Qualifications for Tankermen and for Persons in Charge of Transfers of Dangerous Liquids and Liquefied Gases

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 155

[CGD 79-116]

RIN 2115-AA03

Qualifications for Tankermen and for Persons in Charge of

Transfers of Dangerous Liquids and Liquefied Gases

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; establishment of dates for compliance.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard modifies the qualification requirements for

some Persons in Charge (PICs) of transfers of fuel oil and establish

the date for compliance with the modified requirements. This

modification is necessary to address public concern and implement the

Final Rule, which, in the part addressed here, reduces the risk and

severity of spillage from vessels involved in fuel-oil transfers. The

requirement that PICs obtain letters from their trainers stating that

the PICs have successfully completed certain training should ensure to

the greatest degree possible that crewmembers acting as PICs of fuel-

oil transfers get sufficient training to minimize the risks of water

pollution.

DATES: Effective date: The effective date for the amendments in this

rule is July 1, 1998.

Compliance dates:

(1) The compliance date for 33 CFR 155.710(e)(4) is July 1, 1998.

(2) The compliance date for 33 CFR 155.710(e) introductory text,

(e)(1), (e)(2), and (e)(3) and Sec. 155.715 is October 1, 1998.

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: Mr. Mark C. Gould, Project Manager,

Maritime Personnel Qualifications Division, (202) 267-6890 or 1-800-

842-8740, extension 7-6890.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory History

On December 18, 1980, the Coast Guard published two Notices of

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRMs): CGD 79-116, which proposed rules for

tankermen [45 FR 83290]; and CGD 79-116a, which proposed rules for

Persons in Charge (PIC) of transfers of oil [45 FR 83268].

On October 17, 1989, the Coast Guard published a Supplemental

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SNPRM), entitled, ``Tankerman

Requirements and Qualifications for Persons-in-Charge of Dangerous

Liquid and Liquefied Gas Transfer Operations'' [54 FR 42624], which

combined the original two rulemakings and officially closed CGD 79-116a

as a distinct rulemaking. The Coast Guard received 42 comments on that

SNPRM. No public meeting was requested, nor was one held.

On April 4, 1995, the Coast Guard published an Interim Rule

entitled ``Qualifications for Tankermen and for Persons in Charge of

Transfers of Dangerous Liquids and Liquefied Gases'' [60 FR 17134].

On March 26, 1996, the Coast Guard reopened the comment period [61

FR 13098]. No public meeting was requested, nor was one held.

On May 8, 1997, the Coast Guard published a Final Rule entitled

``Qualifications for Tankermen and for Persons in Charge of Transfers

of Dangerous Liquids and Liquefied Gases'' [62 FR 25115].

On September 17, 1997, the Coast Guard published a request for

comments to that portion of the Final Rule concerning the

qualifications for a PIC of transfer of fuel oil [62 FR 48769]. This

request for comments also delayed the compliance date until July 1,

1998, for 33 CFR 155.710 (e) introductory text and paragraphs (e)(1),

(e)(2), and (e)(3). Several comments requested a public meeting, but

none was held. This regulatory project has been in preparation since

1979. During the nineteen years of preparation, the Coast Guard

requested comments on the proposed rule no fewer than five times. In

the last request for comments, the focus was on a very narrow section

of the entire rule-qualification requirements for PICs of transfers of

fuel oil. The Coast Guard felt that all sides of this debate could be

adequately covered in writing; therefore, no public hearing was

necessary.

Background and Purpose

In the Interim Rule [60 FR 17134 (April 4, 1995)], Sec. 155.710(e)

of title 33, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), which sets out

requirements for Tankermen-PICs, was written ambiguously. If

interpreted literally, the section stated that, on an uninspected

vessel required to have a licensed person aboard, either (a) the PIC of

a transfer of fuel oil must hold a license authorizing service as

master, mate, engineer, or operator aboard that vessel, or (b) that

person must have been instructed by the operator or agent of the vessel

both in his or her duties and in the Federal statutes and regulations

on water pollution that apply to the vessel.

