[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 120 (Friday, June 21, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52324-52354]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-13455]
[[Page 52323]]
Vol. 89
Friday,
No. 120
June 21, 2024
Part III
Department of Homeland Security
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Coast Guard
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
46 CFR Parts 11 and 12
Implementation of Training Requirements for Personnel Serving on U.S.-
Flagged Passenger Ships That Carry More Than 12 Passengers on
International Voyages; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 89 , No. 120 / Friday, June 21, 2024 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 52324]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
46 CFR Parts 11 and 12
[Docket No. USCG-2022-0649]
RIN 1625-AC68
Implementation of Training Requirements for Personnel Serving on
U.S.-Flagged Passenger Ships That Carry More Than 12 Passengers on
International Voyages
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to amend its merchant mariner
training regulations to implement amendments to the International
Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for
Seafarers, 1978, and the Seafarers' Training, Certification and
Watchkeeping Code, to require personnel serving on U.S.-flagged
passenger ships carrying more than 12 passengers on international
voyages to complete passenger ship emergency familiarization. The
proposed rule would expand the applicability of the existing crowd
management training requirement to include specified ratings on
passenger ships. These required trainings would promote the safety of
life at sea.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before September 19, 2024.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2022-0649 using the Federal Decision-Making Portal at
www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.
Collection of information. Submit comments on the collection of
information discussed in section VII.D. of this preamble both to the
Coast Guard's online docket and to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the White House Office of Management and
Budget using their website www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Comments
sent to OIRA on the collection of information must reach OMB on or
before the comment due date listed on their website.
Viewing material proposed for incorporation by reference. Make
arrangements to view this material by calling the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about this document,
call or email Megan Johns Henry, Office of Merchant Mariner
Credentialing (CG-MMC-1), Coast Guard; telephone 202-372-1255, email
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents for Preamble
I. Public Participation and Request for Comments
II. Abbreviations
III. Executive Summary
A. Purpose
B. Legal Authority
C. Summary of Major Provisions
D. Costs and Benefits
IV. Background
V. Discussion of Proposed Rule
VI. Incorporation by Reference
VII. Regulatory Analyses
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Small Entities
C. Assistance for Small Entities
D. Collection of Information
E. Federalism
F. Unfunded Mandates
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. Public Participation and Request for Comments
The Coast Guard views public participation as essential to
effective rulemaking and will consider all comments and material
received during the comment period. Your comments can help shape the
outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the
docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of
this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for
each suggestion or recommendation.
Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through
the Federal Decision-Making Portal at www.regulations.gov. To do so, go
to www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2022-0649 in the search box and click
``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the Search Results column,
and click on it. Then click on the Comment option. If you cannot submit
your material by using www.regulations.gov, call or email the person in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule for
alternate instructions.
Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this
proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as
described in the previous paragraph, and then select ``Supporting &
Related Material'' in the Document Type column. Public comments will
also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following
instructions on the www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked Questions web
page. That FAQ page also explains how to subscribe for email alerts
that will notify you when comments are posted or if a final rule is
published. We review all comments received, but we will only post
comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may choose not
to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that we
receive.
Personal Information. We accept anonymous comments. All comments
received will be posted without change to www.regulations.gov and will
include any personal information you have provided. For more about
privacy and submissions to the docket in response to this document, see
DHS's eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11,
2020).
We do not plan to hold a public meeting, but we will consider doing
so if we determine from public comments that a meeting would be
helpful. We would issue a separate Federal Register notice to announce
the date, time, and location of such a meeting.
II. Abbreviations
BLS U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
BTS Bureau of Transportation Statistics
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CG-MMC Coast Guard Office of Merchant Mariner Credentialing
CSS Code Code of Safe Practices for Cargo Stowage and Securing
DHS Department of Homeland Security
DOT Department of Transportation
GSA U.S. General Services Administration
HTW Human Element, Training and Watchkeeping
IBR Incorporated by Reference
IMO International Maritime Organization
M&IE Meal and Incidental Expenses
MISLE Marine Information for Safety and Law Enforcement
MMC Merchant Mariner Credential
MSC Maritime Safety Committee
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
OMB Office of Management and Budget
POA Privately Owned Automobile
PSC Port State Control
Sec. Section
SBA Small Business Administration
SME Subject matter expert
SOLAS International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974,
as amended
STCW Convention International Convention on Standards of Training,
Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978
STCW Code Seafarers' Training, Certification and Watchkeeping Code
U.S.C. United States Code
VSL Value of a Statistical Life
[[Page 52325]]
III. Executive Summary
A. Purpose
The purpose of this proposed rule is to ensure the safety of
passengers on board U.S.-flagged passenger ships by ensuring all
shipboard personnel have completed training and are competent to assist
passengers in the event of an emergency. As defined in title 46 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), in sections 11.1103 and 12.903,\1\
passenger ships are those ships carrying more than 12 passengers on an
international voyage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Coast Guard adopted these definitions from the
International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS),
1974, as amended, and codified them in the CFR. 78 FR 77796 (Dec.
24, 2013). See additional discussion on SOLAS in section IV,
Background, of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The growing world-wide popularity of passenger ships as a vacation
destination has resulted in the launching of consistently larger
foreign-flagged ships and subsequent concerns over passenger safety.
Passenger-ship travel requires passengers to be assured of their safety
regardless of where the ship originates or where it sails. Typically,
passengers are on board these ships for a short time and do not have
maritime experience, so they rely on the ship's crew to assist them in
emergency situations. It may be impossible for passengers to identify
which crewmembers are trained to assist them in an emergency. Shipboard
emergency situations could pose risks to life, health, and safety, as
well as damage to property and the marine environment.
With this rulemaking, the Coast Guard proposes requiring passenger
ship emergency familiarization for all shipboard personnel on U.S.-
flagged passenger ships, which may prevent the loss of life at sea,
reduce the risk of injury, and increase protection of property and the
marine environment. The Coast Guard proposes expanding the
applicability of the existing crowd management training requirement to
include ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and VII of the STCW
Convention \2\ on passenger ships.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and VII of the
STCW Convention are: Able Seafarer Deck, Able Seafarer Engine,
Ratings Forming Part of a Navigational Watch, and Ratings Forming
Part of an Engine-room Watch.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Legal Authority
The legal basis of this proposed rule is title 14 of the United
States Code (U.S.C.), section 102(3), which grants the Coast Guard
broad authority to promulgate and enforce regulations for the promotion
of safety of life and property on waters subject to the jurisdiction of
the United States. More specifically, 46 U.S.C. 7101 and 7301
authorizes the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
to prescribe the requirements for the credentialing of officers and
ratings respectively. The Secretary has delegated these statutory
authorities to the Coast Guard through DHS Delegation No.
00170.1(II)(92)(e), Revision No. 01.4, which generally authorizes the
Coast Guard to determine and establish the experience and professional
qualifications required for the issuance of credentials.
C. Summary of Major Provisions
This proposed rule would make the following changes, which would
apply to all personnel serving on U.S.-flagged passenger ships that
carry more than 12 passengers on international voyages:
(1) Incorporates by reference the 2017 Edition of the International
Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for
Seafarers, 1978 (STCW Convention), and the Seafarers' Training,
Certification and Watchkeeping Code (STCW Code), which include
amendments through 2016, in 46 CFR parts 11 and 12. The STCW Convention
and the STCW Code prescribe a five-tiered passenger ship training
approach which is detailed in Section V, Discussion of Proposed Rule,
in this document.
(2) Adds a new requirement for all shipboard personnel to complete
passenger ship emergency familiarization appropriate to their capacity,
duties, and responsibilities during an emergency before being assigned
to shipboard duties. The passenger ship emergency familiarization
requirement applies to all shipboard personnel, including masters,
officers, and ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and VII of the
STCW Convention. This familiarization would not require Coast Guard
approval in accordance with 46 CFR part 10, subpart D, and can be
conducted on board the ship or at a shore-based location. Mariners or
vessel operators should maintain documentation verifying that personnel
have completed the passenger ship emergency familiarization.
(3) Expands the applicability of crowd management training to
include ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and VII of the STCW
Convention. Crowd management courses currently require Coast Guard
approval and will continue to require Coast Guard approval. Approved
crowd management courses are readily available to mariners.
D. Costs and Benefits
This proposed rule would affect 1,080 personnel (200 officers, 44
specified ratings,\3\ and 836 personnel) serving on 50 U.S-flagged
passenger ships. For each passenger ship, we assume two individuals
serve in each billet, to account for the rotational nature of shipboard
employment. The cost to the regulated industry would be approximately
$375,707, in 2021 dollars, annualized, and $3,374,817 total, discounted
at 2 percent. The proposed rule does not create additional costs for
the Federal Government. In addition, this proposed rule would not
result in additional costs to obtain a Merchant Mariner Credential
(MMC) endorsement, because the training requirements would be verified
through presentation of course completion documentation during
shipboard inspections, and not via an MMC endorsement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Specified rating for this proposed rule means various
categories of ordinary seaman, able seaman, and qualified members of
the engine department, issued on MMCs. For the purpose of estimates,
specified ratings are the closest to the ratings qualified under
STCW Chapters II, III, and VII.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The expected benefits of this proposed rule would be the
improvement of the safety of life at sea through increased mariner
competence. It would also ensure that U.S.-flagged passenger ships
would not be subject to additional Port State Control (PSC)
requirements in foreign ports.
IV. Background
The STCW Convention establishes minimum standards for training,
certification, and watchkeeping for seafarers. The STCW Convention
includes competence requirements for seafarers to address emergencies
on passenger ships. The STCW Convention applies to personnel engaged on
seagoing ships operating seaward of the boundary line specified in 46
CFR part 7. Coast Guard regulations in 46 CFR 10.107 define the
boundary line as ``mark[ing] the dividing point between internal and
offshore waters for the purposes of several U.S. statutes and, with
exceptions, generally follows the trend of the seaward, highwater
shorelines. See 46 CFR part 7 for the specified boundary line location.
The International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974,
as amended (SOLAS), sets international standards for vessel safety.
SOLAS defines ``passenger ship'' as any ship carrying more than 12
passengers on an international voyage.\4\ The Coast Guard adopted this
definition in 46 CFR
[[Page 52326]]
11.1103 and 12.903.\5\ Every ship subject to SOLAS must maintain a
muster list to identify the functions and duties of each crewmember in
an emergency.\6\ The muster list must also specify the duties assigned
to crewmembers in relation to passengers in case of an emergency. The
Coast Guard has an established program for the credentialing of
personnel serving on U.S. vessels that is governed by domestic statutes
in 14 and 46 U.S.C.,\7\ and in 46 CFR parts 11, 12 and 13. Through
these domestic statutes and regulations, the Coast Guard implements the
provisions of the STCW Convention and the STCW Code. Current
regulations in 46 CFR part 11, subpart K--Officers on a Passenger Ship
When on an International Voyage, detail the crowd management training
requirements for masters, officers, and personnel working onboard U.S.-
flagged passenger ships on an international voyage designated on the
muster list to assist passengers in emergency situations. Regulations
in 46 CFR part 12, subpart I--Crewmembers on a Passenger Ship on an
International Voyage, detail the requirements for seafarers working on
U.S.-flagged passenger ships on an international voyage who perform
duties that involve safety or care for passengers. These personnel must
meet the appropriate requirements of STCW Regulation V/2 and section A-
V/2 of the STCW Code, including safety training, training in crowd
management, crisis management and human behavior, and passenger safety
cargo safety and hull integrity training, and must hold documentary
evidence showing they meet those requirements through approved or
accepted training.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ SOLAS Chapter I, Part A, Regulation 2(f).
\5\ 78 FR 77796 (Dec. 24, 2013). This definition of ``passenger
ship'' is limited to subpart K of 46 CFR part 11 and subpart I of 46
CFR part 12.
\6\ SOLAS, Chapter III, Part B, Regulation 37.
\7\ 14 U.S.C. 102(3), 46 U.S.C. 7101, 7306, and 7313.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 13, 2012, the Costa Concordia, an Italian passenger ship
operating in the Mediterranean Sea with 3,206 passengers and 1,023
crewmembers on board, struck a reef off the Italian coastline. The
incident resulted in the loss of 32 lives (27 passengers and 5
crewmembers), injury to 157 others, and the total loss of the ship. In
the ensuing accident report,\8\ the Italian Ministry of Infrastructures
and Transports concluded that multiple factors contributed to the
injuries and loss of life. Some of these factors included delayed
management of the emergency response and evacuation process,
inconsistencies in assignment of duties, communication issues due to
the different backgrounds of passengers and crewmembers, and passenger
confusion over which personnel employed on passenger ships were trained
to assist in an emergency.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The Ministry of Infrastructures and Transports, Marine
Casualties Investigative Body, Cruise Ship COSTA CONCORDIA, Marine
Casualty on January 13, 2012. This report is available at: https://www.mitma.gob.es/recursos_mfom/2012costaconcordia.pdf (last visited
6/3/2024).
\9\ Id at 159.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The notable loss of the Costa Concordia provided the rationale for
initiating a review of the passenger ship training provisions in the
STCW Convention and the STCW Code. In 2012, the International Maritime
Organization (IMO) Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) considered a
proposal submitted by the United States to review and potentially amend
the STCW required training for mariners working on passenger ships,
considering new challenges posed by the increased size of modern cruise
ships and the large number of passengers on board. The MSC tasked the
Human Element, Training and Watchkeeping (HTW) Subcommittee with
addressing these challenges.
Recognizing that significant numbers of U.S. passengers travel on
foreign-flagged passenger ships, the United States submitted multiple
proposals to the HTW subcommittee for consideration while developing
new training requirements for personnel on passenger ships. The U.S.
submission to the third session of the HTW subcommittee included a
tiered approach to training and familiarization for personnel on
passenger ships, including those providing direct service to
passengers, and passenger ship emergency familiarization. This proposal
was used as the basis of the amendments to the STCW Convention and the
STCW Code that were adopted in 2016 and entered into force on July 1,
2018.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ While the amendments entered into force on July 1, 2018,
the STCW Convention is not self-implementing. The United States must
issue regulations to meet its treaty obligations. As such, all
compliance with the 2016 amendments and 2021 policy letter (CG-MMC
Policy Letter 02-21, ``Guidance On Voluntary Compliance With
Training Requirements For Personnel Serving On U.S.-Flagged
Passenger Ships That Carry More Than 12 Passengers On International
Voyages'') has been voluntary in nature. The Coast Guard does not
have information on which operating companies or mariners in the
affected population have taken measures to comply with the 2016
amendments because compliance is voluntary and not required to be
recorded during an annual inspection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The amendments to the STCW Convention and Code added passenger ship
emergency familiarization requirements for personnel on passenger
ships. They also expanded the applicability of crowd management
training to include ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and VII
of the STCW Convention with the current applicability of masters,
officers, and personnel designated on the muster list to assist
passengers in emergency situations.\11\ The STCW Convention and the
STCW Code require that passenger ship personnel are familiar with
safety features, emergency equipment and procedures, basic
communication, and crowd control techniques in order to assist
passengers, including elderly and disabled individuals, during an
emergency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ IMO Resolution MSC.416(97), Consideration and Adoption of
Amendments to Mandatory Instruments, Amendments to the International
Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping
for Seafarers (STCW), 1978, as amended, and the Seafarers' Training,
Certification and Watchkeeping (STCW) Code, Annex 1, page 4. A copy
of this resolution is available in the docket where indicated under
the ADDRESSES portion of this preamble.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposed rule would codify the STCW Convention and the STCW
Code, including amendments through 2016. As a signatory to the STCW
Convention, the United States must ensure compliance with its treaty
obligations through full implementation of amendments to the STCW
Convention and the STCW Code. The STCW Convention is not self-
implementing; therefore, the Coast Guard does not have discretion and
must issue regulations to implement these requirements. Failure to meet
the treaty obligations could cause the United States to lose status on
the IMO's ``White List,'' which distinguishes administrations that are
in full compliance with the STCW Convention and the STCW Code. Loss of
this status could cause U.S. ships to be subject to more rigorous PSC
inspections in foreign ports, including possible detainment or denial
of entry. Additionally, U.S. mariners could be ineligible to serve on
foreign-flagged ships.
On August 5, 2021, the Coast Guard's Office of Merchant Mariner
Credentialing (CG-MMC) issued Policy Letter 02-21, ``Guidance On
Voluntary Compliance With Training Requirements For Personnel Serving
On U.S.-Flagged Passenger Ships That Carry More Than 12 Passengers On
International Voyages'',\12\ to advise U.S.-flagged passenger ship
operating companies of the amendments to the
[[Page 52327]]
STCW Convention and the STCW Code and encourage voluntary compliance.
This policy letter will be cancelled when this proposed rule becomes
final and effective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ The document is available at: https://www.dco.uscg.mil/
Portals/9/DCO%20Documents/5p/5ps/MMC/MMC-Policy-Letter-02-21-Final-
05AUG21.pdf?ver=8GP3iNQS2pWTD6NG3-
eDTw%3D%3D#:~:text=This%20policy%20letter%20provides%20guidance,Conve
ntion%20and%20the%20STCW%20Code. (last visited 6/3/2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Discussion of Proposed Rule
In the following paragraphs, we provide a section-by-section
description of our proposed amendments to 46 CFR parts 11 and 12, in
section number order with topical headings.
46 CFR Part 11
Authority Citations
We are deleting reference to 46 U.S.C. 8906, and adding, in its
place, 46 U.S.C. chapter 89. Chapter 89 of 46 U.S.C. contains the
authorities for requiring various small vessel officer endorsements,
including the civil penalties (in 46 U.S.C. 8906) for violating the
chapter. We are also updating the reference to DHS Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.4, to reflect the most recent revision of this
document.
