[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 27 (Friday, February 8, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2799-2800]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-01591]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 154
[Docket Number USCG-1999-5705]
RIN 1625-AA-12 and 2115-AE87
Marine Transportation-Related Facility Response Plans for
Hazardous Substances
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is withdrawing its notice of proposed
rulemaking entitled ``Marine Transportation-Related Facility Response
Plans for Hazardous Substances'' that we published on March 31, 2000.
The Coast Guard is withdrawing this rulemaking based on findings that
the proposed rules are no longer appropriate to the current state of
spill response in the chemical industry.
DATES: The notice of proposed rulemaking published March 31, 2000, at
65 FR 17416, is withdrawn as of February 8, 2019.
ADDRESSES: The docket for this withdrawn rulemaking is available by
searching docket number USCG-1999-5705 using the Federal portal at
http://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notice of withdrawal, call or email Mr. Christopher Friese, Commercial
Vessel Safety Specialist, Office of Marine Environmental Response
Policy (CG-MER-1), Coast Guard; telephone 202-372-1227.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Table of Abbreviations
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
OPA 90 Oil Pollution Act of 1990
CTAC Chemical Transportation Advisory Committee
II. Background
The Clean Water Act,\1\ as amended by section 4202(a)(6) of the Oil
Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90),\2\ requires owners or operators of tank
vessels, offshore facilities, and onshore facilities to prepare
response plans to mitigate spills of both oils and hazardous
substances. These plans must address measures to respond, to the
maximum extent practicable, to a worst-case discharge or a substantial
threat of such a discharge, of oil or a hazardous substance into or on
navigable waters, adjoining shorelines, or the exclusive economic zone
of the United States. The primary purpose of requiring response plans
is to minimize the impact of a discharge of oil or hazardous substances
into the navigable waters of the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 33 U.S.C. 1321(j)(5).
\2\ Public Law 101-380, 104 Stat. 484.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 3, 1996, we published an advance notice of proposed
rulemaking soliciting public input on regulations concerning response
plans for certain tank vessels and marine transportation-related
facilities (61 FR 20083), and subsequently held two public meetings on
the subject that were announced in the Federal Register (61 FR 34775).
On March 31, 2000, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
in the Federal Register entitled ``Marine Transportation-Related
Facility Response Plans for Hazardous Substances'' (65 FR 17416). In
the NPRM, we proposed regulations requiring response plans for certain
Marine Transportation-Related facilities. The Coast Guard received
feedback from concerned citizens, commercial entities, and trade
associations regarding the proposed rulemaking. These comments were
made available in the docket. Since then, further analysis by the Coast
Guard and the Chemical Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC) has
shown that implementation of the rules as laid out in the 2000 NPRM
would not significantly increase response effectiveness at this time.
CTAC also identified many areas in which the NPRM may overlap with
existing local and state regulatory schemes as well as current industry
practice. Most coastal states already have regulations in place
governing spill response at facilities that handle hazardous
substances. Area Planning Committees have also been voluntarily
incorporating hazardous substances into their contingency plans, as
facilities that handle hazardous chemicals are often located near sites
that process oil. Furthermore, organizations like the Chemical
Transportation Emergency Center and Spill Center have demonstrated that
synergies from oil response may also be utilized in hazardous substance
response. Marine transportation related facilities handling oil
products must also comply with the Coast Guard's Facility Response Plan
requirements.\3\ Although these requirements address planning for oil
spill response, these best practices may also be applied to hazardous
substance response to an extent. Due to the services and requirements
industry frequently engages in to satisfy
[[Page 2800]]
insurance requirements and company sustainability polices, together
with the existence of new terminal inspection protocols like that
developed by the Chemical Distribution Institute, CTAC was unable to
identify any significant gaps in hazardous substance spill response
planning at marine transportation-related facilities that would be
reduced by the 2000 proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 33 CFR part 154, subpart F.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Withdrawal
The Coast Guard is withdrawing the proposed rulemaking so as to
better analyze the current spill response capabilities of the chemical
industry before conducting any further rulemaking on hazardous
substance response plans for marine transportation-related facilities.
The Coast Guard remains committed to fulfilling its OPA 90 mandate,
however we believe the proposed rules are no longer appropriate as
proposed.
The Coast Guard has determined that withdrawing the proposed rule
is appropriate based on findings that the proposed rules are no longer
applicable to the current state of spill response in the chemical
industry. Accordingly, the Coast Guard is withdrawing the ``Marine
Transportation-Related Facility Response Plans for Hazardous
Substances'' proposed rulemaking announced in an NPRM published March
31, 2000 (65 FR 17416).
IV. Executive Order 13771
The withdrawal of the NPRM qualifies as a deregulatory action under
Executive Order 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs), which 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.'' See the OMB Memorandum titled
``Guidance Implementing Executive Order 13771, Titled `Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs' '' (April 5, 2017).
Dated: February 4, 2019.
Anthony J. Vogt,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Response
Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-01591 Filed 2-7-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P