rule as stated 
in the ``AIS Revisions'' section below. We also received numerous 
comments beyond the scope of our ten questions that were similar or 
reiterated concerns expressed during the previous rulemaking [see USCG-
2003-14757]. Our opinion and resolution of these comments remains as 
stated in our final rule (68 FR 60559), with the following exceptions:

A. Need for AIS and Scope of Availability

    Numerous commenters, for various reasons, do not believe that AIS 
requirements are needed or that they should apply to their type of 
vessel. In general, we disagree. Congress has given us an AIS mandate 
to implement. The Coast Guard has been involved in the development of 
AIS since the 1990s and has done so in response to industry demands 
[see USCG 2003-14757-8] for ``silent VTSs'' and the need to provide 
mariners with pertinent, near real-time navigation information in a 
seamless manner which AIS does while reducing the need for voice 
communication. We recognize AIS is not a panacea. It will not in itself 
prevent a collision or terrorist attack; if AIS is coupled with other 
information sources, however, it does provide the mariner and the 
government with situational awareness to help thwart these events. It 
is not intended to replace the radiotelephone, radio, sound signals, 
security measures, or other similar items; rather, it is there to 
complement them.
    The starting point or initial affected population of AIS has been 
determined for the most part by the MTSA. Congress has stated that all 
self-propelled commercial vessels of 65 feet or greater or 26 feet or 
greater and over 600 horsepower when engaged in towing and certain 
passenger vessels (which we have determined to be those carrying 50 or 
more passengers) should have AIS; a portion of the same population is 
also required to have radiotelephones under the Vessel Bridge-to-Bridge 
Radiotelephone Act of 1971 (Radiotelephone Act), Public Law 92-63, 85 
Stat. 164. See 33 U.S.C. 1201 et seq. A principal purpose of both the 
MTSA and the Radiotelephone Act is to improve navigation safety. AIS 
and the radiotelephone, working together, provide the necessary tools 
to potentially prevent and mitigate collisions and other mishaps.
    The Radiotelephone Act requires every power-driven vessel of 20 
meters (65 feet) or more in length; towing vessels of 26 feet or more 
in length; vessels of 100 gross tons and upward carrying one or more 
passengers for hire; and dredge and floating plants, in or near a 
channel or fairway, engaged in operations likely to restrict or affect 
navigation to be equipped and monitor the Bridge-to-Bridge 
Radiotelephone (33 U.S.C. 1203, 1204).
    We also propose in this NPRM to require AIS on dredges or floating 
plants near commercial channels because these vessels--given the nature 
of their operation--pose a unique challenge to navigation. As for 
passenger vessels, the AIS provision of the MTSA grants the Coast Guard 
discretion as to number of passengers for hire a vessel less than 65 
feet may carry. In our 2003 Temporary Interim Rule, we established that 
threshold at carrying 50 or more passengers for hire. Subsequently, in 
our Final Rule, we excepted these vessels (and fishing vessels) and 
established a 150-passengers-for-hire threshold.
    After we published the Final Rule, we posed two additional 
questions via a Request for Comments (68 FR 61818), specific to these 
segments of industry--fishing and small passenger operators--and the 
burden that these regulations placed on these predominantly small 
entities. We reviewed all of these comments and made Congress aware of 
the various concerns expressed by industry [see USCG-2003-14757-129]; 
nonetheless, this segment of industry is not uniquely impacted by the 
regulations and can greatly benefit from AIS. We therefore propose in 
this NPRM, AIS carriage requirements on

[[Page 76301]]

fishing vessels of 65 feet or more and on vessels carrying 50 or more 
passengers. We propose to omit the distinction of ``for hire'' because 
we believe all passengers, whether paying or not, are subject to a 
similar safety risk and thus deserve the navigation safety and maritime 
security benefit afforded to them by AIS.
    Finally, we propose that any vessel moving CDC also be required to 
carry AIS because of the unique risk the movement of CDC poses to the 
marine transportation system.

B. Reason AIS Requirement Was Not Expanded to All Vessels

    Many commenters expressed the desire that all vessels have AIS. 
Ultimately, we believe all vessels should avail themselves of AIS; 
however, we propose to apply this rule only to those vessels for which 
we have current authority to mandate carriage of AIS. We propose to add 
two classes of vessels, not specifically addressed in the 
Radiotelephone Act: high-speed passenger vessels and vessels involved 
in the movement of certain dangerous cargo. High-speed passenger 
vessels and vessels that transport dangerous cargo pose unique 
challenges that AIS is well-suited to address.
    With the advent of AIS Class B devices and the continual drop in 
prices for Class A devices, these systems will become more affordable. 
Consequently, more vessels will use AIS and the collective benefit AIS 
provides will increase. Someday, we hope all vessels will avail 
themselves of AIS, as many have done so with charts, radiotelephones, 
radars, and other navigation equipment.

C. Use of AIS Class B Devices

    Some commenters recommended that the Coast Guard permit the use of 
AIS Class B devices. We agree. Since publication of the 2003 final rule 
(68 FR 60559) and through the diligent work of various standards 
bodies, we now have AIS Class B devices that are interoperable with AIS 
Class A devices. Class B devices differ slightly in features and nature 
of design, which reduce their cost (on average half the cost of Class A 
devices); however, their performance is somewhat limited. They report 
at a fixed rate (30 seconds) vice the Class A's variable rate (2-10 
seconds dependent on speed and course change). They consume less power, 
but also report at lower power (2 watts versus 12 watts of AIS Class 
A), thus impacting their broadcast range. Despite these design 
limitations, and after extensive testing by the Coast Guard Research 
and Development Center (see International Telecommunication Union study 
group report ``Performance Assessment and Interoperability of Proposed 
Class B AIS With Existing Class A AIS System Using Simulation 
Software'' dated September 9, 2005), we deem AIS Class B devices can 
operate properly and safely amongst Class A devices and offer similar 
AIS benefits. They broadcast and receive virtually the same vessel 
identification and other information. They have the same ability to see 
targets that radar may not always show (around the bend, in sea 
clutter, or during foul weather). For these reasons, we have concluded 
that AIS Class B devices do enhance navigation safety and assist in 
collision avoidance comparable to AIS Class A devices; however, given 
their design limitations, we caution users that they may not be the 
best alternative for vessels that are highly maneuverable, travel at 
high speed, or routinely transit congested waters.
    The Coast Guard seeks comment in this NPRM on whether AIS Class B 
devices should be permitted only on certain vessels or waterways, or 
whether this decision should be best left to the master or owner's 
discretion.
    We welcome the advent of lower cost AIS Class B devices and the 
continual drop in price of AIS Class A devices--currently averaging 
approximately $3,000 vice $7,000 in 2003. Fishing vessels and small 
passenger vessels, previously included in the original AIS carriage 
requirements of our temporary interim rule (68 FR 39353), will be less 
impacted by the current cost of AIS Class A devices and the potential 
to use even lower cost AIS Class B devices.

D. Deviation From AIS Requirements

    There were a number of comments stating that AIS should not be 
required on vessels operating on certain waterways. We recognize that 
the MTSA provides us authority to waive AIS requirements on waterways 
where we determine AIS is not needed for safe navigation; however, we 
have decided not to create a patchwork of waterways where AIS is or is 
not required. Rather than waive requirements on specific waterways we 
propose here to grant a deviation based on where or how vessels 
operate. To that end, we propose to define what conditions under which 
a deviation may be sought. Vessels that operate--
    (1) Solely within a very confined area (e.g., less than a one 
nautical mile radius, shipyard, fleeting area);
    (2) On short and fixed scheduled routes (e.g., a bank-to-bank river 
ferry service); or
    (3) In a manner that makes it unlikely they will encounter other 
AIS users may request a yearly deviation from AIS requirements as set 
forth in Sec.  164.55.

E. Relation of Coast Guard AIS Receiving Infrastructure to Requirement 
for AIS in All Waters

    Some commenters stated that we should not require the carriage of 
AIS in areas where the Coast Guard does not have infrastructure in 
place to receive these data. First, we note that the use of AIS may 
prevent collisions wherever it is used, regardless of the existence of 
shore-side AIS infrastructure. Second, we are working to establish 
nationwide capability to fully utilize AIS data wherever we require it 
to be transmitted.
    As discussed in the Nationwide AIS section above, a NAIS project is 
being conducted to provide the Coast Guard with the capability to 
receive and distribute information from shipboard AIS equipment in 
order to enhance MDA. That project will provide detection and 
surveillance of vessels carrying AIS equipment approaching or operating 
in the maritime domain where little or no shore-side vessel tracking 
currently exists. Although the NAIS project is not projected to be 
fully operational until 2014, we have achieved initial operational 
capability for the receive-only increment of the project, and we 
anticipate achieving initial operational capability in three Coast 
Guard sectors for the transmit-and-receive increment by 2010. Our 
existing AIS network of over 90 sites and initial NAIS (Increment One) 
capability, in conjunction with other resources to benefit our overall 
MDA, would be available before the implementation date of the AIS 
requirements proposed here. To complement our existing AIS and future 
NAIS infrastructure, all Coast Guard cutters, many boats and some 
aircraft are AIS capable.
    For more details on that project, please see the NAIS programmatic 
environmental impact statement notice published November 23, 2005 (70 
FR 70862); the NAIS programmatic environmental impact statement record 
of decision published November 6, 2006 (71 FR 64977); or the NAIS Web 
site at http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-a/Ais/.

V. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    In this section we discuss how we propose to revise our NOAD and 
AIS regulations.

A. NOAD Revisions

    We propose numerous changes to our NOAD regulations. We propose to 
expand the applicability of the NOAD regulations by changing the 
minimum

[[Page 76302]]