Subpart A--General
Section 11.102--Incorporation by Reference
The Coast Guard proposes to update the centralized incorporation by
reference for the 2017 Edition of the STCW Convention and the STCW
Code, which includes amendments through 2016. The STCW Convention sets
the minimum standards for training, certification and watchkeeping for
seafarers. The STCW Code addresses the technical aspects of the STCW
Convention, including minimum standards of competence and the
appropriate methods for demonstrating competence, which includes
training. Currently, regulations in 46 CFR chapter I, subchapter B,
reference the STCW Convention and the STCW Code, as amended through
2011. Additional amendments to the STCW Convention and the STCW Code
were adopted in 2016 and entered into force on July 1, 2018.\13\ These
amendments contain updated seafarer training requirements to address
emergencies on passenger ships, prescribing a five-tiered passenger
ship training approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See footnote 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The five-tiered approach includes passenger ship emergency
familiarization, safety training for personnel providing direct service
to passengers, passenger ship crowd management, crisis management and
human behavior, and passenger safety, cargo safety, and hull integrity
training.\14\ Each tier builds on the previous tier of training, and
the proposed training requirements are structured as appropriate to the
associated position of responsibility on board the ship.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ STCW Convention, Regulation V/2 and the STCW Code, Section
A-V/2, Mandatory minimum requirements for the training and
qualifications of masters, officers, ratings, and other personnel on
passenger ships.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart K--Officers on a Passenger Ship When on an International Voyage
Section 11.1105--General Requirements for Officer Endorsements
The Coast Guard proposes revising the title of this section from
``General requirements for officer endorsements'' to ``General
requirements.'' The proposed change would align with the purpose of
this subpart, in accordance with the STCW Convention and the STCW Code.
Other specific changes to Sec. 11.1105 are detailed below.
In summary, we propose combining existing paragraph (a)
introductory text and text from paragraph (a)(1) into paragraph (a)
introductory text; adding new paragraph (a)(1); redesignating
paragraphs (a)(1)(i) as (a)(3), (a)(1)(ii) as (a)(2), (a)(1)(iii) as
(a)(4) and (a)(1)(iv) as (a)(5); redesignating paragraph (a)(2) as
paragraph (b); and redesignating existing paragraphs (b), (c), and (d)
as paragraphs (c), (d) and (e) respectively. These changes would allow
paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(5) to refer to the applicable paragraphs
(1 through 5) of section A-V/2 of the STCW Code, as detailed in the
following discussion of those paragraphs.
In revised paragraph (a) introductory text, we would change the
word ``vessel'' to ``ship'' for consistency in terminology in this part
and add the text, ``before being assigned to shipboard duties'' for
clarity. The language from existing paragraph (a)(1) in revised
paragraph (a) introductory text details the incorporation of the STCW
Regulation V/2 and of section A-V/2 of the STCW Code. Revised paragraph
(a) introductory text would read, ``To serve on a passenger ship on
international voyages, before being assigned shipboard duties, masters,
deck officers, chief engineers, and engineer officers, must meet the
appropriate requirements of regulation V/2 of the STCW Convention and
of section A-V/2 of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
11.102) as follows:''.
New paragraph (a)(1) would specify that all officers and personnel
aboard passenger ships must have completed passenger ship emergency
familiarization appropriate to their capacity, duties, and
responsibilities. Paragraph (a)(1) would refer to section A-V/2
paragraph 1 of the STCW Code, which requires that passenger ship
emergency familiarization be completed before personnel are assigned to
shipboard duties.
In accordance with section A-V/2 paragraph 1 of the STCW Code,
passenger ship emergency familiarization must include topics to
familiarize personnel with the general safety features aboard the ship,
the location of essential safety equipment, including life-saving
appliances, the importance of personal conduct during the
implementation of emergency plans, and restrictions on the use of
elevators during emergencies. Passenger ship emergency familiarization,
in accordance with section A-V/2 paragraph 1 of the STCW Code, also
includes the requirement to communicate with passengers during an
emergency, including the ability to communicate in the working language
of the ship, including non-verbally communicating safety information,
and understanding one of the languages in which emergency announcements
may be broadcast on the ship during an emergency or drill.
Passenger ship emergency familiarization proposed in paragraph
(a)(1) would not require Coast Guard approval in accordance with 46 CFR
part 10, subpart D, and could be conducted on board the ship or in a
shore-based location. Operating companies would have to ensure
personnel are familiarized with the shipboard layout, their shipboard
duties, and emergency procedures. Personnel or vessel operating
companies should maintain documentary evidence verifying that personnel
have completed the Passenger Ship Emergency Familiarization training.
It is the responsibility of the operating companies, who are obligated
by Regulation I/14, ``Responsibilities of Companies'' of the STCW
Convention, to ensure that documentation relevant to personnel training
is maintained and readily accessible. Port State Control officers or
Coast Guard inspectors may ask to see evidence that personnel have
completed passenger ship emergency familiarization.
Redesignated paragraph (a)(2), which already requires the
completion of safety training for personnel providing direct service to
passengers in passenger spaces, would be revised to include the
addition of ``officers'' to personnel providing direct service to
passengers in passenger spaces. In addition, we would remove ``onboard
passenger ships'' from
[[Page 52328]]
the explanation of passenger spaces. We would add ``passenger ship'' to
more accurately describe the type of safety training required.
Paragraph (a)(2) would refer to section A-V/2 paragraph 2 of the STCW
Code, which requires that passenger ship safety training be completed
before personnel are assigned to shipboard duties.
In accordance with section A-V/2 paragraph 2 of the STCW Code,
passenger ship safety training must include communication.
Specifically, it must include:
The ability to communicate with passengers during an
emergency, taking into account the language or languages appropriate to
the principal nationalities of passengers carried on the particular
route;
The likelihood that an ability to use elementary English
vocabulary for basic instructions can provide a means of communicating
with a passenger in need of assistance, whether or not the passenger
and crew member share a common language;
The possible need to communicate during an emergency by
some other means, such as by demonstration, hand signals, or calling
attention to the location of instructions, muster stations, life-saving
devices, or evacuation routes when oral communication is impractical;
The extent to which complete safety instructions have been
provided to passengers in their native language or languages;
The languages in which emergency announcements may be
broadcast during an emergency or drill to convey critical guidance to
passengers and to facilitate crew members in assisting passengers; and
In accordance with section A-V/2 paragraph 2 of the STCW
Code, passenger ship safety training must include life-saving
appliances, specifically the ability to demonstrate to passengers the
use of personal life-saving appliances, and embarkation procedures with
special attention to disabled persons and persons needing assistance.
Passenger ship safety training proposed in paragraph (a)(2) would
not require Coast Guard approval in accordance with 46 CFR part 10,
subpart D, and could be conducted on board the ship or in a shore-based
location. Personnel completing passenger ship safety training are
obligated to maintain documentary evidence of their training by
Regulation V/2, ``Mandatory minimum requirements for the training and
qualification of masters, officers, ratings and other personnel on
passenger ships,'' of the STCW Convention.
The Coast Guard would make non-substantive changes in redesignated
paragraph (a)(3), which already requires the completion of crowd
management training. In addition, the Coast Guard would make the
following substantive changes to clarify which personnel are required
to complete the required training:
The text, ``ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and
VII of the STCW Convention '' would be added to masters, officers, and
personnel designated on muster lists to assist passengers in emergency
situations.
The text, ``approved or accepted'' would be added to
clarify that masters, officers, ratings qualified under Chapters II,
III, and VII of the STCW Convention, and personnel designated on muster
lists to assist passengers in emergency situations must complete
``approved or accepted'' training in passenger ship crowd management.
Requiring approved or accepted training aligns with 46 CFR part 10,
subpart D, which allows training to be either approved or accepted by
the Coast Guard.
The text would be revised to refer to section A-V/2
paragraph 3 of the STCW Code, which requires crowd management training
to be completed in accordance with STCW regulation V/2, paragraph 7, as
set out in table A-V/2-1. Personnel completing crowd management
training are obligated to maintain documentary evidence of their
training by Regulation V/2, ``Mandatory minimum requirements for the
training and qualification of masters, officers, ratings and other
personnel on passenger ships,'' of the STCW Convention.
Redesignated paragraph (a)(4) would be revised to make one non-
substantive change. Additionally, redesignated paragraph (a)(4), which
already includes a requirement for the completion of crisis management
and human behavior, would be revised to clarify that training in crisis
management and human behavior must be approved ``or accepted'' training
in accordance with 46 CFR part 10, subpart D. Paragraph (a)(4) would
also be revised to refer to section A-V/2 paragraph 4 of the STCW Code,
which requires training in crisis management and human behavior to be
completed in accordance with STCW regulation V/2 paragraph 8, as set
out in table A-V/2-2. Personnel completing crisis management and human
behavior training are obligated to maintain documentary evidence of
their training by Regulation V/2, ``Mandatory minimum requirements for
the training and qualification of masters, officers, ratings and other
personnel on passenger ships,'' of the STCW Convention.
Redesignated paragraph (a)(5) would be revised to make one non-
substantive change. Redesignated paragraph (a)(5) would also be revised
to clarify that training in passenger safety, cargo safety, and hull
integrity must be approved ``or accepted'' training in accordance with
46 CFR part 10, subpart D. Paragraph (a)(5) would also be revised to
refer to section A-V/2 paragraph 5 of the STCW Code, which requires
that training must be completed before personnel are assigned to
shipboard duties.
In accordance with section A-V/2 paragraph 5 of the STCW Code,
passenger safety, cargo safety, and hull integrity training must
include loading and embarkation procedures and, specifically, the
ability to properly apply the procedures established for the ship
regarding loading and discharging vehicles, rail cars and other cargo
transport units, including related communications; lowering and
hoisting ramps; setting up and stowing retractable vehicle decks; and
embarking and disembarking passengers, with special attention to
disabled persons and persons needing assistance.
Passenger safety, cargo safety, and hull integrity training must
also include:
Carriage of dangerous goods, including the ability to
apply any special safeguards, procedures, and requirements regarding
the carriage of dangerous goods on board ro-ro passenger ships; \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ A ro-ro, or roll-on/roll-off passenger ship is defined in
Chapter II-1, Regulation 2 of SOLAS, as being ``a passenger ship
with ro-ro cargo spaces or special category spaces.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Securing cargoes, specifically the ability to correctly
apply the provisions of the Code of Safe Practices for Cargo Stowage
and Securing (CSS Code) \16\ to the vehicles, rail cars, and other
cargo transport units carried, and to properly use the cargo-securing
equipment and materials provided, considering their limitations;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ The CSS Code provides an international standard for the
safe stowage and securing of cargoes to promote the safety of life
both at sea, and during loading and discharge. See https://
www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/Pages/CSS-
Code.aspx#:~:text=All%20cargoes%20should%20be%20stowed,be%20properly%
20qualified%20and%20experienced. (last visited 6/3/2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stability, trim, and stress calculations, specifically the
ability to make proper use of the stability and stress information
provided; calculate stability and trim for different conditions of
loading, using the stability
[[Page 52329]]
calculators or computer programs provided; calculate load factors for
decks; and calculate the impact of ballast and fuel transfers on
stability, trim, and stress; and
Opening, closing and securing hull openings, including the
ability to properly apply the procedures established for the ship for
opening, closing and securing bow, stern and side doors and ramps;
correctly operating the associated systems and conducting surveys on
proper sealing and ro-ro deck atmosphere, including the ability to use
equipment, where carried, to monitor atmosphere in ro-ro spaces and
properly apply the procedures established for the ship for ventilation
of ro-ro spaces during lading and discharging of vehicles, while on
voyage and in emergencies.
Personnel completing passenger safety, cargo safety, and hull
integrity training are obligated to maintain documentary evidence of
their training by Regulation V/2, ``Mandatory minimum requirements for
the training and qualification of masters, officers, ratings and other
personnel on passenger ships,'' of the STCW Convention.
Redesignated paragraph (b) would be revised to state that,
``Personnel required to be trained in accordance with paragraph (a) of
this section must hold documentary evidence of successful completion of
training as proof of meeting these requirements.'' These revisions
clarify who is required to hold evidence of successful completion of
training in accordance with paragraph (a). We are proposing to remove
the existing text, ``through approved or accepted training,'' to
clarify that the training required in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2)
would not have to be Coast Guard-approved or accepted training, while
the training required in paragraphs (a)(3), (a)(4), and (a)(5) must be
Coast Guard-approved or accepted training.
Redesignated paragraph (c) would be revised to update terminology
used in this subpart and make other non-substantive changes. Paragraph
(c) would also be revised to correct references to other revised
paragraphs in this subpart for personnel who must provide evidence of
having maintained the required standard of competence every 5 years.
Redesignated paragraph (d) would be revised to update the paragraph
reference, which was redesignated from paragraph (b) to paragraph (c),
and would be revised to replace the word ``sea'' with ``relevant
seagoing'' to better describe the service needed to maintain the
standard of competence.
Redesignated paragraph (e) would be revised to replace the word
``vessels'' with ``ships'' to provide consistency of terminology used
in this subpart.
46 CFR Part 12
Authority Citations
The Coast Guard proposes to revise the authorities listed for Part
12 by adding 46 U.S.C. 7303 through 7316. We are proposing this change
to more clearly cite the statutory authority provided by Congress to
promulgate regulations for all classifications of ratings endorsements
with respect to standards of competency, training, and sea service. We
are also updating the reference to DHS Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision
No. 01.4, to reflect the most recent revision of this document.
Subpart A--General
Section 12.103--Incorporation by Reference.
The Coast Guard proposes to redesignate paragraph (b)(1),
previously reserved, as paragraph (b)(2). New paragraph (b)(1) would be
added to incorporate by reference the 2017 Edition of the STCW
Convention, which includes amendments through 2016. Redesignated
paragraph (b)(2) would reference the 2017 Edition of the STCW Code,
which include all amendments through 2016.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See section V, Discussion of Proposed Rule, 46 CFR part 11,
subpart A, in this document for a description of the STCW Convention
and the STCW Code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart I--Ratings and Personnel on a Passenger Ship When on an
International Voyage
The Coast Guard proposes revising the title of this subpart from
``Crewmembers on a Passenger Ship on an International Voyage,'' to
``Ratings and Personnel on a Passenger Ship When on an International
Voyage.'' The proposed change would align with the purpose of this
subpart, in accordance with the STCW Convention and the STCW Code. We
propose making an editorial change to Sec. 12.901; for Sec. 12.905,
we propose combining existing paragraph (a) introductory text and
paragraph (a)(1) into paragraph (a) introductory text; redesignating
existing paragraph (a)(2) as paragraph (b); adding new paragraphs
(a)(1) through (a)(5); and redesignating existing paragraphs (b), (c),
and (d) as paragraphs (c), (d) and (e) respectively. Proposed new
paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(5) would refer to the applicable
paragraphs (1 through 5) of section A-V/2 of the STCW Code. The
specific changes to Sec. 12.905 are detailed below.
Section 12.905--General Requirements
In revised paragraph (a) introductory text, we would replace the
word ``vessel'' with ``ship'' to provide consistency of terminology
used in this subpart and revise the text to clarify when and to whom
the requirements apply. We would also move language from existing
paragraph (a)(1) to paragraph (a) introductory text to detail the
incorporation of the STCW Regulation V/2 and of section A-V/2 of the
STCW Code. Revised paragraph (a) introductory text would read, ``To
serve on a passenger ship on an international voyage, before being
assigned shipboard duties, personnel must meet the appropriate
requirements in STCW Regulation V/2 and Section A-V/2 of the STCW Code
(both incorporated by reference, see Sec. 12.103) as follows:''.
Paragraph (a)(1) would be amended to specify that all personnel
must have completed passenger ship emergency familiarization
appropriate to their capacity, duties, and responsibilities. Paragraph
(a)(1) would also refer to section A-V/2 paragraph 1 of the STCW
Code.\18\ Passenger ship emergency familiarization proposed in
paragraph (a)(1) would not require Coast Guard approval in accordance
with 46 CFR part 10, subpart D, and could be conducted on board the
ship or in a shore-based location.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See section V, Discussion of Proposed Rule, Sec. 11.1105,
in this document for a description of section A-V/2 paragraph 1 of
the STCW Code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (a)(2) would be redesignated as paragraph (b). New
paragraph (a)(2) would be added to include the requirement that
personnel providing direct service to passengers in passenger spaces
must have completed the passenger ship safety training. Paragraph
(a)(2) would also refer to section A-V/2 paragraph 2 of the STCW
Code.\19\ Passenger ship safety training proposed in paragraph (a)(2)
would not require Coast Guard approval in accordance with 46 CFR part
10, subpart D, and could be conducted on board the ship or in a shore-
based location.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See section V, Discussion of Proposed Rule, Sec. 11.1105,
in this document for a description of section A-V/2 paragraph 2 of
the STCW Code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed new paragraph (a)(3) would add the requirement that
ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and VII of the STCW
Convention and personnel designated on the muster list to assist
passengers in an emergency situation onboard passenger ships must have
completed approved or accepted training in passenger ship crowd
management. Passenger ship crowd management training must be approved
or accepted training in accordance with
[[Page 52330]]
46 CFR part 10, subpart D. This paragraph would also refer to section
A-V/2 paragraph 3 of the STCW Code.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See section V, Discussion of Proposed Rule, Sec. 11.1105,
in this document for a description of section A-V/2 paragraph 3 of
the STCW Code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed new paragraph (a)(4) would add the requirement that
personnel designated on muster lists as having responsibility for the
safety of passengers in emergency situations onboard passenger ships
must have completed approved or accepted training in crisis management
and human behavior. Crisis management and human behavior training must
be approved or accepted training in accordance with 46 CFR part 10,
subpart D. This paragraph would also refer to section A-V/2 paragraph 4
of the STCW Code.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See section V, Discussion of Proposed Rule, Sec. 11.1105,
in this document for a description of section A-V/2 paragraph 4 of
the STCW Code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed new paragraph (a)(5) would add the requirement that
personnel assigned immediate responsibility for embarking and
disembarking passengers, loading, discharging, or securing cargo, or
closing hull openings onboard ro-ro passenger ships must have completed
approved or accepted training in passenger safety, cargo safety, and
hull integrity. Passenger safety, cargo safety, and hull integrity
training must be approved or accepted training in accordance with 46
CFR part 10, subpart D. This paragraph would also refer to section A-V/
2 paragraph 5 of the STCW Code.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See section V, Discussion of Proposed Rule, Sec. 11.1105,
in this document for a description of section A-V/2 paragraph 5 of
the STCW Code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Redesignated paragraph (b) would be revised to require personnel
completing the training described in paragraph (a) to hold documentary
evidence of meeting these requirements.
Redesignated paragraph (c) would be revised to update terminology
used in this subpart and make other non-substantive changes. Paragraph
(c) would also be revised to correct references to other revised
paragraphs in this subpart for personnel who must provide evidence of
having maintained the required standard of competence every 5 years.
Redesignated paragraph (d) would be revised to update the paragraph
reference which was redesignated from paragraph (b) to paragraph (c)
and would be revised to replace the word ``sea'' with ``relevant
seagoing'' to better describe the service needed to maintain the
standard of competence.
