# Consolidation of Merchant Mariner Qualification Credentials > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3AE9-5436 ## Record - **Collection:** Federal Register - **Document type:** Rule - **Published:** March 16, 2009 - **Citation:** 74 FR 11196 ## Text DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Parts 1, 20, 70, 95, 101, 110, 141, 155, 156, 160, 162, 163, 164, and 165 46 CFR Parts 1, 4, 5, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 26, 28, 30, 31, 35, 42, 58, 61, 78, 97, 98, 105, 114, 115, 122, 125, 131, 151, 166, 169, 175, 176, 185, 196, 199, 401, and 402 [Docket No. USCG-2006-24371] RIN 1625-AB02 Consolidation of Merchant Mariner Qualification Credentials AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard issues this final rule to consolidate the regulations covering issuance of merchant mariner qualification credentials, to reduce the burden on mariners by limiting the number of times they need to appear in person to provide fingerprints and proof of identity, and to address comments received from the public in response to the Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, in some cases through revisions based on those comments. This final rule works in tandem with the joint final rule published by the Coast Guard and the Transportation Security Administration on January 25, 2007, entitled “Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) Implementation in the Maritime Sector; Hazardous Materials Endorsement for a Commercial Driver's License”. DATES: This final rule is effective April 15, 2009. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of April 15, 2009. ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of docket USCG-2006-24371 and are available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. You may also find this docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, call Mayte Medina, Coast Guard, telephone 202-372-1406. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Acronyms II. Regulatory History III. Background and Purpose IV. Summary of Changes From SNPRM V. Discussion of Comments and Changes A. Comments Regarding the TWIC Rulemaking B. General C. Appeals D. Application Process E. Background Checks F. Coast Guard Authority G. Citizenship H. Consistency I. Continuity Documents J. Definitions K. Fees L. Format M. Large Passenger Vessels N. License Creep O. Medical P. National Maritime Center Q. Oaths R. Pilots S. Posting of Credential T. Social Security Numbers U. International Convention on the Standards on Training, Certification, and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, as Amended (STCW) V. Training W. Integration With TWIC X. Questions Outside the Scope of This Rulemaking VI. Regulatory Evaluation A. Executive Order 12866 B. Small Entities C. Assistance for Small Entities D. Collection of Information E. Federalism F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act G. Taking of Private Property H. Civil Justice Reform I. Protection of Children J. Indian Tribal Governments K. Energy Effects L. Technical Standards M. Environment I. Acronyms ADA Americans with Disabilities Act ARPA Automatic Radar Plotting Aid ATP Airline Transport Pilot CFR Code of Federal Regulations CBP Customs and Border Patrol COR Certificate of Registry EEOC Equal Employment Opportunity Commission FAA Federal Aviation Administration FR Final Rule GMDSS Global Maritime Distress and Safety System ILO International Labor Organization IMO International Maritime Organization MERPAC Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee MMC Merchant Mariner Credential MMD Merchant Mariner Document MODU Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit NARA National Archives and Records Administration NDR National Driver Register NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NMC National Maritime Center NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act NVIC Navigation and Inspection Circular OCMI Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection OICEW Officer in Charge of Engineering Watch OICNW Officer in Charge of Navigational Watch OMB Office of Management and Budget OSV Offshore Supply Vessels PVSA Passenger Vessel Safety Act of 1993 QMED Qualified Member of the Engine Department REC Regional Examination Center RFPNW Rating Forming Part of a Navigational Watch SNPRM Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking SOLAS Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea SSN Social Security Number STCW International Convention on the Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, as amended. TOAR Towing Officer's Assessment Record TSA Transportation Security Administration TWIC Transportation Worker Identification Credential US United States USC United States Code II. Regulatory History On May 22, 2006, the Coast Guard published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register titled “Consolidation of Merchant Mariner Qualification Credentials” (71 FR 29462). The NPRM included a 45-day comment period, and announced four public meetings that were held in Newark, NJ, Tampa, FL, St. Louis, MO, and Long Beach, CA. During the comment period for the NPRM, the Coast Guard received over 100 requests, both in writing and in person at the public meetings, for additional time to comment. In response, on January 25, 2007, the Coast Guard published a Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SNPRM) under the same title in the Federal Register (72 FR 3605) providing an additional three months for comments. The SNPRM included a discussion of all comments received in response to the NPRM. We received 19 letters commenting on the SNPRM. No public meeting was requested and none was held. III. Background and Purpose A complete discussion of the background and purpose for this rule can be found in the preamble to the NPRM, 71 FR 29463. Under the current regulations being amended in this rule, the Coast Guard may issue up to four credentials to a mariner: A Merchant Mariner's Document (MMD), Merchant Mariner's License (License), Certificate of Registry (COR), and an International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW) Endorsement. Each credential serves a separate purpose, thus creating the possibility that a mariner might need all four. The Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002, 46 U.S.C. 70105, (MTSA) requires all merchant mariners credentialed under 46 U.S.C. part E to undergo a security threat assessment and obtain a transportation security card. This provision has been implemented by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), which has begun implementing the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) into the maritime sector, and the Coast Guard. All mariners are required, under Coast Guard regulations, to obtain a TWIC by April 15, 2009. 1 This means that, without a regulatory change, a mariner would need up to five credentials. 1 The first TWIC Final Rule, published on January 25, 2007, required all mariners to have a TWIC by September 25, 2008. See 72 FR 3492. On May 7, 2008, the Department of Homeland Security published a Final Rule delaying the date by which mariners must hold a TWIC until April 15, 2009. See 73 FR 25562. This rule will minimize these redundant credentialing requirements, and ease the burden on merchant mariners. The Coast Guard is streamlining its mariner regulations and consolidating the four separate credentialing documents into one Merchant Mariner Credential (MMC). In addition to reducing the number of credentials a mariner will need to hold, this rule also eliminates redundant burdens and government processes. IV. Summary of Changes From SNPRM Cite Change Reason Throughout document Changed the date by which a mariner must hold a TWIC from September 25, 2008 to April 15, 2009 To reflect change in mariner compliance date published by DHS in a Final Rule on May 7, 2008 (73 FR 25562). 46 CFR 10.209, 10.211, 10.214, 10.221, 10.223, 10.225, 10.227, 10.229, 10.231, 10.235, 12.02-7 Added language to reflect that applications for MMC's prior to April 15, 2009 will still need to be made in person at an REC to provide fingerprints and proof of identity, and that for these applications, the Coast Guard will still conduct security threat assessments. After April 15, 2009, TSA will collect the fingerprints and proof of identity and forward that information to the Coast Guard (National Maritime Center (NMC)) To allow the Coast Guard to begin issuing the MMC prior to the date that mariners are required to hold a TWIC, and prior to the date when TSA will begin sharing applicant information with the Coast Guard. 33 CFR 164.13 Changed the term from properly, to appropriately In response to comments. 46 CFR 10.107 Added language to the definition of safe and suitable person to refer the reader to 46 CFR 10.211 and 10.213; and added definitions for large passenger ship, non-resident alien and steward's department In response to comments and changes to regulations. 46 CFR 10.109 Added the first class pilot endorsement, and in (b) added subcategories of able seaman for consistency as well as clarity with the requirements in Parts 12 and 15 In response to comments. 46 CFR 10.211 Added language to specifically state responses that applicants need only provide written disclosure of convictions not previously disclosed on an application In response to comments. 46 CFR 10.215 Table (a) Revised the table to place the reg cites for the requirement In response to comments. 46 CFR 10.215(c) Revised to allow the medical examiner, if qualified, to conduct the appropriate examinations In response to comments. 46 CFR 10.221(a)(2) Added exception for large passenger vessel In response to comments and Congress. 46 CFR 10.225 Removed the requirement that a mariner have proof of applying for a TWIC within the past 30 days In response to comments. Additionally, it provides more flexibility. 46 CFR 10.237 Added language to specify that the Coast Guard will provide the applicant the reason(s) for denial of an application directly to the applicant In response to comments. 46 CFR 11.304(h)(7) Removed the requirement for gathering the TWIC information In response to comments and realization that we had sufficient information to determine the identity of the officer conducting the assessment. 46 CFR 11.518 Added the abbreviation for Qualified Member of the Engine Department (QMED) In response to comments. 46 CFR 11.520 Replaced qualified member of the engine department with QMED In response to comments. 46 CFR 11.1005 Removed the date In response to comments and date is no longer necessary. 46 CFR 12.02-11(d) Revised to state that ratings endorsements will be issued if the holder or applicant is qualified for the endorsement In response to comments. 46 CFR 12.02-17 Revised section to remove reference to Officer in Charge Marine Inspection. In paragraph (g) revised section for clarity In response to comments and to provide clarity after the revisions. 46 CFR 12.05-3(c) Revised paragraph to remove the date and to provide clarity that the endorsement for Rating Forming Part of a Navigational Watch (RFPNW) will be issued upon meeting the requirements of STCW In response to comments and to provide clarity. 46 CFR 12.05-7 Removed the term Commanding Officer In response to comments and for consistency with changes previously proposed. 46 CFR 12.10-1 Removed the term “United States collector or deputy collector of customs'' and replaced it with the appropriate term with the DHS reorganization In response to comments and updating the regulations with current terminology. 46 CFR 12.10-3 Removed the term Commanding Officer In response to comments and for consistency with changes previously proposed. 46 CFR 12.15-1 Removed the term “United States collector or deputy collector of customs'' and replaced it with the appropriate term with the DHS reorganization In response to comments and updating the regulations with current terminology. 46 CFR 12.15-3(d) Removed the February 1, 2002 date In response to comments and because that date is no longer necessary. 46 CFR 12.15-7(c) Revised the newly inserted word from engineer department to engine department Consistency with existing language and in response to comment. 46 CFR 12.40 Revised subpart for the requirements for non-resident aliens working on large passenger vessels In response to comments and new interim rule. 46 CFR 15.401 Spelled out the first use of TWIC In response to comments. 46 CFR 15.530 Revised subpart for the requirements for non-resident aliens working on large passenger vessels In response to comments and new interim rule. 46 CFR 15.701 Removed the word Customs and replaced it with Customs and Border Protection In response to comments and updating the regulations with current terminology. 46 CFR 15.812(b)(1) Clarified the requirement to state that it is either a first class pilot's license or an MMC with a first class pilot's endorsement In response to comments and for clarification. 46 CFR 15.815 Revised radar endorsement language to make it consistent with language proposed in the NPRM for radar endorsements Consistency with other ongoing rulemaking project that is specifically on that requirement. 46 CFR 15.915 Revised header from “Engineer Licenses” to “Engineer Officer Endorsements” In response to comment and to make consistent with the remainder of the proposed rule. 46 CFR 42.05-70 Renumbered section to 42.05-27 In response to comment and because the definition was out of order. 46 CFR 78.65-1 Revised section to provide the option to post either license or merchant mariner credentials on a vessel In response to comment and to provide for the phase-in period when both documents will be in use. 46 CFR 97.53-1 Revised section to provide the option to post either license or merchant mariner credentials on a vessel In response to comment and to provide for the phase-in period when both documents will be in use. 46 CFR 401.210 Revised references to licensed service and added language to include the MMC requirement In response to comments and to correct oversights not addressed in the SNPRM. 