FR Doc 06-369

[Federal Register: January 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 9)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 2154-2167]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr13ja06-14]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

46 CFR Part 10

[USCG-2004-17455]
RIN 1625-AA85

Validation of Merchant Mariners' Vital Information and Issuance
of Coast Guard Merchant Mariner's Licenses and Certificates of Registry

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Interim rule with request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is amending the maritime personnel licensing
rules to include new security requirements when mariners apply for
original, renewal, and raise of grade licenses and certificates of
registry. This interim rule corrects omissions and ambiguities in the
Coast Guard's preexisting maritime personnel licensing regulations.
This interim rule will require all applicants for licenses and
certificates of registry to have their identity checked and their
fingerprints taken for a criminal record review by the Coast Guard. The
new requirements are similar to those that apply to applicants for
merchant mariner's documents.

DATES: This interim rule is effective January 13, 2006 and is
applicable for applications received by the Coast Guard on or after
that date. Comments and related material must reach the Docket
Management Facility on or before April 13, 2006. Comments sent to the
Office of Management and Budget on collection of information must reach
OMB on or before March 14, 2006.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number USCG-2004-17455 to the Docket Management Facility at the U.S.
Department of Transportation. To avoid duplication, please use only one
of the following methods:
(1) Web site: http://dms.dot.gov.

(2) Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
(3) Fax: 202-493-2251.
(4) Delivery: Room PL-401 on the Plaza level of the Nassif
Building, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is 202-366-9329.
(5) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and
docket number or RIN for this rulemaking. All comments will be posted
without change to http://www.dms.dot.gov/feddocket, including any

personal information sent with each comment. For detailed instructions
on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking
process, see the ``Public Participation in Rulemaking Process'' heading
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
submitted comments, go to http://www.dmt.dot.gov You may also access the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this interim
rule, call Mr. Stewart Walker, Project Manager, National Maritime
Center (NMC), U.S. Coast Guard, telephone 202-493-1022. If you have
questions on viewing the docket, call Ms. Andrea M. Jenkins, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, Department of Transportation, telephone
202-366-0271.
For questions on submitting an application for the issuance of a
license or certificate of registry, call the nearest Coast Guard
Regional Examination Center (REC), a list of which appears in Title 46,
Code of Federal Regulations (46 CFR) section 10.105, or on the Internet
at http://www.uscg.mil/STCW/index.htm.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 2155]]

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments
II. Background and Purpose
III. Discussion of the Rule
IV. Regulatory Requirements
A. Administrative Procedure Act
B. Regulatory Evaluation
Baseline Population
Costs
Benefits
Small Entities
Assistance for Small Entities
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
F. Taking of Private Property
G. Civil Justice Reform
H. Protection of Children
I. Indian Tribal Governments
J. Energy Effects
K. Technical Standards
L. Environment
List of Subjects in 46 CFR Part 10

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

Interested persons are invited to participate in this rulemaking by
submitting written data, views, or arguments on all aspects of the
interim rule. Comments that will provide the most assistance to the
Coast Guard in developing these procedures will reference a specific
portion of the interim rule, explain the reason for any recommended
change, and include data, information, or authority that support such
recommended change. See ADDRESSES above for information on how to
submit comments. All comments received will be posted, without change,
to http://dms.dot.gov and will include any personal information you

have provided. Please see DOT's ``Privacy Act'' paragraph below.
The Coast Guard does not plan to hold a public meeting to solicit
comments on this interim rule. However, you may submit a request for
one to the Docket Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES
explaining why a hearing would be beneficial. If the Coast Guard
determines that a public hearing would aid this rulemaking, we will
hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal
Register.
Submitting comments: If you submit a comment, please include your
name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG-
2004-17455), indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. You may
submit your comments and material by electronic means, mail, fax, or
delivery to the Docket Management Facility at the address under
ADDRESSES; but please submit your comments and material by only one
means. If you submit them by mail or delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period in the drafting of the
final rule.
Viewing comments and documents: To view comments, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket,
go to http://dms.dot.gov at any time and conduct a simple search using

the docket number. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in
room PL-401 on the Plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh
Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
Privacy Act: Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). Because the Coast
Guard currently maintains comments on its regulations on the Docket
Management System for the Department of Transportation (DOT), please
review DOT's Privacy Act Statement, published in the Federal Register
on April 11, 2000 at 65 FR 19477, or visit http://dms.dot.gov for the

handling of public comments under the Privacy Act.

II. Background and Purpose

A brief discussion of the terms used in portions of the preamble is
offered to assist in the understanding of this interim rule. The term
``credential'' encompasses the merchant mariner's document (MMD),
license, and certificate of registry (COR). This rule affects only
licenses and CORs, so in this document we use the term ``credential''
only to refer to a license or COR, and we specify if and when we mean
to include MMDs. We use the term ``original'' credential to refer to an
applicant's first license or COR; the term ``subsequent issue''
credential to refer to a raise of grade, renewal, or duplicate license
or COR; and the term ``applicant'' to refer to mariners or prospective
mariners who are applying for a license or COR.
The Coast Guard has been regulating merchant mariners for quite
some time, pursuant to an extensive statutory framework. 46 U.S.C.
2103. Title 46 U.S.C. Chapter 71 addresses licenses, certificates, and
documents and authorizes the Coast Guard to issue licenses and CORs to
applicants found qualified as to age, character, habits of life,
experience, professional qualifications, and physical fitness. Mariners
who serve as officers must possess licenses or CORs to serve on board
U.S.-flagged merchant vessels. 46 U.S.C. 8103. The license or COR
functions as proof of a mariner's qualifications and competency,
specifying each class for which the holder is qualified. 46 U.S.C.
7101. Licenses and CORs for individuals on documented vessels may be
issued only to citizens of the United States. 46 U.S.C. 7102. A license
or COR is valid for five years, and may be renewed for additional five-
year periods. 46 U.S.C. 7106. For raise of grade licenses, such as from
second mate to chief mate, a mariner must have at least one year of
service at sea, receive training, demonstrate practical skills, and
pass an examination. Raises of grade are done at the option of the
mariner, dependent on a mariner's personal initiative. Coast Guard
regulations governing the licensing and registering of mariners appear
at 46 CFR part 10.
At this time merchant mariners may be required to carry one of
three credentials. These are the MMD, license, and COR. This interim
rule affects only the mariner's license and COR.
MMDs are required for mariners who sail on vessels of at least 100
gross register tons on oceans and the Great Lakes, with some
exceptions. When MMDs are required for a vessel, all mariners on that
vessel, whether licensed or unlicensed, must hold them. When MMDs are
not required for a vessel, mariners serving as officers on the vessel
must still hold a proper license, while those not serving as officers
generally will not need to possess any Coast Guard-issued credential.
Unlike licenses and CORs, the MMD is an identity document. An MMD
shows the mariner's photograph, ID number, nationality, address, date
of birth, physical characteristics, and signature. Also, for those
mariners who do not need to carry a license, the MMD is used to show
that the mariner has undergone a safety and security check, and to show
any additional qualifications or endorsements in the Deck, Engine or
Steward's Department, and any additional endorsements such as
Lifeboatman or Tankerman Person-in-Charge.
The license is not an identity document. A license is a certificate
that is issued for a term of five years and demonstrates a mariner's
qualifications and competency to serve as a Deck

[[Page 2156]]

Officer, Engineer Officer, Pilot, or Radio Officer.
CORs are similar to licenses, but are used only for staff officers
in purser and medical positions. Medical positions require that the
candidate also hold a valid State license. The COR, like the license,
is not used for identification purposes. It is a certificate that shows
that the mariner is qualified to perform one or more specialized job
functions.
The purpose of this interim rule is to amend 46 CFR part 10 to
strengthen the security of the licensing process by increasing the
likelihood that licenses and CORs are issued only to eligible mariners.
To do this, the Coast Guard will now require mariners to appear at a
Regional Exam Center (REC) to provide fingerprints, and allow REC staff
to evaluate the information provided on the mariner's application at
the REC. We will use the information provided to conduct a criminal
record review in accordance with applicable law and regulations.