VI. Incorporation by Reference
Material proposed for incorporation by reference appears in the
proposed regulatory text for 46 CFR 11.102 and 12.103. The sections
that reference these standards, and the locations and web addresses
where these standards are available, are listed in those sections. The
material incorporated by reference is summarized in this preamble in
Section V, Discussion of Proposed Rule, under the discussions of
Sec. Sec. 11.102 and 11.1105. For information about how to view this
material, see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble. Copies of the
material are available from the sources listed in the proposed
regulatory text for Sec. Sec. 11.102 and 12.103. Before publishing a
binding rule, we will submit this material to the Director of the
Federal Register for approval of the incorporation by reference.
Consistent with 1 CFR part 51 incorporation by reference
provisions, this material is reasonably available. Interested persons
have access to it through their normal course of business, may purchase
it from the IMO identified in 46 CFR 11.102 or 12.103, or may view a
copy by means we have identified in those sections.
VII. Regulatory Analyses
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and Executive orders related to rulemaking. A summary of our analyses
based on these statutes or Executive orders follows.
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), as amended
by Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing Regulatory 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 costs and
benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility.
Additionally, Executive Order 13609, ``Promoting International
Cooperation,'' promotes the goal of Executive Order 13563. Executive
Order 13609 targets international regulatory cooperation to reduce,
eliminate, or prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory
requirements. As discussed in sections IV. Background, and V.
Discussion of Proposed Rule, as a signatory to the STCW Convention, the
United States is required to implement amendments to the STCW
Convention and the STCW Code through national regulations.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated this
rule a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 14094. Accordingly, OMB has
not reviewed it. A summary of the proposed rule's impacts is presented
below, and a more detailed discussion on the estimated costs and
benefits of this proposed rule follows.
The proposed rule would make the following changes, which would
apply to all personnel serving on U.S.-flagged passenger ships:
(1) Incorporate by reference the 2017 Edition of the STCW
Convention and the STCW Code, to include amendments through 2016 in 46
CFR parts 11 and 12.
(2) Add a new requirement for all personnel to complete passenger
ship emergency familiarization appropriate to their capacity, duties,
and responsibilities during an emergency. Personnel would have to
complete the familiarization before being assigned to shipboard duties.
The passenger ship emergency familiarization requirement would apply to
all personnel, including masters, officers, and ratings qualified under
Chapters II, III, and VII of the STCW Convention. This familiarization
would not require Coast Guard approval in accordance with 46 CFR part
10, subpart D, and could be conducted on board the ship or at a shore-
based location. Mariners or ship operators should maintain
documentation verifying that personnel have completed the passenger
ship emergency familiarization.
(3) Expand the applicability of the crowd management training
requirement by adding ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and VII
of the STCW Convention to the current applicability of officers and
personnel designated on the muster list to assist passengers in
emergency situations. Currently, only masters, officers, and personnel
designated on the muster list to assist passengers on board passenger
ships in emergency situations must complete crowd management training.
The Coast Guard considers the benefits and costs of the proposed
rulemaking against the baseline, which is our best assessment of
maritime affairs absent this proposed action. The Coast Guard does not
have data on whether the U.S.-passenger-ship industry is currently in
compliance with the training requirements in this proposal. Pursuant to
46 CFR 1.01-10(f)(1), which authorizes the Coast Guard to supervise the
administration of the manning of U.S. ships, PSC officers
[[Page 52331]]
and Coast Guard inspectors are currently verifying that mariners hold
the appropriate credentials and have met the training required by the
STCW Convention and the STCW Code, but are not tracking compliance with
the requirements outlined in this proposed rule, since compliance is
currently voluntary.
While the Coast Guard believes it is possible that personnel may
have already completed the required passenger ship trainings before the
effective date of this proposed rule, due to a lack of data, we cannot
assume compliance. Thus, for the purposes of this regulatory analysis,
we assume personnel are not in compliance with the proposed training
requirements, and we measure initial compliance costs in the first year
of implementation. As a result, the Coast Guard estimates that the
operating companies of U.S.-flagged passenger ships would incur
undiscounted average annual costs of approximately $352,560, in 2021
dollars, from the passenger ship emergency familiarization
requirements, and ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and VII of
the STCW Convention would incur undiscounted average annual costs of
$21,185, in 2021 dollars, to comply with the crowd management training
requirement. Taken together, the proposed rule would result in
annualized costs to industry of approximately $375,707, and total costs
of $3,374,817, in 2021 dollars, when discounted at 2 percent over a 10-
year period of analysis. The Coast Guard believes the proposed rule
would improve safety of life at sea by ensuring passenger ship
personnel are equipped to assist passengers in an emergency and would
also maintain the ability of passenger ships and mariners to operate in
international markets. Table 1 provides a summary of the proposed
rule's applicability, affected population, potential costs, and
benefits.
Table 1--Summary of the Proposed Rule's Impacts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Summary
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicability......................... The proposed rule would apply to
personnel serving on U.S.-
flagged passenger ships that
carry more than 12 passengers
on international voyages.
Affected Population................... The proposed rule creates costs
for 37 operating companies
employing 1,080 mariners and
other personnel and for 44
specified ratings serving on 50
U.S.-flagged passenger ships.
Cost Impacts.......................... Operating companies would incur
undiscounted average annual
costs of approximately $352,560
in 2021 dollars, from the
passenger ship emergency
familiarization requirements.
Personnel with ratings
qualified under Chapters II,
III, and VII of the STCW
Convention would incur
undiscounted average annual
costs of approximately $21,185,
in 2021 dollars, in tuition,
travel expenses, opportunity
cost, and per diem to comply
with the crowd management
training requirements. Taken
together, the proposed rule
results in annualized costs to
industry of approximately
$375,707 and total costs of
approximately $3,374,817 in
2021 dollars, when discounted
at 2 percent over a 10-year
period of analysis.
This proposed rule creates no
new costs for Government.
Unquantified Benefits................. The proposed rule aligns U.S.
regulations with international
standards and ensures the U.S.
retains its status on the IMO's
``White List'' which ensures
that U.S.-flagged passenger
ships avoid potential
detainment or denial of entry
in foreign ports and U.S. This
ensures U.S.-flagged vessels
and mariners retain the ability
to operate in international
markets.
The proposed rule promotes
international harmonization and
reciprocity of maritime
regulations between the U.S.
and countries where the
affected ships in this proposed
rule may operate. This
reciprocity promotes the safety
of U.S. passengers who
disproportionately cruise on
foreign-flagged ships.
The proposed rule promotes the
safety of life at sea in the
case of an emergency which may
prevent the loss of life,
reduce the risk of injury, and
increase protection of property
in the marine environment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description of Regulatory Changes
This proposed rule would result in multiple changes that have
costs. First, the proposed rule would add passenger ship emergency
familiarization requirements for officers, ratings, and personnel on
passenger ships making international voyages. This training includes
topics to familiarize personnel with the general safety features aboard
the ship, the location of essential safety equipment, including life-
saving appliances, the importance of personal conduct during the
implementation of emergency plans, and restrictions on the use of
elevators during emergencies. Passenger ship emergency familiarization
also includes the requirement to communicate with passengers during an
emergency, including the ability to communicate in the working language
of the ship, including non-verbally communicating safety information,
and understanding one of the languages in which emergency announcements
may be broadcast on the ship during an emergency or drill. Second, the
proposed rule would expand the applicability of crowd management
training by requiring ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and VII
of the STCW Convention to complete this training. Currently, only
officers and personnel designated on the muster list to assist
passengers in emergency situations are required to complete this
training. Table 2 lists and describes the changes we propose to make to
46 CFR parts 11 and 12, with their associated impacts.
Table 2--Proposed Changes to 46 CFR Parts 11 and 12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section Description of Change Impact
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Revisions to 46 CFR Part 11
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part 11.............................. Revises the authorities listed for part 11 This editorial change would
by removing extraneous references related not impose any costs or cost
to Executive Order 10173 and updates the savings.
reference to DHS Delegation No. 00170.1,
Revision No. 01.4, to reflect the most
recent revision of this document.
11.102(a)............................ Edits paragraph (a) to remove CG-MMC and This editorial change would
National Archives and Records not impose any costs or cost
Administration (NARA) phone numbers, as savings.
well as update the NARA website URL.
11.102(b)............................ Edits paragraph (b) introductory text to This editorial change would
add IMO phone number, email, and website. not impose any costs or cost
savings.
[[Page 52332]]
11.102(b)(1), 11.102(b)(2)........... Amends paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) to This editorial change would
update the incorporation by reference of not impose any costs or cost
the STCW Convention, 2017 Edition, and savings.
specifies the paragraphs in 46 CFR part
11 affected by these amendments.
11.305, 11.307, 11.309, 11.311, Amends footnote 2 in Table 1 of each This editorial change would
11.313, 11.315, 11.317, 11.319, impacted section to add reference to the not impose any costs or cost
11.321, 11.325, 11.327, 11.331, appropriate section of the STCW Code. savings.
11.333.
11.329............................... Renumbers footnotes associated with Table This editorial change would
1 for greater consistency with other not impose any costs or cost
sections, and amends footnote 2 in Table savings.
1 of this section to add reference to the
appropriate section of the STCW Code.
11.1105.............................. Removes the term ``for officer This editorial change would
endorsements'' from the title to reflect not impose any costs or cost
that the Coast Guard does not issue savings.
endorsements in accordance with any of
the requirements in this subpart.
11.1105(a)........................... Merges paragraph (a)(1) into paragraph (a) This editorial change would
introductory text. Replaces the word not impose any costs or cost
``vessel'' with ``ship'' for consistency savings.
with the terminology used in this
subpart, adds the text ``before being
assigned shipboard duties'' and deletes
the text ``of this part'' for clarity.
11.1105(a)(1)........................ Amends paragraph (a)(1) to add a new This change would create new
requirement for officers and personnel to costs and benefits.
complete a passenger ship emergency Operating companies would
familiarization. Paragraph (a)(1)(i) is incur initial-year costs of
revised and redesignated as new paragraph $390,941 (in undiscounted
(a)(3) to retain the requirement for 2021 dollars) to comply with
crowd management training. passenger ship emergency
familiarization
requirements. Affects 200
officers, 44 specified
ratings, and 836 personnel
serving on 50 U.S.-flagged
passenger ships, with
numbers declining in
subsequent years due to
ships exiting the industry.
Benefits include enhanced
passenger safety at sea in
the case of an emergency
which may prevent the loss
of life, reduce the risk of
injury, and increase
protection of property in
the marine environment. It
also increases international
harmonization of maritime
regulation and allows the
U.S. to maintain its status
on the IMO's ``White List''.
11.1105(a)(2)........................ Continues renumbering of paragraphs in This editorial change would
section 11.1105 for consistency with not impose any costs or cost
paragraph numbering in the STCW Code, and savings.
further clarifies that officers and
personnel are required to comply with the
STCW Code's training requirements.
11.1105(a)(3)........................ Paragraph (a)(1)(i) is redesignated as This editorial change would
paragraph (a)(3) to retain the not impose any costs or cost
requirement for crowd management savings since it is a
training. Revisions include adding that revision of an existing
training may be accepted, and adding requirement. The new costs
``ratings qualified under Chapters II, associated with expanding
III, and VII of the STCW Convention'' as crowd management training
affected mariners to harmonize with requirement to ratings
changes in 46 CFR Part 12. qualified under Chapters II,
III, and VII of the STCW
Convention will be reflected
in the changes to 46 CFR
Part 12.
11.1105(a)(4), 11.1105(a)(5)......... Paragraph (a)(1)(iii) is redesignated as This editorial change would
paragraph (a)(4) and paragraph (a)(1)(iv) not impose any costs or cost
is redesignated as paragraph (a)(5) to savings.
continue renumbering of paragraphs in
section 11.1105 for consistency with the
format of the five-tiered approach to
training in the STCW Code and
corresponding paragraph numbering to
improve readability for readers familiar
with the STCW Code.
11.1105(b), 11.1105(c), 11.1105(d), Paragraph (a)(2) is redesignated as This editorial change would
11.1105(e). paragraph (b), redesignates paragraph (b) not impose any costs or cost
as paragraph (c), redesignates paragraph savings.
(c) as paragraph (d), and redesignates
paragraph (d) as paragraph (e). All are
revised to reference the appropriate
paragraph detailing training or evidence
of training. Paragraph (d) deletes
``sea'' and adds ``relevant seagoing''
for consistency. Paragraph (e) changes
``vessels'' to ``ships'' and adds
``Convention'' after ``STCW'' for greater
consistency with the terminology used in
this subpart.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52333]]
Proposed Revisions to 46 CFR Part 12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part 12.............................. Revises the authorities listed for part 12 This editorial change would
by adding additional sections from 46 not impose any costs or cost
U.S.C. 7303-7316 to more clearly cite the savings.
statutory authority provided by Congress,
and updates the reference to DHS
Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No.
01.4, to reflect the most recent revision
of this document.
12.103(a)............................ Edits paragraph (a) to remove CG-MMC and This editorial change would
NARA phone numbers, as well as update the not impose any costs or cost
NARA website URL and email. savings.
12.103(b)............................ Edits paragraph (b) introductory text to This editorial change would
add IMO phone number, email, and website. not impose any costs or cost
savings.
12.103(b)(1)......................... Redesignates paragraph (b)(1) as paragraph This editorial change would
(b)(2) and adds a new paragraph (b)(1) to not impose any costs or cost
incorporate by reference the STCW savings.
Convention, 2017 Edition.
12.103(b)(2)......................... Amends redesignated paragraph (b)(2) to This editorial change would
update the incorporation by reference of not impose any costs or cost
the STCW Code, 2017 Edition, and updates savings.
the sections and paragraphs in 46 CFR
Part 12 affected by these amendments.
12.603............................... Amends footnotes 2 and 3 in Table 1 to This editorial change would
Sec. 12.3603(d) to add reference to the not impose any costs or cost
appropriate sections of the STCW Code. savings.
12.605, 12.609, 12.611............... Amends footnote 2 in Table 1 to Sec. This editorial change would
12.3605(c), Sec. 12.3609(c), and Sec. not impose any costs or cost
12.3611(c) to add reference to the savings.
appropriate sections of the STCW Code.
12.901............................... Revises the title of subpart I to better This editorial change would
reflect the purpose of the subpart in not impose any costs or cost
accordance with the STCW Code. Changes savings.
the text ``part'' to ``subpart'' for
consistency.
12.905(a)............................ Moves text from paragraph (a)(1) into This editorial change would
paragraph (a) introductory text. Replaces not impose any costs or cost
the word ``vessel'' with ``ship'' for savings.
consistency with terminology used in this
subpart and revises the text to specify
when and to whom the requirements apply.
12.905(a)(1)......................... Amends paragraph (a)(1) to add a This change would create new
requirement for all personnel to complete costs and benefits. 37
passenger ship emergency familiarization. operating companies would
incur initial-year costs of
$390,941 (in undiscounted
2021 dollars) to achieve
compliance with passenger
ship emergency
familiarization
requirements. Affects 200
officers, 44 ratings, and
836 personnel serving on 50
U.S.-flagged passenger
ships, with numbers
declining in subsequent
years due to ships exiting
the industry. Benefits
include enhanced passenger
safety at sea in the case of
an emergency which may
prevent the loss of life,
reduce the risk of injury,
and increase protection of
property in the marine
environment. It also
increases international
harmonization of maritime
regulation and allows the
U.S. to maintain its status
on the IMO's ``White List''.
12.905(a)(2)......................... Redesignates paragraph (a)(2) as paragraph This editorial change would
(b). Adds new paragraph (a)(2) to specify not impose any costs or cost
that personnel providing direct service savings.
to passengers in passenger spaces must
complete passenger ship safety training
specified in section A-V/2 paragraph 2 of
the STCW Code. This was an existing
requirement but is now being specified
for greater clarity and consistency with
the five-tiered approach to training in
the STCW Code.
[[Page 52334]]
12.905(a)(3)......................... Adds new paragraph (a)(3) to require This change would create new
ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, costs and benefits. Ratings
and VII of the STCW Convention and qualified under Chapters II,
personnel designated on the muster list III, and VII of the STCW
to assist passengers in emergency Convention would incur
situations to complete crowd management average annual costs of
training. $21,185 (in undiscounted
2021 dollars). More
specifically, we estimate
ratings will incur $65,185
(in undiscounted 2021
dollars) in the first year
to comply with crowd
management training
requirements and then incur
an average of $16,296 (in
undiscounted 2021 dollars)
in annually recurring costs
to train new ratings due to
turnovers. Affects 44
specified ratings serving on
50 U.S.-flagged passenger
ships in the first year of
implementation, with
decreasing numbers every
year after. See table 3 for
details on turnovers.
Benefits include enhanced
passenger safety at sea in
the case of an emergency
which may prevent the loss
of life, reduce the risk of
injury, and increase
protection of property in
the marine environment. It
also increases international
harmonization of maritime
regulation and allows the
U.S. to maintain its status
on the IMO's ``White List''.
In addition, this ensures
U.S. mariners meet
international standards and
maintain their ability to
serve on foreign-flagged
ships.
12.905(a)(4)......................... Adds new paragraph (a)(4) to specify that This editorial change would
personnel designated on the muster list not impose any costs or cost
as having responsibility for the safety savings.
of passengers in emergency situations
must complete training in crisis
management and human behavior. This was
an existing requirement but is now being
specified for greater clarity and
consistency with the five-tiered approach
to training in the STCW Code.
12.905(a)(5)......................... Adds new paragraph (a)(5) to specify that This editorial change would
personnel assigned immediate not impose any costs or cost
responsibility for embarking and savings.
disembarking passengers, loading,
discharging, or securing cargo, or
closing hull openings onboard ro-ro
passenger ships must complete training in
passenger safety, cargo safety, and hull
integrity. This was an existing
requirement but is now being specified
for greater clarity and consistency with
the five-tiered approach to training in
the STCW Code.
12.905(b)............................ Redesignates paragraph (a)(2) as paragraph This editorial change would
(b) and revises text of paragraph (b) to not impose any costs or cost
clarify that personnel must retain savings.
documentary evidence of training
completion. This was an existing
requirement but is now being specified
for greater clarity and consistency with
the STCW Code.
