[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 152 (Tuesday, August 7, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47050-47051]
[FR Doc No: 2012-19266]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC12-13-000; (FERC-915)]

Commission Information Collection Activities; Comment Request

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Comment request.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or
FERC) is submitting the information collection FERC-915 (Public Utility
Market-Based Rate Authorization Holders--Records Retention Requirement)
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review of the
information collection requirements. Any interested person may file
comments directly with OMB and should address a copy of those comments
to the Commission as explained below. The Commission issued a Notice in
the Federal Register (77 FR 28863, 5/16/2012) requesting public
comments. FERC received no comments on the FERC-915 and is making this
notation in its submittal to OMB.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due by September
6, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Comments filed with OMB, identified by the OMB Control No.
1902-0223, should be sent via email to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission Desk Officer. The Desk Officer may also be
reached via telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    A copy of the comments should also be sent to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, identified by the Docket No. IC12-13-000, by
either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Web Site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and by fax at
(202) 273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-915, Public Utility Market-Based Rate Authorization
Holders--Records Retention Requirement.
    OMB Control No.:1902-0223.
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-915 information
collection requirements with no changes to the reporting requirements.
    Abstract: The Commission has the regulatory responsibility under
section 205 of the Federal Power Act to ensure that wholesale sales of
electricity are just and reasonable and provided in a non-
discriminatory manner. Under section 35.41(d), the Commission requires
all sellers with market-based rates to retain all relevant sales
documents for five years. Relevant documents include all information
upon which they bill their prices charged for electric energy or
electric energy products sold pursuant to their market-

based rate tariff and the prices reported for use in price indices.
    The five-year statute of limitations applies where the Commission
seeks civil penalties for violations of the Anti-Manipulation rule or
other rules, regulations, or orders to which the price information may
be relevant.
    The information maintained by the respondents under FERC-915 is
used by the Commission to monitor the entities' sales, ensure that the
prices are just and reasonable, maintain the integrity of the wholesale
jurisdictional sales markets, and ensure that the entities comply with
the requirements of the Federal Power Act, the Commission's regulations
and any orders authorizing market-based rate sales.
    Type of Respondents: Public Utility Market-Based Rate Authorization
Holders.
    Estimate of Annual Burden \1\: The Commission estimates the total
Public Reporting Burden for this information collection as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Burden is defined as the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. For
further explanation of what is included in the information
collection burden, reference 5 Code of Federal Regulations 1320.3.

                      FERC-915 (IC12-13-000): Public Utility Market-Based Rate Authorization Holders--Records Retention Requirement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of                      Average  burden
                                                                        Number of      responses per   Total number of     hours  per    Estimated total
                                                                       respondents       respondent       responses         response      annual burden
                                                                                (A)              (B)    (A) x (B) = (C)            (D)                (C) x (D)
Electric Utilities with Market-Based Rate Authority................           1,730                1            1,730                1            1,730
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The total estimated annual cost burden to respondents is $369,638
[$40,655 (labor costs) + $315,792 (record retention/storage cost) +
$13,191 (electronic record-keeping cost) = $369,638]
     Labor costs: $40,655 [(1,730 hours / 2 \2\ = 865 hours *
$19/hours \3\ = $16,435) + (1730 hours / 2 = 865 * $28/hour \4\ =
$24,220)]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Commission assumes 50% of responding entities utilize
conventional (i.e. ``paper'' storage).
    \3\ 2012 average hourly wage of filing clerk working within an
electric utility.
    \4\ The Commission bases the $28/hour figure on a FERC staff
study that included estimating public utility recordkeeping costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Record retention/storage cost (using an estimate of 48,891
cubic feet): $315,792 \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Commission bases this figure on industry archival
storage costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Electronic record retention/storage cost: $13,191 (1,730
respondents / 2 = 865 respondents * $15.25/hour \6\ = $13,191).\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Per entity; the Commission bases this figure on the
estimated cost to service and to store 1 GB of data (based on the
aggregated cost of an IBM advanced data protection server).
    \7\ The Commission assumes 50% of responding entities are
storing records in electronic formats.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.

    Dated: August 1, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-19266 Filed 8-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 33 (Wednesday, February 19, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9385-9387]
[FR Doc No: 2014-02962]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0736; Directorate Identifier 2013-SW-013-AD;
Amendment 39-17747; AD 2014-03-10]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Various Restricted Category Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for various
restricted category helicopters, originally manufactured by Bell
Helicopter Textron, Inc. (Bell), model numbers HH-1K, TH-1F, TH-1L, UH-
1A, UH-1B, UH-1E, UH-1F, UH-1H, UH-1L, and UH-1P. This AD requires
inspecting the tail rotor (T/R) cable assembly for an incorrectly
machined body. This AD is prompted by a report from Bell that a
defective body on the cable prevents the barrel assembly from fully
engaging in the body cavity. These actions are intended to prevent
disengagement of the cable from the barrel, failure of the T/R pitch
control, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

DATES: This AD is effective March 26, 2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain document listed in this AD as of March 26, 2014.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact Bell
Helicopter Textron, Inc., P.O. Box 482, Fort Worth, TX 76101; telephone
(817) 280-3391; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/. You may review a copy of the referenced service information at
the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham
Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth Texas 76137.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the Docket Operations Office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, any incorporated-by-reference
service information, the economic evaluation, any comments received,
and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations
Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations Office, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-
140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Helene Gandy, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Rotorcraft Certification Office, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA,
2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    On August 20, 2013, at 78 FR 51127, the Federal Register published
our notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which proposed to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to various restricted
category helicopters originally manufactured by Bell, Model HH-1K, TH-
1F, TH-1L, UH-1A, UH-1B, UH-1E, UH-1F, UH-1H, UH-1L, and UH-1P, with a
cable assembly, part number 205-001-720-001 installed. The current type
certificate holders for these models include but are not limited to
Arrow Falcon Exporters Inc.; AST, Inc.; Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.;
Global Helicopter Technology, Inc.; Hagglund Helicopters, LLC;
International Helicopters, Inc.; JJASPP Engineering Services, LLC;
Northwest Rotorcraft, LLC; OAS Parts LLC; Richards Heavylift Helo,
Inc.; Robinson Air Crane, Inc.; Rotorcraft Development Corporation; San
Joaquin Helicopters; Smith Helicopters; Southern Helicopter, Inc.;
Southwest Florida Aviation International, Inc.; Tamarack Helicopters,
Inc.; and Southwest Florida

Aviation, Inc. The NPRM proposed to require inspecting each cable
assembly to determine if an incorrectly machined body is installed. If
an incorrectly machined body is installed, the NPRM proposed to require
replacing the cable assembly within 50 hours time-in-service. Until the
cable assembly is replaced, the NPRM proposed to require inspecting the
assembly for separation daily.
    The proposed requirements were intended to prevent disengagement of
the cable from the body, T/R pitch control failure in a fixed position,
and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD, but we did not receive any comments on the NPRM (78 FR 51127,
August 20, 2013).

FAA's Determination

    We have reviewed the relevant information and determined that an
unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other
products of the same type design and that air safety and the public
interest require adopting the AD requirements as proposed.

Related Service Information

    We reviewed Bell Alert Service Bulletin No. UH-1H-12-08, dated
August 28, 2012 (ASB), which describes procedures for inspecting the
barrel assembly to determine if an incorrectly machined body is
installed. If an incorrectly machined body is installed, the ASB
specifies replacing the cable assembly. The ASB further specifies
inspecting the barrel assembly and cable connection daily until the
cable assembly is replaced.

