[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 59 (Tuesday, March 26, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13123-13125]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7304]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
33 CFR Part 183
[CGD 95-041]
Propeller Injury Prevention Aboard Rental Boats
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The purpose of this Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(ANPRM) is to gather current, specific, and accurate information about
the injuries involving propeller strikes and rented boats. In a request
for comments published May 11, 1995, the Coast Guard solicited comments
from all segments of the marine community and other interested persons
on various aspects of propeller accident avoidance aboard houseboats
and other displacement type recreational vessels. The information
received was voluminous, but was too general to be helpful. Consistent
with the President's Regulatory Reinvention Initiative, the Coast Guard
is interested in obtaining maximum public involvement before it makes
any decision that would impose a new burden on the regulated community.
Information gathered in response to this ANPRM will supplement that
which the Coast Guard received in response to the request for comments
and will be used to determine the appropriate Federal and State roles
in reducing propeller-strike incidents, whether governmental
intervention is appropriate and, if so, whether it should be directed
at the vessels, their manufacturers, their operators or owners, or the
companies leasing such vessels. This ANPRM also announces one public
meeting at Coast Guard Headquarters at which individuals and interested
parties may make oral presentations about the propeller strike
avoidance issue. The Coast Guard has also arranged four other
opportunities, throughout the country, for those interested in this
subject to express their views.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 1, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to the Executive Secretary, Marine
Safety Council (G-LRA/3406)(CGD95-041),
[[Page 13124]]
U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second Street SW., Washington, DC
20593-0001, or may be delivered to room 3406 at the above address
between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The telephone number is (202) 267-1477.
The Executive Secretary maintains the public docket for this
notice. Comments will become a part of this docket and will be
available for inspection or copying at room 3406, U.S. Coast Guard
Headquarters.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Randolph Doubt, Project Manager, Recreational Boating Product
Assurance Division, (202) 267-0984.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
The Coast Guard encourages interested persons to submit written
data, views or arguments. Persons submitting comments should include
their names and addresses and identify this notice (CGD 95-041). Please
submit two copies of all comments and attachments in an unbound format,
no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic
filing. Persons wanting acknowledgment of receipt of comments should
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope.
The Coast Guard will consider all comments received during the
comment period.
Background Information
The Coast Guard published a request for comments on propeller
accidents involving houseboats and other displacement type recreational
vessels on May 11, 1995 [60 FR 25191]. In a second Federal Register
notice published August 9, 1995, the Coast Guard reopened and extended
the comment period until November 7, 1995. The Coast Guard received
1,994 responses. More than 1,800 of these were form letters from
individuals who support the development of regulations to require the
use of propeller guard technology or pump jet propulsion on vessels
used in the rental houseboat industry. An additional 69 comments
supporting the development of regulations to prevent the incidence of
propeller-strike accidents were received from accident victims and
their relatives, attorneys, physicians, State law enforcement agencies,
manufacturers of devices designed to prevent propeller-strike
accidents, and other individuals. Comments opposing regulations were
received from 57 boaters, nine houseboat livery operators and marinas,
members of 10 associations, committees, or councils, 13 boat and engine
manufacturers, and six naval architects or marine consultants.
Solicitation of Views
While available data in the Coast Guard's regulatory docket on this
subject does not fully support the costs or burdens that would be
imposed by Federal regulation, the number of responses received to the
request for comments indicates a great deal of public interest in
whether and how the Federal Government should act to prevent propeller-
strike accidents.
Persons submitting comments should do as directed under Request for
comments above, and reply to the following specific questions. Form
letters simply citing anecdotal evidence or stating support for, or
opposition to regulations, without providing substantive data or
arguments do not supply support for regulations.
1. The Coast Guard is making an effort to improve its database of
recreational boating accidents resulting in injuries which require
medical treatment beyond first aid. Part of that effort consists in
trying to determine the extent to which accidents involving propeller
strikes by rented boats are a problem. What information is available
regarding the incidence of propeller-strike injuries or fatalities
involving individuals who rent boats, and what trends, if any, do the
data indicate?
2. To what extent are data available to indicate whether the type
of propulsion (e.g., outboard motor, inboard engine or inboard-outboard
engine) contributes to the incidence of propeller-strike accidents
involving rental boats?
3. In two fatal accidents during the last several years, one on
Lake Shasta and one on Lake Havasu, the victim was in the water and was
struck by the propeller when a rental houseboat was put in reverse and
backed into them. Several other houseboat accidents have resulted in
injuries. The Coast Guard is interested in determining whether
accidents involving propeller strikes and rented houseboats occur
nationwide, or are limited to a few States or bodies of water. If the
latter is the case, do any particular hazardous local conditions
contribute to the likelihood of such accidents? If so, the Coast Guard
is interested in determining the nature and location of those
conditions.
4. To what extent are data available on the relationship between
the consumption of alcohol or the use of controlled substances and
propeller-strike accidents involving rental boats?