12.905(c), 12.905(d), 12.905(e)...... Redesignates paragraph (b) as paragraph This editorial change would
(c), redesignates paragraph (c) as not impose any costs or cost
paragraph (d), redesignates paragraph (d) savings.
to paragraph (e), and revises text to
reference the correct paragraphs
outlining training requirements and
evidence of training. Paragraph (d) is
updated to remove ``sea'' and add
``relevant seagoing'' for consistency.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Affected Population
This proposed rule would have two affected populations that would
incur costs: (1) operating companies with U.S.-flagged passenger ships;
and (2) ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and VII of the STCW
Convention serving on the same ships.
The Coast Guard analyzed data from the Marine Information for
Safety and Law Enforcement (MISLE) database to determine the number of
U.S.-flagged passenger ships that carry more than 12 passengers on
international voyages and to determine the number of unique owners and
operators.\23\ We determined that there are 50 U.S.-flagged passenger
ships owned by 37 operating companies that would incur the costs of
providing passenger ship emergency familiarization to the officers,
ratings, and personnel aboard their ships. Unlike most STCW Convention
and STCW Code training requirements, it would be incumbent upon the
owners and operators of these passenger ships to provide this training,
since it is ship-specific and is given on board prior to assuming
duties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ The Coast Guard used MISLE to provide data on all active
(inspected by definition) U.S.-flagged passenger vessels that carry
over 12 passengers on international voyages as defined by their
SOLAS certification and route type.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To determine the number of officers, ratings, and personnel
impacted by the proposed passenger ship emergency familiarization
requirements, as well as the number of ratings qualified under Chapters
II, III, and VII of the STCW Convention who would be subject to the
proposed crowd management training
[[Page 52335]]
requirements, the Coast Guard used additional data from the MISLE
database.\24\ The Coast Guard reviewed the certificate of inspection
for all 50 U.S.-flagged passenger ships in the affected ship population
and reviewed the manning requirements for each ship.\25\ Accordingly,
we determined that 1,080 personnel [(100 officers + 22 specified
ratings + 418 additional personnel) x 2 mariners per ship] would be
subject to the proposed training requirements.\26\ Specifically, the
passenger ship emergency familiarization requirement would affect 1,080
personnel (200 officers + 44 specified ratings + 836 personnel), and
the expanded applicability of crowd management training requirements
would affect the 44 ratings. See table 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ MISLE was accessed on September 9, 2021.
\25\ According to 46 U.S.C. Subtitle II, Part F: Manning of
Vessels, manning requirements refer to requirements generally for
the number of individuals required, qualifications and conditions of
employment, and duties; for masters and other licenses and
registered individuals; for pilots; for unlicensed personnel; for
small vessels; for tank vessels; and for pilotage on the Great
Lakes.
\26\ For each passenger ship, we assume two individuals to serve
in each billet, to account for the rotational nature of shipboard
employment.
Table 3--Counts of Mariners in the Affected Population
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Number of Number of additional
officers specified ratings personnel Total mariners
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crew 1................................ 100 22 418 540
Crew 2................................ 100 22 418 540
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................. 200 44 836 1,080
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, we utilized historical ship population data from 2012
to 2021 to estimate growth rates within the industry, and subsequent
changes to the ship and mariner population into the future. After
examining the changes in ship population over time, the Coast Guard
determined that the population of U.S.-flagged passenger ships is
facing a gradual decline despite apparent growth in the foreign-flagged
fleet. While linear growth rates are typically preferred, we determined
that a linear decline that would eventually reach zero is an
unrealistic picture of the changing dynamics of the ship population.
Instead, a logarithmic decline that gradually levels off according to
the formula for the trend line y = -10.93ln(x) + 70.614 more accurately
portrays the industry because logarithmic functions are best used to
project slow rates of decline, and trend towards a number without
reaching zero. This rate of decline is reflected in Figure 1. However,
for the purposes of this analysis, we estimate that the U.S.-flagged
ship population will decrease by one ship each year, which is the
closest whole number to the average annual change in population over
the next 10 years of analysis. Therefore, we estimate that the
continuous decrease in the affected mariner population is equivalent to
the manning requirements of a ship exiting service each year.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP21JN24.001
Next, we reviewed the manning requirements for the 50 U.S.-flagged
passenger ships to derive the average manning requirement and thereby
estimate the decrease in mariners and personnel each year. The affected
population of 50 U.S.-flagged passenger ships is comprised of 3
categories of ships: 3 passenger vessels of 100 or more gross tons (46
CFR Subchapter H), 9 small passenger vessels of less than 100 gross
tons carrying more than 150 passengers or with overnight accommodations
for more than 49 passengers (46 CFR Subchapter K), and
[[Page 52336]]
38 small passenger vessels of less than 100 gross tons (46 CFR
Subchapter T). The average crew size for each of the categories of
vessels and the entire population is displayed in Table 4.
Table 4--Average Counts of Mariners by Category of Passenger Vessel in the Affected Population
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Average Average additional
Vessel category officers ratings personnel
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Passenger Vessels of 100 or More Gross Tons............... 8 7 40
Passenger Vessels Carrying More Than 150 Passengers or 3 0 20
With Overnight Accommodations for More Than 49 Passengers
Passenger Vessels of Less Than 100 Gross Tons............. 1 0 3
-----------------------------------------------------
Total (Across Entire Population) \27\................. 2 1 8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on this data, the Coast Guard estimates that the average ship
in the population carries 11 mariners (2 officers, 1 specified rating,
and 8 personnel) and operates with 2 crews that would be subject to the
proposed requirements. The Coast Guard assumes that, as ships subject
to the proposed requirements exit the fleet, mariners will have less
opportunity to serve aboard these ships and leave the affected
population. Because we do not know which category of vessel may exit
the affected population in a given year, we elect to use the overall
population average rather than the specific estimates for the
subcategories of ships to account for mariner exit in the affected
population. We believe that, since the majority of the affected
population is made up of smaller ships (38 of the 50 affected ships),
this overall average which tends toward a smaller ship is most
representative. Therefore, we estimate that each exiting ship would
result in 22 fewer personnel subject to the proposed training
requirements (4 officers, 2 specified ratings, and 16 personnel across
2 crews). The Coast Guard requests comments on the accuracy of our
assumptions related to ship and mariner exit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ These totals are calculated from the full affected
population of vessels. For example, 200 officers divided by 50 ships
leads to an average of 2 officers per ship.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mariner Turnover
In any given year, there will be turnover in the mariner population
and some credentialed mariners will choose to exit the industry. The
turnover rate is the number of mariners who leave the industry and will
need to be replaced by mariners with an MMC. Because the Coast Guard
does not issue passenger ship endorsements, we cannot estimate the
turnover rate from existing data. Instead, the Coast Guard uses the
turnover rate derived for the ``Persons in Charge of Fuel Transfers''
final rule (PIC rule), published on May 27, 2020 (85 FR 31677) as an
approximation for the turnover rate for this rule.\28\ In that rule,
the Coast Guard estimated that, in any given year, 32.55 percent of the
population that was eligible to renew a specific MMC endorsement would
not do so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/05/27/2020-11366/person-in-charge-of-fuel-transfers (last visited 3/15/2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The PIC rule utilized data from the National Maritime Center (NMC)
for individuals obtaining MMCs with issue dates from April 2009 to
March 2020 and expiration dates from August 2009 to March 2025. In the
data from NMC, every MMC issued and every mariner has a unique
identifying number such that sorting by mariner reference number shows
all the MMCs for that mariner. We then cleaned the data and applied a
formula that marks each MMC as either renewed, not renewed, or
ineligible to renew. We marked any MMC with an expiration date after
July 18, 2019 (when the data was downloaded) as ineligible to renew.
Otherwise, we assumed an MMC is renewed if the issue date is within
2,190 days of the previous MMC's issue date. The period of 2,190 days
is equivalent to 6 years (6 years x 365 days in a standard calendar
year), which represents the validity period of 5 years plus a year-long
grace period wherein a mariner cannot use the expiring MMC but could
renew that MMC without having to retake the required formal training
from the beginning. If there was no new MMC issued by March 2015, we
assumed that the mariner left the marine industry or otherwise no
longer requires an MMC (turned over) in 2015. We then tabulated how
many MMCs in each calendar year were eligible to renew, how many of
those eligible were renewed, and how many of those eligible were not
renewed to produce a turnover percentage as discussed. The PIC rule
utilized a 3-year average of turnover rates to arrive at the calculated
turnover rate. This rate assumes that any mariner lost to turnover in a
given year is replaced by a mariner with an original MMC, in order to
maintain a stable population of mariners able to serve the total
population of vessels. We believe this turnover rate is a good
approximation for the turnover rate in our population, because the MMC
endorsement in the PIC rule has similar requirements for qualification,
including similar prerequisites such as Basic and Advanced Firefighting
training. The Coast Guard requests comments on the accuracy of our
assumption that the estimated PIC turnover rate is similar to the
passenger ship turnover rate.
Therefore, in a similar manner, for this proposed rule, we assume
that any mariner lost to annual turnover would be replaced by a mariner
with the same credentials at this rate. This methodology ensures a
stable population of mariners able to serve the total population of
active ships. Because we propose, in part 12.905(d), that the standard
of competence in crowd management can be maintained through evidence of
1 year of sea service within the last 5 years, employing this turnover
rate allows us to capture the number of new ratings entering service
who would require crowd management training. This turnover rate is
applied only to ratings, because this group of mariners can be replaced
by those who have a newly issued original MMC, as noted above, and will
be required to complete this training.
Together, in subsequent years, we expect to see decreasing numbers
of mariners seeking to meet the proposed requirements of this rule.
Table 5 outlines the number of officers, ratings, and personnel we
estimate would be required to complete passenger ship emergency
familiarization and crowd management training over the next 10 years of
analysis.
[[Page 52337]]
Table 5--Mariners Needing Passenger Ship Emergency Familiarization and Crowd Management Trainings Due to Turnover and Ship Population Decline
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
personnel needing Number of ratings
Officers in Ratings in Personnel in passenger ship seeking crowd
Year population \29\ population \30\ population \31\ emergency management
familiarization training due to
each year turnovers \32\
(a) (b) (c) (d) = (a + b + c) (e) = (b) x 32.55%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................................ 200 44 836 1,080 44
2............................................................ 196 42 820 1,058 14
3............................................................ 192 40 804 1,036 13
4............................................................ 188 38 788 1,014 12
5............................................................ 184 36 772 992 12
6............................................................ 180 34 756 970 11
7............................................................ 176 32 740 948 10
8............................................................ 172 30 724 926 10
9............................................................ 168 28 708 904 9
10........................................................... 164 26 692 882 8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Columns (a), (b), and (c) describe the decrease in overall mariner
population each year due to ships being retired from service, estimated
at approximately one ship per year. Column (d) provides a running total
of personnel who will be required to take passenger ship emergency
familiarization each year before assuming shipboard duties. Finally,
column (e) describes the total number of ratings who would seek crowd
management training due to turnover within the mariner population.
Since we assume that mariners are currently not in compliance with the
Section A-V/2 of the STCW Code, the total is the full population of
ratings in year 1, with only new ratings completing training due to
turnover in subsequent years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Officers in population values are equal to the previous row
value minus 4 (2 officers each across 2 crews) as a result of 1
vessel exiting the industry each year.
\30\ Ratings in population values are equal to the previous row
value minus 2 (1 ratings each across 2 crews) as a result of 1
vessel exiting the industry each year.
\31\ Personnel in population values are equal to the previous
row value minus 16 (8 personnel each across 2 crews) as a result of
1 vessel exiting the industry each year.
\32\ Rounded to the nearest whole number. The first row in this
column is an exception and should not be calculated with the
provided (e) = (b) x 32.55% formula because all ratings would need
to seek crowd management training in the first year of analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Costs
The Coast Guard has considered the additional costs of the proposed
rulemaking against the baseline. Specifically, we have considered
whether there are compliance costs to operating companies and personnel
aboard the ships, as well as enforcement costs to the Federal
government associated with the proposed rulemaking.
First, the proposed rule would add passenger ship emergency
familiarization requirements for officers, ratings, and personnel on
passenger ships making international voyages. These costs would be
incurred by operating companies in the ship population. Second, the
proposed rule would expand the applicability of crowd management
training by requiring ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and VII
of the STCW Convention to complete this training. Currently, only
officers and personnel designated on the muster list to assist
passengers in emergency situations are required to complete this
training. The Coast Guard believes that there may be existing ratings
qualified under Chapters II, III, and VII of the STCW Convention with
duties on the muster list, which already requires them to complete
crowd management training. However, for the purposes of our analysis,
due to a lack of data, we assume that all qualified ratings in the
affected population would need to complete crowd management for the
first time as a result of this proposed rule. The Coast Guard requests
comment on the validity of this assumption.
While these changes to training requirements would create new costs
for operating companies and ratings qualified under Chapters II, III,
and VII of the STCW Convention, the Coast Guard does not anticipate
that this rulemaking would create added enforcement costs to the
Federal government. We estimate that Coast Guard inspectors currently
need 5-10 minutes to verify training documents during a PSC inspection,
and that this proposal would not add to the time and resources expended
under the current requirements.
Passenger Ship Emergency Familiarization and Crowd Management Trainings
The proposed rule would require officers, ratings, and personnel to
complete the passenger ship emergency familiarization and expand the
applicability of crowd management training to include ratings qualified
under Chapters II, III, and VII of the STCW Convention. Discussions
with subject matter experts (SMEs) from CG-MMC and personnel at local
Coast Guard inspections offices reveal that we are currently unable to
determine whether the U.S. passenger ship industry is in compliance
with the training requirements of the STCW Convention because
compliance is voluntary and not required to be recorded during an
inspection. Therefore, for the purposes of this analysis, we assume
that everyone in the affected population would need to comply with the
proposed passenger ship emergency familiarization and crowd management
training requirements. We request public comment as to the actual
percentage of the affected population that is in compliance with the
2016 training requirements.
The following section estimates the initial first-year compliance
costs and the future recurring compliance costs associated with the
proposed rulemaking.
[[Page 52338]]
Cost of Passenger Ship Emergency Familiarization
Passenger ship emergency familiarization is conducted on board when
personnel report for duty and would include topics to familiarize
personnel with the general safety features aboard the ship, the
location of essential safety equipment, including life-saving
appliances, the importance of personal conduct during the
implementation of emergency plans, and restrictions on the use of
elevators during emergencies. Passenger ship emergency familiarization
also includes the requirement to communicate with passengers during an
emergency, including the ability to communicate in the working language
of the ship, including non-verbally communicating safety information,
and understanding one of the languages in which emergency announcements
may be broadcast on the ship during an emergency or drill. Because this
training is ship-specific and given before personnel are assigned to
shipboard duties, we assume that operating companies incur the costs of
these required trainings. Costs are based on the opportunity cost of
time of personnel required to complete the training.
The Coast Guard assumes that a mariner serving at management level
aboard the ship gives the familiarization training to crewmembers.
According to 46 CFR 10.107, management level refers to the level of
responsibility associated with (1) serving as master, chief mate, chief
engineer officer or second engineer officer onboard a seagoing ship;
and (2) ensuring that all functions within the designated area of
responsibility are properly performed. We believe mariners at this
level to be most qualified to provide this training, given that this
training is meant to be specific to the ship on which the mariners
serve. The Coast Guard requests comment on this assumption and whether
another individual would be more likely to provide this training.
Based on input from SMEs and Coast Guard inspectors from local
offices with oversight in the operating areas of the ships, the Coast
Guard estimates that this training requires 4 hours per individual. In
addition, we assume that it requires half this time, or 2 hours, for a
management level officer to prepare to deliver the training. We make
this assumption as they are responsible for shipboard management and
familiar with the areas required to be included in the passenger ship
emergency familiarization training. Given the relatively small size of
the average ship in the affected population and the ship-specific
knowledge of the management level officers on board, we assume that 2
hours would be sufficient development and preparation time for both
initial and subsequent training offerings. The Coast Guard requests
comment on the accuracy of our assumptions related to the time to
prepare for and deliver passenger ship emergency familiarization
training.
To compute the opportunity cost of time of the affected population
to complete passenger ship emergency familiarization training, we use
the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics' (BLS) Occupational Employment
Statistics occupational series, ``53-5021 Captains, Mates, and Pilots
of Water Vessels,'' under North American Industry Classification System
(NAICS) 483100--Deep Sea, Coastal, and Great Lakes Water Transportation
to estimate the hourly mean wage rate for officers, which is $46.02 in
2021 dollars.\33\ Similarly, we use BLS occupational series, ``53-5011
Sailors and Marine Oilers,'' to estimate the mean wage rate for
ratings, which is $28.07 in 2021 dollars.\34\ Finally, we use ``53-6061
Passenger Attendants'' to estimate the mean wage rate for personnel,
which is $24.26 in 2021 dollars.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ https://www.bls.gov/oes/2021/may/oes535021.htm (last
visited 6/3/2024).
\34\ https://www.bls.gov/oes/2021/may/oes535011.htm (last
visited 6/3/2024).
\35\ https://www.bls.gov/oes/2021/may/oes536061.htm (last
visited 6/3/2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next, we apply a load factor to these wage rates to determine the
total compensation of officers, ratings, and personnel more accurately.
We calculate a load factor of 1.48 (1.4756 rounded up) from the BLS's
Employer Costs of Employee Compensation December 2021 release.\36\ We
then multiply the hourly wage rates by this load factor. Therefore, we
find the loaded hourly wage rate of an officer is $68.11 ($46.02 x
1.48), the loaded hourly wage rate of a rating is $41.54 ($28.07 x
1.48), and the loaded hourly wage rate of personnel is $35.90 ($24.26 x
1.48).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ We obtained a total compensation estimate of $33.57 and the
wages and salaries estimate of $22.75 for private industry workers
for the transportation and material moving occupational group from
Table 4 of the Employer Costs for Employee Compensation--December
2021 release at https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ecec_03182022.pdf (last visited 6/3/2024). This allowed us to
determine a load factor of 1.475 ($33.47/$22.75) that we could apply
to the mean hourly wage rate to obtain an estimate for total
compensation for an officer and rating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because all personnel must receive this training each time they
report for duty, we assume that the training would be delivered to the
entire population of personnel each year. In addition, we assume that
this new training will be delivered at a quarterly frequency on
average, in line with other trainings required for mariners serving on
Subchapter T and K vessels according to CFR 46 185.420 and 122.420,
respectively. This means that, in the first year, 200 officers, 44
specified ratings, and 836 personnel across 2 crews (assuming each crew
serves 6 months on average) would need to take this training twice, for
a total of 8 training hours per mariner. Additionally, 1 management
level officer would need to prepare to deliver the training and
document completion of the training for personnel aboard their ship
twice for each crew, meaning 100 officers (1 officer delivering the
training twice for each crew across 50 ships) would need to spend 4
hours preparing to deliver the training in the first year, 0.166 hours
(10 minutes) of which would be used to document training completion.