46 CFR 402.220 Revised section to provide for mariners holding either a license or MMC In response to comments and to provide for the phase-in period when both documents will be in use. V. Discussion of Comments and Changes The following comments were submitted to the docket for the MMC SNPRM. All written comments received are available for inspection in the public docket for this rulemaking, where indicated under ADDRESSES . A. Comments Regarding the TWIC Rulemaking We continued to receive comments to the docket regarding the TWIC. This rulemaking is limited to the consolidation of merchant mariner credentials, including the requirement for a TWIC as required by 46 U.S.C. 70105; however, comments regarding the TWIC rulemaking are inappropriate for discussion in this rulemaking. They are not addressed in this FR; they were forwarded to the appropriate office either at the Coast Guard or at TSA for consideration, and included in the discussion of comments in the TWIC final rule, published on January 25, 2007 (72 FR 3492). B. General The Coast Guard received a number of positive comments on the SNPRM. We received one comment commending the Coast Guard on recognizing the need to move forward on concurrent processing of a TWIC and MMC. We received one comment supporting the removal of language in § 12.01-1 that stated that the MMD was owned by the Coast Guard. We received one comment expressing support for the revised requirements in § 15.815(d) and (e) requiring mariners to either carry their radar certificate with them or have a copy on file with their company. We received one comment that specifically stated that all the credentials should be combined as proposed in the SNPRM. We received four comments supporting the issuance of MMCs through the mail. We received one comment applauding the removal of withholding the reason for the denial of a credential. We received numerous comments agreeing with the need for proper identification and credentialing of mariners, in order to ensure safe vessel operation and national security. We received one comment commending the Coast Guard for allowing the mariner to take his/her oath before any person. We received one comment noting that the MMC represents an opportunity to make the mariner credentialing system more transparent, predictable and fair. We received one comment expressing appreciation of the Coast Guard's efforts to protect a mariner's privacy by removing the Social Security number on the form of payment. We received one comment expressing concern that focusing the emphasis of the MMC on competency of the mariner would undermine the principle that the Coast Guard must be vigilant in its issuance of its credentials. We disagree. While TSA is responsible for verifying identity and conducting security vetting for mariners, the Coast Guard will only issue credentials to those individuals who pass the security vetting and the safety and suitability check conducted by the Coast Guard. We will not ignore whether the individual is a security threat, though our focus will be qualifying the mariner to be employed on vessels and ensuring the individual is not a threat to maritime safety. We received one comment noting that the mariner would still be required to carry multiple credentials and documents and thus the synergetic effect of the Coast Guard's proposed consolidation of the mariner's credentials is somewhat diluted. We agree. The Coast Guard recognizes that mariners will still be required to carry more than one credential; however, those issued by the Coast Guard will be reduced from as many as four to one. We received one comment suggesting that this rulemaking should be used to remedy existing deficiencies in the licensing system. We disagree. The purpose of this rulemaking is to streamline the existing merchant mariner credentialing process, to minimize redundant requirements, and simplify the credentialing program. While it is expected that this will remedy some of the existing deficiencies in the merchant mariner credentialing program, it is not the intent of this rulemaking. The Coast Guard has a number of initiatives in progress which are intended to improve the merchant mariner credentialing system, which include reorganization of the NMC and fully developing a quality standard system. We received one comment asking the Coast Guard to address the deletions and additions of definitions, subsections, figures, and tables within the rulemaking. In the NPRM, we provided a table showing where various subsections were moved between the various parts of Title 46 of the CFR (71 FR 29464-81). Additionally, when the definitions were consolidated we had no intention of removing definitions and have reviewed the list to ensure that all of the definitions within the subchapter have been retained, unless otherwise noted in this or previous regulatory documents. Within this preamble, we will discuss any changes from the SNPRM, which would not have been discussed in either the NPRM or the SNPRM. We received one comment requesting that we readdress the comments they made to the NPRM. The Coast Guard has determined that readdressing even some of the comments we received on the NPRM would be redundant, as those comments were already fully addressed in the “Discussion of Comments and Changes” section of the SNPRM (72 FR 3608). As such, we have not readdressed comments received on the NPRM; this discussion will only address those comments received on the SNPRM. We received one comment stating that the creation of an entirely new form of a credential to replace the traditional license would create more problems than it might solve. We disagree. While we recognize that the transition to this new credential will not be without challenges, we believe it will result in a better credential accepted by more mariners than the credentials currently in place. One commenter recommended that the MMC proposal be withdrawn. We do not agree with this comment and are proceeding with this final rule. Without this final rule, mariners would face duplicative appearance requirements when applying for their TWIC and their Coast Guard issued License, MMD, COR, or STCW Endorsement. We received one comment expressing concern with this rulemaking because it comes at an especially active period in maritime regulation and it was recommended that we proceed with caution. We recognize that the Coast Guard is involved in multiple regulatory projects at this time, and that several of them touch upon the same regulatory provisions being amended by this final rule. All persons involved in this project are sensitive to this fact, and have been diligent in ensuring that the same approach and language is used in all projects. As a result of this diligence, recent changes, published in an interim rule for vessel security officer training and certification (May 20, 2008; 73 FR 29060) and in final rules on training and service requirements for merchant marine officers (September 11, 2008; 73 FR 52789) and technical amendments for 46 CFR (September 29, 2008; 73 FR 56505), have been incorporated into this final rule. One commenter expressed concern that the SNPRM implied the MMC is an identity document in addition to being a proficiency document. They felt adding the identity concept to the MMC would introduce confusion and recommended that the TWIC remain the proof of identification. We disagree. There have been numerous comments recommending the MMC be International Labor Organization (ILO) 185 compliant. In order to meet those requests, the Coast Guard must make this credential, in part, an identification credential. Identification will not be the primary function of the MMC, as the TWIC will be used as the primary identification document aboard U.S. vessels and at U.S. facilities. The MMC may be used as an identity document in other places, as it will hold a digital photo of the mariner, which will be taken from the TWIC enrollment application during which time proof of identity is inspected. We received one comment requesting the implementation of this rulemaking be delayed until there have been trials of the information sharing between the Coast Guard and TSA. We agree, in part, with this comment. Before we fully implement this rulemaking we will be testing the transmission of information between the two agencies. If we are able to begin issuance of the MMC before the full implementation of TWIC, we may begin a partial implementation of those portions of the rule that do not require the information sharing. We received one comment stating that the Coast Guard must educate other state and Federal agencies about the status of a merchant mariner credential, and the requirements to achieve them. While not the purpose of this rulemaking, we agree we need to educate other agencies about the MMC. We will use all available channels to inform State and Federal agencies about the new credential. We received one comment stating that the majority of licensed officers favor retaining the license as a separate document and as a certificate of qualifications at the licensed level. We disagree. This statement is not represented by the comments received during this rulemaking. We received one comment stating that the present documentation and licensing regulations should remain intact and should not be changed to a system of endorsements on a newly created MMC. We disagree. Even before the MMC and TWIC rulemakings, the Coast Guard recognized the need to revise the current credentials, to make them less confusing. This need was further reinforced by comments received and responses made to Congress regarding the number of credentials being carried by mariners and the need to reduce that number. We received one comment seeking clarification on a statement within the SNPRM preamble regarding delaying the final rule until “next year” to allow the Coast Guard to accept and apply additional public comments. The intent of the statement within the SNPRM was to state that the Coast Guard was going to seek additional comments in conjunction with the rulemaking process. Because at that time mariners would not have been required to hold a TWIC until September 25, 2008 (see TWIC final rule at 72 FR 3587-88), we recognized that there was ample time to allow for additional comment before needing to finalize this MMC rulemaking project. Providing a second round of comments has helped ensure that in consolidating the existing mariner credentialing regulations, we were not unintentionally changing any qualifications requirements. We received one comment stating that not allowing mariners to serve prior to issuance of their MMC conflicted with the TWIC policy which allowed service for up to 30 days before they actually received their TWIC and that this Coast Guard policy would negate that advantage. We received two comments encouraging the Coast Guard to seek issuance of interim MMCs for mariners serving on passenger vessels that have been issued a TWIC, but are waiting on the processing of the MMC. We received one comment recommending issuance of interim credentials to persons who have had recent prior experience crewing on U.S.-flag vessels, or on other vessels that have evidence, issued by the Federal Maritime Commission, of compliance with sections 44102 and 44103 of Title 46 of the United States Code. In contrast, we received one comment stating that the issuance of interim credentials would be confusing and unnecessary, especially considering that we do not currently have interim credentials and everyone has managed to deal with it by planning ahead. The Coast Guard has decided not to allow merchant mariners to serve prior to the issuance of their MMC. The U.S. Code provides that the Coast Guard may issue credentials to those applicants found qualified as to age, character, habits of life, experience, professional qualifications and physical fitness (46 U.S.C. 7101(c), 7306, and 7313). The law provides that the Coast Guard must ensure a mariner meets the aforementioned criteria before issuing a credential and the possession of such a credential is required to serve in a position on any vessel that requires a credential. We received one comment that suggested the replacement of the phrase “* * * a properly endorsed license * * *” with “* * * an appropriately endorsed license * * *” in 33 CFR 164.13(b) and (c). We concur with the suggestion and have made this change. We received one comment seeking clarification regarding the listing of the Young Men's Christian Association (YMCA) but not the Young Women's Christian Association (YWCA) in 46 CFR 10.219(h)(2)(ii) and whether the failure to include that organization was intentional, and if so for further rationale for not including the organization. The YWCA was intentionally excluded from the current published list in the regulations. The list has been in place and unchanged since the establishment of fee regulations in 1993, and it is not our intention with this rulemaking to add or remove organizations from the existing list. An organization seeking to be added to the list may follow the procedure, unchanged by this rulemaking, laid out in paragraph (h)(2)(i). We received one comment recommending that 46 CFR 11.502(b) be revised to reflect three propulsion modes: motor, steam, and gas turbine. We agree, in part. There are three propulsion modes that should be included in the regulations; however, this change is being considered in a separate, larger Coast Guard rulemaking, titled “Implementation of the 1995 Amendments to the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978” (RIN: 1625-AA16). We received one comment that recommended 46 CFR 11.1105 be the same as § 11.1005: “To serve on a non-Ro-Ro passenger ship a person endorsed as master, mate, chief mate, engineer, or chief engineer shall meet the appropriate requirements of the International Convention on the Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, as amended (STCW) Regulation V/3 and of section A-V/E of the STCW Code.” We disagree. It is not the purpose of this rule to revise the substantive qualifications requirements or even just the text of the requirements; this rule serves to reorganize the various parts, consolidate the various mariner credentials, and eliminate redundant appearance requirements in light of the new TWIC requirement. As noted in an earlier response, the Coast Guard has a number of ongoing regulatory projects that, if completed, would