size of vessels covered below the current 300 gross tons, require that 
a notice of departure be submitted for all vessels required to submit a 
notice of arrival, and mandate electronic submission of NOAD notices to 
the National Vessel Movement Center. These changes are described in 
further detail under the following 11 headings in this section.
1. Applicability
    We propose to amend the applicability of our regulations in 33 CFR 
part 160, subpart C, to clarify that unless a vessel is exempted, NOAD 
regulations apply to U.S. vessels in commercial service and all foreign 
vessels departing to or coming from a port or place in the United 
States. See proposed Sec.  160.203. We have revised some exemptions in 
proposed Sec.  160.204. For example, foreign vessels 300 gross tons or 
less not engaged in commercial service and not carrying certain 
dangerous cargo is one group of vessels that will continue to be 
generally exempted from submitting a NOA and will no longer have a 
separate NOA requirement for Coast Guard District Seven.
2. Definitions
    We propose to add definitions for commercial service, continental 
United States (which includes Alaska), disembark, embark, foreign 
vessel, offshore supply vessel, oil spill response vessel, passenger 
vessel, recreational vessel, and towing vessel to the definitions 
section in 33 CFR part 160, subpart C, proposed Sec.  160.202. These 
additions would clarify the meaning of these 10 terms used in our NOAD 
regulations. Most of the new definitions come directly from 46 U.S.C. 
2101.
3. Exemptions
    We also propose to change the exemptions from reporting 
requirements currently found in Sec.  160.203. We would revise the 
exemption for vessels 300 gross tons or less not carrying CDCs so that 
all commercial vessels coming from a foreign port or place would be 
required to submit a NOA, regardless of tonnage.
    We propose to remove the exemption for foreign commercial vessels 
300 gross tons or less whether or not they are coming from a foreign 
port. Removing this exemption entirely for foreign commercial vessels 
would allow the Coast Guard to align its vessel reporting requirements 
with CBP electronic arrival manifest requirements in 19 CFR 4.7b. We 
propose to maintain the exemption for U.S. commercial vessels 300 gross 
tons or less, not carrying CDCs, and transiting between ports or places 
of the United States because most are already screened through specific 
Federal and State registration and/or licensing programs as are the 
mariners that operate and crew these vessels.
    We currently require all foreign commercial and recreational 
vessels 300 gross tons or less arriving at a port or place in the 
Seventh Coast Guard District to submit NOAs directly to the cognizant 
Captains of the Port (COTPs). We are proposing to remove that unique 
NOA requirement for foreign recreational vessels arriving in the 
Seventh Coast Guard District. This will ensure consistency between 
Coast Guard districts and allow more efficient use of Coast Guard 
District Seven personnel and resources.
    Vessels over 300 gross tons are currently subject to NOA 
regulations. We continue to require their compliance so that we can 
maintain visibility of these vessels because they carry a greater 
number of passengers and crew and a larger volume of cargo.
    We also propose to revise an exemption for vessels operating upon 
the Mississippi River above mile 235 and its tributaries. That 
exemption would be limited to vessels required to report to the Inland 
River Vessel Movement Center (IRVMC) under 33 CFR part 165.
    We propose to clarify the exemption for a vessel operating 
exclusively within a COTP Zone when not carrying certain dangerous 
cargo. Under both the current 33 CFR 160.203(b)(2) and proposed 33 CFR 
160.204(a)(4)(ii), once a vessel has arrived at a port or place within 
a single COTP zone and has submitted the required NOA, if it then 
transits to another port or place within the same COTP Zone it is 
considered to be operating exclusively within that Zone and, therefore, 
is not required to submit a NOAD if it is not carrying CDC. If that 
vessel, however, is carrying CDC or leaves one COTP Zone and enters 
another, it is not covered by the exemption under current Sec.  
160.203(b)(2) or proposed Sec.  160.204(a)(4)(ii) and, therefore, must 
submit the required notices.
4. Submitter
    We have inserted proposed Sec.  160.205 to clarify who must submit 
notices of arrival and notices of departure. This section would direct 
the owner, agent, master, operator, or person in charge of a vessel to 
submit NOADs in compliance with the subpart's time, method, and notice 
content requirements.
5. NOA Information
    We propose to remove the optional submission of INS (now CBP) Form 
I-418 to satisfy crew and passenger information reporting requirements 
currently found in Sec.  160.206(c) and to remove the option of 
submitting consolidated NOAs found in Sec.  160.206(d). The Coast Guard 
found that many vessels submitting consolidated NOAs, or NOAs with 
consecutive port submissions, were not reporting changes in their crew, 
cargo, or persons in addition to crew. The eNOAD system we have 
developed to support the submission of non-consolidated NOADs meets the 
requirements of both the Coast Guard and CBP.
    We would revise Sec.  160.206, which contains the information 
requirements for NOA reports. The Coast Guard proposes adding a 
requirement for the Maritime Mobile Service Identity (MMSI) number for 
vessels in NOA reports because that number is associated with AIS. For 
vessels with an MMSI, this would allow the Coast Guard to quickly link 
a vessel's NOA with its AIS broadcast in order to detect security 
anomalies.
    We also propose to require passport country of issuance and 
passport date of expiration information from everyone onboard who 
presents a passport--crewmembers and persons in addition to crew. This 
additional passport information will aid in the detection of fraudulent 
passports that may be used by individuals, both foreign and domestic, 
attempting to enter or depart the United States.
    We propose to add a requirement to indicate whether the vessel is 
300 gross tons or less and whether the vessel's voyage will be less 
than 24 hours in NOA reports. This information will allow the Coast 
Guard to prioritize screening of vessels on brief voyages with a 
shorter reporting requirement so they are screened before entering 
their port or place of destination.
    We also propose to add a data field for vessels to submit their 
estimated time of arrival to the entrance to the port (if applicable). 
This would be used by COTPs to facilitate vessel traffic management and 
to coordinate boardings and inspections. Additionally, we propose to 
clarify through item (2)(i) in the table for proposed 33 CFR 160.206 
that vessels that have visited ports or places outside the continental 
United States need to submit the last five foreign ports or places 
visited on their NOA. In a separate item from the table, (2)(ix), all

[[Page 76303]]

vessels must report their last port of call, whether domestic or 
foreign.
    These two data fields, with accompanying items requesting arrival 
and departure dates from ports or places listed, will better enable us 
to determine which vessels are coming from foreign ports, and whether 
they may have been subject to inspection at another U.S. port since 
entering U.S. navigable waters. A vessel that has not visited a foreign 
port would make the appropriate entry, as specified by eNOAD, for the 
(2)(i) and (2)(ii) fields to report they have not visited a foreign 
port or place.
    Finally, in regard to Sec.  160.206, we propose to revise the 
reporting requirements on the operational condition of equipment. For 
that item, we have replaced the reference to 33 CFR 164.35 with 33 CFR 
part 164, so that we would include all relevant navigation equipment, 
including AIS.
6. NOD Information
    We propose that all vessels required to submit a NOA will also be 
required to submit a NOD when departing from a port or place of the 
United States. The departure information required by proposed Sec.  
160.207--regarding the vessel, voyage, cargo, crewmembers, and persons 
in addition to the crew--would increase our awareness of vessel 
movements and, by supplementing NOA data, would allow us to maintain a 
complete picture of movements in and out of U.S. ports or places.
    Commercial vessels departing U.S. ports or places bound for foreign 
ports or places are currently required by CBP to submit an electronic 
passenger departure manifest and an electronic crewmember departure 
manifest. See 19 CFR 4.64. As noted in their final rule entitled 
``Electronic Transmission of Passenger and Crew Manifests for Vessels 
and Aircrafts,'' published in the Federal Register April 7, 2005 (70 FR 
17820, 17833), however, CBP has adopted the use of the Coast Guard's 
eNOAD to eliminate duplicate reporting requirements and provide a 
``single window'' for filing manifest information. While, as indicated 
in the paragraph above, we would not limit our NOD requirements to 
vessels going to foreign ports, our proposed rule will not change what 
CBP stated in their final rule: eNOAD will capture the notice 
information we require and the electronic manifest information CBP 
requires. See 70 FR 17831 (Apr. 7, 2005).
    We have worked with CBP to avoid requiring a vessel to submit the 
same information to our agencies separately, but our agencies do have 
separate missions. The information we need to better enable us to 
fulfill our mission under 33 U.S.C. 1225--to prevent damage to 
structures on, in, or adjacent to the navigable waters of the United 
States, as well as protecting those navigable waters--may differ 
somewhat from information CBP requires to implement the laws defining 
its missions. To the extent, however, that we both require the same 
information of vessels, we do not require separate submissions of that 
information to satisfy our respective regulations in 19 CFR and 33 CFR.
7. Electronic Submission
    In proposed Sec.  160.210, we would require NOAs and NODs be 
submitted via electronic formats found at the National Vessel Movement 
Center's (NVMC) Web site: http://www.nvmc.uscg.gov. Mandating 
electronic submission of NOADs allows the Coast Guard and CBP to 
quickly and automatically process, validate, and screen arrival and 
departure notices. The CBP's Advance Passenger Information System 
(APIS) regulations, 19 CFR 4.7b and 4.64, mandated that arrival and 
departure information be submitted by the electronic system. Coast 
Guard and CBP consolidated the reporting requirements and provided the 
public with a ``single-window'' for transmitting NOA and NOD 
information. Information received through the eNOAD system is 
automatically forwarded to both the Coast Guard and CBP.
    Currently, 87 percent of NOA submissions are made via the eNOAD 
method. The eNOAD offers a quick and easy way to submit NOAs and NODs.
8. When To Submit NOA
    We recognize that the current times for submitting NOAs in Sec.  
160.212 might encumber some small commercial vessels transiting between 
U.S. and foreign ports; therefore, we propose to make the reporting 
time closer to the departure time for smaller vessels that make 
frequent, short voyages between U.S. and foreign ports or places.
    For U.S. commercial vessels 300 gross tons or less, arriving from a 
foreign port, and on a voyage of less than 24 hours, we propose in this 
NPRM a submission time of 60 minutes prior to departure from the 
foreign port or place. This population of vessels often engages in 
multiple, unscheduled, short-term voyages within a given 24-hour 
period. Because of the emergent and spontaneous nature of their 
business, this portion of the vessel industry would be 
disproportionately affected if required to submit NOADs 24 hours before 
arrival. Additionally, the Coast Guard or State authorities already 
document commercial vessels of the United States of 300 gross tons or 
less.
    In contrast, we have much less information on some foreign 
commercial vessels of 300 gross tons or less; nor do we have advance 
access to foreign merchant mariner documentation or licenses of 
commercial vessel crews. As a result, our personnel require more time 
to review and verify the information submitted by foreign commercial 
vessels 300 gross tons or less; therefore, we are not proposing to 
reduce the reporting time for this population of foreign vessels.
    This proposed rule would also mandate that foreign commercial 
vessels of 300 gross tons or less that had been required by Sec.  
160.210(c) to contact COTPs in the Seventh Coast Guard District would 
instead submit their NOAs and NODs to the NVMC.
    In proposed 33 CFR 160.212(a)(4) and (b)(4), we have sought to 
clarify that the times for submitting a NOA or update are based on a 
vessel's arrival at a port or place.
9. When To Submit NOD
    We are proposing a new requirement to mandate times for submitting 
NODs. This requirement is similar to the time frame for departure 
notices mandated by CBP in its APIS requirements, 19 CFR 4.7b.
10. Force Majeure
    In proposed 160.215, we specify information to be conveyed by 
vessels bound for a port or place in the United States under force 
majeure. The Coast Guard recognizes the special circumstances of such 
vessels and limits the requirements of 33 CFR part 160, subpart C, to 
reporting information to the nearest Captain of the Port regarding the 
vessel operator's intentions, any hazardous conditions, and whether the 
vessel is carrying or controlling a vessel carrying CDC. COTP zones are 
defined in 33 CFR part 3.
11. Customs Form 1302 Removed
    Finally, we propose to remove some NOA regulatory text that has 
been suspended. Requirements for submittal of Customs Form 1302, a 
cargo declaration, were included in Coast Guard NOA regulations 
published February 28, 2003. See 68 FR 9537. The paragraphs in 33 CFR 
part 160 referencing this cargo declaration were suspended 3 months 
later pending further CBP regulatory action under then recently enacted 
legislation. See 68 FR 27907 (May 22, 2003). At the time, we noted that 
we would remove these

[[Page 76304]]

cargo-manifest submission requirements from Coast Guard regulations 
when they were no longer needed.
    On December 5, 2003, CBP published its ``Required Advance 
Electronic Presentation of Cargo Information'' final rule (68 FR 
68140), which fully addressed the requirement for submission of this 
cargo declaration (Customs Form 1302). 19 CFR 4.7. Our proposed rule 
would reinstate the suspended paragraphs (d) and (e) regarding Customs 
Form 1302 in 33 CFR part 160 so that we could then remove them because 
they are no longer needed.

