Small Passenger Vessel Inspection and Certification

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is adopting, as a final rule with some

changes, the interim final rule which completely revised the

regulations affecting small passenger vessels of less than 100 gross

tons. This rule creates a separate subchapter for small passenger

vessels carrying more than 150 passengers or having overnight

accommodations for more than 49 passengers, provides additional

alternatives to certain required lifesaving equipment, adopts

additional industry standards, and establishes new upper-limit

breakpoints above which a passenger vessel of less than 100 gross tons

must comply with the same construction and outfitting requirements

applicable to a passenger vessel of 100 gross tons or more. It also

updates the regulations to accommodate the advanced technology, larger

size, and increased passenger-carrying capacity of small passenger

vessels.

DATES: This rule is effective October 30, 1997. The incorporation by

reference of certain publications listed in the rule is approved by the

Director of the Federal Register on October 30, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Documents as indicated in this preamble are available for

inspection or copying at the office of the Executive Secretary, Marine

Safety Council (G-LRA/3406), U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second

Street SW., room 3406, Washington, DC 20593-0001 between 9:30 a.m. and

2 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone

number is 202-267-1477.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Eric P. Christensen,

Project Manager, Office of Operating and Environmental Standards, (G-

MSO-2), phone 202-267-1181, telefax 202-267-4570.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory History

A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), published in the Federal

Register (54 FR 4412) of January 30, 1989, contained a proposed

revision of 46 CFR chapter I, subchapter T, concerning the inspection

and certification of small passenger vessels. The NPRM also proposed a

revision to those portions of 46 CFR chapter I, subchapter S, affecting

the subdivision and stability of small passenger vessels. The NPRM

comment period was originally scheduled to expire on May 31, 1989, but

was extended to July 31, 1989. Public meetings were held on the NPRM in

Washington, DC, St. Louis, New Orleans, San Francisco, Chicago, and

Boston. Over 225 people attended and 116 presented their views at the

meetings.

The Coast Guard received over 300 comment letters on the NPRM

providing both support and criticism of the various proposed changes.

Based on the comments received, the Coast Guard published a

Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SNPRM) (59 FR 1994) on

January 13, 1994. The SNPRM significantly changed the NPRM by proposing

(1) the creation of a separate, new subchapter (46 CRF chapter I,

subchapter K) just for small passenger vessels carrying more than 150

passengers or having overnight accommodations for more than 49

passengers; (2) alternatives to certain required lifesaving equipment;

(3) greater recognition of industry standards; and (4) the

establishment of new upper limits above which a vessel would have to

comply with the construction and outfitting requirements applicable to

a passenger vessel of more than 100 gross tons. During the 150 day

comment period, the Coast Guard received over 160 letters raising over

900 separate issues. Public meetings were held on the SNPRM in New

London, Seattle, Chicago, Annapolis, Tampa, Cincinnati, and Long Beach.

Over 225 persons attended and 80 presented their views at the meetings.

On January 10, 1996, the Coast Guard published an Interim Final

Rule (IFR) in the Federal Register (61 FR 864). During the 150 day

comment period, the Coast Guard received 37 letters containing over 350

comments. Public meetings were held on the IFR in St. Louis, Oakland,

Mobile, and New Haven. Over 130 persons attended and 36 members of the

public presented their views on the IFR at the meetings.

Background and Purpose

Subchapter T contained the regulations for the inspection and

certification of small passenger vessels, including requirements for

construction, outfitting of lifesaving and fire protection equipment,

machinery and electrical installations, and operations. Since the

subchapter's last major revision in 1963, significant changes have

occurred affecting the small passenger vessel fleet, including (1)

statutory changes, (2) increases in vessel size and passenger carrying

capacity,(3) increases in the services offered by the owners and

operators of small passenger vessels, (4) expansions of vessel routes,

and (5) technological advances. Consequently, this rulemaking is

necessary to respond to these changes.

Summary of Changes to the IFR

This final rule adopts, as is, the interim final rule published on

January 10, 1996, with the following notable changes:

(1) Small passenger vessels are no longer grouped into three

categories for regulatory purposes, as provided in the IFR. Separate

treatment of small passenger vessels carrying more than 600 passengers

or having overnight accommodations for more 150 passengers (the group

known as ``K1'' or ``K prime'') has been removed. In this

final rule, all small passenger vessels are grouped into two

categories. Vessels carrying more than 150 passengers or having

overnight accommodations for more than 49 passengers are under

subchapter K (46 CFR parts 114 through 122). All other small passenger

vessels are under subchapter T (46 CFR parts 175 through 185).

(2) The only change to the IFR that could have a substantial

economic impact results from the removal of the K\1\ category. It is

the requirement for stairtowers landing areas, which is restored for

vessels having overnight accommodations for more than 49 passengers.

However, because this type of vessel was built to the guidelines in

Coast Guard NVIC 11-83 (``Regulations for Very Large 46 CFR Subchapter

T Vessels''), which called for stairtower landing areas in accordance

with subchapter H, this change will have no affect on existing vessels.

In addition, it will provide consistency for boat builders who have

built this type of vessel for the past 13 years.

The remaining changes, for the most part, are made to realign the

text after the removal of the K\1\ category, to correct errors in the

Code of Federal Regulations, and to fine-tune the IFR in response to

comments.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

(a) General.

(1) Eleven comments recommended that the breakpoint between

subchapter K and K' be raised from 600 to 1,000 passengers to be in

line with two compartment subdivision. Two comments noted that over the

course of the rulemaking process, several vessels have been built which

would fall into

[[Page 51327]]

the K' category (600+ passengers). Though not required to be built to

the extensive subchapter H standards (passenger vessels of 100 gross

tons or more) called for in K' these vessels have operated safely for

years, and it was recommended that the breakpoint for these vessels be

increased to 1,000 passengers.

The Coast Guard partially agrees. Two-compartment subdivision

begins at 600 passengers. Of the 450 subchapter K vessels identified in

the IFR, only 35 carried over 600 passengers. Some of these vessels

were built as far back as 1944. The operating record of these vessels

is satisfactory. However, the Coast Guard is concerned with the trend

of building larger vessels by manipulating the exemptions to the

tonnage rules. The Coast Guard has determined that additional

requirements for vessels carrying overnight or large numbers of

passengers are appropriate. However, the Coast Guard agrees that

adherence to all of the requirements in subchapters H, F, and J is not

warranted on small passenger vessels.

NVIC 11-83, ``Regulations for very large 46 CFR Subchapter T

vessels,'' identified additional safety requirements for vessels

carrying more than 49 overnight passengers that could be applied by the

OCMI based on the increased size of the vessel. These additional

requirements were taken from subchapters F, H, J and S. In July, 1995,

Change 1 to the NVIC added vessels carrying more than 600 passengers to

the NVIC's applicability. Many of the recommendations contained in the

NVIC were incorporated into subchapter K under the SNPRM and IFR. The

Coast Guard stated that subchapter K was to be the middle ground

between traditional small passenger vessels under subchapter T and

large passenger vessels under subchapter H.

In order to determine a course of action, the Coast Guard compared

the recommendations of NVIC 11-83, including Change 1, to the

regulations contained in the IFR for subchapter K and K' vessels. In

addition, vessels identified in the Marine Safety Information System

(MSIS) as carrying more than 600 passengers and admeasuring less than

100 gross tons had their systems and equipment compared to the NVIC.

Based upon these reviews, the Coast Guard decided to eliminate the K'

thresholds and place, in subchapter K, additional requirements on

vessels carrying more than 600 passengers to focus on the safety

concerns of larger vessels. The elimination of 200 feet and 150

overnight passenger thresholds from subchapter K was based on the data

collected by the Coast Guard. Only 3 of the vessels identified were

over 200 feet in length. This equates to less than a tenth of one

percent of the total small passenger vessel fleet of over 5,500

vessels. Clearly, it is not the industry standard to build vessels over

200 feet that admeasure less than 100 gross tons. As for the

elimination of the 150 overnight passenger threshold, the Coast Guard

has determined that the additional requirements, formerly applied in

accordance with NVIC 11-83 to vessels carrying more than 49 overnight

passengers and now included in this rule, are appropriate for small

passenger vessels carrying more than 150 overnight passengers. The

Coast Guard has identified only one vessel, the QUEEN OF THE WEST, that

is a subchapter K vessel carrying more than 150 overnight passengers.

Specific changes to the subchapter K regulations include the

requirements for an independently-driven fire pump, two electrical

generating sets, exit lights, floodlights for lifeboat and liferaft

embarkation stations, and emergency lighting for vessels carrying more

than 600 passengers. These requirements already exist in the IFR for

vessels carrying more than 49 overnight passengers. In addition,

stairtower landing area requirements for vessels carrying more than 600

passengers have been placed in Sec. 116.438, and fire hydrant

requirements have been placed in Sec. 118.310. The fire hydrant valve

requirement was believed to be omitted from the IFR and is considered

good marine practice.

Both the stairtower and fire main requirements were contained in

NVIC 11-83. Therefore, the Coast Guard has determined that the changes

in the final rule should have no impact on vessels carrying more than

49 overnight passengers because this type of vessel has been designed

and built to the NVIC for over 13 years.

The Coast Guard has determined that by specifically addressing the

additional requirements in subchapter K, rather than referring to part

72 in subchapter H for structural fire protection or to applicable

parts of subchapters F and J for machinery and electrical requirements,

a consistent minimum level of safety is achieved. It also eliminates

confusion in interpreting the word ``applicable.'' In addition, the

Coast Guard has determined that although this is a relatively

significant change to the regulations, the overall impact to the

subchapter K vessel fleet is a reduction in regulations for

constructing vessels carrying more than 600 passengers.

(2) Two comments recommended that indices for subchapters K and T

be added to title 46, Code of Federal Regulations. They appear in the

October 1, 1996, edition of title 46.

(3) Two comments noted that these regulations have not used

grandfathering as extensively as in previous regulations despite the

absence of specific dangers to public safety.

As discussed in the preambles of the NPRM and SNPRM, the Coast

Guard considers the use of grandfathering and phase-in periods in this

rule appropriate. The Coast Guard uses grandfathering extensively in

this rule. Existing vessels are grandfathered for construction and

arrangement, electrical, and machinery requirements unless the vessel

undergoes a major conversion or adds new equipment. Additional

requirements in firefighting, lifesaving, and vessel operations (crew

training) are considered appropriate. The Coast Guard acknowledges that

the small passenger vessel industry is safe; however, casualties still

occur and life and property are lost as a result. The revised

regulations contained in the IFR and final rule will result in an

increased level of safety for passengers and crew alike.

(4) Two comments asked for a list of all documents, such as

Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circulars (NVIC's), Policy File

Memorandums from G-MCO (formerly G-MVI), Coast Guard Headquarters (HQ)

policy letters, and Marine Safety Manual (MSM) sections, that are

canceled or revised as a result of this rule. They are:

NVIC 11-83 with Change 1 ``Regulations for Very Large 46 CFR

Subchapter T Passenger Vessels'' (Canceled).

G-MVI Policy letter 13-86 ``Certificated Small Passenger Vessels

Carrying Six or Less Passengers'' (Canceled).

G-MVI Policy letter 22-89 ``Watertight Doors in Subdivision

Bulkheads on Small Passenger Vessels'' (Canceled).

G-MVI Policy letter 16-93 ``Drydock Extensions for Small Passenger

Vessels (T-Boats)'' (Canceled).

G-MVI Policy letter 05-95 ``Policy on Rail Heights for Passenger

Vessels and Small Passenger Vessels'' (Revised).

Policy File Memorandum (PFM) 1-94 on very low fire load options

(still in effect and will be incorporated into NVIC 6-80 on structural

fire protection).

(5) Two comments concerned 46 CFR chapter I, subchapter Q, which

contains requirements for the specification and approval of equipment,

construction, and materials and which is referenced in subchapters K

and T. They

[[Page 51328]]

recommend that subchapter Q be repealed because the practice of

approving equipment is outdated in this age of comprehensive consensus

standards, corporate quality control, and the rapidly evolving

technology in materials and innovative equipment.

The Coast Guard disagrees that subchapter Q is unnecessary. Where

certain items of equipment are required by statute or regulation to be

carried on a vessel, the Coast Guard equipment approval system is an

invaluable resource for ship operators who would otherwise be uncertain

if a particular item would be acceptable. It ensures that requirements

are applied uniformly to all vessels and eliminates the need for case-

by-case evaluations by an Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI).

Some specifications in subchapter Q are outdated and in need of

revision. However, acceptance standards are still needed to ensure that

critical materials and equipment meet minimum national or international

safety standards. As resources allow, the Coast Guard intends to revise

subchapter Q to maximize the use of performance standards and suitable

industry consensus standards. The Coast Guard is very active in

encouraging and assisting in the development of industry and

international standards.

(6) Two comments suggested that the recommendations of the National

Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) (M-95-37 through 39) resulting from

the ARGO COMMODORE casualty should be implemented before publishing a

final rule.

The Coast Guard has provided a response to the NTSB regarding those

recommendations. The recommendations were considered in developing

these regulations; however, problems surrounding the onboard

firefighting efforts in this casualty were more related to personnel

and training than to equipment.

(7) Two comments asked why there were 55 outstanding NTSB

requirements concerning the safety of small passenger vessels.

The Coast Guard has resolved virtually all of the previously

outstanding NTSB recommendations concerning small passenger vessels.

(8) Six comments stated that there were too many new regulations;

industry cannot take any more.

The Coast Guard notes that many of the rulemaking projects

published in the last year have centered around the adoption of

industry standards and the removal of obsolete regulations. These

regulations are designed to ease the burden on industry. Other new

rulemakings, such as the implementation of the International Convention

on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers

(STCW) and the revision of 46 CFR chapter I, subchapter W, (Lifesaving

Appliances) are in response to changes in the International Convention

for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, (SOLAS) and are mandated by

international treaty. Where possible, the Coast Guard tries to minimize

the impact of SOLAS amendments on the domestic fleet. The small

passenger vessel rulemaking has been in development since 1985 and

industry has commented on three different versions of proposed and

interim regulations. Because of the extensive public participation in

this rulemaking at the 17 public meetings and by the submission of

written comments, the new small passenger vessel regulations will be a

viable, flexible standard for the next 30 years.

(9) One comment recommended that the operators of passenger vessels

be held accountable for the safety of the passengers who consume

alcoholic beverages on the vessels.

The master is already responsible for the safety of the passengers

and crew on board the vessel. The Coast Guard has determined that

additional regulations are not required to clarify this point.

(10) One comment noted that accident and risk analysis criteria

needed to be better developed if used in developing regulations. The

comment also noted that the statistics for passenger vessel casualties

included foreign flag vessels. The comment stated that 35 percent of

casualties occurred on diving boats where the casualty had nothing to

do with the vessel's equipment. In addition, a number of casualties

were dockside and had nothing to do with the operation of the vessel.

It recommended that the Coast Guard rethink how it handles casualties.

Just because vessels are getting bigger does not mean that they are not

as safe.

The Coast Guard notes that there are several related efforts that

have been undertaken to improve risk analysis. They are as follows:

(a) A Risk-Based Technologies (RBT) Management Team has been

established to guide risk analysis development. The RBT Management Team

is coordinating the risk activities of the Coast Guard Headquarter's

Office of Marine Safety with reference to other government agencies and

the International Maritime Organization (IMO).

(b) A Marine Board study entitled ``Risk Assessment and Management

of Marine Systems'' and is slated to be completed in mid 1997. The goal

of this project is to learn to understand and use the different risk

assessment methodologies.

(c) An internal instruction providing guidance in risk-based

decision-making to the Captain of the Port (COTP), due in December

1997, will provide technical and administrative guidance to the field

on how risk assessment and management can and should be used in support

of Commandant (G-M)'s Business Plan goals.

(d) The Marine Safety Evaluation Program (MSTEP) is based on the

use of risk-based technologies and is designed to improve the current

process of assessing the safety of marine systems that are within the

Coast Guard's regulatory domain.

In formulating these regulations, the Coast Guard focused on

casualties to small passenger vessels. The Coast Guard has commended

the industry throughout the rulemaking process on its history of safe-

operations and tried to keep new requirements narrowed to the areas of

most concern.

(b) Comments on and Changes to Particular Provisions of the IFR

Sections 114.110 and 175.110 General Applicability

(1) One comment recommended that the breakpoint for subchapter T

boats carrying overnight passengers needs to be increased from 49 to

100 passengers based on the safe operating record of these vessels.