In the Final Rule [62 FR 25115 (May 8, 1997)], the Coast Guard

corrected this ambiguity by revising the section. The Final Rule

required that, onboard one of these same uninspected vessels, the PIC

of a transfer of fuel oil hold either (a) a license authorizing service

as master, mate, engineer, or operator aboard that vessel, or (b) a

merchant mariner's document (MMD) endorsed as Tankerman-PIC.

Before this clarification, the Captains of the Port (COTPs) in some

ports, particularly deepwater, were already interpreting the section in

this way. However, in other ports, particularly inland and river, the

COTPs were allowing the industry to comply with either the ambiguous

requirements stated in the Interim Rule or the intended requirements

stated in the Interim Rule as clarified in the Final Rule.

Many in the inland maritime industry were satisfied with the

wording of the Interim Rule and, not suspecting that the Final Rule

would change the qualification requirements, did not submit comments

until the Final Rule was published. Many of these comments claimed that

the Coast Guard had not provided the opportunity to comment on the

revised text of Sec. 155.710(e). As a result, the Coast Guard issued a

request for comment on Sec. 155.710(e) and delayed the compliance date

for this section except paragraph 4--whose compliance date already was

July 1, 1998--until July 1, 1998 [62 FR 48769 (September 17, 1997)].

Discussion of Comments and Changes

The Coast Guard received a total of 96 written comments in response

to the

[[Page 35823]]

reopened comment period. All of these letters are available for

inspection in CGD 79-116 at the address listed under ADDRESSES.

Applicability

The Coast Guard received four written comments addressing the

applicability of this rule. One of the comments asked whether an

Uninspected Towing Vessel (UTV) with a 14,000-gallon fuel capacity

would have to comply with this rule if the transfer of fuel oil was

always accomplished by a shoreside fueling-company whose trucks have a

maximum capacity of 8,000 gallons.

Section 155.700 of title 33 CFR states that, if either vessel has a

capacity in excess of 250 barrels (or 10,500 gallons), then 33 CFR

155.710(e) applies.

A second comment questioned whether this rule would apply to Mobile

Offshore Drilling Units (MODUs). More specifically, it asked, ``What

must the PIC of a transfer of fuel on a MODU hold--a license, an

endorsed MMD, or neither?''

That person must hold a license or else hold an MMD endorsed as

Tankerman-PIC. 33 CFR Section 155.700 of 33 CFR, the applicability

section that covers 33 CFR 155.710(e), applies to each vessel with a

capacity of more than 250 barrels of fuel oil, cargo oil, or hazardous

materials. Therefore, the PIC of a transfer of fuel oil on a MODU

encompassed by 33 CFR 155.710 must comply with 33 CFR 155.710(e)(1);

that is, he or she must hold a valid license issued under 46 CFR part

10 authorizing service as a master, mate, pilot, engineer, or operator

aboard that vessel, or else hold an MMD endorsed as Tankerman-PIC.

The third comment expressed concern that the Coast Guard had stated

that crewmembers of Oil Spill Response Vessels (OSRVs) belong to a

category of person eligible to seek restricted Tankerman-PIC

endorsements in 46 CFR 13.111, though the Coast Guard Authorization Act

of 1996 stated that they are not subject to requirements of tankermen

for tank vessels as such.

