Limited Service Domestic Voyage Load Lines for River Barges on Lake Michigan

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

46 CFR Part 45

[USCG 1998-4623]

RIN 2115-AF38

Limited Service Domestic Voyage Load Lines for River Barges on

Lake Michigan

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to allow certain unmanned dry cargo

river barges to be exempt from the normal Great Lakes load line

requirements to operate on Lake Michigan. Instead, these river barges

would need to obtain a limited domestic service load line for two

specific routes (between Chicago, Illinois and Milwaukee, Wisconsin;

and between Chicago and Muskegon, Michigan). This proposed rule will

allow certain non-hazardous cargoes originating at inland river ports

to be directly transported as far as Milwaukee and Muskegon by river

barge, thereby realizing the benefits of the relatively low cost-per-

ton-mile of river barge transportation.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before January 4,

1999.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments to the Docket Management Facility,

(USCG 1998-4623), U.S. Department of Transportation, Room PL-401, 400

Seventh Street SW, Washington, DC 20593-001, or deliver them to room

PL-401, on the Plaza Level of the Nassif Building at the same address,

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal

holidays. The telephone number is 202-267-1477.

The Docket Management Facility maintains the public docket for this

rulemaking. Comments and documents, as indicated in this preamble, will

become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or

copying at room PL-401 on the Plaza Level of the Nassif Building at the

same address between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays. You may also access this docket on the Internet at

http://dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions on this proposed rule,

contact Mr. Thomas Jordan, Office of Marine Safety and Environmental

Protection (G-MSE-2), U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, Room 1308,

telephone 202-267-0142. For questions on viewing or submitting material

to the docket, contact Dorothy Walker, Chief,

[[Page 58680]]

Dockets, Department of Transportation, telephone 202-366-9329.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

The Coast Guard encourages interested persons to participate in

this rulemaking by submitting written data, views, or arguments.

Persons submitting comments should include their names and addresses,

identify this rulemaking (USCG 1998-4623) and the specific section of

this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for

each comment. Please submit all comments and attachments in an unbound

format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and

electronic filing. Persons wanting acknowledgment of receipt of

comments should enclose stamped, self-addressed postcards or envelopes.

The Coast Guard will consider all comments received during the

comment period. It may change this proposed rule in view of the

comments.

The Coast Guard plans no public hearing. Persons may request a

public hearing by writing to the Docket Management Facility at the

address under ADDRESSES. The request should include the reasons why a

hearing would be beneficial. If it determines that the opportunity for

oral presentations will aid this rulemaking, the Coast Guard will hold

a public hearing at a time and place announced by a later notice in the

Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

Before the establishment of limited service domestic voyage load

line routes on Lake Michigan, barge cargoes originating at inland river

ports and destined for Lake Michigan ports had to be transferred to a

Great Lakes load lined vessel at Chicago (Calumet Harbor). This

transshipment was necessary because the present load line regulations

do not allow vessels onto the Great Lakes without a Great Lakes load

line, and river barges typically do not meet all the requirements for

unrestricted service on the Great Lakes.

In January 1991, the Port of Milwaukee approached the Coast Guard

to explore the possibility of establishing a relaxed domestic load line

that would allow river barges to operate along the western shore of

Lake Michigan between Chicago and Milwaukee. Later that year, a barge

company made a similar request for an eastern Lake Michigan route

between Chicago and Muskegon, Michigan. The motivation for these route

requests was economic. River barges offer relatively low costs per ton-

mile to move cargo and can therefore deliver cargoes to the Lake ports

less expensively. These routes could thereby stimulate more economic

activity in the port regions as well.

Because river barges are not designed to operate in the severe

weather conditions experienced on the Great Lakes, the American Bureau

of Shipping (ABS), the Coast Guard, and the industry worked together to

determine the appropriate operational restrictions and other

requirements that would allow river barges to safely venture onto Lake

Michigan. It was recognized that river barges can only operate on Lake

Michigan during fair-weather periods and only on carefully selected

routes. The group reviewed weather conditions and available ports of

refuge along the proposed routes.

