[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 182 (Wednesday, September 19, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47284-47293]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-20374]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 151

[Docket No. USCG-2018-0245]
RIN 1625-AC45


Ballast Water Management--Annual Reporting Requirement

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is eliminating the requirement for certain 
vessels that operate on voyages exclusively within a single Captain of 
the Port Zone to submit an Annual Ballast Water Summary Report for 
calendar year 2018. We view this current reporting requirement as 
unnecessary for us to analyze and understand ballast water management 
practices. This final rule will reduce the administrative burden on 
this regulated population of U.S. non-recreational vessels equipped 
with ballast tanks.

DATES: This final rule is effective October 1, 2018.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being 
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2018-0245 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open 
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about this document 
call or email Mr. John Morris, Program Manager, Environmental Standards 
Division, Coast Guard; telephone 202-372-1402, email 
environmental_standards@uscg.mil.

[[Page 47285]]


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents for Preamble

I. Abbreviations
II. Basis and Purpose, and Regulatory History
    A. Legal Authority
    B. Regulatory History
    C. Purpose of the Rule
III. Discussion of Comments
IV. Discussion of the Rule
V. Regulatory Analyses
    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

I. Abbreviations

ANS Aquatic nuisance species
BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics
BWM Ballast water management
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COI Collection of Information
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
ICR Information Collection Request
NANPCA Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 
1990
NBIC National Ballast Information Clearinghouse
NISA National Invasive Species Act of 1996
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
OMB Office of Management and Budget
Pub. L. Public Law
RA Regulatory analysis
REC Record of Environmental Consideration
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Basis and Purpose, and Regulatory History

    In this section we identify our statutory authority for this rule, 
the regulatory history of this rulemaking and the regulations we are 
amending, this rule's effective date, and the problem we intend this 
rule to address.

A. Legal Authority

    The Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 
1990 (NANPCA, Pub. L. 101-646), as amended by the National Invasive 
Species Act of 1996 (NISA, Pub. L. 104-332), requires the Secretary of 
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to ensure, to the maximum 
extent practicable, that aquatic nuisance species (ANS) are not 
discharged into waters of the United States from vessels (16 U.S.C. 
4701 et seq.). These statutes also direct the Secretary to issue 
regulations and collect records regarding vessel ballasting practices 
as a means for determining vessel compliance with the ballast water 
management (BWM) program (16 U.S.C. 4711(c) and (f)) and they authorize 
the Secretary to revise such regulations, as necessary, on the basis of 
best scientific information, and in accordance with criteria developed 
by the Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force (ANS Task Force) (16 U.S.C. 
4711(e)). The Secretary has delegated the regulatory functions and 
authorities in 16 U.S.C. 4711 to the Commandant of the Coast Guard 
(Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1 (II)(57)).

B. Regulatory History

    On May 9, 2018, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPRM) (83 FR 21214) in the Federal Register. In the NPRM, 
we proposed to amend our regulations on ballast water management by 
eliminating the requirement for vessels operating on voyages 
exclusively within a single Captain of the Port (COTP) Zone to submit 
an Annual Ballast Water Summary Report for calendar year 2018. Ten 
individuals or organizations submitted comments relevant to the NPRM 
during the comment period that ended June 9, 2018.
    Coast Guard regulations regarding BWM are located in 33 CFR part 
151, subparts C (Sec. Sec.  151.1500 through 151.1518) and D 
(Sec. Sec.  151.2000 through 151.2080). The existing regulations we are 
amending, Sec. Sec.  151.2015 and 151.2060, were issued in 2015 and 
concern BWM reporting and recordkeeping requirements. See ``Ballast 
Water Management Reporting and Recordkeeping'' final rule (80 FR 73105, 
Nov. 24, 2015). We noted in the NPRM that we received recommendations 
to issue a rule like the one we proposed in the NPRM. These three 
recommendations were in response to our June 8, 2017 (82 FR 26632), 
request to the public to identify rules that should be repealed, 
replaced, or modified to alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See items -0102, -0143, and -0147 in docket USCG-2017-0480, 
Evaluation of Existing Coast Guard Regulations and Collections of 
Information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (d)(3), the Coast Guard is 
making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the 
Federal Register. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), agencies may make a rule 
effective less than 30 days after publication if the rule is ``a 
substantive rule which grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a 
restriction.'' This rule relieves a restriction by allowing vessels 
operating on voyages exclusively within a single COTP Zone to do so 
without having to file an Annual Ballast Water Summary Report for 2018. 
Therefore, 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) allows us to make this rule effective 
less than 30 days after the rule is published. Moreover, under 5 U.S.C. 
553(d)(3), agencies may make a rule effective less than 30 days after 
publication if the agency finds good cause for dispensing with the 
delayed effective date requirement. In this instance, it would be 
unnecessary for the Coast Guard to wait to make the rule effective 30 
days after publication. The October 1, 2018 effective date makes it 
clear that as of that date vessels that operate on voyages exclusively 
within a single COTP Zone no longer need to obtain or retain 
information that would have been required for the Annual Ballast Water 
Summary Report for calendar year 2018. Also, it would be contrary to 
public interest to continue to impose a requirement into the month of 
October when the requirement to report those data in March 2019 has 
been removed.