Differences Between This AD and the Service Information

    The ASB specifies inspecting the barrel assembly at the next daily
inspection; this AD specifies inspecting within 25 hours TIS. The ASB
also specifies replacing any defective cable assembly at the next phase
inspection, within 50 hours TIS, or by December 31, 2012; this AD
specifies replacing the cable assembly within 50 hours TIS.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 716 helicopters of U.S.
Registry. We estimate that operators will incur the following costs in
order to comply with this AD. At an average labor rate of $85 per hour,
inspecting the barrel assembly requires about 1 work-hour, for a cost
per helicopter of $85 and a total cost of $60,860 for the fleet. If
required, replacing a defective cable assembly requires about 8 work-
hours, and required parts cost about $625, for a cost per helicopter of
$1,305.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866;
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent
that it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2014-03-10 Various Restricted Category Helicopters: Amendment 39-
17747; Docket No. FAA-2013-0736; Directorate Identifier 2013-SW-013-
AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to various restricted category helicopters
originally manufactured by Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., Model HH-
1K, TH-1F, TH-1L, UH-1A, UH-1B, UH-1E, UH-1F, UH-1H, UH-1L, and UH-
1P; current type certificate holders include but are not limited to
Arrow Falcon Exporters Inc.; AST, Inc.; Bell Helicopter Textron,
Inc.; Global Helicopter Technology, Inc.; Hagglund Helicopters, LLC;
International Helicopters, Inc.; JJASPP Engineering Services, LLC;
Northwest Rotorcraft, LLC; OAS Parts LLC; Richards Heavylift Helo,
Inc.; Robinson Air Crane, Inc.; Rotorcraft Development Corporation;
San Joaquin Helicopters; Smith Helicopters; Southern Helicopter,
Inc.; Southwest Florida Aviation International, Inc.; Tamarack
Helicopters, Inc.; and Southwest Florida Aviation, Inc., with a
cable assembly, part number 205-001-720-001 installed, certificated
in any category.

 (b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as an incorrectly machined
body on the cable assembly, which could prevent the barrel assembly
from fully engaging in the body cavity. This condition could result
in disengagement of the cable from the barrel, failure of the tail
rotor pitch control, and subsequent loss of control of the
helicopter.

(c) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective March 26, 2014.

(d) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(e) Required Actions

    (1) Within 25 hours time in service (TIS), inspect each cable
assembly to determine if there is a false cut on the body of the
barrel assembly, as depicted in Figure 1 of Bell Alert Service
Bulletin No. UH-1H-12-08, dated August 28, 2012.
    (2) If there is a false cut, before the first flight of each
day, inspect the cable assembly for separation of the barrel
assembly from the body. If there is any separation, before further
flight, replace the cable assembly.
    (3) Within 50 hours TIS, replace the cable assembly with an
airworthy cable assembly that does not have a false cut in the body.
Replacing the cable assembly is terminating action for the
inspections required by paragraph (e)(2) of this AD.

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Rotorcraft Certification Office, FAA, may
approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Helene Gandy,
Aviation Safety Engineer, Rotorcraft Certification Office,
Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas
76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(g) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6720: Tail Rotor
Control System.

(h) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Bell Alert Service Bulletin No. UH-1H-12-08, dated August
28, 2012.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For Bell service information identified in this AD, contact
Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., P.O. Box 482, Fort Worth, TX 76101;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663,
Fort Worth, Texas 76137. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 31, 2014.
Lance T. Gant,
Acting Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-02962 Filed 2-18-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 67 (Thursday, April 7, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19267-19268]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8226]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 67 / Thursday, April 7, 2011 / Rules
and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 61

[Docket No. FAA-2006-26661; Amdt. No. 61-127]
RIN 2120-AI86

Pilot, Flight Instructor, and Pilot School Certification;
Technical Amendment

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is correcting a final rule published on August 21,
2009 (74 FR 42500). In that rule, the FAA amended its regulations to
revise the training, qualification, certification, and operating
requirements for pilots, flight instructors, ground instructors, and
pilot schools. This document reinstates two paragraphs that were
inadvertently removed in one section, and amends an out-of-date cross
reference in another section.

DATES: Effective April 7, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning
this action, contact Jeffrey Smith, Airmen Certification and Training
Branch, AFS-810, General Aviation and Commercial Division, Flight
Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For legal interpretative questions about this
final rule, contact: Anne Moore, AGC-240, Office of Chief Counsel,
Regulations Division, Federal Aviation Administration,<PHONE_NUMBER>;
e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On August 21, 2009, the FAA published a final rule entitled,
``Pilot, Flight Instructor, and Pilot School Certification; Final
Rule'' (74 FR 42500). That final rule revised the training,
qualification, certification, and operating requirements for pilots,
flight instructors, ground instructors, and pilot schools. The FAA is
now issuing a technical amendment to Sec.  61.57 to reinsert paragraphs
(d)(1) and (d)(2) because those paragraphs were inadvertently removed
from the final rule. The FAA is also amending an incorrect reference in
Sec.  61.65(c).

Technical Amendment

    Section 61.57(d) establishes the requirements for an instrument
proficiency check. Prior to issuance of the 2009 final rule, Sec.
61.57(d) contained introductory text as well as paragraph (d)(1), which
set forth the aircraft in which an instrument proficiency check must be
performed, and paragraph (d)(2), which set forth those persons who are
authorized to conduct an instrument proficiency check. In the 2009
final rule, the FAA stated in the amendatory instructions to Sec.
61.57(d) that it was amending paragraph (d) rather than the
introductory text to paragraph (d). As a result, paragraphs (d)(1) and
(d)(2) were unintentionally removed from the final rule. The FAA is
issuing this technical amendment to restore paragraphs (d)(1) and
(d)(2) to Sec.  61.57.
    The FAA is also correcting a minor error to a reference in
paragraph (c) of Sec.  61.65. In the 2009 final rule, the FAA added
paragraphs (e) and (f) to this section. A corresponding change to a
cross reference in paragraph (c) that would have accounted for these
additions was unintentionally omitted. This technical edit will correct
that omission.
    Because the changes in this technical amendment result in no
substantive change, we find good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3)
to make the amendment effective in less than 30 days.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 61

    Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety.

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends chapter I of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:

PART 61--CERTIFICATION: PILOTS, FLIGHT INSTRUCTORS, AND GROUND
INSTRUCTORS

0
1. The authority citation for part 61 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701-44703, 44707, 44709-
44711, 45102-45103, 45301-45302.

0
2. Amend Sec.  61.57 by adding paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2) to read as
follows:

Sec.  61.57  Recent flight experience: Pilot in command.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) The instrument proficiency check must be--
    (i) In an aircraft that is appropriate to the aircraft category;
    (ii) For other than a glider, in a flight simulator or flight
training device that is representative of the aircraft category; or
    (iii) For a glider, in a single-engine airplane or a glider.
    (2) The instrument proficiency check must be given by--
    (i) An examiner;
    (ii) A person authorized by the U.S. Armed Forces to conduct
instrument flight tests, provided the person being tested is a member
of the U.S. Armed Forces;
    (iii) A company check pilot who is authorized to conduct instrument
flight tests under part 121, 125, or 135 of this chapter or subpart K
of part 91 of this chapter, and provided that both the check pilot and
the pilot being tested are employees of that operator or fractional
ownership program manager, as applicable;
    (iv) An authorized instructor; or
    (v) A person approved by the Administrator to conduct instrument
practical tests.
* * * * *

0
3. Amend Sec.  61.65 by revising paragraph (c) introductory text to
read as follows:

Sec.  61.65  Instrument rating requirements.