III. Discussion of the Rule

The Coast Guard is revising its merchant mariner credentialing
regulations with respect to licenses and CORs. MMDs are not affected by
this rule because on January 6, 2004, the Coast Guard published an
interim rule in the Federal Register, entitled ``Validation of Merchant
Mariners' Vital Information and Issuance of Coast Guard Merchant
Mariner's Documents (MMDs)'' (69 FR 526) to require appearance at a
Coast Guard REC for the purposes of presenting identification and
having fingerprints taken for original, renewal, and raise of grade
MMDs. This rulemaking is meant to implement similar requirements for
licenses and CORs. Similar to the MMD rulemaking, the Coast Guard is
phasing in these requirements over a five-year period to reduce the
burden on both mariners and Coast Guard resources.
There are approximately 200,000 credentialed mariners in the United
States. The MMD interim rule mentioned above affected approximately
half of this population. This rulemaking will affect the remaining
population. All of our substantive changes will increase the likelihood
that the Coast Guard will process applications only from, and issue
credentials only to, applicants who can prove they are who they claim
to be, and whose backgrounds can be verified to make sure they meet
security-related requirements. In addition to our substantive changes,
we corrected minor stylistic and grammatical errors in 46 CFR part 10
only when making a substantive change within the same section.
The substantive changes to 46 CFR part 10 are discussed in Table 1,
below. This table lists the problem with the preexisting regulations in
column 1, then in column 2 it lists the change that was made and why.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), under the authority of
the Aviation and Transportation Security Act and the Maritime
Transportation Security Act of 2002, is developing a program that can
be used to control access to secure areas in vessels, facilities, and
ports. (See 49 U.S.C. 114(f)(12); 46 U.S.C. 70105.) This program
includes a system-wide transportation worker identification card which
is currently under development. DHS is developing this program through
the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the Coast Guard, and
other Federal agencies, including others within DHS. The Coast Guard
will work with TSA to ensure that the regulations for obtaining
licenses and CORs are consistent with this initiative to minimize
future impacts on mariners.

Table 1.--Former and New Provisions of 46 CFR Part 10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Former Rule New Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The definition for ``conviction'' We revised the definition of
specified that an applicant convicted ``conviction'' to include
of certain crimes was ineligible for foreign or military court
licensing, but did not include foreign convictions, as these may be
or military court convictions. (Sec. relevant to a determination of
10.103). an applicant's character and
habits of life; convictions
for certain crimes by those
courts now will count against
an applicant. (Sec. 10.103).
An applicant who fails a chemical test The regulation now defines
for dangerous drugs was ineligible for ``dangerous drug,'' using the
licensing, but the regulation did not same definition that appears
define a ``dangerous drug.'' (Sec. in 46 CFR 16.105. 46 CFR
10.103). 16.105 is part of the Coast
Guard's regulations on
chemical testing of merchant
mariners. This correction of
an omission conforms our
regulations in parts 10 and
16. (Sec. 10.103).
Applicants for renewals could conduct All applicants must appear at a
the entire renewal process by mail. Coast Guard Regional Exam
(Sec. 10.105, Sec. 10.209). Center (REC) to be
fingerprinted by, and show
identification (ID) to, an REC
employee. This personal
appearance requirement allows
the Coast Guard to see that
the fingerprints and ID
actually belong to the
applicant, thereby reducing
the chance of fraud. (Sec.
10.105, Sec. 10.209).
The Coast Guard allowed applicants to All fingerprints must be taken
provide fingerprints taken by an at an REC, by an REC employee.
outside entity. (Sec. 10.201). Allowing mariners to submit
fingerprints that were taken
elsewhere left the Coast Guard
with no assurance that the
fingerprints actually belonged
to the applicant. (Sec.
10.105, Sec. 10.201).
Applicants for original and subsequent Applicants must appear at an
issue credentials had to show proof of REC and present two acceptable
their age and citizenship, but were forms of ID. The requirement
not required to show ID. (Sec. of two IDs provides the Coast
10.201). Guard with an adequate amount
of documentation to be
reasonably confident that
applicants are who they say
they are. (Sec. 10.105).

[[Page 2157]]

No list of acceptable forms of ID was A list of acceptable forms of
presented in the regulation. (None). ID is now presented in the
regulation. As the requirement
for ID is new, this list
notifies the mariners as to
what forms will be acceptable.
The forms of ID that are
listed are more easily
verifiable by REC employees
and more difficult to falsify.
Additionally, on May 11, 2005,
Congress enacted the REAL ID
Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-13),
which establishes a process
for promulgating standards for
the issuance of driver's
licenses and ID cards. The
statute states that after May
11, 2008 Federal agencies will
be prohibited from accepting
for any official purpose IDs
issued by States and
territories that do not comply
with this Act. Because of
this, acceptable driver's
licenses and ID cards are
limited to those issued by
States and territories that
meet the requirements of the
Act. As the requirements of
the Act do not become
mandatory until May 11, 2008,
IDs from all States will be
acceptable at least until that
date, so long as their
validity can be verified by an
REC employee. (Sec. 10.105).
An applicant's qualifications could The application can now be
only be approved by the Officer in approved by any officer
Charge, Marine Inspection, (OCMI). specified by Coast Guard
(Sec. 10.201). policy. This reduces the
likelihood of unreasonable
delays in approving an
applicant's qualifications.
(Sec. 10.201).
Applicants could prove citizenship The Coast Guard began issuing
through any Merchant Mariner's new MMDs utilizing more tamper-
Document (MMD) issued by the Coast resistant cards on February 3,
Guard. (Sec. 10.205). 2003. Only valid MMDs issued
after that date may be used to
document citizenship and
identity. (Sec. 10.205).
Applicants could use any of the The Coast Guard is no longer
following atypical proofs of their accepting atypical proofs of
citizenship: Baptismal certificates; citizenship. We believe
parish records; statements of a verifying atypical proofs of
physician's attendance at a birth; citizenship is best left in
delayed certificates of birth; reports the jurisdiction of government
from the Census Bureau which showed agencies that specialize in
the earliest available record of age document verification and
or birth; affidavit(s) from a parent, citizenship like the U.S.
other relative, or two or more Citizenship and Immigration
responsible citizens; school records; Services (USCIS) or the
immigration records; and insurance Department of State. Thus, we
policies. (Sec. 10.205). have aligned acceptable proof
of citizenship with commonly
used documents listed on the
USCIS's Eligibility for
Employment (I-9) form. By
doing so, we maintained
acceptance of commonly used
documents, including birth
certificates, Certificates of
Citizenship, Certificates of
Naturalization, and passports.
These documents are issued by
government agencies and are
more difficult to alter than
the previously accepted
atypical proofs of
citizenship. (Sec. 10.205).
There was no requirement for a criminal Criminal record reviews and
record review or fingerprint fingerprints are required of
submission for renewals. (Sec. all applicants each time an
10.201). application is made, including
renewals. No credential will
be issued until the applicant
has passed a criminal record
review. This is to increase
the likelihood that
credentials are only given to
those mariners whose character
and habits of life are such
that the applicant can be
entrusted with the duties and
responsibilities of the
license or COR. (Sec.
10.201).
Criminal record reviews were not Criminal record reviews are now
mandatory in the language of the required for all applicants--
regulation for all original and regardless of whether they are
subsequent issue applicants. (Sec. original or subsequent issue
10.201). applications. The Coast Guard
will not issue any credential
until the applicant has passed
a criminal record review. This
is to increase the likelihood
that credentials are only
given to those mariners whose
character and habits of life
are such that the applicant
can be entrusted with the
duties and responsibilities of
the license or COR. (Sec.
10.201).
In section 10.201(a), the Officer in We revised 10.201(a) to allow
Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) had others in the Coast Guard to
to be satisfied as to an applicant's make eligibility
eligibility for a license or COR. determinations. This change
(Sec. 10.201). was made to streamline
internal Coast Guard
administrative procedures.
(Sec. 10.201).
Applicants were not required to provide Every time that a mariner
new fingerprints and/or ID when applies for a new credential
seeking a raise of grade or renewal they must provide a set of
credential. (Sec. 10.209). fingerprints and two
acceptable forms of ID. While
the likelihood that an
individual's fingerprints will
change is low, it is
imperative that the Coast
Guard determine if a mariner
is who he or she says he or
she is before issuing a
credential. This information
will be used for
identification purposes as
well as to update any criminal
record history. (Sec.
10.105, Sec. 10.209).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Regulatory Requirements