C. Purpose of the Rule

    The purpose of this rule is to remove an unnecessary burden. The 
Coast Guard determined that the annual reporting requirement in 33 CFR 
151.2060(e) for vessels operating in a single Captain of the Port 
(COTP) Zone is unnecessary for us to analyze and understand ballast 
water management practices. As stated in the NPRM, the Coast Guard 
reviewed the 2016 annual reports and concluded that the reports do not 
contribute to the quality and breadth of BWM data as originally 
intended because the current annual reporting data fields are too 
simplistic to capture vessel movements and ballasting operations in the 
necessary level of detail. (83 FR 21214, 21216) Our amendments to 33 
CFR 151.2015 and 151.2060 are in accordance with 16 U.S.C. 4711(e), 
which authorizes the Secretary to revise such regulations, as 
necessary, on the basis of best scientific information, and in 
accordance with criteria developed by the ANS Task Force.
    The 2015 final rule established a 3-year requirement starting in 
2016 for the master, owner, operator, agent, or person in charge of 
certain vessels with ballast tanks to submit an annual report of their 
BWM practices. The requirement applies to U.S. non-recreational vessels 
that operate on voyages exclusively between ports or places within a 
single COTP Zone. The annual reports contain information, specified in 
Sec.  151.2060(f), about the vessel, the number of ballast tanks on

[[Page 47286]]

board, total ballast water capacity, and a record of ballast water 
loadings and discharges. The reports are submitted to the National 
Ballast Information Clearinghouse (NBIC).
    Under current regulations, the annual report for calendar year 2018 
is due on March 31, 2019. This rule will eliminate the annual reporting 
requirement in Sec.  151.2060(e) before the 2018 report is due.

III. Discussion of Comments

    The Coast Guard received 11 public submissions in response to the 
NPRM, 10 of which were germane to the proposed rule. Of those 10 
submissions, 7 supported the proposed rule and 3 opposed it. The Coast 
Guard appreciates these commenters taking the time to submit comments.
    In the following discussion, we summarize the reasons or 
information some commenters gave in support of their position or 
recommendation. After each summary, we state our response.
    Most of the seven commenters who wrote in support of the rule 
tended not to provide detailed reasons for their support. They said 
that the annual report had no value or was unnecessary and burdensome, 
that vessels operating in a limited geographic area pose a low risk of 
introducing ANS, or simply indicated their support for the rule as 
proposed. One commenter pointed out that the annual reports do not have 
a field to indicate if the vessel is using ballast water from a U.S. 
public water system. The Coast Guard is removing the reporting 
requirement because the annual reports did not provide data to help the 
Coast Guard determine whether vessels that operate solely in a single 
COTP Zone should be subject to the same or similar BWM regulations as 
those applicable to vessels operating in multiple COTP Zones.
    One commenter who opposed the proposed rule stated that, without 
information, there is no way to determine any adverse or advantageous 
results and that the annual reports should continue so we can be 
certain of no ill effects. We have received and reviewed annual reports 
for 2016 and 2017 and have concluded that they do not contribute to the 
quality and breadth of BWM data as we originally intended. The 
objective of our annual reporting requirement was to gather sufficient 
data--without imposing an undue burden on vessels that were otherwise 
not required to report--to determine whether vessels that operate 
solely in a single COTP Zone should be subject to the same or similar 
BWM regulations as those applicable to vessels operating in multiple 
COTP Zones.\2\ We have concluded that the annual reports do not 
effectively contribute to the quality and breadth of BWM data to the 
extent necessary for us to make the determination, including 
determining whether there are any ill effects. The information called 
for in the report is a simplistic summary of discharges rather than 
detailed information on the volume, number, and location of discharges. 
This level of detail is insufficient to determine whether this 
population of vessels presents a threat of spreading ANS and, as 
explained later in this document, we are unable to improve the 
reporting fields before the reporting requirement expires. Accordingly, 
we are issuing this final rule to relieve an unnecessary burden by 
eliminating the annual report requirement for calendar year 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ From the preamble of the 2015 final rule, 80 FR 73105, 
73106, November 24, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This same commenter suggested that the staff resources necessary to 
remove the annual reporting requirement for 2018 is sharply higher than 
the total savings we estimated for this final rule in the NPRM. We 
disagree with the premise that this deregulatory effort was not worth 
doing. The Coast Guard received multiple requests from the public to 
remove this reporting requirement. This rule will not require 
additional Coast Guard resources to implement and will be budget 
neutral. Executive Order 12866 calls for agencies not to impose 
unreasonable costs on society. Having concluded the annual reporting 
requirement is an unnecessary burden, it would be unreasonable to 
impose its cost on those required to comply with 33 CFR 151.2060(e).
    A public interest group that focuses on Hawaii suggested that the 
Coast Guard revise the reporting form instead of eliminating the 
reporting requirement if the requirement does not provide necessary 
information or, alternatively, identify a different way to assess risk 
and mitigation measures. Although we have described weaknesses in the 
annual reports, the Coast Guard has not identified revisions to the 
reporting form that would effectively contribute to the quality and 
breadth of existing BWM data and could be implemented in time for the 
final reporting deadline. The reporting requirement itself would expire 
before we could identify better reporting parameters and implement them 
in regulation. In that situation, it is important to remove an 
unnecessary burden in a timely manner before the affected population 
has to submit its 2018 annual reports.
    The Coast Guard will consider future improvements to reporting 
requirements and forms. The Coast Guard's investment in ballast water 
management research and data collection is significant. There are 
currently multiple existing sources of information that effectively 
contribute to the quality and breadth of BWM data. The Coast Guard, in 
partnership with other federal agencies, has coordinated a shared 
approach to ballast water management and data collection.
    As stated in the NPRM, the annual reporting requirement failed to 
meet the objective, which was to serve as a minimally burdensome method 
of gathering data to help the Coast Guard determine whether vessels 
that operate solely in a single COTP zone should be subject to the same 
or similar BWM regulations as those applying to vessels operating in 
multiple COTP zones. A discussion of the objective can be found in the 
preamble of the 2015 final rule (80 FR 73105, 73106). The 2016 and 2017 
annual reports do not contribute to the quality and breadth of BWM 
data, nor do they contribute to a better understanding of patterns of 
ballast water management and discharge, including in Hawaii and the 
Honolulu COTP Zone.
    This same public interest group stated that the exemption for 
vessels traveling within a single COTP Zone from ballast water 
management and annual reporting requirements may make some sense for 
some parts of the United States, but not for the Honolulu COTP Zone, 
which includes many islands, some separated by thousands of miles. This 
group stated that the areas of ocean between each of these islands 
serve as barriers that result in unique marine communities for each of 
the islands, yet ballast water and vessel biofouling provide species 
the opportunity to move thousands of miles to new areas within the COTP 
Zone. It also stated that it is not clear whether the unique and non-
contiguous nature of the Honolulu COTP Zone was considered during the 
National Environmental Policy Act review or in the drafting of the 
proposed rule. The commenter believed that the Coast Guard should 
provide an analysis of the proposed rule's impact on the vast and 
diverse ecologies of the Honolulu COTP Zone.
    The public interest group's comment begins by referencing two 
separate issues. One issue is the requirement to conduct ballast water 
management. The other issue is the requirement to submit ballast water 
annual reports.
    In our NPRM, we did not propose to amend any ballast water 
management requirements, and this final rule does

