Quiero saber acerca de...

43920

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES

to print for Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals, as well as associated amendments, will permit facilities to satisfy regulatory requirements at a lower cost. LNG and LHG facilities are required to submit Operations Manuals and Emergency Manuals and amendments, while MTR
facilities are required to submit only Operations Manuals and amendments.
Under current regulations, facility operators are required to send two printed copies of each manual and set of amendments to the COTP. The final rule will permit these documents to be submitted electronically, at the discretion of the facility operators.
Facility operators exercising this option will no longer need to assemble and mail printed versions, resulting in administrative cost savings. The final rule will also permit facility operators sending their documentation in print format to submit only one copy of their documents, resulting in further administrative cost savings.
Additionally, current regulations require those facility operators whose documents were not approved by the COTP to resubmit two copies of revised documents to the COTP in print format.
As stated previously, in the NPRMs economic analysis we erroneously estimated that in the current regulations the facility only mailed back one revised copy to the COTP. This has been corrected in the economic analysis of the final rule.7 The annual cost associated with the additional manual that must be sent by those LNG/LHG
and MTR facilities, which includes the costs of manufacturing the additional manuals and amendments as well as the shipping and handling associated, is $1,056 per year and $10,563.30 over a 10-year period in nominal terms. The final rule will permit facility operators to resubmit their documents in either electronic or print format. Facility operators exercising the option to use an electronic format will no longer need to assemble and mail two printed versions, while those who decide to instead send printed documentation will only need to send one copy instead of two to the COTP. This reduction in paper documentation will result in additional administrative cost savings.
Finally, the final rule permits facilities to keep documentation at their 7 The cost difference between the NPRM and the final rule, accounted for by correctly estimating two manuals instead of erroneously estimating one, is $1,056.33 per year and $10,563.30 over a 10-year period, in nominal terms.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:21 Aug 10, 2021

Jkt 253001

facilitys marine transfer area in either electronic or print format. Currently, this documentation must be kept in print format at these locations.
According to Coast Guard SMEs from the Office of Port and Facility Compliance CGFAC, the typical facility has, on average, two marine transfer areas.8 LNG and LHG facilities are required to keep one copy of an Operations Manual and one copy of an Emergency Manual and to keep each manual up-to-date with amendments at each of their marine transfer areas. MTR
facility operators are required to keep one Operations Manual and amendments at each marine transfer area. Those facility operators that exercise the option to use electronic documents instead of print will experience a benefit, in the form of a cost savings, resulting from no longer having to assemble these printed documents one copy for each marine transfer area,9 as well as not having to physically place this documentation at the two marine transfer areas.10
The final rule also results in administrative cost savings to the Coast Guard. Currently, when the COTP
examines an Operations Manual or Emergency Manual and finds it meets the regulatory requirements or is adequate, they must return a stamped copy to the facility. Under the final rule, the COTP will not return a printed copy of the manual via mail.
Instead, the COTP will send either a printed or an electronic message back to the facility stating that the Coast Guard has examined the manual.11 As a result, the Coast Guard will experience cost savings from not having to handle and mail back to the facility a stamped, printed version of the manual when the facility sends electronic documentation to the Coast Guard.
On the other hand, if the COTP finds inadequacies in the submitted manual, meaning the manual does not 8 Based on an SME assessment from CGFAC. All Coast Guard SME input assessments mentioned in this final rule, unless stated otherwise, are from CGFAC.
9 Each marine transfer area is saved one copy.
However, as each facility has, on average, two marine transfer areas, each facility is saved two copies total.
10 These areas are not the same as the administrative offices of the facilities; hence, labor time needs to be expended to place manuals at the transfer areas after they are assembled.
11 The Coast Guard envisions sending back an electronic format of the manual with an electronically stamped watermark, notification, or similar method.

PO 00000

Frm 00012

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

meet the regulatory requirements, the COTP must currently mail back a copy of the manual, or provide a notification, with annotations or comments specifying how to correct the manual.12
Based on the requirements in the final rule, the COTP will be allowed to send an electronic or printed message, instead of only a notification in written form, explaining why the manual does not meet the requirements of the part.
The COTP will not be obligated to send back any copies of the manual with their explanation for why the manual does not meet the requirements.
In addition, when the COTP receives corrected versions of the manual back from facilities, under current regulations, the COTP must send back to the facility one printed copy of the document. In the economic analysis contained in the NPRM, we had erroneously estimated that no printed copies of the corrected manual were sent back to the facility when the COTP
finds the corrected manual adequate.
This is corrected in the economic analysis contained in this final rule. As the final rule permits the Coast Guard to electronically notify facilities regarding whether their manuals are adequate or inadequate the Coast Guard will experience a cost savings.
In table 1, we show a summary of the impacts of the final rule. As a result of the previously discussed changes between this RA and the NPRM, the projected cost savings to industry and Coast Guard have increased from the analysis in the NPRM. The annualized and 10 year cost savings to industry, both discounted 7 percent, increased approximately 9 percent from the NPRM
estimates of $36,307 and $255,007 to $39,394 and $276,689, respectively. The annualized and 10-year cost savings to the Coast Guard, both discounted 7
percent, increased approximately 16
percent, from the NPRM estimates of $7,426 and $52,160 to $8,616 and $60,512, respectively. As a result, the aggregated annual and 10-year cost savings for both the private sector and the Coast Guard, discounted at 7
percent, increased approximately 10
percent, from $43,734 and $307,167 to $48,010 and $337,200, respectively.
12 The word inadequacies is used on numerous occasions in the text of the current regulation.
Sections where the word is explicitly cited include paragraphs 154.320a1 and 154.320c2.

E:FRFM11AUR1.SGM

11AUR1