* * * * *
    (c) Flight proficiency. A person who applies for an instrument
rating must receive and log training from an authorized instructor in
an aircraft, or in a flight simulator or flight training

device, in accordance with paragraph (g) of this section, that includes
the following areas of operation:
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 1, 2011.
Pamela Hamilton-Powell,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2011-8226 Filed 4-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 228 (Wednesday, November 29, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56613-56615]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25773]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2014-E-1653]

Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent
Extension; SOLX SYSTEM

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) has
determined the regulatory review period for SOLX SYSTEM and is
publishing this notice of that determination as required by law. FDA
has made the determination because of the submission of an application
to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO),
Department of Commerce, for the extension of a patent which claims that
human drug product.

DATES: Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published (in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section) are incorrect may submit either
electronic or written comments and ask for a redetermination by January
29, 2018. Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA for a
determination

regarding whether the applicant for extension acted with due diligence
during the regulatory review period by May 29, 2018. See ``Petitions''
in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for more information.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments
must be submitted on or before January 29, 2018. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
midnight Eastern Time at the end of January 29, 2018. Comments received
by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be
considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service
acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2014-E-1653 for ``Determination of Regulatory Review Period for
Purposes of Patent Extension; SOLX SYSTEM.'' Received comments, those
filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket
and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,''
publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets
Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with Sec.  10.20 (21 CFR 10.20) and
other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's
posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18,
2015, or access the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beverly Friedman, Office of Regulatory
Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg.
51, Rm. 6250, Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984
(Pub. L. 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug and Patent Term
Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100-670) generally provide that a patent may
be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as the patented item
(human drug product, animal drug product, medical device, food
additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory review by FDA
before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a product's regulatory
review period forms the basis for determining the amount of extension
an applicant may receive.
    A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A
testing phase and an approval phase. For human drug products, the
testing phase begins when the exemption to permit the clinical
investigations of the drug becomes effective and runs until the
approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial
submission of an application to market the human drug product and
continues until FDA grants permission to market the drug product.
Although only a portion of a regulatory review period may count toward
the actual amount of extension that the Director of USPTO may award
(for example, half the testing phase must be subtracted as well as any
time that may have occurred before the patent was issued), FDA's
determination of the length of a regulatory review period for a human
drug product will include all of the testing phase and approval phase
as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(1)(B).
    FDA has approved for marketing the human drug product SOLX SYSTEM.
SOLX SYSTEM is indicated for:
     Pre-storage leukocyte reduction of Citrate Phosphate
Dextrose Solution (CPD) whole blood followed by preparation of AS-7 Red
Cells, Leukocytes Reduced, prepared at room temperature and placed at 1
to 6 [deg]C within 24 hours of collection. AS-7 Red Cells, Leukocytes
Reduced, may be stored at 1 to 6 [deg]C for up to 42 days after
collection.
     Pre-storage leukocyte reduction of CPD whole blood held at
1 to 6 [deg]C and preparation of AS-7 Red Cells, Leukocytes Reduced
within 72 hours after collection. AS-7 Red Cells, Leukocytes Reduced,
may be stored at 1 to 6 [deg]C for up to 42 days after collection.
     Preparation of Fresh Frozen Plasma (FFP), Leukocytes
Reduced prepared from a whole blood collection and frozen at -18 [deg]C
or below within 8 hours of collection. FFP, Leukocytes

Reduced may be stored at -18 [deg]C or colder for up to 1 year after
collection.
     Preparation of Plasma Frozen within 24 hours after
Phlebotomy (PF24), Leukocytes Reduced prepared from a whole blood
collection. The product can be held at room temperature up to 8 hours
after collection, refrigerated at 1 to 6 [deg]C until separated, and
placed at -18 [deg]C or below within 24 hours of whole blood
collection. PF24, Leukocytes Reduced may be stored at -18 [deg]C or
colder for up to 1 year after collection.
    Subsequent to this approval, the USPTO received a patent term
restoration application for SOLX SYSTEM (U.S. Patent No. 6,150,085)
from Haemonetics Corporation, and the USPTO requested FDA's assistance
in determining this patent's eligibility for patent term restoration.
In a letter dated November 5, 2015, FDA advised the USPTO that this
human drug product had undergone a regulatory review period and that
the approval of SOLX SYSTEM represented the first permitted commercial
marketing or use of the product. Thereafter, the USPTO requested that
FDA determine the product's regulatory review period.

II. Determination of Regulatory Review Period

    FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for
SOLX SYSTEM is 1,250 days. Of this time, 708 days occurred during the
testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 542 days occurred
during the approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the
following dates:
    1. The date an exemption under section 505(i) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 355(i)) became
effective: November 24, 2009. The applicant claims November 25, 2009,
as the date the investigational new drug application (IND) became
effective. However, FDA records indicate that the IND effective date
was November 24, 2009, which was 30 days after FDA receipt of the IND.
    2. The date the application was initially submitted with respect to
the human drug product under section 505(b) of the FD&C Act: November
1, 2011. FDA has verified the applicant's claim that the new drug
application (NDA) for SOLX SYSTEM (NDA BN110059) was initially
submitted on November 1, 2011.
    3. The date the application was approved: April 25, 2013. FDA has
verified the applicant's claim that NDA BN110059 was approved on April
25, 2013.
    This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the
maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the USPTO
applies several statutory limitations in its calculations of the actual
period for patent extension. In its application for patent extension,
this applicant seeks 894 days of patent term extension.

III. Petitions

    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are
incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and, under
21 CFR 60.24, ask for a redetermination (see DATES). Furthermore, as
specified in Sec.  60.30 (21 CFR 60.30), any interested person may
petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for
extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period.
To meet its burden, the petition must comply with all the requirements
of Sec.  60.30, including but not limited to: Must be timely (see
DATES), must be filed in accordance with Sec.  10.20, must contain
sufficient facts to merit an FDA investigation, and must certify that a
true and complete copy of the petition has been served upon the patent
applicant. (See H. Rept. 857, part 1, 98th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 41-42,
1984.) Petitions should be in the format specified in 21 CFR 10.30.
    Submit petitions electronically to https://www.regulations.gov at
Docket No. FDA-2013-S-0610. Submit written petitions (two copies are
required) to the Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Dated: November 24, 2017.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2017-25773 Filed 11-28-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 180 (Wednesday, September 16, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57757-57765]
[FR Doc No: 2020-18298]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

46 CFR Part 11

[Docket No. USCG-2017-1025]
RIN 1625-AC42

Crediting Recent Sea Service of Personnel Serving on Vessels of
the Uniformed Services

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is extending the period, from 3 years to 7
years, in which sea service aboard vessels of the uniformed services
can be used to satisfy the requirement for recent sea service to
qualify for a Merchant Mariner Credential with a national officer
endorsement.

DATES: This final rule is effective September 16, 2020.