The Coast Guard disagrees. Many of the requirements for subchapter

K vessels with 50 or more overnight passengers were in existence under

the old small passenger vessel policy in the form of NVIC 11-83. The

safe operating record of this segment of the industry may be the result

of Coast Guard guidelines that have been in place for years.

(2) One comment suggested that 200 feet not be used as a breakpoint

for limit for subchapter K'. Tonnage is the self limiting criteria. One

comment stated that the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) rules for

vessels less than 200 feet will be revised to apply to vessels less

than 300 feet.

The Coast Guard has determined that gross tonnage is not a self-

limiting criteria. While the Coast Guard agrees that an upper size-

limit is necessary to address manning and passenger safety concerns,

historically, small passenger vessels rarely exceed 200 feet in length.

According to Coast Guard data, the longest subchapter K vessel is 230

feet. The Coast Guard has determined that the requirements applicable

to vessels carrying more than 600 passengers or more than 49 overnight

passengers adequately address the minimum

[[Page 51329]]

construction and equipment requirements for larger, small passenger

vessels. Future rulemakings regarding alternate tonnage will set a size

threshold for subchapter K vessels and maintain the subchapter-K-class

vessel as the middle ground between vessels under subchapters T and H.

Once the ABS Rules are published, the Coast Guard will consider

incorporating the new rules by reference in these regulations.

(3) One comment recommended that the applicability sections of

these regulations be aligned with the Passenger Vessel Safety Act of

1993.

The Coast Guard agrees and the regulations in Secs. 114.110 and

175.110 have been so aligned.

Sections 114.400 and 175.400 Definitions of Terms Used in This

Subchapter

(1) One comment recommended that the definition of ``accommodation

space'' be revised to allow space-heating equipment with an element

temperature in excess of 250 deg.F (121 deg.C).

The Coast Guard concurs. The intent of the 121 deg.C temperature

limitation was to ensure that cooking equipment normally associated

with a galley would not be installed in an accommodation space. The

definition of ``accommodation space'' has been amended to use the same

terminology as the definition of ``galley.''

(2) One comment suggested that the definition of ``cold water''

allow for more OCMI discretion for vessels that operate in cold water

for only a couple of months of the year.

The Coast Guard disagrees because the OCMI has adequate authority

under Sec. 114.550 to give special consideration to the application of

the cold water requirements if warranted by the circumstances.

(3) Four comments noted that, under the definition of ``exposed

waters,'' the definition for winter season in the Great Lakes infers

that all waters inside 20 nautical miles are partially protected

waters. The definition of ``partially protected waters'' does not

contradict this. The comment asked if the change was intended.

The definition of ``exposed waters'' for the Great Lakes did not

change with the publication of the IFR. OCMI's have always had the

authority to declare certain waters within 20 miles of a harbor of safe

refuge exposed for the purpose of stability.

(4) One comment noted that the definition of ``hardwood,'' as used

in the wood industry, is not based on specific gravity. The performance

intended is the resistance to fire and hardwoods normally possess good

fire-resistance qualities. In general, hardwoods have specific gravity

between 0.5 and 0.8. Coast Guard policy, written in 1980 (NVIC 6-80),

states ``oak or similar hardwood.'' The word ``similar'' refers to

properties involving the material's resistance to fire. Although it can

reasonably be concluded that dense woods such as those with a specific

gravity in excess of 0.66 would be resistant to fire, such a definition

is not necessary for regulatory purposes and has not presented a

problem for at least the past 16 years.

The Coast Guard has revised the definition to specifically mention

oak and its fire resistant properties.

(5) One comment noted that the definition of ``hazardous

condition'' includes illness of a person on board. Though seasickness

is not considered an illness by most people in the sport fishing

community, prolonged seasickness can have a profound effect on a

person's ability to think clearly and to maintain balance.

The Coast Guard agrees that seasickness can be quite debilitating

and create a hazardous condition. If an individual can no longer

function, possibly due to dehydration, the master should consider

either providing medical attention on board or removing the individual

from the vessel.

(6) Four comments requested that the definition of ``High Speed

Craft'' (HSC) be clarified. They asked if the IMO HSC Code applies only

to international conventions? Could STCW bring in the HSC criterion?

What does the phrase ``the aforementioned generality'' mean? Could a

basic, every-day, mono-hull boat under subchapters K and T that is in

domestic service and equipped with extra horsepower for prolonged

engine life or operating conditions be considered an HSC? Sections

114.540 and 175.540 state that the IMO HSC Code can be used as an

equivalent to the requirements contained in subchapters K and T,

respectively.

The Coast Guard does not make a determination on whether a vessel

is an HSC without the owner of the vessel applying for HSC Code

equivalency. The requirements under STCW contain no additional

requirements for vessels meeting the HSC Code definition. Vessels

operating on domestic voyages are allowed to apply for the HSC

equivalency, but do not necessarily need to receive SOLAS HSC

certification. However, once the Coast Guard has granted HSC

equivalency to a small passenger vessel, the code must be complied with

in its entirety. In order to avoid confusion and make the HSC Code

definition more readable, the term ``aforementioned generality'' has

been removed.

(7) Twelve comments recommended that paragraph (3) of the

definition ``major conversion'' be deleted. The comments remarked that

operators should not be discouraged from doing things to substantially

prolong the life of their vessels. Normal maintenance itself prolongs

the life of a vessel. The comments also noted that the definition is

too broad. One comment recommended the definition be changed to mean a

conversion of a vessel that, as determined by the Commandant,

substantially adds to the length, beam, height, or draft of the vessel

in order to accommodate an increase of more than 15 percent of the

passengers currently authorized.

The definitions of ``major conversion'' are based upon statute. The

Coast Guard agrees that normal maintenance prolongs a vessel's life and

supports continuous maintenance. Normal maintenance does not constitute

a major conversion. However, the Coast Guard does not agree that an

arbitrary 15 percent should be added to the definition. The Coast Guard

will continue to use the current definition and apply it to vessels on

a case-by-case basis.

(8) One comment recommended that the last sentence of the

definition of ``means of escape'' be deleted because the terms

``exit,'' ``exit access,'' and ``exit discharge'' are not familiar to

the maritime community. The terms are used in National Fire Protection

Association (NFPA) 101.

The Coast Guard agrees in part. A key difference between the means

of escape under subchapters K and T and under subchapter H is that

protected escape routes are not required in vessels constructed to

subchapter T. However, vessels constructed to subchapters K or H must

have protected escape routes culminating at protected areas where

passengers are separated from the effects of fire or flooding. The

terms ``exit,'' ``exit access,'' and ``exit discharge'' are intended to

indicate that protected escape routes are made up of many differing

components, including corridors, stairways, and stairtowers, which must

provide continuously protected access from a space to an area of

refuge. The last sentence of the definition in subchapter T has been

deleted.

(9) Six comments recommended that the definition of ``new vessel''

be changed to allow vessels started before March 11, 1996, to be

completed after September 11, 1996.

The Coast Guard advises that this practice has been done on a case-

by-case

[[Page 51330]]

basis. Extending the date would only cause confusion and another round

of appeals. By the time this rule is published, this issue will be

moot.

(10) Three comments recommended that the definition of ``pantry''

be aligned with the IMO definition of pantry, which refers to a space

that does not contain heat sources with temperatures exceeding

425 deg.F.

The Coast Guard disagrees. The IMO definition, as contained in

SLS.17/Circ.3, uses terms such as ``appliances consuming small amounts

of electrical power'' and ``hot plates for keeping food warm.'' Since

these terms are somewhat vague, they are more difficult to apply and

enforce. No changes were made to the definition.

(11) One comment requested that definitions for the following terms

be added to allow for better use of the regulations and to assist

personnel in answering questions on Coast Guard exams. The terms

include ``enclosed space,'' ``partially enclosed space,'' ``fire

station,'' ``floodable length,'' ``bulkhead deck,'' ``collision

bulkhead,'' ``coaming,'' ``hull strainer,'' ``hydrostatic release

unit,'' ``pendant,'' ``lifeline'' (by revising 46 CFR 160.010-3(g) and

160.027 to correct problems with life float and buoyant apparatus

lifelines and pendants), ``positive action valve'' (defined so a store

clerk can understand), ``pressure vessel,'' and ``ships service.''

The Coast Guard has determined that adding these definitions would

not add any value to the regulation. Instead of adding a definition for

``fire station,'' the Coast Guard has changed the term ``fire

station(s)'' to ``fire hydrant(s)'' throughout the rule. The Coast

Guard is unclear as to what the ``problems'' with lifelines and

pendants are; the current specifications have been used successfully

since 1982. Changes to the buoyant apparatus and lifefloat

specification subparts in subchapter Q are beyond the scope of this

rulemaking.

(12) Based on a working review and use of the IFR, the Coast Guard

has made the following additional changes to this section in order to

correct any errors and make it more readable. The definition of

``atrium'' has been modified by removing ``escalator opening'' from the

list of purposes an atrium could not be used for to resolve a conflict

with Sec. 116.440. Section 116.440 allows an escalator to be installed

in an atrium, provided that the footprint of the escalator is

subtracted from opening area computations.

(13) The Coast Guard has amended the definition of ``auxiliary

machinery space'' to include spaces that contain refrigeration

equipment.

Accordingly, spaces that contain refrigeration equipment are

removed from the definition of ``machinery space.''

(14) Definitions of ``low risk service space'' and ``high risk

service space'' are amended to change motion picture rooms from high

risk to low risk. Motion picture rooms have not posed a significant

fire risk since nitrocellulose film was phased out several years ago.

Additionally, the break point for cleaning gear lockers has been

changed from a fire load basis to a size and contents basis to be

consistent with the interpretation of subchapter H. Additionally,

``small'' cleaning gear lockers (less than 5 square meters) may be

considered type 6 spaces if they do not contain flammable liquids.

(15) Changes are made to the definitions of ``accommodations

space,'' ``high risk accommodations space,'' ``overnight accommodations

or overnight accommodations space,'' and ``passenger accommodations

space'' to recognize the addition of a type 6 space. See the discussion

on Sec. 116.415 in this preamble for information on the addition of

type 6 spaces.

Sections 114.540 and 175.540 Equivalents

The Coast Guard is amending Secs. 114.540(b) and 175.540(b) by

removing the word ``pending'' because IMO adopted the HSC code on May

20, 1994.

Sections 114.560 and 175.560 Appeals

Nine comments recommended that the Coast Guard be required to

answer industry appeals within 30 days of receipt.

The Coast Guard acknowledges that recent appeals, such as that for

the SCHOONER AMERICA, illustrate that short-turnaround appeals can be

completed within 24 hours. The Coast Guard has determined that 30 days

is an appropriate length of time for responding to most industry

inquiries or appeals. Internally, the Coast Guard places a 30-day due

date on correspondence received from the public. In such a case, the

respondent should receive a response within 45 days, including mail

delays. However, some issues are more complex and require more research

and time to arrive at an appropriate response. Conversely, some appeals

come up out of the blue and need an immediate resolution. Like any

concern with over 10,000 customers, the Coast Guard prioritizes tasks

and accomplishes them as resources allow. As stated in the preamble to

the IFR, a revision to 46 CFR 1.03 is beyond the scope of this

rulemaking.

Sections 114.600 and 175.600 Incorporation by Reference

Several standards incorporated by reference have been changed to

reference the most recent edition. In addition, based on revisions to

Secs. 116.300, 177.300, and 177.410, the ABS Guide for High Speed Craft

and MIL-R-21607E(SH) ``Resins, Polyester, Low Pressure Laminating, Fire

Retardant'' have been added.

Sections 114.800 and 175.800 Approved Equipment and Material.

The statement regarding equipment approvals in Secs. 114.800 and

175.800 has been deleted by the Coast Guard, because this practice has

not been done in years.

Sections 115.107 and 176.107 Period of Validity.

Eight comments expressed concern over inspection creep. The

comments recommended that the Certificate of Inspection (COI) should

expire on the last day of the month and year of inspection. An

additional comment suggested that, with the three-year inspection

interval, operators have an opportunity to enter into a trial

streamline-inspection program. Reinspections could be done by the

company and the Coast Guard could monitor the effectiveness of the

inspection program during the vessel's triennial exam.

The Coast Guard notes that the three-year inspection interval is

statutory in nature. The Coast Guard's Compliance Division (G-MOC) is

examining the feasibility of establishing policies to reduce inspection

creep. The streamlined-inspection program is being addressed under a

separate Coast Guard rulemaking (CGD 96-055) and is beyond the scope of

the this rulemaking.

Sections 115.113 and 176.113 Passengers Permitted

Two comments stated that existing vessels would suffer capacity

losses under the criteria which establishes additional exceptions to

the rail and area rules of thumb. They stated that, because there was

no problem with the old system of determining passenger capacity, there

is no need for change.

The prohibition of length of rail criteria used in conjunction with

either fixed seating or deck area is not understood. The Coast Guard

states that the new sections merely clarify what has been accepted

practice by the Coast Guard for many years. Length of rail criteria was

not allowed to be combined

[[Page 51331]]

with deck area or fixed seating under old Sec. 176.01-25(b). Existing

vessels should not be affected by this clarification of the old

requirement.

Sections 115.114 and 176.114 Alternative Requirements for a Vessel

Operating as Other Than a Small Passenger Vessel

(1) Three comments stated that, to be of any value to the industry,

the ability to operate as other than an inspected vessel must come

without the route, manning, and other restrictions in paragraph (c) of

these sections.

The Coast Guard disagrees. The operating endorsements required

under paragraphs (c) are placed on the COI to ensure the vessel meets

the requirements for the intended uninspected service.

(2) Two comments stated that the wording is confusing and the

intent of these sections needs to be explained in the preamble.

As stated in the preambles of the NPRM, SNPRM, and IFR, the intent

of this section is to allow an inspected small passenger vessel to

operate as an uninspected or recreational vessel by an endorsement on

the vessel's COI. Under 46 U.S.C. 3313(a), a small passenger vessel

must be in compliance with its COI at all times. Sections 115.114 and

176.114 are intended to provide for alternatives and allow small

passenger vessels to remain competitive with uninspected vessels.

(3) Three comments recommended that the Coast Guard automatically

endorse vessel COI's with an endorsement to operate under subchapter C.

The Coast Guard disagrees with automatic endorsement. As stated in

the SNPRM preamble, by requiring an owner to request an endorsement,

the Coast Guard can better ensure that the owner is aware of the

implications of the endorsement and the applicable uninspected vessel

requirements in 46 CFR chapter I, subchapter C, or recreational boat

requirements in 33 CFR chapter I, subchapter S.

(4) One comment stated that paragraph (b)(2) is confusing with

regard to minimum manning specified on the vessel's COI. According to

the comment, minimum manning is always above what an owner may be

requesting in accordance with this section.

The intent of paragraph (b)(2) is to allow the OCMI to state, on

the COI, the required manning on the vessel based upon the type of

operation and number of passengers carried. For example, many COI's

have an endorsement stating that, when carrying less than 6 passengers,

a deckhand is not required.

(5) Two comments asked why freight service is excluded. Freight

service is less prone to safety issues than passenger service.

Freight service is not excluded. A small passenger vessel of more

than 15 gross tons must meet the requirements of subchapters K or T as

appropriate when carrying freight for hire. A vessel of 15 gross tons

or less is an uninspected vessel when carrying freight for hire and,

therefore, must meet the applicable requirements for an uninspected

vessel.

Sections 115.204 and 176.204 Permit to Carry Excursion Party

Three comments recommended removing paragraph (c) so that the only

limits on loading a vessel with an excursion permit are sufficient

stability and appropriate lifesaving equipment. One comment noted that

there has been a change to the old regulations that requires that the

number of passengers be limited based on seating, deck area, and rail

space.

The Coast Guard disagrees. The purpose of the excursion permit is

to allow a passenger vessel to carry additional passengers or operate

on a more severe route, or both, for a limited period of time, if the

cognizant OCMI believes it can be done safely. The OCMI will not

normally allow a vessel to carry more passengers than there is space

available, regardless of sufficient stability. Overcrowding a vessel

presents unique hazards, such as inadequate crowd control. The Coast

Guard has determined that this is an unacceptable operating condition.

Many vessel operators limit the number of passengers carried on a

routine basis for various reasons including survival-craft capacity,

fire-pump requirements, and operator comfort. The vessel may have

adequate stability and space available for additional passengers, but

the operator may choose to carry fewer than the maximum calculated. In

this case, an excursion permit would allow the operator to carry

additional passengers without overcrowding the vessel and to stay

within stability limitations.