B. AIS Revisions

    We are proposing numerous changes to our automatic identification 
system and related regulations. Those regulations require the 
installation and operation of a device that automatically broadcasts 
information about the vessel--its position, and current voyage--that 
may be received by other AIS-equipped stations.
    The proposed rule would revise current AIS operation requirements 
and would expand AIS applicability to all U.S. navigable waters; under 
our current regulations, vessels not on an international voyage are 
only required to use AIS in Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) areas. We 
would also expand AIS applicability to all commercial vessels 65 feet 
or more in length and the following commercial vessels, regardless of 
length: Vessels carrying 50 or more passengers (whether for hire or 
not); vessels carrying 12 or more passengers for hire and capable of 
speeds in excess of 30 knots; dredges and floating platforms operating 
near or in a commercial channel or shipping fairway; and any vessels 
carrying or engaged in the movement of CDC. These proposed changes are 
described in greater detail in the 12 headings below in this section.
1. Changes to VTS Terminology and Definitions
    In Sec.  160.5, we replace the term ``Commanding Officers, Vessel 
Traffic Services'' with ``Vessel Traffic Services Director'' to better 
align with our current sector organizational structure.
    In part 161, we are making several changes. Those include adding 
vessels operating with a type-approved AIS to the definition of 
``Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) user'' in Sec.  161.2. Since all Coast 
Guard VTSs are AIS-capable, this revision will facilitate vessel 
traffic management within a VTS and will allow AIS-equipped vessels to 
avail themselves of VTS services.
2. Administrative Changes and Changes in Definition
    In part 161, we propose making two revisions, in Sec. Sec.  161.12 
and 161.19, to reflect the new location (Sec.  160.202) of our certain 
dangerous cargo (CDC) definition.
    In part 164, we are making several revisions including in Sec.  
164.02(a), in which we are revising the section reference to Sec.  
164.46 to reflect the new location of AIS requirements for SOLAS 
vessels in that section, paragraph (c), which, unlike the rest of the 
part, apply to vessels in innocent passage.
    We are adding four items to the incorporation by reference list in 
Sec.  164.03 ((f)(2), (5), (6), and (8)) reflecting new guidance 
regarding AIS installation, use of binary applications and the AIS 
destination field, and deleting the IEC and ITU portions.
    We are revising Sec.  164.46 to expand its applicability and better 
define the proper operation of AIS.
    We are moving three terms--gross tonnage, length, and properly 
installed--previously discussed in the note to Sec.  164.46(a) and 
adding them to a new proposed ``Definitions'' paragraph at Sec.  
164.46(a). This paragraph (a) also includes definitions for Automatic 
Identification System (AIS) and International Voyage. We have combined 
the properly installed definition with the broader properly installed, 
operational definition.
    We are making a revision to Sec.  164.46(b) to denote only ``Coast 
Guard type-approved'' equipment as meeting our requirements. This would 
include various newly, Coast Guard type-approved AIS Class B devices, 
but these devices currently await FCC certification (FCC rules 
regarding AIS Class B certification are pending; see 71 FR 60102, 
October 12, 2006). We have done so in response to the many commenters 
who asked about alternative or less expensive ways to meet the 
requirement with AIS Class B devices.
3. Expansion of AIS Carriage Requirements
    We propose to revise AIS requirements and extend applicability 
beyond VTS areas to all U.S. navigable waters. Further, we would expand 
applicability to all commercial vessels 65 feet or more in length, 
including fishing vessels and vessels carrying passengers regardless of 
the number of passengers. We would also require commercial passenger 
vessels carrying 50 or more passengers (whether for hire or not), 
reducing the previous passenger threshold from 150 or more for hire. 
Additionally, we propose that vessels carrying 12 or more passengers 
for hire and capable of speeds in excess of 30 knots; dredges and 
floating platforms operating near or in a commercial channel or 
shipping fairway; and any vessels carrying or controlling vessels 
carrying CDC be required to install and use AIS.
4. Class A and Class B AIS Devices
    We have also added a note that addresses the use of AIS Class B 
devices. AIS Class B devices differ slightly in features and nature of 
design, which reduces their cost (on average half the cost of AIS Class 
A devices) but also impacts their performance. They report at a fixed 
rate (30 seconds) versus the AIS Class A variable rate (2-10 seconds 
dependent on speed and course change). They consume less power but also 
report at lower power (2 watts versus 12 watts of AIS Class A), thus 
impacting their broadcast range. Despite these design limitations, AIS 
Class B devices offer similar AIS benefits. They broadcast and receive 
virtually the same vessel identification and information. They have the 
same ability to see targets that radar may not always show (around the 
bend, in sea clutter, or during foul weather). For these reasons, and 
after conducting our own AIS Class B testing, we have concluded that 
AIS Class B devices would enhance navigation safety and assist in 
collision avoidance as do Class A devices; however, we caution users 
that they may not be the best alternative for vessels that are highly 
maneuverable, travel at high speed, or routinely transit congested 
waters.
5. Changes Regarding SOLAS AIS Requirements
    As previously noted, we propose to revise paragraph (b) of Sec.  
164.02 to reflect the new location in Sec.  164.46 for SOLAS 
requirements. In our proposed Sec.  164.46(c), we omit SOLAS 
implementation dates because those dates have lapsed. In the proposed 
paragraph (c), we would also reflect SOLAS applicability for self-
propelled vessels in three paragraphs rather than four:
     500 gross tonnage or more,
     300 gross tonnage or more on international voyage, or
     150 gross tonnage or more carrying more than 12 
passengers.
    The first two paragraphs, Sec.  164.46(c)(1) and (2), would 
properly reflect SOLAS applicability for tankers; therefore, there is 
no need to list tanker applicability separately.

[[Page 76305]]

6. Clarification of Operating Requirements
    In response to numerous comments and suggestions, we have expanded 
operating requirements in new paragraph Sec.  164.46(d) clarifying that 
the use of AIS does not relieve the vessel of existing requirements in 
the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 
(72 COLREGS), 28 U.S.T. 3459, T.I.A.S. 8587, or Inland Navigation 
Rules, 33 U.S.C. 2001 through 2073, the Vessel Bridge-to-Bridge 
Radiotelephone Act (33 U.S.C. 1201 through 1208), part 26 of this 
chapter, nor requirements of the Federal Communications Commission 
(FCC) specified in 47 CFR part 80. AIS-equipped vessels are to sound 
whistle signals and display lights or shapes to denote a vessel's 
navigation status. Vessels should ensure that their AIS ``navigation 
status'' field accurately reflects the vessel status as denoted by its 
navigation lights or displayed shapes. Vessels must also make 
appropriate voice broadcasts and passing arrangements on the designated 
VHF bridge-to-bridge channel. We also address the use of AIS messaging 
and note that it should not be relied upon for distress or urgent 
marine communications.
    We also propose a requirement for the vessel to ascertain that its 
AIS and associated equipment is properly operating prior to navigating. 
We have done so in response to the many improperly operating AIS we 
have encountered in enforcing the current regulations. Many users are 
not aware that proper operation of AIS on SOLAS certificated vessels 
requires the use of external devices (the vessel's navigation system, 
gyro, and their associated converters) or that they broadcast the 
pertinent information regarding the vessel's description, dimensions, 
and navigation status. We reiterate here that vessels not ascertaining 
that their broadcast AIS information is correct prior to navigation 
will now be in clear violation of the rules. This also pertains to the 
broadcasts of an unassigned or improper Maritime Mobile Service 
Identity (MMSI) number. Each vessel's properly assigned MMSI is what 
distinguishes its reports from other vessel's reports. Duplicate or 
improper MMSIs may cause a vessel's reports not to be heard or to 
interfere with the reports of other vessels.
7. Location and Use of AIS
    We further propose that the functionality and the display of AIS 
information be located at or near the conning position of the vessel 
and be used by the master or the person in charge to pilot or direct 
the movement of the vessel. The safety benefits of AIS can only be 
accrued by those who avail themselves of its information; thus, we deem 
it should be located at the conning position for use by the master and 
conning officer and that a periodic watch be kept of AIS information. 
Note, we do not require that the unit itself be installed there, only 
that access to AIS information be available there. This can be 
accomplished by the AIS MKD or some other appropriate AIS presentation 
device, such as an AIS-capable radar or electronic chart system being 
installed there.
8. Integration of External Sensors
    We recognize the use of external sensors or devices, such as 
transmitting heading devices, gyros, rate of turn indicators, ECDIS/
ECS, or radar, and we are aware that such devices may improve AIS 
performance; however, as of the date of this publication, we do not 
require their installation or integration, except for those vessels 
subject to requirements in SOLAS Regulation V/19 as denoted in proposed 
Sec.  164.46(c). We are also mindful that the MKD is not the most 
optimal interface to access and use AIS information; it was never 
intended to be so. Each AIS has, at minimum, two high speed input/
output ports for connection of onboard control equipment, ECDIS/ECS, 
radar, etc., and a pilot/auxiliary port for connection of an AIS pilot 
system. Use of these ports for external display systems is certainly 
envisioned and desirable; however, we note that technical requirements 
to do so are still in development. Requirements regarding electronic 
chart systems and the display and integration of AIS information on 
them will be the subject of a separate rulemaking.
9. Implementation Date
    We also propose an implementation date, for those vessels covered 
by this rulemaking, but not currently required to have AIS, of no later 
than 7 months after publication of the final rule. We consider this a 
reasonable length of time for owners to plan to purchase and install 
AIS.
10. Location of AIS Pilot Port
    In proposed Sec.  164.46(g), we clarify the previous requirement 
that the AIS Pilot Port be located ``near'' an alternating current (AC) 
outlet to a maximum length--no more than 3 feet from each other.
11. Requests for Deviation
    The following vessels may request a yearly deviation from AIS 
requirements. Vessels that operate--
    Solely within a very confined area (e.g., less than a one nautical 
mile radius, shipyard, fleeting area);
    On short and fixed scheduled routes (e.g., a bank-to-bank river 
ferry service); or
    In a manner that makes it unlikely they will encounter other AIS 
users.
12. Removal of Expired Requirements
    We propose to remove Sec.  164.43 and its separate and expired 
Prince William Sound AIS requirement. Also, in Sec.  165.1704, we 
propose to remove paragraph (c)(6) because it refers to expired 
requirements for having Automatic Identification System Shipborne 
Equipment in the Prince William Sound regulated navigation area.

C. Incorporation by Reference

    Material proposed for incorporation by reference appears in 33 CFR 
164.03. 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.  164.03.
    Before publishing a binding rule, we will submit this material to 
the Director of the Federal Register for approval of the incorporation 
by reference.

VI. Regulatory Analysis

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes 
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our 
analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and 
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) requires a determination whether 
a regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to review 
by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and subject to the 
requirements of the Executive Order. This rulemaking has been 
identified as significant under Executive Order 12866. A combined 
Regulatory Analysis and an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is 
available in the docket as indicated under the ``Public Participation 
and Request for Comments'' section of this preamble. A summary of the 
analysis follows.
    This proposed rule would expand the applicability for NOAD and AIS 
requirements.

[[Page 76306]]

    The regulatory analysis (RA) presents the scope and magnitude of 
costs incurred by industry (vessel owners) and benefits derived from an 
anticipated reduction in marine casualty cases, and we include a cost-
effectiveness analysis for both segments of this rulemaking. We also 
present the overarching assumptions that provided the foundation for 
both our cost and benefit analyses and make this information available 
to the public for comment.
    The NOAD portion of this proposed rule would significantly expand 
the applicability to include all commercial foreign-flag vessels 
regardless of tonnage down to zero gross tons that make port calls to 
the United States. The expanded NOAD applicability also includes all 
U.S. commercial vessels 300 gross tons or less coming from a foreign 
port. It would also require that a notice of departure be submitted for 
all vessels that are required to submit a notice of arrival. The 
proposed rule would also mandate electronic submission of NOAD notices 
to NVMC.
    Section 102 of the MTSA mandates that AIS be installed on all--
foreign or domestic--commercial self-propelled vessels equal to or 
greater than 65 feet in length (including fishing vessels) in U.S. 
navigable waters, including those outside already-regulated VTS areas. 
This includes towing vessels equal to or greater than 26 feet in length 
and 600 horsepower and, as determined by the Secretary under authority 
of the MTSA, passenger vessels carrying at least 50 passengers, certain 
high-speed passenger craft, certain dredges or floating plants, and 
vessels carrying or moving CDCs. These expanded requirements would 
allow the Coast Guard to better correlate vessel AIS data with NOAD 
data, enhance our ability to identify anomalies, and expand our overall 
MDA.
    We could not, with a great degree of certainty, estimate how many 
vessels transit outside of VTS coverage areas. With this in mind, we 
estimated the numbers of vessels affected by this rulemaking by using 
the population figures presented in the AIS final rule (included in the 
MTSA suite of rulemakings) under docket number, USCG-2003-14757. The 
Coast Guard published the final rule for AIS in the Federal Register on 
October 22, 2003, at 68 FR 60559. We estimate that both segments of the 
proposed rule would affect approximately 42,607 vessels. The total 
number of domestic vessels affected is approximately 17,323 and the 
total number of foreign vessels affected is approximately 25,284.
    We estimate that the NOAD portion of the proposed rule would affect 
approximately 5,566 domestic vessels and approximately 25,284 foreign 
vessels. Of the 5,566 domestic vessels, approximately 4,566 would be 
required to install AIS and submit NOADs and about 1,000 of the 
remaining vessels would be required to submit NOADs only. The total 
number of vessels affected by the NOAD portion of the proposed rule is 
approximately 30,850.
    We estimate that the AIS portion of the proposed rule would affect 
approximately 16,323 domestic vessels and approximately 1,119 foreign 
vessels. The total number of vessels affected by the AIS portion of 
this proposed rule is approximately 17,442.
    Table 4 below summarizes the vessel population affected by the 
proposed rule.