ADDRESSES: To view comments on the notice of proposed rulemaking and
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket,
go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2017-1025 in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about this document
call or email Cathleen Mauro, Office of Merchant Mariner Credentialing
(CG-MMC-1), Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents for Preamble

I. Abbreviations
II. Basis and Purpose
III. Background
IV. Discussion of Comments
V. Discussion of the Rule
VI. Regulatory Analyses
    A. Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Small Entities
    C. Assistance for Small Entities
    D. Collection of Information
    E. Federalism
    F. Unfunded Mandates
    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. Abbreviations

BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
ICR Information Collection Request
MMC Merchant Mariner Credential
MMLD Merchant Mariner Licensing and Documentation System
NMC National Maritime Center
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
PHS Public Health Service
RA Regulatory Analysis
RFA Regulatory Flexibility ACT
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Basis and Purpose

    Under 46 CFR 11.201(c)(2), an applicant for a national officer
endorsement on a Merchant Mariner Credential (MMC) must have at least 3
months of required service on vessels of appropriate tonnage or
horsepower within the 3 years immediately

preceding the date of application. Section 305 of the Howard Coble
Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2014 \1\ amended 46
U.S.C. 7101 to specifically authorize the Coast Guard to extend the
period from 3 years to 7 years for individuals whose 3 months of
qualifying sea service was aboard vessels of the uniformed services.
Such individuals must also satisfy all other requirements for a
national officer endorsement on an MMC. In this final rule, consistent
with the statutory authorization, we establish in regulation a 7-year
period within which the attainment of 3 months of qualifying sea
service aboard vessels of the uniformed services can be used to satisfy
the requirement for recent sea service to qualify for an MMC with a
national officer endorsement.\2\ This regulatory change affects only 46
CFR part 11, ``Requirements for officer endorsements,'' and,
specifically, only 46 CFR 11.201(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Public Law 113-281, 128 Stat. 3022 (2014).
    \2\ The change is also consistent with Executive Order 13860,
Supporting the Transition of Active Duty Service Members and
Military Veterans Into the Merchant Marine, 84 FR 8407 (Mar. 7,
2019). See also Public Law 113-281, Sec.  305(c), 46 U.S.C. 7302
note.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3), this rule will
become effective upon the date of publication in the Federal Register.
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), an agency is permitted to make ``a
substantive rule which grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a
restriction . . .'' to become immediately effective. This rule relieves
a restriction by extending the period, from 3 years to 7 years, in
which sea service aboard vessels of the uniformed services can be used
to satisfy the requirement for recent sea service to qualify for a
Merchant Mariner Credential with a national officer endorsement.

III. Background

    Individuals serving on vessels of the uniformed services represent
a population who may qualify for an MMC. When these individuals spend
the final years of their careers assigned to shoreside units, the
requirement in 46 CFR 11.201(c)(2) to have at least 3 months of
qualifying sea service within 3 years of application for an officer
endorsement poses an obstacle to meeting the requirement for recent sea
service. This rule will update the recent sea service requirements for
a person to qualify for a national officer endorsement based on sea
service aboard vessels of the uniformed services.
    On December 18, 2014, Congress amended 46 U.S.C. 7101 by adding
paragraph (j), which authorized the Coast Guard to extend the period
from 3 years to 7 years for individuals whose 3 months of qualifying
sea service was aboard vessels of the uniformed services. Subsequent to
enactment of 46 U.S.C. 7101(j)(1), the Coast Guard issued CG-CVC Policy
Letter 15-03, ``Crediting Recent Service of Uniformed Service
Personnel,'' \3\ on October 16, 2015, to implement 46 U.S.C. 7101(j)(1)
until a rulemaking could be completed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ CG-CVC Policy Letter 15-03 can be accessed at: https://www.dco.uscg.mil/Portals/9/DCO%20Documents/5p/CG-5PC/CG-CVC/Policy%20Letters/2015/CG-CVC_pol15-03.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Discussion of Comments

    In the 2019 Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM),\4\ the Coast
Guard requested comments on our proposal to extend, from 3 years to 7
years, the period for qualifying sea service that is the subject of
this final rule. The Coast Guard received no comments on that proposal.
Accordingly, the Coast Guard has made no changes from the proposed rule
in response to public comment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 84 FR 48842, September 17, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the same NPRM, the Coast Guard asked for public input on two
related questions that were not part of the proposal. The Coast Guard
received input from two commenters in response to these questions. The
questions were:
    (1) Should the period for ``recent'' service be extended to 7 years
for all national officer endorsements?; and
    (2) Is it necessary to have a requirement for recent sea service
for an original, renewal, or raise of grade of an MMC with a national
officer endorsement?
    The responses to these questions do not impact this rulemaking, but
may be used to inform future Coast Guard decisions on regulatory
initiatives regarding the requirement for recent sea service. We
summarize the comments here.
    The Coast Guard asked if the period for recent sea service should
be extended to 7 years for all national officer endorsements. The Coast
Guard received input from two commenters in response to this question.
The first commenter does not support extending the period of recent sea
service to 7 years for all national officer endorsements. This
commenter discusses the rapid changes in technology that make it
critical for mariners to have recent service in order to maintain
familiarization with current equipment, associated practices, and safe
shipboard operations. Further, this commenter notes the importance of
recent service on vessels of appropriate horsepower and tonnage so that
mariners will have experience on vessels with handling characteristics,
navigation equipment, and firefighting equipment relevant to the
endorsement they are seeking.
    The second commenter supports extending to 7 years the period of
recent service for all original national officer endorsements, not just
those for uniformed service members. This commenter believes extending
the period within which recent service can be obtained to all mariners
would create an even standard regardless of how they obtained their
qualifying sea service, and would provide an equitable option within
the industry without a negative impact to safety. This same commenter
does not support extending the period for required service to 7 years
in the case of renewing an MMC officer endorsement or raising the grade
of an existing officer endorsement.
    The Coast Guard also asked if a recent sea service requirement is
necessary for an original, renewal, or raise of grade of an MMC with a
national officer endorsement. The Coast Guard received input from two
commenters in response to this question. Both commenters support the
requirement for recent sea service to obtain a national officer
endorsement. The commenters emphasized the importance of ensuring the
competency of mariners who make operational decisions that could impact
the safety of life, cargo, and the marine environment. The second
commenter supported the recent sea service requirement as a means of
ensuring competency within the maritime workforce, believing it is
important for mariners to have experience on the job before serving in
positions of authority where safety could be adversely affected by a
lack of experience. With respect to renewals, both commenters believe
the existing regulatory requirements for renewing an officer
endorsement provide reasonable options for mariners who do not have
recent sea service to renew a credential and return to employment
within the industry. See 46 CFR 10.227(e) for the available options a
mariner may use, other than recent sea service, to meet the
professional requirements for renewal. The commenters also state that
the renewal options allowed under 46 CFR 10.227(e) should not be
extended for raising the grade of an officer endorsement due to the
nature of taking on increased responsibility and, therefore, having an
increased role in ensuring the safety of a vessel.
    The first commenter also expressed concern over the training of
Coast Guard

personnel evaluating MMC applications, specifically with regard to the
tonnage and horsepower portion of the recent service requirements.
However, the training of Coast Guard personnel evaluating MMC
applications is outside the scope of this rulemaking.