A. Administrative Procedure Act

Implementation of this rule as an interim rule with a request for
public comment after the effective date of the rule is based upon the
``good cause'' exception found under the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA) at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). The Coast Guard has determined that
delaying implementation of this rule to await public notice and comment
is unnecessary, impracticable and contrary to the public interest for
the following reasons:
In the interests of marine safety and seamen's welfare, the Coast
Guard was given general superintendence of merchant marine personnel by
46 U.S.C. 2103 and 46 U.S.C. chapter 71. In 2002, Congress found that
U.S. ports are susceptible to large-scale acts of terrorism that could
cause a large loss of life or economic disruption, that ``ports are
often a major locus of Federal crime,'' (Maritime Transportation
Security Act of 2002, section 101, Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064) and
that it

[[Page 2158]]

is in the best interest of the United States to increase port security.
A Coast Guard-issued license authorizes its holder to serve in the
capacity of vessel's officer, allowing him or her to assume positions
of responsibility in the command and control of merchant marine
vessels. The harm that can be caused by persons who wrongfully obtain
licenses with the intention of committing crimes or terrorist acts
jeopardizes mariner safety and welfare, as well as national security.
Our goal is to protect the licensing process from abuse. As discussed
above, the Coast Guard has identified several omissions and ambiguities
in the former rule that could facilitate licensing abuse. This interim
rule corrects those omissions and clarifies those ambiguities to
promote maritime safety and security within the United States.
Further, delay or suspension of the existing merchant mariner
licensing process pending completion of notice and comment and
publication of a final rule could have a severe impact on the
professional lives of individual mariners, who are required to carry
valid licenses to work on board certain U.S.-flag vessels, and could
interfere with maritime commerce, which relies on the ready
availability of licensed personnel.
The delay of this rule would set up ``a situation in which the
interest of the public would be defeated,'' as well as impede the ``due
and timely execution'' of an important Coast Guard function; see
Utility Solid Waste Activities Group v. Environmental Protection
Agency, 236 F.3d 749 (D.C. Cir. 2001). The Coast Guard therefore finds
delay of the implementation of this rule to allow for prior notice and
comment to be impracticable and contrary to the public interest.
The Coast Guard also finds good cause, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3),
for this interim rule to take effect immediately. The Coast Guard finds
that, for the reasons previously discussed, it would be impracticable
and contrary to the public interest to subject this interim rule to
prior notice and public comment, or to delay its taking effect.
Although we have good cause to publish this rule without prior
notice and comment, we value public comments. As a result, we are
soliciting public comments on this interim rule and may revise the
final rule in response to those comments.

B. Regulatory Evaluation

Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'', 58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993, requires a determination whether a regulatory
action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) and subject to the requirements of the
Executive Order. This rule has been identified as significant under
Executive Order 12866 and has been reviewed by OMB.
This interim rule changes certain requirements in 46 CFR part 10
for how mariners and prospective mariners will apply for licenses and
CORs.
This interim rule requires applicants for original (new) and
subsequent issue (raise of grade, renewal, and duplicate) licenses and
CORs to have their fingerprints taken at an REC and to have their IDs
checked at an REC. The rule requires an applicant to appear at least
once in the application process, even if submitting an application by
mail, fax, or other electronic means, and requires that the Coast Guard
conduct fingerprinting and check IDs for original (new) and subsequent
issue (raise of grade, renewal, and duplicate) license and COR
transactions. The primary costs of this rule to applicants for licenses
and CORs include the travel cost to an REC and the time spent at an REC
in order to have their fingerprints taken and IDs checked. Currently,
there is no consistent fingerprinting or identification policy among
the RECs for license or COR applications. Some RECs asked all license
applicants to visit an REC for fingerprinting, and some do not. All
RECs allowed an applicant to renew a license or COR entirely by mail,
since there was no requirement to submit fingerprints for that
transaction. This interim rule will create one consistent policy at all
RECs.
The following sections discuss the baseline population of
applicants and the portion of this population that will incur
additional costs, the estimated cost per applicant, and the estimated
national costs and benefits.
Baseline Population
The average annual population of applicants who apply for a license
or a COR is 30,142 mariners and prospective mariners. This population
includes 9,384 applicants for original (new) licenses, 20,627
applicants for subsequent issue (raise of grade, renewal, and
duplicate) licenses, and 131 applicants for CORs. This population
includes all applicants with or without a valid MMD at the time of the
license or COR application. Table 2 presents the average annual
applicant population by transaction type.