The requirement to base passenger load on the passengers permitted

criteria is taken from the Coast Guard's Marine Safety Manual. This

practice has been in effect since 1960 and was placed in the SNPRM as a

result of comments to the NPRM.

Sections 115.310 and 176.310 Certification Expiration Date Stickers

Four comments recommended that the Coast Guard eliminate the

prohibition of operating in the event that the Certification Expiration

Date Sticker is damaged or lost.

The Coast Guard disagrees. In the event the sticker is damaged, the

owner should call the Coast Guard for another sticker. The function of

the sticker is clearly defined in the regulations. Operating without a

visible sticker may result in an at-sea Coast Guard boarding to verify

the legality of the charter.

Sections 115.402 and 176.402 Initial Inspection for Certification

One comment recommended that builders be allowed to submit plans as

well as owners.

The Coast Guard agrees. It is common practice for a builder to

submit plans, on behalf of an owner, to the Coast Guard. However, it is

the owner's responsibility to request an initial inspection for

certification, which is the basis of the requirement. Once the

application package is sent to the Coast Guard (including the plans

from the builder), the owner may inform the Coast Guard to deal

directly with the builder, as appropriate.

Sections 115.404 and 176.404 Subsequent Inspections for Certification

Two comments asked why language was added to this section allowing

the OCMI to require the vessel to get underway. The comments also noted

that this is not required of other inspected vessels.

The Coast Guard advises that the practice of getting vessels

underway as part of the COI exam is common in many Marine Safety Office

(MSO) zones. The language merely reaffirms the OCMI's authority to use

an underway test to verify the condition of the vessel's internal

structure, as well as machinery and steering. In addition, any drills

the inspector may wish to conduct must be as if an actual emergency is

taking place. A man-overboard drill at the dock lacks realism and is

not as effective as an underway drill.

Sections 115.500 and 176.500 When Required

Two comments recommended that the wording be changed to reflect

that a reinspection can take place 60 days on either side of the COI

anniversary date, if that is the intent of the paragraph.

The Coast Guard advises that it is their practice to allow a 60 day

window on either side of the COI date. No changes were made to these

sections based on comments.

[[Page 51332]]

Sections 115.600 and 176.600 Drydock and Internal Structural

Examination Intervals

(1) One comment noted that the drydock and internal structural

examinations are written as if they are two separate examinations.

The Coast Guard advises that internal structural exams can be done

with the vessel in or out of the water. In the past, some operators

have hauled their vessels out of the water for only a short period of

time and continued the internal exam back in the water. This option

remains in place with the wording in the IFR.

(2) One comment stated that vessels less than 65 feet carrying less

than 12 passengers on an international voyage are being adversely

affected by the new annual drydock and internal exam requirement

required by paragraph (b).

It is not the Coast Guard's intent to require vessels, not subject

to SOLAS requirements, to meet standards derived from international

standards. Language is added to the rule to indicate vessels subject to

SOLAS requirements are to be hauled out annually.

Sections 115.610 and 176.610 Scope of Drydock and Internal Structural

Examinations

One comment recommended that propeller shafts should not be

examined and rudders should not be removed, unless there is obvious

damage or the inspector can otherwise justify the action.

The Coast Guard agrees. These sections were revised as a result of

comments to the SNPRM. Since these sections do not contradict the

comment, no changes have been made to the rule.

Sections 115.612 and 176.612 Notice and Plans Required

Four comments stated that the wording in paragraph (b) is

constrictive and is contrary to good maintenance practice in the field

and in industry. The comments recommended that the words ``but not

limited to'' be added after the word ``maintenance.''

The Coast Guard agrees and has added these words in both sections.

Sections 115.630 and 176.630 Tailshaft Examinations

Four comments recommended that tailshafts not be drawn, unless

there is obvious damage or the inspector can otherwise reasonably

justify the action.

The Coast Guard agrees. These sections were revised as a result of

comments to the SNPRM. Since these sections do not contradict the

comment, no changes have been made to the rule.

Sections 115.700 and 176.700 Permission for Repairs and Alterations

Five comments recommended that repairs in kind to maintain a

vessel's material state should not require the permission of the OCMI.

Only repairs that involve altering a vessel's substantive

characteristics or the safety of passengers must be reported to the

OCMI for approval. The Coast Guard has determined that the language of

this section satisfactorily addresses the comment. Repairs involving

the replacement of plating, refastening, or other items covered in

paragraph (a) require Coast Guard involvement because they affect

passenger safety.

Sections 115.802 and 176.802 Hull

Six comments recommended that specific wording be added to

paragraph (c) to reference the working of ``wood'' hulls. One comment

queried that if underway inspections were not required for large

vessels, then why are they required on small vessels other than wood

vessels? Two comments stated that seasonal vessels do not keep crews on

board year round so the personnel are not normally present for

inspections. If personnel were required to be on hand, then it would be

an added cost burden to an already overburdened industry. Two comments

recommended that underway drills should be confined to dinner-cruise

and excursion vessels, where passengers tend to be less aware of vessel

operations than they are on fishing and dive boats.

As stated previously, underway inspections are commonplace at many

MSO's regardless of hull material. Underway inspections verify the

integrity of the hull structure regardless of hull material. Secondary

bonds in fiberglass reinforced plastic (FRP) vessels and welds in

aluminum and steel vessels can fail, resulting in an unsafe condition.

Because the term ``working of the hull'' is more geared to wood hulls,

the Coast Guard has deleted the words ``working of'' and added the

words ``and internal structure'' to paragraph (c) to clarify the

requirements. In addition, the operation of the main engines and

steering gear under normal operating load can only be done underway.

Performance of man overboard drills can also be better determined

underway. With the new drill and crew training requirements in place,

there should be a crew member on board during an inspection. The Coast

Guard has determined that the days of inspections during ``winter lay-

up'' are over. The owner will have to schedule an inspection when the

vessel is completely ready for inspection. The Coast Guard has not

determined that there is a significant cost burden to industry in order

to comply with an underway inspection at the vessel's inspection for

certification.

Sections 115.808 and 176.808 Lifesaving

In order to correct inconsistencies contained in the IFR, the Coast

Guard has amended these sections to include the term ``inflatable

buoyant apparatus.''

Sections 115.812 and 176.812 Pressure Vessels and Boilers

Four comments stated that referencing Sec. 61.05 of subchapter F

for pressure valves has reduced the inspection interval from three

years to two. It was recommended that pressure vessel examinations be

eliminated altogether due to the lack of casualty data and the cost to

industry.

The Coast Guard notes that items not inspected become neglected. To

say that, because there have been no problems with pressure vessels,

they no longer need to be inspected, does not take into consideration

the idea that it is the inspection that has reduced the risk. However,

the Coast Guard has determined that the three-year interval is

appropriate for the types of air receivers found on small passenger

vessels and has amended these sections accordingly.

Sections 115.920 and 176.920 Exemptions

Two comments recommended that the Coast Guard add exemptions to the

STCW-driven regulations.

This request is beyond the scope of this rulemaking but may be

addressed under the Coast Guard's on-going rulemaking on STCW (CGD 95-

062).

Sections 116.202 and 177.202 Plans and Information Required

(1) Five comments suggested that, with the Coast Guard's

initiatives to streamline vessel inspections, plan approval will, most

likely, be delegated to third parties. It was recommended that a time

frame within which plans must be approved by the Coast Guard or a

third-party organization be added to the rule.

The Coast Guard does not intend to delegate all plan review

functions to third parties. However, depending on the type of vessel

and plan, there may be options available for the use of classifications

societies or professional engineers. The Coast Guard notes that time-

frames are dependent on the number of plans submitted and personnel

available for review. In

[[Page 51333]]

addition, requirements for plan approval were relaxed in the IFR by

requiring that only basic scantling plans be approved before

construction. By reducing the number of plans that require approval

before construction and by enabling classification societies and

professional engineers to review construction plans, the delays

experienced in the past should be minimized.

(2) Two comments stated that cross curves of stability are not

appropriate for subchapter T boats and are generally no longer used

because of computers.

The Coast Guard notes that cross curves contain the calculation of

righting arms for the various angles of heel. This data is necessary

for evaluating the stability of a vessel. However, the Marine Safety

Center (MSC) may accept, on a case-by-case basis, computer tabulated

righting arm data, if calculated at a close enough interval to

accurately approximate the righting arm curves.

(3) Two comments noted that electrical plant analysis is a new and

time-consuming requirement for T-boats.

The Coast Guard advises that electrical plant load analysis is not

necessarily required on T-boats. Section 177.202(b) contains the plans

and information that may be required by an OCMI or MSC. For the

electrical plant load analysis requirement, sufficient capacity of the

electrical system needs to be determined by the Coast Guard. If the

Coast Guard cannot determine that sufficient capacity exists, then the

owner is required to provide evidence that the electrical system is of

sufficient capacity.

(4) Two comments asked what constitutes reasonable destructive

testing?

Reasonable destructive testing includes burnout tests for

fiberglass reinforced plastic laminates to determine resin content and

bend tests on welding coupons, when required.

Sections 116.300 and 177.300 Structural Design

One comment recommended that the ABS 1990 High Speed Craft guide be

acceptable for scantlings of aluminum.

The Coast Guard agrees and has added this to the rule. In addition,

the ABS rules are also acceptable for vessels constructed of fiberglass

reinforced plastic.

Sections 116.340 and 177.340 Alternate Design Considerations

Four comments wondered what happened to the five-year rule.

The Coast Guard advises that the five-year rule has been retained

from the SNPRM in Sec. 177.310 of subchapter T.

Section 116.405 General Arrangement and Outfitting

(1) The requirements for plastic pipe in concealed spaces, as

written in the IFR, are inaccurate and contradict subchapter F and

current Coast Guard policy. As a result, the current text in

Sec. 116.405 (f)(1) and (f)(2) has been deleted and Sec. 116.405(f) has

been rewritten, requiring plastic pipe to be regulated in accordance

with subchapter F and current Coast Guard policy.

(2) Seven comments to Sec. 116.405(i) stated that heavy-duty,

plastic waste receptacles are the industry standard, because they are

non-rusting and lightweight. The comments requested that the use of

plastic waste receptacles be authorized.

The Coast Guard states that the requirement for waste receptacles

to be constructed of noncombustible materials is consistent with

subchapter H and the old subchapter T. The new regulations in the IFR

state the desired performance. This provides vessel owners with

potential options by not explicitly restricting the use of plastics, as

long as an equivalent level of safety can be achieved.

Section 116.415 Fire Control Boundaries

(1) The Coast Guard provides the following comments on Type 6

spaces. Tables 116.415(b) and (c) were modified in the IFR to be more

consistent with subchapter H. However, for ease of application, the

three types of accommodations spaces in subchapter H were simplified to

two in subchapter K. Specifically, type 6 and type 7 spaces in

subchapter H were consolidated into a single category (type 7) in

subchapter K. This consolidation increased the boundary requirements

for a number of spaces that would have been classified as type 6 in

subchapter H. Therefore, the type 6 category has been added to

subchapter K. Additionally, the bulkhead requirement in table

116.415(b) for a boundary between a type 5 and 7 space has been reduced

from A-15 to B-15, in order to be consistent with subchapter H.

(2) Table 116.415(b) is amended to clarify that distinct

stairtowers must be separated with A-0 bulkheads.

Section 116.422 Ceilings, Linings, Trim, Interior Finish, and

Decorations

(1) Three comments recommended restoring the provision from the

NPRM that allowed the use of gypsum wall board in boundaries not

required to be structural fire control boundaries.

This issue was addressed in the preamble to the IFR. The

regulations explicitly state the performance without making detailed

reference to specific construction materials. Approved, noncombustible-

faced gypsum board is available from several suppliers at a comparable

cost to paper-faced gypsum board.

(2) One comment suggested that the term ``combined area of the

bulkheads'' in Sec. 116.422(c)(2) include the ceiling.

The Coast Guard agrees and has changed this section to include the

ceiling.

Section 116.423 Furniture and Furnishings

(1) Four comments questioned that, if CAL TB 133 is the same as UL

1056, then why is CAL TB 133 not included in the regulations or

incorporated by reference? Commercial sources recognize and rely on CAL

TB 133.

The Coast Guard advises that CAL TB 133 is acceptable as discussed

in the preamble of the IFR. It is not incorporated by reference because

it applies to a particular State. UL 1056 was developed to provide a

national standard and, thus, there is no need to reference any

particular, local government requirement. However, revised NVIC 6-80

will state that CAL TB 133 is an acceptable alternative to UL 1056.

(2) Three comments recommended that carpet should be allowed on

bulkheads because of its sound and acoustical control. The comments

stated that the use of rated carpet should not be a problem. The Coast

Guard was reminded that airlines use carpeting on bulkheads. The

comments pointed out that carpeting is easier to maintain than a

painted surface. As a minimum, one comment recommended that it be

allowed at least on chair rails.

The Coast Guard disagrees. The issue of carpeting on bulkhead walls

was adequately addressed in the preamble to the IFR.

Section 116.427 Fire Load of Accommodation and Service Spaces

The Coast Guard advises that paragraph (a) of this section has been

amended to indicate that fire load calculations are not required for

low risk service spaces.

Section 116.433 Windows and Air Ports in Fire Control Boundaries

The Coast Guard has concluded that the use of glass in stairtowers

needs some clarification and text is added to this section,

accordingly. A-class doors

[[Page 51334]]

should include limitations on glass consistent with those in subchapter

H. The text is amended to read similar to subchapter H, Sec. 72.05-

25(b)(4). Along with this change, Sec. 116.435(c)(9) is amended to

allow unrestricted use of glass in doors opening out onto open decks.

Section 116.435 Doors

(1) One comment requested that the Coast Guard consider using ASTM

F 1384 instead of UL 10B as the standard for fire testing doors.

The Coast Guard stated that the regulations, which contain

prescriptive requirements for doors, do not specifically call out UL

10B. NVIC 6-80 discusses acceptable tests, such as UL 10B. Revised NVIC

6-80 will state that test requirements, such as ASTM F 1384 and UL 10B,

are available as options to the minimum requirements in the

regulations.

(2) Four comments recommended that the Coast Guard not ban

horizontal doors and consider gravity neutral hatches.

Horizontal doors are not banned. They simply cannot be used in

passenger areas. Horizontal doors are not appropriate for use by

passengers because of the awkward situation caused by opening or

closing these devices during egress.

Section 116.438 Stairtowers, Stairways, Ladders, and Elevators

(1) Two comments suggested that, for vessels in domestic service,

appropriately located and protected exterior stairways should be

equivalent to stairtowers.

The Coast Guard states that, in addition to protection from the

effects of fire, indoor stairtowers afford protection from severe

weather. No changes were made to this section.

(2) One comment recommended that this section include a maximum

vertical height on intermediate stairway landings similar to subchapter

H requirements.

The Coast Guard disagrees. Because of the nature of vessels,

particularly vessels constructed to subchapter K, inherent limitations

on vessel construction make it impractical to install stairways which

have large flights uninterrupted by landings. No changes were made to

this section.

(3) After further review of Sec. 116.438, the Coast Guard revised

this section as follows. Paragraph (k)(2) is revised to require that

stairtowers give access to either an embarkation station, as opposed to

an embarkation deck, or an area of refuge. The term ``embarkation

station'' was used for consistency with the term used in Sec. 116.510.

Paragraph (k)(3) is revised to clarify which spaces constitute

``enclosed spaces in which a fire is likely to originate.'' Paragraph

(l)(6) is revised for clarity by deleting the words ``satisfactory''

and ``vertical.'' By deleting these words, the paragraph requires that,

in the absence of stairtowers, stairs must provide a means of escape,

which refers back to the definition of ``means of escape'' in

Sec. 114.400.

Section 116.439 Balconies

Paragraph (d) is revised to require that sprinkler systems be

designed in accordance with NFPA 13 (which has recently been modified

to address marine sprinkler systems) as opposed to Sec. 76.25.

Paragraph (e) is reworded to clarify that the open area in a balcony

space must be at least 93 square meters (1,000 square feet), unless

other provisions are installed.

Section 116.440 Atriums

Paragraph (c) is revised to require that sprinkler systems be

designed in accordance with NFPA 13 (which has recently been modified

to address marine sprinkler systems) as opposed to Sec. 76.25.