change portions of 46 CFR chapter I, subchapter B. Once these projects are completed, we will examine whether a complete revision of the regulations in subchapter B is warranted. The change suggested by the commenter could be incorporated into such a revision. We received one comment recommending a revision to § 12.15-7(c) changing the phrase “engineer department” to “engine department”. We agree with this suggestion and have made this change. We received one comment noting that we did not correct the heading for § 15.915. That omission was an oversight on the part of the Coast Guard; we have corrected that heading in this final rule to “Engineer Officer Endorsements”. One comment recommended §§ 78.65-1, 97.53-1, and 131.955 state that the page of the credential should show the information for officer credentials and include the license for the 5 year implementation period. We agree, and have amended the sections to read “All officers on a vessel must have their license or officer endorsements conspicuously displayed”. We received one comment recommending that § 401.210(a)(1) be revised to allow for the transition period when mariners will still hold licenses. We agree; this entire paragraph has been revised in this final rule, in order to allow the Coast Guard to start issuing MMCs even before mariners are required to obtain TWICs. These changes mean that, until April 15, 2009, mariners applying for their MMC will need to appear at an REC in person to provide proof of identity, citizenship, and their fingerprints. After April 15, 2009, the Coast Guard will be able to obtain that information from the record TSA created when the mariner enrolled for his/her TWIC and will not have to appear at an REC. We received one comment recommending that § 402.220(a)(1), (a)(2), & (a)(3) should state license and MMC endorsement. We agree that these terms would provide clarity, and have made the suggested changes. We received one comment recommending that we model the mariner licensing system after the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) processes, based upon the Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) license for the FAA coupled with type-rating for a specific aircraft. We disagree. While this would ensure that each mariner is qualified for each specific vessel upon which he or she serves, it would make the regulations much more difficult and confusing. Additionally, vessels are not as uniform as aircraft in their design and operation, thus using the FAA model would not be appropriate. One commenter suggested that STCW endorsements should be issued when a person meets STCW requirements for their position instead of in response to a request to go on an international voyage. We concur; however, we do not issue STCW endorsements unless requested by mariner. Thus, when the STCW endorsement is issued relies upon when the mariner makes his/her request. We received one recommendation that the CFRs should be drafted to provide a list of requirements as has been done in some of the license checklists. We disagree. While this idea appears on the surface to be a good solution, it would actually result in more difficulties over time. Checklists exist as aids that provide guidance on these regulations and are available for review at: http://www.uscg.mil/stcw/index.htm . Including such checklists in the regulations would mean they could only be revised through a regulatory change, requiring notice and comment under the Administrative Procedure Act. By providing the checklists as aids to understanding the regulations, we are able to quickly update and clarify them as requirements are revised or confusion is discovered. We received one comment noting that the safekeeping of the MMC would be easier if it were a passport-sized document. We agree and have started the process of transitioning to this style of document. C. Appeals We received one comment seeking clarification to the revised language in § 12.03-1(c)(2). We have removed specific references to the Commanding Officer of the National Maritime Center throughout this rulemaking. In our view, this will have no effect on the processes currently in place. Coast Guard policy requires that Commanding Officers sign official correspondence or delegate it, as appropriate, within their command. We do not envision course application appeals being delegated below the Commanding Officer, except in his or her absence to an Acting Commanding Officer. D. Application Process We received one comment recommending the Coast Guard implement a Web-based application system and two comments recommending the Coast Guard allow electronic submission of applications. We agree. As resources are available, the Coast Guard intends to develop systems through which a mariner may apply for an MMC using various Web-based applications. We received one comment recommending that §§ 10.223(c)(2) and 10.227(d)(2) read “* * * have a valid TWIC or show proof of applying for a TWIC * * *”. We disagree. Mariners will not meet the TWIC requirement unless they actually hold the TWIC; completing the application process is not enough. Mariners need to plan to enroll with enough time to ensure their TWIC is available and able to be picked up prior to April 15, 2009 (the compliance date for the TWIC requirement for mariners). Therefore, this section only applies to those individuals who would already hold a valid TWIC and MMC. We received one comment recommending the removal of the requirement of proof that a TWIC be obtained or applied for (within the past 30 days) in order to receive an original MMC from § 10.225(b)(2). We agree that it would not be necessary to provide the 30-day limitation on the TWIC application for an original merchant mariner credential, and have made the suggested change. One commenter expressed concern that the coordination of regulatory roles and administrative functions between two agencies within the same Department did not lead to development of one application and enrollment process, vetting of criminal or other records for safety, suitability, and terrorist security risks, determination of qualifications and issuance of a single combined Merchant Mariner Document (MMD)/TWIC. We disagree. When the Coast Guard and TSA first began collaborating to issue regulations on TWIC, the issue of whether all credentials could be combined into a single MMC/TWIC was thoroughly explored. Unfortunately, this is not an option at this time. As the use of biometric and smart card technology becomes more wide-spread, this decision may be able to be revisited. However, at this time, it is simply not possible to combine the two credentials onto one card. We have, through this final rule, streamlined the application process for the MMC, to avoid duplicative appearance requirements and security vetting. We received one comment recommending § 10.225(b)(5) be removed, since an applicant for an original MMC would not hold any of these credentials—cancelled or uncancelled. We agree, and have made the suggested change. We received one comment requesting that all mariners seeking renewals of towing vessel credentials be required to complete practical towing demonstrations, as well as for those mariners whose most recent credential has been suspended or revoked as stated in § 10.235(f). We disagree. The towing vessel credential requirements were developed through a separate rulemaking, during which this requirement was presented to the public and they were provided an opportunity to comment on the requirement. To add this requirement to all other mariners would require notice and comment that is currently outside the scope of this rulemaking. We received one comment recommending that § 10.237(a) clearly state that the written statement detailing the reason(s) for denial be provided to the applicant. We agree. It is the intention of this rulemaking to clarify the MMC process and we will make the suggested change to provide additional clarity. We received one comment questioning why we retained the Officer in Charge of Marine Inspection (OCMI) authority to make decisions about service and exam requirements in § 11.201. This provision was retained because it provides the local Coast Guard official most familiar with the local area the ability to revise the requirements based upon that local knowledge. We received one comment requesting that we reconsider allowing an expired passport as evidence of citizenship verification. After reconsideration, we have decided to accept an expired passport, especially considering that the individual will undergo a thorough vetting for immigration status by the TSA during the security threat assessment, and a second vetting by the Coast Guard for suitability and safety qualifications. We received one comment recommending the establishment of a process to identify delayed applications and require supervisory review, as well as a process to recoup lost salary. We agree, in part. We have established a process within the quality standard system that will identify delayed applications and bring them to the attention of the leadership of the NMC. At present, there is no intention to develop a process to provide lost salary to applicants of a MMC. E. Background Checks We received one comment recommending the Coast Guard discontinue its duplicative background checks or the requirement to hold the TWIC, because it is unreasonable for both agencies to simultaneously examine a mariner's criminal background. We received three comments recommending that the TWIC and MMC data be incorporated into a single card. We received one comment recommending that the MMD be retained in its present role and format, but with additional functionality that would allow it to serve, at the unlicensed level, as both a transportation security card and a certificate of qualifications. We disagree. It is necessary for both the Coast Guard and TSA to review the criminal background, since both agencies are examining different issues to determine whether an individual should hold the credential issued by that agency. Also, it is not within the purview of the Coast Guard to change the requirement to hold the TWIC because that requirement is found in 46 U.S.C. 70105. The information in the applications for the MMD and TWIC are different with respect to the different focus of the two credentials. Additionally, to only make the MMD consistent for unlicensed personnel would create disconnect between the ratings and officers as well as those mariners serving on inland routes not required to have an MMD. This proposed scheme would create as many credentials as the current system, and frustrate the project's original purpose to consolidate credentials. However, this final rule does eliminate duplicative processes and requirements, such as the personal appearance and security background examinations requirements. We received four comments recommending the Coast Guard limit criminal conviction disclosure to those not previously disclosed on an application for a Coast Guard credential. Similarly, we received one comment recommending that § 10.211 be revised to request full disclosure of criminal history only on the applicant's original application. We agree and have made the suggested changes in this final rule. We received one comment recommending that the self-disclosure of criminal history be eliminated from the application entirely. We disagree. There should be some requirement for self-disclosure; however, we have agreed that the disclosure should only cover the period since the last application or any item not previously disclosed to the Coast Guard. This is a benefit for the mariner and provides the opportunity for supplemental information not otherwise available in the public record to be submitted to the Coast Guard for consideration during the evaluation period. We received two comments stating that an unlimited review is counter to the Congressional intent regarding the National Driver Register (NDR). We agree, and the statutory three year limit (found in 49 U.S.C. 30305) on such a review has been incorporated into this final rule (see § 10.213). This does not, however, limit the Coast Guard's ability to continue an unlimited review if the information obtained from the NDR is about a revocation or suspension still in effect on the date of the request. F. Coast Guard Authority We received two comments questioning whether the MMC with an officer endorsement will have the same significance as a license and whether the Coast Guard has authority to change the format of the license. As noted in the SNPRM, the authority to revise the license is well within the broad authority provided to the Coast Guard under 46 U.S.C. Part E. Thus, the MMC with an officer endorsement will carry the same weight as a license. G. Citizenship We received one comment requesting clarification on § 10.231(d)(2) regarding the specific mention of naturalized citizens. This language was brought from the existing language in 46 CFR 10.207; it has not changed and carries the same meaning as it did prior to being moved by this final rule. H. Consistency We received one comment strongly recommending that the wording referencing mariner credential authority in parts covered by this regulation be changed by replacing the words “not more than” with the words “less than”. This change was being sought to make the revisions more consistent with the provisions within STCW, as well as U.S. inspections language. While we do not necessarily agree or disagree with the suggestion, this final rule is not the appropriate place to contemplate this change. The primary focus of this rulemaking is the development of a consolidated credential and a reorganization of subchapter B. This recommendation, however, is being contemplated for incorporation in a separate rulemaking, titled “Implementation of the 1995 Amendments to the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978.” We received one comment recommending the rules be consistent in the use of the term QMED for “Qualified Member of the Engine Department.” We agree. It is appropriate to establish an abbreviation in the text that can then be used in subsequent sections of the rules. We have revised § 11.518 to provide the abbreviation, and then used the term “QMED” for the