                             Table 4--Summary of U.S. and Foreign Vessel Populations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Total vessels affected *
                                                             NOAD        AIS    --------------------------------
                                                                                    U.S.     Foreign     Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 U.S. Vessels...........................................   ** 5,566     16,323      17,323     25,284     42,607
 Foreign Vessels........................................     25,284   *** 1,119  .........  .........  .........
                                                         -----------------------
    Total Vessels by Portion of Rule....................     30,850     17,442   .........  .........  .........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Totals do not add up to sum of portions of the proposed rule since some vessels required to install AIS would
  also be required to submit NOADs. Consequently, adding both would double count most of the ``AIS affected''
  vessels.
** Of the approximately 5,566 U.S. vessels required to submit NOADs, about 1,000 would submit NOADs only; the
  remainder of about 4,566 would be required to both install AIS and submit NOADs.
*** All of the approximately 1,119 foreign-flag vessels required to install AIS would also be required to submit
  NOADs.

    Our NOAD vessel populations include vessels greater than 300 gross 
tons (approximately 3,099), although these vessels are currently 
required to submit NOAs for a distinct voyage or port call to the U.S. 
The proposed rule would mandate that all commercial vessels would be 
required to submit NODs as well as NOAs; therefore, we based our 
analysis on this difference in applicability. The proposed rule would 
also mandate that all commercial vessels must submit NOADs 
electronically (eNOAD).
    The eNOAD system would allow the Coast Guard to meet its 
notification of arrival requirements and provide synergy with the CBP 
requirements that would eliminate duplicative reporting. We anticipate 
that submitting NOADs by this format should reduce the burden hours 
imposed on industry whereas under a temporary final rule (69 FR 51176, 
Aug. 18, 2004) and a subsequent interim rule (70 FR 74663, Dec. 16, 
2005), two new methods of electronic submission were added and made 
optional. All vessels would be required to submit NOADs by a computer, 
which would require the purchase of this item.
    We assess the costs and benefits of the proposed rule over the 10-
year period, 2008-2017, and present costs in 2006 dollars. We discount 
costs to their present value (PV) at three and seven percent discount 
rates over the period of analysis. Cost estimates include capital costs 
such as the purchase of a computer, and transmission, annual 
maintenance, and replacement costs for the NOAD portion of this 
rulemaking. Cost estimates for the AIS portion of this rulemaking 
include the AIS unit itself and installation, training, annual 
maintenance, and replacement costs. Quantified, monetized benefit 
estimates for the AIS portion of this rulemaking include avoided 
injuries, fatalities, and pollution as a result of the proposed rule. 
Non-quantified benefits for AIS include enhanced MDA, improved 
information sharing with NOAD, and improved overall communications. We 
expect that non-quantified benefits exist for the NOAD portion of this 
rulemaking such as an efficient and timesaving method of notification 
thereby reducing the hour burden on industry and Coast Guard resources.
    Considering domestic commercial vessels less than or equal to 300 
gross tons coming from a foreign port, for example, we propose a 60-
minute notice time for vessels on voyages of less than 24 hours. We 
believe that this population of vessels would originate

[[Page 76307]]

mostly from Caribbean or Canadian ports and many vessels in this 
population potentially could be charter vessels such as fishing vessels 
or smaller ferries that would not have passenger information until a 
few minutes before departure. To the extent that many vessels in this 
population are charter vessels, a 60-minute notice time would greatly 
benefit these small vessel owners since they would not be idle in port 
waiting for the charter to reach its capacity. In contrast, if we 
expand the notice time, for example, to 24 hours for this vessel 
population, these vessel owners potentially would lose customers and 
revenues since they rely on walk-up business as they wait in port in 
order to satisfy a longer notice time. It may be likely that a longer 
notice time would force some of these small business owners to leave 
the industry as they realize lower revenues and reduced economic 
profits as a result.
    Our proposed 60-minute notice time provides flexibility for the 
smaller vessel owner since these businesses would continue to be able 
to operate efficiently as charter businesses due to the spontaneous 
nature of their business. This requirement also aligns with the Customs 
and Border Patrol (CBP) proposed requirement, which would alleviate 
confusion within the industry and provide consistency for the public. 
The Coast Guard requests comments from the public on how a shorter 
notice time benefits your business with increased flexibility as 
opposed to a longer notice time. We would also like comments on how 
much this provision would save your business annually.
    We estimate the total initial cost of the proposed rule to U.S. 
vessel owners and operators to comply with the NOAD portion of this 
rulemaking is between $3.4 and $4.3 million (non-discounted, with a 
2008 implementation date), which covers the preparation of NOADs, the 
capital cost of purchasing a computer [we used $500 for the cost of a 
computer which is consistent with the CBP's APIS rulemaking (70 FR 
17820, Apr. 7, 2005)]. The total initial year cost to U.S. vessel 
owners and operators to comply with the AIS portion of this rulemaking 
is approximately $69.0 million (non-discounted, with a 2008 
implementation date), which includes the capital cost of an AIS unit, 
installation, and training costs. Due to economies of scale, we 
estimate the cost of an AIS unit to be approximately $3,000. The annual 
recurring cost for the NOAD portion of the proposed rule would be 
approximately between $4.1 million (using median number of trips made 
per vessel) and $6.7 million (using mean number of trips made per 
vessel) (non-discounted). The annual recurring cost of the AIS portion 
of the proposed rule would be approximately $4.4 million (non-
discounted).
    We estimate that the 10-year total present discounted value or cost 
of the proposed rule to U.S. vessel owners is between $132.2 and $163.7 
million (seven and three percent discount rates, respectively, 2006 
dollars) over the period of analysis, 2008-2017. We estimate the 10-
year present discounted value or cost of the NOAD portion of the 
proposed rule using both a high and a low median number of trips to 
account for the variability in the number of trips made. The 10-year 
total present discounted value or cost to U.S. vessel owners for the 
NOAD portion of the proposed rule is between $10.4 and $20.1 million at 
seven and three percent discount rates, respectively. Using the median 
and mean number of trips made by U.S.-flag vessels, we estimate the 
annualized NOAD costs to U.S.-flag vessel owners and operators to be 
approximately $1.5 and $2.4 million, respectively.
    The 10-year total present discounted value or cost to U.S. vessels 
owners for the AIS portion of the proposed rule is between $121.8 and 
$143.5 million at seven and three percent discount rates, respectively. 
The AIS portion of the proposed rule is the most costly element 
representing about 87 percent of the 10-year total present discounted 
value or cost at both seven and three percent discount rates. The 
initial cost (non-discounted) for the AIS portion represents nearly 94 
percent of the total initial cost (non-discounted) of the proposed 
rule. We estimate annualized AIS costs to U.S. vessel owners and 
operators to be approximately between $17.3 and $16.8 million at seven 
and three percent discount rates, respectively.
    We estimate that the 10-year total present discounted value or cost 
for foreign-flag vessels to comply with the NOAD portion of the 
proposed rule is between $40.9 and $62.4 million at seven and three 
percent discount rates, respectively. Using the mean and median number 
of trips made by foreign-flag vessels, we estimate the annualized NOAD 
costs to foreign-flag vessel owners and operators to be approximately 
$7.3 and $4.8 million, respectively. We estimate the total present 
discounted value or cost for foreign-flag vessel owners to comply with 
the AIS portion of the proposed rule is between $8.3 and $9.8 million 
at seven and three percent discount rates, respectively. We estimate 
annualized AIS costs to foreign-flag vessel owners and operators to be 
approximately $1.2 million. We estimate that the total present 
discounted value or cost of the proposed rule for both U.S. and 
foreign-flag vessel owners is between $181.4 and $235.9 million at 
seven and three percent discount rates, respectively, over the 10-year 
period of analysis.
    Table 5 below summarizes the total annualized costs of the proposed 
rule for both U.S. and foreign-flag vessel owners and operators.

       Table 5--Summary of Total Annualized Costs of Proposed Rule to U.S. and Foreign-Flag Vessel Owners
                                                   [$Millions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                     Totals *
                                                                NOAD * (median        AIS         (median trips
                                                                 trips made)                          made)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S.-Flag Vessels............................................      $2.4 ($1.5)      $16.8-$17.3    $20.2 ($19.2)
Foreign-Flag Vessels.........................................        7.3 (4.8)              1.2        8.5 (7.0)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Mean number of trips made.

    In the interest of national security and maritime domain awareness, 
the Coast Guard believes that this proposed rule, through a combination 
of NOAD and AIS, would strengthen and enhance not only maritime 
security but also the national security of this country. We believe 
that expanding NOA applicability, specifically to foreign commercial 
vessels under 300 gross tons and to all U.S. commercial vessels coming 
from foreign ports or places, and requiring them to also submit NODs--
in conjunction with AIS--would accomplish this goal. The combination

[[Page 76308]]

of NOAD and AIS would create a synergistic effect between the two 
requirements and would include a significant number of smaller vessels 
not currently covered under the current regulations. This is the 
primary benefit of the proposed rule.
    Ancillary or secondary benefits exist in the form of avoided 
injuries, fatalities, and barrels of oil not spilled into the marine 
environment. We estimate that the total discounted benefit (injuries 
and fatalities) derived from 68 marine casualty cases analyzed over an 
8-year data period from 1996-2003 for the AIS portion of the proposed 
rule is between $24.7 and $30.6 million using $6.3 million for the 
value of statistical life (VSL) at seven and three percent discount 
rates, respectively. Just based on barrels of oil not spilled, we 
expect the AIS portion of the proposed rule to prevent 22 barrels of 
oil from being spilled annually.
    The 68 casualty cases over the 8-year data period yielded about 
$3.2 million in property damage or about $400,000 per year.
    Table 6 below summarizes our findings.

 Table 6--Summary of Total Discounted Cost and Benefit of Proposed Rule for U.S. and Foreign-Flag Vessels (2008-
                               2017, 7 and 3 Percent Discount Rates, 2006 Dollars)
                                                   [$Millions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  10-Year total
                                                                     NOAD             AIS            cost of
                                                                                                  proposed rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 Percent Discount Rates:
    U.S. Vessels *...........................................      $10.4-$16.9           $121.8    $132.2-$138.6
    Foreign Vessels **.......................................        40.9-52.6              8.3        49.2-61.0
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
        Total Cost...........................................        51.3-69.5            130.1      181.4-199.6
3 Percent Discount Rate:
    U.S. Vessels *...........................................        12.3-20.1            143.5      155.8-163.7
    Foreign Vessels **.......................................        48.1-62.4              9.8        58.0-72.2
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
        Total Cost...........................................        60.4-82.5            153.4      213.8-235.9
 
                         AIS Benefits
Injuries and Fatalities Avoided:                                             -
    7 Percent Discount Rate (6.3M VSL).......................                              24.7
    3 Percent Discount Rate (6.3M VSL).......................                              30.6
Pollution Avoided (bbls): ***                                                -
    7 Percent Discount Rate..................................                               136
    3 Percent Discount Rate..................................                               169
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals may not sum due to independent rounding.
* Using three (and four for vessels <=300 GT) and eight (and nine for vessels <=300 GT) median and mean number
  of trips, respectively.
** Using two (and three for vessels <=300 GT) and four (and five for vessels <=300 GT) median and mean number of
  trips, respectively.
*** We did not find cases involving oil spills from foreign-flag vessels.