Section 116.500 Means of Escape

Paragraph (a) is revised to indicate that a ladder and a deck

scuttle are acceptable as a second means of egress for crew spaces on

any vessel, regardless of length. Difficulty has been encountered in

the application of paragraph (h). In the IFR, this paragraph indicates

that the maximum allowable travel distance to a means of egress could

not exceed 46 meters (150 ft). Means of egress is (and was in the IFR)

defined as ``a continuous and unobstructed way of exit travel from any

point in a vessel to an embarkation station or area of refuge.'' The

intent of Sec. 116.500(h) is to limit the distance of travel to a

protected area, such as a stairway, area of refuge, or embarkation

station. Section 116.500(h) is revised to clarify that travel distance

to an exit may not exceed 46 meters, measured as actual walking

distance. A definition was added to Sec. 114.400 to define ``exit'' as

either an area protected as a stairway, or a door which leads to an

area of refuge or an embarkation station. Paragraph (p)(1) is amended

to change the maximum dimension for a space that is permitted to have a

single means of escape from 3.6 meters to 30 square meters to be

consistent with other subchapters.

Section 116.520 Emergency Evacuation Plan

Paragraph (b) is amended to clarify that evacuation procedures must

be developed for all possible casualty scenarios determined as required

by paragraph (a). Since promulgation of the IFR, some difficulties have

been encountered in determining acceptable standards for refuge areas.

The preamble to the IFR indicated that standards for a refuge area are

intended to be performance based. In the absence of a systematic

approach which considers plausible fire scenarios and methods used to

protect passengers while the crew attempts fire suppression or

passengers await embarkation of lifesaving appliances, the Coast Guard

considers the following minimum provisions acceptable: (1) minimum

separation from other spaces other than voids, cofferdams, and tanks of

A-60 integrity; (2) ventilation systems shall only service a single

area of refuge, unless separated from other spaces by smoke and fire

dampers; and (3) the refuge area shall be located in a public space

above the bulkhead deck.

Sections 116.600 and 177.600 Ventilation of Enclosed and Partially

Enclosed Spaces

One comment queried about requirements for ventilation of passenger

accommodation spaces.

The Coast Guard acknowledges that reference to passenger

accommodation spaces was inadvertently deleted during the revision of

this section for the IFR. Wording is added to the final rule.

Section 116.610 Ventilation Ducts

Four comments stated that Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioner

(HVAC) return air should not require ducting if there is adequate air

grille area near the HVAC unit, and does not require penetration of a

Class A barrier. Another comment stated that the enclosed ceiling area

should be able to be used as a return plenum.

The Coast Guard advises that there are numerous arrangements for

ventilation which may meet the intended performance. There are current

Coast Guard policies on this issue and the revision of NVIC 6-80 on

structural fire protection will formally incorporate many of these. It

is not realistic to include all of this information in the text of the

regulations. The text of the regulations includes only the basic

requirements which permit flexibility for the designer. The Coast Guard

has changed the regulations by removing the requirement that non-steel

ducts must be fitted with steel sleeves at each A-

[[Page 51335]]

Class or B-Class fire control boundary penetrated. In addition, the

regulations prohibiting a stairway or stairtower to serve as an air

return for another space; a duct in a bulkhead or overhead designed for

the passage of air from one space to another; or the use of concealed

spaces as return ventilation plenums or ducts have been removed.

Sections 116.820 and 177.820 Seating

Two comments recommended restoring the SNPRM wording ``by permanent

or temporary means.'' This option permits the rearranging of

furnishings for different functions.

The Coast Guard notes that the wording in the SNPRM was removed due

to a comment that stated the wording was confusing and unnecessary. The

change was considered editorial in nature and did not affect the

section. The Coast Guard has not determined that paragraph(d)(4)

precludes operators from moving furniture to accommodate a particular

charter. The bottom line is that the seats must be secured to prevent

injury to passengers.

Section 177.900 Deck Rails

(1) One comment questioned whether the requirements of paragraph

(g)(1) applied to a vessel applying for an excursion permit. The

comment noted that the cost of installing new rails, chain link fence,

or bars may be prohibitive.

The Coast Guard states that paragraph (g)(1) does apply. Small

passenger vessels should already meet the requirements for rail course

spacing.

(2) One comment suggested that as older vessels come up for

recertification, the new rail height requirements should be applied.

Another comment recommended that Commandant institute a change to 46

CFR 177.35-1(d) and require sport fishing vessels that travel ocean

routes be required to have rails at least 42 inches high, or sea rails

from 30 to 42 inches. This will increase safety by requiring higher

rails on vessels that encounter heavier sea conditions. A third comment

recommended that all rail heights on passenger carrying vessels should

be at least 40 inches. Where angling equipment requires a lower rail, a

ten inch hinged section can be incorporated.

The Coast Guard's position since the NPRM in 1989 is that 1 meter

rails are consistent with SOLAS standards, and appropriate for small

passenger vessels. Retrofitting railing on existing vessels was

considered in the original cost benefit analysis, but the cost could

not be justified based on the casualty statistics. Therefore, no

changes were made to these sections.

Section 116.960 Guards for Exposed Hazards

Three comments addressed a question posed by the Coast Guard in the

IFR regarding non-skid surfaces on stairs and open hatch protection.

The comments stated the need for non-skid surfaces on stairways, and

open hatch protection are best left to the operators. Common sense is a

better guide than prescriptive standards.

The Coast Guard thanks the industry for providing this input. No

further action will be taken at this time.

Section 116.1030 Operating Station Visibility

One comment urged the Coast Guard to make a clear, non-technical

statement concerning the use of tinted glass in the operating station.

The Coast Guard advises that the use of industry standards is

intended to aid the industry in complying with the regulations. Owners

and operators wishing to tint their pilothouse windows must communicate

the standards to the vendor who will make sure the correct products are

used.

Section 116.1160 Watertight Integrity

The Coast Guard received eight comments regarding the 6'' coaming

requirement. The requirement for 6'' coamings is a problem for some

vessels, especially vessels that are designed with a small aft cockpit

used as a boarding area. It is difficult to let people know that there

is a coaming to negotiate as they enter the vessel. It should be noted

that more than 65% of passenger injuries occur in this area of a

vessel. The comment desired to know if there is some way to minimize

the coaming in this area. The comment understands the requirement for

fore deck areas, but an aft cockpit area may have better than 40'' of

bulwark. Two comments also understand downflooding, but passenger

injuries should take precedence. The Coast Guard notes that

Sec. 171.122 only applies to vessels of at least 100 gross tons. These

comments were considered in developing Sec. 179.360. Ensuring that

passengers and crew are aware of potential trip and fall hazards is the

responsibility of the vessel owner/operator. Warning signs, safety

instructions and adequate embarking and disembarking points should

assist in accommodating these issues. The Coast Guard reminds owners

and operators of small passenger vessels that 46 CFR subparts 114.540

and 175.540 accommodate the issue of equivalents for subchapter K and T

vessels respectively. ``The Commandant may approve any arrangement * *

* which provides a level of safety equivalent to that established * *

*'' may assist an owner or operator in determining equivalent or

alternative coaming requirements.

Section 177.410 Structural Fire Protection

Internal review by the Coast Guard identified possible

misinterpretation of the requirements for fiber reinforced plastic,

specifically the text of Sec. 177.410(b) in the IFR. Coast Guard policy

has allowed resin systems that do not meet MIL-R-21607 to be accepted

as fire retardant resins if they have a flame spread rating of 25 or

less when tested to ASTM Standard E-84 (per NVIC 8-87 with Change 1).

This policy was changed with the publication of the IFR which raised

the maximum E-84 flame spread rating to 100 for qualifying fire

retardant resins. The text of Sec. 177.410(b) of this rule is amended

to retain the allowance of fire retardant resins meeting MIL-R-21607

that was previously in subchapter T regulations for vessels that carry

150 passengers or less. For polyester resins that have not been

accepted under MIL-R-21607 or other resin types such as epoxy,

phenolic, and vinyl ester, alternate acceptance criteria using ASTM E-

84 have been established. The end result is that the spirit of NVIC 8-

87 requirements for fire retardant resins has been effectively

incorporated into the regulation. In order to qualify resin systems

using ASTM E-84, either the resin manufacturer or the shipbuilder must

submit test results of the resin system as tested in a glass fiber

laminate form. The regulation does not specify a laminate schedule for

testing, but rather specifies a range of laminate thickness and a

minimum resin content by percent weight. The glass fiber reinforcement

may be in any form (i.e., chopped strand mat, woven roving, cloth,

chopped fiberglass) as long as the test laminate contains a minimum of

40 percent resin content by weight. This resin content was chosen in

order to be consistent with the requirements of MIL-R-21607 which

specifies a resin content between 38 and 44 percent. A resin system

that passes the ASTM E-84 requirements may be used in any laminate, of

any thickness, resin content, and with any type of fiber reinforcement

including glass fiber, polymer fiber, and carbon fiber. The Coast Guard

has determined that this provides an acceptable equivalent to the MIL-

R-21607 requirements for a fire retardant rating. Note that the 1 year

weathering criteria is not required for

[[Page 51336]]

laminates tested to ASTM E-84. If a builder, using a certain lay-up

process and laminate schedule, is able to attain the required flame

spread rating even though the particular resin system used has not

previously qualified as fire retardant, then a request for

consideration for qualifying that specific laminate schedule in a

particular vessel may be submitted to the MSC.

Section 178.310 Applicability Based on Length and Passenger Capacity

One comment noted that following references to three or four

different regulations is extremely complicated for individuals with

limited reading skills.

The Coast Guard appreciates the concern with the complicated nature

of the regulations, and agrees that they can be confusing. However,

continuous efforts are being made to simplify the format. The

regulatory cites in paragraphs (a) and (b) provide options for

compliance with intact stability standards. To repeat wording on the

same page or out of subchapter S would be redundant and make the

regulations more confusing.

Section 178.325 Intact Stability Requirements for a Sailing Vessel

One comment questioned why sailing school vessel stability

standards are included in this part.

The Coast Guard states that part 169 refers to subchapter S, parts

170-174, for stability requirements, as does Sec. 178.325. Sailing

school vessels can also be inspected as subchapter T boats. For this

reason, reference to them must be included in this subchapter.

Section 178.330 Simplified Stability Proof Test

The Coast Guard has reevaluated this section. The simplified

stability test on passenger vessels less than 65 feet is done in

accordance with Sec. 178.330 (Sec. 171.030 in old subchapter T). The

vessel is to be loaded as described in Sec. 178.330(a)(4). The

traditional method for conducting the simplified test is provided on

Coast Guard form, CG-4006 (Rev. 8-79). This form dates back to

``Ancient'' subchapter T in Sec. 179.10-1, but the verbiage in new

subchapter T is quite similar. Basically, the total weight of all

persons and other loads are to be on board and ``distributed so as to

provide normal operating trim and to simulate the vertical center of

gravity (VCG), causing the least stable condition that is likely to

occur in service.'' Form CG-4006 goes one step further. On page 2 of 8,

paragraph (2), the weight distribution on board a vessel ``having one

upper deck above the main deck available to passengers . . .,'' has an

additional safety factor thrown in that is not currently taken from or

referenced in the regulations. The weight located on the one upper deck

is the equivalent of 1.33 times the actual weight of passengers to be

located there. The rationale for doing so is understood, however, one

problem is it appears ``arbitrary'' with no reference in the

regulations and no other apparent basis. It certainly does help to

ensure the conservatism of the test, which has been proven by the test

of time since it appears no subchapter T boats have been lost due to

stability who have performed this simple stability test. The Coast

Guard affirms keeping the 1.33 safety factor for weight distribution on

the upper deck, and put it in Sec. 178.330(a)(4) of the new regulation.

The simplified stability test is written in accordance with

Sec. 171.030, and all other test parameters are referenced in this

section. Although there does not appear to be any formal explanation as

to the origin of the \1/3\ safety factor applied to the passenger

weight distribution on the upper deck, the simplified stability test

has clearly withstood the test of time. It has been double checked and

validated in numerous casualty investigations, and this change will be

made in subchapter S, under Sec. 171.030(c).

Section 179.212 Watertight Bulkheads for Subdivision

Two comments supported the watertight division requirements for

wooden hull vessels.

The Coast Guard thanks the industry for this input.

Section 179.230 Damage Stability Requirements

One comment noted that in the new regulations, vessels

demonstrating intact stability through calculation were no longer

required to meet damage stability requirements, and urged the Coast

Guard to reinstate the requirement.

The Coast Guard agrees. The damage stability requirements for

vessels less than 19.8 meters (65 feet) carrying more than 49

passengers and vessels carrying more than 12 passengers on an

international voyage were inadvertently deleted in the SNPRM. In order

to remain consistent with subchapter S, reference to Sec. 179.212(b)

has been removed. This will ensure that any vessel required to meet

intact stability and Type II subdivision standards in subchapter S will

also have to meet damage stability.

Section 179.240 Foam Flotation Material

One comment questioned why there is a length limitation of 65 feet

for the use of foam flotation in subchapter T when there is no such

limitation in subchapter S (Sec. 170.245). It was recommended that the

length limitation from subchapter T be removed and leave the decision

to the OCMI.

The Coast Guard agrees that the regulations should be consistent.

The NPRM originally proposed the limit on foam flotation for small

passenger vessels, understanding that proper subdivision for larger

vessels should not be an issue. When subchapter K was created in the

SNPRM, subchapter K vessel stability was addressed in subchapter S.

Subchapter S should have been revisited to address the use of foam

flotation for subchapter K vessels. However, since approval of the use

of foam as flotation material remains with the cognizant OCMI and/or

the MSC, and in view of MSC experiences, the length restriction of

subchapter T is removed and does not weaken the intent of the

regulation. In addition, the text in Sec. 179.240(b)(1) to meet the

requirements for fire resistance in MIL-P-21929 has been removed. The

Coast Guard approval process for flotation foams does not currently

require these materials to meet the fire resistance criteria in MIL-P-

21929.

Section 179.350 Openings in the Side of a Vessel Below the Bulkhead or

Weather Deck

One comment wanted to know if a flap-operated check valve would be

considered a positive action valve.

The Coast Guard says no. Positive action valves are gate, ball,

barrel, or globe valves.

Section 179.360 Watertight Integrity

One comment recommended that the Coast Guard reconsider six inch

coaming requirements due to trips and falls of passengers. Another

comment recommended that the Coast Guard consider the use of removable

coamings that could be used in the event of severe weather to minimize

downflooding.

The coaming issue has been previously discussed under

Sec. 116.1160. The use of removable coamings is not specifically

prohibited in the regulations. However, the Coast Guard has determined

that a coaming installed only part of the time would add to passenger

confusion and injuries in the event of an emergency such as rough

weather.

Sections 117.10 and 180.10 Applicability to Vessels on an

International Voyage

One comment asked what subchapter W is? Another comment recommended

a vessel less than 65 feet carrying less

[[Page 51337]]

than 12 passengers on an international voyage should not have to meet

SOLAS requirements and carry life rafts.

The Coast Guard advises that reference to subchapter W (46 CFR

chapter I, subchapter W) was a proactive step designed to minimize the

number of revisions to the final rule. Subchapter W was published as an

interim rule on May 20, 1996. The Coast Guard also states that it was

not its intention to require vessels, not subject to SOLAS, to meet

requirements based upon international standards. Both sections are

revised to indicate requirements for vessels subject to SOLAS.

Sections 117.15 and 180.15 Applicability to Existing Vessels

Two comments stated that all existing vessels should have the

option of a ten year phase-in period regarding survival craft

installation.

The Coast Guard disagrees. The Coast Guard's stand on

grandfathering has not changed since the publication of the SNPRM and

the IFR.

Sections 117.64 and 180.64 Emergency Position Indicating Radiobeacons

(EPIRB)

One comment stated that the Coast Guard should not require EPIRBs

until a cost benefit analysis shows the need for these devices.

In the report ``A Study of Lifesaving Systems,'' the Coast Guard

determined that more lives would have been saved if the vessels

involved would have had EPIRBs rather than inflatable survival craft.

The successes seen in the fishing vessel industry as a result of the

required 406MHz satellite EPIRB supports the need for the small

passenger vessel industry to upgrade to the more accurate and reliable

device.

Sections 117.68 and 180.68 Distress Flares and Smoke Signals

(1) One comment questioned the exemption of not requiring vessels

on short runs to carry distress signals. The comment noted that

recreational vessels are required to carry distress signals.

The Coast Guard advises that the exemption is designed for ferries

and other vessels on set schedules and operating not far from shore. No

changes have been made to these sections.