[[Page 47287]]

not relieve ship owners and operators of any existing mandatory ballast 
water management practices. As we plan to do with other comments not 
directed at the annual reporting requirement, we will take this comment 
into consideration for possible future action. However, we did not 
revise this final rule in response to it, because this rulemaking is 
narrowly focused on removing an annual reporting requirement that the 
Coast Guard has concluded does not provide useful information. The 
reporting requirement was intended to obtain data that would lead to a 
better understanding of patterns of ballast water management and 
discharge. The Coast Guard considers the requirement for the 2018 
annual report to be unduly burdensome because the data submitted in 
annual reports from vessels operating exclusively in one COTP Zone have 
not been helpful in analyzing trends in transport, management, or 
discharge of ballast water.
    The preliminary Record of Environmental Consideration (REC) for the 
NPRM did not mention Hawaii or the Honolulu COTP Zone, but the REC for 
this final rule does respond to these comments. Again, this rule is 
narrowly focused on removing the requirement to file a 2018 annual 
report.
    Finally, this commenter states that ballast water reports should be 
available to the states, and that the Coast Guard should also be 
sampling ballast discharges to verify whether ballast water mitigation 
measures detailed in annual reports are effective. For information 
related to ballast water reports, states and interested persons may 
contact the NBIC for information through its website.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Visit NBIC website at: http://invasions.si.edu/nbic/index.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding the sampling of ballast water discharges, it would be 
impracticable under the current annual reporting requirement for the 
Coast Guard to sample ballast discharges because vessel owners and 
operators are not required to report in advance when they discharge 
their ballast water. Also, the annual report does not require detailed 
information about mitigation measures. As a possible future action, we 
may consider changing the annual reporting requirement to include more 
on mitigation measures and to facilitate discharge sampling, but such 
changes would need to go through notice-and-comment rulemaking and that 
would take more time to complete than the limited time we have to 
effectively remove the 2018 annual report requirement.
    A Hawaii state agency commented that the Honolulu COTP Zone 
(described in 33 CFR 3.70-10) stretches across a vast and ecologically 
diverse expanse of the Pacific Ocean and that the unique geographic 
circumstances of Hawaii (and other Pacific Islands within U.S. 
jurisdiction) make this annual reporting requirement of particular 
value to the state of Hawaii. Certain islands in the Honolulu COTP Zone 
are more than 2,500 miles from each other. The agency urges the Coast 
Guard to reject the proposed rule because it says information obtained 
from the annual report required under 33 CFR 151.2060 is the only way 
to track and understand the possible threat these vessels pose in terms 
of ballast water discharge. They stated this information will also 
become an integral part of the ``best scientific information 
available'' that is required as guidance in developing future Coast 
Guard regulations.
    This Hawaii state agency points to differences between COTP Zones 
in other jurisdictions and the COTP Honolulu Zone. Noting that Hawaii 
is the only purely archipelagic state in the United States, the agency 
requests not only that the 2018 annual reporting requirement be kept in 
place, but that annual reporting be made permanent. This state agency 
views vessel ballast water and biofouling as the only vector for most 
aquatic invasive species to reach Hawaiian waters because each county 
in Hawaii is separated by deep channels of open ocean. It views these 
annual reports as an integral part of their understanding of the 
movement of ballast water into and between the islands in the Hawaiian 
Archipelago and vital to the protection of Hawaiian aquatic resources.
    The Coast Guard appreciates the unique geographic circumstances of 
Hawaii identified in this comment. The comments we received with 
respect to the Honolulu COTP Zone caused us to reexamine how we 
describe COTP Zones for purposes of ballast water regulations intended 
to prevent the discharge of ANS into waters of the United States from 
vessels. But, the reporting requirement did not produce data to help 
the Coast Guard understand trends in transport, management, or 
discharge of ballast water. As stated earlier in this preamble, the 
2016 and 2017 annual reports do not contribute to the quality and 
breadth of BWM data, nor do they contribute to a better understanding 
of patterns of ballast water management and discharge, including in 
Hawaii and the Honolulu COTP Zone. The aggregate volumes of ballast 
water taken up and discharged by each vessel over the course of a 
calendar year do not provide enough detail on vessel movement or 
ballasting operations. The Coast Guard also disagrees that this is the 
only source of relevant information, and notes that states may require 
vessels in their jurisdiction to start submitting more detailed data 
for their own uses.
    As stated in the NPRM (83 FR 21216) and earlier in this section, 
the Coast Guard views the existing reporting requirement as not meeting 
the necessary objective for any COTP Zone, including the Honolulu COTP 
Zone. Therefore, in this final rule, we have eliminated the annual and 
final reporting requirements for calendar year 2018.
    In calling for a permanent annual reporting system for these 
vessels, the Hawaii state agency requested that all avenues of 
receiving and documenting information regarding ballast water as a 
vector for aquatic invasive species be retained to ensure that future 
regulations are based on the full spectrum of facts presented. Instead 
of removing a reporting requirement, this commenter stated that 
shortcomings of the current system should be used to inform the 
development of future regulations. Finally, the state agency commented 
that if the annual reports were freely accessible to state government 
entities through the NBIC website, these annual reports could help 
guide the development of state regulations.
    The Coast Guard agrees that there are lessons to be learned from 
the shortcomings in the annual reporting requirement. We may consider 
in the future whether a different, possibly permanent, reporting 
requirement is appropriate, but it would take time to evaluate what 
fields to include and then to offer proposed changes for public notice 
and comment. To attempt to do that in this rulemaking would prevent us 
from removing an unnecessary burden within the limited time frame we 
have to do so. We do not believe the 2018 annual report will contribute 
to a comprehensive understanding of the threats posed by ballast water. 
Accordingly, we do not believe that we should continue to impose the 
unnecessary burden of requiring a 2018 annual report. Therefore, this 
final rule eliminates the annual and final reporting requirements for 
calendar year 2018. All other reporting and recordkeeping requirements 
remain in effect. In addition, states may contact the NBIC regarding 
access to information from annual reports.
    One commenter recommended that the Coast Guard make ballast water 
reporting an annual requirement for all