remainder of that subpart. We received one comment questioning the retention of the term Commanding Officer, National Maritime Center in §§ 12.05-7(b) and 12.10-3(a). We have removed the term commanding officer from those sections. We received two comments asking why the language referring to the United States collector or deputy collector of customs was left in the regulations in §§ 12.10-1 and 15.701(c), even though we removed the language referring to the shipping commissioner. We removed the reference to the shipping commissioner because it was a function the Coast Guard previously performed, but no longer performs. The term United States Collector of Customs now falls under the responsibility of the Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) Port Director, and this change has been incorporated in this final rule. We received one comment noting that we left out the shipping commissioner language in § 12.15-1. We have made this correction in this final rule. We received one comment questioning why there was a difference in language between §§ 13.407 and 13.507, when it did not appear that there should be a difference in the language. We agree with this comment, and have revised § 13.507 accordingly in this final rule. We received one comment seeking clarification on § 401.210(a)(6), which allows a Great Lakes Pilot to have either an MMD or a TWIC. This option was left in place because this final rule will go into effect before all mariners are required to hold a TWIC, therefore there will be a period where individuals might hold an MMD without a TWIC. We have revised the language to ensure that, on April 15, 2009, (the date when all mariners must hold a TWIC) only a TWIC will be acceptable. I. Continuity Documents We received one comment asking us to leave the decision whether to retain a continuity license and TWIC, or document of continuity without TWIC, to the license holder. As an agency, we have decided not to continue to issue continuity licenses, but rather only documents of continuity. Should a mariner choose to obtain a TWIC, but seek to obtain an MMC for continuity purposes only, they will still receive a document of continuity. This decision is based on a desire to consolidate as many of our pre-existing credentials into the fewest number of mariner credentials as possible. J. Definitions We received two comments stating that the definition for “day” should not have been revised regarding 100-ton vessels and the service for Mobile Offshore Drilling Units (MODU) needed to be removed from the definition. We disagree. The definition of “day” for vessels of 100 Gross Register Tons (GRT) or less was not significantly revised—we opted to use the more generic reference of Coast Guard rather than Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection. The definition of “day” for MODUs was already included in that definition in the pre-existing 46 CFR 10.103 under “service as.” We are including it in this definition in order to consolidate all definitions for “day” in one location. We received two comments recommending that the definition for “safe and suitable person” should refer to 46 CFR 10.211. While we do not believe it is necessary to make the connection between the definition and 46 CFR 10.211, we made the change to assist the mariner. We received one comment stating the definition for “senior company official” needs clarification. This definition is consistent with the existing definition currently found in 46 CFR 10.103, therefore no change has been made. We received one comment stating the Coast Guard should fully analyze the change of the application of the definition of “operate, operating or operation” to the entire Subchapter B. We disagree. The definition is restricted to the manning requirements, and therefore analyzing its application throughout the entire subchapter would not be appropriate. We received one comment recommending that a section be inserted at 46 CFR 12.01-6 to direct the reader to the definitions found in 46 CFR 10.107. We disagree. This final rule is a consolidation of the pre-existing regulations, and as part of that consolidation, all definitions are found in the beginning of the subchapter. We believe that mariners and others who use these regulations will quickly adjust to looking in one spot (46 CFR 10.107) for definitions that apply throughout the subchapter. We received one comment that stated that the definition for “credential” was out of order. We agree and have renumbered it at 46 CFR 42.05-27. We received a comment stating that the definition for “merchant mariner credential” needs to be added to 46 CFR Parts 70, 91, 114, 125, 160, 169, 175, 188, and 199. We disagree. The minimal addition of the phrase “merchant mariner credential” to those parts does not necessitate the addition of that definition. We note that those parts previously referenced either an MMD or a license (or both), with neither of those terms defined in those parts, without confusion. We received one comment recommending the definition for “conviction” not refer to decisions made by a foreign country's court of record. We disagree. This definition is consistent with the existing definition for “conviction.” This rulemaking is about the MMC, not changing the qualifications for licensing, and it is therefore beyond the scope of this rulemaking to address the meaning of the term “conviction. We received one recommendation that the definition for “regional examination center” should be revised to incorporate upcoming changes to the National Maritime Center and Regional Examination Center system. While we agree that the change is necessary, it is beyond the scope of this rulemaking as the change needs to be made in more places in the CFR than just those being amended by this final rule. Some of these changes were recently made as part of a series of technical amendments to Title 46 of the CFR. 73 FR 56505. K. Fees We received one comment stating that while the MMC rule might reduce cost to the mariners, the entire TWIC/MMC rulemaking increases costs to the mariners. While we recognize that the new TWIC requirement carries a new fee, the regulatory analysis for that project considered that new fee as a part of its cost and benefit analysis, thus it is inappropriate for that cost to be counted again in this final rule. The regulatory analysis for this rulemaking only considers the costs and benefits associated with the changes made by this final rule. L. Format We received one comment asking that the Coast Guard make a certificate suitable-for-framing with the officer information printed upon it, in addition to the final MMC. We disagree. While this was also the recommendation from Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee (MERPAC), the Coast Guard has decided not to produce such a document at this time since this rulemaking's purpose is to consolidate credentials. We received one comment stating that MERPAC has gone on record opposing the MMC. We disagree. We have reviewed the recommendations from MERPAC, and have found no facts which would support this statement. We received one comment recommending the use of the term “license endorsement” rather than “officer endorsement”. We disagree. “License” merely signifies permission granted from a government. In our view, “officer” is more the appropriate term as it signifies an individual who is in a position of authority. We received one comment recommending a new certificate of qualification be developed for ratings, and that the Coast Guard continue to issue two separate credentials. We disagree. We are seeking to develop a consolidated credential where an individual could have all of their qualifications in a single location. We received four comments recommending the MMC be designed to meet the requirements of ILO 185. We agree. This was one of the items taken into account during the style selection process, as well as one of the reasons we could not combine the MMC with the TWIC. While the initial MMCs may not be ILO 185 compliant, as it will take some time to ensure the new credential meets all of the requirements, the Coast Guard is working diligently to bring the MMC into full ILO 185 compliance. We received one comment recommending the expiration dates of the MMC and TWIC be aligned. We disagree. This is not necessary and in some cases may not be in the best interests of those impacted by the regulations. We considered the costs associated with both documents, and believe that it may be economically advantageous to some mariners if the MMC and TWIC expiration dates do not align. However, those mariners wishing to bring these expiration dates into alignment may do so under this final rule. M. Large Passenger Vessels We received one comment stating that the Coast Guard needed to incorporate the Large Passenger Vessel Crew Requirements (RIN: 1625-AB16) that were published in the Interim Rule on April 24, 2007 (72 FR 20278). We received one comment recommending that 46 CFR 10.211(a)(2) be amended to include new subsection (d) for aliens in the steward's department on large passenger vessels. We received one comment recommending that we incorporate the MMC language in 46 CFR Parts 12 and 15 relating to large passenger vessel crew requirements. We agree with these suggestions and have incorporated the changes made by the interim rule into this final rule. N. License Creep We received four comments requesting the effective date of a mariner's renewed credential be the same as the expiration date (i.e. delayed issue of the credential). We agree, in part. While the Coast Guard agrees with this comment, we are awaiting authority from Congress to make such a change. Currently, Congress requires that the Coast Guard issue credentials for five years. In order to take action on this comment, the Coast Guard requires statutory authority to issue a credential that is valid for a period beyond 5 years. We received one comment stating that this rule does nothing to reduce license creep. It is our hope that the streamlining features established by this rule will reduce license creep; additionally, the Coast Guard is moving forward with the reorganizations of the National Maritime Center and the Regional Examination Centers, both of which are more focused on improvement of processes. O. Medical We received one comment recommending that we require general medical exams for all mariners, including entry-level mariners. We disagree. We do not have authority to require such exams. We received two comments recommending Column 5 of table 46 CFR 10.215 be revised to read, “may be required to demonstrate physical ability”. We agree with the intent of this suggestion. However, we have opted to remove the “x” from the box and add, in its place, the appropriate paragraph which provides the specific requirement and applicability of the demonstration of physical ability. This should eliminate some confusion over who must “demonstrate physical ability”. We received one comment recommending revision to 46 CFR 10.215(c) to allow medical examiners to perform the audiometer/speech discrimination tests. We agree and have made the suggested change. Medical examiners who are qualified to conduct the necessary hearing tests will be authorized to perform them. We received one comment requesting an evaluation of 46 CFR 10.215(e) with regard to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and to either revise the paragraph or state that the ADA does not apply. The commenter seems to be concerned that medical examiners will require the demonstration of physical ability in more places than necessary to avoid potential lawsuits. While we agree that this requirement is only mandatory for those mariners who are not undergoing a medical examination or those whom the medical examiner believes are physically unable to perform the duties of a merchant mariner, we do not believe it is appropriate to add the suggested language into the regulations. We received one comment stating that the demonstration of physical ability: (1) Fails to provide sufficient information to ensure consistent test results, (2) will result in increased cost per examination, and (3) will increase the time needed to obtain medical results. We disagree. The regulations provide general statements of what is required of the mariner, and additional information is available in Navigation and Inspection Circular (NVIC) 04-08, which was issued by the Coast Guard on September 18, 2008. (NVIC 04-08 replaced NVIC 02-98, incorporating developments and advancements in modern medical practices as well as improvements in the medical evaluation process.) We encourage the public to review the discussions of physical ability, examiner alternatives and current industry practice in the September 29, 2008 notice of availability for the NVIC. 73 FR 56600. Additionally, this requirement is not going to apply to all mariners. It will only apply to those mariners whose physical ability might negatively impact maritime safety, as determined by their medical examiner during the course of normal physical examination. This demonstration will save the applicant an investment of time and money when an unknown medical or physical condition may prevent the issuance of the credential sought based on ability. It will also assist the Coast Guard in issuing a credential with certain limitations instead of denying the credential altogether or requiring additional tests. Both medical exams and demonstrations of physical ability are currently practiced and required under STCW Code. This rule clarifies the STCW requirement for physical ability; it does not alter it in any way. Based on consultation with medical practitioners, the National Maritime Center, and the Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee (MERPAC), the determination of need for and demonstration of physical ability is part of common medical practice and will not result in a net change in baseline examination time and costs to industry. We received one comment stating that the medical examiner is not the appropriate person to attest the mariner's ability to meet the demonstration of physical ability, since it is not a medical exam but a physical agility test. We disagree. However, we note that it is not necessary for the