(2) After review of the IFR, the Coast Guard has included ``limited

coastwise'' as an applicable route in paragraph (a) of both sections.

Section 180.70 Ring Life Buoys

(1) One comment recommended that the term ``ring life buoy'' be

used in the title for subpart C.

The Coast Guard agrees. In both subchapters K and T, the heading

for subpart C reads ``Ring Life Buoys and Life Jackets.''

(2) After review of Secs. 117.70(c)(5) and 180.70(c)(5), the Coast

Guard has changed the term ``510 kilograms'' to ``5 kilonewtons'' to

indicate force units.

Sections 117.71 and 180.71 Life Jackets

(1) Six comments stated that the allowance for additional personal

flotation devices (PFDs) to be carried for a temporary need and not

marked with a vessel's name, but with another name or a company's name,

needs to be addressed in this section.

This change would reduce the amount of confusion and

misinterpretation within the Coast Guard and industry. The Coast Guard

agrees. Language is included in Sec. 122.604 to allow another vessel's

name or a company's name to be on life jackets used to meet a temporary

need.

(2) One comment recommended that all passengers be required to wear

an inflatable life vest which fits the body and can be, in an

emergency, inflated by pulling a string.

The Coast Guard has not determined that this is a practical

solution for reducing the number of fatalities due to an individual

falling overboard. The master of a vessel is responsible for the

passengers and crew of that vessel. In instances of rough weather or

other potentially dangerous situations, the master is responsible for

ensuring that the passengers and crew are properly outfitted for an

emergency.

Section 180.75 Life Jacket Lights

One comment recommended that ferries and vessels operating within

20 miles from a harbor of safe refuge be required to carry life jacket

lights.

The Coast Guard disagrees. The Coast Guard has determined that

vessels operating within 20 miles from a harbor of safe refuge are

close enough to search and rescue resources so that, by the time

assistance arrives on scene, persons in the water should not become

separated too far from survival craft (inflatable buoyant apparatus

(IBA), life floats, and buoyant apparatus) equipped with marker lights.

This is especially true with the rapid distress notification proven

with the Category 1, 406 MHz, satellite EPIRB that is required for

vessels operating on a limited coastwise route.

Sections 117.130 and 180.130 Stowage of Survival Craft

After review of the IFR, the Coast Guard amends these sections by

referring to the approval series 160.062 and 160.162 for hydrostatic

release units.

Sections 117.150 and 180.150 Survival Craft Embarkation Arrangements

The Coast Guard revises Secs. 117.150(a) and 180.150(a) to correct

a discrepancy noted when trying to apply the survival craft embarkation

standards. A launching appliance approved under the approval series

160.032 is not suitable for liferafts. For davit-launched liferafts, a

liferaft launching appliance approved under the 160.163 series (with an

automatic release hook approved under the 160.070 or 160.170 series) is

the appropriate requirement. For throw-over liferafts and inflatable

buoyant apparatus where the embarkation station is greater than four

and one-half meters (15 feet) above the waterline, a marine evacuation

system approved under the 160.175 series is the appropriate

requirement.

Sections 117.175 and 180.175 Survival Craft Equipment

One comment suggested that the wording ``12-thread manila'' is

confusing and outdated. Another comment stated that inflatable buoyant

apparatus equipment packs are not the same as rigid buoyant apparatus.

The Coast Guard agrees. Wording is changed to reflect a \3/8\ inch

lanyard made of ultraviolet resistant material. Additionally, these

sections are revised to state that an equipment pack in an inflatable

buoyant apparatus is required to meet standards set by the

manufacturer.

Sections 117.200 and 180.200 Survival Craft--General

(1) One comment noted that the reference to Sec. 160.151 is not

appropriate because it does not exist in 46 CFR. Another comment stated

that there is no reference to inflatable buoyant apparatus in

Sec. 160.010, and IBAs are not defined in Sec. 175.400.

The Coast Guard states that the approval series in Sec. 160.151 has

been used for years to indicate liferafts approved as complying with

SOLAS. An upcoming revision to subchapter Q will contain the approval

series in Sec. 160.151. However, a change to the text in subchapters K

and T, referring to the approval series, would be more appropriate. As

for inflatable buoyant apparatus and other survival craft, the same

reference to approval series should remove the confusion.

(2) Three comments stated that subchapter K and K'' vessels are

their own best survival craft. The comments also stated that there

should be no

[[Page 51338]]

difference between the survival craft requirements between subchapters

K and T. Two comments suggested that since subchapter T boats can

install watertight bulkheads to avoid carrying IBAs, subchapter K

vessels should have the benefit of the lesser requirement.

The Coast Guard disagrees. The Coast Guard's concern is putting

large numbers of passengers in cold water offshore. Warm water

requirements are similar between subchapters K and T. The Coast Guard

recognizes that subchapter K vessels are built to more stringent

standards; however, survival craft standards are driven by the number

of passengers on board. The industry should recognize that there is a

difference between carrying 100 passengers, 20 miles offshore and 400

passengers on the same route. All things being equal (i.e., Steel

vessel of similar dimensions), a subchapter K vessel requires

structural fire protection and out of the water survival craft for 67

percent of the passenger capacity (will accommodate 100 percent of

passengers). The Coast Guard considers these increased requirements

necessary to address the vessels operating environment, proximity to

adequate rescue resources, and number of passengers carried.

(3) Three comments noted that three miles is used as a breakpoint

for survival craft operating on a limited, coastwise route. Offshore

casino vessels operate beyond three miles, but no further, and should

receive the same treatment. The comments recommended moving the

breakpoint to five miles.

The Coast Guard disagrees. The three mile breakpoint resulted from

new EPIRB requirements. The EPIRB provides an equivalent level of

safety for vessels electing to not carry additional survival craft

within three miles. Vessels operating beyond three miles and not

wanting to carry required survival craft must convince the OCMI that

they have provided an equivalent level of safety.

(4) One comment noted that in Table 117.200, Footnote 9,

Sec. 117.207(e) should read Sec. 117.207(f).

The Coast Guard agrees and the change is made. In addition,

Footnote 8 is changed to read Sec. 117.207(e).

(5) The Coast Guard deletes the term ``citation in brackets'' in

paragraph (c) in both sections.

Section 180.202 Survival Craft--Vessels Operating on Oceans Routes

One comment stated that 67 percent inflatable buoyant apparatus

does not provide enough capacity for all passengers carried.

The Coast Guard disagrees. As stated in the preamble to the IFR,

IBAs are tested to a 150 percent overload capacity. This means that a

vessel with 67 percent IBA capacity can accommodate 100 percent of the

persons on board.

Section 180.204 Survival Craft--Vessels Operating on Coastwise Routes

(1) One comment recommended that life floats be phased out because

they do not provide adequate out of the water hypothermia protection.

As stated in the preamble to the IFR, the Coast Guard reduced

survival craft requirements from those proposed in the SNPRM due to the

casualty history of the small passenger vessel industry. Even the Coast

Guard's own study of subchapter T boat casualties concluded that more

people would have been saved if the vessels were equipped with EPIRBs

rather than inflatable survival craft.

(2) One comment stated that life floats do not provide adequate

shark protection.

The OCMI has the latitude to require additional survival craft in

areas considered hazardous. This may include shark infested waters.

However, casualty statistics do not indicate a trend in fatalities due

to shark attacks.

Sections 117.205 and 180.205 Survival Craft--Vessels Operating on

Limited Coastwise Routes

(1) Two comments recommended that the Coast Guard authorize vessels

to reduce the number of IBAs required during winter months when fewer

passengers are carried.

The Coast Guard advises that the OCMI has the authority to endorse

the COI with a cold water restriction.

(2) One comment suggested that the reference to Sec. 180.204(d) is

confusing. It was recommended that the requirements be spelled out in

each section.

The Coast Guard disagrees. The Coast Guard is trying to reduce

redundant wording in the regulation.

(3) One comment stated that wood vessels less than 65 feet

operating on limited coastwise (LCW) routes are just as safe as FRP

vessels in cold water and should not be required to carry inflatable

buoyant apparatus.

The Coast Guard advises that wood vessels account for over 90% of

the loss of vessel/loss of life casualties over the past 20 years.

Statistics indicate that the route of a vessel did not matter. Existing

wood vessels less than 65 feet also have the option of installing

watertight bulkheads in lieu of carrying inflatable survival craft.

Section 117.207 Survival Craft--Vessels Operating on Lakes, Bays, and

Sounds Routes

One comment recommended that vessels meeting paragraph (f) should

use the existing 30 percent life float requirement. The comment further

recommended changing the wording in paragraph (f) ``may be granted a

reduction* * *'' to ``be provided with life floats of an aggregate

capacity that will accommodate at least 30 percent of the total number

of persons on board.''

The Coast Guard disagrees. The wording in the IFR appropriately

allows the OCMI latitude in reducing the amount of primary lifesaving

equipment on board a certain vessel.

Sections 117.208 and 180.208 Survival Craft--Vessels Operating on

River Routes

(1) One comment recommended the Coast Guard revisit the issue of

not requiring vessels operating within one mile of shore on a rivers

route to carry survival craft.

The Coast Guard states that the one mile exemption is carried over

from the old small passenger vessels regulations. Casualty statistics

do not warrant increased survival craft requirements on vessels

operating in such close proximity to shore.

(2) Two comments recommended adding a three mile equivalent or

alternative to the 15 minute radio communication schedule.

The Coast Guard states that the three mile distance criteria

applied to other bodies of water is not practical in a rivers route.

Most vessels will be exempt from survival craft requirements because

they will operate within one mile of shore. For vessels that do operate

beyond one mile from shore, a 15 minute communications schedule or

participation in a Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) allows the vessel to

quickly notify the Coast Guard in the event of a casualty.

Sections 117.210 and 180.210 Rescue Boats

One comment stated that rescue boat is not well defined. It also

stated that the reference to subchapter H is not specific as to which

part. Two comments stated that the subchapter Q standard for a rescue

boat ignores 50 years of experience. They noted that even the Coast

Guard uses rigid hull inflatable boats with great success. The comments

recommended that the Coast Guard consider the use of rescue boats other

than those approved by subchapter Q. The Coast Guard agrees that rescue

boats of the rigid-hull

[[Page 51339]]

inflatable type can provide satisfactory service. In the past, OCMIs

have approved boats such as rigid-hull inflatables as ``equivalents''

to straight 160.056 rowboat-type rescue boats. This practice will not

change. With the publication of subchapter W on May 20, 1996 (61 FR

25272), the reference to subchapter H in Secs. 117.810 and 180.810 is

no longer appropriate since Sec. 75.10-5(e) no longer exists. In order

to maintain the intent of the rescue boat section, performance language

from the old subchapter H requirement has been added to both

subchapters K and T. In addition, the approval series 160.056 has been

retained for vessels operating on protected waters. The 160.156

approval series cited as the rescue boat standard in subchapter W

allows the use of rigid-hull inflatable and entirely inflatable rescue

boats. The Coast Guard has determined that by adding performance

language, retaining the 160.056 standard for vessels operating on

protected waters, and adding the 160.156 approval series for vessels

operating on exposed and partially protected waters, the intent of the

former subchapter H cross reference is maintained.

As resources allow, rescue boat requirements in subchapter Q will

be updated to reflect the variety of available, suitable boats.

Sections 118.300 and 181.300 Fire Pumps

(1) One comment noted that the word ``manual'' is confusing when

discussing local operation of the fire pump. The comment wanted

clarification as to what is meant and is it the intent of the Coast

Guard to require a manual electric switch at the pump? Two comments

recommended the section be reworded to read ``A fire pump must be

capable of operation from both the control station and the pump

location.''

The Coast Guard acknowledges that the intent is to be able to

operate the pump from the operating station and locally at the pump.

How that is to be accomplished is up to the owner or operator of the

vessel. In order to reduce confusion, the word ``manual'' is deleted.

(2) Two comments suggested that the fire pump required in

Sec. 181.300(b) for vessels less than 65 feet carrying more than 49

passengers is excessive and should be reconsidered using casualty data.

In addition, fixed extinguishing systems will be required, so the fires

encountered will be put out with portable extinguishers.

The Coast Guard disagrees. Subchapter T previously required a fire

pump on vessels that carry over 49 passengers. Casualty history

available to the Coast Guard may not accurately reflect the number of

fires on these vessels, since fires which were extinguished using the

fire pump may not have been reported. The Coast Guard has determined

that vessels which carry more than 49 passengers represent a risk that

warrants requiring a fire pump, regardless of vessel size. No changes

were made to this section.

(3) With regard to the comment about fires encountered being put

out with portable extinguishers, the Coast Guard disagrees, in that

portable extinguishers are not an acceptable replacement for a firemain

system. Portable extinguishers are adequate only for small incipient

fires, have limited amount of agent, and provide the fire fighting

agent for a short duration. On the other hand, hose streams off of a

firemain system provide unlimited water supply.

Sections 118.310 and 181.310 Fire Main and Hydrants

As previously discussed in Secs. 114.400 and 175.400, the Coast

Guard amends Sec. 118.310 by adding a new paragraph (d) requiring

vessels carrying more than 600 passengers or with overnight

accommodations for more than 49 passengers to meet subchapter H fire

main and hydrant standards. This is already required under the IFR for

vessels carrying more than 600 passengers, and was a recommended and

accepted practice in NVIC 11-83 for vessels with overnight

accommodations for more than 49 passengers. In addition, Secs. 118.310

and 181.310 are amended by adding paragraph (c) that requires isolation

valves on fire hydrants to allow damaged hoses to be removed and

replaced while the fire main is charged. This is a common marine design

practice that the Coast Guard has determined must be maintained.

Sections 118.320 and 181.320 Fire Hoses and Nozzles

As previously discussed in Secs. 114.400 and 175.400, the Coast

Guard amends Secs. 118.320(a) and 181.320(a) by replacing ``fire

stations'' with ``fire hydrants.''

Section 181.400 Where Required

(1) One comment recommended that the documentation for a fixed

CO2 fire extinguishing system be retained. The comment

reiterated the NTSB recommendation M-95-37 from the ARGO COMMODORE fire

casualty requiring that plan approval records for fixed fire

extinguishing systems be maintained for the life of the vessel.

The Coast Guard has not determined that it is necessary to issue a

regulation requiring vessel owners to retain plan approval records for

their vessels. NVIC 13-83 encourages vessel owners and operators to

keep a complete set of vessel plans, including fixed firefighting

system plans.

(2) Four comments stated that the industry is still concerned over

automatic shutdown of main engines and ventilation, and recommended

that fire and heat detectors are a better alternative.

The Coast Guard advises that detection systems are required by

Sec. 181.400. It is true that manual systems are still required to

shutdown machinery and ventilation, because one of the keys to fighting

a fire is keeping the extinguishing agent in the space protected.

(3) Three comments stated that fire extinguishing systems should

not be retrofitted to all existing wood and FRP vessels. They stated

the casualties do not justify the cost to the industry.

As for justification and cost, the Coast Guard's position has not

changed since the SNPRM and IFR. The vessels most at risk are wood and

FRP.

(4) One comment noted that by definition a wheelhouse is a control

space. The comment asked if Sec. 118.400(e)(1) and (e)(2) require a

smoke activated and manual fire detection system in the wheelhouse?

The Coast Guard acknowledges that the wording used in the IFR would

lead someone to believe that a detection system is required in the

wheelhouse. However, from a practical standpoint, the Coast Guard has

determined that placing an automatic and manual fire detection system

in a continuously manned operating station is unnecessary. This section

is revised accordingly.

Sections 118.410 and 181.410 Fixed Gas Fire Extinguishing Systems

(1) After further review of the IFR, the Coast Guard has determined

that paragraph (b)(2) of these sections needed to be revised to clarify

when release of an extinguishing agent requires two distinct

operations. The reference to paragraph (c)(2) may be confusing to the

reader. The Coast Guard has amended these sections by removing any

confusing references.

(2) Section 118.410(d)(7)(ii) has been revised to be consistent

with Sec. 181.410(d)(7)(ii), which requires the distribution lines to

undergo a test similar to that conducted on the manifold system. This

correction is needed to allow for the 300 PSI pressure

[[Page 51340]]

drop that is indicated in paragraph (d)(7)(i).

Sections 118.500 and 181.500 Required Number, Type, and Location

One comment recommended that the regulations should better describe

the different types of extinguishers or define portable or semi-

portable; the old regulations did.

The Coast Guards states that the new regulations contain the same

information as the old regulations, but in a slightly different format.