[[Page 47288]]

vessels operating on the Great Lakes and allow for an aggregate total 
rather than a tank-by-tank accounting. If the Coast Guard does not 
implement annualized submissions for vessels operating on the Great 
Lakes, the commenter recommended that we modify the Equivalent 
Reporting Program requirement of 10 or more arrivals per month. These 
recommendations would affect the BWM reporting requirements for vessels 
that travel between COTP Zones and are therefore outside the scope of 
this rulemaking, which focuses on eliminating an annual reporting 
requirement for vessels that operate exclusively in one COTP Zone.
    The commenter also expressed a concern that the NBIC's web-based 
reporting form allows only one log-in per company. This concern is also 
beyond the scope of this rulemaking, but the Coast Guard will take it 
into consideration for future improvements.
    One company that supported our proposed rule appeared to believe 
that the amendments to Sec.  151.2015 created a new exemption from 
reporting requirements. We want to make clear that our amendment to the 
table in Sec.  151.2015 is a conforming change in response to our 
change in Sec.  151.2060(b). Under this final rule, as well as under 
existing regulations, vessels operating exclusively in a single COTP 
Zone are not required to comply with Sec.  151.2060(b) reporting 
requirements.
    In this final rule, we made no changes from the proposed rule based 
on our consideration of comments we received on the NPRM.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This final rule removes the Annual Ballast Water Summary Report 
requirement for vessels equipped with ballast tanks that operate 
exclusively in a single COTP Zone so that they will not be required to 
file the 2018 annual report. In this section, we describe the changes 
we are making to 33 CFR 151.2015 and 151.2060 to accomplish the removal 
of this reporting requirement. The text of this final rule is the same 
as we proposed in the NPRM.
    Section 151.2015. Currently Sec.  151.2015(c) exempts vessels that 
operate exclusively on voyages between ports or places within a single 
COTP Zone from the ballast water management requirements in Sec.  
151.2025 and from the recordkeeping requirements in Sec.  151.2070. We 
have added the reporting requirements in Sec.  151.2060 to this list of 
exemptions in Sec.  151.2015(c). This makes it clear to vessels that 
operate exclusively on voyages between ports or places within a single 
COTP Zone that they are not subject to the reporting requirements in 
Sec.  151.2060.
    We have amended Table 1 to Sec.  151.2015, which lists specific 
exemptions for types of vessels. Specifically, we are amending the 
column ``151.2060 (Reporting)'' to reflect that vessels operating 
exclusively on voyages between ports or places within a single COTP 
Zone are exempt from the reporting requirements in Sec.  151.2060.
    We also added a footnote to the same table for non-seagoing 
vessels. This footnote replaced the current lengthy qualifying language 
in the ``151.2070 (Recordkeeping)'' column of the table for those non-
seagoing vessels that operate exclusively on voyages between ports or 
places within a single COTP Zone. We extend the footnote to the table's 
``151.2060 (Reporting)'' column in that row based on our amendment to 
Sec.  151.2015(c). Non-seagoing vessels are the only category of 
vessels in the table that may need this potential exemption reminder 
because the other categories of vessels are either exempt or operate in 
multiple COTP Zones.
    Section 151.2060. Section 151.2060(e) and (f) applied only to 
vessels operating exclusively on voyages between ports or places within 
a single COTP Zone. We have removed Sec.  151.2060(e) and (f). 
Paragraph (e) contained the requirement to submit the Annual Ballast 
Water Summary Report to the NBIC, and paragraph (f) described the 
information to be included in that report. The only remaining reporting 
requirement in Sec.  151.2060 is now based in paragraph (b). That 
paragraph contained language exempting vessels operating exclusively on 
voyages between ports or places within a single COTP Zone. We are 
deleting that language because it is now unnecessary. With the removal 
of Sec.  151.2060(e) and (f), we can now state in Sec.  151.2015(c) 
that vessels operating exclusively on voyages between ports or places 
within a single COTP Zone are exempt from any and all reporting 
requirements in Sec.  151.2060. With our amendment to Sec.  
151.2060(b), vessels subject to the reporting requirements of paragraph 
(b) will not need to first read through an exemption that does not 
apply to them.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and 13563 
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review) direct agencies to assess 
the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if 
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize 
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public 
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive 
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and 
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting 
flexibility. Executive Order 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling 
Regulatory Costs) directs agencies to reduce regulation and control 
regulatory costs and provides that ``for every one new regulation 
issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination, 
and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently managed and 
controlled through a budgeting process.''
    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated this 
rule a ``significant regulatory action,'' under section 3(f) of 
Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, OMB has not reviewed it. DHS 
considers this rule to be an Executive Order 13771 deregulatory action. 
See the OMB Memorandum ``Guidance Implementing Executive Order 13771, 
Titled `Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs' '' (April 
5, 2017). A regulatory analysis (RA) follows.
    The Coast Guard received no comments regarding the RA. However, the 
Coast Guard did receive revised data from the NBIC for year 2017. The 
updated data increase the affected population by 112 vessels, bringing 
the total affected population to 278 vessels. We have amended the final 
rule RA to reflect the new information from NBIC.
    This is a deregulatory rulemaking that removes reporting 
requirements for vessels with ballast tanks operating exclusively 
within a single COTP. The removal of the reporting requirement will 
provide a one-time cost savings for those vessels affected by this 
deregulatory action. We estimate an industry cost saving of $5,796 
(non-discounted), and individual vessel cost savings of $20.85. We 
provide a detailed analysis of the cost savings associated with this 
deregulatory rule below. This final rule will not impose costs on 
industry.
    The Coast Guard considers all estimates and analysis in this RA 
final. Table 1 presents a summary of the economic impact of the final 
rule.