actual medical examiner to conduct the demonstration of physical ability, only that he or she signs for (“attest to”) evaluations conducted by those within their medical practice. We received one comment stating that the medical examiner should not be required to attest in writing to the applicant's ability to perform non-medical tasks, rather it should be provided by the actual person performing the evaluation. We disagree. Medical examiners routinely sign-off for the tests/exams performed by persons within their practice. This evaluation should not be different. We received one comment requesting that language be added requiring mariners to report changes in their medical condition. The Coast Guard does not believe it is appropriate to add that requirement in this rule, as it was not contemplated or proposed in the SNPRM. In the future, the Coast Guard intends to develop regulations specifically on the medical requirements for merchant mariners. This ensures that an adequate review of the requirements can be made by those impacted by the regulations. We received two comments recommending 46 CFR 10.215 (b) be revised to require the color vision test for original issue only. The Coast Guard does not believe it is appropriate to make this revision in this final rule. We are limiting the changes made by this final rule to those medical issues that were proposed in the SNPRM, to consolidate the various credentials issued by the Coast Guard to mariners, and to reorganize the regulations governing the applications for, issuance of, and qualifications for those credentials. As previously mentioned, the Coast Guard intends to develop regulations specifically addressing medical requirements for mariners. We will keep this comment in mind for future reference, as we develop regulations specifically on the medical requirements for merchant mariners. We received two comments recommending table 10.215(a) be clarified so that hearing, vision, and physical demonstration only be required if the medical practitioner has concerns. We agree, in part. The requirements regarding vision will be checked at each examination, which is a requirement consistent with the other modes of transportation. The hearing and demonstration of physical ability will only be required if the medical examiner has concerns regarding the applicant's medical condition as it relates to a possible negative impact on maritime safety. We received two comments recommending that 46 CFR 10.227 be revised to allow proof of physical proficiency to be submitted on an alternative to the 719K. We disagree. At this time, we do not have an alternative form approved for such use. Those revisions will have to be completed in a rulemaking process which provides the public with adequate opportunity to comment. We received one comment recommending 46 CFR 10.215 be revised to ensure that the vision and hearing requirements match those on any proposed medical NVIC. We agree. Any NVIC must be based upon the regulations which they clarify, and therefore cannot include reference to requirements outside of those found in the regulations. We received one comment recommending 46 CFR 12.05-5 provide a reference to 46 CFR 10.215. We agree that such a reference would be appropriate and have made the suggested change. P. National Maritime Center We received one comment recommending 46 CFR 10.217 be revised to provide the address to the new medical branch of the NMC. We disagree. Merchant mariner applications will continue to be submitted to the servicing Regional Examination Centers listed in the regulations until such time as those requirements are revised through appropriate notice and comment. We received one comment stating that 46 CFR 10.217 seems to contradict the new reorganization of the Mariner Licensing and Documentation (MLD) Program. We recognize the inconsistency. The Coast Guard is still in the process of reorganizing the MLD program. Some of these changes were recently made in a series of technical amendments to Title 46 of the CFR. 73 FR 56505. We received one comment stating that 46 CFR 10.02-17(f) and (g) appear to give the Officer in Charge of Marine Inspection (OCMI) the authority to refuse an examination. This is true. Until the reorganization of the MLD program is complete, the OCMI will still retain that authority. However, in an effort to reduce confusion, and in preparation of the reorganization, we have revised “OCMI” to “Coast Guard”. Q. Oaths We received one comment requesting that the oath not be required. At this time, the Coast Guard is not able to remove the oath requirement from the regulations, as it is also a statutory requirement (46 U.S.C. 7105). R. Pilots We received one comment stating that the MMC would result in lowering the standards for pilots. We disagree. This final rule does not substantially change the requirements for pilots. The only changes made were based upon changes in terminology. We received one comment stating that first class pilot endorsements were absent from the list of endorsements in 46 CFR 10.109. We agree and have made the suggested change. We received three comments stating that 46 CFR 15.812 is confusing, and possibly implies any officer can fulfill the requirements of a first class pilot. We agree that portions of this section are confusing, and have revised it to ensure the language is consistent with the existing requirements and comprehensible. S. Posting of Credential We received one comment stating that 46 CFR 10.203(c) and (d) confuses the issue regarding the posting of the document. We disagree. The posting of the credential is not inconsistent with this requirement, since the mariner is normally on the vessel with his or her credential. However, in order to clarify this, we have added a reference to the posting requirement in 10.203(c). T. Social Security Numbers We received one comment requesting that the Social Security Number (SSN) not be used for recordkeeping purposes as proposed in 46 CFR 10.207. While we recognize the need to protect the SSN, it still remains the best method of correlating records on an individual. We will retain the SSN for internal recordkeeping purposes only. U. International Convention on the Standards on Training, Certification, and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, as Amended (STCW) We received one comment recommending 46 CFR 10.205(f) be deleted because it is unnecessarily confusing. We disagree. This language is consistent with our existing requirements; changing it is outside the scope of this project. This change will be considered, in a separate rulemaking titled “Implementation of the 1995 Amendments to the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978.” We received one comment recommending that the date, January 31, 1997, referenced in 46 CFR 11.1005 be removed. We agree with this comment and have made the suggested change. We received one comment expressing concern that 46 CFR 12.02-7 may be in error and that there may be additional vessels greater than 200 GRT/1000 Hp to which STCW applies. We disagree. This language was carried over exactly from the existing requirements located at 46 CFR 12.02-7. We received two comments seeking clarification for why the dates were left in 12.05-3(b) and 12.15-3, and not in 12.05-3(c) and 12.15-3(e). These dates were retained because removing them would have amounted to a substantive change to the regulations, which is outside the scope of this rulemaking. This revision will be considered, in a separate rulemaking titled “Implementation of the 1995 Amendments to the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978.” V. Training We received one comment stating there is an inconsistency in 46 CFR 11.304 between the requirements for Officer in Charge of Navigational Watch (OICNW) and Officer in Charge of Engineering Watch (OICEW) regarding onboard training. While we agree there is an inconsistency, it is not accidental. These requirements are inconsistent because the requirements for OICNW and OICEW within the STCW are different. W. Integration With TWIC We received one comment asking why a TWIC was required in both 11.304(g) and (h). While drafting the SNPRM, the TWIC requirement was added because it was thought that an identity document would be necessary to determine the identity of each individual involved in the training process. However, upon reflection, there is no need to require the number of the TWIC be included for the identity of the individual, especially since not everyone involved in the training will hold a TWIC. We have, therefore, removed it from this final rule. We received four comments expressing concern that the delay in the issuance of the TWIC could and should delay the issuance of the MMC. We disagree. While there may be a delay in fully implementing all of the provisions within the MMC rule, such as the sharing of information between TSA and Coast Guard, once the credential is ready to be issued by the Coast Guard, it would be appropriate to move forward with the rule. As such, we have included language in this final rule that was not included in the SNPRM, that will allow the Coast Guard to issue MMCs, continue performing full background checks (for both safety and security), and require the appearance of the mariner in person for application of new and renewal MMCs, even before the regulatory requirement for mariners to obtain a TWIC is passed. We received one comment stating that an automatic revocation of the MMC is inappropriate when the TWIC is invalidated and proposed a temporary suspension. We agree. There will not be an automatic revocation of an MMC when the TWIC is denied or has been revoked. Any action against the MMC will be taken through the existing Suspensions and Revocations (S&R) procedure. However, because a mariner who lacks a valid TWIC will not be permitted unescorted access to secure areas, this will likely preclude performance of normal job functions on a vessel regulated by 33 CFR part 104. We received one comment stating that the TWIC should not be a requirement for the issue or reissue of an MMC. We disagree. Statute requires all mariners who are credentialed by the Coast Guard to hold a transportation security card (46 U.S.C. 70105). Further, the statute specifically includes all mariners engaged on towing vessels, which would include the unlicensed deckhands on inland towing vessels. We received one comment requesting that we wait a full 5 years before suspending or revoking a mariner's credential for failing to hold a TWIC. We disagree. The TWIC final rule requires a mariner holding a credential issued by the Coast Guard to apply for and activate a TWIC prior to April 15, 2009. After this date, a mariner failing to hold a TWIC would be in violation of this requirement, and the Coast Guard may begin suspension and revocation (S&R) proceedings. We received one comment asking us to ensure that S&R proceedings against an MMC would not begin until the appeals regarding the TWIC have been exhausted. We disagree. Under normal circumstances, S&R proceedings will not begin until all appeals regarding the TWIC have been completed. However, if the Coast Guard is provided with information considered sufficient to justify a temporary suspension of the MMC, then that action will be started immediately. We received one comment asking if mariners will be able to serve during times of national need without a TWIC. At this time, 46 U.S.C. 70105 does not provide flexibility to allow a mariner to serve without a TWIC. We received one comment stating that 10.235(h) contradicted the preamble language for appeals. While we note that the language in the rule is not the same as the language in the preamble, the preamble also states that, if the situation warrants, we would pursue temporary suspension under 46 U.S.C. 7702, which also is not specifically detailed in the regulations. See discussion under “4. Appeals” at 72 FR 3609. We received one comment recommending that § 15.401 be amended to include the abbreviation for TWIC following the phrase. We have made the suggested edit. We received one comment recommending that language be added to § 15.720(a) clearly stating that foreign persons would be subject to the escorting requirements in the TWIC regulations. While we agree that these foreign individuals are only allowed to be used in foreign waters when U.S. citizens are unavailable to fill those positions, we have not made the suggested change. The appropriate revision would be to add a requirement that the crew be replaced with U.S. citizens with the appropriate credentials before returning to a United States port. Such a change, however, would go beyond what was included in either the NPRM or the SNPRM. We will keep this suggestion in mind for future rulemaking projects in this area. We received one comment stating opposition to TSA being involved in the credentialing of mariners; this opposition included their involvement in the background checks. This comment is beyond the scope of this rulemaking, as the function to administer 46 U.S.C. 70105 (the TWIC requirement) was delegated to TSA, not the Coast Guard. We received one comment expressing opposition to the Coast Guard in not reviewing TSA's decisions regarding the TWIC. We disagree. It is not appropriate for the Coast Guard to review or duplicate TSA's performance in conducting the security vetting, as well as the possible appeals associated with any TWIC denial. TSA has provided opportunity in its regulations for independent review, by an Administrative Law Judge, of any adverse decisions in regard to the TWIC. X. Questions Outside the Scope of This Rulemaking We received a number of comments that the Coast Guard determined to be outside the scope of this rulemaking. These comments were forwarded to the appropriate organizations for consideration in future regulatory actions. VI. Regulatory Evaluation We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analysis based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders. A. Executive Order 12866 This rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. A final Regulatory Evaluation follows: This rule makes substantive changes to the requirements in 46 CFR parts 10, 12, 13, 14, and 15 for the form on which the mariner's