V. Discussion of the Rule

    As specifically authorized by 46 U.S.C. 7101(j)(1), and consistent
with existing policy, the Coast Guard is amending 46 CFR 11.201(c)(2)
to allow individuals who have attained qualifying sea service aboard
vessels of the uniformed services within 7 years preceding the date of
application for a national officer endorsement to use this service to
satisfy the requirement for recent sea service. The Coast Guard is also
amending the regulation to allow applicants to use a combination of sea
service obtained on vessels of appropriate tonnage or horsepower within
3 years preceding the date of application with sea service obtained on
vessels of the uniformed services within 7 years preceding the date of
application to meet the requirement for 3 months of recent sea service.
Allowing for a combination of service provides maximum flexibility for
applicants in meeting the service requirements for a for a national
officer endorsement. This rule uses, without change, the regulatory
text proposed in the NPRM.

VI. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on these statutes or Executive Orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and 13563
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review) direct agencies to assess
the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying costs and
benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility.
Executive Order 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs) directs agencies to reduce regulation and control regulatory
costs and provides that ``for every one new regulation issued, at least
two prior regulations be identified for elimination, and that the cost
of planned regulations be prudently managed and controlled through a
budgeting process.''
    The OMB has not designated this rule a significant regulatory
action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, OMB
has not reviewed it. Because this rule is not a significant regulatory
action, this rule is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order
13771. See the OMB Memorandum titled ``Guidance Implementing Executive
Order 13771, titled `Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs' '' (April 5, 2017). A regulatory analysis (RA) follows.
    We did not receive public comments regarding the regulatory
analysis of the proposed rule; therefore, we adopt the preliminary
regulatory analysis of the proposed rule as final. However, we have
updated this analysis using 2018 wage rate estimates, which are
reflected in the revised analysis below.
    This final rule will revise existing regulations related to the
requirement for recent sea service to qualify for an MMC with a
national officer endorsement. Specifically, it will amend 46 CFR
11.201(c)(2) by establishing a 7-year period within which the
attainment of 3 months of qualifying sea service aboard vessels of the
uniformed services would satisfy the requirement for recent sea
service. This change will apply to original and raise of grade national
officer endorsement applicants who have served on vessels of the
uniformed services. Under 10 U.S.C. 101(a)(5), ``uniformed services''
means the armed forces, the commissioned corps of the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the commissioned corps of
the Public Health Service (PHS). To estimate the impact of the
increased timeframe to attain the 3 months of qualifying sea service
that is necessary to satisfy the requirement for recent sea service, we
examined data on officer endorsement applications provided by the
National Maritime Center (NMC).
    This final rule intends to update the regulatory requirements with
the service standard authorized under 46 U.S.C 7101(j)(I). This service
standard was implemented by the Coast Guard through CG-CVC Policy
Letter 15-03 on an interim basis until a rulemaking could be completed.
    CG-CVC Policy Letter 15-03 intended to increase the number of
qualified applicants for a national officer endorsement, which will
subsequently increase the pool of credentialed mariners supporting U.S.
commerce and the growth of the marine transportation system. However,
after examining the existing data, it was not possible to estimate the
extent of any increases. Information provided by the NMC from the
Merchant Mariner Licensing and Documentation (MMLD) system was used to
estimate the number of mariners that may be affected by this rule. The
data available from 2016-2018 indicates that applicants for an original
endorsement or raise of grade to an existing endorsement may be able to
utilize previous sea service on vessels of the uniformed services to
meet the professional requirements for a national officer endorsement.
Meeting the requirements for an original officer endorsement may allow
a mariner to be employed at a higher initial wage rate. We present an
analysis of the potential positive distributional impacts (qualitative)
on mariners in the benefits section.
    This final rule will increase the period from 3 years to 7 years
within which qualifying sea service aboard vessels of the uniformed
services can be used to satisfy the requirement for recent sea service
to qualify for an MMC with a national officer endorsement. Although
this final rule will provide increased flexibility to applicants for an
MMC, the Coast Guard cannot conclusively determine how many individuals
will take advantage of this flexibility or estimate the impact of
increasing the period from 3 years to 7 years on the number of total
qualified merchant mariners--therefore, we did not estimate costs.
Although the annual average number of original and raise of grade
national officer endorsements is decreasing, the number of individuals
using prior service on vessels of the uniformed services is increasing
based on data between 2016-2018. The Coast Guard did not receive any
public comments to supplement this analysis and no additional data has
become available. Therefore, we are unable to determine the source of
the increase in national officer endorsements issued with sea service
on vessels of the uniformed services (see table 1).

            Table 1--Summary of the Impacts of the Final Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Category                             Summary
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicability................  Amend requirement in 46 CFR 11.201(c)(2)
                                to 3 months of qualifying sea service
                                within 7 years of application for a
                                national officer endorsement for
                                individuals who have service on vessels
                                of the uniformed services.
Potentially Affected           Based on a historical estimate of the
 Population.                    proportion of individuals who used prior
                                service on vessels of the uniformed
                                services to the number of original and
                                raise of grade national officer
                                endorsements issued between 2016 and
                                2018, we estimate that about 516
                                prospective mariners may apply annually
                                for an MMC with a national officer
                                endorsement utilizing service on vessels
                                of the uniformed services. However, the
                                data did not allow us to conclusively
                                estimate the increase in mariners due to
                                annual fluctuations in the applications
                                as a result of factors external to this
                                rule.
Costs........................  No costs estimated because this final
                                rule will only provide increasing
                                flexibility for qualified merchant
                                mariners.
Unit Fee and Wage estimates    Unit costs for individuals who will take
 (these are no costs for the    advantage of the flexibility provided by
 final rule).                   the rule include the evaluation,
                                examination, and issuance fees for an
                                MMC--that ranges from $45-$110 for a
                                total unit cost of $255 for each
                                individual--and the labor time it takes
                                to fill out the forms at the respective
                                loaded mean hourly wage rates and
                                submission to the NMC that ranges from 5
                                to 18 minutes. The loaded mean hourly
                                wage rates for individuals range from
                                $26.99 to $57.95.
Unquantified Benefits........   Potential for an increased pool
                                of qualified mariners supporting U.S.
                                commerce and the growth of the marine
                                transportation system.
                                Potential for an increase in the
                                number of job opportunities for
                                individuals who have served on vessels
                                of the uniformed services.
                                Potential for an increase in the
                                starting wage rate for mariners who will
                                now qualify for a national officer
                                endorsement.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Please see the benefit section of this analysis for the wage rates
  in this table.