[[Page 47289]]



                            Table 1--Summary of the Economic Impact of the Final Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Affected
             Change                    Description           population        Cost savings         Benefits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eliminate the requirement for    Owners or operators of  70 owners or       No Costs. One-     The final rule
 vessels operating exclusively    vessels with ballast    operators of 278   time industry      removes the
 within a single COTP Zone to     tanks and operating     vessels            savings of         reporting
 report ballast management        exclusively on          operating in one   $5,796.            requirement for
 practices to the NBIC.           voyages between ports   COTP Zone.                            the remainder of
                                  and places within one                                         2018 and
                                  COTP Zone will not                                            provides a one-
                                  have to report their                                          time partial
                                  ballast management                                            year savings for
                                  practices for the                                             owners or
                                  final year of a 3-                                            operators.
                                  year requirement to
                                  report ballasting
                                  operations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under this final rule, the Coast Guard will no longer require 
owners or operators of vessels with ballast tanks operating exclusively 
on voyages between ports or places within a single COTP Zone to submit 
an annual summary report of their ballast water management practices.
    Starting with the 2016 annual report, owners or operators of 
vessels affected by the 2015 final rule provision in Sec.  151.2060(e) 
have submitted annual summary reports, as required, to the NBIC. These 
summary reports were used to estimate the number of vessels that 
operated and the amount of ballast water discharged within a single 
COTP Zone. Based on the data received and analyzed by the NBIC, the 
Coast Guard was able to determine the actual number of vessels affected 
by the 2015 final rule. The NBIC data confirms that 70 owners or 
operators of 278 U.S.-flagged vessels \4\ have reported ballasting 
operations in accordance with Sec.  151.2060(e). Table 2 presents the 
vessel types and number of these vessels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ We estimated the population of affected vessels in the 2015 
final rule to be 1,280. This was an estimate based on potential 
vessels that might operate exclusively within a single COTP Zone. 
Since the publication of the 2015 final rule, vessel owners or 
operators have been providing information to the NBIC regarding 
their ballasting operations and area of operation. From this 
information, we are able to determine the actual vessel population 
that operates exclusively within a single COTP Zone. This final 
rule, in addition to eliminating Sec.  151.2060(e), also reduces the 
affected population estimated in the 2015 final rule from 1,280 to 
278 vessels.

Table 2--U.S.-Flagged Vessels Operating Exclusively Within a Single COTP
                    Zone Affected by This Final Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Affected
                                                            population
                       Vessel type                       ---------------
                                                           NPRM     FR
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tanker--Other...........................................       1       1
Tug only................................................      57     126
Offshore supply vessel..................................      38      41
Other (research, fishing, etc.).........................      21      24
Passenger...............................................       2       7
Bulk Carries............................................       2  ......
Tug--Barge Combo........................................  ......       1
Barge only..............................................      45      77
General Cargo...........................................  ......       1
                                                         ---------------
    Total...............................................     166     278
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: NBIC Data https://invasions.si.edu/nbic/.