The Coast Guard disagrees. It agrees that 46 U.S.C. 3702(f)

establishes that 46 U.S.C. Chapter 37, and statutes whose applicability

is based on 46 U.S.C. Chapter 37, do not apply to an OSRV. However, 46

U.S.C. 3302(a) makes clear that the designation of a vessel as an OSRV

does not preclude it from also being considered a tank vessel under

other laws and regulations. An OSRV is a tank vessel as defined by 46

U.S.C. 2101(39). 46 U.S.C. 3702(f) only states only that an OSRV will

not be subject to regulations promulgated under the authority in 46

U.S.C. Chapter 37. This does not affect the applicability to an OSRV of

other regulations for tank vessels, regulations not based on the

authority of 46 U.S.C. Chapter 37. The Ports and Waterways Safety

Program (33 U.S.C. Chapter 25, 33 U.S.C. 1221 et. seq.) and the Water

Pollution Prevention and Control Program (33 U.S.C. Chapter 26, 33

U.S.C. 1251 et. seq.) also apply to these types of operations conducted

by OSRVs. The purposes of Chapter 25 include the protection of the

marine environment and natural resources through, among other

functions, the regulation of vessel manning. The tankerman requirements

for OSRVs are based on these statutes and on 33 CFR part 155.

Therefore, under 33 CFR 155.710(a)(3), the PIC of a transfer of liquid

cargo in bulk or of cargo-tank cleaning on an OSRV shall hold a

Tankerman-PIC endorsement issued under 46 CFR part 13 that authorizes

the holder to supervise the transfer of fuel oil, the transfer of

liquid cargo in bulk, or cargo-tank cleaning, as appropriate to the

product. Note that 46 CFR 13.111(a) discusses the possibility of OSRVs'

crewmembers' obtaining a restricted Tankerman-PIC endorsements.

Individual companies should ask their Regional Examination Centers

(RECs) about establishing training programs and competency requirements

unique to their vessels' configurations and operations.

A fourth comment asked whether floating crane rigs or other

stevedoring equipment need to comply with this rule.

Again, 33 CFR 155.700, the applicability section that covers 33 CFR

155.710(e), applies to each vessel with a capacity of more than 250

barrels of fuel oil, cargo oil, or hazardous materials. Therefore, the

PIC of a transfer of fuel oil on any vessel encompassed by 33 CFR

155.710 must comply with 33 CFR 155.710--either (e)(1), if the vessel

is inspected, or (e)(2), if the vessel is uninspected.

Exemptions

One comment asked that this rule continue to exempt those vessels

with a fuel-oil capacity of less than 250 barrels.

The Coast Guard agrees and makes no changes to the applicability

under 33 CFR 155.700.

Comment Period

Several comments requested that the Coast Guard hold public

meetings before making a final decision on such an important issue.

The Coast Guard declines. The public has received more than

adequate opportunity to submit comments or ask questions on this issue.

General Comments

The comments received did not surprise the Coast Guard. Comments

from deepwater ports generally tended to favor the stricter

interpretation, since many uninspected vessels in those ports each

already carry several licensed persons aboard, as well as unlicensed

crewmembers documented as Tankermen-PICs. On the other hand, comments

from inland and river ports, where vessels usually each carry only one

licensed person onboard, generally tended to favor the wording of the

Interim Rule.

Two of the comments shared the opinion that the Coast Guard should

require the PIC to hold a valid MMD. One of these two recommended that

the PIC receive his or her vessel-specific training from the master of

the UTV or other licensed officer.

The Coast Guard disagrees. For previously mentioned reasons, and

because of the expense applicants would incur to complete the required

training, PICs on UTVs need not obtain MMDs.

Another comment stated that most spills caused by the human factor

are the result of attitude rather than ability. The PIC knows how to do

the job; he or she simply fails to execute.

The Coast Guard does not know whether this is true; however, the

first step is to require some minimal amount of training to maximize

the chances of a safe transfer of fuel oil. Besides, training can

improve attitude along with ability.

A recommendation in one comment stated that the Coast Guard needs

to understand the unique operating and regulatory environment of the

brown-water maritime fleet.

The Coast Guard agrees, and has gone to extraordinary lengths to

include the inland and river marine industry in this rulemaking. In

fact, it was mostly comments from the brown-water fleet of UTVs that

led the Coast Guard to the final amendments in this reconstitution of

the Final Rule.

