Coast Guard Proposes to Align Some Vessel Inspection and Certification Regulations with 'Seagoing Barge' Rules
The U.S. Coast Guard wants to revise several vessel inspection and certification rules to align them with a statutory definition of “seagoing barge” and with an exemption from inspection and certification requirements for some seagoing barges, it said in a Federal Register notice scheduled for Jan. 9. The proposed changes are intended to eliminate ambiguity in existing regulation, reduce the potential for confusion among the regulated public, and help the Coast Guard perform its maritime safety and stewardship missions, it said.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
The Coast Guard published a direct final rule (DFR) on seagoing barges Dec. 14, 2011. The DFR relied on 33 CFR 1.05-55, which sets the parameters for CG's issuance of DFRs and states that a DFR will be withdrawn if the CG receives any adverse public comment. It defines “adverse” as a comment that “explains why the rules would be inappropriate … or would be ineffective or unacceptable without a change.” After publication of DFR, the CG received two adverse comments and withdrew the DFR, stating its intention to reconsider the changes in a notice of proposed rulemaking. This NPRM is essentially identical to the withdrawn DFR but takes the adverse comments into account.
The purpose of the NPRM is to propose changes to align CG regulations with current statutory language, reducing ambiguity that could confuse the regulated public. The ambiguity arose from two legislative changes that affect how seagoing barges are defined and regulated.
First, seagoing barges were once defined as non-self-propelled vessels of 100 gross tons and over that proceed on voyages on the high seas or ocean. But in 1983, Congress changed the definition to a non-self-propelled vessel of at least 100 gross tons making voyages beyond the statutorily defined Boundary Line. Although the CG then amended 46 CFR 90.10-26 to align that section's definition of seagoing barge, two CG rules continue to use the pre-1983 definition.
A second problem is that under 46 U.S.C/ 3301(6), all seagoing barges must be inspected by the Coast Guard. But in 1993, Congress added an exemption, 46 U.S.C. 3302(m), to exempt a seagoing barge from the section 3301(6) inspection requirements if the barge is unmanned and doesn’t carry either a hazardous material as cargo or a flammable or combustible liquid, including oil, in bulk.
Since then, the CG has required seagoing barges to be inspected and certified only if they're not subject to the exemption. Nevertheless, some owners and operators of unmanned barges that carry neither hazardous nor flammable/combustible materials voluntarily undergo inspection and maintain certification. This may be a business judgment, allowing a barge to switch quickly to a service that is ineligible for the exemption, but it's also possible that some owners and operators continue to have their barges inspected and certificated only because they're unaware of the exemption, causing them and the CG unnecessary expense.
Comments are due March 10 at WWW.REGULATIONS.GOV.
Further information: William Abernathy, (202) 372-1363 or William.J.Abernathy@uscg.mil.