    We do not expect quantifiable benefits for the NOAD portion of this 
proposed rule and benefits in this case are non-probabilistic (i.e., 
not based on historical probabilities). We believe, however, that there 
are considerable inherent qualitative benefits resulting from the NOAD 
requirement.
    The Coast Guard Intelligence Coordination Center provided an 
intelligence analysis to other internal Coast Guard offices and to the 
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) indicating terrorist 
organizations have the capability and the intention to conduct attacks 
on the U.S. using vessels as a delivery method for direct attacks on 
waterborne primary targets and as a delivery method for personnel and 
weapons in support of attacks on secondary targets. Vessels not 
currently covered under the applicability of NOAD and AIS regulations 
could pose a security risk to the maritime transportation system that 
terrorist organizations could exploit. Expanding the applicability of 
NOAD and AIS will enhance maritime domain awareness by lowering the 
potential security risks. We believe that having this proposed rule in 
place could prevent terrorist attacks in the future that might 
otherwise have occurred without the rule.
    Since the security benefits noted above are difficult to quantify, 
we conducted a break-even analysis to determine what change in the 
reduction of risk would be necessary in order for the benefits of the 
rule to exceed the costs. Because the types of events that would be 
prevented by this regulation vary greatly, we calculate potential 
break-even results using a range of generic events that result in loss 
of life or casualties. We do expect that most events would also involve 
asset destruction or other capital loss. Events involving loss of 
capital in addition to casualties would cause the change in risk 
reduction to be smaller for costs to equal benefits.
    We use $6.3 million as an estimate of a Value of a Statistical Life 
(VSL) to represent an individual's willingness to pay to avoid a 
fatality involving maritime transportation and calculate annualized 
benefits. Our VSL estimate is based on the 2008 report ``Valuing 
Mortality Risk Reductions in Homeland Security Regulatory Analyses'' 
prepared for the U.S. Customs and Border Protection. This report is 
available on the docket as detailed under ADDRESSES.
    We subtract the annualized benefits of the NOAD and AIS portions of 
the proposed rule (7 percent discount rate over 10 years) from the 
annualized costs and divide these net costs by the value of casualties 
avoided to calculate an annual risk reduction range that would be 
required for the benefits of both portions of the rule to at least 
equal the costs.
    The annual risk reductions required for the rule to breakeven are 
presented below for a range of casualties. As shown, depending on the 
casualties avoided, risk would have to be reduced 0.1 (1,000 casualties 
avoided) to 1.2 percent (100 casualties avoided) in order for the NOAD 
portion of the proposed rule to breakeven. For the AIS portion of the 
proposed rule, risk would have to be reduced 0.3 (1,000 casualties 
avoided) to 2.9 percent (100 casualties avoided) in order for the AIS 
requirements of the proposed rule to

[[Page 76309]]

breakeven. These small changes in risk reduction suggest the potential 
benefits of the proposed rule justify the costs.

   Annual Percent Risk Reduction Required for Costs To Equal Benefits
                 [Annualized at 7 percent over 10 years]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Casualties avoided                      NOAD     AIS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
100...................................................      1.2      2.9
250...................................................      0.5      1.2
500...................................................      0.2      0.6
750...................................................      0.2      0.4
1,000.................................................      0.1      0.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    See the ``Regulatory Analysis'' in Docket No. USCG-2005-21869 at 
http://www.regulations.gov for details of these calculations

B. Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this 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. An 
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is available in the docket as 
indicated under the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' 
section of this preamble.
    We have reviewed this proposed rule for potential economic impacts 
on small entities. From our analysis, we conclude that this proposed 
rule may affect a substantial number of small entities, as defined by 
the Small Business Administration (SBA). Small entities affected by 
this rulemaking are vessel owners and operators.
    Due to the large number of vessels and vessel owners and operators 
potentially affected, we took a random sample of the total number of 
companies that could be affected by this rulemaking. We found that this 
rulemaking may affect as many as 14,506 U.S. companies that own and 
operate the 17,323 domestic vessels. Using 95 percent as our confidence 
level, we took a random sample of 375 small businesses. We researched 
approximately 3,300 companies in order to achieve our sample size of 
375 small businesses, or about a 9 to 1 ratio. We found that some of 
the companies that we researched lacked company data such as revenues 
and employee size, which precluded us from using those companies in our 
analysis based on SBAs criteria for small companies. Based on the 
industry classification codes from the North American Industry 
Classification System (NAICS), we found that about 12 percent of the 
small businesses analyzed are classified under the NAICS code for 
``navigational services to shipping'' companies. About 11 percent of 
the small businesses analyzed are classified under the NAICS code for 
``scenic and sightseeing transportation'' companies. The remaining 77 
percent of the small businesses analyzed represent a variety of 
different industry classification codes, each representing a small 
portion of the small businesses analyzed (for more details, see the 
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis available in the docket).
    To estimate the impact on small businesses in the initial year, we 
multiplied the first year costs for implementing NOAD (includes 
capital, installation, and submission costs) and installing AIS 
(includes capital, installation, and training costs) by the number of 
vessels that each small business owns. We divided this cost by the 
average annual revenues for each small business to obtain a proportion 
of the initial cost to annual revenues. This allows us to determine the 
initial cost impact of this proposed rule on small businesses. We also 
estimated the annual cost impact on small businesses using the same 
methodology explained above. Again, we multiplied the annual costs that 
each small business would incur for implementing NOAD (includes 
operation and maintenance and submission costs) and installing AIS 
(includes operation and maintenance costs) by the number of vessels 
that each small business owns. We divided this cost by the average 
annual revenues for each small business to obtain a proportion of the 
annual costs to annual revenues.
    Table 7 presents the initial and annual revenue impacts for the 
sample of 375 small companies that we researched with known average 
annual revenues.

  Table 7--Estimated Revenue Impact of the Proposed Rule for Small Businesses That Own U.S.-Flag SOLAS and Non-
                                                  SOLAS Vessels
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Initial                             Annual
                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Number of small  Percent of small   Number of small  Percent of small
    Percent impact on annual revenue        entities with     entities with     entities with     entities with
                                            known revenue     known revenue     known revenue     known revenue
                                                data              data              data              data
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0-3.....................................               357                95               375               100
>3-5....................................                10                 3                 0                 0
>5-10...................................                 7                 2                 0                 0
>10-20..................................                 1                 0                 0                 0
>20.....................................                 0                 0                 0                 0
                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................               375               100               375               100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As shown, the proposed rule would have a 3 percent or less impact 
on 95 percent of the small businesses that own vessels that would have 
to comply with both the NOAD and AIS portions of this proposed rule 
during the first year the rule is in effect. The proposed rule would 
have a 3 percent or less impact on 100 percent of the small businesses 
annually that we sampled. The data suggest this proposed rule would not 
have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities and 
we request comments from the public on whether they believe this 
finding is correct. For more information on small entities, refer to 
the Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (RFA) portion of the regulatory 
analysis in the docket under docket number USCG-2005-21869.
    The Coast Guard is interested in the impact of this rulemaking on 
small entities. If you are a small entity, we specifically request 
comments regarding the economic impact of this proposed rule on you.

[[Page 76310]]

C. 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 rulemaking so that they can better 
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If you 
think that this proposed rule would affect your small business, 
organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions 
concerning these provisions or options for compliance, please consult 
with the Coast Guard personnel listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section of this proposed rule. Note, the Coast Guard will not 
retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this 
rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
    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).

D. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule calls for the 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 follow. The estimate covers 
the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing sources of 
data, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and 
reviewing the collection.
    This proposed rule modifies two existing OMB-approved collections, 
1625-0100 (formerly 2115-0557), and 1625-0112. The request for approval 
of these Collections of Information are available in the docket where 
indicated under the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' 
section of this preamble.
    The summary of the revised 1625-0100 collection follows:
    Title: Advance Notice of Vessel Arrival and Departure.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0100.
    Summary of the Collection of Information: The Coast Guard requires 
pre-arrival notices from certain vessels entering a port or place in 
the United States. This proposed rule would increase the number of 
vessels required to submit a NOA and establishes a NOD requirement.
    Need for Information: To ensure port safety and security and to 
ensure the uninterrupted flow of commerce. To this end, the Coast Guard 
must modify its NOA regulations.
    Proposed Use of Information: This information is required to 
control vessel traffic, develop contingency plans, and enforce 
regulations.
    Description of the Respondents: Respondents are the owner, agent, 
master, operator, or person in charge of a vessel that arrives at or 
departs from a port or place in the United States.
    Number of Respondents: The existing OMB-approved number of 
respondents is 9,206. This proposed rule would increase that number by 
21,644. The total number of respondents would be 30,850.
    Frequency of Response: The existing OMB-approved number of 
responses is 78,538. This proposed rule would increase that number by 
78,584. The total number of responses would be 157,122.
    Burden of Response: The existing OMB-approved burden of response is 
approximately 2.5 hours. This proposed rule would decrease that number 
by 60 percent, due to the mandated use of electronic reporting. The 
estimated burden of response is now 1 hour.
    Estimate of Total Annual Burden: The existing OMB-approved total 
annual burden is 200,039 hours. This proposed rule would decrease that 
number by 42,917, due to the mandated use of electronic reporting. The 
estimated total annual burden would be 157,122 hours.
    The summary of the revised 1625-0112 collection follows:
    Title: Enhanced Maritime Domain Awareness via Electronic 
Transmission of Vessel Transit Data.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0112.
    Summary of the Collection of Information: The Coast Guard plans to 
collect, store, and analyze data transmitted by AIS to enhance maritime 
domain awareness (MDA). Awareness and threat knowledge are critical for 
securing the maritime domain and the key to preventing adverse events. 
Domain awareness enables the early identification of potential threats 
and enhances appropriate responses, including interdiction at an 
optimal distance with capable prevention forces.
    Need for Information: To ensure port safety and security and to 
ensure the uninterrupted flow of commerce. To this end, the Coast Guard 
must establish this new collection.
    Proposed Use of Information: This information collection, storage, 
and analysis would greatly expand the breadth and depth of the Coast 
Guard's MDA. This enhanced MDA would enable quicker, more efficient 
responses to marine casualties and improve the Coast Guard's ability to 
prevent and respond to potential terrorist threats. It would also 
contribute an essential aspect to the Coast Guard's COP. The COP is the 
Coast Guard's system for sharing operational data among those who need 
it to perform their missions.
    Description of the Respondents: Respondents are the operator or 
person in charge of a vessel that must carry AIS as mandated by the 
MTSA. The MTSA requires the following vessels carry AIS:
     A self-propelled commercial vessel of at least 65-feet in 
overall length.
     Vessels carrying more than a number of passengers for hire 
determined by the Secretary [herein, 50 or more passengers, or more 
than 12 for hire at speeds in excess of 30 knots].
     A towing vessel of more than 26 feet overall in length and 
600 horsepower.
     Any other vessel for which the Secretary decides that an 
automatic identification system is necessary for the safe navigation of 
the vessel [herein, certain dredges or floating plants or engaged in 
moving certain dangerous cargoes].
    Number of Respondents: The existing OMB-approved number of 
respondents is 450. This proposed rule would increase that number by 
17,442. The total number of respondents would be 17,892.
    Frequency of Response: The existing OMB-approved number of 
responses is 450. This proposed rule would increase that number by 
169,944. The total number of responses would be 170,394.
    Burden of Response: The estimated annual AIS-related burden of 
response is 1\1/2\ hour.
    Estimate of Total Annual Burden: The existing OMB-approved total 
annual burden is 150 hours. This proposed rule would increase that 
number by 18,522. The estimated total annual burden would be 18,672.
    As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 
3507(d)), we have submitted a copy of this proposed rule to the Office 
of Management and Budget (OMB) for its review of the collection of 
information.
    We ask for public comment on the collection of information to help 
us

[[Page 76311]]

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.

E. 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. We have analyzed this proposed rule 
under that Order and have determined, that to the extent States have a 
current requirement in effect for notices of vessel arrivals or 
departures to a State agency--for example, notices to pilot authorities 
for pilot services--we do not intend to preempt those requirements with 
this rule.
    However, we reserve our position with respect to preemption of any 
prospective new State rule or legal requirement for a notice of arrival 
or submission of information requirements that are similar to those set 
forth in this rule. The U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Locke, 
529 U.S. 89, 120 S.Ct. 1135 (2000), held that pursuant to title I of 
the Ports and Waterways Safety Act (PWSA) (33 U.S.C. 1221-1232), the 
authority for the NOAD portion of this proposed rule, the Coast Guard 
can preempt conflicting or similar State requirements on vessel 
operation. The Court held also that Congress had preempted the field of 
marine casualty reporting. Accordingly, based on the Supreme Court's 
holding in the Locke case, we believe that any prospective State 
requirement for a NOA or information gathering requirement directed at 
vessel owners or operators that is similar to that contained in this 
rule is inconsistent with the Federalism principles enunciated in that 
case and is preempted.
    Regarding the AIS portion of this proposed rule, 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), 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. In addition, under the authority of Title I of the PWSA 
(specifically 33 U.S.C. 1223) and the MTSA, this regulation will 
preempt any State action on the subject of AIS carriage requirements. 
(See Locke.) Our proposed AIS carriage requirements fall into the 
category of equipping of vessels. Because the States may not regulate 
within this category, preemption under Executive Order 13132 is not an 
issue for the AIS portion of this proposed rule.