On September 21, 1992, the Coast Guard published a notice in the

Federal Register (57 FR 43479) that established a limited service

domestic load line route on western Lake Michigan between Chicago,

Illinois (Calumet Harbor) and Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

On March 31, 1995, the Coast Guard published a second notice in the

Federal Register (60 FR 16693), announcing establishment of another

limited service route. This route is along the eastern side of Lake

Michigan between Chicago (Calumet Harbor) and St. Joseph, Michigan

(Benton Harbor). With the exception of the limiting wind conditions,

the requirements are the same for both routes. The prevailing weather

patterns on the new eastern route make it necessary for the

requirements to be different from the western route. In addition, the

second notice also imposed a new requirement for both routes. This new

requirement stated that the lead barge in the tow had to be rake-ended

rather than box-ended. The notice also allowed the initial load line

survey of barges less than 10 years old to be conducted afloat, and it

also prohibited cargo movements between ports on the two different

routes without first entering the river system at Calumet Harbor.

On September 28, 1995, the Coast Guard published a third notice in

the Federal Register (60 FR 50234) revoking the rake-ended barge

requirement imposed by the second notice. This notice was in response

to several comments pointing out that the restriction was not

necessary.

On August 26, 1996, the Coast Guard published a fourth notice in

the Federal Register (61 FR 43804) extending the eastern route from St.

Joseph, Michigan to Muskegon, Michigan. This extension required some

special considerations, principally because the ports of refuge are

further apart. Accordingly, the Coast Guard, ABS, and local barge

industry representatives developed some additional operational

requirements for barges traveling this extended route.

Discussion of Proposed Rules

The requirements for the Chicago/Milwaukee and Chicago/Muskegon

routes have already been presented and discussed in the previous

Federal Register notices (see Background section of this notice).

Subpart E of 46 CFR part 45, ``Unmanned River Service Dry Cargo

Barges,'' already provides a load line exemption for river barges

operating on Lake Michigan on the Chicago/Burns Harbor route.

Therefore, this subpart is being reorganized to incorporate the new

Milwaukee and Muskegon route requirements.

With four exceptions (discussed below), all of the requirements

appearing in the original subpart E or the Federal Register notice of

61 FR 43804 of August 26, 1996 have been retained. Some parts of

subpart E have been reworded and consolidated using Plain Language to

make the organization of the material easier to read.

The first exception concerns the proposed wind speed limits for the

Milwaukee and Muskegon routes. As published in the Federal Register of

August 26, 1996, these were originally set at continuous wind speeds of

15 knots and 20 knots for certain wind directions. In response to the

Federal Register notice, two comments were received which recommended

revising these limits to be sustained wind speeds of 16 and 21 knots,

respectively. The reason for this recommendation is that the Great

Lakes Marine Weather Forecast (MAFORS) reports ``sustained winds''

(vice ``continuous winds'') in slightly different speed ranges. For

example, MAFORS 1 is winds of 11 to 16 knots, and MAFORS 2 is winds of

17 to 21 knots. The commenters believe that the Federal wind speed

limits should align with actual forecasts that are used by most

mariners on the Lake. The Coast Guard agrees with this recommendation

and has incorporated it into this proposal.

The second exception concerns the ban on having cargo originating

at one Lake Michigan port from being delivered to another Lake port

without first entering the river system at Calumet Harbor. The original

reason behind this ban was that the Lake Michigan routes were intended

to connect Milwaukee and Muskegon to inland (river) ports, not to each

other. Comments have been received, however, arguing that this ban is

economically based, not safety based and therefore is not an

appropriate

[[Page 58681]]

limitation. The Coast Guard concurs and the proposed regulations remove

this ban; however, further comments on this issue are requested.

The third exception is that the allowable offshore distances for

the different routes have been harmonized. Specifically, the original

regulations for the Burns Harbor route did not specify any horsepower

requirement but limited the tow to ``not farther than 5 miles from a

harbor of refuge.'' The later notices for the other routes (Milwaukee,

St. Joseph, and Muskegon) specify a minimum horsepower requirement but

allow the tows to be ``not more than 5 nautical miles from shore,''

which is a more flexible standard. The proposed regulations remove the

harbor-of-refuge limitation for Burns Harbor tows and allow them 5

nautical miles offshore, but also impose a minimum requirement of 1,000

HP for the towboat (same as for tows to St. Joseph).