The Coast Guard received eleven comments agreeing with the wording

as it appeared in the Final Rule [62 FR 25115 (May 8, 1997)]. These

comments stated that requiring a license or an MMD for transfers of

fuel oil on UTVs is good marine practice. One of the eleven stated that

the rule should require that the PIC of such transfers hold either a

license or an MMD.

Upon reviewing the public comments, the Coast Guard now disagrees.

Because it lacks firm statistical evidence that transfers of fuel oil

contribute to the amount of pollution from UTVs, the

[[Page 35824]]

Coast Guard lacks adequate reason to require a license or an MMD with

Tankerman-PIC endorsement.

Most comments agreed that the Coast Guard should require PICs of

transfers of fuel oil to obtain instruction by the operators or agents

of their vessels, both in their duties and in the Federal statutes and

regulations on water pollution that apply to their vessels. These

comments presented the following persuasive arguments:

Statistics

Many of the comments stated there are currently no statistics to

prove that spills from transfers of fuel oil contribute significantly

to the pollution of the marine environment.

Although the Coast Guard speculates, and has heard from reliable

sources off the record, that mid-stream transfers contribute

significantly to pollution of rivers, there are currently no supporting

statistics. However, the Coast Guard recently instituted new data-

gathering systems that in time will provide statistics one way or the

other.

Further, many of the comments stated that, factually, there are no

data to show that a reduction in oil spills would occur if the PIC of a

UTV transfer of fuel oil were required to hold a license or MMD and

that, therefore, no such requirement would be appropriate.

The Coast Guard agrees and, again, has dropped the requirement.

Training

Several comments stated that the key to the safe transfer of fuel

oil to UTVs is training. They suggested that the Coast Guard and

industry jointly develop and adopt a training program that specifically

addresses transfers.

The Coast Guard agrees--in part. For now, the new requirement for a

letter of training from the operator or agent of a vessel will satisfy

the training requirements. However, if it later turns out that this

training is not having the desired effect, the Coast Guard will ask the

industry to help it develop and adopt more formal training.

Several comments felt that simple possession of a license does not

endow an Operator of Uninspected Towing Vessels (OUTV) with sufficient

knowledge of transfers of fuel oil. In addition, the OUTV often is not

physically present where the transfer takes place. Therefore, it is

unfair to make the OUTV legally responsible for the transfer.

The Coast Guard agrees. The person legally responsible for the

transfer of fuel oil to the UTV, if not from the barge, is the PIC

aboard the UTV.

Five comments recommended that the Coast Guard create a new UTV

license that specifically certifies an individual for transfers of fuel

oil. The industry and Coast Guard would jointly develop qualifications

and training procedures for this license.

Currently, the Coast Guard disagrees. For now, a letter of training

from the operator or agent of a vessel will satisfy the training

requirements. However, if it later turns out that this training is not

having the desired effect, the Coast Guard will consider strengthening

the requirements in a further rulemaking.

Courses in Firefighting

Four of the comments addressed the requirements for the successful

completion of approved courses in firefighting. The comments stated

that these courses do not apply to operations on UTVs.

The Coast Guard agrees that most existing, approved courses in

firefighting contain more-detailed training than personnel aboard UTVs

need. However, the Coast Guard no longer requires approved courses in

firefighting for PICs of uninspected vessels involved in transfers of

fuel oil. The Coast Guard remains willing, should the need arise, to

work with industry in designing the proper curriculum for a course in

firefighting applicable to UTVs.

Training in Preventing Pollution

Some of the comments stated that significant training in preventing

pollution is not now required to obtain a license as OUTV. Therefore,

mere possession of a license, as required in the Final Rule, will not

ensure that a transfer of fuel oil is safely conducted.

The Coast Guard agrees that there is insufficient stress put on

environmental protection to ensure that the bare fact of holding an

OUTV license marks a PIC as sufficiently trained in preventing water

pollution.