F. 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.

G. Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not require a taking of private property 
or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, 
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected 
Property Rights. We note that on March 20, 2006, a challenge to our 
existing AIS regulations was dismissed by the United States District 
Court for the District of Columbia, MariTEL, Inc. v. Collins et al., 
422 F.Supp.2d 188 (D.D.C. 2006). In that case, MariTEL, Inc., alleged, 
in part, that our 2003 AIS final rule constituted a taking of its 
property--radio frequencies it purchased at a Federal Communications 
Commission (FCC) auction. The court concluded that our AIS equipment 
requirements were authorized by the FCC and that because our existing 
AIS regulations did not specify frequency requirements, our AIS final 
rule did not constitute a taking.

H. 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.

I. Protection of Children

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

J. Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule would require certain vessels to submit NOADs 
and to install and operate AIS. Some of these vessels may be owned by 
Indian tribes, but the 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.

K. 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. Although it is a ``significant 
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866, this rulemaking is not 
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, 
distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a 
significant energy action; therefore, it does not require a Statement 
of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.

L. Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards 
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, 
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why 
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or 
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management 
systems practices) that are developed or

[[Page 76312]]

adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies.
    The Coast Guard will use the following new voluntary consensus 
standard from the International Electrotechnical Commission: IEC 62287-
1, Maritime navigation and radiocommunication equipment and systems--
Class B shipborne equipment of the automatic identification system 
(AIS)--Part 1: Carrier-sense time division multiple access (CSTDMA) 
techniques, dated February 9, 2006 in our type-approval process.
    In addition, this proposed rule uses the following standards 
required to implement the AIS requirements of an international 
agreement, SOLAS:
    1. IMO Resolution A.917(22), Guidelines for the Onboard Operational 
Use of Shipborne Automatic Identification System (AIS), dated January 
25, 2002.
    2. IMO SN/Circ.236, Guidance on the Application of AIS Binary 
Applications, dated May 20, 2004.
    3. IMO SN/Circ.244, Guidance on the Use of the UN/LOCODE in the 
Destination Field in AIS Messages, dated December 15, 2004.
    4. IMO SN/Circ.245, Amendments to the Guidelines for the 
Installation of a Shipborne Automatic Identification System (AIS)(SN/
Circ.227), dated March 2, 2005.

M. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland 
Security Management Directive 5100.1 and Commandant Instruction 
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and 
have made a preliminary determination under the Instruction that this 
action is not likely to have a significant effect on the human 
environment. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this 
preliminary determination is available in the docket where indicated 
under the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' section of 
this preamble. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the 
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed 
rule.

List of Subjects

33 CFR Part 160

    Administrative practice and procedure, Harbors, Hazardous materials 
transportation, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Vessels, Waterways.

33 CFR Part 161

    Harbors, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Vessels, Waterways.

33 CFR Part 164

    Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Waterways.

33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes 
to amend 33 CFR parts 160, 161, 164, and 165 to read as follows:

PART 160--PORTS AND WATERWAYS SAFETY--GENERAL

Subpart C--Notification of Arrival and Departure, Hazardous 
Conditions, and Certain Dangerous Cargoes

    1. The authority citation for part 160 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1223, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. Subpart C is 
also issued under the authority of 33 U.S.C. 1225 and 46 U.S.C. 
3715.

    2. Revise the heading to subpart C to read as shown above.


Sec.  160.5  [Amended]

    3. In Sec.  160.5(d), remove the phrase ``Commanding Officers, 
Vessel Traffic Services'' and add, in its place, the term ``Vessel 
Traffic Services Director''.
    4. Revise Sec.  160.201 to read as follows:


Sec.  160.201  General.

    This subpart contains requirements and procedures for submitting a 
notice of arrival (NOA), a notice of departure (NOD), and a notice of 
hazardous condition. The sections in this subpart describe:
    (a) Applicability and exemptions from requirements in this subpart;
    (b) Required information in a NOA and a NOD;
    (c) Required updates to a NOA and a NOD;
    (d) Methods and times for submission of a NOA and a NOD and updates 
to a NOA and a NOD;
    (e) How to obtain a waiver; and
    (f) Requirements for submission of the notice of hazardous 
condition. Sec. Sec.  160.202 through 160.204 [Redesignated]
    5. Redesignate Sec.  160.202 as Sec.  160.203, Sec.  160.203 as 
Sec.  160.204, and Sec.  160.204 as Sec.  160.202, respectively.
    6. In redesignated Sec.  160.202, add definitions, in alphabetical 
order, for ``commercial service'', ``continental United States'', 
``disembark'', ``embark'', ``foreign vessel'', ``offshore supply 
vessel'', ``oil spill response vessel'', ``passenger vessel'', 
``recreational vessel'', and ``towing vessels'', and revise the 
introductory text to read as follows:


Sec.  160.202  Definitions.

    Terms in this subpart that are not defined in this section or in 
Sec.  160.3 have the same meaning as those terms in 46 U.S.C. 2101. As 
used in this subpart--
* * * * *
    Commercial service means any type of trade or business involving 
the transportation of goods or individuals, except service performed by 
a combatant vessel.
    Continental United States means the contiguous 48 states, Alaska, 
and the District of Columbia.
* * * * *
    Disembark means when a crewmember or a person in addition to the 
crew is detached from the vessel.
    Embark means when a crewmember or a person in addition to the crew 
joins the vessel.
    Foreign vessel means a vessel of foreign registry or operated under 
the authority of a country except the United States.
* * * * *
    Offshore supply vessel means a motor vessel of more than 15 gross 
tons but less than 500 gross tons as measured under 46 U.S.C. 14502, or 
an alternate tonnage measured under 46 U.S.C. 14302 as prescribed by 
the Secretary under 46 U.S.C. 14104 that regularly carries goods, 
supplies, individuals in addition to the crew, or equipment in support 
of exploration, exploitation, or production of offshore mineral or 
energy resources.
    Oil spill response vessel means a vessel that is designated in its 
certificate of inspection as such a vessel, or that is adapted to 
respond to a discharge of oil or a hazardous material.
* * * * *
    Passenger vessel means a vessel of at least 100 gross tons as 
measured under 46 U.S.C. 14502, or an alternate tonnage measured under 
46 U.S.C. 14302 as prescribed by the Secretary under 46 U.S.C. 14104--
    (1) Carrying more than 12 passengers, including at least one 
passenger for hire;
    (2) That is chartered and carrying more than 12 passengers; or
    (3) That is a submersible vessel carrying at least one passenger 
for hire.
* * * * *
    Recreational vessel means a vessel being manufactured or operated

[[Page 76313]]

primarily for pleasure; or leased, rented, or chartered to another for 
the latter's pleasure.
* * * * *
    Towing vessel means a commercial vessel engaged in or intending to 
engage in pulling, pushing, or hauling alongside, or any combination of 
pulling, pushing, or hauling alongside.
* * * * *
    7. In redesignated Sec.  160.203:
    a. Revise paragraph (a);
    b. Remove paragraph (b);
    c. Redesignate paragraphs (c) and (d) as paragraphs (b) and (c); 
and
    d. In redesignated paragraph (c), following the two places where 
the term ``NOA'' is used, add the phrase ``or NOD''.
    The revision reads as follows:


Sec.  160.203  Applicability.

    (a) This subpart applies to U.S. vessels in commercial service and 
all foreign vessels that are bound for or departing from ports or 
places of the United States.
* * * * *
    8. In redesignated Sec.  160.204, lift the suspension of paragraphs 
(d) and (e), and revise Sec.  160.204 to read as follows:


Sec.  160.204  Exemptions.

    (a) Except for reporting notice of hazardous conditions, the 
following vessels are exempt from requirements in this subpart:
    (1) A passenger or offshore supply vessel when employed in the 
exploration for or in the removal of oil, gas, or mineral resources on 
the continental shelf.
    (2) An oil spill response vessel (OSRV) when engaged in actual 
spill response operations or during spill response exercises.
    (3) A vessel required by 33 CFR 165.830 or 165.921 to report to the 
Inland River Vessel Movement Center (IRVMC).
    (4) The following vessels neither carrying certain dangerous cargo 
nor controlling another vessel carrying certain dangerous cargo:
    (i) A foreign vessel 300 gross tons or less not engaged in 
commercial service.
    (ii) A vessel operating exclusively within a single Captain of the 
Port Zone. Captain of the Port zones are defined in 33 CFR part 3.
    (iii) A U.S. towing vessel and a U.S. barge operating solely 
between ports or places of the continental United States.
    (iv) A public vessel.
    (v) Except for a tank vessel, a U.S. vessel operating solely 
between ports or places of the United States on the Great Lakes.
    (vi) A U.S. vessel 300 gross tons or less, engaged in commercial 
service not coming from a foreign port or place.
    (b) A vessel less than 500 gross tons need not submit the 
International Safety Management (ISM) Code Notice (Entry 7 in Table 
160.206 of Sec.  160.206).
    (c) A U.S. vessel need not submit the International Ship and Port 
Facility Security (ISPS) Code Notice information (Entry 8 in Table 
160.206 of Sec.  160.206).
    9. Add Sec.  160.205 to read as follows:


Sec.  160.205  Notices of arrival and departure.

    The owner, agent, master, operator, or person in charge of a vessel 
must submit notices of arrival and notices of departure consistent with 
the requirements in this subpart.
    10. In Sec.  160.206, lift the suspension of item (8) in table in 
paragraph (a) and revise Sec.  160.206 to read as follows:


Sec.  160.206  Information required in a NOA.

    (a) Information required. With the exceptions noted in paragraph 
(b) of this section, each NOA must contain all of the information items 
specified in Table 160.206. Vessel owners and operators should protect 
any personal information they gather in preparing notices for 
transmittal to the National Vessel Movement Center (NVMC) so as to 
prevent unauthorized disclosure of that information.

                                      Table 160.206--NOA Information Items
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Vessels neither carrying CDC     Vessels carrying CDC or
                Required information                     nor controlling another     controlling another vessel
                                                           vessel carrying CDC              carrying CDC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Vessel Information:
    (i) Name........................................                            X                             X
    (ii) Name of the registered owner...............                            X                             X
    (iii) Country of registry.......................                            X                             X
    (iv) Call sign..................................                            X                             X
    (v) International Maritime Organization (IMO)                               X                             X
     international number or, if vessel does not
     have an assigned IMO international number,
     substitute with official number................
    (vi) Name of the operator.......................                            X                             X
    (vii) Name of charterer.........................                            X                             X
    (viii) Name of classification society...........                            X                             X
    (ix) Maritime Mobile Service Identity (MMSI)                                X                             X
     number, if applicable; and.....................
    (x) Whether the vessel is 300 gross tons or less                            X                             X
     (yes or no)....................................
(2) Voyage Information:
    (i) Names of last five foreign ports or places                              X                             X
     visited........................................
    (ii) Dates of arrival and departure for last                                X                             X
     five foreign ports or places visited...........
    (iii) For the port or place of the United States                            X                             X
     to be visited, list the name of the receiving
     facility, the port or place, the city, and the
     state..........................................
    (iv) For the port or place of the United States                             X                             X
     to be visited, the estimated date and time of
     arrival........................................
    (v) For the port or place in the United States                              X                             X
     to be visited, the estimated date and time of
     departure......................................
    (vi) The location (port or place and country) or                            X                             X
     position (latitude and longitude or waterway
     and mile marker) of the vessel at the time of
     reporting......................................
    (vii) The name and telephone number of a 24-hour                            X                             X
     point of contact...............................
    (viii) Whether the vessel's voyage time is less                             X                             X
     than 24 hours (yes or no)......................
    (ix) Last Port of Call..........................                            X                             X
    (x) Dates of arrival and departure for last port                            X                             X
     or place visited; and..........................
    (xi) The estimated date and time of arrival to                              X                             X
     the entrance of the port, if applicable. List
     sea buoy, pilot station, or COLREGS demarcation
     line...........................................