Affected Population

    Section 7101(j)(1) of 46 U.S.C. applies to applicants that have 3
months of qualifying service on vessels of the uniformed services
within the 7 years immediately preceding the date of application. The
pool of applicants who will be affected by this final rule are current
and former members of the U.S. armed forces,\5\ the commissioned corps
of NOAA and PHS, and civilians who attained qualifying sea service
aboard vessels of the uniformed services within 7 years preceding the
date of application for a national officer endorsement. There are
approximately 1.34 million military personnel serving in the U.S. armed
forces, 683,063 personnel serving in the Reserve,\6\ and approximately
727,000 civilians employed by the uniformed services.7 8 9
To estimate the number of people potentially affected by this final
rule, we examined data provided by the NMC. The NMC evaluates MMC
applications and issues credentials to qualified mariners. As noted in
section IV, on December 18, 2014, Congress amended 46 U.S.C. 7101 to
authorize the Coast Guard to extend the period by which a mariner can
obtain 3 months of qualifying sea service aboard vessels of the
uniformed services from 3 years to 7 years to satisfy the requirement
for recent sea service. Following that, in October 2015, CG-CVC Policy
Letter 15-03 was published to implement 46 U.S.C. 7101(j)(1) on an
interim basis until the Coast Guard could complete a rulemaking. This
analysis utilized Coast Guard data from the MMLD database on all
original and raise of grade national officer endorsements issued
beginning in 2010, and original and raise of grade national officer
endorsements issued utilizing prior sea service on vessels of the
uniformed services beginning in 2016. In 2016, the NMC began
identifying applications utilizing prior service aboard vessels of the
uniformed services to meet the requirement for recent sea service under
46 CFR 11.201(c)(2). The data spans from January 2016 through December
2018 to include 36 months (unless otherwise noted). Therefore, given
the data availability, we use the statistical baseline of 2016 for this
analysis. The observations are as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Under 10 U.S.C. 101(a)(4), the U.S. armed forces includes
the Air Force, Army, Coast Guard, Navy, and Marines Corps.
    \6\ The Reserve consists of the Army National Guard, the Army
Reserve, the Navy Reserve, the Marine Corps Reserve, the Air
National Guard, the Coast Guard Reserve, and the Air Force Reserve.
    \7\ Armed forces civilian personnel data from https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2011/compendia/statab/131ed/national-security-veterans-affairs.html, accessed March 26, 2019.
    Armed forces and Reserves population data from https://www.cna.org/pop-rep/2017/summary/summary.pdf, accessed March 24,
2020. Readers can find the data in Table 1. U.S. armed forces is
1.34 million (1,294,520 + 41,553). The Reserve is 683,063 (677,892 +
5,171).U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) public data, accessed 24
March 2020, https://usphs.gov/aboutus/leadership.aspx.
    NOAA public data, accessed July 14, 2018, https://www.fedscope.opm.gov/ibmcognos/cgi-bin/cognosisapi.dll. To access,
use the following path: FSe--Employment Generic, Employment--March
2018 Generic, Agency--All Agencies, CM54--National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration. This link is only accessible by a
government computer.
    \8\ As stated in CG-CVC Policy Letter No. 15-03, section
(4)(a)(3), this will also apply to civilian mariners working aboard
vessels of the uniformed services. For example, the more-than 5000
civil servant mariners who work aboard Military Sealift Command
vessels, the union contract mariners who sail aboard NOAA vessels,
and the Navy-owned prepositioning vessels.
    \9\ There are approximately 709,265 DoD civilian personnel,
6,500 PHS personnel, and 11,268 NOAA personnel. 709,265 + 6,500 +
11,268 = 727,033, which is rounded to 727,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) The annual average number of original and raise of grade
national officer endorsements issued is 7,203 (as observed from 2010-
2018). In Figure 1, we show the results of our observation of
historical data indicating that the number of annual officer
endorsements issued from 2010-2018 is on a downward trend.
    (2) In 2016, there were 7,165 original and raise of grade national
officer endorsements issued, of which 356 used prior service on vessels
of the uniformed services to meet the requirements for the
endorsement.\10\ This is equivalent to approximately 5.0 percent (356 /
7,165). In 2017, there were 6,330 original and raise of grade national
officer endorsements issued, of which 495 used prior service on vessels
of the uniformed services to meet the requirements for the endorsement.
This is equivalent to approximately 7.8 percent (495 / 6,330). In 2018,
there were 5,748 original and raise of grade national officer
endorsements issued, of which 501 used prior service on vessels of the
uniformed services to meet the requirements for the endorsement. This
is equivalent to approximately 8.7 percent (501 / 5,748).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Qualification meaning prior service on vessels of the
uniformed services to meet the requirement for recent sea service to
qualify for a national officer endorsement.

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

    (3) The average percentage of original and raise of grade national
officer endorsements issued using prior sea service aboard vessels of
the uniformed services is about 7.2 percent ([0.05 + 0.078 + 0.087] / 3
= 0.072 or 7.2 percent).
    (4) Using the figure derived in (1) and the figure derived in (3),
the Coast Guard found the average number of (estimated) national
officer endorsements using prior sea service aboard vessels of the
uniformed services to be 516 per year (7,203 average annual number of
national officer endorsements issued x 0.072 percentage of national
officer endorsements issued using prior sea service on vessels of the
uniformed services).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Slight errors may be due to rounding.
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16SE20.001

Costs Analysis

    This final rule will amend 46 CFR 11.201(c)(2) and establish a 7-
year period within which the attainment of 3 months of qualifying sea
service aboard vessels of the uniformed services could be used to
satisfy the requirement for recent sea service to qualify for a
national officer endorsement, which is the current industry practice.
Therefore, we expect the rule to generate no cost to industry and the
Federal Government. Following the publication of CG-CVC Policy Letter
15-03, the Coast Guard anticipated an increase in the total number of
MMCs issued with original or raise of grade national officer
endorsements. In 2016, the NMC began collecting data on the number of
applicants using prior sea service aboard vessels of the uniformed
service.\12\ As shown in table 2, the total number of national officer
endorsements issued, either original or raise of grade, decreased
approximately 20 percent from 2016-2018. However, the number of
national officer endorsements issued, either original or raise of
grade, that utilized sea service on vessels of the uniformed services
increased approximately 41 percent [(501-356) / 356].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The data is available for years 2016-2018, which leads to a
baseline year of 2016.

                                  Table 2--National Officer Endorsements Issued
                                                   [2016-2018]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        National Officer Endorsements Issued--Original and Raise of Grade
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year............................................................            2016            2017            2018
Applications....................................................           7,165           6,330           5,748
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  National Officer Endorsements Issued with Service on Vessels of the Uniformed Services--Original and Raise of
                                                      Grade
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year............................................................            2016            2017            2018
Applications....................................................             356             495             501
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated previously, this rule expects to increase the number of
qualified applicants for a national officer endorsements that will
ultimately lead to an increase in the number of credentialed mariners.
However, even with the increase in the national officer endorsements
issued utilizing sea service on vessels of the uniformed services, the
decrease in national officer endorsements issued from 2010-2018 is
significant enough to conclude that the population of credentialed
mariners is decreasing.
    In addition, due to data limitations described above, we cannot
ascertain if the increase in national officer endorsements issued with
sea service on vessels of the uniformed services from 2016-2018 was due
to applicants utilizing sea service on vessels of the uniformed
services resulting from CG-CVC Policy Letter 15-03 or if it was just
part of the annual fluctuations in applications.
    As a result, we are unable to estimate the impact of CG-CVC Policy
Letter 15-03 on the number of original or raise of grade national
officer endorsements issued, and we are also unable to conclusively
estimate the impact of this rule on the number of total qualified
merchant mariners. Without being able to estimate the increase in the
number of original or raise of grade national officer endorsements
issued utilizing prior service on vessels of the uniformed services as
directly related to CG-CVC Policy Letter 15-03, we are unable to assign
costs to this rule.
    Although there are no costs for this rule, we present a unit cost
estimate for a mariner to obtain an MMC. The fees associated with an
application for an MMC are established in 46 CFR 10.219. The fees for
an original or raise of grade national officer endorsement include
evaluation, examination, and issuance fees ranging from $45-$110. We
also estimate it takes a mariner between 5 and 18 minutes (based on
NMC's OMB-approved Information Collection Request (ICR), with a control
number of 1625-0040), at a respective mariner's loaded hourly wage rate
(see table 3) to fill out the MMC application for submission to the
NMC. However, because this rule will extend the period of time a
mariner has to attain 3 months of qualifying sea service aboard vessels
of the uniformed services from 3 years to 7 years, which has been the
industry practice since 2015 when CG-CVC Policy Letter 15-03 went into
effect, there is no cost associated with this change.
    Because we cannot determine the impact on the number of national
officer endorsements issued related to CG-CVC Policy Letter 15-03, we
also cannot estimate the government costs associated with this
rulemaking. However, we are able to provide the following assessment of
government costs for clarification purposes only. It normally takes a
Coast Guard evaluator at the GS-8 level with a loaded mean hourly wage
of $49 approximately 45 minutes to review the MMC application and
associated documentation for a unit cost of about $36.75.\13\
Government costs would result if there were an increase in applications
for MMCs or if the time to evaluate the application changed from the
estimated time in the ICR with a control number of 1625-0040. This
would be realized at the NMC where applications for MMCs are evaluated
and credentials are issued.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Information provided by the NMC. The mean hourly wage rate
for a GS-8 employee is $49, ``Outside Government Rate'', per
Commandant Instruction 7310.1T, November 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Benefits