Table 2.--Summary of Average Annual Applicant Population by Transaction Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicants for Applicants for
Current credential status of applicant original subsequent Applicants for Total
licenses issue licenses all CORs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicants who currently have an MMD............ 2,038 7,302 131 ..............
Applicants who DO NOT currently have an MMD..... 7,346 13,325 .............. ..............
-----------------
Total Affected Population................... 9,384 20,627 131 30,142
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The average annual population is based on field information and
data received from the Coast Guard's NMC and the Coast Guard's Maritime
Personnel Qualifications Division. The period of analysis is inclusive
from year 2005 through year 2009. We use a five-year period because all
currently licensed mariners must renew their licenses and CORs once
every five years. Therefore, this five-year period will cover a
complete license and COR renewal cycle, which will give an accurate
snapshot of the total cost of the interim rule for mariners to comply
with the new application requirements.
The subset of the population that will incur additional costs from
this rule is comprised of those applicants who currently apply for
licenses and CORs who do not have their fingerprints taken at an REC
and do not have their IDs checked at an REC. These applicants must now
incur an additional cost for travel to an REC to have their
fingerprints taken and to have their IDs checked.
Not all applicants will incur additional costs from this interim
rule. The subset of the population that will not incur additional costs
includes applicants who currently visit an REC to have their
fingerprints taken and their

[[Page 2159]]

IDs checked. These applicants are currently complying with what this
rule requires by visiting an REC to have their fingerprints taken and
their IDs checked. Prior to this interim rule, some RECs asked
applicants to visit an REC to have fingerprints taken and IDs checked
as a part of the application process for licenses; other RECs did not.
Some applicants also traveled to RECs to have their fingerprints taken
because of their close proximity to an REC.
Based on information from the Coast Guard's RECs, we estimate that
40 percent of the applicants for original licenses and 15 percent of
the applicants for subsequent issue licenses currently travel to an REC
for the purposes of having their fingerprints taken and IDs checked.
Therefore, we do not include these applicants in the cost analysis.
There could be other applicants who do not incur additional costs,
such as applicants who simultaneously apply for both MMDs and licenses.
These applicants may have chosen to apply for both credentials at the
same time to minimize cost and to synchronize the expiration dates for
both of their credentials. Since these applicants will be applying for
an MMD and a license at the same time, they will make one appearance at
an REC to have their fingerprints taken and to have their IDs checked.
These applicants would be regulated and processed under the regulations
for MMDs published on January 6, 2004, which currently require
applicants to have their fingerprints taken and their IDs checked at an
REC. 69 FR 526. Therefore, these applicants do not incur additional
costs by this rule.
However, it is difficult to estimate what percentage of these
applicants is simultaneously applying for credentials after the
publication of the regulations for MMDs. We do not adjust our analysis
for these mariners, and therefore our estimates may be conservative
because we possibly have counted some of the applicants twice, once
under the MMD interim rule, and once under this interim rule. Based on
discussions with Coast Guard staff and REC officials, we believe that
this number will be relatively small.
Accordingly, the estimated total annual quantity of applicants who
will incur an additional cost (referred to as the baseline population)
by this rule is 23,294 applicants for licenses and CORs. This baseline
population is estimated as the total affected population less the
subset of the affected population that does not incur additional costs.
Table 3 presents the summary of the annual baseline population that
will incur additional costs under this interim rule.

Table 3.--Summary of Average Annual Baseline Population by Transaction Type That Will Incur Additional Costs \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicants for Applicants for
Current credential status of applicant original subsequent Applicants for Total
licenses issue licenses all CORs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicants who currently have an MMD............ 1,223 6,207 131 ..............
Applicants who DO NOT currently have an MMD..... 4,408 11,326 .............. ..............
-----------------
Total Affected Population \2\............... 5,630 17,533 131 23,294
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This baseline population is adjusted to reflect the percentage of current applicants who already travel to
have their fingerprints taken at an REC. These are the totals in Table 2 less a 40 percent reduction in
original applicants and less a 15 percent reduction in subsequent issue applicants.
\2\ Some values may not total due to rounding.

Costs
The costs of this rule include (1) the cost of applicants' time at
an REC, and (2) the cost of applicants' travel to and from an REC. For
all costs, we assume an applicant's wage rate as a proxy for the
opportunity cost of the work time or free time forgone due to a
mariner's visit to an REC and travel to and from an REC. We also assume
maximum government per diem reimbursement rates as proxy unit costs for
travel expenses. Table 4 presents the basic unit cost assumptions and
sources that we used in this analysis of the interim rule.

Table 4.--Summary of Basic Unit Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item Unit cost Source reference
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opportunity Cost of Applicant $37/hour......... This wage rate is
Time. conservatively based
on the 90th
percentile wage
estimate (the
highest) from the
2002 National
Occupation
Employment and Wage
Statistics for
Captains, Mates, and
Pilots of Water
Vessels published by
the Bureau of Labor
Statistics. This
wage rate best
applies to licensed
officers because
they typically earn
higher wages than
other mariners.
Driving Mileage............... $0.375/mile 2004 Privately Owned
(rounded to Vehicle (POV)
$0.38/mile). Reimbursement Rates
for Automobiles in
Amendment 2003-6 of
the Federal Travel
Regulation,
published December
15, 2003, and
effective January 1,
2004, by the General
Services
Administration
(GSA). 68 FR 69618.
Round-trip Air-Fare........... $250/trip........ This airfare is based
on industry research
of current airfare
price levels and the
2002 price index for
airline fares in the
Statistical Abstract
of the United
States: 2003, 123rd
Edition, issued
December 2003, by
the U.S. Census
Bureau.

[[Page 2160]]

Round-trip Airport Transfer... $50/transfer..... This round-trip
airport transfer
cost is based on
research of the
average private and
public transfer
costs, including
taxi or car rental
costs associated
with U.S. airports
and regional
destinations. It is
not a mathematic or
rigorous estimate,
but an average
transfer cost based
on information
available from
associations and
trade groups,
airports, transit
authorities, and
governments.
Incidentals and Meals......... $53/day.......... The average
incidentals and
meals reimbursement
rate for the 17
current REC
locations. The GSA
provides rates for
the continental U.S.
The Department of
Defense provides
rates for the non-
continental U.S.
These rates are part
of the Federal
Travel Regulation
and are frequently
updated.
Lodging....................... $137/night....... The average lodging
reimbursement rate,
including an
additional 18%
lodging tax, for the
17 current REC
locations. The GSA
provides rates for
the continental U.S.
The Department of
Defense provides
rates for the non-
continental U.S.
These rates are part
of the Federal
Travel Regulation
and frequently
updated.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cost of REC Time
We estimate that an applicant will spend two hours at an REC being
fingerprinted, having their ID checked, and possibly waiting before,
during, or after to complete these requirements. This is the REC wait-
time estimate based on discussions with Coast Guard REC personnel
familiar with operations and customer processing time for applicants
who currently visit an REC for fingerprinting and ID examination. We
expect very few applicants to take more than two hours, and many to
take less time; however, we believe two hours to be an appropriate
estimate of the total possible time an applicant will spend at an REC
in order to calculate conservative but reasonable costs attributable to
REC processing and waiting time.
We estimate the cost of an applicant's time at the REC to be $74 (2
hours x $37 per hour cost of time = $74). The estimated annual cost of
REC time for the baseline applicant population is $1,723,756 ($74 per
applicant x 23,294 total applicants = $1,723,756).
Travel Cost
We estimate round-trip travel, travel to and from an REC, to take
one day or require multiple day and overnight stays to complete. After
a review of current mariner addresses from the Coast Guard's NMC, we
estimate that approximately 60 percent of current mariners live within
one-day round-trip travel to an REC, 30 percent live within overnight
round-trip travel (one night and two days) to an REC, and 10 percent
live at a distance greater than overnight round-trip travel (greater
than one night and two days) to an REC. These are national percentages
for all mariners who currently have addresses on file with the NMC.
We assume these national percentages will most likely approximate
the travel distances to an REC for current license and COR applicants.
Therefore, we are applying the demographic characteristics (home of
record trends) of the current population of all mariners, upon the
future pool of applicants for licenses and CORs. Table 5 presents a
summary of the baseline applicant population that will incur additional
cost by travel distance to their closest REC using these national
population percentages.