The Coast Guard requests comment on the accuracy of our assumptions
surrounding the frequency of this training.
Therefore, in the first year of implementation, we estimate that
operating companies would incur costs of $390,941 in undiscounted 2021
dollars, rounded. This is the sum of 200 officers taking the training
twice for a total of 8 hours at a loaded wage rate of $68.11 (200 x 8 x
$68.11 = $108,976), 44 specified ratings taking the training twice for
a total of 8 hours at a loaded wage rate of $41.54 (44 x 8 x $41.54 =
$14,622.08), 836 personnel taking the training twice for a total of 8
hours at a loaded wage rate of $35.90 (836 x 8 x $35.90 = $240,099.20),
and 100 officers preparing to deliver and document completion of the
training twice for a total of 4 hours at a loaded wage rate of $68.11
(100 x 4 x $68.11 = $27,244.
Costs to the population of operating companies would decrease over
time as ships exit the industry at an estimated rate of one per year.
The Coast Guard estimates that the average ship in the population
carries 11 mariners (2 officers, 1 specified rating, and 8 personnel)
and operates with 2 crews that would be subject to the proposed
requirements. The Coast Guard assumes that, as ships subject to the
proposed requirements exit the fleet, mariners serving on those ships
would also exit the affected population and would no longer be subject
to the proposed training requirements. Therefore, we estimate that each
exiting ship would result in 22 fewer personnel subject to the proposed
training requirements (4 officers, 2 specified ratings, and 16
personnel), and this is reflected in the calculations. Over the 10
years of
[[Page 52339]]
analysis, we estimate that operating companies would incur average
annual costs of $352,560 and total costs of $3,525,602, in undiscounted
2021 dollars. Table 6 describes the cost impacts of the passenger ship
emergency familiarization requirements over the next 10 years of
analysis.
Table 6--Undiscounted Costs of the Passenger Ship Emergency Familiarization Requirement Over 10 Years of Analysis
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hours to
Officers Officers Ratings Personnel Officer Rating Personnel Hours to prepare and
Year giving taking taking taking loaded loaded loaded take document Total cost
training training training training wage wage wage training training
(a) (b) (c) \37\ (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) = [(a x e x
i)
+ (b x e x h)
+ (c x f x h)
+ (d x g x h)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1................................ 100 200 44 836 $68.11 $41.54 $35.90 8 4 $390,941
2................................ 98 196 42 820 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 382,412
3................................ 96 192 40 804 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 373,883
4................................ 94 188 38 788 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 365,354
5................................ 92 184 36 772 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 356,825
6................................ 90 180 34 756 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 348,296
7................................ 88 176 32 740 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 339,767
8................................ 86 172 30 724 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 331,237
9................................ 84 168 28 708 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 322,708
10............................... 82 164 26 692 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 314,179
Average...................... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ........... 352,560
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10-Year Total............ ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ........... 3,525,602
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.
Cost of the Crowd Management Trainings
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ The 32.55 percent turnover rate for ratings discussed in
the mariner turnover section is not reflected here because the
emergency familiarization training will be given each year when
reporting for duty. Except for those mariners leaving the population
due to ships exiting the market, we assume that the number of
ratings will be constant each year in order to fully meet the
manning requirements of the ships remaining in the affected
population.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The crowd management training requirement would apply to the 44
specified ratings across 2 crews in the affected mariner population for
the first year of implementation. In subsequent years, only a fraction
of the mariner population would need to seek crowd management training,
due to a declining ship population and employee turnover.\38\ The cost
of attending a crowd management course includes tuition, travel
expenses, opportunity cost of time, and meal and incidental expenses
(M&IE), which would be incurred by the affected ratings qualified under
Chapters II, III, and VII of the STCW Convention.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ See table 4 for more specifics on the numbers of ratings
who would seek crowd management training over the next 10 years of
analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Tuition and Opportunity Cost of Attendance
There are currently approximately 25 Coast Guard-approved training
providers offering crowd management training. Because crowd management
is an existing training requirement, we do not assume any new costs to
training providers to develop crowd management courses and obtain Coast
Guard approval of these courses. The websites of seven training centers
provide detailed information on the length and tuition for the course.
According to this data, the duration of a crowd management course
ranges from 4 to 8 hours to complete, for an average of 5.17 hours. As
a result, we estimate that ratings would take 1 day, on average, to
complete the course. Tuition ranges from $90 to $400, for an average
cost of $219. Table 7 provides an overview of the available crowd
management courses with associated costs and hours, while table 8
describes the estimated undiscounted cost for an individual rating to
take crowd management training.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ All websites accessed March 15, 2023.
\40\ Not all training providers indicated the length of course
time on their websites. Those not providing the length of their
offered crowd management course are indicated with an N/A in the
Hours column.
Table 7--Coast Guard Approved Training Centers Currently Offering Crowd Management Training Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Training center Website \39\ Cost Hours \40\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska Vocational Technical Center............. https://avtec.edu/maritime/courses/ $90.00 4.0
crowd-management-alavtc-142/.
Captain School USVI............................ http://www.captainschoolusvi.com/...... 250.00 N/A
Chesapeake Marine Training Institute........... https://www.chesapeakemarineinst.com/ 200.00 4.0
cmti-course/crowd-management/.
Maritime Professional Training................. https://www.mptusa.com/course-details/ 199.00 8.0
crowd-management-course-155.
Maritime Institute............................. https://maritimeinstitute.com/course/ 400 7.0
crowd-management/.
Quality Maritime Training, LLC................. http://qualitymaritimetraining.com/ 195.00 4.0
courses/all-courses/crowd-management/.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Resolve Maritime Academy....................... https://resolveacademy.com/course/crowd- 199.00 4.0
management/.
Average.................................... ....................................... 219 5.17
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52340]]
Table 8--Opportunity Cost of Time for Ratings To Complete a Crowd
Management Course
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total
Opportunity
Loaded wage rate Hours cost of crowd
management
course
(a) (b) (c) = (a) x (b)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$41.54................................ 8 $332
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.
(b) Travel Distribution
To estimate the cost of travel and the opportunity cost of travel
time, we assume varying modes of travel for mariners getting to and
from approved training based on the distribution of travel modes,
derived in table 16 of CG-MMC Policy Letter 01-21: Guidelines for
Qualifying for STCW Endorsements for Basic and Advanced IGF Code
Operations cost analysis.\41\ We reflect the same percentages in this
NPRM as in the policy letter by assuming that 20 percent would drive to
the training center and return the same day, 46 percent would drive and
stay 2 nights, and 34 percent would fly and stay 2 nights.\42\ The
percentages used in CG-MMC Policy Letter 01-21 derived from the
distance required to travel to the nearest training provider for each
mariner based on the ZIP Code associated with their credential and the
ZIP Codes associated with the training provider locations. The policy
letter utilized a random sample of 100 mariners with STCW endorsements
involving the International Code of Safety for Ships Using Gases or
Other Low Flashpoint Fuels (IGF Code) travelling to training centers
offering relevant IGF Code training courses. In that analysis, we
determined that 20 mariners would commute to the nearest training
provider (or live less than 85.4 miles from a training provider), 46
would drive to the nearest training provider and lodge overnight (or
live between 85.4 miles and 583.5 miles from a training provider), and
34 would fly to the nearest training provider and lodge overnight (or
live greater than 583.5 miles from a training provider).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ https://www.regulations.gov/document/USCG-2020-0181-0002.
Similar methodology was also used in the Towing Vessel Firefighting
Training Appendix A, published on October 3, 2023, (88 FR 67966),
available at: https://www.regulations.gov/document/USCG-2020-0492-0013.
\42\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because there is no specific endorsement for the population of
mariners affected by this proposed rule (mariners serving on small
passenger ships making international voyages), it is not possible to
accurately replicate this methodology in this analysis. Due to this
lack of data, we have determined to use the percentages as they appear
in CG-MMC Policy Letter 01-21. We acknowledge that this creates
uncertainty surrounding our cost estimates related to travel for this
specific population of mariners. The Coast Guard requests public
comment on our decision to use these predetermined rates of travel for
this cost analysis.
We use the same methodology from CG-MMC Policy Letter 01-21 to
estimate the thresholds and opportunity costs for travel among the
affected population. Using updated data, the Coast Guard estimates that
mariners who live or reside less than 93.9 miles from a training
provider would commute to the closest site without lodging or utilizing
overnight accommodations. We base this assumption on a report titled,
``Commuting in America (2): The National Report on Commuting Patterns
and Trends,'' from the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials, which posits that Americans, on average, are
willing to spend up to a maximum of 90 minutes commuting to work each
way.\43\ This report, which used data from the American Community
Survey, illustrates that approximately 97.5 percent of American
commuters spent 90 minutes (1.5 hours) or less commuting to work.\44\
To convert 90 minutes into a distance, we calculate an average driving
speed using data from the Department of Transportation (DOT's) National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration's report, ``National Traffic
Speeds Survey III: 2015.'' \45\ From this report, we take the mean
speed from the three road classes across the five time periods
provided. We obtain an average speed of 62.6 mph. We then multiply the
average speed of these three road classes by 1.5 hours (90 minutes) to
obtain our commuting distance threshold of 93.9 miles (62.6 mph x 1.5
hours).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ The American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials conducted the report in 2013 and used
Census Bureau data in the report. Please see Figure 11-13 on page 16
to obtain the travel distribution time to work in minutes. Readers
can access the report at https://transportation.org/traveltrends/commuting-in-america/brief-13-11-commuting-departure-time-and-trip-time/. Last accessed March 12, 2024.
\44\ The American Community Survey is an ongoing survey by the
U.S. Census Bureau. It regularly gathers information pertaining to
demographics and housing characteristics of U.S. households. More
information on this survey can be found at: https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/about.html (last visited 6/3/2024).
For information on ``mega-commuting'' refer to footnote 29 or
this brochure from the ACS: https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/working-papers/2013/demo/SEHSD-WP2013-03.pdf (last
visited 6/3/2024).
\45\ In order to convert this to distance, we take the mean
total of table 12's Speed by Road Type and Time of Day estimates
from 2015 to get at average road speed of 62.6 miles per hour. This
information can be found in table 12 using the ``Download Document''
link for Publication No. DOT HS 812 485 (March 2018) at this
website: https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/35961 (last visited 6/3/
2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The next threshold we estimated is the distance at which a mariner
would choose to drive to the training provider and lodge for the
duration of the training before returning to their place of residence.
To determine this distance, we establish a range by calculating the
minimum and maximum distances for this threshold. The minimum distance
at which mariners would drive and lodge during training must be equal
to the threshold established by those mariners commuting: 93.9 miles
(188 miles round trip).
The National Household Travel Survey estimates that 94.3 percent of
Americans travel by personal vehicle when making round trips of less
than 500 miles.\46\ We use this distance of 500 miles as the lower
bound of our maximum distance threshold. To estimate the upper bound of
our maximum distance threshold, we reference data from the Office of
Airline Information report, ``Average Length of Haul, Domestic Freight
and Passenger Modes (Miles),'' which calculated the average domestic
passenger flight length of 944 miles (1,888 miles round trip) in
2021.\47\ We use this average domestic passenger flight statistic
because it reflects a distance at which the average American prefers
flying over other modes of transportation when traveling from one
location to another.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ The BTS conducted the National Household Travel Survey in
2001, and it was last updated in May of 2017. Please see table 4,
``Percent of Long-Distance Trips by Mode and Roundtrip Distance'' to
obtain the travel distance distribution of trips by miles and travel
mode. Readers can access the table at: https://www.bts.gov/archive/publications/highlights_of_the_2001_national_household_travel_survey/table_04.
The table was accessed on September 13, 2022.
\47\ The Office of Airline Information at the BTS collects air
freight and domestic passenger summary data. This office divides
revenue passenger miles by revenue passenger enplanements to
calculate the average length of passenger trips. To find the average
length of a domestic flight, please see table 1-38, ``Average Length
of Haul, Domestic Freight and Passenger Modes (Miles)'' and refer to
cell AM:13. Readers can access the table at: https://www.bts.gov/content/average-length-haul-domestic-freight-and-passenger-modes-miles. The table was accessed on March 12, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, to validate the value of an 1,888 miles round trip,
we reference the National Household Travel Survey
[[Page 52341]]
data. A round-trip distance of 1,888 miles is close to the 2,000 plus
miles round-trip distance category used by the National Household
Travel Survey. For trips of over 2,000 miles round trip, 22.2 percent
of Americans would travel by car and 74.8 percent would travel by
flying. We then average our lower and upper bounds for the maximum
distance threshold to obtain an average maximum distance of 1,194 miles
[(500 miles + 1,888 miles) / 2], or 597 miles one-way.
Therefore, the Coast Guard determines that, beyond 583.4 miles
between a mariner's place of residence and the training provider they
attended, mariners would choose to fly and lodge instead of drive and
lodge. Table 9 displays the distance thresholds for all three choices
of transportation.
Table 9--Modes of Travel and Travel Distance Thresholds
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Travel distance (one-way)
threshold for a mariner to
Travel choice reach their nearest training
provider denoted by x
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commute................................ x < 93.9 miles.
Drive and Lodge........................ 93.9 miles <= x <= 597 miles.
Fly and Lodge.......................... x > 597 miles.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) Opportunity Cost of Travel Time for Mariners
After determining the travel mode thresholds, the Coast Guard then
determined the costs associated with each mode of travel. A mariner
incurs an opportunity cost during the time they spend traveling to the
closest training provider. To calculate these costs, we utilized the
commuting distances and times calculated in CG-MMC Policy Letter 01-21.
The policy letter calculated that the average commuter faces a 61.2-
mile round trip, and those driving and lodging face approximately a
498.8-mile round trip.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ The calculations for average trip distances were obtained
from page 31 of the CG-MMC Policy Letter 01-21: Guidelines for
Qualifying for STCW Endorsements for Basic and Advanced IGF Code
Operations cost analysis. See https://www.regulations.gov/document/USCG-2020-0181-0002 (last visited 6/3/2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next, we calculated the wages associated with the opportunity cost
of travel. To calculate these costs, we took the mean hourly loaded
wage rate for a rating taking a crowd management course, $41.54, and
multiplied it by the time required to travel to and from the closest
training provider. For mariners commuting, it would take an average
round-trip time of approximately 0.98 hours to commute to a training
provider [the average round-trip distance divided by the average mean
road class speed (61.2 miles round trip / 62.6 mph)]. Similarly, we
performed this calculation for those mariners driving and lodging to
get an average round-trip time of about 7.97 hours (498.8 / 62.6 mph).
However, mariners driving and lodging would be traveling only half the
round-trip distance, or 3.99 hours, twice (on the day of arrival and
the day of departure). Lastly, the Coast Guard estimated that it would
take mariners the equivalent of an entire workday (8 hours) to fly to a
training provider and fly back to their place of residence. This
estimate encompasses the time necessary to travel to and from the
airport, to go through security, wait for boarding, time on the tarmac,
time in-flight, and the time to go through baggage claim upon arrival.
For each travel mode, we multiplied the mean hourly loaded wage
rate by the average commuting time, and the days traveling and the
distribution of travel mode to arrive at the weighted opportunity cost
of travel for a mariner. Table 10 displays the opportunity cost of time
for each mode of transportation for an individual mariner.
Table 10--Weighted Average of Opportunity Cost of Time Used by Mode of Transportation per Mariner
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commuting time Loaded hourly Percent of Total opportunity
Mode of travel per day Days traveling wage for a mariners who cost (sum of
(hours) deck officer travel columns)
(a) (b) (c) (d) = (a) x (b) x (c) x
(d)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flying to Training Provider....................................... 8 2 $41.54 34.00 $226
Driving to Training Provider and Lodging.......................... 3.99 2 41.54 46.00 152
Commuting to Training Provider.................................... 0.97 1 41.54 20.00 8
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Total Opportunity Cost of Travel for a Mariner for .............. .............. .............. .............. 387
Crowd Management Training....................................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.
(d) Fuel Costs
If a mariner chooses to commute or chooses to drive and lodge for
the duration of the training, they would incur the costs associated
with the use of their own personal vehicle to travel to and from the
training provider. The U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) sets
the mileage reimbursement rate for federal employees who use their
privately owned vehicle (POV) for official government travel and to
present this information in a single standard mileage rate. The GSA
also conducts reviews of travel costs on an annual basis to determine
the mileage reimbursement rate by factoring in the costs of the
following: the price of gasoline and oil, depreciation of the original
vehicle cost, the costs of maintenance and insurance, and state and
Federal taxes. The GSA approximates the POV mileage reimbursement rate
to be $0.56 per mile
[[Page 52342]]
in 2021.\49\ To calculate the fuel costs for mariners commuting and not
lodging, we multiplied this reimbursement rate by the number of days a
mariner commutes by the average round-trip distance calculated for
commuting, 61.2 miles. We used this same method when calculating the
costs for mariners driving and lodging, with the difference being that
they spend the equivalent of 1 day when completing their round-trip
distance of 498.8 miles. Therefore, a mariner would incur a fuel cost
of about $34.27 ($0.56 x 61.2 miles x 1 day) when commuting and $279.33
($0.56 x 498.8 miles x 1 day) when driving to and lodging near a
training provider.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ The GSA mileage rate data is available at https://www.gsa.gov/travel/plan-book/transportation-airfare-rates-pov-rates/privately-owned-vehicle-pov-rates/pov-mileage-rates-archived. We
used the rate per mile rate of $0.56 for January 1, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A mariner traveling by air would need to pay for round-trip airfare
and transport fare to and from the airport. Using data from the Bureau
of Transportation Statistics (BTS), we estimate the average unadjusted
round-trip airfare to be $307 in 2021.\50\ To calculate the cost of
transport, we refer to the costs of round-trip airport transfer in the
2006 interim rule, Validation of Merchant Mariners' Vital Information
and Issuance of Coast Guard Merchant Mariner's Licenses and
Certificates of Registry, published January 13, 2006 (71 FR 2154), or
$50. We inflate this value using the 2021 4th Quarter and the 2006 4th
Quarter Gross Domestic Product (GDP) implicit price deflator values of
112.848 and 84.770, respectively.\51\ After dividing the values, we
obtain a factor of approximately 1.331. We multiply this value by $50
to obtain a transfer cost of approximately $66.55, in 2021 dollars.