A letter from the operator or agent of a vessel, stating that the

PIC has been instructed both in his or her duties and in the Federal

statutes and regulations on water pollution that apply to the vessel,

will satisfy the training requirements.

Voluntary Industry Standards

Several of the comments mentioned the existence of voluntary

industry standards. They stated that the American Waterways Operators

(AWO) carries out a Responsible Carrier Program with the Coast Guard.

Many of the comments urged that this Program, as well as other

voluntary industry initiatives, should improve marine safety and

environmental protection without this new rule.

The Coast Guard agrees that the Responsible Carrier Program is

indeed an exemplary initiative for volunteer companies to help reduce

pollution and improve marine safety. However, the volunteer companies

participating in the various initiatives are not, nor have they ever

been, the companies with which the Coast Guard is concerned. The Coast

Guard is concerned with companies that do not belong to any of these

initiatives. What incentive do they have to implement new programs to

help improve marine safety and reduce pollution? Therefore, the new

requirement, for an operator or agent of a vessel to sign a letter

stating that the crewmember acting as PIC in a transfer of fuel oil has

received the proper training, significantly increases the chances that

the training has, in fact, been conducted. Only time will tell the

significance of the impact these voluntary initiatives will have on

marine safety and environmental protection.

In addition, the Coast Guard received one comment stating that the

towing industry has chosen to turn its back on this issue in the past

because it carries unlicensed engineers on its UTVs.

The Coast Guard partially agrees. However, with AWO's Responsible

Carrier Program and similar initiatives now in place, the Coast Guard

feels that the industry is trying to address the problem without added

regulation.

Regional Examination Centers

Two comments stated that RECs of the Coast Guard are already

inundated with licensing and documentation. The advent of the estimated

3,000-4,000 applicants required to obtain the MMD endorsed as

Tankerman-PIC would place the RECs in an untenable position.

The Coast Guard recognized that the initial impact on the RECs

would have been significant. That is why the plan staggered the date of

compliance to correspond with renewal of MMDs, normally accomplished

every 5 years. This Final Rule renders this issue irrelevant: It lifts

the burden from the RECs and, to some extent, from the mariners while

it shifts it in kind though not in amount for the operators and agents.

Cost

Several comments felt that the cost of hiring a licensed tankerman

for each transfer of fuel oil to a UTV would be staggering.

The Coast Guard disagrees, but the point is moot. No vessel will

have to hire a licensed tankerman for each

[[Page 35825]]

transfer, or to incur fees transfer by transfer. The PIC of each

transfer will be an onboard crewmember who has received in-house

training from the vessel's operator or agent.

Use of Other Trained Personnel on a Vessel

Two comments recommended that the expertise of a driver required to

hold a commercial driver's license at the shoreside fueling-company

suffice for a transfer of fuel oil to a UTV.

The Coast Guard disagrees. The PIC onboard the UTV must have some

minimal training to ensure that he or she is aware of the rules

peculiar to the vessel and of the law that governs the prevention of

pollution.

Another comment stated that the Tankerman-PIC onboard the barge

supplying the fuel oil should be responsible for the entire transfer to

the UTV.

The Coast Guard disagrees. The PIC on the barge is, in all

probability, unfamiliar with the loading characteristics of the

receiving UTV. The PIC onboard the UTV must have some minimal training

to ensure that he or she is aware of the rules for the vessel and of

the laws that govern the prevention of pollution.

Many of the comments recommended that companies, rather than their

PICs aboard UTVs, be responsible for the safe completion of transfers

of fuel oil to the UTVs.

The Coast Guard agrees in part. Each company is responsible for the

proper training of its PICs and is accountable to its underwriters and

the law for unsafe practices. However, the PIC is the logical person to

be responsible for the safe completion of a transfer of fuel oil to the

UTV.