Table 5.--Summary of the Affected Applicants by REC Travel Distance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent of
current Number of
Round-trip mariner possible
Distance to closest REC (miles) distance to population license or COR
closest REC within applicants
(miles) distance within
(percent) distance \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
50.............................................................. 100 60 13,976
100............................................................. 200 30 6,988
>=200........................................................... >=400 10 2,329
-----------------
Total....................................................... .............. 100 23,294
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some values may not total due to rounding.

We estimate that most mariners live within a close proximity to an
REC--approximately 90 percent live within same-day or one-night round-
trip travel from an REC. However, there are mariners who live far from
their closest REC, which we consider to be greater than overnight
round-trip travel or more than 400 miles round trip. For example, this
would include mariners in parts of the Great Lakes Basin and Alaska,
where a large area is served by only one or a few RECs.
We assume for the purpose of estimating costs that most applicants
who live within short distances to an REC will drive round trip--this
will ensure similar application of cost methodology across variable
distances. While there will be some applicants who take public
transportation or use another mode of travel, we believe, on average,
most applicants will drive themselves to an REC, with the exception of
those applicants who live far from their nearest REC, which we consider
to be greater than overnight round-trip travel.
We assume that most applicants who live far from an REC will fly
round

[[Page 2161]]

trip--this will ensure similar application of cost methodology for
those who will travel far distances. While there will be some
applicants who take another mode of travel or a combination of travel
modes, we believe, on average, most applicants will choose to travel by
plane if they live far away.
We assume the applicants will drive or fly during the day to
complete their round-trip travel to and from an REC. We also assume
that one-day of travel is approximately eight hours of travel. Table 6
presents a summary of travel distances and time:

Table 6.--Summary of the Travel Distances and Time \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum number
Round-trip travel distance from closest REC of travel days Maximum number
(miles) Duration of travel to complete of hours to
distance complete
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
100........................................... One-day Driving................. 1 8
200........................................... Overnight Driving............... 2 16
>=400......................................... Overnight Air................... 2 16
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The travel time is assumed to be the maximum number of days that would be necessary to complete the round-
trip travel converted into hours.

While some applicants will drive longer distances in a single day,
we assume the maximum number of days and hours to complete each round-
trip driving distance will provide an appropriate estimate of time to
calculate the maximum costs attributable to applicant travel time.
The following is an estimate of applicant travel costs using the
above populations, unit costs, distances, and times:
One-day Travel by Automobile
For an applicant within one-day round-trip travel to and from an
REC, we assume the cost to include the mileage, the opportunity cost of
the time spent traveling, and incidentals. We assume the cost for one-
day round-trip incidentals to be $53 and the mileage reimbursement to
be $0.38 per mile.
The estimated cost per applicant for one-day round-trip travel is
$387 ((100 round-trip miles x $0.38 per mile reimbursement rate) + (8
travel hours x $37 per hour cost of time) + $53 per day incidentals =
$387). The estimated annual cost for one-day round-trip travel for the
affected applicants is $5,408,712 ($387 per applicant x 13,976 one-day
travel applicants = $5,408,712).
Overnight Travel by Automobile
For an applicant having to travel overnight, we assume the cost to
include mileage, the opportunity cost of time spent traveling, lodging,
and incidentals. We also assume the cost for lodging and incidentals
for overnight round-trip travel to be $243 ((2 days x $53 per day
incidentals) + $137 per night lodging = $243).
The estimated cost per applicant for overnight round-trip travel is
$911 ((200 round-trip miles x $0.38 per mile reimbursement rate) + (16
travel hours x $37 per hour cost of time) + $243 lodging and
incidentals = $911). The estimated annual cost of overnight round-trip
travel for the affected applicants is $6,366,068 ($911 per applicant x
6,988 applicants = $6,366,068).
Greater Than Overnight Travel (Travel by Air)
We assume that applicants who live at distances greater than 200
miles must travel for more than one night and will incur the maximum
cost of this interim rule. There exists no precise data to predict or
forecast with confidence the actual or future quantity of these
applicants living at far distances from an REC, and the combinations of
days and nights they will need to travel round-trip to an REC. We
expect these relatively few applicants will most likely choose another
mode or combination of modes of transportation to travel round-trip
between their home of record and the closest REC. We assume the cost of
this travel will consist of the airfare, airport transfers to-and-from
home and an REC, the opportunity cost of time spent traveling, and the
round-trip travel costs associated with overnight incidentals and
lodging.
We estimated the cost per applicant for lodging and incidentals for
overnight air travel to be $243 ((2 days x $53 per day incidentals) +
$137 per night lodging = $243). The estimated cost per applicant for
overnight air travel is $1,185 ($250 airfare + (2 round-trip airport
transfers x $50 per transfer) + (16 travel hours x $37 per hour cost of
time) + $243 lodging and incidentals = $1,185). The estimated annual
cost of overnight air travel for affected applicants is $2,759,865
($1,185 per applicant x 2,329 applicants = $2,759,865).
We assume these estimates will approximate the maximum costs
associated with travel by air. Most likely the total travel time will
be less and involve fewer lodging and incidentals expenses, and will
not be as costly in terms of the applicant's time.
Total National Cost
The annual cost of this rule to the affected applicants, consisting
of the cost of travel and time for these applicants, is estimated to be
$16 million (non-discounted). The estimated five-year (2005-2009),
discounted present value of the total cost of this rule to the
applicants is $71 million based on a 7% discount rate and $77 million
based on a 3% discount rate. As stated above, all currently licensed
mariners must renew their licenses and CORs every five years.
Therefore, a five-year period of analysis covers a complete renewal
cycle and provides an accurate snapshot of the total cost of the
interim rule for affected applicants. Table 7 summarizes the total
annual cost of the rule to applicants.

[[Page 2162]]

Table 7.--Summary of Affected Applicants and Annual Cost \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual cost
Number of Annual costs for all Percent of
Cost component affected per affected affected total annual
applicants applicant applicants \2\ cost (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
REC Time Cost................................... 23,294 $74 $1,723,756 11
One-day Round-trip Travel Cost.................. 13,976 387 5,408,712 33
Overnight Round-trip Travel Cost................ 6,988 911 6,366,068 39
Greater Than Overnight Round-Trip Travel Cost... 2,329 1,185 2,759,865 17
-----------------
Total Annual Cost of the Interim Rule....... .............. .............. 16,258,401 100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All annual costs include the cost of the applicants' time spent traveling and time spent at an REC.
\2\ Some values may not total due to rounding.