Table 11 presents the average fuel and transfer costs associated with
ratings completing a crowd management course.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ To view the annual average price of a round-trip airfare
for 2021 in unadjusted dollars, visit the link at: https://
www.bts.dot.gov/newsroom/2021-annual-average-domestic-air-fares-
remain-
stable#:~:text=The%202021%20annual%20average%20domestic,collecting%20
such%20records%20in%201995 (last visited 6/3/2024).
\51\ U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Gross Domestic Product:
Implicit Price Deflator [GDPDEF], retrieved from FRED, Federal
Reserve Bank of St. Louis; https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GDPDEF, March 6, 2024.
Table 11--Weighted Average Fuel and Transfer Costs for a Rating Taking Crowd Management Course
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transport fare Percent of
Mode of travel Fuel cost/ to and from mariners who Average cost to
ticket cost airport travel mariner
(a) (b) (c) = [(a) + (b)] x (c)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flying and lodging........................ $307.00 $66.55 34 $127
Driving and lodging....................... 279.33 0 46 128
Commuting................................. 34.27 0 20 7
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted Average Fuel Cost for a .............. .............. .............. 262
Mariner taking Crowd Management
Training.............................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.
(e) Meal and Incidental Expense (M&IE) Rates and Lodging Costs
Mariners incur M&IE during training and travel days, and mariners
not commuting incur lodging expenses during training days. To estimate
these costs, we utilize the GSA 2021 general travel per diem rates of
$55 for a full day and $41.25 for first and last day, calculated at 75
percent of the full day rate.\52\ We also utilize the general lodging
rates provided by GSA for 2021 and a calculated average lodging tax
rate for 2021 from the 2021 HVS Lodging Tax Report--USA,\53\ to arrive
at average lodging costs of $102.09 per night.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ GSA per diem rates can be found here: https://www.gsa.gov/about-us/newsroom/news-releases/fy2021-per-diem-rates-for-federal-travelers-released-08142020 (last visited 6/3/2024). See https://www.gsa.gov/travel/plan-and-book/per-diem-rates/faqs#15, reference
FAQ #15, for information on calculating first and last travel day
M&IE per diem.
\53\ https://www.hvs.com/article/9160-2021-hvs-lodging-tax-report-usa (last visited 6/3/2024).
\54\ The lodging cost includes lodging tax. According to the
GSA, the standard lodging rate for 2021 was $96. See https://www.gsa.gov/about-us/newsroom/news-releases/fy2021-per-diem-rates-for-federal-travelers-released-08142020. The average lodging tax
rate was 6.34%, which can be found here: https://www.hvs.com/article/9160-2021-hvs-lodging-tax-report-usa. These websites were
accessed on September 13, 2022. Thus, lodging cost per night is
estimated to be $102.09 [($96 per night x 6.34% = $6.09 tax) + $96].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We assume that those who choose to drive or fly would spend 2
nights (arrival and training day) in a hotel, which costs $102.09 per
night, for a total of $204.18. Accordingly, personnel who commute to a
training center would incur $41.25, while personnel who drive or fly
would spend about $137.50 ((2 days x $41.25) + (1 day x $55)) on meals
and incidentals. Table 12 presents the weighted average cost breakdown
by mode of transportation.
Table 12--Weighted Average Mariners Incur M&IE and Lodging Costs (Undiscounted) for Ratings Taking Crowd
Management Course
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent of
Mode of travel Lodging costs M&IE mariners who Total cost
travel
(a) (b) (c) = [(a) + (b)] x (c)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flying and lodging........................ $204.18 $137.50 34.00 $116.17
Driving and lodging....................... 204.18 137.50 46.00 157.17
Commuting................................. 0.00 41.25 20.00 8.25
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted Average MI&E and Lodging .............. .............. .............. 282
Costs................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52343]]
(f) Documentation Costs
It is the responsibility of the operating companies who are
obligated by STCW Convention Regulation I/14, ``Responsibilities of
Companies,'' to ensure that documentation relevant to personnel
training is maintained and readily accessible. According to the
information collection request, Standards of Training, Certification
and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW), 1995, 1997 and 2010 Amendments
to the International Convention (OMB Control Number 1625-0079), it
currently takes a technical specialist 0.083 hours (5 minutes) to
record that personnel serving on passenger vessels are trained as
required by Regulation V/2 of the STCW Convention. Given that this
proposed rule expands the applicability of the crowd management
training to ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and VII of the
STCW Convention, and that other STCW Convention and STCW Code trainings
are already required to be recorded, we assume this documentation would
not create additional costs. The Coast Guard requests comment on the
validity of this assumption.
(g) Total Cost to Mariners Taking Crowd Management Training
We estimate the total undiscounted annual costs for mariners
required to take a crowd management course by adding the totals costs
in tables 7, 8, 8, 9, and 10 and then multiplying by the affected
population in table 5. We estimate the total undiscounted 10-year cost
to be $211,850, and the undiscounted average cost to be $21,185 in 2021
dollars. Table 13 describes the total undiscounted costs for mariners
taking a crowd management course over the next 10 years of analysis.
Table 13--Total Undiscounted Costs for Mariners Taking a Crowd Management Course
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mariners Average Opportunity
required to Total Total fuel MI&E & cost of time Tuition
Year take training opportunity costs lodging of taking costs Total costs
course cost of travel costs course
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) = [a x (b + c + d + e +
f)]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1..................................... 44 $387 $262 $282 $332 $219 $65,185
2..................................... 14 387 262 282 332 219 20,741
3..................................... 13 387 262 282 332 219 19,259
4..................................... 12 387 262 282 332 219 17,778
5..................................... 12 387 262 282 332 219 17,778
6..................................... 11 387 262 282 332 219 16,296
7..................................... 10 387 262 282 332 219 14,815
8..................................... 10 387 262 282 332 219 14,815
9..................................... 9 387 262 282 332 219 13,333
10.................................... 8 387 262 282 332 219 11,852
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average........................... .............. .............. ........... ........... .............. ........... 21,185
Average (Years 2-10).............. .............. .............. ........... ........... .............. ........... 16,296
10-Year Total..................... .............. .............. ........... ........... .............. ........... 211,850
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.
Likewise, table 14 describes the total cost to industry (operating
companies and ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and VII of the
STCW Convention) of the proposed rulemaking. Operating companies would
incur the costs of the proposed passenger ship emergency
familiarization, while the ratings who would be required to take the
crowd management course under the proposed expanded applicability would
incur those related costs. The Coast Guard estimates that the
annualized total cost to industry over the next 10 years of analysis
would be $375,707, in 2021 dollars, when discounted at 2 percent.
Table 14--Total Cost to Industry of the Proposed Rulemaking Over a 10-Year Period of Analysis
[2021 dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crowd management
Passenger ship training costs for
Year emergency ratings qualified Total cost Discounted
familiarization under STCW chapters (2%)
costs II, III, and VII
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................ $390,941 $65,185 $456,126 $447,182
2............................................ 382,412 20,741 403,153 387,498
3............................................ 373,883 19,259 393,142 370,467
4............................................ 365,354 17,778 383,132 353,954
5............................................ 356,825 17,778 374,602 339,289
6............................................ 348,296 16,296 364,592 323,747
7............................................ 339,767 14,815 354,581 308,684
8............................................ 331,237 14,815 346,052 295,352
9............................................ 322,708 13,333 336,042 281,185
10........................................... 314,179 11,852 326,031 267,459
------------------------------------------------------------------
Total.................................... ................. .................... 3,737,452 3,374,817
Annualized............................... ................. .................... ........... $375,707
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.
[[Page 52344]]
Standards Incorporated by Reference (IBR)-Related Changes
Proposed IBR-related changes refer to the sections in 46 CFR parts
11 and 12 that would be revised to incorporate the 2017 Edition of the
STCW Convention and the STCW Code. See Section V, Discussion of
Proposed Rule, in this preamble. In themselves, the IBR-related changes
do not impose any cost on the regulated industry. Table 2 describes
each IBR-related change in the proposed rule and provides explanations
for the no-cost determinations.
Costs to Government
Coast Guard inspectors are currently requesting mariner credentials
and training records related to the STCW Convention and the STCW Code,
but they are not tracking compliance with the requirements outlined in
this proposed rule since compliance is currently voluntary. We estimate
that verifying the training documents currently would require 5-10
minutes per vessel. We do not anticipate this rulemaking to add to the
time and resources currently necessary to verify training certificates
as part of an inspection. Accordingly, the proposed rulemaking has no
new costs to the Government.
Benefits
The Coast Guard anticipates that the proposed rule would improve
the safety of life at sea in the case of an emergency by ensuring that
ship personnel are familiar with safety features, emergency equipment
and procedures, basic communication, and crowd management techniques.
This is important so that the ship's personnel would be able to assist
passengers, including elderly and disabled individuals, during an
emergency. The consequences of the loss of a ship from the affected
population are potentially catastrophic.
While there are no examples of major accidents in the affected
population of U.S.-flagged ships, the Costa Concordia disaster in the
foreign fleet provides some insight into the how costly improper
emergency management can be. On January 13, 2012, the Costa Concordia,
an Italian passenger ship operating in the Mediterranean Sea with 3,206
passengers and 1,023 crewmembers on board, struck a reef off the
Italian coastline. The incident resulted in the loss of 32 lives (27
passengers and 5 crewmembers), injury to 157 others, and the total loss
of the ship. In the ensuing accident report,\55\ the Italian Ministry
of Infrastructures and Transports concluded that multiple factors
contributed to the injuries and loss of life. Some of these factors
included delayed management of the emergency response and evacuation
process, inconsistencies in assignment of duties, communication issues
due to the different backgrounds of passengers and crewmembers, and
passenger confusion over which personnel employed on passenger vessels
were trained to assist in an emergency.\56\ While other factors
certainly contributed to the loss of life and injury in this maritime
disaster, it is evident that clearly communicated emergency procedures
and experience with crowd management could have aided both crew and
passengers in responding to the emergency occurring onboard their ship.
Both U.S.-flagged ships and ships in the foreign-flagged fleet (where
U.S. passengers disproportionately travel) can expose passengers and
crew to greater risk of loss of life and injury.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ See footnote 8.
\56\ Ibid at 159.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While we have not conducted a risk analysis on the U.S.-flagged
ship population related to the training provisions in this proposed
rule due to a lack of data, we can estimate the costs associated with
loss of life and ship in the population. We utilized data from the
National Vessel Documentation Center to estimate $809,500 as the median
price of a U.S.-flagged passenger ship.\57\ In addition, we reviewed
the manning requirements for all 50 ships in the ship population to
derive the average manning requirement and maximum number of
passengers. Based on this data, we estimate that the average ship in
the population can carry 11 mariners (2 officers, 1 specified rating,
and 8 personnel) and 120 total passengers at one time. In order to
estimate the benefit of preventing a fatality, we utilize the Value of
a Statistical Life (VSL) estimate of $11.8 million for analyses, using
a base year of 2021.\58\ The VSL is defined as the additional cost that
individuals would be willing to bear for improvements in safety (that
is, reductions in risks) that, in the aggregate, reduce the expected
number of fatalities by one. This conventional terminology has often
provoked misunderstanding on the part of both the public and
decisionmakers. What is involved is not the valuation of life, as such,
but the valuation of reductions in risks. For example, a VSL of $11.8
million does not mean that a specific human life is worth $11.8 million
but is, instead, meant to measure the willingness to pay for reductions
in only small risks of premature death (say, $118 for a risk of 1 in
100,000). This approach to valuation of mortality risks is endorsed by
OMB Circular A-4, which provides guidance to Federal agencies on the
development of regulatory analysis.\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ The median price is utilized here due to significant
outliers on the upper bound of vessel valuations. The mean price is
weighted upward by the inclusion of 4 large ships with valuations of
$500,000,000, which is atypical for the relatively small size ships
in the population.
\58\ For more information on the VSL, see the DOT guidance
located at https://www.transportation.gov/office-policy/transportation-policy/revised-departmental-guidance-on-valuation-of-a-statistical-life-in-economic-analysis (last visited 3/12/2024).
\59\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CircularA-4.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the event of a total loss of ship and life due to lack of
emergency training and procedure, we estimate losses totaling $809,500
from loss of ships and $1.5 billion from loss of life,\60\ per ship
lost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ Loss of life is calculated as $1,545,800,000 [($11.8
million x 131 people (11 crew members and 120 passengers)], rounded.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beyond the costs associated with a catastrophic loss, it should be
noted that the United States is required to implement amendments to the
STCW Convention and the STCW Code through national regulations. Failure
to meet our treaty obligation to fully implement the STCW Convention
could cause the United States to lose its status on the IMO White List.
The White List distinguishes administrations that are in full
compliance with the STCW Convention and the STCW Code. Loss of this
status could cause U.S. ships to be subject to more rigorous PSC
inspections in foreign ports, including possible detainment or denial
of entry, resulting in potential revenue losses. Additionally, U.S.
mariners could be ineligible to serve on foreign-flagged passenger
ships. Hence, by aligning national regulations with the STCW Convention
and the STCW Code, the proposed rule would ensure that owners and
operators of U.S.-flagged ships, as well as U.S. mariners, are able to
operate in international markets.
Further, there is an additional benefit in the promotion of
international harmonization and reciprocity of maritime regulation.
This proposed rule advances Executive Order 13609, ``Promoting
International Cooperation,'' which targets international regulatory
cooperation to reduce, eliminate, or prevent unnecessary differences in
regulatory requirements. By promoting harmonization of international
maritime safety regulations, the United States ensures that our ships
comply with international standards and meet the regulations of foreign
countries while
[[Page 52345]]
our ships are in their waters, while also promoting higher baseline
safety standards for foreign-flagged ships that often carry U.S.
passengers.
Alternatives Considered
As a party to the STCW Convention, the United States is obligated
to implement all amendments into domestic law. The United States
proposed and supported these amendments, recognizing the enhanced
safety measure as desirable.
This proposed rule would codify the STCW Convention and the STCW
Code, including amendments through 2016. As a signatory to the STCW
Convention, the United States must ensure compliance with its treaty
obligations through full implementation of amendments to the STCW
Convention and the STCW Code. The STCW Convention is not self-
implementing; therefore, the Coast Guard does not have discretion and
must issue regulations to implement these requirements. Failure to meet
the treaty obligations could cause the United States to lose status on
the IMO's ``White List,'' which distinguishes administrations that are
in full compliance with the STCW Convention and the STCW Code. Because
the Coast Guard must implement the training requirements outlined in
the 2016 amendments and does not propose to implement any discretionary
requirements as a part of this proposed rule, we have not examined any
alternatives to the proposed rule.
B. Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, we
have considered the impact of this proposed rule on 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 discussing the impact of
this proposed rule on small entities addresses the following as
required under section 603(b) of the RFA:
(1) A description of the reasons why action by the agency is being
considered;
(2) A succinct statement of the objectives of, and legal basis for,
the proposed rule;
(3) A description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number
of small entities to which the proposed rule will apply;
(4) A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and
other compliance requirements of the proposed rule, including an
estimate of the classes of small entities that will be subject to the
requirement and the type of professional skills necessary for
preparation of the report or record;
(5) An identification, to the extent practicable, of all relevant
Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the
proposed rule; and
(6) A description of any significant alternatives to the proposed
rule that accomplish the stated objectives of applicable statutes and
that minimize any significant economic impact of the rule on small
entities.
1. A description of the reasons why action by the agency is being
considered.
The growth of foreign flagged passenger ships as a vacation
destination has resulted in the launching of consistently larger ships
and subsequent concerns over passenger safety. Passenger ship travel
requires passengers to feel assured of their safety, regardless of
where the ship originates or hails. Typically, passengers are only on
board these ships for a short time, and seldom have maritime
experience, so they rely on the ship's crew to assist them in emergency
situations. In emergency situations, it may be impossible for
passengers to identify which crewmembers are trained to assist them in
an emergency. Such situations pose risks to life, health, and safety,
as well as damage to property and the marine environment.
The IMO has worked to address these risks, leading to amendments in
2016 to the STCW Convention and the STCW Code to ensure that passenger
ship personnel are familiar with the safety features, emergency
equipment and procedures, basic communication, and crowd management
techniques in order to assist passengers, including elderly and
disabled individuals, during an emergency.
The United States is a signatory to the STCW Convention and must
ensure compliance with its treaty obligations through full
implementation of the STCW Convention and the STCW Code. The STCW
Convention is not self-implementing. The Coast Guard must issue
regulations to implement these requirements. The Coast Guard issued CG-
MMC Policy Letter 02-21 to advise owners and operators of U.S.
passenger ship operating companies of the requirements of the STCW
Convention and the STCW Code. However, if the Coast Guard does not
issue regulations to implement these requirements, they are not
enforceable, and there is a risk that U.S. ships could be denied entry
to or detained in foreign ports, that U.S. mariners could be ineligible
to serve on foreign-flagged ships, and that operating companies,
personnel, and, we believe, the passengers would be at higher risk for
loss of ship, serious injury, or loss of life as the result of an
emergency for which mariners and personnel were unprepared.
2. A succinct statement of the objective of, and legal basis for,
the proposed rule.
The legal basis of this proposed rule is title 14 U.S.C. 102(3),
which grants the Coast Guard broad authority to promulgate and enforce
regulations for the promotion of safety of life and property on waters
subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. More specifically, 46
U.S.C. 7101 authorizes the Secretary of DHS to prescribe the
requirements for credentialing, and 46 U.S.C. 7306 and 7313 authorize
the prescription of requirements for ratings. The Secretary of DHS has
delegated these statutory authorities to the Coast Guard through DHS
Delegation No. 00170.1(II)(92)(e), Revision No. 01.4, which generally
authorizes the Coast Guard to determine and establish the experience
and professional qualifications required for the issuance of
credentials.
3. A description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number
of small entities to which the proposed rule will apply.
As described in section VII A, Regulatory Planning and Review, in
this document, there would be two affected populations of the proposed
rule: (1) operating companies that would incur the costs of the
proposed required passenger ship emergency familiarization, and (2)
ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and VII of the STCW
Convention who would need to complete a crowd management course.
Ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and VII of the STCW
Convention are individuals and not entities; as such, the second
affected population does not contain any small entities. We focus the
attention of this analysis on the operating companies of U.S.-flagged
passenger ships.