    This final rule will align the regulations in 46 CFR 11.201(c) with
the authority granted in 46 U.S.C. 7101(j)(1) with no negative economic
impact on the affected population. As mentioned earlier in this
document, the Coast Guard issued CG-CVC Policy Letter 15-03 to
implement 46 U.S.C. 7101(j)(1) on an interim basis until a rulemaking
could be completed. Without the regulatory change made by this final
rule, our regulations would not reflect the most up-to-date sea service
standard specifically authorized under 46 U.S.C. 7101(j)(1).
Accordingly, this final rule helps avoid confusion by ensuring the most
up-to-date applicable standard is incorporated in the regulation.
    The Coast Guard has identified several qualitative benefits for
this rule. The final rule will improve the pathways to qualify for an
MMC with a national officer endorsement and increase the number of job
opportunities for individuals with experience aboard vessels of the
uniformed services. This also provides the ability for a larger pool of
mariners to enter the workforce at a higher pay rate than they would
have realized prior to CG-CVC Policy Letter 15-03. Although there is
also a potential for an increase in the pool of applicants, at this
time the data does not allow us to estimate this impact. While there
was a 41 percent increase in the number of original and raise of grade
national officer endorsements issued utilizing prior sea service on
vessels of the uniformed services, there was also a corresponding 20
percent decrease (see table 2) in the number of original and raise of
grade national officer endorsements issued that did not utilize prior
sea service from 2016-2018. The 20 percent decrease is a more
significant indication of the annual credentialing trend as compared to
the 41 percent increase to the population that did use prior sea
service as part of their application. At this time, the data is not
robust enough to allow us to estimate the impact of CG-CVC Policy
Letter 15-03 on the number of original and raise of grade national
officer endorsements issued.
    Providing a method for individuals to use recent sea service on
vessels of the uniformed services to qualify for an MMC with a national
officer endorsement could result in the opportunity for them to be
initially employed at a higher pay rate, which leads to the possibility
of favorable wage impacts to the mariner. Below, we describe the
potential increase in wages to the mariner resulting from having
previous service on vessels of the uniformed services.
    To estimate the potential wage impacts to the mariner, we compared

the shipboard wage rates for an individual with an MMC with an officer
endorsement to that of an individual with an MMC with a rating
endorsement. The job categories for individuals with an officer
endorsement as defined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) are as
follows: (1) Deck Officers, to include captains, mates, and pilots for
water vessels; and (2) Engine Officers, to include ship engineers. The
job categories for ratings are as follows: (1) Deck, including sailors;
and (2) Engine, including marine oilers. If an applicant was unable to
meet the existing 3-year requirement for recent sea service to qualify
for an MMC with a national officer endorsement, they may seek
employment as a rating to obtain recent sea service.14 15
Ratings are employed at a lower wage rate than officers. Tables 3 and 4
show the calculation for the loaded wage factor and the loaded wage
rate for each personnel category. As described in table 4, individuals
who do not hold an officer endorsement are classified as a rating paid
at a lower wage than those that have an officer endorsement aboard a
vessel. To meet the requirement for 3 months of recent sea service for
an MMC with a national officer endorsement, an individual would have to
spend that time employed as a rating aboard a vessel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ For officers: https://www.bls.gov/oes/2018/may/oes535021.htm and https://www.bls.gov/oes/2018/may/oes535031.htm;
for ratings: https://www.bls.gov/oes/2018/may/oes535011.htm. The
mean hourly wage figure is what is used in the Coast Guard
calculation.
    \15\ Currently, there are 45 types of officer endorsements and
12 types of rating endorsements available for an MMC. Because the
BLS does not have wage information on all of these endorsement
types, these categories were chosen as the best categories to
encompass the endorsement types.

                                     Table 3--Loaded Wage Factor Calculation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Total          Wage &       Loaded  wage
         Personnel category                  Data source           compensation      salaries         factor
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All Workers Private Industry.......  BLS Employer Costs for               $27.83          $18.84           1.477
                                      Employee Compensation, all
                                      workers private industry,
                                      service providing,
                                      production, transportation
                                      and materials moving.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                        Table 4--Loaded Wage Calculation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Mean  hourly    Loaded  wage     Loaded wage
         Personnel category                  Data source               wage           factor          ($2018)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deck Officers......................  Wage Rate: 2018 mean hourly          $39.61           1.477          $58.50
                                      wage for Captains, Mates,
                                      and Pilots of Water
                                      Vessels.
Engine Officers....................  Wage Rate: 2018 mean hourly           36.40           1.477           53.76
                                      wage for Ship Engineers.
Deck and Engine Ratings............  Wage Rate: 2018 mean hourly           22.20           1.477           32.79
                                      wage for Sailors and
                                      Marine Oilers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Numbers may not sum due to independent rounding.

    We estimate the loaded hourly wage rate \16\ to be $58.50 for Deck
Officers and $53.76 for Engine Officers, respectively. This equates to
an average loaded mean hourly wage rate for officers of $56.13.\17\ We
estimate the loaded mean hourly wage rate of Deck and Engine ratings to
be $32.79.18 19
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Employer Costs for Employee Compensation provides
information on the employer compensation and can be found at https://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/dsrv?cm. To obtain the load factor, we used
the multi-screen database and searched for ``private industry
workers'' under ``total compensation'' and then for ``Service
providing'' in the category ``Production, transportation and
materials moving Occupations'', within the United States. Similarly,
we followed the same steps to get the value for ``wages and
salaries'' to calculate the load factor, we used the series ID
CMU201S000500000D and CMU202S000500000D and 2019 quarter 3. The
loaded wage factor is equal to the total compensation of $27.83
divided by the wages and salary of $18.84 ($27.83 / $18.84) = 1.477.
    \17\ To get the average loaded hourly labor rate for ratings,
the calculation is ($58.50 + $53.76) / 2 = $56.13.
    \18\ All wage rates are in 2018 dollars.
    \19\ Slight calculation adjustments may occur due to rounding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To obtain the wage difference for the period a person would need to
work as a rating on board a vessel to obtain recent sea service to
qualify for a national officer endorsement, we must first calculate the
3-month wage for a rating, then calculate the 3-month wage for an
officer, and then calculate the difference. We estimated the working
hours in a 3-month, or 90-day period, to be 720 hours (90 working days,
including weekends, multiplied by 8-hour working days).\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Per the subject matter expert, the working hours is 7 days
a week, 8 hours per day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Using the calculated loaded mean hourly wage rate for Deck and
Engine ratings, the Coast Guard calculated the total wages for a 3-
month time period to be $23,608.80 ($32.79 x 720). Using the calculated
average loaded mean hourly wage rate for officers, we calculated the
total wages for a 3-month time period to be $40,413.60 ($56.13 x
720).\21\ We can then calculate the loss in wages from being unable to
qualify for an MMC with a national officer endorsement for a 3-month
period. The difference in wages totals $16,804.80 ($40,413.60-
$23,608.80) per mariner. See table 5 below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Slight calculation adjustments may occur due to rounding.