The primary cost to these applicants of this interim rule is the
travel cost (90 percent of the total cost), which is driven by the
mariners' opportunity cost of time, cost of lodging, and other per diem
factors. About one-half of the cost of this rule to the affected
applicants, as a percentage of total annual cost, is overnight and
greater than overnight round-trip travel, which are 39 percent and 17
percent, respectively. However, these two travel cost components only
apply to 40 percent of the applicants, with greater than overnight
round-trip travel only applying to 10 percent.
These costs will impact mariners and prospective mariners who are
interested in applying for licenses or CORs. The cost impacts will be
high for any mariner who will have to travel to an REC, because of the
limited number of RECs available: 17 RECs nationwide, including two in
Alaska and one in Hawaii.
In Table 7, the cost per applicant for time spent at an REC is
relatively low at $74 per applicant. However, if there is any travel
involved that will force an applicant to forgo a minimal amount of
work, such as one-day round-trip travel, then the total cost per
applicant increases 6 times to $461, which includes the additional one-
day round-trip travel cost of $387 per mariner ($74 REC time + $387
one-day round-trip travel = $461 for a mariner who must travel one-day
and visit an REC).
However, we believe the total cost estimate of this interim rule to
the affected applicants is a conservative estimate, because the REC
locations, together, can serve approximately 90 percent of applicants
within a 100-mile radius. We also used conservative driving distances,
for example, one-day travel is 100 miles round-trip and overnight
travel is 200 miles round-trip. The RECs are also located in or near
major maritime ports that may allow mariners and prospective mariners
to access the REC before, during, or after the applicants' marine-
related business operations.
The cost of the applicants' time, however, will be a net loss to
the applicants. The applicants will forgo work-time or free-time in
order to comply with this rule, and may have to compensate by using
vacation leave. However, we do not expect there to be a loss in
business or productivity in the maritime sector, because the work
schedules of these mariners often involve several days off their
vessels per voyage, which they could use to visit an REC. Owners and
operators of vessels also have several mariners they can use in the
event another mariner is not available.
Benefits
We anticipate several qualitative benefits from the new
fingerprinting and ID requirements established by this interim rule.
All applicants for licenses and CORs will now have their fingerprints
taken by Coast Guard personnel at an REC and must have their ID checked
by Coast Guard personnel at an REC. In the past, applicants could have
had their fingerprints taken and their identity checked by outside
entities and submitted them by mail without a guarantee of accuracy or
validity.
The Coast Guard currently requires applicants seeking licenses or
CORs to have their basic information on identity and possible criminal
records reviewed so that the Coast Guard issues licenses and CORs only
to eligible applicants. However, in the past some mariners did not have
their fingerprints taken at, nor their identification checked by, the
Coast Guard. Under these conditions, there was a possibility that
fingerprints and proof of ID could have been falsified. A terrorist
could then use a falsified license or COR to portray himself or herself
as a qualified deck, engineering, or staff officer. The cumulative
effect of the changes described in Table 1 (see Discussion of Rule)
will be to increase the likelihood that the Coast Guard will process
applications only from, and issue credentials only to, applicants who
can prove they are who they claim to be, and whose backgrounds can be
verified to make sure they meet security-related requirements.
We expect this interim rule to assist the Coast Guard in its effort
to help secure U.S. ports, waterways, marine infrastructure, and
marine-related commercial activities and international trade by
protecting the licensing process from abuse.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would 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.
This rule does not require a general notice of proposed rulemaking and,
therefore, is exempt from the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. Although this rule is exempt, we have reviewed it for
potential economic impacts on small entities.
We do not expect this rule to have a significant impact on a large
number of small entities. This rule sets new application requirements
for mariner licenses and CORs that will prevent abuse and assist the
Coast Guard in its effort to help secure U.S. marine infrastructure,
commercial activities, and the free flow of trade. We expect this
interim rule to help prevent the interruption of U.S. business
activities that may result from the abuse of mariner licenses and CORs.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule so that they can

[[Page 2163]]

better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking.
If you think this interim rule would affect your small business,
organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the
person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. The Coast Guard
will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain
about this interim 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).

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

This interim rule calls for a collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Title 44, United States Code (44
U.S.C.) sections 3501-3520. This rule modifies the burden in the
collection previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under OMB Control Number 1625-0040. The fingerprint and
identification (ID) requirements involved with the license and
certificate of registry (COR) applications are included in the
previously approved collection.
This interim rule changes certain requirements in Title 46, Code of
Federal Regulations (46 CFR) part 10 for how mariners and prospective
mariners will apply for licenses and CORs.
This interim rule requires applicants for original (new) and
subsequent issue (raise of grade, renewal, and duplicate) licenses and
CORs to have their fingerprints taken and to have their IDs checked at
a Coast Guard Regional Examination Center (REC). The rule requires an
applicant to appear at least once in the application process, even if
submitting an application by mail, fax, or other electronic means, and
requires that the Coast Guard conduct fingerprinting and check IDs for
original and subsequent issue license and COR transactions as provided
in 46 CFR 10.105 and 10.209. The rule also changes the list of
acceptable forms of ID that an applicant must present at an REC as
provided in 46 CFR 10.105 and 10.205, and requires that applicants
report foreign and military convictions in addition to domestic
convictions as provided in 46 CFR 10.201.
The primary impacts of this rule for license and COR applicants
include the travel to and from an REC and the time spent at an REC in
order to have their fingerprints taken and IDs checked. There has not
been a consistent fingerprinting or ID policy among the RECs for
license or COR applications. Some RECs ask all license applicants to
visit the REC for fingerprinting and some do not. Some RECs permit an
applicant to renew a license or COR entirely by mail, since there was
no requirement to submit fingerprints for that transaction. If an REC
did require fingerprints, candidates were allowed to have them taken by
local authorities (sheriff, police, etc.) and submit them with their
applications. The continuance of this practice could allow an applicant
to submit fingerprints that are not those of the license candidate.
This interim rule creates a consistent policy for all RECs, and the
Coast Guard will be assured that the prints submitted for a criminal
record check are those of the applicant who appears before the Coast
Guard with appropriate ID.
As defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(c), ``collection of information''
comprises reporting, recordkeeping, monitoring, posting, labeling, and
similar actions. The title and description of the collection of
information, a description of those who must collect the information,
and an estimate of the total annual burden follow. The estimate covers
the additional time mariners will spend traveling to and from an REC,
the additional time mariners will spend waiting and processing at an
REC, the changes in the list of acceptable forms of ID that a mariner
must present at an REC, and the requirement that applicants must now
report foreign and military convictions in addition to domestic
convictions.
We assume there are no additional burden hours or costs associated
with the changes to the list of acceptable forms of ID, because these
forms of legitimate IDs are widely held by the public. We also
determined that the requirement for applicants to report foreign and
military convictions in addition to domestic convictions is a
negligible impact because they currently must report convictions, not
specified as foreign or military, in the application process.
Title: Continuous Discharge Book, Merchant Mariner Application,
Physical Examination Report, Sea Service Report, Chemical Testing, and
Entry Level Physical Report.
OMB Control Number: 1625-0040.
Agency Form Numbers: CG-719A, CG-719B, CG-719K, CG-719S, CG-719P,
and CG-719K/E.
Summary of the Collection of Information: In accordance with 46
U.S.C. and 46 CFR, the collection of this information is necessary to
determine competency, character, and physical qualifications for the
issuance of Coast Guard licenses, CORs, and merchant mariner documents.
Summary of the Modification to the Collection of Information: This
interim rule adds new collection of information requirements in 46 CFR
10.105, 10.201, 10.205, and 10.209 for license and COR applicants.
These new provisions require applicants to spend time traveling to and
from an REC, to spend time waiting and processing at an REC, to present
ID at an REC from a list of acceptable forms of ID, and to report
foreign and military convictions.
Need for Information: The Coast Guard needs this information to
process applications only from, and issue credentials only to,
applicants who can prove they are who they claim to be, and whose
backgrounds can be verified to make sure they meet security and safety
related requirements. This information assists the Coast Guard in its
effort to help secure U.S. ports, waterways, marine infrastructure, and
marine-related commercial activities, including international trade, by
protecting the licensing and COR process from abuse.
Description of Respondents: The previously approved collection and
the interim rule require applicants for licenses and CORs to submit
their applications, including their fingerprints, to an REC. However,
the interim rule further requires applicants for original and
subsequent issue licenses and CORs to have their fingerprints taken and
their IDs checked at an REC. It also requires applicants to present IDs
at an REC from a list of acceptable forms of ID and to report foreign
and military convictions on the application.
Number of Respondents: The previously approved number of
respondents is 200,000. This rule will not increase the number of
respondents in this collection. This rule requires the existing
population of applicants (respondents) for original and subsequent
issue licenses and CORs to have their fingerprints taken and their IDs
checked at an REC. Previously, the Coast Guard also permitted
respondents in this collection to apply for some originals and all
subsequent issue licenses and CORs entirely by mail as an alternative
to traveling to an REC.