    We estimated in the 2015 final rule that the total annual amount of 
burden hours for owners or operators completing the reporting 
requirement at 40 minutes per vessel per year. We break down those 40 
minutes as 25 minutes to account for time needed throughout the year to 
record ballast management operations, and 15 minutes for time needed by 
owners or operators to aggregate and calculate the recorded ballast 
water discharge information and to complete the electronic form 
submitted to the NBIC.
    This final rule, which becomes effective October 1, 2018, allows 
the Coast Guard to stop enforcing of the requirements of Sec.  
151.2060(e) at the end of fiscal year 2018, which is September 30, 
2018. The current regulation requires annual reports only through the 
calendar year 2018. Therefore, any realized savings from this final 
rule will account for the last 3 months of calendar year 2018. We 
estimate that the total time saved by this final rule will be 21.25 
minutes per vessel (15 minutes for submission of report + 6.25 total 
minutes from the last 3 months of 2018). Converting this time to an 
hourly equivalent, we arrive at 0.35 hours (21.25 minutes / 60 
minutes).
    We anticipate that the person charged with collecting and reporting 
the information to NBIC will be a vessel Captain, Mate, or Pilot. The 
mean hourly wage rate associated with these professions is reported by 
the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) to be $39.19 per hour.\5\ We 
calculated the load factor from data collected in the Employer Cost for 
Employee Compensation survey conducted by the BLS and applied it to the 
mean hourly wage rate to obtain a fully loaded wage rate, which more 
accurately represents the employer's cost per hour for an employee's 
work.\6\ The load factor we used for this economic analysis is 
1.52.7 8 The loaded mean hourly wage rate used to assess the 
savings estimates for this final rule is calculated at $59.57 ($39.19 x 
1.52).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Information about the wage rates for Captains, Mates and 
Vessel Pilots (53-5021) can be found at https://www.bls.gov/oes/2016/may/oes535021.htm.
    \6\ A loaded wage rate is what a company pays per hour to employ 
a person, not the hourly wage the employee receives. The loaded wage 
rate includes the cost of benefits (health insurance, vacation, 
etc.).
    \7\ From the BLS, Employer Cost for Employee Compensation 
survey. Total compensation divided by wage and salary compensation.
    \8\ The load factor for wages is calculated by dividing total 
compensation by wages and salaries. For this report, we used the 
Transportation and Materials Moving Occupations, Private Industry 
report (Series IDs, CMU2010000520000D and CMU2020000520000D) for all 
workers using the multi-screen data search. Using 2016 Q2 data, we 
divide $27.55/$18.08 to get the load factor of 1.52. See https://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/srgate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We anticipate that by eliminating the reporting requirement from 
the last quarter of the year, this final rule will reduce industry's 
economic burden by 97.3 hours (278 vessels x 0.35 hours). We calculate 
the dollar value saved to be $20.85 per vessel ($59.57 wage x 0.35 
hours). The estimated one-time total savings for removing the reporting 
requirement for the 278 vessels operating exclusively between ports or 
places within a single COTP Zone is $5,796 ($20.85 per vessel savings x 
278 vessels), non-discounted. Table 3 presents the total savings to the 
affected population.

               Table 3--Total Savings for Affected Vessels
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hourly Wage Paid to Employee...................................   $39.19
Load Factor to Account for Cost of Benefits....................     1.52
Loaded Wage....................................................   $59.57
Hours Saved Per Vessel.........................................     0.35
Savings per Vessel (Hours x Loaded Wage Rate)..................   $20.85

[[Page 47290]]

 
Affected Population............................................      278
                                                                --------
    Total Savings* (Savings per Vessel x Affected Population)..   $5,796
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents undiscounted savings totals. Totals may not sum due to
  rounding.

    This final rule will not have annual recurring savings. It does not 
require additional Coast Guard resources to implement it, and it is 
budget neutral. In addition, a one-time savings of $5,796 in 2018 is 
equivalent to approximately $331 in 2016 dollars using perpetual time 
horizon discounting at 7 percent.

B. Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, we have 
considered whether this final rule will 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.
    As described in the ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' section of 
this RA, we expect that the savings per vessel will be $20.85 for the 
remainder of 2018. The Coast Guard is eliminating the reporting 
requirement under Sec.  151.2060(e), which applies to owners or 
operators of vessels operating exclusively between ports or places 
within a single COTP Zone. Based on our economic assessment of the 
rule, we conclude that this final rule will add no cost burden to 
industry.
    Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that 
this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities

C. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104-121, we offer to assist small 
entities in understanding this rule so that they can better evaluate 
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the final 
rule will affect your small business, organization, or governmental 
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or 
options for compliance, please contact the person in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this final rule. 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 rule calls for a change to an existing collection of 
information (COI) 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.
    Title: Ballast Water Management Reporting and Recordkeeping.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0069.
    Summary of the Collection of Information: This rule modifies the 
existing BWM reporting and recordkeeping requirement in Sec.  
151.2060(e). In the current regulation, the Coast Guard requires 
vessels with ballast tanks that operate exclusively on voyages between 
ports or places within a single COTP Zone to submit an annual summary 
report on their ballast water practices. The final rule published in 
2015 requires vessels to report to the NBIC for a 3-year period, after 
which a sunset clause in the rule has this provision expiring at the 
end of the 2018 calendar year. This final rule will remove the last 
year of reporting requirements for the population affected by the 2015 
final rule and prior to the provision's sunset, thereby returning the 
overall COI burden estimates to the 2015 final rule's level.
    Need for Information: The Coast Guard is removing the reporting 
requirement under Sec.  151.2060(e) because the value of information 
provided by the affected population did not meet the expectations of 
the Coast Guard.
    Proposed Use of Information: The collection of this BWM data was 
intended to fill a limited gap in information about vessels operating 
exclusively within a single COTP Zone. The data was to measure ballast 
water practices within a COTP Zone by vessels that operated exclusively 
within a single COTP Zone. We removed Sec.  151.2060(e) and (f) because 
the data collected did not help the Coast Guard to better understand 
these ballasting practices.
    Description of the Respondents: The respondents are the owners or 
operators of vessels with ballast water tanks operating exclusively on 
voyages between ports or place within a single COTP Zone.
    Number of Respondents: The current number of respondents is 9,663. 
However, in the 2015 final rule, we incorrectly estimated the 
additional number of respondents in the COI to be 1,280. The population 
of 1,280 was an overestimation because information about vessels 
operating exclusively within a single COTP Zone had not been documented 
prior to the 2015 final rule. For the purpose of maintaining continuity 
between the number of respondents in the 2015 final rule and number of 
respondents in the overall COI OMB Control Number: 1625-0069, the Coast 
Guard estimates changes to the overall COI using the 2015 final rule 
COI values to obtain a net result of zero.\9\ Therefore, in order to 
revert back to the 2015 baseline, we needed to subtract the 1,280 
respondents we incorrectly estimated in the 2015 final rule.\10\ With 
this change, we are maintaining the 2015 baseline of 8,383 respondents 
because we would be subtracting the incorrect estimated population of 
1,280 respondents. The incurred cost savings and burden-hour reduction 
we estimate in this final rule will affect only 278 respondents for the 
last 3 months of this calendar year. After this time, the OMB-approved 
number of respondents would remain at the 2015 baseline level of 8,383 
respondents because of the sunset clause in the 2015 final rule. We 
show these calculations, for illustrative purposes, in Table 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The goal is to revert the COI Control No. 625-0069 back to 
its original collection prior to the 2015 ballast water 
recordkeeping and reporting final rule.
    \10\ Appendix A of COI OMB Control No. 1625-0069.

[[Page 47291]]



                           Table 4--Summary of Collection of Information, Respondents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Current COI     Final rule
                         Reporting items                            respondents       change      New COI values
(A)                                                                          (B)             (C)         (B - C)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Voyage Reports..................................................           8,383               0           8,383
Annual Reports..................................................           1,280           1,280               0
Compliance Extension Request....................................               0               0               0
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
        Total...................................................           9,663           1,280           8,383
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Frequency of Response: The reporting requirement under this COI is 
scheduled to occur annually. With this final rule, current respondents 
under Sec.  151.2060(e) are no longer required to maintain and submit 
BMW information on an annual basis.
    Burden of Response: The Coast Guard anticipates that the 
elimination of the rule will decrease burden by approximately 40 
minutes per report for vessels with ballast water tanks operating 
exclusively on voyages between ports or places within a single COTP 
Zone.
    Estimate of Total Annual Burden: The annual reduction in burden is 
estimated as follows:
    (a) Annual reduction in burden resulting from removing reporting 
requirement for vessels operating within a single COTP Zone.
    This final rule will reduce the private sector burden hours for 
this COI by 97.3 hours (278 vessels x 0.35 hours [3 months of 
savings]). There are three items associated with this COI: Voyage 
reports, annual reports (which are applicable to this final rule), and 
compliance extension requests. The voyage reports and compliance 
extension requests are not included in this final rule. The burden 
estimates in this COI stemming from these voyage reports and compliance 
requests will be unaffected. Voyage reports account for 60,727 hours, 
annual reports account for 858 hours, and compliance extension requests 
account for 234 hours, for a total of 61,819 hours. Essentially, with 
this final rule, we are accounting for the 97.3 burden hours of 
reduction in annual reports in the last 3 months of this calendar year 
only, prior to the sunset clause becoming effective. To capture this 
change we must first correct for the erroneously estimated hourly 
burden of 858 hours. First, we subtract the 858 erroneous burden hours 
from the total of 61,819 hours and replace it with the correct burden 
estimate of 97 hours. This gives us a total burden of 61,058 hours and 
represents the corrected amount from which to estimate the burden 
reduction due to the final rule. The final rule will then remove the 
corrected 97 burden hours that should have been included in the 2015 
COI. After December 31, 2018, the burden hours will return to the 2015 
baseline level of 60,961 hours.
    Moreover, due to the establishment of a sunset clause in the 2015 
final rule, all recordkeeping and reporting burden associated with this 
regulation will be eliminated. This adjustment would only reduce 
current Information Collection Request (ICR) burden levels prior to the 
2015 final rule. We show the burden hour calculations in Table 5.

                           Table 5--Summary of Collection of Information, Burden Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Current COI     Final rule
                         Reporting items                            respondents       change      New COI values
(A)                                                                          (B)             (C)         (B - C)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Voyage Reports..................................................          60,727               0          60,727
Annual Reports..................................................             858             858               0
Compliance Extension Request....................................             234               0             234
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
        Total...................................................          61,819             858        * 60,961
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Although this final rule would subtract 97.3 hours for the last 3 months of this year, after this time, the
  total hour burden estimate would revert back to the 2015 baseline level or current OMB inventory amount of
  60,961 due to the fact that there will no longer be a need to complete annual reports for vessels traveling
  exclusively between ports or places within a single COTP Zone.