Similarly, the fourth exception harmonizes the Burns Harbor weather

restrictions with the restrictions applicable to all tows on the

eastern side of Lake Michigan, (which sail past Burns Harbor).

Specifically, the present regulations for the Burns Harbor route limit

tows to ``fair weather conditions'' whereas the St. Joseph/Muskegon

route weather limits are more specifically defined (wind speeds and

wave heights). Tows to Burns Harbor are now subject to the same limits

as the other eastern Lake routes.

Regulatory Evaluation

This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and does not require an

assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of

that order. It has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and

Budget under that order. It is not significant under the regulatory

policies and procedures of the Department of Transportation (DOT) (44

FR 11040; February 26, 1979).

The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this proposed rule

to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 10e

of the regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary.

This regulatory action imposes costs only on those unmanned dry

cargo river barge operators who voluntarily decide to obtain this

particular load line for their barges. The American Bureau of Shipping

(ABS) issues U.S. load lines. ABS indicates that approximately 12

barges may obtain load line certificates each year. The principal cost

of obtaining a load line under this rule results from ABS's level of

effort to survey barges and review their design. The unit cost is

typically less than $3,000, although costs will vary from barge to

barge, depending upon its design and material condition. In return for

this cost investment, the barge operator will have commercial

opportunities to move certain cargoes on Lake Michigan from inland

river ports to Milwaukee, Muskegon, and intermediate Lake ports. It is

expected that the barge operators will not incur the load line cost

unless they anticipate a satisfactory return on their investment.

The economic impact of this rulemaking on the local region is

expected to be generally beneficial, since these regulations are likely

to promote intermodal competition among waterborne and overland modes.

It has been several years now since these barges have been permitted to

operate in Milwaukee. The Coast Guard requests estimates of cargo

volumes that may be shipped by barge as a result of this proposal and

prospective effects on other transportation modes. The Coast Guard also

requests comments on the costs, benefits, and other economic impacts of

this load line program.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the

Coast Guard considers whether this proposed rule, if adopted, 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.

This new load line program proposal will be open to all river barge

operators, including those that qualify as small entities. The Coast

Guard believes that many of the affected operators are small entities.

While compliance with these load line regulations would require an

initial investment of about $3,000, the regulations are voluntary and

provide flexibility and choice to small entities, as well as other

affected operators.

The proposed program is expected to expand the cargo base and

potential business of barges on the affected routes and increase modal

and intermodal competition for certain cargoes.

Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that

this proposed rule, if adopted, will not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small entities. If however, you think

that your business or organization qualifies as a small entity and that

this proposed rule will have a significant economic impact on your

business or organization, please submit a comment to the Docket

Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why you

think it qualifies and in what way and to what degree this proposed

rule will economically affect it.

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

wants to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule so

that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in

the rulemaking process. If your small business or organization is

affected by this rule and you have questions concerning its provisions

or options for compliance, please contact Mr. Thomas Jordan, Office of

Marine Safety and Environmental Protection (G-MSE-2), 202-267-0142.

Copies of this NPRM will also be mailed to local Small Business

Development Centers.

The Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman

and 10 Regional Fairness Boards were established to receive comments

from small businesses about Federal agency enforcement actions. The

Ombudsman will annually evaluate the enforcement activities and rate

each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment

on the enforcement actions of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-

888-734-3247).

Collection of Information

This proposed 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 title and description of the information

collections, a description of the respondents, and an estimate of the

total annual burden follow. Included in the estimate of the time for

reviewing instructions, searching existing sources of data, gathering

and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the

collection.

Title: Limited Service Domestic Voyage Load Lines for River Barges

on Lake Michigan.

Summary of the Collection of Information: This proposal contains

collection of information requirements for 46 CFR part 45.

Need for Information: This proposal extends load line provisions to

unmanned dry cargo river barges operating on certain areas of Lake

Michigan.

[[Page 58682]]

Proposed Use of Information: Information collection is necessary so

that the Coast Guard may determine that the vessel complies with

minimum design standards before and after certification, as well as

prove noncompliance in case of delinquent vessels.

Description of the Respondents: Unmanned dry cargo river barges

operating on certain areas of Lake Michigan may obtain load line

certification.