qualifications appear and the credential that will serve as the mariner's primary identification credential, and makes many non-substantive nomenclature changes throughout Titles 33 and 46 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Title 46 lays out the standards for merchant mariners, including eligibility and training requirements to obtain credentials needed to serve in one of the many roles in the merchant marine; wherever possible, this rulemaking will not change these qualification requirements. This rulemaking will combine the elements of the Merchant Mariner's License, Merchant Mariner's Document (MMD), Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping (STCW) Endorsement, and Certificate of Registry (COR) into one document, called the Merchant Mariner Credential (MMC). Although it technically serves as a certificate of identification, practically, the MMC would serve as the mariner's qualification document. This rulemaking project was developed in conjunction with a joint rulemaking project, published by the Coast Guard and the Transportation Security Administration, titled “Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) Implementation in the Maritime Sector; Hazardous Materials Endorsement for a Commercial Driver's License” (the “TWIC rule”; RIN: 1652-AA41). The final rule for that joint project was published on January 25, 2007, in the same issue of the Federal Register as the SNPRM for this project. The TWIC rule implemented the requirements of 46 U.S.C. 70105 and requires all merchant mariners holding an active License, MMD, COR, or STCW Endorsement to hold a TWIC. The TWIC is a biometric identification card, and will serve as the mariner's primary identity document while in U.S. waters. With this final rule, the MMD, License, COR, and STCW Endorsement will be consolidated into the MMC, which will serve as the mariner's qualification document, as well as an identity document (though the latter primarily when the mariner is serving outside of U.S. waters). All current qualification and suitability requirements associated with Licenses, MMDs, STCW Endorsements, and CORs remain the same, with only minor exceptions. Prior to the effective date of this final rule, all four credentials (MMD, License, COR, and STCW Endorsement) were issued at one of 17 Coast Guard Regional Examination Centers (RECs). For first time applicants, the process of obtaining an MMD, License, COR, or STCW Endorsement required at least two visits to an REC. During the first visit, an applicant had to be fingerprinted by, and establish his or her identity and legal presence in the U.S. to, an REC employee. After the successful completion of a safety and security review, verification of an applicant's identity, and verification that the applicant had satisfied all other requirements for the particular credential sought, an REC issued the credential to the applicant. For first time applicants, this required a return trip to the REC to retrieve their credential and take an oath to faithfully perform all duties required of them by law. Individuals renewing credentials did not need to restate the oath and could receive their renewed credentials by mail. However, all applicants, those seeking new credentials as well as those seeking to renew their credentials, had to travel to an REC once in the application process to be fingerprinted by, and show proof of identification to, an REC employee. The requirements to receive a TWIC are similar to the requirements to receive an MMD, License, COR, or STCW Endorsement. In order for an applicant to receive a TWIC, the applicant is required to travel to a designated TWIC enrollment center to submit fingerprints, proof of identity, and legal presence in the U.S. A background check is conducted to determine that the applicant is not a security risk. Once an applicant has been approved, the applicant must return to the TWIC enrollment center to pick up the TWIC and prove their identity by a one-to-one match of the applicant's fingerprint against the electronic fingerprint template stored on the card. Soon, TSA will submit to the Coast Guard the applicant's fingerprints, photograph, proof of citizenship, proof of legal presence in the U.S., and FBI number and any criminal record (if applicable) provided with the individual's TWIC application. Since the applicant's fingerprints, photograph and proof of citizenship, and identity will have been verified by TSA and submitted to the Coast Guard, this final rule removes the requirement for a merchant mariner to travel to an REC to submit this information to an REC employee. In addition to allowing the merchant mariner to mail in their application, this rule will also allow new applicants to mail in their notarized oath, which would be a nominal cost to the applicant. This will remove the requirement for a second trip to the REC to pick up their card and take the oath. This rulemaking creates the possibility for a mariner to receive his or her MMC entirely through the mail. Written examinations will still occur at RECs, and the RECs will remain accessible to mariners should they choose to seek their services in person. This rulemaking will also remove the $45 issuance fee for continuity licenses and MMDs. These documents are issued to applicants for renewal of licenses and MMDs that are endorsed with qualified ratings who are unwilling or otherwise unable to meet all the requirements to serve and allows the mariner to renew the license or MMD with the following restrictive endorsement placed on the license: “License renewed for continuity purposes only; service under the authority of this license is prohibited.” Merchant mariner's documents are issued with the following restrictive endorsement: “Continuity only; service under document prohibited.” The following sections discuss the baseline population of applicants that will be affected by this rulemaking and provides an assessment of the impacts to merchant mariners by this rulemaking. Baseline Population The Coast Guard data for the number of affected merchant mariners came from the NMC, which provides credentialing, training, and certification services to all merchant mariners. There are approximately 205,000 credentialed merchant mariners. The NMC also estimates that the current population of mariners with a continuity document is approximately 4,500. In addition to the current population of merchant mariners, there are a number of new applicants every year. Assessment Under the current rule, applicants pay a $45 issuance fee for each credential that they apply for. Under this rulemaking the applicants will only apply for a single credential (the MMC) and as a result will only be required to pay one $45 issuance fee regardless of the number of endorsements that they carry. This change is not a reduction in any fee that a mariner must pay, but a reduction in the number of fees that the mariner must pay. Any mariner that would, under the current rules, solicit multiple mariner qualifying documents (such as both an MMD and a License), will benefit from this change in the fee structure. If the merchant mariner has not synchronized the expiration dates of his or her current credentials, then they may currently be traveling to an REC multiple times within a five-year span. The issuance of the MMC will require mariners to track and update only one document and will potentially eliminate the need to travel to an REC entirely. This will provide greater flexibility to the mariner. Currently, approximately 13,843 mariners have more than one credential and have not aligned their expiration dates. These mariners will not only receive a benefit from reduced application fees, but also from fewer, if any, trips to a REC. In order to reduce the burden of traveling and having to apply for a new MMC before the mariner's current MMD, License, COR, or STCW Endorsement expires, this rulemaking will allow mariners to apply for an MMC at the time that their current credentials expire, which will essentially phase in the MMC over a five-year period. Since all currently issued credentials are valid for five-year periods, all mariners will have to renew their credentials by the close of the five-year grace period. When a mariner applies to renew his or her MMD, License, COR, or STCW Endorsement, they will instead be issued an MMC, which will reflect all of their qualifications in the form of endorsements on the MMC. This will allow mariners to apply over a longer period of time and will not create an additional burden by requiring mariners to make an extra trip to the RECs. Mariners whose credentials do not expire simultaneously may choose to wait to renew the credentials that have yet to expire, but if the applicant later chooses to renew that credential, the expiration date of the MMC on which the endorsement would be added will not change unless the mariner also renews all other endorsements on the MMC. Currently, mariners may only renew their credentials within 12 months of their expiration date. This rulemaking will allow mariners to apply for renewal anytime before their current credentials expire and up to one year after the expiration date. As a result, this rulemaking will provide greater flexibility to mariners by allowing them to apply for an MMC at the time they choose. In a separate Coast Guard rulemaking document, published on January 13, 2006 (71 FR 2154), it was estimated that approximately 60 percent of current mariners live within one-day roundtrip travel to an REC, 30 percent live within overnight roundtrip travel (one night and two days) to an REC, and 10 percent live at a distance greater than overnight roundtrip travel (greater than one night and two days) to an REC. This was derived from national percentages for all mariners who have addresses on file with the NMC. In the TWIC rule, TSA and the Coast Guard estimated that there would be many more TWIC enrollment centers than Coast Guard RECs (we now know that number will be 149 vice 17 RECs). By allowing mariners to visit TWIC enrollment centers instead of RECs, this rule will provide a potential benefit for many mariners by reducing the travel costs and time currently required to receive a credential. In the separate rulemaking document (referenced above), the cost for mariners to travel to and from one of 17 RECs was estimated. The travel cost to mariners for a one-day roundtrip travel to and from an REC was given as $387. The estimated cost to mariners for overnight roundtrip travel was $911. Applicants who live distances greater than 200 miles and must travel for more than one night were determined to incur the maximum estimated cost of $1,185. The TWIC has the effect of transferring the cost of travel from an REC to the cost of travel to a TWIC enrollment center, but that cost is associated with the TWIC rule, not with this rule. The overall cost for mariners associated with this rulemaking will decrease or remain the same and will serve to provide more flexibility to mariners. As there will be more TWIC enrollment centers than RECs, the distance required and the amount of time spent traveling will be reduced for most mariners. Based on the percentages above, 60 percent of the mariners that live within one-day roundtrip travel will potentially receive the economic benefits of having a TWIC enrollment center located closer to them than one of the current RECs. The remaining 30 percent of mariners that live within an overnight round-trip travel and the 10 percent of mariners that live a distance greater than an overnight roundtrip travel have an increased likelihood of having a TWIC enrollment center located closer to them than one of the current RECs and will potentially receive an even greater benefit in travel cost savings from this rule. In addition to these benefits, the removal of the issuance fee for continuity documents will provide mariners who choose to apply for a continuity document a savings of $45. B. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. We do not expect this rule to have a significant impact on a large number of small entities. This rulemaking consolidates the number of credentials merchant mariners must carry and streamlines the application process in a way that would help prevent abuse, reduce cost, and assist the Coast Guard in its effort to help secure U.S. marine infrastructure, commercial activities, and the free flow of trade. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of U.S. small entities. C. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If this rule will affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the individuals listed above in the section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. D. Collection of Information This rule calls for a collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). This rulemaking will require the modification of one or more credentialing program collections of information currently approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under OMB Control Numbers 1625-0040, 1625-0012, 1625-0078, and 1625-0079. However, the changes from this rule which require modification of these collections of information will not go into effect until after April 15, 2009, when TSA begins sharing TWIC enrollment information with the Coast Guard. A number of policy decisions must be made before the changes to those collections can be finalized, such as how the information will be transferred from TSA to the Coast Guard, methods of submission for mariners, and the format of a new application form once Coast Guard is receiving information from TSA. Because these regulatory changes will not go into effect immediately, approval for revisions to these OMB Control Numbers will not be submitted to OMB until these policy decisions have been made. The changes made by this rule that go into effect in 30 days are burden neutral, and as such do not require immediate revision to the collections of information listed above. You are not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. E. Federalism A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on state or local governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism. F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a state, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. G. Taking of Private Property This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. H. Civil Justice Reform This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. I. Protection of Children We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and does not create an environmental risk to health or safety that may disproportionately affect children. J. Indian Tribal Governments This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. K. Energy Effects We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under that order because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. L. Technical Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, the Coast Guard did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. M. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 0023.1 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded that this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule is categorically excluded under section 2.B.2 Figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(c) of the Instruction. This rule involves the training, qualifying, licensing, and disciplining of maritime personnel and involves matters of procedure only; it consolidates the credentials issued to merchant mariners and revises the application process for issuing those credentials. An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES . List of Subjects 33 CFR Part 1 Administrative practice and procedure, Authority delegations (Government agencies), Freedom of information, Penalties. 33 CFR Part 20 Administrative practice and procedure, Hazardous substances, Oil pollution, Penalties, Water pollution control. 33 CFR Part 70 Navigation (water) and Penalties. 33 CFR Part 95 Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse, Marine safety, and Penalties. 33 CFR Part 101 Harbors, Maritime security, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Vessels, Waterways. 33 CFR Part 110 Anchorage grounds. 33 CFR Part 141 Citizenship and naturalization, Continental shelf, Employment, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 33 CFR Part 155 Alaska, Hazardous substances, Oil pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 33 CFR Part 156 Hazardous substances, Oil pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Water pollution control. 33 CFR Part 160 Administrative practice and procedure, Harbors, Hazardous materials transportation, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels, Waterways. 33 CFR Part 162 Navigation (water) and Waterways. 33 CFR Part 163 Cargo vessels, Harbors, Navigation (water), Waterways. 33 CFR Part 164 Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Waterways. 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. 46 CFR Part 1 Administrative practice and procedure, Organization and functions (Government agencies), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 46 CFR Part 4 Administrative practice and procedure, Drug testing, Investigations, Marine safety, Nuclear vessels, Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Safety, Transportation. 46 CFR Part 5 Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse, Investigations, Seamen. 46 CFR Part 10 Incorporation by reference, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seamen, Transportation Worker Identification Card. 46 CFR Part 11 Incorporation by reference, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Schools, Seamen. 46 CFR Part 12 Incorporation by reference, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seamen. 46 CFR Part 13 Cargo vessels, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seamen. 46 CFR Part 14 Oceanographic research vessels, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seamen. 46 CFR Part 15 Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seamen, Vessels. 46 CFR Part 16 Drug testing, Marine safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Safety, Transportation. 46 CFR Part 26 Marine safety, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 46 CFR Part 28 Alaska, Fire prevention, Fishing vessels, Marine safety, Occupational safety and health, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seamen. 46 CFR Part 30 Cargo vessels, Foreign relations, Hazardous materials transportation, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seamen. 46 CFR Part 31 Cargo vessels, Marine safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 46 CFR Part 35 Cargo vessels, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Occupational safety and health, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seamen. 46 CFR Part 42 Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels. 46 CFR Part 58 Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels. 46 CFR Part 61 Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels. 46 CFR Part 78 Marine safety, Navigation (water), Passenger vessels, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 46 CFR Part 97 Cargo vessels, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 46 CFR Part 98 Cargo vessels, Hazardous materials transportation, Marine safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Water pollution control. 46 CFR Part 105 Cargo vessels, Fishing vessels, Hazardous materials transportation, Marine safety, Petroleum, Seamen. 46 CFR Part 114 Marine safety, Passenger vessels, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 46 CFR Part 115 Fire prevention, Marine safety, Passenger vessels, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 46 CFR Part 122 Marine safety, Passenger vessels, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 46 CFR Part 125 Administrative practice and procedure, Cargo vessels, Hazardous materials transportation, Marine safety, Seamen. 46 CFR Part 131 Cargo vessels, Fire prevention, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Occupational safety and health, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 46 CFR Part 151 Cargo vessels, Hazardous materials transportation, Marine safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Water pollution control. 46 CFR Part 166 Schools, Seamen, Vessels. 46 CFR Part 169 Fire prevention, Marine safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Schools, Vessels. 46 CFR Part 175 Marine safety, Passenger vessels, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 46 CFR Part 176 Fire prevention, Marine safety, Passenger vessels, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 46 CFR Part 185 Marine safety, Passenger vessels, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 46 CFR Part 196 Marine safety, Oceanographic research vessels, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 46 CFR Part 199 Cargo vessels, Marine safety, Oil and gas exploration, Passenger vessels, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 46 CFR Part 401 Administrative practice and procedure, Great Lakes, Navigation (water), Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seamen. 46 CFR Part 402 Great Lakes, Navigation (water), Seamen. For the reasons listed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR parts 1, 20, 70, 95, 101, 110, 141, 155, 156, 160, 162, 163, 164, and 165; 46 CFR parts 1, 4, 5, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 26, 28, 30, 31, 35, 42, 58, 61, 78, 97, 98, 105, 114, 115, 122, 125, 131, 151, 166, 169, 175, 176, 185, 196, 199, 401 and 402; and in 46 CFR, add a new part 11 as follows: 33 CFR CHAPTER I PART 1—GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read as follows: Authority: 14 U.S.C. 633; 33 U.S.C. 401, 491, 525, 1321, 2716, and 2716a; 42 U.S.C. 9615; 49 U.S.C. 322; 49 CFR 1.45(b), 1.46; section 1.01-70 also issued under the authority of E.O. 12580, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193; and sections 1.01-80 and 1.01-85 also issued under the authority of E.O. 12777, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351. § 1.08-5 [Amended] 2. In § 1.08-5(b)(1), after the word “licensed”, add the words “or credentialed”. § 1.25-1 [Amended] 3. In § 1.25-1(a), remove the words “documents, certificates, or licenses” and add, in their place, the words “merchant mariner credentials, merchant mariner documents, licenses or certificates”. PART 20—RULES OF PRACTICE, PROCEDURE, AND EVIDENCE FOR FORMAL ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS OF THE COAST GUARD 4. The authority citation for part 20 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321; 42 U.S.C. 9609; 46 U.S.C. 7701, 7702; 49 CFR 1.46. 5. In § 20.102— a. In the definition for “Complaint”, after the word “merchant”, add the words “mariner credential,”; b. In the definition for “Suspension and revocation proceeding or S&R proceeding”, after the words “merchant mariner's”, add the word “credential,”; and c. Add definitions for the terms “credential” and “Merchant mariner credential or MMC”, in alphabetical order, to read as follows: § 20.102 Definitions. Credential means any or all of the following: (1) Merchant mariner's document. (2) Merchant mariner's license. (3) STCW endorsement. (4) Certificate of registry. (5) Merchant mariner credential. Merchant mariner credential or MMC means the credential issued by the Coast Guard under 46 CFR part 10. It combines the individual merchant mariner's document, license, and certificate of registry enumerated in 46 U.S.C. subtitle II part E as well as the STCW endorsement into a single credential that serves as the mariner's qualification document, certificate of identification, and certificate of service. § 20.904 [Amended] 6. In § 20.904— a. In paragraph (e)(1) introductory text, after the words “certificate of registry” remove the word “or”; and, after the word “document”, add the words “, credential, or endorsement”; b. In paragraph (e)(1)(i)(B), after the word “certificate” remove the word “or”; and, after the word “document”, add the words “, credential, or endorsement”; c. In paragraph (f) introductory text, after the words “revocation of a”, add the words “credential, endorsement,”; and d. In paragraph (f)(1), after the words “issuance of a new” remove the words “license, certificate, or document” and add, in their place, the words “merchant mariner credential with appropriate endorsement”. § 20.1201 [Amended] 7. In § 20.1201— a. In paragraph (a), remove the words “merchant mariner's license, certificate of registry, or document” and add, in their place, the words “mariner's credential”; b. In paragraph (b) introductory text, before the words “license, certificate, or document”, add the words “merchant mariner credential,”; and c. In paragraph (b)(2)(ii), after the words “renewal of the”, add the words “merchant mariner credential,”. § 20.1202 [Amended] 8. In § 20.1202(a), before the words “license, certificate of registry, or document”, add the word “credential,”. § 20.1205 [Amended] 9. In § 20.1205— a. In the section heading, before the words “license, certificate of registry, or document”, add the words “merchant mariner credential,”; b. In paragraph (a), after the words “move that his or her”, add the words “merchant mariner credential,”; and c. In paragraph (b), after the words “return of the suspended”, add the word “credential,”. § 20.1307 [Amended] 10. In § 20.1307 paragraph (c)(2), after words “merchant mariner's license”, add the words “, merchant mariner credential,”. PART 70—INTERFERENCE WITH OR DAMAGE TO AIDS TO NAVIGATION 11. The authority citation for part 70 continues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 14, 16, 30 Stat. 1152, 1153; secs. 84, 86, 92, 633, 642, 63 Stat. 500, 501, 503, 545, 547 (33 U.S.C. 408, 411, 412; 14 U.S.C. 84, 86, 92, 633, 642). § 70.05-10 Revocation of merchant mariner credential officer endorsement or license. 12. In § 70.05-10— a. Revise the section heading as set forth above; and b. In the text, after the words “shall also have his”, add the words “merchant mariner credential officer endorsement or”. PART 95—OPERATING A VESSEL WHILE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ALCOHOL OR A DANGEROUS DRUG 13. Revise the authority citation for part 95 to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 2071; 46 U.S.C. 2302; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. § 95.015 [Amended] 14. In § 95.015(b), remove the words “a licensed individual” and add, in their place, the words “an officer”. § 95.045 [Amended] 15. In § 95.045 introductory text, remove the words “a licensed individual” and add, in their place, the words “an officer”. PART 101—MARITIME SECURITY: GENERAL 16. The authority citation for part 101 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 192; Executive Order 12656, 3 CFR 1988 Comp., p. 585; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-11, 6.14, 6.16, and 6.19; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 17. In § 101.105— a. In the definitions for “Master” and “Operator, Uninspected Towing Vessel”, before the word “license”, wherever it appears, add the words “merchant mariner credential or”; and b. Add a definition for the term “Merchant mariner credential or MMC” to read as follows: § 101.105 Definitions. Merchant mariner credential or MMC means the credential issued by the Coast Guard under 46 CFR part 10. It combines the individual merchant mariner's document, license, and certificate of registry enumerated in 46 U.S.C. subtitle II part E as well as the STCW endorsement into a single credential that serves as the mariner's qualification document, certificate of identification, and certificate of service. PART 110—ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS 18. Revise the authority citation for part 110 to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236, 2030, 2035, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. § 110.186 [Amended] 19. In § 110.186(b)(3), after the word “licensed”, add the words “or credentialed”. § 110.188 [Amended] 20. In § 110.188(b)(10), after the word “licensed”, add the words “or credentialed”. § 110.214 [Amended] 21. In § 110.214(a)(3)(i), after the word “licensed” add the words “or credentialed”. PART 141—PERSONNEL 22. Revise the authority citation for part 141 to read as follows: Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1356; 46 U.S.C. 70105; 49 CFR 1.46(z). § 141.5 [Amended] 23. In § 141.5(b)(1) remove the words “licensed officers, and unlicensed crew” and add, in their place, the words “crew, and officers holding a valid license or MMC with officer endorsement”. 