                                         Table 5--90-Day Wage Difference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Loaded mean     90 Days  in     90 Days  in
                       Personnel category                           hourly wage        hours        wages \22\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deck and Engine Officers........................................          $56.13             720      $40,413.60
Deck and Engine Ratings.........................................           32.79             720      $23,608.80
Individual Difference (Impact)..................................  ..............  ..............    ($16,804.80)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In summary, although we were unable to estimate the impact of this
rule on the number of merchant mariners available for employment on
commercial vessels, we provide an estimate of the potential wage
increases to the mariner if they are initially credentialed as an
officer versus a rating. By increasing the period to meet the
requirement for recent sea service to qualify for an MMC with a
national officer endorsement, an individual forgoes having to work at a
lower pay rate to obtain the prerequisite service for an officer
endorsement. A potential increase in the entry wage rate for the
applicant, if they are able to take advantage of this opportunity,
could lead to an improved quality of life for the mariners who will now
qualify for an MMC with a national officer endorsement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Figures may not add due to rounding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regulatory Alternative Considered

    In developing this rule, the Coast Guard considered the following
alternative to this rule: Continuing to allow the extended period for
recent sea service as provided in CG-CVC Policy Letter 15-03. We
rejected this alternative. In enacting Section 305 of the Howard Coble
Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2014, Congress expressly
authorized the Secretary to extend the period for recent sea service
from 3 years to 7 years for individuals whose sea service was aboard
vessels of the uniformed services. Accordingly, the Coast Guard is
taking action, through rulemaking, to make the regulatory language
consistent with the Secretary's authority provided in 46 U.S.C.
7101(j)(1).
    There are no other feasible alternatives that would be consistent
with the policy goals of this rule. The existing regulatory language in
46 CFR 11.201(c)(2) requires qualifying sea service to be attained
within a 3-year period preceding the date of application for all
applicants.

B. Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 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. The rule affects individuals and not companies who employ these
individuals. The RFA does not consider individuals to be small
entities. Additionally, this rule does not impose any costs on non-
Federal entities. Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C.
605(b) that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities.

C. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104-121, we offer to assist small
entities in understanding this rule so that they can better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. 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.
    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).

D. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520. As defined in 5
CFR 1320.3(c), ``collection of information'' comprises reporting,
recordkeeping, monitoring, posting, labeling, and other similar
actions. Because the data indicates that this rule will not result in
an increase in the number of applicants, it will not add respondents
for recording and recordkeeping to the existing collection (OMB Control
Number 1625-0040), ``Application for Merchant Mariner Credential (MMC),
Application for Merchant Mariner Medical Certificate, Application for
Merchant Mariner Medical Certificate for Entry Level Ratings, Small
Vessel Sea Service Form, DOT/USCG Periodic Drug Testing Form,
Disclosure Statement for Narcotics, DWI/DUI, and/or Other Convictions,
Merchant Mariner Medical Certificate, Recognition of Foreign
Certificate.''

E. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism) if it has a substantial direct effect on States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this final rule under Executive Order
13132 and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental
federalism principles and preemption requirements as described in
Executive Order 13132. Our analysis follows.
    It is well settled that States may not regulate in categories
reserved for regulation by the Coast Guard. It is also well settled
that the subject matter in 46 U.S.C. 7101 concerning the issuance and
classification of merchant marine officer credentials by the United
States Coast Guard is to be given pre-emptive effect over any
conflicting state laws. See, e.g., United States v. Locke, 529 U.S. 89
(2000) (finding that the states are foreclosed from regulating tanker
vessels) see also Ray v. Atlantic Richfield Co., 435 U.S. 151, 157
(1978) (state regulation is preempted where ``the scheme of federal
regulation may be so pervasive as to make reasonable the inference that
Congress left no room for the States to supplement it [or where] the
Act of Congress may touch a field in which the federal interest is so
dominant that the federal system will be assumed to preclude
enforcement of state laws on the same subject.'' (citations omitted)).
Because this final rule involves the credentialing of mariners under 46
U.S.C. 7101, it relates to personnel qualifications for vessels subject
to a pervasive scheme of federal regulation and is therefore foreclosed
from regulation by the States. Because the States may not regulate
within this category, this final rule is consistent with the
fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements in
Executive Order 13132.

F. Unfunded Mandates

    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 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Although this rule will not result
in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

G. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause 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 will not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
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 will 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. We have determined that it is not a
``significant energy action'' under Executive Order 13211, because
although it is a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866, it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on
the supply, distribution, or use of energy, and the Administrator of
OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated
it as a significant energy action.

L. Technical Standards and Incorporation by Reference

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

M. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a determination that this action is one of a category of actions that
do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the
human environment. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting
this determination is available in the docket. For instructions on
locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble. This
rule is categorically excluded under paragraph L56 of Appendix A, Table
1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. Paragraph L56
pertains to the training, qualifying, licensing, and disciplining of
maritime personnel. This rule involves amending the period within which
qualifying sea service aboard vessels of the uniformed services can be
used to satisfy the requirement for recent sea service to qualify for a
Merchant Mariner Credential with a national officer endorsement.

List of Subjects in 46 CFR Part 11

    Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Schools,
Seamen.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
46 CFR part 11 as follows:

PART 11--REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFICER ENDORSEMENTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 11 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 14 U.S.C. 503; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 46 U.S.C. 2101, 2103,
and 2110; 46 U.S.C. chapter 71; 46 U.S.C. 7502, 7505, 7701, 8906,
and 70105; Executive Order 10173; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1. Section 11.107 is also issued under the
authority of 44 U.S.C. 3507.

0
2. Amend Sec.  11.201 by redesignating paragraph (c)(1) through (c)(6)
as paragraph (c) introductory text through (c)(5) and revising newly
redesignated (c)(1) to read as follows;

Sec.  11.201   General requirements for national and STCW officer
endorsements.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) An applicant for a national officer endorsement must meet one
of the following:
    (i) Have at least 3 months of required service on vessels of
appropriate tonnage or horsepower within the 3 years immediately
preceding the date of application; or
    (ii) Have at least 3 months of required service on vessels of the
uniformed services as defined in 10 U.S.C. 101(a)(5) of appropriate
tonnage or horsepower within the 7 years immediately preceding the date
of application; or
    (iii) Have at least 3 months of required service attained through a
combination of service established under paragraphs (c)(1)(i) or (ii)
of this section.
* * * * *

    Dated: August 12, 2020.
R.V. Timme,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Prevention
Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-18298 Filed 9-15-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P