Sections 119.320 and 182.320 Water Heaters

One comment stated that the requirements for water heaters are

confusing. It was recommended that the Coast Guard reduce the amount of

technical data. Hooking up a water heater is not a difficult task.

The Coast Guard partially agrees that the language is confusing.

Most water heater installations will meet the exception criteria in

paragraph (b). The Coast Guard has determined that there also needs to

be a reference to larger, higher capacity installations. The Coast

Guard redesignates paragraph (b) as (a) and vice versa in order to

reduce any confusion.

Section 182.415 Carburetors

One comment noted that Coast Guard Approval Numbers 162.015,

162.042, and 162.043 are not in the current subchapter Q. In addition,

Approval Number 162.043 cannot be found in the Coast Guard's Equipment

lists (COMDTINST M16714.3E) and is confusing.

The Coast Guard agrees that the referenced Approval Numbers are

old, and were used prior to SAE and UL standards. The intent is that

older gas engine installations can remain in service using previously

approved equipment as long as that equipment is in good and serviceable

condition.

Section 119.425 Engine Exhaust Cooling

One comment recommended allowing the injection of engine exhaust

cooling water farther down stream if the exhaust line forward of the

cooling water injection is properly insulated. This has been accepted

by MSC in the past.

The Coast Guard partially agrees. Equivalencies are granted on a

case by case basis, and this practice will continue. If the designer is

concerned about water injection, consider a dry horizontal system.

Sections 119.430 and 182.430 Engine Exhaust Pipe Installation

Two comments stated that check valves installed in exhaust lines

impede the flow of exhaust. They recommended changing the wording to

read ``deter or minimize the in flow of water.''

The Coast Guard partially agrees. The intent of paragraph (d) is to

prevent cold water from entering the exhaust system. There is no

requirement for a check valve to be installed. However, in the interest

of clarity, the Coast Guard has determined that paragraph (c) provides

enough guidance as to the exhaust installation, and has removed

paragraph (d).

Section 182.435 Integral Fuel Tanks

In the recent past, the Coast Guard has been asked to make this

section performance based, rather than limited to strictly closed cell

polyvinyl chloride (PVC).

The Coast Guard agrees this should be done, and has revised this

section to allow for equivalents to closed cell PVC foam.

Section 182.445 Fill and Sounding Pipes for Fuel Tanks

Four comments stated that paragraph (b) of this section is entirely

unnecessary. The comments also stated that sounding pipes are not

always practical, and gages are expensive and troublesome. Small

passenger vessels, especially ferries, operate on scheduled runs so

fueling is done on a schedule corresponding to that vessel.

Recordkeeping should be an acceptable alternative.

The Coast Guard disagrees. Fuel tank level monitoring is an

indispensable part of not only fuel management, but also damage

control. If a tank is in communication with the sea, bilge, cargo, or

any other tank, no matter what the contents, the proper level must be

able to be determined for stability and environmental protection

concerns.

Sections 119.458 and 182.458 Portable Fuel Systems

One comment questioned whether the prohibition against the use of

portable fuel systems also restricts the carriage of emergency

gasoline-operated pumps and generators.

The Coast Guard states that generators that use gasoline or any

other fuel must meet the requirements of parts 119 and 120 or 182 and

183 in subchapters K and T, respectively. As for emergency dewatering

pumps, the Coast Guard has determined that their use should not be

prohibited. Sections 119.458 and 182.458 are revised to allow

dewatering pumps. Additional guidance on the carriage of spare fuel is

in Volume II, page 10-3, of the Coast Guard MSM.

Section 119.465 Ventilation of Spaces Containing Diesel Machinery

The Coast Guard notes that the prohibition of dampers in machinery

space supply air ducts in paragraph (f) is contradictory to

Sec. 116.610(f) which requires automatic fire dampers in ducts serving

machinery spaces.

The Coast Guard has determined that the requirements designed to

contain a fire within a machinery space take precedence over the damper

prohibition. Paragraph (f) in Sec. 119.465 is revised to reflect the

requirements in Sec. 116.610(f).

Section 182.465 Ventilation of Spaces Containing Diesel Machinery

One comment asked what if there is only one exhaust outlet for

multiple ventilation intakes? Does the area of the exhaust have to be

proportionally increased with the number of inlets?

The Coast Guard advises that paragraph (c) of this section requires

at least two intake and two exhaust ventilation ducts. Each duct must

have the open area indicated in the paragraph. Where additional ducts

are installed, each additional duct must meet the requirements of this

section.

Section 182.520 Bilge Pumps

(1) One comment stated that bilge pumps are not dewatering pumps.

They are used for the maintenance removal of accumulated water. A 25

gallon per minute (GPM) pump is larger than needed on vessels less than

65 feet carrying more than 49 passengers. The comment suggested a ten

GPM pump.

The Coast Guard states that a 25 GPM pump has been the standard for

30 years, and the Coast Guard sees no reason to change to a less

conservative standard.

(2) One comment recommended that the discharge hose mentioned in

paragraph (b)(2) of this section be long enough to discharge the water

over the side of a vessel.

The Coast Guard agrees. The wording in paragraph (b)(2) is revised

to read the same as Sec. 119.520(b)(2).

Sections 119.530 and 182.530 Bilge High Level Alarms

(1) One comment suggested that bilge alarms are okay for vessels

without one compartment subdivision, but excessive for other vessels.

The Coast Guard disagrees that only vessels without one compartment

subdivision need a high bilge level alarm. The time to discover that

your vessel has taken on water is not when

[[Page 51341]]

you start to ``feel'' the vessel move differently. In an emergency

situation, time is everything and can mean the difference between life

and death.

(2) Two comments suggested a bilge pump resettable counter in lieu

of an indicator light. Sometimes, the bright sunlight makes it hard to

see the indicator light, and the operator may not be aware of how many

times the bilge pump has cycled on and off.

The Coast Guard states that the regulation only calls for a visual

indicator. The intent of the requirement is to give the operator an

indication when the automatic bilge pumps are running. Where lights are

not practical, the OCMI considers alternatives proposed by the owner or

operator.

(3) One comment questioned if a separate light is required to

indicate that the automatic pump is running. This point is not clear.

The Coast Guard states that a separate indicating light is required

because a ``pump running'' light is not an alarm as required by

paragraph (a). No additional clarification is required.

Section 182.610 Main Steering Gear

One comment noted that paragraph (f)(1) of this section references

46 CFR 111.93-11(d). This cite does not exist. The comment also

questioned why is overload protection prohibited for steering gear

systems?

The Coast Guard acknowledges that the reference to Sec. 111.93-11

is outdated. The new subchapter F cite of Sec. 58.25-55(d) is added to

subchapter T. The Coast Guard advises that overload protection is

prohibited on steering gear systems to ensure that the steering gear

will continue to run until failure in an emergency. Only short-circuit

protection is allowed for the reasons of preventing catastrophic damage

to motors, wiring, and the possibility of fire.

Section 182.720 Nonmetallic Piping Materials

(1) Two comments noted that this regulation means that the operator

cannot replace a fuel or hydraulic hose with make up fittings. Ordinary

practice is to assemble replacement hoses using material that far

exceeds the pressure demands of the system. If a hose is replaced in an

80 pound per square inch (psi) system with a 1000 psi hose, the proof

test, at twice the rated pressure, is not possible.

The Coast Guard agrees. The wording in paragraph 182.720(e)(1) is

changed to ``twice the maximum operating pressure of the system.''

(2) After review, the Coast Guard has revised paragraph

182.720(e)(3)(ii) to include watertight decks in addition to watertight

bulkheads.

Section 183.322 Multiple Generators

One comment noted that the revision of subchapter J is complete.

The IFR references subchapter J prior to its revision. Which version is

to be used?

The Coast Guard states that a review of the newly revised

subchapter J has been done to ensure that the referenced cites are

still accurate and appropriate. The cites listed in this rule are

appropriate.

Sections 120.340 and 183.340 Cable and Wiring Requirements

One comment noted that the revision to subchapter J allows the use

of wire nuts for wire and cable connections. Subchapters K and T

specifically prohibit the use of wire nuts. The regulations need to be

consistent and not allow the use of wire nuts.

The Coast Guard states that wire nuts are allowed in subchapter J

subject to very specific conditions outlined in Sec. 111.60-17. The

Coast Guard has determined that reiterating those conditions in

paragraph (i) of these sections is appropriate in order to be

consistent with subchapter J.

Section 183.376 Grounded Distribution Systems (Neutral Grounded)

One comment noted that this cite correctly assumes that there could

be a dual voltage system not fed by a dual voltage generator and,

therefore, could be of the ungrounded or floating neutral type. Because

this is possible, a reference needs to be made to Sec. 111.05-25 of

subchapter J for ground detection of ungrounded systems. This will

avoid confusion during the plan approval process for both the Coast

Guard and industry.

The Coast Guard agrees. Text in subchapter J is added to

subchapters K and T under new Secs. 120.378 and 183.378 entitled

``Ungrounded Systems.''

Section 183.430 Portable Lights

One comment suggested that small (30 feet or less), outboard

powered, open boat (or small boat with no enclosed engine space) should

be required to carry only one operable, portable light.

The Coast Guard advises that this type of request should be made to

the OCMI. It is reasonable to assume that, if the vessel is not

equipped with a separate machinery space, then the portable light

required to be outside that space is not required. A regulatory change

is not necessary.

Sections 120.432 and 183.432 Emergency Lighting

Two comments stated that the requirement for an emergency light to

have a continuous operating capacity of six hours is excessive.

Standard industrial units have a two hour capacity.

The Coast Guard agrees. Emergency lighting used to escape from

below deck spaces on a small passenger vessel should not need to run

more than two hours. The six hour criterion is reduced to two hours.

Sections 121.220 and 183.220 Cooking Equipment

One comment recommended that the Coast Guard require UL approval on

cooking appliances, and the requirement for heavy duty hinges is

unclear.

The Coast Guard has determined that the general requirements

contained in this section adequately address the safety concerns

regarding cooking equipment on board vessels. UL, NFPA, and American

Boat and Yacht Council (ABYC) standards were considered in drafting

this requirement in 1989. The Coast Guard agrees that the words ``heavy

duty'' add no value to the requirement and has removed those words from

both Sec. 121.220 in subchapter K and Sec. 184.220 in subchapter T.

Section 184.402 Compasses

One comment asked if existing vessels were supposed to be exempt

from the illuminated compass requirement.

The Coast Guard acknowledges that existing vessels are exempt

unless the OCMI decides that due to the route or service of the vessel

an illuminated compass is required. All new vessels, unless exempted by

paragraph (b), are required to have an illuminated compass.

Section 121.404 Radars

Three comments wanted to know who decides if a radar is suitable.

There are no criteria to determine a standard. How can a designer or

builder know what to look for? Different Coast Guard Districts may have

different standards. The Coast Guard should either set performance

standards or let the master decide what is appropriate, and hold the

master responsible for the safe operation of the vessel.

The Coast Guard agrees that performance standards are needed to

determine if a radar is suitable. As stated in the SNPRM preamble, the

Radio Technical Commission for Maritime Services (RTCM) was developing

recommended standards for

[[Page 51342]]

radar on small vessels. The Coast Guard received those recommendations

after the drafting and publication of the IFR and, therefore, could not

publish them for public comment. The Coast Guard has determined that

the recommendations of the RTCM are acceptable for determining the

suitability of radar on towing vessels (61 FR 35064) and that the same

standards should apply to small passenger vessels. However, the

recommended standards cannot be incorporated into the Final Rule

without public comment. Therefore, the Coast Guard will establish

policy guidance for owners, operators, builders, and OCMIs to help

determine the suitability of radar installations on small passenger

vessels. The policy will be based on the RTCM standards, but will also

allow flexibility in the event that certain recommended standards are

impractical for small passenger vessels. Based upon feedback to the

policy, the Coast Guard will consider revising the radar requirements

for small passenger vessels in a future rulemaking.

Sections 121.420 and 184.420 Charts and Nautical Publications

Two comments stated that charts and nautical publications are not

necessary for ferries which run from point A to B and back day after

day.

The Coast Guard agrees that not all vessels require the same charts

and nautical publications. The OCMI has discretion as provided by the

words ``As appropriate...'' in paragraph (a) to allow relaxation of

certain requirements based on a particular vessel's operation.

Sections 121.506 and 184.506 Emergency Broadcast Placard

Two comments stated that the emergency broadcast placard is

unnecessary. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) licensed radio

operators and the crews are aware of the contents of a distress call.

Even if an individual was unaware of the proper procedures, in an

emergency, correct procedure does not take precedence; saving time and

lives do.

The Coast Guard disagrees. A lack of proper procedure in an

emergency may be the difference between a quick and a delayed response

by the Coast Guard. In many emergencies, a vessel's crew has one chance

to get a distress call off. Valuable information regarding the

location, number of passengers, or conditions on scene could be left

out and thus hamper rescue efforts. The Coast Guard has determined that

the placard serves a real purpose as a memory jogger for individuals

using the radio in an emergency.

Sections 121.702 and 184.702 Oil Pollution Prevention Equipment and

Procedures

Even though the text of these sections refers to 33 CFR part 155,

the title of these sections does not take into consideration the

garbage plan requirements of 33 CFR 155.540. The Coast Guard amends the

title of these sections to read ``Pollution prevention equipment and

procedures.''

Sections 121.710 and 184.710 First Aid Kits

Four comments stated that the rule on first aid kits is

unacceptable and must be withdrawn. The subchapter Q approval must be

rewritten before it can be used as a standard for subchapter T vessels.

The approval is 46 years old and outdated. Two comments noted that the

requirement to have or dispense drugs, even the over-the-counter

variety, needs careful consideration. Many vessels will not dispense

aspirin, sea-sick pills, etc., but might have them available for sale

to reduce or remove their liability. One comment suggested that the

routes and missions of vessels need to be considered when determining

the type of first-aid kit required. Two comments recommended that the

``Good Samaritan'' provision is needed in the rewrite of Sec. 160.041

of subchapter Q. OSHA approved first aid kits should be an approved

substitute instead of the Coast Guard approved kits.

The Coast Guard agrees that the approval published in subchapter Q

is outdated and should not be used as the basis of a required first aid

kit. As a matter of policy, the Coast Guard provides manufacturers

seeking approval of first-aid kits under approval series 160.041 with

much more basic guidelines. The following is a list of items required

to be in a Coast Guard Approved first-aid kit under approval series

160.041:

(2) Units of Adhesive Bandage Compresses (16 per unit).

(2) Units of 5 cm (2 in.) Bandage Compresses (4 per unit).

(3) Units of 10 cm (4 in.) Bandage Compresses (1 per unit).

(2) Units of Triangular Bandages (1 per unit).

(2) Units of Absorbent Gauze Compresses (1 per unit).

(2) Units of 10 cm (4 in.) Gauze Roller Bandages (1 per unit).

(1) Aluminum Splint.

(1) Tourniquet.

(1) Unit of Eye Dressing Packet (Pads and Strips) (4 per unit).

(2) Units of 30 ml (1 oz) Eye Wash Solution.

(1) Unit of Ammonia Inhalants (10 per unit).

(1) Unit of Antiseptic Swabs (10 per unit).

(2) Units of 3.0 gram (0.11 oz) Burn Treatment Compound (6 per unit).

(2) Units of 324 milligram (5 grain) Aspirin Tablets (48 per unit).

This list is provided for operators who wish to build an equivalent

kit as allowed by the regulations. The Coast Guard has determined that

a first aid kit is important as an initial response tool for major and

minor injuries on board small passenger vessels. The Coast Guard notes

that some state marine boards required first aid kits above and beyond

the old Coast Guard regulations. These kits were basic, yet afforded

the master an opportunity to effectively respond to cuts, fish hooks

and other minor injuries. The Coast Guard has revised the wording in

subchapters K and T to reference the approval series 160.041, instead

of citing the specification in subchapter Q.

Sections 122.202 and 185.202 Notice of Casualty

Eleven comments suggested that the term ``treatment beyond first

aid'' be better defined. The comments recommended that the Coast Guard

adopt the ``Report of the Quality Action Team (QAT) on Marine Safety

Investigations.''

The Coast Guard agrees that ``treatment beyond first aid'' could be

better defined. The Coast Guard has initiated a rulemaking project to

address the recommendations in the QAT report. It is beyond the scope

of this rulemaking to make changes to 46 CFR Part 4.

Section 185.280 Official Logbook for Foreign Voyages

(1) One comment asked where an individual could obtain official

logbooks. The comment noted that they could not be obtained from the

Government Printing Office.