Of the 50 ships in the affected ship population, there are 37
operating companies. Of these 37 operating companies:
2 are governmental jurisdictions with populations over
50,000, neither of which is classified as a small entity;
1 is a non-profit organization, and is classified as a
small entity;
34 are private companies, of which 2 are not classified as
small businesses, 20 are classified as small businesses, and 13 could
not be classified because information could not be found on those
[[Page 52346]]
13 businesses. For the purpose of this analysis, we classify those 13
businesses, where information could not be found, as small entities.
We researched the number of employees and revenue of these
companies using proprietary and public business databases. Then we
measured company size data using the SBA business size standards to
assess how many companies in this industry may be small entities. The
SBA provides business size standards for all sectors of the North
American Industry Classification System (NAICS).\61\ Our analysis of
the available company information revealed 10 primary NAICS codes.
Table 15 displays the NAICS codes of the small businesses found in our
sample.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/2023-06/Table%20of%20Size%20Standards_Effective%20March%2017%2C%202023%20%282%29.pdf (last visited 6/3/2024).
Table 15--NAICS Codes of Identified Small Businesses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Count of small SBA size
Title NAICS code businesses SBA size standard type threshold
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scenic and Sightseeing 48721005 6 Revenue................... $14,000,000
Transportation, Water.
Inland Water Passenger Transportation 48321201 4 Employee.................. 550
All Other Amusement and Recreation 71399021 3 Revenue................... $9,000,000
Industries.
Tour Operators....................... 56152007 2 Revenue................... $25,000,000
Site Preparation Contractors......... 23891061 1 Revenue................... $19,000,000
New Single-family Housing 23611505 1 Revenue................... $45,000,000
Construction (Except For-Sale
Builders).
Hotels (except Casino Hotels) and 721110 1 Revenue................... $40,000,000
Motels.
Boat Dealers......................... 44122215 1 Revenue................... $40,000,000
All Other Transit and Ground 48599906 1 Revenue................... $19,000,000
Passenger Transportation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revenue Impacts of the Proposed Rule. To determine the impacts of
the proposed rule on small operating companies, we used information on
revenue or employee size as available on business directory websites.
As discussed in the ``Cost to Industry'' section of the regulatory
analysis, we estimate that there is a population of 50 ships that would
be subject to this rule in the first year of implementation, with an
estimated population decline of 1 ship per year in subsequent years.
There are 37 unique owners and operators of the affected ships
employing 1,080 officers, ratings, and personnel subject to the
proposed passenger ship emergency familiarization requirements, 33 of
which are considered small entities. The Coast Guard was able to find
revenue data on 20 of those 33 small entities, allowing us to analyze
estimated impacts.
We estimate that 4 hours is the time needed for officers, ratings,
and personnel to complete the proposed passenger ship emergency
familiarization. In addition, a management level officer would need
approximately 2 hours to prepare to deliver the passenger ship
emergency familiarization aboard each ship for each crew. We assume
there are 2 crews per vessel to account for the rotational nature of
shipboard employment, and that each crew (serving an average of 6
months on board each ship) will take the training twice per year in
line with other quarterly training requirements as outlined in 46 CFR
185.420 and Sec. 122.420. Thus, we multiply the estimated training and
training preparation hours by 2 to capture the quarterly frequency of
training per year. The loaded hourly wage rate of officers, ratings,
and personnel are $68.11, $41.54, and $35.90 respectively.
Because all officers, ratings, and additional personnel are
required to participate in emergency familiarization training, the
Coast Guard needed to determine the number of officers, ratings, and
personnel impacted by the proposed passenger ship emergency
familiarization requirements. To determine this, we reviewed the
certificate of inspection for all 27 U.S.-flagged passenger ships in
the affected ship population owned by entities with available revenue
data and reviewed the manning requirements for each ship. We then added
the total officers, ratings, and additional personnel for each ship
owned by each entity and multiplied by 2 to account for both crews on
each ship. After determining the total affected personnel for each
entity, we then calculate undiscounted first-year costs (in 2021
dollars) for each impacted small entity in the affected population with
known revenue data[(number of officers delivering training x 4
preparation hours x $68.11 hourly wage) + (number of officers x 8
training hours x $68.11 hourly wage) + (number of specified ratings x 8
training hours x $41.54 hourly wage) + (number of additional personnel
x 8 training hours x $35.90 hourly wage)]. We then divide the
calculated first-year cost by the small entity's revenue to find the
level of impact on the affected small entity. For example, for owner or
operator ``A'' in column 1, we estimate undiscounted first-year costs
of $13,490.40 [(8 officers x $68.11 officer wage x 8 training hours) +
(0 ratings x $41.54 rating wage x 8 training hours) + (28 additional
personnel x $35.90 personnel wage x 8 training hours) + (4 officers
delivering training x $68.11 officer wage x 4 training preparation
hours)]. We then find the estimated level of impact on owner or
operator ``A'' of 0.76 percent by dividing the calculated first-year
cost by its revenue obtained from public business databases ($13,490.40
/ $891,000 = 1.56%). See Table 16 for the calculations of first-year
costs and impacts on small entities in the affected population.
[[Page 52347]]
Table 16--Estimated First-Year Impact of the Emergency Familiarization Training for Affected Small Entities With Known Revenue Data
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Officers
delivering Additional Training
Owner or operator \62\ Number Officers Ratings Additional training Officer Rating personnel Training preparation Total cost Owner or Percent
of ships personnel (2 per wage wage wage hours hours operator revenue impact
ship)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A............................ 2 8 0 28 4 $68.11 $41.54 $35.90 8 4 $13,490.40 $891,000.00 1.51
B............................ 3 8 0 14 6 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 10,014.48 2,184,000.00 0.46
C............................ 1 2 0 10 2 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 4,506.64 1,313,000.00 0.34
D............................ 1 2 0 10 2 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 4,506.64 8,000,000.00 0.06
E............................ 3 6 0 12 6 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 8,350.32 15,400,000.00 0.05
F............................ 1 4 0 4 2 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 3,873.20 534,000.00 0.73
G............................ 1 4 0 4 2 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 3,873.20 31,124,000.00 0.01
H............................ 1 4 0 8 2 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 5,022.00 744,000.00 0.68
I............................ 1 4 0 8 2 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 5,022.00 298,000.00 1.69
J............................ 3 6 0 8 6 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 7,201.52 2,184,000.00 0.33
K............................ 1 2 0 8 2 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 3,932.24 19,481,000.00 0.02
L............................ 1 2 0 4 2 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 2,783.44 1,649,000.00 0.17
M............................ 1 4 0 12 2 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 6,170.80 149,000.00 4.14
N............................ 1 4 0 10 2 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 5,596.40 149,000.00 3.76
O............................ 1 4 0 10 2 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 5,596.40 337,000.00 1.66
P............................ 1 4 0 12 2 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 6,170.80 149,000.00 4.14
Q............................ 1 4 0 12 2 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 6,170.80 236,343,000.00 0.00
R............................ 1 4 0 10 2 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 5,596.40 649,000.00 0.86
S............................ 1 2 0 2 2 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 2,209.04 2,400,000.00 0.09
T............................ 1 4 0 6 2 68.11 41.54 35.90 8 4 4,447.60 149,000.00 2.98
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52348]]
For this proposed rule, the Coast Guard considers an impact of
greater than 1 percent (.01) of a small entity's annual revenue to be a
significant impact. Table 17 shows the distribution of revenue impacts
on the small entities affected by this proposed rule. In addition to
the less than 1 percent threshold, which indicates no significant
impact, we also include the 1-to-3 percent threshold indicating
significant impact, and a greater than 3 percent threshold showing even
greater impacts on affected small entities. The Coast Guard estimates
that 7 small entities, or 35 percent of the population with known
revenue, would incur significant impacts, with 3 of those small
entities incurring impacts greater than 3 percent of their annual
revenue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ Small entity names have been removed to protect personal
identifiable information.
Table 17--Distribution of Revenue Impacts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small entities Portion of small
Percent of revenue impact with known entities with
revenue known revenue (%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
<1................................ 13 65
1-3............................... 4 20
>3................................ 3 15
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and
other compliance requirements of the proposed rule, including an
estimate of the classes of small entities which will be subject to the
requirements and the type of professional skills necessary for
preparation of the report or record.
This proposed rule would call for a revised collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520. This proposed rule would revise the current information
collection, Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for
Seafarers (STCW), 1995, 1997 and 2010 Amendments to the International
Convention, OMB Control Number: 1625-0079.
Under the existing OMB Control Number 1625-0079, the Coast Guard
collects information from owners and operators of U.S.-flagged
passenger ships, and ratings and officers serving on these ships, as
well as from training centers. The proposed rule would add additional
collection of information requirements to this existing collection of
information in order to implement the STCW Convention and the STCW
Code. These additional collection of information requirements would:
(1) require the operating companies of U.S.-flagged passenger ships
that carry 12 passengers or more on international voyages to provide
documentary evidence that all personnel serving on these ships have
completed a passenger ship emergency familiarization, and (2) require
documentary evidence that required personnel have completed crowd
management training for ratings serving on U.S.-flagged passenger ships
that carry 12 passengers or more on international voyages.
The additional collection of information in the proposed rule would
ensure that mariners have completed training necessary to comply with
the STCW Convention and the STCW Code and adequately assist passengers
in the event of an emergency. The additional collection of information
is also needed to demonstrate to the IMO that the United States, as a
signatory to the STCW Convention, has met the obligation to implement
requirements through national regulations.
The additional collection of information in this proposed rule
would affect an estimated 33 small entities. These entities are owners
and operators of ships carrying 12 or more passengers on international
voyages who employ officers, ratings, and personnel required to
complete passenger ship emergency familiarization.
According to the current collection of information, a management
level officer spends about 5 minutes to document evidence of personnel
training on behalf of operating companies. Accordingly, we estimate
that the passenger ship emergency familiarization requirement of the
proposed rule would increase the burden hour of the existing collection
of information by 8.3 hours (50 ships x 0.166 hours per response x 2
crews = 16.6 hours).
In addition to the recordkeeping requirements of the proposed rule,
there are also new training requirements. First, the proposed rule
would expand the applicability of crowd management training by
requiring ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and VII of the STCW
Convention to complete this training. Currently, only officers and
personnel designated on the muster list to assist passengers in
emergency situations are required to complete this training.
Second, the proposed rule creates a new requirement for all
personnel to complete passenger ship emergency familiarization
appropriate to their capacity, duties, and responsibilities during an
emergency. Personnel would have to complete the familiarization before
being assigned to shipboard duties. The passenger ship emergency
familiarization requirement would apply to all personnel, including
masters, officers, and ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and
VII of the STCW Convention. This familiarization would not require
Coast Guard approval in accordance with 46 CFR part 10, subpart D, and
could be conducted on board the ship or at a shore-based location.
Mariners or ship operators should maintain documentation verifying that
personnel have completed the passenger ship emergency familiarization.
This training includes topics to familiarize personnel with the general
safety features aboard the ship, the location of essential safety
equipment, including life-saving appliances, the importance of personal
conduct during the implementation of emergency plans, and restrictions
on the use of elevators during emergencies. Passenger ship emergency
familiarization also includes the requirement to communicate with
passengers during an emergency, including the ability to communicate in
the working language of the ship, including non-verbally communicating
safety information, and understanding one of the languages in which
emergency announcements may be broadcast on the ship during an
emergency or drill.
5. An identification, to the extent practicable, of all relevant
Federal rules which may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the
proposed rule.
[[Page 52349]]
There are no relevant Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with this proposed rule.
6. A description of any significant alternatives to the proposed
rule which accomplish the stated objectives of applicable statutes, and
which minimize any significant economic impact of the rule on small
entities.
As a party to the STCW Convention, the United States is obligated
to implement all amendments into domestic law. The United States
proposed and supported these amendments, recognizing the enhanced
safety measure as desirable.
This proposed rule would codify the 2017 edition of the STCW
Convention and the STCW Code. As a signatory to the STCW Convention,
the United States must ensure compliance with its treaty obligations
through full implementation of amendments to the STCW Convention and
the STCW Code. The STCW Convention is not self-implementing; therefore,
the Coast Guard does not have discretion and must issue regulations to
implement these requirements. Failure to meet the treaty obligations
could cause the United States to lose status on the IMO's ``White
List,'' which distinguishes administrations that are in full compliance
with the STCW Convention and the STCW Code. Because the Coast Guard
must implement the training requirements outlined in the 2016
amendments and does not propose to implement any discretionary
requirements as a part of this proposed rule, we have not examined any
alternatives to the proposed rule.
7. Conclusion.
We are interested in the potential impacts from this proposed rule
on small entities and we request public comment on these potential
impacts. If you think that this proposed rule will have a significant
economic impact on you, your business, or your organization, please
submit a comment to the docket at the address under ADDRESSES in the
interim rule. In your comment, explain why, how, and to what degree you
think this proposed rule will have an economic impact on you.
C. Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104-121, we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its
provisions or options for compliance, please call or email the person
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule.
The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question
or complain about this proposed 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 would call for a revised 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.
Title: Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for
Seafarers (STCW), 1995, 1997 and 2010 Amendments to the International
Convention.
OMB Control Number: 1625-0079.
Summary of the Collection of Information: The STCW Convention
establishes minimum standards of training, certification and
watchkeeping for seafarers. The United States is a signatory to the
STCW convention, which defines standards of competence necessary to
ensure safety of life at sea and the marine environment and addresses
the responsibilities of signatories to ensure seafarers meet standards
of competence. The information collection requirements are necessary to
implement the STCW Convention.
Under the existing information collection, OMB Control Number 1625-
0079, the Coast Guard collects information from owners and operators of
U.S.-flagged passenger ships, and ratings and officers serving on these
ships, as well as training centers. The proposed rule would add
additional requirements to the existing collection of information in
order to implement the passenger ship training requirements of the STCW
Convention. These additional collection of information requirements
would: (1) require the owners and operators of U.S.-flagged passenger
ships that carry 12 passengers or more on international voyages to
provide documentary evidence that officers, ratings, and personnel
serving on these ships have completed passenger ship emergency
familiarization, (2) require owners and operators of U.S.-flagged
passenger ships that carry 12 passengers or more on international
voyages to provide documentary evidence that ratings qualified under
Chapters II, III, and VII of the STCW Convention have completed crowd
management training, and (3) require training providers to document
course completion or disenrollment for crowd management training.\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\63\ As of March 24, 2014, each school with an approved course
must keep records for at least 5 years after the end of each
student's completion or disenrollment from a course or program (46
CFR 10.403). Training providers are not expected to keep additional
records under this collection of information, only to continue to
keep the records already required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Need for Information: The additional collection of information in
the proposed rule would ensure that: (1) passenger ship personnel are
trained to adequately assist passengers in the case of an emergency,
(2) mariners have proof of completion of training necessary for
compliance with the STCW Convention, and (3) the United States can
verify and demonstrate that it has in place national regulations which
implement the STCW Convention and the STCW Code, as is required of a
signatory to the convention.
Proposed Use of Information: The Coast Guard would use the
additional collection of information in the proposed rule to help to
ensure compliance with international requirements and to maintain
acceptable quality in activities associated with training and
assessment of merchant mariners.
Description of the Respondents: The respondents are owners and
operators of U.S.-flagged passenger ships that carry 12 passengers or
more on international voyages and training providers offering crowd
management courses.
Number of Respondents: The additional collection of information in
this proposed rule would affect an estimated 37 passenger ship
operating
[[Page 52350]]
companies that carry 12 or more passengers on international voyages.
These companies would have to document completion of passenger ship
emergency familiarization for all personnel serving aboard their ships
and retain documentation of a crowd management course for the ratings
qualified under Chapters II, III, and VII of the STCW Convention
serving aboard their ships.
Frequency of Response: Operating companies of U.S.-flagged
passenger ships that carry 12 or more passengers on international
voyages would be required to submit the additional information when it
is requested during a PSC inspection. The required passenger ship
emergency familiarization and crowd management training records would
be recorded at completion, to be available upon request.
Burden of Response: According to the current collection of
information, a management level officer spends about 0.083 hours (5
minutes) to document evidence of mariners' training on behalf of a ship
owner or operator for each of the two crews. Given this training is
delivered twice for each crew, we estimate that a management level
officer will spend 0.166 hours (10 minutes) to document evidence of
this training each year. Accordingly, we estimate that the proposed
passenger ship emergency familiarization would increase the burden hour
of the existing collection of information by approximately 17 hours
annually (50 ships x 0.166 hours per response x 2 crews = 16.6 hours).
Also, according to the existing collection of information, a
technical specialist spends about 0.083 hours (5 minutes) to document
training records for personnel serving aboard passenger ships. Given
that this proposed rule expands the applicability of the crowd
management training to ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and
VII of the STCW Convention as a subset of the overall mariner
population, and operating companies already record STCW training
completion for this population, this creates a negligible increase in
the amount of time required to document training records.
The existing collection of information for training providers shows
that an administrative specialist spends about 1 hour to document
course completion, including a student's performance. However, because
this action is taken once annually for each approved course, this would
not increase the estimated burden for training providers, although this
rule may minimally increase the number of students taking a crowd
management course.
Estimate of Total Annual Burden: The total estimated burden hours
for this proposed rule is approximately 17 hours for operating
companies of U.S.-flagged passenger ships that carry 12 or more
passengers providing documentary evidence of having completed passenger
ship emergency familiarization.
As required by 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), we will submit a copy of this
proposed rule to OMB for its review of the collection of information.
We ask for public comment on the proposed collection of information
to help us determine, among other things--
How useful the information is;
Whether the information can help us better perform our
functions;
How we can improve the quality, usefulness, and clarity of
the information;
Whether the information is readily available elsewhere;
How accurate our estimate is of the burden of collection;
How valid our methods are for determining the burden of
collection; and
How we can minimize the burden of collection.
If you submit comments on the collection of information, submit
them to both the OMB and to the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.
You need not respond to a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid control number from OMB. Before the Coast
Guard could enforce the collection of information requirements in this
proposed rule, OMB would need to approve the Coast Guard's request to
collect this information.
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 proposed 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 is as follows.
It is well settled that States may not regulate in categories
reserved for regulation by the Coast Guard. It is also well settled
that all the categories covered in 46 U.S.C. 7101, 7306, 7313 and 8101
addressing personnel qualifications, and manning of ships, and any
other category in which Congress intended the Coast Guard to be the
sole source of a ship's obligations, are within the field foreclosed
from regulation by the States. See, e.g., United States v. Locke, 529
U.S. 89 (2000) (finding that the states are foreclosed from regulating
tanker ships) see also Ray v. Atlantic Richfield Co., 435 U.S. 151, 157
(1978) (state regulation is preempted where ``the scheme of federal
regulation may be so pervasive as to make reasonable the inference that
Congress left no room for the States to supplement it [or where] the
Act of Congress may touch a field in which the federal interest is so
dominant that the federal system will be assumed to preclude
enforcement of state laws on the same subject.'' (Citations omitted).