One comment asked whether the Tankerman-PIC on the fueling barge

bears any responsibility for ensuring compliance by the UTV. The PIC on

the barge is responsible for satisfying requirements for the safe

transfer of fuel oil from the barge, though not to the vessel. The PIC

on the UTV is responsible for satisfying them for the safe transfer of

it to the UTV, though not from the barge. Several comments stated that

possession of a license or MMD will not ensure that the transfer of

fuel oil to a UTV is conducted safely. Therefore, they could not

understand the logic behind the insistence by the Coast Guard that the

requirement is ``good marine practice.''

The Coast Guard now agrees. A letter from the operator or agent of

a vessel, stating that the PIC has been instructed both in his or her

duties and in the Federal statutes and regulations on water pollution

that apply to the vessel, will satisfy the training requirements.

One comment stated that the most appropriate option might be to

require the PIC on a UTV to obtain a restricted Tankerman-PIC (Barge)

endorsement.

The Coast Guard disagrees. The PIC on a UTV must have received

training peculiar to his or her UTV to minimize the chances of a

polluting spill. The transfer procedures on a tank barge may be vastly

different from those on any UTV.

Inapplicable Comments

Six comments suggested that in-house training is sufficient for the

safe loading and unloading of chemical barges dockside. The loading or

unloading of chemical cargo is not the subject of this request for

comments. The Coast Guard will answer these comments by letter.

The Coast Guard will also answer by letter another comment, which

asked about the applicability of the Final Rule to vessels loading or

unloading chlorine. Qualifications for persons loading and unloading

chemical cargoes are not the subject of this request for comments.

One comment stateds that the Coast Guard should exempt or

grandfather from the rules those who can show prior experience in

loading and unloading cargo.

The loading and unloading of cargo (other than fuel oil) by

Tankerman-PICs are not proper subjects of this comment period. The

Coast Guard will answer this comment by letter, too.

Although the Coast Guard will allow those who wish to act as PICs

of transfers of fuel oil to so act after obtaining instruction by the

operators or agents of their vessels both in their duties and in the

Federal statutes and regulations on water pollution that apply to the

vessels, it is still concerned that some may not receive the proper

training necessary to minimize the chances of water pollution.

Therefore, after receiving proper instruction from the operator or

agent of a vessel, each trainee will have to receive a letter of

instruction. The letter must come from the party providing the

training. The training need occur only once, unless there is some

unique characteristic about a particular vessel that would necessitate

later, vessel-specific training. No person changing his or her place of

employment need retake the training, unless there is something unique

about the new vessel. The letter of instruction must stay either with

the person, on the vessel, or in the office of the operator or agent of

the vessel. It must be readily available to Coast Guard boarding

officers.

Collection of Information

This reconstitution of a final rule provides for a collection of

information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501

et seq.). As defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(c), ``collection of information''

includes reporting, recordkeeping, monitoring, posting, labeling, and

other, similar actions.

The information collections associated with this rule concern the

letter of instruction described in 33 CFR Secs. 155.710(e)(2) and

155.715. The Coast Guard sought authority for the collection from the

OMB, asking emergency processing of the request for authority by July

15, 1998. The title and description of the collection, a description of

the respondents, and an estimate of the total annual burden follow. The

new request has been submitted and is pending approval. A copy of the

request is available for review in the docket.

The Coast Guard estimates that the letter of instruction will

impose an annual burden of 153 hours' information collection. The

burden comprises all time for both gathering and maintaining the

information.

Title: Letter of Instruction for Persons -In-Charge (PICs) on

Uninspected Vessels.

Summary of the Collection of Information: This Final Rule contains

collection-of-information requirements in 33 CFR 155.710(e)(2) and

155.715.