The Coast Guard advises that the ``Official Logbook, Merchant

Marine'' (CG-706B) can be obtained free of charge to the public through

the General Services Administration (GSA). The supply number for the

form is 753000F010040. In addition, the publication is not subject to

copyright; it may be reproduced by anyone who desires to do so.

However, care should be given not to create the appearance that the

Coast Guard approves of an individual, entity, or group of either, as

the appropriate source to obtain an official logbook. This can be done

by including a statement in the book that

[[Page 51343]]

the official logbook can be obtained for free from the GSA.

(2) One comment stated that the laws cited in official logbooks are

outdated; 46 CFR was revised in 1983.

As for the out of date regulatory cites, the Coast Guard does not

guarantee either that the citations are all inclusive or current. The

Coast Guard expressly retains the discretion to allocate limited

resources to perform tasks that preclude the updating of the statutory

and regulatory authorities governing the matters addressed in the

logbook.

(3) One comment suggested that logbooks needed to include the

number of hours a crewmember is on watch. Crews on passenger vessels

should not be allowed to work upwards of 30+ hours in a single stint.

The Coast Guard states that the updating of logbooks is beyond the

scope of this rulemaking. Besides, small passenger vessels are required

to carry alternate crews when operating more than 12 hours in any 24

hour period.

Sections 122.304 and 185.304 Navigation Underway

(1) One comment recommended that senior deckhands should be allowed

to control the movement of the vessel.

The Coast Guard states that the master of a vessel has ultimate

responsibility for the operation of that vessel. If the master places a

deckhand, senior or otherwise, in control of the vessel, the master is

still responsible for the deckhand's actions while at the helm.

(2) One comment recommended that paragraph (a)(6) of these sections

be reworded with ``visual and/or radar contacts'' so that visual

contacts are not ignored.

The Coast Guard agrees that a clarification is warranted and

revises these paragraphs.

Sections 122.335 and 185.335 Loading Doors

One comment noted that paragraph (a) of these sections requires

loading doors to be closed watertight. The comment noted that vessels

with Load Lines are only required watertight hatches below the

freeboard deck. It was recommended that the paragraphs be revised to

allow for weathertight loading doors.

The Coast Guard agrees. The reference to watertight is removed.

Loading doors that are required to be watertight should be watertight

when closed and secured. The same goes for weathertight hatches.

Sections 122.410 and 185.410 Watchmen

One comment recommended that these sections be expanded to include

language that a watchman shall provide assistance and protection to ill

passengers located in deck areas. Another comment recommended that

Commandant institute a change to 46 CFR 185.22 and require that at all

times during which bunks in passenger areas below the main deck are

occupied, the vessel's patrolman be required to guard against missing

passengers as well as fire and other dangers. This will increase safety

by minimizing the possible length of time before a passenger is

discovered missing.

The Coast Guard agrees. Any passenger at risk of falling overboard

should be identified and dealt with properly by the crew in order to

prevent a man overboard situation. The sections are revised to include

guarding against a man overboard situation.

Sections 122.420 and 185.420 Crew Training

(1) Two comments recommended the words ``once every three months''

be removed from paragraph (a). Sections 122.520 and 122.524 require

monthly drills and training.

The Coast Guard disagrees. Certain aspects of the emergency

instruction placard and Station Bill are not covered in the monthly

drills. In addition, the once every three month requirement is intended

to be used as a refresher and review of the vessel's safety procedures.

Drills need not be carried out during this crew training.

(2) Five comments noted that many companies operate sister or

comparably equipped vessels. The term ``sister vessel'' should be

incorporated into this section.

The Coast Guard agrees that sister vessels within a fleet should be

considered for crew training and drill purposes. A new paragraph (b) is

added to address training on sister vessels.

(3) Two comments suggested paragraph (a) is contrary to good crew

training. To bring a fresh, new crew member up to par, especially in a

multiple boat fleet, is impossible without on the job training.

Experience and shepherding from senior crew members are the best

training methods, especially when backed up by company training

sessions. The Coast Guard states that as with any job, new crew members

will have fewer responsibilities than the more senior crew members. The

Coast Guard does not see how requiring a company to indoctrinate new

employees is contrary to good crew training. If individuals are going

to be placed in a position of responsibility during an emergency, then

they should have the requisite level of training.

(4) One comment stated that drill documentation needs to be better

explained in Secs. 122.420, 122.520, and 122.524. One comment

recommended that language should be revised or added to state that when

a vessel gets underway with passengers on board, the crew shall have

sufficient training to handle an emergency. Three comments agreed with

drill documentation; one disagreed. One comment stated that crew

training requirements are too costly, especially for seasonal

operations.

The Coast Guard considers the language of the crew training

sections of subchapters K and T to be appropriate and does not see the

need to shorten or further generalize the language.

(5) One comment suggested that crew training should be amended to

include the identification of seasickness, with extreme nausea, as a

hazardous condition.

The Coast Guard has not determined that additional language

regarding seasickness is appropriate under the crew training sections.

Sections covering man overboard, rough seas, and the revised Watchman

sections provide adequate guidance to the master concerning their

responsibilities and that of their crew to prevent or respond to a man

overboard situation.

(6) One comment stated that logging drills is common sense,

however, there is no requirement to keep attendance records on who has

been trained. It was recommended that this requirement be added to the

rule.

The Coast Guard notes that it is the master's responsibility to

provide training to all members of a vessel's crew. The Coast Guard

agrees that attendance records would be beneficial in determining

compliance with the crew training requirements. However, the Coast

Guard does not want to limit the compliance options currently open to

vessel operators. During the comment period other options such as

training cards carried by each crewmember were discussed.

Sections 122.504 and 185.504 Passenger Count

Seven comments stated that passenger counts are not accurate. The

intent of these sections is understood, but the problem is with

compliance for some operators, especially ferry vessel operators. One

comment suggested that the requirement to keep a count of disembarking

passengers should not be required for ferry vessels. Another comment

recommended that a passenger count should not be required on vessels

traveling less than a mile or on a run of less than 30 minutes.

[[Page 51344]]

The Coast Guard's position on passenger lists and counts has not

changed from what was stated in the IFR. The Coast Guard needs to be

informed of the number of people on board a vessel in the event of a

casualty or other emergency requiring Coast Guard assistance. The

requirements leave compliance methods up to the operator. The Coast

Guard has determined that the maximum amount of flexibility has been

built into the requirements while still maintaining the integrity of

the law in 46 U.S.C. 3502.

Sections 122.506 and 185.506 Passenger Safety Orientation

(1) Two comments stated that passengers do not listen to the

passenger safety orientation presentation. Eight comments recommended

that the use of placards on bulkheads, especially on ferries and

vessels in short (less than 30 minutes) and multiple stop service, be

authorized. One comment stated that placards and handouts would only be

read by those who read the PFD placards, that is, no one.

The Coast Guard advises that the intent of the regulation is to

inform passengers of basic safety equipment locations and emergency

procedures in the event of an emergency. This will help reduce the

amount of confusion among passengers when crew members are trying to

maintain control in an emergency.

(2) Two comments recommended authorizing the use of a tape

recording on orientation when Secs. 121.610 and 184.610 become

mandated. Another comment recommended authorizing the use of handouts

on vessels operating on oceans and coastwise routes. The Coast Guard

agrees that all vessels should be able to use the alternative

announcement in paragraph (b).

(3) One comment suggested that paragraph (b)(2) is

counterproductive, would alarm passengers, and prove to be a boon to

ambulance chasers. One comment stated that the requirement for

overnight passengers to don PFDs and receive a safety orientation in

paragraph (d) trickled down from subchapters H and K and should be

eliminated from subchapter T.

The Coast Guard disagrees. Some operators commented that the

announcement is not practical due to vessel design, operating

environment, duration of voyage, or other restrictions. The Coast Guard

agrees that the requirement could be more flexible, especially for

ferries on short (less than 15 minute) runs. A new paragraph (c) has

been added to allow the OCMI latitude in the use of bulkhead placards

for ferries under unique operating conditions.

(4) Two comments recommended changing the language in paragraph (a)

to read ``as soon as possible after getting underway'' to allow for

some flexibility in the passenger orientation requirement.

The Coast Guard agrees. Paragraph (a) is changed to allow

flexibility in when the orientation is given.

(5) One comment recommended adding zero tolerance language to

safety orientation.

The Coast Guard indicates there are no plans to add zero tolerance

language to safety orientation. However, vessel operators are not

precluded from adding their company's zero tolerance language to the

passenger orientation.

(6) One comment recommended that the Coast Guard should emphasize

that seasickness is a hazardous condition, and that ill passengers

should notify the crew, find a ``buddy'' to assist them during the

illness, and don a PFD.

The Coast Guard agrees that all passengers who become ill have the

right to contact a crewmember or the master. It is the master's

responsibility to look after the passengers on his or her vessel.

Afterall, this is a service industry and passengers should expect to be

taken care of once on board a vessel. However, the Coast Guard has not

determined that it is necessary to require the master of a vessel to

announce that if passengers are ill, to report to a crewmember.

(7) One comment recommended that operators of older vessels, with

lower than legal handrails.

The Coast Guard states since grandfathered vessels are allowed to

have rails at a height previously approved, they are not illegal.

(8) Two comments suggested that the welcome aboard speech should

not contain language that states that the master will require

passengers to don PFDs in the event of a hazardous condition. Sea

conditions that would require the donning of PFDs are avoided by

operators.

The Coast Guard disagrees. The language is consistent with

Secs. 122.508 and 185.508. Informing passengers that in an emergency,

they shall be required to don life jackets as directed by the Captain

should not put them under any undue duress.

Section 185.508 Wearing of Life Jackets

(1) One comment suggested that crewmembers should be required to

wear type 5 inflatable PFDs on deck when the master determines it is

necessary due to weather or other extreme operating conditions. ``The

failure of the master to give such an order under such circumstances is

gross negligence.''

The Coast Guard emphasizes that the master of a vessel has the

authority to require the crew to don PFDs due to operating or weather

conditions. Inflatable PFDs are allowed as per Sec. 117.73 (c) and (d),

and Sec. 180.73 (c) and (d) as work vests as long as they are approved

as such under the 160.053 or 160.077 series.

(2) One comment was uncomfortable with the wording that the master

shall require passengers to don life jackets under certain

circumstances including ``severe weather.'' Severe weather needs to be

better defined or the word ``shall'' be changed to ``may.''

The Coast Guard states that replacing ``shall'' with ``may''

defeats the purpose of the requirement. This section outlines the

master's responsibility for getting passengers and crew into life

jackets under certain circumstances. No changes to this section were

made.

(3) One comment stated that paragraph (a)(4) requires passengers to

don PFDs when the vessel is under tow. This wording should be changed

to ``disabled vessels under tow'' in order to avoid the interpretation

that when the vessel is using an assist tug to come alongside a pier,

the passengers must don PFDs.

The Coast Guard disagrees that paragraph (a)(4) should be clarified

with the proposed language in the comment.

(4) One comment recommended adding paragraph (c) ``The master of

the vessel shall strongly recommend that if passengers become seasick

and remain on deck, they should don a lifejacket.''

The Coast Guard agrees with the intent of the comment about seasick

passengers donning life jackets. However, the master of the vessel is

responsible for safety of the passengers while on board his or her

vessel. A prudent mariner, noting a passenger in distress to the point

of being in danger of falling overboard, will take the appropriate

action to ensure that passenger's safety. The Coast Guard has

determined that no changes to this section of the regulations are

required at this time.

Section 185.510 Emergency Instructions

One comment recommended including seasickness with nausea in the

emergency instructions and indicate appropriate cautionary actions to

be undertaken by the crew. The emergency instructions are geared toward

emergencies affecting the entire vessel.

[[Page 51345]]

The Coast Guard has not determined that it is appropriate to

address individual seasickness in this section.

Section 122.520 Abandon Ship and Man Overboard Drills and Training

Three comments stated that the requirement that a vessel cannot get

underway if more than 25% of the crew has not received training is

burdensome. Abandon ship and man overboard drill techniques, once

mastered, are transferable. It is recommended that paragraph (2) be

deleted as written. Restate as a goal that the master shall ensure that

each crewmember is trained to respond in an emergency. Four comments

recommended allowing for crossover training on sister vessels. As

stated previously, the Coast Guard modified the paragraph's language to

allow for sister vessel training. However, paragraph (b)(2) will be

retained so that new employees will receive the proper indoctrination

prior to getting underway with passengers.

The Coast Guard agrees that certain drill techniques are

transferable, however, vessel specific items such as fire hydrant

location and survival craft type are not.

Section 122.524 Fire Fighting Drills and Training

Three comments stated that fire fighting drills are supported as

long as the master's duty is cast as a goal instead of a prescriptive

standard.

The Coast Guard contends that the requirements are appropriate as

written.

Sections 122.602 and 185.602 Hull Markings

One comment stated that the hull marking requirements,

specifically, the loading and draft mark requirements, are not

necessary. Another comment noted that paragraph (c)(2) requires three

draft marks. It was recommended that the rule define the center mark as

the limiting draft, and that the fore and aft marks are the limiting

trim in either direction.

The Coast Guard's position on hull markings has not changed. The

Coast Guard agrees that paragraph (c)(2) could be better written. Both

sections have been rewritten to clarify the hull marking requirements.

Section 122.604 Lifesaving Equipment Markings

Two comments stated that referencing IMO resolutions is not

practical for small passenger vessel owners. These publications are

difficult to locate and expensive to purchase. It was recommended to

not cite the reference, but quote the specific language.

The Coast Guard advises that the referenced IMO publication for

lifesaving equipment markings is used as an alternative to the

standards spelled out in Secs. 122.604(f) and 185.604(f). These symbols

can be obtained at the local MSO, and it is not necessary to purchase

the publication.

Sections 122.730 and 185.730 Servicing of Inflatable Liferafts,

Inflatable Buoyant Apparatus, Inflatable Life Jackets, and Inflated

Rescue Boats

After review, the Coast Guard has determined that liferafts and

IBAs should be required to be serviced at a facility approved, by the

Commandant, to service that particular brand. The reference in the IFR

to the procedures in Sec. 160.151 is troublesome because Sec. 160.151

does not exist. A reference to Sec. 160.051, which does exist, would be

obsolete and require revision soon. However, both current and proposed

rules require that approved servicing facilities perform approved

servicing in accordance with the applicable regulations.

Section 170.173 Criterion for Vessels of Unusual Proportion and Form

One comment recommended that this section be revised to incorporate

intact stability standards and policy (NVICs, PFMs, and MTNs) currently

used by the MSC for vessels that operate on protected and partially

protected waters.

The Coast Guard agrees. Criteria used successfully in the past and

listed in MSC's PFM 1-89 are incorporated into this rule.

Part 171--Special Rules Pertaining to Vessels Carrying Passengers

Public comments brought to the Coast Guard's attention that certain

sections regarding bulkhead penetrations, watertight integrity, and

deck drainage for vessels less than 100 gross tons had mistakenly been

deleted from subchapter S. The Coast Guard has determined that the

error occurred during the creation of subchapter K. When the NPRM was

published in 1989, the Coast Guard proposed that the stability

requirements in subchapter S for vessels less than 100 gross tons be

moved back into subchapter T for the convenience of the reader. The

proposal also involved the removal of redundant language in subchapter

S. When subchapter K was proposed in the 1994 SNPRM, language was added

to part 116 requiring subchapter K vessels to meet applicable stability

standards in subchapter S with some exceptions noted in subpart K.

However, the proposed revisions to subchapter S deleting certain

requirements for vessels of less than 100 gross tons were not removed

from the rulemaking document. In February, 1997, the MSC sent out

bulletin 01-97 to naval architects, designers, and boat builders

throughout the United States explaining the error and providing interim

guidance until publication of the final rule. The Coast Guard has

amended part 171 in this final rule by reinstating Secs. 171.110,

171.114, 171.115, 171.119, 171.120, 171.122, 171.124, 171.130, 171.140,

171.145, 171.150, and 171.155 as published in the October 1, 1995

edition of 46 CFR parts 166 to 199. The Coast Guard apologizes for any

confusion this error may have caused to the small passenger vessel

industry.

Incorporation by Reference

The Director of the Federal Register has approved the material in

Secs. 114.600 and 175.600 for incorporation by reference under 5 U.S.C.

552 and 1 CFR part 51. Copies of the material are available from the

sources listed in those sections.