[[Page 76314]]

 
(3) Cargo Information:
    (i) A general description of cargo, other than                              X                             X
     CDC, onboard the vessel (e.g., grain,
     container, oil, etc.)..........................
    (ii) Name of each CDC carried, including cargo    ............................                            X
     UN number, if applicable; and..................
    (iii) Amount of each CDC carried................  ............................                            X
(4) Information for each Crewmember Onboard:
    (i) Full name...................................                            X                             X
    (ii) Date of birth..............................                            X                             X
    (iii) Nationality...............................                            X                             X
    (iv) Passport* or mariner's document number                                 X                             X
     (type of identification and number)............
    (v) Passport country of issuance*; and..........                            X                             X
    (vi) Passport date of expiration*...............                            X                             X
    (vii) Position or duties on the vessel; and.....                            X                             X
    (viii) Where the crewmember embarked (list port                             X                             X
     or place and country)..........................
(5) Information for each Person Onboard in Addition
 to Crew:
    (i) Full name...................................                            X                             X
    (ii) Date of birth..............................                            X                             X
    (iii) Nationality...............................                            X                             X
    (iv) Passport number*...........................                            X                             X
    (v) Passport country of issuance*...............                            X                             X
    (vi) Passport date of expiration;* and..........                            X                             X
    (vii) Where the person embarked (list port or                               X                             X
     place and country).............................
(6) Operational condition of equipment required by                              X                             X
 33 CFR part 164 of this chapter (see note to
 table):
(7) International Safety Management (ISM) Code
 Notice:
    (i) The date of issuance for the company's                                  X                             X
     Document of Compliance certificate that covers
     the vessel.....................................
    (ii) The date of issuance for the vessel's                                  X                             X
     Safety Management Certificate; and.............
    (iii) The name of the Flag Administration, or                               X                             X
     the recognized organization(s) representing the
     vessel Flag Administration, that issued those
     certificates...................................
(8) International Ship and Port Facility Security
 Code (ISPS) Notice:
    (i) The date of issuance for the vessel's                                   X                             X
     International Ship Security Certificate (ISSC),
     if any.........................................
    (ii) Whether the ISSC, if any, is an initial                                X                             X
     Interim ISSC, subsequent and consecutive
     Interim ISSC, or final ISSC....................
    (iii) Declaration that the approved ship                                    X                             X
     security plan, if any, is being implemented....
    (iv) If a subsequent and consecutive Interim                                X                             X
     ISSC, the reasons therefore....................
    (v) The name and 24-hour contact information for                            X                             X
     the Company Security Officer; and..............
    (vi) The name of the Flag Administration, or the                            X                             X
     recognized security organization(s)
     representing the vessel Flag Administration
     that issued the ISSC...........................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Note to Table 160.206. For items with an asterisk (*), see 
paragraph (b) of this section. Submitting a response for item 6 does 
not serve as notice to the District Commander, Captain of the Port, or 
Vessel Traffic Center, under 33 CFR 164.53 that navigation equipment is 
not operating properly.
    (b) Exceptions. If a crewmember or person on board other than a 
crewmember is not required to carry a passport for travel, then 
passport information required in Table 160.206 by items (4)(iv) through 
(vi), and (5) (iv) through (vi), need not be provided for that person.
    11. Add Sec.  160.207 to read as follows:


Sec.  160.207  Information required in a NOD.

    (a) Information required. With the exceptions noted in paragraph 
(b) of this section, each NOD must contain all of the information items 
specified in Table 160.207. Vessel owners and operators should protect 
any personal information they gather in preparing notices for 
transmittal to the NVMC so as to prevent unauthorized disclosure of 
that information.

                                      Table 160.207--NOD Information Items
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Vessels neither carrying CDC   Vessels either carrying CDC
                Required information                     nor controlling another       or  controlling another
                                                           vessel carrying CDC          vessel  carrying CDC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Vessel Information:
    (i) Name........................................                            X                             X
    (ii) Name of the registered owner...............                            X                             X

[[Page 76315]]

 
    (iii) Country of registry.......................                            X                             X
    (iv) Call sign..................................                            X                             X
    (v) International Maritime Organization (IMO)                               X                             X
     international number or, if vessel does not
     have an assigned IMO international number,
     substitute with official number................
    (vi) Name of the operator.......................                            X                             X
    (vii) Name of charterer.........................                            X                             X
    (viii) Name of classification society; and......                            X                             X
    (ix) Maritime Mobile Service Identity (MMSI)                                X                             X
     number.........................................
(2) Voyage Information:
    (i) The name of departing port or place of the                              X                             X
     United States, the estimated date and time of
     departure......................................
    (ii) Next port or place of call (including                                  X                             X
     foreign), the estimated date and time of
     arrival; and...................................
    (iii) The name and telephone number of a 24-hour                            X                             X
     point of contact...............................
(3) Cargo Information:
    (i) A general description of cargo, other than                              X                             X
     CDC, onboard the vessel (e.g., grain,
     container, oil, etc.)..........................
    (ii) Name of each CDC carried, including cargo    ............................                            X
     UN number, if applicable; and..................
    (iii) Amount of each CDC carried................  ............................                            X
(4) Information for each Crewmember Onboard:
    (i) Full name...................................                            X                             X
    (ii) Date of birth..............................                            X                             X
    (iii) Nationality...............................                            X                             X
    (iv) Passport* or mariner's document number                                 X                             X
     (type of identification and number)............
    (v) Passport country of issuance*...............                            X                             X
    (vi) Passport date of expiration*...............                            X                             X
    (vii) Position or duties on the vessel; and.....                            X                             X
    (viii) Where the crewmember embarked (list port                             X                             X
     or place and country)..........................
(5) Information for each Person Onboard in Addition
 to Crew:
    (i) Full name...................................                            X                             X
    (ii) Date of birth..............................                            X                             X
    (iii) Nationality...............................                            X                             X
    (iv) Passport number*...........................                            X                             X
    (v) Passport country of issuance*...............                            X                             X
    (vi) Passport date of expiration* and...........                            X                             X
    (vii) Where the person embarked (list port or                               X                             X
     place and country).............................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Note to Table 160.207. For items with an asterisk (*), see 
paragraph (b) of this section.
    (b) Exceptions. If a crewmember or person on board other than a 
crewmember is not required to carry a passport for travel, then 
passport information required in Table 160.207 by items (4)(iv) through 
(vi), and (5) (iv) through (vi), need not be provided for that person.
    12. In Sec.  160.208, revise the section heading and paragraphs (a) 
and (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  160.208   Updates to a submitted NOA or NOD.

    (a) Unless otherwise specified in this section, whenever events 
cause submitted NOA and NOD information to become inaccurate, vessels 
must submit an update within the times required in Sec. Sec.  160.212 
and 160.213.
* * * * *
    (c) When reporting updates, revise and resubmit the NOA or NOD.
    13. In Sec.  160.210, lift the suspensions on the last sentence of 
paragraph (b), the last sentence of paragraph (c), and paragraph (d); 
and revise Sec.  160.210 to read as follows:


Sec.  160.210   Methods for submitting a NOA or a NOD.

    (a) National Vessel Movement Center (NVMC). Vessels must submit NOA 
and NOD information required by Sec. Sec.  160.206 and 160.207 to the 
NVMC, by electronic Notice of Arrival and Departure (eNOAD) using 
methods specified at: http://www.nvmc.uscg.gov.
    (b) Saint Lawrence Seaway. Those vessels transiting the Saint 
Lawrence Seaway inbound, bound for a port or place in the United 
States, may meet the submission requirements of paragraph (a) of this 
section by submitting the required information to the Saint Lawrence 
Seaway Development Corporation and the Saint Lawrence Seaway Management 
Corporation of Canada via eNOAD using methods specified at: http://www.nvmc.uscg.gov.
    14. In Sec.  160.212, lift the suspension of paragraph (c), and 
revise Sec.  160.212 to read as follows:


Sec.  160.212   When to submit a NOA.

    (a) Submission of a NOA. (1) Except as set out in paragraph (a)(2) 
and (a)(3) of this section, all vessels must submit NOAs within the 
times required in paragraph (a)(4) of this section.
    (2) Towing vessels, when in control of a vessel carrying CDC and 
operating solely between ports or places of the continental United 
States, must submit a NOA before departure but at least 12

[[Page 76316]]

hours before arriving at the port or place of destination.
    (3) U.S. vessels 300 gross tons or less, arriving from a foreign 
port or place, and whose voyage time is less than 24 hours must submit 
a NOA at least 60 minutes before departure from the foreign port or 
place.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (4) If your voyage time is--         Then you must submit a NOA--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) 96-hours or more; or.....  At least 96-hours before arriving at the
                                port or place of destination; or
(ii) Less than 96-hours......  Before departure but at least 24-hours
                                before arriving at the port or place of
                                destination.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Submission of updates to a NOA. (1) Except as set out in 
paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) of this section, vessels must submit 
updates in NOA information within the times required in paragraph 
(b)(4) of this section.
    (2) Towing vessels, when in control of a vessel carrying CDC and 
operating solely between ports or places in the continental United 
States, must submit updates to a NOA as soon as practicable but at 
least 6 hours before entering the port or place of destination.
    (3) U.S. vessels 300 gross tons or less, arriving from a foreign 
port or place, whose voyage time is--
    (i) Less than 24 hours but greater than 6 hours, must submit 
updates to a NOA as soon as practicable, but at least 6 hours before 
entering the port or place of destination.
    (ii) Less than or equal to 6 hours, must submit updates to a NOA as 
soon as practicable, but at least 60 minutes before departure from the 
foreign port or place.
    (4) Times for submitting updates to NOAs are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
If your remaining voyage time
             is--               Then you must submit updates to a NOA--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) 96-hours or more.........  As soon as practicable, but at least 24-
                                hours before arriving at the port or
                                place of destination.
(ii) Less than 96-hours but    As soon as practicable, but at least 24-
 not less than 24-hours;        hours before arriving at the port or
 or..........                   place of destination; or
(iii) Less than 24-            As soon as practicable, but at least 12-
 hours.......                   hours before arriving at the port or
                                place of destination.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    15. Add Sec.  160.213 to read as follows:


Sec.  160.213   When to submit a NOD.

    (a) Submission of a NOD. All vessels must submit a NOD no later 
than 60 minutes before departure.
    (b) Submission of updates to a NOD. Vessels must submit updates in 
NOD information as soon as practicable but no later than 12 hours after 
departure.


Sec.  160.215   [Redesignated as Sec.  160.216]

    16. Redesignate Sec.  160.215 as Sec.  160.216, and add a new Sec.  
160.215 to read as follows:


Sec.  160.215   Force majeure.

    When a vessel is bound for a port or place of the United States 
under force majeure, it must comply with the requirements in this 
section, but not other sections of this subpart. The vessel must report 
the following information to the nearest Captain of the Port as soon as 
practicable:
    (a) The vessel master's intentions;
    (b) Any hazardous conditions as defined in Sec.  160.202; and
    (c) If the vessel is carrying certain dangerous cargo or 
controlling a vessel carrying certain dangerous cargo, the amount and 
name of each CDC carried, including cargo UN number if applicable.

PART 161--VESSEL TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

    17. The authority citation for part 161 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1223, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 70114, 70117; Public 
Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.1.

    18. In Sec.  161.2, revise the term ``VTS User'' to read as 
follows:


Sec.  161.2   Definitions.

* * * * *
    VTS User means a vessel, or an owner, operator, charterer, master, 
or person directing the movement of a vessel within a VTS area, that 
is:
    (1) Subject to the Vessel Bridge-to-Bridge Radiotelephone Act;
    (2) Required to participate in a VMRS; or
    (3) Equipped with a Coast Guard type-approved Automatic 
Identification System (AIS).
* * * * *
    19. In Sec.  161.5, revise paragraph (b) to read as follows:


Sec.  161.5   Deviations from the rules.

* * * * *
    (b) Requests to deviate from any provision in this part due to 
circumstances that develop during a transit or immediately preceding a 
transit may be made to the appropriate Vessel Traffic Center (VTC). 
Requests to deviate must be made as far in advance as practicable. Upon 
receipt of the request, the VTC may authorize a deviation if it is 
determined that, based on vessel handling characteristics, traffic 
density, radar contacts, environmental conditions and other relevant 
information, such a deviation provides a level of safety equivalent to 
that provided by the required measure or is a maneuver considered 
necessary for safe navigation under the circumstances.


