[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 95 (Thursday, May 17, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 27738-27739]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-2459]



Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 151

RIN 1625-ZA13

Vessels Carrying Oil, Noxious Liquid Substances, Garbage, 
Municipal or Commercial Waste, and Ballast Water; Technical, 
Organizational and Conforming Amendment

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.


SUMMARY: This rule makes a non-substantive change to Title 33 of the 
Code of Federal Regulations. The purpose of this rule is to make a 
conforming amendment and technical correction to a Coast Guard 
navigation and navigable water regulation. This rule will have no 
substantive effect on the regulated public.

DATES: This final rule is effective May 17, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as 
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, 
are part of docket USCG-2007-28201 and are available for inspection or 
copying at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, 
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays. You may also find this docket on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, 
call Mr. Ray Davis, Coast Guard, telephone 202-372-1461. If you have 
questions on viewing the docket, call Ms. Renee V. Wright, Program 
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-493-0402.


Regulatory History

    We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this 
regulation. Under both 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A) and (b)(B), the Coast Guard 
finds this rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking 
requirements because this change involves agency organization and 
practices, and good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM for the 
revision in the rule because it is a non-substantive change. This rule 
consists only of a technical and conforming amendment. The change will 
have no substantive effect on the public; therefore, it is unnecessary 
to publish an NPRM. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds 
that, for the same reasons, good cause exists for making this rule 
effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

    This rule, which becomes effective May 17, 2007, makes a technical 
correction to 33 CFR part 151. This rule does not create any 
substantive requirements.

Discussion of Rule

    This rule corrects the authority citation in part 151 and amends 33 
CFR Sec.  151.2010. When the Coast Guard converted the voluntary 
ballast water management guidelines in 33 CFR part 151, Subpart D, into 
a mandatory ballast water management program (69 FR 44952, July 28, 
2004), we inadvertently did not make changes to Sec.  151.2010 to 
reflect several exemptions. Specifically, that crude oil tankers 
engaged in coastwise trade and Department of Defense and Coast Guard 
vessels were exempted from the mandatory ballast water management 
requirements in Sec.  151.2035, which had previously been a voluntary 
program as stated by statutory language in the National Invasive 
Species Act of 1996 (NISA). We discussed this exemption and its 
reasoning in the preamble of the 2004 final rule, stating, ``NISA 
authorizes specific exemptions for crude oil tankers engaged in 
coastwise trade, and Department of Defense and Coast Guard vessels. 
Therefore, we do not currently have the authority to include these 
vessels in the applicability for the final rule.'' This statement made 
clear our intention to carry that exemption forward into the mandatory 
    With respect to the exemptions for vessels operating exclusively 
within one Captain of the Port (COTP) Zone, the language changed to 
include only exemptions for Sec. Sec.  151.2040 and 151.2045, but not 
Sec.  151.2035. This exemption is not taken from NISA. The Coast Guard 
established it as a discretionary exercise of its regulatory authority 
after notice and comment rulemaking. It would be inappropriate to 
expand the ballast water management requirements exemption beyond those 
previously granted by means of a technical amendment not subject to a 
notice and comment rulemaking. These vessels will continue following 
the requirements in Sec.  151.2035. While this includes the 
requirements in Sec.  151.2035(b), which calls for ballast water 
management for vessels operating outside the U.S. EEZ, vessels 
operating exclusively in a COTP Zone will not operate outside the U.S. 
EEZ and, therefore, compliance with those particular requirements is 
not mandatory. These vessels are reminded, however, that they must 
comply with Sec.  151.2035(a), which calls for ballast water management 
inside of U.S. waters.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section 
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does 
not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not 
reviewed it under that Order. We expect the economic impact of this 
rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. 
As this rule involves internal agency practices and procedures and a 
non-substantive change, it will not impose any costs on the public.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities.

[[Page 27739]]

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. This rule does not require a general 
NPRM and, therefore, is exempt from the requirements of the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act. Although this rule is exempt, we have reviewed it for 
potential economic impact on small entities and determined that it will 
not have an impact on small entities.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).


    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local 
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial 
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under 
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary 
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may 
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any 
one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we 
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

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

Civil Justice Reform

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

Protection of Children

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

Indian Tribal Governments

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

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant 
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to 
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use 
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy 
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects 
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards 
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, 
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why 
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or 
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management 
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus 
standards bodies. This rule does not use technical standards. 
Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus 


    We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 
which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and 
have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit 
the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the 
Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under 
figure 2-1, paragraphs (34)(a) and (b), of the Instruction from further 
environmental documentation because this rule involves editorial, 
procedural, and internal agency functions. A final ``Environmental 
Analysis Check List'' and a final ``Categorical Exclusion 
Determination'' are available in the docket where indicated under 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 151

    Administrative practice and procedure, Oil pollution penalties, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Water pollution control.

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


1. Revise the authority citation for part 151 to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321, 1903, 1908; 46 U.S.C. 6101; Pub. L. 
104-227, 110 Stat. 304; E.O. 12777, 3 CFR 1991 Comp., p. 351; 
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

2. Revise Sec.  151.2010 to read as follows:

Sec.  151.2010  Which vessels are exempt from the mandatory 

    (a) Two types of vessels are exempt from the requirements in 
Sec. Sec.  151.2035, 151.2040, and 151.2045:
    (1) A crude oil tanker engaged in the coastwise trade.
    (2) A Department of Defense or Coast Guard vessel subject to the 
requirements of section 1103 of the Act, or any vessel of the Armed 
Forces, as defined in the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 
U.S.C. 1322(a)) that is subject to the ``Uniform National Discharge 
Standards for Vessels of the Armed Forces'' (33 U.S.C. 1322(n)).
    (b) One type of vessel is exempt from the requirements in 
Sec. Sec.  151.2040 and 151.2045:
    (1) A vessel that operates exclusively within one Captain of the 
Port (COTP) Zone.
    (2) [Reserved]

    Dated: May 11, 2007.
Stefan G. Venckus,
Chief, Office of Regulations and Administrative Law, United States 
Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 07-2459 Filed 5-15-07; 9:58 am]