Need for Information: The U. S. Coast Guard administers and

enforces the laws and regulations promoting the safety of life and

property in marine transportation. It establishes Standards of training

for mariners to ensure their ability to safely and adequately carry out

duties and responsibilities that promote safety on vessels. To ensure

that training standards are complied with, each PIC on an uninspected

vessel must carry a letter of instruction. The letter's contents should

verify the PIC's credentials, stating that the holder has received

sufficient formal instruction from the owner, operator, or agent of the

vessel, as required by 33 CFR 155.710(e)(2).

Proposed Use of Information: Carriage of a letter of instruction

will verify the credentials of the PIC, and expedite verification of

compliance by the Captain of the Port (COTP).

Description of the Respondents: Respondents include the operator,

agent, or PIC involved in a transfer described in 33 CFR 155.700.

Number of Respondents: According to data from the Coast Guard

Marine Safety Management System, there are approximately 1380 vessels

that are

[[Page 35826]]

classified as uninspected vessels and are required to have PICs for

transfers. The total population count [2760] represents the number of

vessels [1380] multiplied by the number of PICs aperper vessel [2].

Frequency of Response: The Coast Guard expects that each PIC will

receive the recognized training once.

Burden of Response: 10 minutes annually per respondent.

Estimated Total Annual Burden: An annual burden of 153 hours'

information collection.

Persons submitting comments on the collection of information should

submit the comments both to OMB and to the Coast Guard where indicated

under ADDRESSES by the date under DATES.

No person need to respond to a request for collection of

information unless it displays a currently valid control number from

OMB.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 155

Hazardous substances, Oil pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard is

amending 33 CFR part 155 as follows:

TITLE 33--NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS

PART 155--OIL OR HAZARDOUS MATERIAL POLLUTION PREVENTION

REGULATIONS FOR VESSELS

1. The authority citation for part 155 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231, 1321(j); 46 U.S.C. 3715; Sec. 2, E.O.

12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR 1991 Comp., p. 351; 49 CFR 1.46. Sections

155.100 through 155.130, 155.350 through 155.400, 155.430, 155.440,

155.470, 155.1030(j) and (k), and 155.1065(g) also issued under 33

U.S.C. 1903(b); and sections 155.1110 and 155.1150 also issued under

33 U.S.C. 2735.

2. Revise paragraphs (e) introductory text, (e)(1), (2) and (e)(3)

of Sec. 155.710 to read as follows:

Sec. 155.710 Qualifications of person in charge.

* * * * *

(e) The operator or agent of each vessel to which this section

applies shall verify to his or her satisfaction that the PIC of any

transfer of fuel oil requiring a Declaration of Inspection--

(1) On each inspected vessel required by 46 CFR chapter I to have a

licensed person aboard, holds a valid license issued under 46 CFR part

10 authorizing service as a master, mate, pilot, engineer, or operator

aboard that vessel, or holds a valid merchant mariner's document

endorsed as Tankerman-PIC;

(2) On each uninspected vessel, either complies with the

requirements of paragraph (e)(1) of this section or carries a letter

satisfying the requirements of Sec. 155.715 and designating him or her

as a PIC, unless equivalent evidence is immediately available aboard

the vessel or at his or her place of employment.

(3) On each tank barge, for its own engine-driven pumps, either

complies with paragraph (e)(1) or (2) of this section or has been

instructed by the operator or agent of the vessel both in his or her

duties and in the Federal statutes and regulations on water pollution

that apply to the vessel; or

* * * * *

3. Add a new Sec. 155.715 to read as follows:

Sec. 155.715 Contents of letter of designation as a person-in-charge

of the transfer of fuel oil.

The letter of instruction required in Sec. 155.710(e)(2) must

designate the holder as a person-in-charge of the transfer of fuel oil

and state that the holder has received sufficient formal instruction

from the operator or agent of the vessel to ensure his or her ability

to safely and adequately carry out the duties and responsibilities of

the PIC described in 33 CFR 156.120 and 156.150.

Dated: June 23, 1998.

J. P. High,

Acting Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety and Environmental

Protection.

[FR Doc. 98-17267 Filed 6-30-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-14-P