    (b) Reduction of annual burden due to the elimination of the 
current rule.
    This final rule will result in a reduction of annual burden of 97.3 
hours for the last 3 months of the year ending December 31, 2018. 
However, after correcting for the overestimated burden in the 2015 COI, 
the reduction in annual burden hours as reflected in the Supporting 
Statement for this COI is 858 hours (as explained above).
    As required by 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), we will submit a copy of this 
final rule to OMB for its review of the collection of information. You 
are not required to respond to a COI unless it displays a currently 
valid OMB control number.

E. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132 
(Federalism) if it has a substantial direct effect on States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government. We have analyzed this final rule under Executive Order 
13132 and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental 
federalism principles and preemption requirements described in 
Executive Order 13132. Our analysis follows.
    This final rule will revise the Coast Guard's BWM reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements promulgated under the authority of NANPCA, 
as amended by NISA. Specifically, we are removing the requirement that 
an Annual Ballast Water Summary Report for calendar year 2018 be 
submitted for vessels operating on voyages exclusively between ports or 
places within a single COTP Zone. NANPCA, as amended by

[[Page 47292]]

NISA, contains a ``savings provision'' that saves to States their 
authority to ``adopt or enforce control measures'' for ANS (16 U.S.C. 
4725). Nothing in the Act would diminish or affect the jurisdiction of 
any State over species of fish and wildlife. This type of BWM reporting 
and recordkeeping is a ``control measure'' saved to States under the 
savings provision and would not be preempted unless State law makes 
compliance with Coast Guard requirements impossible or frustrates the 
purpose of Congress. Additionally, the Coast Guard has long interpreted 
this savings provision to be a congressional mandate for a Federal-
State cooperative regime in which Federal preemption under NANPCA, as 
amended by NISA, would be unlikely. The Coast Guard does not intend for 
the removal of this Federal reporting requirement to be a 
determination, or have any implications, with regard to the necessity 
of existing or future state BWM reporting requirements. Therefore, this 
final rule is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and 
preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.

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 (adjusted for 
inflation) or more in any 1 year. Although this final rule will not 
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule 
elsewhere in this preamble.

G. Taking of Private Property

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

H. Civil Justice Reform

    This final 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 final rule under Executive Order 13045 
(Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks). This rule is not an economically significant rule and will not 
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might 
disproportionately affect children.

J. Indian Tribal Governments

    This final rule does not have tribal implications under Executive 
Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments), because it will 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 final rule under Executive Order 13211 
(Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use). We have determined that it is not a 
``significant energy action'' under that order because it is not a 
``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is 
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, 
distribution, or use of energy.

L. Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act, codified as a 
note to 15 U.S.C. 272, directs agencies to use voluntary consensus 
standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides 
Congress, through OMB, 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 adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies.
    This final rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did 
not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

M. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security 
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD 
(COMDTINST M16475.1D), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with 
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), 
and have made a determination that this action is one of a category of 
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant 
effect on the human environment. A final Record of Environmental 
Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket 
where indicated under the ADDRESSES section of this preamble. This rule 
is categorically excluded under paragraph L54 of Appendix A, Table 1 of 
DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. Paragraph L54 pertains 
to regulations which are editorial or procedural. This rule involves 
the removal of the last year of a 3-year annual ballast water reporting 
requirement.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 151

    Administrative practice and procedure, Ballast water management, 
Oil pollution, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Water pollution control.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 
33 CFR part 151, subpart D, as follows:

PART 151--VESSELS CARRYING OIL, NOXIOUS LIQUID SUBSTANCES, GARBAGE, 
MUNICIPAL OR COMMERCIAL WASTE, AND BALLAST WATER

0
1. The authority citation for part 151, subpart D, is revised to read 
as follows:

    Authority:  16 U.S.C. 4711; Department of Homeland Security 
Delegation No. 0170.1(II)(57).


0
2. Amend Sec.  151.2015 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (c), after the text ``(ballast water management (BWM) 
requirements),'' add the text ``151.2060 (reporting),''; and
0
b. Revise the fourth and sixth rows in table 1 to Sec.  151.2015.
    The revisions read as follows:


Sec.  151.2015  Exemptions.

* * * * *

[[Page 47293]]



          Table 1 to Sec.   151.2015--Table of 33 CFR 151.2015 Specific Exemptions for Types of Vessels
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     151.2025 (management)      151.2060 (reporting)    151.2070 (recordkeeping)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Vessel operates exclusively on     Exempt...................  Exempt..................  Exempt.
 voyages between ports or places
 within a single COTP Zone.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Non-seagoing vessel..............  Exempt...................  Applicable \1\..........  Applicable.\1\
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Unless operating exclusively on voyages between ports or places within a single COTP Zone.

Sec.  151.2060   [Amended]

0
3. Amend Sec.  151.2060 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (b), remove the words ``Unless operating exclusively on 
voyages between ports or places within a single COTP Zone, the'' and 
add, in their place, the word ``The''; and
0
b. Remove paragraphs (e) and (f).

    Dated: September 14, 2018.
J.P. Nadeau,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Prevention 
Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-20374 Filed 9-18-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P