Number of Respondents: The Coast Guard estimates that 12 such

barges may seek certification.

Frequency of Response: Each vessel must respond once annually.

Burden of Response: The Coast Guard estimates that 9.33 hours will

be spent by each vessel that chooses to gain load line certification.

Estimates Total Annual Burden: The total annual burden of extending

these load line provisions to the 12 unmanned dry cargo barges

operating on certain areas of Lake Michigan is 112 hours.

As required by section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of

1995, the Coast Guard has submitted a copy of this proposed rule to the

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for its review of the collection

of information.

The Coast Guard solicits public comment on the proposed collection

of information to (1) evaluate whether the information is necessary for

the proper performance of the functions of the Coast Guard, including

whether the information would have practical utility; (2) evaluate the

accuracy of the Coast Guard's estimate of the burden of the collection,

including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3)

enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the collection on those

who are to respond, as by allowing the submittal of responses by

electronic means or use of other forms of information technology.

Persons submitting comments on the collection of information should

submit their comments both to OMB and to the Docket Management Facility

where indicated under ADDRESSES by the date under DATES.

Persons are not required to respond to a collection of information

unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Before the

requirements for this collection of information become effective, the

Coast Guard will publish a notice in the Federal Register of OMB's

decision to approve, modify, or disapprove the collection.

Unfunded Mandates

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), (Pub.

L. 104-4, 109 Stat. 48), requires Federal agencies to assess the

effects of certain regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal

governments, and the private sector. UMRA requires a written statement

of economic and regulatory alternatives for proposed and final rules

that contain Federal mandates. A ``Federal mandate'' is a new or

additional enforceable duty imposed on any State, local, or tribal

government, or the private sector. If any Federal mandate causes those

entities to spend, in the aggregate, $100 million or more in one year,

the UMRA analysis is required. This rule does not impose Federal

mandates on any State, local, or tribal governments, or the private

sector.

Federalism

The Coast Guard has analyzed this proposed rule under the

principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 12612 and has

determined that this proposed rule does not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Environment

The Coast Guard considered the environmental impact of this

proposed rule and concluded that under figure 2-1, paragraph

(34)(d)(e), of Commandant Instruction M16475.1C, that it is

categorically excluded from further environmental documentation. A

``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' is available in the docket for

inspection or copying where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 46 CFR Part 45

Great Lakes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes

to amend 46 CFR part 45 as follows:

PART 45--GREAT LAKES LOAD LINES

1. The authority citation for part 45 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 46 U.S.C. 5115; 49 CFR 1.46.

2. Revise Subpart E to read as follows:

Subpart E--Unmanned River Barges on Lake Michigan Routes

Sec.

45.171 What is the purpose of this subpart?

45.173 Which barges are eligible for the exemptions under this

subpart?

45.175 What routes does this subpart apply to?

45.177 What are the freeboard requirements?

45.179 What are the cargo limitations?

45.181 What are the exemption requirements for the Burns Harbor

route?

45.183 What are the load line requirements for the Milwaukee, St.

Joseph, and Muskegon routes?

45.185 What are the tow limitations?

45.187 What are the weather limitations?

45.191 What are the pre-departure requirements?

45.193 What are the towboat power requirements?

45.195 What are the additional equipment requirements for towboats

on the Muskegon route?

45.197 What are the operational plan requirements for the Muskegon

route?

Subpart E--Unmanned River Barges on Lake Michigan Routes

Sec. 45.171 What is the purpose of this subpart?

(a) This subpart defines conditions under which certain unmanned,

river-service, dry-cargo barges may be exempted from the Great Lakes

load line requirements of this part while operating on certain Lake

Michigan routes.

(b) The requirements of this subpart are summarized in the

following table:

BILLING CODE 4910-15-U

[[Page 58683]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02NO98.277

BILLING CODE 4910-15-C

[[Page 58684]]

Sec. 45.173 Which barges are eligible for the exemptions under this

subpart?

The barges eligible for the exemption under this subpart are as

follows:

(a) Unmanned, dry-cargo barges operating between Calumet Harbor

(Chicago), IL, and Burns Harbor, IN, may be exempted from the

requirements that they have a load line if they are operated in

accordance with this subpart.