Therefore, because the States may not regulate within these categories,
this rule is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and
preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.
While it is well settled that States may not regulate in categories
in which Congress intended the Coast Guard to be the sole source of a
ship's obligations, the Coast Guard recognizes the key role that State
and local governments may have in making regulatory determinations.
Additionally, for rules with federalism implications and preemptive
effect, Executive Order 13132 specifically directs agencies to consult
with State and local governments during the rulemaking process. If you
believe this proposed rule would have implications for federalism under
Executive Order 13132, please call or email the person listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble.
F. Unfunded Mandates
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 million (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Although this proposed rule would
not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the potential effects
of this proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble.
G. Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would 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).
[[Page 52351]]
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 proposed rule is not an economically significant rule and
would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that
might disproportionately affect children.
J. Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments), because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
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 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 Standard
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 proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
M. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01, Rev.1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
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 preliminary 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 preliminary Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket.
For instructions on locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of
this preamble. This proposed rule would be categorically excluded under
paragraphs L54 and L56 of Appendix A, table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual
023-01, Rev. 1.\64\ Paragraph L54 pertains to regulations that are
editorial or procedural and paragraph L56 pertains to regulations
concerning the training, qualifying, licensing, and disciplining of
maritime personnel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/DHS_Instruction%20Manual%20023-01-001-01%20Rev%2001_508%20Admin%20Rev.pdf (last visited 6/29/2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposed rule involves implementation of the STCW Convention
and the STCW Code particularly concerning requirements for personnel
serving on passenger ships on international voyages. In particular, the
STCW Convention and the STCW Code requires passenger ship emergency
familiarization and crowd management training to promote the safety of
life at sea in the case of an emergency. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed rule.
List of Subjects
46 CFR Part 11
Incorporation by reference, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Schools, Seamen.
46 CFR Part 12
Incorporation by reference, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Seamen.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 46 CFR parts 11 and 12 as follows:
PART 11--REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFICER ENDORSEMENTS
0
1. The authority citation for part 11 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 14 U.S.C. 503; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 46 U.S.C. 2101, 2103,
and 2110; 46 U.S.C. chapter 71; 46 U.S.C. chapter 89; 46 U.S.C.
7502, 7505, 7701, and 70105; E.O. 10173; DHS Delegation No. 00170.1,
Revision No. 01.4. Section 11.107 is also issued under the authority
of 44 U.S.C. 3507.
0
2. Revise Sec. 11.102 to read as follows:
Sec. 11.102 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. All approved material is available for
inspection at the Coast Guard, Office of Merchant Mariner Credentialing
(CG-MMC) and at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). Contact the Coast Guard, CG-MMC at U.S. Coast Guard, Stop 7509,
2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20593-7509, 202-
372-2357, [email protected]. For information on the availability of
this material at NARA, email: [email protected], or go to:
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations. The material may
be obtained from the sources in the following paragraphs of this
section.
(b) International Maritime Organization (IMO), 4 Albert Embankment,
London SE1 7SR, England, +44 (0)20 7735 7611, [email protected], https://imo.org.
(1) The International Convention on Standards of Training,
Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, 2017 Edition (the
STCW Convention or the STCW), IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 11.201(h);
11.426(c); 11.427(f); 11.428(c); 11.429(d); 11.493(e); 11.495(e);
11.497(c); 11.553(d); 11.555(e); 11.1001(a); 11.1003(a); 11.1009(c);
and 11.1105(a).
(2) The Seafarers' Training, Certification and Watchkeeping Code,
2017 Edition (the STCW Code), IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 11.201(h);
11.301(a) and (f); 11.302(a), (c), and (d); 11.303(a) through (d);
11.305(a), (c), and (e); 11.307(a), (c), and (e); 11.309(a), (d,) and
(e); 11.311(a), (c), and (d); 11.313(a), (c), and (d); 11.315(a), (c),
and (d); 11.317(a), (c), and (d); 11.319(a), (c), and (d); 11.321(a),
(c), and (d); 11.325(a), (c), and (d); 11.327(a), (c), and (d);
11.329(a), (d), and (e); 11.331(a), (d), and (e); 11.333(a), (c), and
(d); 11.335(a) through (c); 11.604; 11.901(c); 11.1001(a); 11.1003(a);
and 11.1105(a).
(3) The International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea,
1974 (SOLAS),
[[Page 52352]]
incorporation by reference approved for Sec. 11.601.
Sec. 11.305 [Amended]
0
3. Amend Sec. 11.305 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(2), remove the text ``of this part''; and
0
b. In paragraph (e), footnote 2 to Table 1 to Sec. 11.305(e), after
the text ``not previously satisfied,'' add the text ``in accordance
with section A-II/2 of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 11.102).''
Sec. 11.307 [Amended]
0
4. Amend Sec. 11.307 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(2), remove the text ``of this part''; and
0
b. In paragraph (e), footnote 2 to Table 1 to Sec. 11.307(e), after
the text ``not previously satisfied,'' add the text ``in accordance
with section A-II/2 of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 11.102).''
Sec. 11.309 [Amended]
0
5. Amend Sec. 11.309 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(1)(ii), remove the text ``of this part''; and
0
b. In paragraph (e), footnote 2 to Table 1 to Sec. 11.309(e), after
the text ``not previously satisfied,'' add the text ``in accordance
with section A-II/1 of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 11.102).''
Sec. 11.311 [Amended]
0
6. Amend Sec. 11.311 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(2), remove the text ``of this part''; and
0
b. In paragraph (d), footnote 2 to Table 1 to Sec. 11.311(d), after
the text ``not previously satisfied,'' add the text ``in accordance
with section A-II/2 of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 11.102).''
Sec. 11.313 [Amended]
0
7. Amend Sec. 11.313 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(2), remove the text ``of this part''; and
0
b. In paragraph (d), footnote 2 to Table 1 to Sec. 11.313(d), after
the text ``not previously satisfied,'' add the text ``in accordance
with section A-II/2 of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 11.102).''
Sec. 11.315 [Amended]
0
8. Amend Sec. 11.315 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(2), remove the text ``of this part''; and
0
b. In paragraph (d), footnote 2 to Table 1 to Sec. 11.315(d), after
the text ``not previously satisfied,'' add the text ``in accordance
with section A-II/2 of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 11.102).''
Sec. 11.317 [Amended]
0
9. Amend Sec. 11.317 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(2), remove the text ``of this part''; and
0
b. In paragraph (d), footnote 2 to Table 1 to Sec. 11.317(d), after
the text ``not previously satisfied,'' add the text ``in accordance
with section A-II/3 of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 11.102).''
Sec. 11.319 [Amended]
0
10. Amend Sec. 11.319 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(1)(ii), remove the text ``of this part''; and
0
b. In paragraph (d), footnote 2 to Table 1 to Sec. 11.319(d), after
the text ``not previously satisfied,'' add the text ``in accordance
with section A-II/1 of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 11.102).''
Sec. 11.321 [Amended]
0
11. Amend Sec. 11.321 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(2), remove the text ``of this part''; and
0
b. In paragraph (d), footnote 2 to Table 1 to Sec. 11.321(d), after
the text ``not previously satisfied,'' add the text ``in accordance
with section A-II/3 of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 11.102).''
Sec. 11.325 [Amended]
0
12. Amend Sec. 11.325 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(2), remove the text ``of this part''; and
0
b. In paragraph (d), footnote 2 to Table 1 to Sec. 11.325(d), after
the text ``not previously satisfied,'' add the text ``in accordance
with section A-III/2 of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 11.102).''
Sec. 11.327 [Amended]
0
13. Amend Sec. 11.327 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(2), remove the text ``of this part''; and
0
b. In paragraph (d), footnote 2 to Table 1 to Sec. 11.327(d), after
the text ``not previously satisfied,'' add the text ``in accordance
with section A-III/2 of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 11.102).''
0
14. Amend Sec. 11.329 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(1)(ii), remove the text ``of this part''; and
0
b. In paragraph (e), in table 1 to Sec. 11.329, revise the footnotes.
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 11.329 Requirements to qualify for an STCW endorsement as
Officer in Charge of an Engineering Watch (OICEW) in a manned
engineroom or designated duty engineer in a periodically unmanned
engineroom on vessels powered by main propulsion machinery of 750 kW/
1,000 HP propulsion power or more (operational level).
* * * * *
(e) * * *
Table 1 to Sec. 11.329(e)--STCW Endorsement as OICEW in a Manned Engine Room or Designated Duty Engineer in a
Periodically Unmanned Engine Room on Vessels Powered by Main Propulsion Machinery of 750 kW/1,000 HP Propulsion
Power or More
[Operational level]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Competence-- STCW Table Training required by
Entry path from national endorsements Sea service \1\ A-III/1 \2\ this section \3\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Designated duty engineer, 3,000 kW/ 12 months.............. Yes.................... Yes
4,000 HP \4\.
Designated duty engineer, 750 kW/ 24 months.............. Yes.................... Yes
1,000 HP \4\.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This column provides the minimum additional service required of the seafarer in order to meet the
requirements of this section.
\2\ Complete any items in paragraph (a)(3) of this section not previously satisfied in accordance with section A-
III/1 of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 11.102).
\3\ Complete any items in paragraph (a)(4) of this section not previously satisfied.
\4\ STCW certificate should be limited to vessels less than 500 GRT.
Sec. 11.331 [Amended]
0
15. Amend Sec. 11.331 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(2), remove the text ``of this part''; and
0
b. In paragraph (e), footnote 2 to Table 1 to Sec. 11.331(e), after
the text ``not
[[Page 52353]]
previously satisfied,'' add the text in accordance with section A-III/3
of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 11.102).''
Sec. 11.333 [Amended]
0
16. Amend Sec. 11.333 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(2), remove the text ``of this part''; and
0
b. In paragraph (d), footnote 2 to Table 1 to Sec. 11.333(d), after
the text ``not previously satisfied,'' add the text ``in accordance
with section A-III/3 of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 11.102).''
Subpart K--Officers and Personnel on a Passenger Ship When on an
International Voyage
0
17. Revise Sec. 11.1105 to read as follows:
Sec. 11.1105 General requirements.
(a) To serve on a passenger ship on international voyages, before
being assigned shipboard duties, masters, deck officers, chief
engineers, and engineer officers must meet the appropriate requirements
of the STCW Regulation V/2 and of section A-V/2 of the STCW Code
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 11.102) as follows:
(1) Officers and personnel must have completed passenger ship
emergency familiarization appropriate to their capacity, duties, and
responsibilities as specified in section A-V/2 paragraph 1 of the STCW
Code.
(2) Officers and personnel providing direct service to passengers
in passenger spaces must have completed passenger ship safety training
specified in section A-V/2 paragraph 2 of the STCW Code.
(3) Masters, officers, ratings qualified under Chapters II, III,
and VII of the STCW Convention, and personnel designated on muster
lists to assist passengers in emergency situations must have completed
approved or accepted training in passenger ship crowd management
specified in section A-V/2 paragraph 3 of the STCW Code.
(4) Masters, chief engineer officers, chief mates, second engineer
officers, and any person designated on muster lists as having
responsibility for the safety of passengers in emergency situations
onboard passenger ships must have completed approved or accepted
training in crisis management and human behavior as specified in
section A-V/2 paragraph 4 of the STCW Code.
(5) Masters, chief engineer officers, chief mates, second engineer
officers, and every person assigned immediate responsibility for
embarking and disembarking passengers, loading, discharging, or
securing cargo, or closing hull openings onboard ro-ro passenger ships
must have completed approved or accepted training in passenger safety,
cargo safety, and hull integrity as specified in section A-V/2
paragraph 5 of the STCW Code.
(b) Personnel required to be trained in accordance with paragraph
(a) of this section must hold documentary evidence of successful
completion of training as proof of meeting these requirements.
(c) Personnel required to be trained in accordance with paragraphs
(a)(3), (a)(4), or (a)(5) of this section must provide, at intervals
not exceeding 5 years, evidence of maintaining the standard of
competence.
(d) The Coast Guard will accept onboard training and experience,
through evidence of 1 year of relevant seagoing service within the last
5 years, as meeting the requirements of paragraph (c) of this section.
(e) Personnel serving onboard small passenger ships engaged in
domestic, near-coastal voyages, as defined in Sec. 10.107 of this
subchapter, are not subject to any obligation for the purpose of this
STCW requirement.
PART 12--REQUIREMENTS FOR RATING ENDORSEMENTS
0
18. The authority citation for part 12 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 31 U.S.C. 9701; 46 U.S.C. 2101, 2103, 2110, 7301,
7302, 7303-7316, 7503, 7505, 7701, and 70105; DHS Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.4.
0
19. Revise Sec. 12.103 to read as follows:
Sec. 12.103 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. All approved material is available for
inspection at the Coast Guard, Office of Merchant Mariner Credentialing
(CG-MMC) and at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). Contact Coast Guard, CG-MMC at U.S. Coast Guard, Stop 7509,
2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20593-7509, 202-
372-2357, [email protected]. For information on the availability of
this material at NARA, email: [email protected], or go to:
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations. The material may
be obtained from the sources in the following paragraphs of this
section.
(b) International Maritime Organization (IMO), 4 Albert Embankment,
London SE1 7SR, England; + 44(0)20 7735 7611; [email protected];
www.imo.org.
(1) The International Convention on Standards of Training,
Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, 2017 Edition (the
STCW Convention or the STCW), IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 12.811(a) and
12.905(a).
(2) The Seafarers' Training, Certification and Watchkeeping Code,
2017 Edition (the STCW Code); IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 12.601(b);
12.602(a), (c), and (d); 12.603(a), (c), and (d); 12.605(a) through
(c); 12.607(a) and (c)); 12.609(a) through (c); 12.611(a) through (c);
12.613(a) and (b); 12.615(a) and (b); 12.617(a) and (b); 12.619(a);
12.621(a); 12.623(b); 12.811(a); and 12.905(a).
Sec. 12.603 [Amended]
0
20. Amend Sec. 12.603 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(4), remove the text ``of this part'';
0
b. In paragraph (d), footnote 2 to Table 1 to Sec. 12.603(d), after
the text ``not previously satisfied,'' add the text ``in accordance
with section A-II/4 of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 12.103).''; and
0
c. In paragraph (d), footnote 3 to Table 1 to Sec. 12.603(d), after
the text ``not previously satisfied,'' add the text ``in accordance
with section A-II/5 of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 12.103).''
Sec. 12.605 [Amended]
0
21. Amend Sec. 12.605 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(3), remove the text ``of this part''; and
0
b. In paragraph (c), footnote 2 to Table 1 to Sec. 12.605(c), after
the text ``not previously satisfied,'' add the text ``in accordance
with Table A-II/4 of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 12.103).''
Sec. 12.607 [Amended]
0
22. In Sec. 12.607(a)(4), remove the text ``of this part''.
Sec. 12.609 [Amended]
0
23. Amend Sec. 12.609 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(3), remove the text ``of this part''; and
0
b. In paragraph (c), footnote 2 to Table 1 to Sec. 12.609(c), after
the text ``not previously satisfied,'' add the text ``in accordance
with Table A-III/4 of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 12.103).''
Sec. 12.611 [Amended]
0
24. Amend Sec. 12.611 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(2)(iii), remove the text ``of this part''; and
0
b. In paragraph (c), footnote 2 to Table 1 to Sec. 12.611(c), after
the text ``not previously satisfied,'' add the text ``in accordance
with Table A-III/7 of the STCW Code (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 12.103).
0
25. Revise the subpart heading to subpart I to read as follows:
[[Page 52354]]
Subpart I--Ratings and Personnel on a Passenger Ship When on an
International Voyage
Sec. 12.901 [Amended]
0
26. In Sec. 12.901, remove the word ``part'' and add, in its place,
the word ``subpart''.
0
27. Revise Sec. 12.905 to read as follows:
Sec. 12.905 General requirements.
(a) To serve on a passenger ship on an international voyage, before
being assigned shipboard duties, personnel must meet the appropriate
requirements in STCW Regulation V/2 and section A-V/2 of the STCW Code
(both incorporated by reference, see Sec. 12.103) as follows:
(1) All personnel must have completed passenger ship emergency
familiarization appropriate to their capacity, duties, and
responsibilities as specified in section A-V/2 paragraph 1 of the STCW
Code.
(2) Personnel providing direct service to passengers in passenger
spaces must have completed the passenger ship safety training specified
in section A-V/2 paragraph 2 of the STCW Code.
(3) Ratings qualified under Chapters II, III, and VII of the STCW
Convention and personnel designated on the muster list to assist
passengers in emergency situations must have completed approved or
accepted training in passenger ship crowd management specified in
section A-V/2 paragraph 3 of the STCW Code.
(4) Personnel designated on muster lists as having responsibility
for the safety of passengers in emergency situations onboard passenger
ships must have completed approved or accepted training in crisis
management and human behavior as specified in section A-V/2 paragraph 4
of the STCW Code.
(5) Personnel assigned immediate responsibility for embarking and
disembarking passengers, loading, discharging, or securing cargo, or
closing hull openings onboard ro-ro passenger ships must have completed
approved or accepted training in passenger safety, cargo safety, and
hull integrity as specified in section A-V/2 paragraph 5 of the STCW
Code.
(b) Personnel required to be trained in accordance with paragraph
(a) of this section must hold documentary evidence of successful
completion of training as proof of meeting these requirements.
(c) Personnel required to be trained in accordance with paragraph
(a)(3), (a)(4), or (a)(5) of this section must provide, at intervals
not exceeding 5 years, evidence of maintaining the standard of
competence.
(d) The Coast Guard will accept onboard training and experience,
through evidence of 1 year of relevant seagoing service within the last
5 years, as meeting the requirements of paragraph (c) of this section.
(e) Personnel serving onboard small passenger vessels engaged in
domestic, near-coastal voyages, as defined in Sec. 15.105(g)(1) of
this subchapter, are not subject to any obligation for the purpose of
this STCW requirement.
Dated: June 13, 2024.
W.R. Arguin,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Prevention
Policy.
[FR Doc. 2024-13455 Filed 6-20-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P