24. In § 141.10, add a definition for the term “Transportation Worker Identification Credential or TWIC”, in alphabetical order, to read as follows: § 141.10 Definitions. Transportation Worker Identification Credential or TWIC means an identification credential issued by the Transportation Security Administration according to 49 CFR part 1572. § 141.25 [Amended] 25. In § 141.25— a. In paragraph (a) introductory text, remove the word “The” and add, in its place, the words “For the purposes of this part, the”; and b. In paragraph (a)(1), before the words “merchant mariner's document”, add the word “valid”, and remove the words “under 46 CFR Part 12”. 26. In § 141.30— a. In the introductory text, remove the first appearance of the word “The” and add, in its place, the words “For the purposes of this part, the”; b. In paragraph (a), before the words “merchant mariner's document”, add the word “valid”, and remove the words “under 46 CFR Part 12”; and c. In paragraph (b), remove the words “Immigration and Naturalization Service” and add, in their place, the words “Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency”; and d. Add a new paragraph (d) to read as follows: § 141.30 Evidence of status as a resident alien. (d) A valid Transportation Worker Identification Credential. § 141.35 [Amended] 27. In § 141.35(a)(1), after the words “merchant mariner's document”, add the words “, Transportation Worker Identification Credential,”. PART 155—OIL OR HAZARDOUS MATERIAL POLLUTION PREVENTION REGULATIONS FOR VESSELS 28. The authority citation for part 155 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231, 1321(j); E.O. 11735, 3 CFR, 1971-1975 Comp., p. 793. Sections 155.100 through 155.130, 150.350 through 155.400, 155.430, 155.440, 155.470, 155.1030(j) and (k), and 155.1065(g) are also issued under 33 U.S.C. 1903(b). Sections 155.480, 155.490, 155.750(e), and 155.775 are also issued under 46 U.S.C. 3703. Section 155.490 also issued under section 4110(b) of Public Law 101-380. 29. Revise § 155.110 to read as follows: § 155.110 Definitions. Except as specifically stated in a section, the definitions in part 151 of this chapter, except for the word “oil”, and in part 154 of this chapter, apply to this part. The following definition also applies to this part: Merchant mariner credential or MMC means the credential issued by the Coast Guard under 46 CFR part 10. It combines the individual merchant mariner's document, license, and certificate of registry enumerated in 46 U.S.C. subtitle II part E as well as the STCW endorsement into a single credential that serves as the mariner's qualification document, certificate of identification, and certificate of service. 30. In § 155.710— a. In paragraph (a)(2), after the word “license”, add the words “or officer endorsement”; b. Revise paragraph (e)(1) to read as set out below; c. In paragraph (f), after the word “MMD”, add the words “ or merchant mariner credential”; and after the words “either a license”, add the words “, officer endorsement,”; and d. In paragraph (g), after the words “need not hold any of the”, add the words “merchant mariner credentials,”. § 155.710 Qualifications of person in charge. (e) * * * (1) On each inspected vessel required by 46 CFR chapter I to have an officer aboard, holds a valid license or merchant mariner credential issued under 46 CFR chapter I, subchapter B, authorizing service as a master, mate, pilot, engineer, or operator aboard that vessel, or holds a valid merchant mariner's document or merchant Mariner credential endorsed as Tankerman-PIC; § 155.815 [Amended] 31. In § 155.815(b), after the word “licensed” add the words “or credentialed”. PART 156—OIL AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL TRANSFER OPERATIONS 32. The authority citation for part 156 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231, 1321(j); 46 U.S.C. 3703a, 3715; E.O. 11735, 3 CFR 1971-1975 Comp., p. 793. Section 156.120(bb) and (ee) are also issued under 46 U.S.C. 3703. § 156.210 [Amended] 33. In § 156.210(d), remove the words “a licensed individual” and add, in their place, the words “an officer”. PART 160—PORTS AND WATERWAYS SAFETY—GENERAL 34. The authority citation for part 160 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1223, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. Subpart C is also issued under the authority of 33 U.S.C. 1225 and 46 U.S.C. 3715. § 160.113 [Amended] 35. In § 160.113(b)(4), remove the word “licensed”. PART 162—INLAND WATERWAYS NAVIGATION REGULATIONS 36. Revise the authority citation for part 162 to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 37. Add a new § 162.5 to read as follows: § 162.5 Definitions. The following definition applies to this part: Merchant mariner credential or MMC means the credential issued by the Coast Guard under 46 CFR part 10. It combines the individual merchant mariner's document, license, and certificate of registry enumerated in 46 U.S.C. subtitle II part E as well as the STCW endorsement into a single credential that serves as the mariner's qualification document, certificate of identification, and certificate of service. 38. In § 162.130(c), revise the definition for “Master” to read as follows; § 162.130 Connecting waters from Lake Huron to Lake Erie; general rules. (c) * * * Master means the master or operator, the person designated by the master or operator to navigate the vessel, or, on a vessel not requiring persons holding licenses or merchant mariner credential officer endorsements, the person in command of the vessel. PART 163—TOWING OF BARGES 39. The authority citation for part 163 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 152, 2071; 49 CFR l.46(n). § 163.01 [Amended] 40. In § 163.01(b), after the word “license”, add the words “or merchant mariner credential”. 41. Add a new § 163.03 to read as follows: § 163.03 Definitions. The following definition applies to this part: Merchant mariner credential or MMC means the credential issued by the Coast Guard under 46 CFR part 10. It combines the individual merchant mariner's document, license, and certificate of registry enumerated in 46 U.S.C. subtitle II part E as well as the STCW endorsement into a single credential that serves as the mariner's qualification document, certificate of identification, and certificate of service. PART 164—NAVIGATION SAFETY REGULATIONS 42. The authority citation for part 164 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1222(5), 1223, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 2103, 3703; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1 (75). Sec. 164.13 also issued under 46 U.S.C. 8502. Sec. 164.61 also issued under 46 U.S.C. 6101. 43. In § 164.13— a. In paragraph (b), remove the words “a licensed engineer” and add, in their place, the words “an engineer with an appropriately endorsed license or merchant mariner credential”; and b. Revise paragraph (c) to read as follows: § 164.13 Navigation underway: tankers. (c) Each tanker must navigate with at least two deck officers with an appropriately endorsed license or merchant mariner credential on watch on the bridge, one of whom may be a pilot. In waters where a pilot is required, the second officer, must be an individual holding an appropriately endorsed license or merchant mariner credential and assigned to the vessel as master, mate, or officer in charge of a navigational watch, who is separate and distinct from the pilot. 44. In § 164.70, add a new definition for the term “Merchant mariner credential or MMC”, in alphabetical order, to read as follows: § 164.70 Definitions. Merchant mariner credential or MMC means the credential issued by the Coast Guard under 46 CFR part 10. It combines the individual merchant mariner's document, license, and certificate of registry enumerated in 46 U.S.C. subtitle II part E as well as the STCW endorsement into a single credential that serves as the mariner's qualification document, certificate of identification, and certificate of service. PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 45. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 46. Add a new § 165.3 to read as follows: § 165.3 Definitions. The following definitions apply to this part: Credential means any or all of the following: (1) Merchant mariner's document. (2) Merchant mariner's license. (3) STCW endorsement. (4) Certificate of registry. (5) Merchant mariner credential. Merchant mariner credential or MMC means the credential issued by the Coast Guard under 46 CFR part 10. It combines the individual merchant mariner's document, license, and certificate of registry enumerated in 46 U.S.C. subtitle II part E as well as the STCW endorsement into a single credential that serves as the mariner's qualification document, certificate of identification, and certificate of service. § 165.120 [Amended] 47. In § 165.120(b)(1), remove the words “ the Licensed Federal Pilot” and add, in their place, the words “an individual holding a valid merchant mariner's license or merchant mariner credential endorsed as pilot”. § 165.153 [Amended] 48. In § 165.153(d)(6) and (d)(7), remove the word “licensed” wherever it appears. § 165.810 [Amended] 49. In § 165.810(f)(1), remove the words “licensed engineer” and add, in their place, the words “appropriately licensed or credentialed engineer officer”. § 165.1310 [Amended] 50. In § 165.1310(f)(2), remove the word “licensed” and add, in its place, the words “holding a license or merchant mariner credential issued”. 46 CFR CHAPTER I PART 1—ORGANIZATION, GENERAL COURSE AND METHODS GOVERNING MARINE SAFETY FUNCTIONS 51. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552; 14 U.S.C. 633; 46 U.S.C. 7701; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 93; Pub. L. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1; § 1.01-35 also issued under the authority of 44 U.S.C. 3507. 52. In § 1.01-05, add new paragraphs (d) and (e) to read as follows: § 1.01-05 Definitions. (d) The term Credential means any or all of the following: (1) Merchant mariner's document. (2) Merchant mariner's license. (3) STCW endorsement. (4) Certificate of registry. (5) Merchant mariner credential. (e) The term Merchant mariner credential or MMC means the credential issued by the Coast Guard under 46 CFR part 10. It combines the individual merchant mariner's document, license, and certificate of registry enumerated in 46 U.S.C. subtitle II part E as well as the STCW endorsement into a single credential that serves as the mariner's qualification document, certificate of identification, and certificate of service. § 1.01-10 [Amended] 53. In § 1.01-10, in paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(C), remove the words “licenses, documents or certificates” and add, in their place, the word “credentials.'' 54. In § 1.01-15— a. In paragraph (a)(1), remove the words “licenses, certificates, and documents” and add, in their place, the word “credentials”, and remove the words “licensing, certificating” and add, in their place, the word “credentialing”; and b. Revise paragraph (b) to read as follows: § 1.01-15 Organization; Districts; National Maritime Center. (b) The Officers in Charge, Marine Inspection, in the Coast Guard districts, under the supervision of the District Commanders, and the Officer in Charge, Activities Europe, under the supervision of the Atlantic Area Commander are in charge of the marine inspection offices in the various ports and have command responsibilities with assigned marine safety zones for the performance of duties with respect to the inspection, enforcement and administration of navigation and vessel inspection laws, and rules and regulations governing marine safety. The Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, has been designated and delegated to give immediate direction to Coast Guard activities relating to marine safety functions consisting of inspection of vessels in order to determine that they comply with the applicable laws, rules, and regulations relating to construction, equipment, manning and operation, and to be satisfied that such vessels are in seaworthy condition for the services in which such vessels are to be operated; shipyard inspections; factory inspections of materials and equipment for vessels; credentialing shipment and discharge of seaman; investigations of marine casualties and accidents; investigations of violations of law; negligence, misconduct, unskillfullness, incompetence or misbehavior of persons holding credentials issued by the Coast Guard; initiations of actions seeking suspension or revocation under 46 U.S.C. chapter 77 of credentials held by persons, and presentation of cases at hearings before Administrative Law Judges; and the enforcement of navigation, vessel inspection and seaman laws in general. § 1.01-25 [Amended] 55. In § 1.01-25— a. In paragraph (b)(1), remove the words “licenses, certificates, or documents” and add, in their place, the word “credentials”; and b. In paragraphs (c) introductory text and (c)(1) introductory text, remove the words “license, certificate or document” wherever they appear and add, in their place, the word “credential”. PART 4—MARINE CASUALTIES AND INVESTIGATIONS 56. The authority citation for part 4 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231, 1321; 43 U.S.C. 1333; 46 U.S.C. 2103, 2306, 6101, 6301, 6305; 50 U.S.C. 198; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 170.1. Authority for subpart 4.40: 49 U.S.C. 1903(a)(1)(E); Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 57. Add § 4.03-75 to read as follows: § 4.03-75 Merchant mariner credential and credential. The following definitions apply to this part: Credential means any or all of the following: (1) Merchant mariner's document. (2) Merchant mariner's license. (3) STCW endorsement. (4) Certificate of registry. (5) Merchant mariner credential. Merchant mariner credential or MMC means the credential issued by the Coast Guard under 46 CFR part 10. It combines the individual merchant mariner's document, license, and certificate o [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3AE9-5436. Public record. Not legal advice.