(b) Unmanned, dry-cargo barges operating between Calumet Harbor

(Chicago), IL, and Milwaukee, WI, or between Calumet Harbor and

Muskegon, MI, may be exempted from the Great Lakes load line

requirement if they are issued a limited-service, domestic-voyage load

line, and are operated in accordance with this subpart.

Sec. 45.175 What routes does this subpart apply to?

This subpart applies to the following routes on Lake Michigan,

between Chicago (Calumet Harbor), IL, and--

(a) Milwaukee, WI;

(b) Burns Harbor, IN;

(c) St. Joseph, MI; and

(d) Muskegon, MI.

Sec. 45.177 What are the freeboard requirements?

The freeboard requirements are as follows:

(a) All barges operating under this subpart must have a minimum

freeboard of 24 inches (610 mm).

(b) Additionally, open hopper barges must have a combined freeboard

plus cargo-box-coaming height of at least 54 inches (1,372 mm).

Sec. 45.179 What are the cargo limitations?

The cargo limitations are as follows:

(a) Only dry cargoes may be carried. Liquid cargoes, even in drums

or tank containers, may not be carried.

(b) Hazardous materials, as defined in part 148 of this chapter and

49 CFR chapter 1, subchapter C, may not be carried.

Sec. 45.181 What are the exemption requirements for the Burns Harbor

route?

In order for a barge on the Burns Harbor route to be exempt from

the requirements that it have a load line, the following requirements

must be met:

(a) The barge must be operated only between Calumet Harbor and

Burns Harbor and must be operated in accordance with this subpart.

(b) The owner of the barge must apply for this exemption in writing

to the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI), U.S. Coast Guard

Marine Safety Office, 215 W. 83rd St--Suite D, Burr Ridge, IL 60521.

The application may be in any form and must be signed by the owner or

an officer authorized to represent the barge's owner. No form or

certificate will be returned. However, the owner's certification will

be kept on file. The owner of a barge for which a load line exemption

is in effect must notify the OCMI of the transfer of ownership, change

of service, or other disposition of the barge.

(c) The owner and operator must agree to maintain the barge and

comply with the operational requirements of this subpart.

(d) The application must include the following general information:

(1) Barge name.

(2) Type.

(3) External dimensions.

(4) Types of cargo.

(5) Official number or other classification number.

(6) Owner and operator addresses and telephone numbers.

(7) Place and date built.

(e) The application must state and certify--

(1) That the barge has been designed and built to at least the

minimum scantlings of the ABS River Rules which were in effect at the

time of construction; and

(2) That the applicable provisions of 46 CFR part 45, subpart E,

will be complied with before and during all voyages between Chicago

(Calumet Harbor), IL, and Burns Harbor, IN, and intermediate ports on

Lake Michigan.

Sec. 45.183 What are the load line requirements for the Milwaukee, St.

Joseph, and Muskegon routes?

The load line requirements for the Milwaukee, St. Joseph, and

Muskegon routes are as follows:

(a) Load line certificate:

(1) The load line issued under this subpart must be a limited-

service, domestic-voyage load line.

(2) Except as provided under paragraph (b)(2)(vi) of this section,

the term of the certificate is five years.

(3) The load line certificate is valid for the Milwaukee, St.

Joseph, and Muskegon routes and intermediate ports. However, operators

must comply with the route-specific requirements on the certificate.

(4) The freeboard assignment, operational limitations, and towboat

requirements of this subpart must appear on the certificate.

(b) Conditions of assignment.

(1) An initial load line survey under Sec. 42.09-25 of this chapter

and subsequent annual surveys under Sec. 42.09-40 of this chapter are

required.

(2) At the request of the barge owner, the initial load line survey

may be conducted with the barge afloat if the following conditions are

met:

(i) The barge is less than 10 years old.

(ii) The draft during the survey does not exceed 15 inches (380

millimeters).

(iii) The barge is empty and thoroughly cleaned of all debris,

excessive rust, scale, mud, and water. All internal structure must be

accessible for inspection.

(iv) Gaugings are taken to the extent necessary to verify that the

scantlings are in accordance with approved drawings.