[[Page 2164]]

Frequency of Response: The previously approved number of responses
is 50,000 each year. This rule will increase that number by 23,294,
which is the annual number of applicants that were previously not
required to and chose not to appear at an REC to have their
fingerprints taken and their IDs checked at an REC. See the
``Regulatory Evaluation'' section for a discussion of the baseline
population of applicants. The total number of annual responses will now
be 73,294.
Burden of Response Time From Revision of Collection: The burden of
response time from this rule on applicants for licenses and CORs
includes the travel time to and from an REC and the time spent at an
REC in order to have their fingerprints taken and IDs checked. We
assume the applicants will drive or fly during the day to complete
their round-trip travel to and from an REC. We also assume that one day
of travel is approximately eight hours of travel (see Table 5 and Table
6 of the ``Regulatory Evaluation'' section for a summary of travel
distances and time).
We estimate that an applicant will spend two hours at an REC being
fingerprinted, having their ID checked, and possibly waiting before,
during, or after to complete these requirements. This is the REC wait-
time estimate based on discussions with Coast Guard REC personnel
familiar with operations and customer processing time for applicants
who currently visit an REC for fingerprinting and ID examination (see
the Cost of REC Time discussion in the section ``Regulatory
Evaluation'').
Estimate of Total Annual Burden Hours: The previously approved
total annual burden is 21,875 hours. This rule, because of the travel
requirements and REC waiting and processing time, will increase that
number by approximately 307,481 hours (see the ``Regulatory
Evaluation'' section for a discussion of the time and costs of this
rule for applicants). The total number of hours will now be 329,356.
Estimate of Total Annual Burden Cost: There is not a total annual
operations & maintenance (O&M) burden cost reported in the previously
approved collection (see form OMB 83-I, Box 14.b., for this
collection). Since this rule requires applicants to travel to and from
an REC and to wait at an REC while processing fingerprints and IDs,
there is an associated reporting cost burden (annual O&M costs) that is
added to the collection. This cost burden includes expenses from this
rule incurred by applicants for travel time, lodging, incidentals, and
time waiting at an REC. This rule increases the annual cost burden by
approximately $16 million, which is the same as the reported non-
discounted annual cost of the rule (see the ``Regulatory Evaluation''
section for a discussion of the costs of this rule for applicants). The
total annual O&M cost to be reported on form OMB 83-I, Box 14.b., of
this collection will be $16 million.
As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3507(d)), we have submitted a copy of this interim rule to OMB for its
review of the collection of information. Due to the circumstances
surrounding this interim rule, we asked for emergency approval of our
request. We received OMB approval for this collection of information on
January 4, 2006.
We request public comment on the collection of information to help
us determine how useful the information is; whether it can help us
perform our functions better; whether it is readily available
elsewhere; how accurate our estimate of the burden of collection is;
how valid our methods for determining burden are; how we can improve
the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information; and how we can
minimize the collection burden.
If you submit comments on the collection of information, submit
them to both OMB and the Docket Management Facility where indicated
under ADDRESSES, by the date under DATES.
You need not respond to a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid control number from OMB. We received OMB
approval for this collection of information on January 4, 2006. The
approval expires June 30, 2006.

D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

This rule will not have substantial direct effects 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. Therefore, in accordance with section 6 of
Executive Order 13132, the Coast Guard certifies that this rule does
not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation
of a federalism summary impact statement.
The law is well-settled that States may not regulate in categories
expressly reserved for regulation by the Coast Guard. The law also is
well-settled that all of the categories covered in 46 U.S.C. 3306,
3703, 7101, and 8101 (design, construction, alteration, repair,
maintenance, operation, equipping, personnel qualification, and manning
of vessels), as well as the reporting of casualties and any other
category in which Congress intended the Coast Guard to be the sole
source of a vessel's obligations, are within the field foreclosed from
regulation by the States. See United States v. Locke and Intertanko v.
Locke, 529 U.S. 89, 120 S.Ct. 1135 (March 6, 2000). Since this interim
rule involves the manning of U.S. vessels and the licensing of merchant
mariners, it relates to personnel qualifications. Because the States
may not regulate within this category, this rule does not present new
preemption issues under Executive Order 13132.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any
one year. The Act does not require an assessment in the case of an
interim rule issued without prior notice and public comment.
Nevertheless, the Coast Guard does not expect this rule to result in
such an expenditure. We discuss this rule's effects elsewhere in this
preamble.

F. Taking of Private Property

This interim rule will not affect a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.

G. 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.

H. Protection of Children

We have analyzed this interim rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This interim rule is not an economically significant rule and
does not create an environmental risk to health or safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

I. Indian Tribal Governments

This interim rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial

[[Page 2165]]

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.

J. Energy Effects

We have analyzed this interim 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. Although it is a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866, it affects only the
issuance of credentials to merchant mariners and therefore is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a
significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement
of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.

K. Technical Standards

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

L. Environment

We have analyzed this interim rule under Commandant Instruction
M16475.1D, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit
the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the
Instruction. Therefore, we believe this rule should be categorically
excluded under Figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(c) of the Instruction, from
further environmental documentation. This rule updates the training,
qualifying, licensing, and disciplining of maritime personnel. An
``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a ``Categorical Exclusion
Determination'' are available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 46 CFR Part 10

Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Schools,
Seamen.

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 46
CFR part 10 as follows:

PART 10--LICENSING OF MARITIME PERSONNEL

0
1. The authority citation for part 10 is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 14 U.S.C. 633; 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, and
8906; Executive Order 10173; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1. Section 10.107 is also issued under the
authority of 44 U.S.C. 3507.