5. Some States have laws requiring boat operators to complete a
boating safety course.
a. To what extent do available data indicate whether boater
behavior patterns, a lack of boating education, or a lack of boating
law enforcement contribute to the incidence of propeller-strike
accidents involving rental boats?
b. Do data indicate whether mandatory boating education for
individuals renting boats with propellers significantly contribute to a
reduction in the number of propeller-strike accidents?
c. If so, do data indicate what type of boating education would be
the most effective?
d. What other vessel operator-oriented requirements might reduce
the incidence of propeller-strike accidents involving rental boats?
e. What economic or other burdens would be imposed on companies
leasing recreational boats if either the Federal or State Government
was to require education of individuals renting propeller-driven boats?
6. The two fatal accidents mentioned above occurred when
individuals were in the water astern of the vessels and the vessels
were put in reverse. While limited operator visibility astern may have
contributed to the accidents, the transom is also the usual location
for swim platforms and boarding ladders for swimmers. Do available data
indicate whether vessel design features contribute to the incidence of
propeller-strike accidents involving rental boats? If so, what vessel
design features might reduce the incidence of propeller-strike
accidents involving rental boats?
7. Are there any proven technologies that would help reduce the
risk of propeller-strike accidents involving rented boats? What
technologies are unacceptable, and for what reasons?
8. The two fatal accidents mentioned above involved rental
houseboats. If the Coast Guard developed regulations in this area, how
should it define the term, ``houseboat?'' Are there any other vessel
types the Coast Guard should consider regulating? If so, what vessels,
if any, should be excepted from such regulations?
9. What, if any, types of information should be displayed on boats
and/or motors leased, rented or chartered for noncommercial use for the
purpose of alerting operators or passengers to the dangers of a
propeller strike?
10. What are the economic and other impacts on companies renting
boats or other entities if the Coast Guard were to require companies to
retrofit such vessels with devices or methods of propulsion designed to
reduce the
[[Page 13125]]
incidence of propeller-strike accidents? In considering regulations,
the Coast Guard must assess the potential adverse impacts on small
business entities. To what extent are small entities engaged in leasing
recreational boats?
11. a. How many companies are currently leasing propeller-driven
boats for bareboat charters by the recreational boating public? How
many vessels are involved and on which bodies of water?
b. How many companies are currently offering propeller-driven
uninspected boats for charter by the recreational boating public? How
many vessels are involved and on which bodies of water?
12. What adverse impacts might result from a regulation requiring
livery companies to verbally brief individuals renting propeller-driven
boats about the dangers of propeller-strike accidents, and requiring
individuals chartering such vessels to acknowledge receiving the
information?
13. Under current Federal statutes (46 U.S.C. 4306), the States do
not have the authority to establish carriage requirements for
associated equipment, such as a mechanical means for preventing
propeller strikes, on vessels operated on waters where both the Coast
Guard and the State have jurisdiction. However, a State may impose more
stringent requirements on vessels such as rental boats on waters
subject to the State's exclusive jurisdiction, so long as such a
requirement is not imposed upon vessel manufacturers. What is the
proper role for the States in reducing propeller-strike accidents
involving rented boats? If the Coast Guard allowed the States to
regulate the equipment carried, or the use of rental boats, how would
interstate commerce be affected?
Open Meetings
A subcommittee of the National Boating Safety Advisory Council, and
the National Association of State Boating Law Administrators are
studying the propeller injury prevention issue. The Coast Guard invites
interested parties and the public to make brief oral presentations
about the propeller injury prevention issue during the following
meetings or events:
From 5 to 7 p.m., Monday, April 22, 1996 at the National Water
Safety Congress Professional Development Seminar at the Boardwalk
Resort in Panama City, FL, (April 23-25, 1996).
From 3 to 5 p.m., Monday April 29, 1996 at the National Boating
Safety Advisory Council Meeting at the Parc Fifty-Five Hotel in San
Francisco, CA (April 27-29, 1996).
From 8:30 to 10:30 a.m., Wednesday May 1, 1996 at the Northeastern
States Boating Law Administrators Conference in the Camden Room at the
Samoset Resort in Rockland, ME (April 29-30, 1996).
From 1 to 4 p.m., Monday, May 6, 1996 in Room 2415 of Coast Guard
Headquarters in Washington, DC.
From 10 a.m. to 12 p.m., Sunday, May 19, 1996 at the Southern
States Boating Law Administrator Conference at the Royal Sonesta Hotel
in New Orleans, LA (May 18-22, 1996).
Those wishing to give an oral presentation should submit their
name, address, and organization represented (if any) at least seven
days prior to the particular meeting or event, to COMMANDANT (G-NAB-6),
room 1505, U.S. Coat Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20593-0001, Attn: Mr. Jay Doubt. Individuals wishing to
give an oral presentation who fail to notify the Coast Guard within
seven days of a particular meeting or event will be allowed to do so if
time permits.
Those giving oral presentations are reminded of the necessity to
also furnish written comments, if those comments are intended for
inclusion in the regulatory docket.
The Coast Guard will consider all relevant comments in determining
what action may be necessary to address propeller accidents involving
rented propeller-driven vessels.
Dated: March 15, 1996.
Rudy K. Peschel,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Office of Navigation Safety and
Waterway Services.
[FR Doc. 96-7304 Filed 3-25-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-14-M