(v) The hull plating (bottom and sides) and stiffeners below the

light waterline are closely examined internally. If the surveyor

determines that sufficient cause exists, the surveyor may require that

the barge be drydocked or hauled out and further external examination

conducted.

(vi) The initial load line certificate is to be issued for a term

of 5 years or until the barge reaches 10 years of age, whichever occurs

first. At that time, the barge must be drydocked or hauled out and be

fully examined internally and externally.

Sec. 45.185 What are the tow limitations?

The tow restrictions are as follows:

(a) Barges cannot be manned.

(b) No more than three barges per tow.

(c) Tows cannot be more than 5 nautical miles from shore.

Sec. 45.187 What are the weather limitations?

The weather restrictions are as follows:

(a) The weather limits (ice conditions, wave height, and sustained

winds) are specified in Sec. 45.171(b), table 45.171(b).

(b) If weather conditions are expected to exceed these limits at

any time during the voyage, the tow may not leave harbor or, if already

underway, must proceed to the nearest appropriate harbor of safe

refuge.

Sec. 45.191 What are the pre-departure requirements?

Before beginning each voyage, the towing vessel master must conduct

the following:

(a) Weather forecast. Determine the marine weather forecast along

the planned route, and contact the dock operator at the destination

port to get an update on local weather conditions.

(b) Inspection. Inspect each barge of the tow to ensure that each

meet the following requirements:

(1) A valid load line certificate, if required, is on board.

(2) The barge is not loaded deeper than permitted.

(3) The deck and side shell plating are free of visible holes,

fractures, or serious indentations, as well as damage that would be

considered in excess of normal wear.

[[Page 58685]]

(4) The cargo box side and end coamings are watertight.

(5) All manholes are covered and secured watertight.

(6) All voids are free of excess water.

(7) Precautions have been taken to prevent shifting of cargo.

(c) Verifications. On voyages north of St. Joseph, the towing

vessel master must contact a mooring/docking facility in St. Joseph,

Holland, Grand Rapid, and Muskegon to verify that sufficient space is

available to accommodate the tow. The tow cannot venture onto Lake

Michigan without confirmed space available.

(d) Log entries. Before getting underway, the towing vessel master

must note in the logbook that the pre-departure barge inspections,

verification of mooring/docking space availability, and weather

forecast checks were performed.

Sec. 45.193 What are the towboat power requirements?

The towing vessel must meet the following requirements:

(a) General. Have adequate horsepower to handle the tow, but not

less than the amount specified for the route in this section.

(b) Milwaukee, Burns Harbor, and St. Joseph routes. Have a minimum

of 1,000 HP.

(c) Muskegon route. Have a minimum of 1,000 HP to St. Joseph and a

minimum of 1,500 HP from St. Joseph to Muskegon.

Sec. 45.195 What are the additional equipment requirements for

towboats on the Muskegon route?

The additional equipment requirements for towboats on the Muskegon

route that go beyond St. Joseph are as follows:

(a) Communication equipment. Two independent voice communication

systems in operable condition, such as Very High Frequency (VHF) radio,

radiotelephone, or cellular phone. At least two persons aboard the

vessel must be capable of using the communication systems.

(b) Cutting gear. Equipment that can quickly cut the towline at the

towing vessel. The cutting gear must be in operable condition and

appropriate for the type of towline being used, such as wire,

polypropylene, or nylon. At least two persons aboard the vessel must be

capable of using the cutting gear.

Sec. 45.197 What are the operational plan requirements for the

Muskegon route?

The towing vessel on the Muskegon Route must have aboard an

operational plan that is available for ready reference by the master.

The plan must include the following:

(a) The cargo limitations, the general operational requirements,

and the special operational requirements of this subpart.

(b) A list of mooring and docking facilities (with phone numbers

and area codes) in St. Joseph, Holland, Grand Haven, and Muskegon that

can accommodate the tow.

(c) A list of towing firms (with phone numbers and area codes) that

have the capability to render assistance to the tow, if required.

(d) Guidelines for possible emergency situations, such as barge

handling under adverse weather conditions, and other emergency

procedures.

Dated: October 20, 1998.

Joseph J. Angelo,

Acting Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety and Environmental

Protection.

[FR Doc. 98-29245 Filed 10-30-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-U