Regulatory Evaluation

This Final rule is a significant regulatory action under section

3(f) of Executive order 12866 and has been reviewed by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) under that Order. It is significant under

the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of

Transportation (44 FR 11040; February 26, 1979). A regulatory

evaluation, with addendum, is available in the docket for inspection

and copying where indicated under ADDRESSES.

A draft regulatory evaluation was prepared for the SNPRM based on

comments to the NPRM and placed in the rulemaking docket. The

evaluation contained information on the methodology and data sources

used in determining costs and benefits, details on the costs and

benefits of over 70 changes, alternatives to proposed changes, costs

for sample small passenger vessels, and a profile of the small

passenger fleet and its casualty history. The Coast Guard received

several comments stating that the draft evaluation for contained

outdated costs and objecting to the risk-assessment methodology used

and the cost/benefit analysis.

The SNPRM identified the three most significant monetary cost/

benefit items of this rulemaking as--

1. Liferafts or inflatable buoyant apparatus for certain vessels;

2. Passenger/crew lists; and

3. Fixed fire extinguishing systems in machinery spaces.

As a result of the comments received on the draft evaluation and

the SNPRM

[[Page 51346]]

as a whole, the Coast Guard significantly reduced the cost of the

rulemaking by incorporating the following changes in the IFR:

1. Reduced the number of vessels required to carry inflatable

survival craft.

2. Revised the passenger and crew list requirements.

In addition, the Coast Guard made other significant changes in the

IFR that resulted in reduced costs to the small passenger vessel

industry. For example, the IFR--

1. Provided more options to meet structural fire protection

requirements;

2. Eliminated the requirement to install overspeed trip devices for

main propulsion engines and generators; and

3. Deleted the requirement to have wooden vessels more than 20

years old drydocked annually.

In order to address the impact of these changes, the Coast Guard

provided an addendum to the draft regulatory evaluation prepared for

the SNPRM. The addendum updated the changes in cost associated with the

elimination of some of the inflatable lifesaving equipment and of the

requirements to maintain passenger and crew list for certain vessels.

In order to provide consistency with the draft evaluation, the addendum

used the same methods of calculating the total and Average Annual Cost

(AAC) of the requirements. However, the information used to calculate

the number of vessels affected and the cost of required equipment were

updated to provide an accurate estimate.

The Coast Guard determined that by adopting these changes, the

overall costs of this rule to the industry was reduced by 63 percent.

The comments from industry on the IFR confirmed the significant cost

reductions and applauded the Coast Guard's efforts.

The Coast Guard has determined that the changes made by this final

rule, including the elimination of the K' threshold, will not change

the impact of this rule significantly. As a result, no further changes

were made to the final regulatory evaluation adopted in the IFR.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the

Coast Guard considered whether this rule will have a significant

economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. ``Small

entities'' include small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that

are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their

fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than

50,000.

As discussed at length in Small Entities section of the preamble to

the IFR (61 FR 883), this rule will affect the operators of small

passenger vessels. These firms come under the Standard Industrial Code

(SIC) categories 4489 (Water Transportation of Passengers) and 4482

(Ferries), both of which are considered small entities if they have 500

or less employees.

We received numerous comments pointing out an error in the Small

Entities section in the IFR. The comments disagreed with the statement

that few small entities operate the 405 vessels carrying more than 150

passengers. In fact, nearly all owners and operators of small passenger

vessels, including vessels carrying more than 150 passengers,

constitute small entities under the SIC. Owners and operators of

vessels carrying more than 150 passengers are subject to higher costs

than other small passenger vessels due to additional requirements, such

as structural fire protection. The Coast Guard contends that, despite

these additional requirements, this rule still should not have a

significant economic impact on owners and operators vessels carrying

more than 150 passengers because of the size of their operations and

volume of their business.

As very likely all of the entities affected by this rulemaking are

small entities, the entire regulatory evaluation prepared for this

rulemaking is applicable to small entities. For a discussion of the

impacts of this rulemaking, see the Regulatory Evaluation section in

this preamble.

The only potential impact that the changes to the IRF will have

results from the removal of the K \1\ category. The requirement for

stairtowers landing areas is restored for vessels having overnight

accommodations for more than 49 passengers. However, because this type

of vessel was built to the guidelines in NVIC 11-83, which required

stairtower landing areas in accordance with subchapter H, this change

will have no effect on existing vessels. In addition, it will provide

consistency for boat builders who have built this type of vessel for

the past 13 years. Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under section

605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) that

this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

Assistance for Small Entities

In accordance with section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), the Coast Guard

will answer questions by small entities concerning information on, and

advice about, compliance with statutes and regulations, interpreting

and applying the law to specific sets of facts supplied by the small

entity. For questions concerning this rule, contact the Vessel

Compliance Division (G-MOC-2) at 202-267-1464.

Collection of Information

This final rule provides for a collection of information under the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). As required

by 5 U.S.C. 3507(d), the Coast Guard submitted a copy of this rule to

the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review of the collection

of information. OMB has approved the collection. The sections providing

for a collection are listed in the discussion of collection of

information in the preamble to the interim final rule (61 FR 884). The

corresponding approval number from OMB is OMB Control Number 2115-0578,

which expires on August 13, 1999. The collections concern the

inspection and certification of vessels, including the preparation and

submittal of applications and plans for certificates and the marking

vessels and equipment.

Persons are not required to respond to a collection of information

unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

Federalism

The Coast Guard has analyzed this final rule under the principles

and criteria contained in Executive Order 12612 and has determined that

this rule does not have sufficient implications for federalism to

warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Environment

The Coast Guard considered the environmental impact of this final

rule and concluded that, under paragraphs 2.B.2.e.(34)(c) through (e)

of Commandant Instruction M16475.1B, this rule is categorically

excluded from further environmental documentation. This rule concerns

the inspection, certification, and equipping of vessels and the

training of maritime personnel. A ``Categorical Exclusion

Determination'' is available in the docket for inspection or copying

where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects

46 CFR Parts 114 and 175

Incorporation by reference, Marine safety, Passenger vessels,

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

[[Page 51347]]

46 CFR Parts 115 and 176

Fire prevention, Marine safety, Passenger vessels, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

46 CFR Parts 116, 117, 119, 171, 178, 179, 180, and 182

Marine safety, Passenger vessels.

46 CFR Parts 118 and 181

Fire prevention, Marine safety, Passenger vessels.

46 CFR Parts 120 and 183

Electric power, Marine safety, Passenger vessels.

46 CFR Parts 121 and 184

Communications equipment, Marine safety, Navigation (water),

Passenger vessels.

46 CFR Parts 122 and 185

Alcohol and alcoholic beverages, Drugs, Hazardous materials, Marine

safety, Navigation (water), Passenger vessels, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

46 CFR Part 170

Marine safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels.

46 CFR Part 173

Marine safety, Vessels.

46 CFR Part 177

Marine safety, Passenger vessels, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Coast Guard adopts the

interim rule amending 46 CFR parts 114 through 122, 170, 171, 173, and

175 through 185, which was published at 61 FR 864 on January 10, 1996,

as a final rule with the following changes:

Subchapter K--Small Passenger Vessels Carrying More Than 150

Passengers or With Overnight Accommodations for More Than 49

Passengers

PART 114--GENERAL PROVISIONS

1. The authority citation for part 114 is revised to read as

follows:

Authority: 46 U.S.C. 2103, 3306, 3703; 49 U.S.C. App. 1804; 49

CFR 1.45, 1.46. Sec. 114.900 also issued under 44 U.S.C. 3507.

2. In Sec. 114.110, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows; remove

paragraphs (b) and (c); redesignate paragraph (f) as paragraph (b);

redesignate paragraphs (d) and (e) as paragraphs (c) and (d),

respectively; and remove paragraph (g) and table 114.110(g):

Sec. 114.110 General applicability.

(a) Except as in paragraph (b) of this section, this subchapter

applies to each vessel of less than 100 gross tons that carries more

than 150 passengers, or has overnight accommodations for more than 49

passengers, and that--

(1) Carries at least one passenger for hire;

(2) Is chartered with or without a crew provided or specified by

the owner or the owner's representative; or

(3) If a submersible vessel, carries at least one passenger for

hire.

Note to paragraph (a): For a vessel of less than 100 gross tons

that carries 150 or less passengers or has overnight accommodations

for 49 or less passengers, see subchapter T of this chapter.

* * * * *

3. In Sec. 114.400, in paragraph (b), revise the definitions for

``accommodation space'' introductory text, ``atrium,'' ``auxiliary

machinery space,'' ``cold water,'' ``hardwood,'' ``high risk

accommodation space,'' ``high risk service spaces,'' ``High Speed

Craft,'' ``low risk service spaces,'' ``machinery space,'' ``overnight

accommodations or overnight accommodation space,'' and ``passenger

accommodation space'' and add, in alphabetical order, a definition for

``approval series'' and ``exit'' to read as follows:

Sec. 114.400 Definitions of terms used in this subchapter.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

Accommodation space (5, 6, or 7 depending on size, fire load, and

furnishings) means a space that does not contain any cooking appliance

other than a microwave oven or other low heat (maximum heating element

temperature less than 121 deg.C (250 deg.F)) appliance used as a--

* * * * *

Approval series means the first six digits of a number assigned by

the Coast Guard to approved equipment. Where approval is based on a

subpart of subchapter Q of this chapter, the approval series

corresponds to the number of the subpart. A listing of approved

equipment, including all of the approval series, is published

periodically by the Coast Guard in Equipment Lists (COMDTINST M16714.3

series), available from the Superintendent of Documents.

* * * * *

Atrium (5 or 7 depending on fire load and furnishings) means a

continuous deck opening connecting more than two deck levels within an

accommodation space that is covered at the top of the series openings

and is used for purposes other than an enclosed stairway, or a utility

trunk for pipe, cable, or ductwork.

Auxiliary machinery space (12) means a space containing only pumps,

tanks, electrical machinery, ventilation or air conditioning equipment,

refrigeration machinery, resistors steering machinery, etc., with not

more than 2.5 kilograms per square meter (0.5 pounds per square foot)

of combustible storage.

* * * * *

Cold water means water where the monthly mean low water temperature

is normally 15 degrees Celsius (59 degrees Fahrenheit) or less.

* * * * *

Exit means--

(1) A stairtower or a stairway which terminates at an area of

refuge or embarkation station; or

(2) A door which leads directly to an area of refuge or embarkation

station.

* * * * *

Hardwood means oak or a similar wood with a specific gravity of

approximately 0.6 and having fire resistant properties similar to oak.

* * * * *

High risk accommodation space (6 or 7 depending on size) means an

accommodation space that contains a fire load greater than 15 kilograms

per square meter (3 pounds per square foot), or a cleaning gear locker

which contains storage space for materials other than flammable liquids

and which has a deck area less than 5 square meters.

High risk service spaces (9) include--

(1) Galley;

(2) Large laundry or drying room;

(3) Garbage or trash disposal storage area;

(4) Paint or lamp locker;

(5) Cleaning gear locker or small storeroom in an accommodation

area;

(6) Mail or baggage room; and

(7) Pantries and storerooms which contain flammable liquids or have

a deck area not less than 5 square meters including connecting

alleyways and stairs.

* * * * *

High Speed Craft means a craft that is operable on or above the

water and has characteristics so different from those of conventional

displacement ships, to which the existing international conventions,

particularly SOLAS, apply, that alternative measures should be used to

achieve an equivalent level of safety. In order to be considered a high

speed craft, the craft must be capable of a maximum speed equal to or

exceeding V=3.7 X displ1667 h, where ``V'' is the maximum

speed and ``displ'' is the vessel displacement corresponding to the

design waterline in cubic meters.

[[Page 51348]]

Low risk service spaces (8) include--

(1) Cleaning gear lockers which have a deck area less than 5 meters

containing only slop sinks, and having no room for stowing materials

other than brooms, mops, or soap;

(2) Small laundries or drying rooms containing only a tub, washing

machine, and/or household type electric dryer;

(3) Workshops that are not part of a machinery space;

(4) Washrooms and toilet spaces; and

(5) Motion picture projection rooms.

* * * * *

Machinery space (10) means a space, including a trunk, alleyway,

stairway, or duct to such a space, that contains--

(1) Propulsion machinery of any type;

(2) Steam or internal combustion machinery;

(3) Oil transfer equipment;

(4) Electrical motors of more than 10 hp;

(5) One or more oil-fired boilers or heaters; or

(6) Electrical generating machinery.

* * * * *

Overnight accommodations or overnight accommodation space (5, 6 or

7 depending on size, fire load and furnishings) means an accommodation

space for use by passengers or by crew members, that has one or more

berths, including beds or bunks, for passengers or crew members to rest

for extended periods. Staterooms, cabins, and berthing areas are

normally overnight accommodation spaces. Overnight accommodations do

not include spaces that contain only seats, including reclining seats.

* * * * *

Passenger accommodation space (5, 6 or 7 depending on size, fire

load, and furnishings) means an accommodation space designated for the

use of passengers.

* * * * *

Sec. 114.540 [Amended]

4. In Sec. 114.540(b), remove the word ``pending''.

5. In Sec. 114.600(b), under the entry for American Bureau of

Shipping, add a new entry for ``Guide for High Speed Craft'' at the end

and, under the entry for National Fire Protection Association, remove

the words ``NFPA 13-1994'', ``NFPA 70-1993'', ``NFPA 92B-1991'', and

``NFPA 701-1989'' and add, in their place, the words ``NFPA 13-1996'',

``NFPA 70-1996'', ``NFPA 92B-1995'', and ``NFPA 701-1996'',

respectively:

Sec. 114.600 Incorporation by reference.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

* * * * *

American Bureau of Shipping (ABS)

* * * * *

Guide for High Speed Craft, 1997............................. 116.300

* * * * *

6. Revise Sec. 114.800(b) to read as follows:

Sec. 114.800 Approved equipment and material.

* * * * *

(b) Coast Guard publication COMDTINST M16714.3 (Series) ``Equipment

Lists, Items Approved, Certificated or Accepted under Marine Inspection

and Navigation Laws,'' lists approved equipment by type and

manufacturer. COMDTINST M16714.3 (Series) may be obtained from New

Orders, Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA

15250-7954.

PART 115--INSPECTION AND CERTIFICATION

7. The authority citation for part 115 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(j); 46 U.S.C. 2103, 3306; 49 U.S.C.

App. 1804; E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR, 1971-1975 Comp., p. 743;

E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277; 49 CFR 1.46.

8. In Sec. 115.600(b), revise the first sentence to read as

follows:

Sec. 115.600 Drydock and internal structural examination intervals.

* * * * *

(b) A vessel making an international voyage subject to SOLAS

requirements must undergo a drydock examination at least once every 12

months. * * *

* * * * *

Sec. 115.612 [Amended]

9. In Sec. 115.612(b), remove the words ``such as'' and add, in

their place, the words ``including, but not limited to,''.

Sec. 115.802 [Amended]

10. In Sec. 115.802(c), remove the words ``the working of the

hull'' and add, in their place, the words ``the hull and internal

structure''.

Sec. 115.808 [Amended]

11. In Sec. 115.808, in paragraph (a)(1), remove the words

Sec. 71.25-15 in subchapter H (Passenger Vessels) of this chapter'' and

add, in their place, the words ``Sec. 122.520 of this chapter'' and, in

paragraph (a)(4), after the word ``liferaft'', add the words,

inflatable buoyant apparatus,''.

Sec. 115.810 [Amended]

12. In Sec. 115.810(b), in table 115.810(b), in the ``Test''

column, in the fourth sentence for the entry ``Carbon dioxide'', remove

the word ``Inspection'' and add, in its place, the word ``Inspect''.

13. Revise Sec. 115.812(a) to read as follows:

Sec. 115.812 Pressure vessels and boilers.

(a) Pressure vessels must be tested and inspected in accordance

with part 61, subpart 61.10, of this chapter; except that, they must be

inspected once every 3 years instead of at the intervals in Sec. 61.10-

5(a), (b), and (d) of this chapter.

* * * * *

PART 116--CONSTRUCTION AND ARRANGEMENT

14. The authority citation for part 116 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 46 U.S.C. 2103, 3306; E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR,

1980 Comp., p. 277; 49 CFR 1.46.

15. In Sec. 116.300, in paragraph (b)(1)(ii), remove the words

``Aluminum Vessels;'' and add in their place, the words ``Aluminum

Vessels; or'' and add paragraph (b)(2) to read as follows:

Sec. 116.300 Structural design.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(2) ABS Guide for High Speed Craft.

* * * * *

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.