Sec.  161.12   [Amended]

    20. In Sec.  161.12(d)(5), remove the section reference ``Sec.  
160.204'' and add, in its place, the section reference ``Sec.  
160.202''.
    21. In Sec.  161.19, revise paragraph (f) to read as follows:


Sec.  161.19   Sailing Plan

* * * * *
    (f) Dangerous cargo on board or in its tow, as defined in Sec.  
160.202 of this chapter.

PART 164--NAVIGATION SAFETY REGULATIONS

    22. The authority citation for part 164 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1222(5), 1223, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 2103, 3703; 
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. Sec. 164.13 
also issued under 46 U.S.C. 8502. Sec. 164.46 also issued under 46 
U.S.C. 70114 and sec. 102 of Public Law 107-295. Sec. 164.61 also 
issued under 46 U.S.C. 6101.

    23. In Sec.  164.02, revise the introductory text of paragraph (a) 
to read as follows:


Sec.  164.02  Applicability exception for foreign vessels.

    (a) Except for Sec.  164.46(c), none of the requirements of this 
part apply to vessels that:
* * * * *

[[Page 76317]]

    24. Revise Sec.  164.03 to read as follows:


Sec.  164.03   Incorporation by reference.

    (a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this part 
with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register under 5 
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any edition other than that 
specified in this section, the Coast Guard must publish notice of 
change in the Federal Register and the material must be available to 
the public. All approved material is available for inspection at the 
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For more 
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html. Also, it is available for inspection at the Coast 
Guard, Office of Navigation Systems (CG-5413), 2100 Second Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20593-0001, and is available from the sources listed 
below.
    (b) American Petroleum Institute (API), 1220 L Street, NW., 
Washington, DC 20005.
    (1) API Specification 9A, Specification for Wire Rope, Section 3, 
Properties and Tests for Wire and Wire Rope, May 28, 1984, IBR approved 
for Sec.  164.74.
    (2) [Reserved].
    (c) American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), 100 Bar 
Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.
    (1) ASTM D4268-93, Standard Test Method for Testing Fiber Ropes, 
IBR approved for Sec.  164.74.
    (2) [Reserved].
    (d) Cordage Institute, 350 Lincoln Street, Hingham, MA 02043.
    (1) CIA-3, Standard Test Methods for Fiber Roper Including Standard 
Terminations, Revised, June 1980, IBR approved for 164.74.
    (2) [Reserved].
    (e) International Maritime Organization (IMO), 4 Albert Embankment, 
London SE1 7SR, U.K.
    (1) IMO Resolution A342(IX), Recommendation on Performance 
Standards for Automatic Pilots, November 12, 1975, IBR approved for 
Sec.  164.13.
    (2) IMO Resolution A.917(22), Guidelines for the Onboard 
Operational Use of Shipborne Automatic Identification System (AIS), 
January 25, 2002, IBR approved for Sec.  164.46.
    (3) Resolution MSC.74(69), Annex 3, Recommendation on Performance 
Standards for a Universal Shipborne Automatic Identification System 
(AIS), May 12, 1998, IBR approved for Sec.  164.46.
    (4) SN/Circ. 227, Guidelines for the Installation of a Shipborne 
Automatic Identification System (AIS), January 6, 2003, IBR approved 
for Sec.  164.46.
    (5) SN/Circ.244, Guidance on the Use of the UN/LOCODE in the 
Destination Field in AIS Messages, December 15, 2004, IBR approved for 
Sec.  164.46.
    (6) SN/Circ.245, Amendments to the Guidelines for the Installation 
of a Shipborne Automatic Identification System (AIS)(SN/Circ.227), 
March 2, 2005, IBR approved for Sec.  164.46.
    (7) SOLAS, International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 
1974, and 1988 Protocol relating thereto, 2000 Amendments, effective 
January and July 2002, (SOLAS 2000 Amendments), IBR approved for Sec.  
164.46.
    (8) Conference resolution 1, Adoption of amendments to the Annex to 
the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, and 
amendments to Chapter V of SOLAS 1974, adopted on December 12, 2002, 
IBR approved for Sec.  164.46.
    (9) SN/Circ.236, Guidance on the Application of AIS Binary 
Applications, May 20, 2004, IBR approved for Sec.  164.46.
    (f) Radio Technical Commission for Maritime Services (RTCM), 655 
Fifteenth Street, NW., Suite 300, Washington, DC 20005.
    (1) RTCM Paper 12-78/DO-100, Minimum Performance Standards, Loran C 
Receiving Equipment, 1977, IBR approved for Sec.  164.41.
    (2) RTCM Paper 71-95/SC112-STD, RTCM Recommended Standards for 
Marine Radar Equipment Installed on Ships of Less Than 300 Tons Gross 
Tonnage, Version 1.1, October 10, 1995, IBR approved for Sec.  164.72.
    (3) RTCM Paper 191-93/SC112-X, RTCM Recommended Standards for 
Maritime Radar Equipment Installed on Ships of 300 Tons Gross Tonnage 
and Upwards, Version 1.2, December 20, 1993, IBR approved for Sec.  
164.72.


Sec.  164.43   [Removed]

    25. Remove Sec.  164.43.
    26. Revise Sec.  164.46 to read as follows:


Sec.  164.46   Automatic Identification System.

    (a) Definitions. As used in this section--
    Automatic Identification Systems or AIS means a maritime navigation 
safety communications system standardized by the International 
Telecommunication Union (ITU), adopted by the International Maritime 
Organization (IMO), that--
    (1) Provides vessel information, including the vessel's identity, 
type, position, course, speed, navigational status and other safety-
related information automatically to appropriately equipped shore 
stations, other ships, and aircraft;
    (2) Receives automatically such information from similarly fitted 
ships; monitors and tracks ships; and
    (3) Exchanges data with shore-based facilities.
    Gross tonnage means tonnage as defined under the International 
Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969.
    International voyage means a voyage from a country to which the 
present International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 
1974 applies to a port outside such country, or conversely.
    Properly installed, operational means an Automatic Identification 
System (AIS) that is installed and operated using the guidelines set 
forth by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) Safety of 
Navigation Circulars (SN/Circ.) 227, 236, 244, and 245, and Resolution 
A.917(22)(Incorporated by reference, see Sec.  164.03).
    (b) AIS carriage. The following vessels must have onboard a 
properly installed, operational, Coast Guard type-approved Automatic 
Identification System (AIS):
    (1) A self-propelled vessel of 65 feet or more in length, engaged 
in commercial service;
    (2) A towing vessel of 26 feet or more in length and more than 600 
horsepower, engaged in commercial towing;
    (3) A self-propelled vessel carrying 50 or more passengers, engaged 
in commercial service;
    (4) A vessel carrying more than 12 passengers for hire and capable 
of speeds in excess of 30 knots;
    (5) A dredge or floating plant engaged in or near a commercial 
channel or shipping fairway in operations likely to restrict or affect 
navigation of other vessels except for an unmanned or intermittently 
manned floating plant under the control of a dredge; and
    (6) A self-propelled vessel carrying or engaged in the movement of 
certain dangerous cargoes as defined in Sec.  160.202 of this 
subchapter.

    Note to paragraph (b): Except for those vessels denoted in 
paragraph (c) of this section, use of Coast Guard type-approved AIS 
Class B is permissible, however, not well-suited, on vessels that 
are highly maneuverable, navigate at high speed, or routinely 
operate on or near very congested waterways or in close-quarter 
situations with other AIS equipped vessels.

    (c) SOLAS provisions. The following self-propelled vessels must 
comply with International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 
as amended, Chapter V, regulation 19.2.1.6, 19.2.4 (AIS Class A), and 
19.2.3.5 or 19.2.5.1 as applicable (Incorporated by reference, see 
Sec.  164.03):

[[Page 76318]]

    (1) A vessel of 500 gross tonnage or more;
    (2) A vessel of 300 gross tonnage or more, on an international 
voyage; and
    (3) A vessel of 150 gross tonnage or more, when carrying more than 
12 passengers on an international voyage.
    (d) Operations. The requirements in this paragraph are applicable 
to any vessel equipped with AIS.
    (1) Use of AIS does not relieve the vessel of the requirements to 
sound whistle signals or display lights or shapes in accordance with 
the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 
(72 COLREGS), 28 U.S.T. 3459, T.I.A.S. 8587, or Inland Navigation 
Rules, 33 U.S.C. 2001 through 2073; nor of the radio requirements of 
the Vessel Bridge-to-Bridge Radiotelephone Act, 33 U.S.C. 1201-1208, 
part 26 of this chapter, and 47 CFR part 80.
    (2) AIS must be maintained in effective operating conditions which 
includes the:
    (i) Ability to reinitialize the AIS should the need arise (this 
could require access and knowledge of the AIS power source and 
password);
    (ii) Ability to access AIS information from the primary conning 
position of the vessel;
    (iii) Accurate broadcast of a properly assigned Maritime Mobile 
Service Identity (MMSI) number;
    (iv) Accurate input and upkeep of all AIS data and system updates; 
and
    (v) Continual operation of AIS, and its associated devices (e.g., 
GPS, gyro, converters), at all times the vessel is underway, at anchor, 
or moored in or near a commercial channel or shipping fairway in 
operations likely to restrict or affect navigation of other vessels, 
except--
    (A) When use of AIS would compromise the safety or security of the 
vessel or a security incident is imminent.
    (B) The AIS should be returned to continuous operation as soon as 
the compromise has been mitigated or the security incident has passed. 
At that time, those vessels denoted in paragraph (b), must report to 
the nearest U.S. Captain of the Port or Vessel Traffic Center, and 
record in the ship's official log, the AIS operational interruption and 
the reason for the interruption.
    (3) AIS messaging must be conducted in English and solely to 
exchange or communicate navigation safety information (for example, 
SECURITE). Although not prohibited, it should not be relied upon as the 
primary means for broadcasting distress or urgent communications (for 
example, MAYDAY or PAN PAN). (47 CFR 80.1109, Distress, urgency, and 
safety communications).

    Note to paragraph (d): AIS devices must be able to broadcast 
vessel position, course, and speed, and may require the input of an 
external positioning device (e.g., DGPS) to do so. Although of great 
benefit, the integration of existing, or installation of, other 
external devices or displays (e.g., transmitting heading device, 
gyro, rate of turn indicator, ECDIS/ECS, and radar) is highly 
recommended but is not currently required except as denoted in Sec.  
164.46(c).

    (e) Watchkeeping. AIS is primarily intended for use of the master 
or person in charge of the vessel, or the person designated by the 
master or person in charge to pilot or direct the movement of the 
vessel, who must maintain a periodic watch for AIS information.
    (f) Portable AIS. The use of a portable AIS is permissible only to 
the extent that electromagnetic interference does not affect the proper 
function of existing navigation and communication equipment on board 
and such that only one AIS unit may be in operation at any one time.
    (g) Pilot Port. The AIS Pilot Port, on any vessel subject to 
pilotage, must be readily available and easily accessible from the 
primary conning position of the vessel and within at least 3 feet of a 
120-volt 50/60 Hz AC power receptacle.
    (h) Exceptions. Only those vessels that operate solely within a 
very confined area (e.g., less than a one nautical-mile radius, 
shipyard, fleeting area), or on short and fixed schedules (e.g., a 
bank-to-bank river ferry service), or that otherwise are not likely to 
encounter another AIS equipped vessel, may request a yearly deviation 
from this section as set forth in Sec.  164.55.
    (i) Implementation date. Those vessels identified in paragraph (b) 
of this section that were not previously subject to AIS carriage must 
install AIS no later than [date of the first day of the seventh month 
after publication of the final rule to be inserted].


Sec.  164.53   [Amended]

    27. In Sec.  164.53(b), following the word ``vessel's'', add the 
phrase ``automatic identification system (AIS),''.

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

    28. The authority citation for part 165 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 
1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland 
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.


Sec.  165.1704   [Amended]

    29. In Sec.  165.1704, in paragraph (c)(4), following the 
punctuation mark ``;'', add the word ``and''; in paragraph (c)(5), 
following the term ``6 knots'', remove ``; and'' and add, in their 
place, the punctuation mark ``.''; and remove paragraph (c)(6).

    Dated: December 2, 2008.
Thad W. Allen,
Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commandant.
[FR Doc. E8-29698 Filed 12-11-08; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P