0
2. In Sec. 10.103, revise the definition for ``Conviction'' and add,
in alphabetical order, a definition for ``Dangerous drug'' to read as
follows:

Sec. 10.103 Definitions of terms used in this part.

* * * * *
Conviction means the applicant for a license or certificate of
registry has been found guilty by judgment or plea by a court of the
United States, the District of Columbia, any State, territory, or
possession of the United States, a foreign country, or any military
court, of a criminal felony or misdemeanor or of an offense described
in section 205 of the National Driver Register Act of 1982, as amended
(49 U.S.C. 30304). Conviction of more than one offense at a single
trial will be considered to be multiple convictions. If an applicant
pleads guilty or no contest, is granted deferred adjudication, or is
required by the court to attend classes, make contributions of time or
money, receive treatment, submit to any manner of probation or
supervision, or forgo appeal of a trial court's conviction, then the
applicant will be considered to have received a conviction. A later
expunged conviction will not negate the conviction unless it is proved
to the Coast Guard that the expungement is based upon a showing that
the court's earlier conviction was in error.
Dangerous drug means a narcotic drug, a controlled substance, or a
controlled-substance analogue (as defined in section 102 of the
Comprehensive Drug Abuse and Control Act of 1970 (21 U.S.C. 802)).
* * * * *

0
3. Revise Sec. 10.105 to read as follows:

Sec. 10.105 Applications.

(a) Applicants for licenses and certificates of registry may apply
at the following Coast Guard Regional Examination Centers (RECs):

Boston, MA
New York, NY
Baltimore, MD
Charleston, SC
Miami, FL
New Orleans, LA
Houston, TX
Memphis, TN
St. Louis, MO
Toledo, OH
San Pedro, CA
Oakland, CA
Portland, OR
Seattle, WA
Anchorage, AK
Juneau, AK
Honolulu, HI

(b) A complete application for a license or certificate of
registry, whether original, renewal, duplicate, or raise of grade,
consists of a written application, all applicable supplementary
documents required by this part, fingerprints, and two forms of ID. The
written portion of the application may be submitted by mail, fax, or
other electronic means. However, no application is complete until the
applicant appears in person and is fingerprinted by and provides
evidence of his or her identity to a member of the REC staff. If the
applicant is simultaneously applying for more than one credential, a
single personal appearance and fingerprinting will satisfy this
requirement for all pending applications.
(c) Each applicant must present at least two forms of
identification to an REC employee as evidence of his or her identity.
Expired or otherwise invalid forms may not be used. At least one of the
forms of identification must contain the applicant's photograph.
Acceptable forms of identification include the following:
(1) U.S. military identification card;
(2)(i) Before May 11, 2008, a U.S. driver's license;
(ii) On or after May 11, 2008, U.S. driver's license issued by a
State that meets the standards promulgated pursuant to the REAL ID Act
of 2005;
(3) U.S. passport;
(4) Official identification card issued by a State, or local
government or by a territory or possession of the U.S. that meets the
standards promulgated pursuant to the REAL ID Act of 2005.
(5) Official identification card issued by the Federal Government.
This

[[Page 2166]]

includes a Federal employee's identification credential;
(6) Port credential, with photograph of the applicant, issued by
State or local government port authority;
(7) Law enforcement credential, that includes a photograph of the
applicant and is issued by a Federal, State, or local government or by
a territory or possession of the U.S.;
(8) Merchant mariner's document issued after February 3, 2003;
(9) Foreign passport; or
(10) Original or a certified copy of a birth certificate, issued by
a State, county, municipality or outlying possession of the U.S.
bearing an official seal.

0
4. In Sec. 10.201, revise paragraphs (a), (b), (h) introductory text,
and (h)(1) to read as follows:

Sec. 10.201 Eligibility for licenses and certificates of registry,
general.

(a) The applicant for a license or certificate of registry, whether
original, renewal, duplicate, or raise of grade, must establish to the
satisfaction of the Coast Guard that he or she possesses all the
qualifications necessary (including but not limited to age, experience,
character references and recommendations, physical health, citizenship,
approved training, passage of a professional examination, a test for
dangerous drugs, and when required by this part, a practical
demonstration of skills) before the Coast Guard will issue a license or
certificate of registry.
(b) No person who has been convicted of a violation of the
dangerous drug laws of the United States, the District of Columbia, any
State, territory, or possession of the United States, or a foreign
country, by any military or civilian court, is eligible for a license
or certificate of registry, except as provided by the provisions of
paragraph (h) of this section. No person who has ever been the user of,
or addicted to, a dangerous drug, or has ever been convicted of an
offense described in section 205 of the National Driver Register Act of
1982, as amended (49 U.S.C. 30304) because of addiction to or abuse of
alcohol is eligible for a license or certificate of registry, unless he
or she furnishes satisfactory evidence of suitability for service in
the merchant marine as provided in paragraph (j) of this section.
* * * * *
(h) Criminal record review. The Coast Guard will review the
criminal record of an applicant before the issuance of a license or
certificate of registry. An applicant conducting simultaneous
transactions for merchant mariner's credentials will undergo only one
criminal record check. Applicants must provide written disclosure of
all prior convictions at the time of application.
(1) The Coast Guard will use the fingerprints submitted pursuant to
Sec. 10.105(b) to obtain a criminal record report. An applicant's
criminal record report may be used to determine that an applicant's
character and habits of life are such that the applicant cannot be
entrusted with the duties and responsibilities of the license or
certificate of registry. Should such a determination be made, the
application may be disapproved. If an application is disapproved, the
Coast Guard will advise the applicant in writing that the
reconsideration and appeal procedures in subpart 1.03 of this chapter
apply and will, in appropriate circumstances, notify the applicant of
the reason(s) for disapproval. The Coast Guard will not administer a
written examination until final agency action has been made on the
applicant's appeal.
* * * * *

0
5. In Sec. 10.202 add paragraph (m) to read as follows:

Sec. 10.202 Issuance of licenses, certificates of registry, and STCW
certificates or endorsements.

* * * * *
(m) No license or certificate of registry will be issued until the
applicant has passed a criminal record review as set forth in Sec.
10.201 of this chapter.

0
6. In Sec. 10.205 revise paragraphs (a) and (c) to read as follows:

Sec. 10.205 Requirements for original licenses, certificates of
registry, and STCW certificates and endorsements.

(a) General. The applicant for an original license or certificate
of registry must present satisfactory documentary evidence of
eligibility with respect to the applicable requirements of Sec. 10.201
through Sec. 10.203. Each applicant must submit an application as set
forth in Sec. 10.105 and, unless exempted under Sec. 10.112, submit
the evaluation fee set out in table 10.109 in Sec. 10.109.
* * * * *
(c) Citizenship. Each applicant must provide acceptable evidence of
his or her citizenship to the Coast Guard. The Coast Guard will reject
any evidence of citizenship that we do not believe to be authentic.
``Acceptable evidence of citizenship'' means an original of any one of
the following documents:
(1) Original or a certified copy of a birth certificate, issued by
a State, county, municipality or outlying possession of the U.S.
bearing an official seal.
(2) Merchant mariner's document issued by the Coast Guard after
February 3, 2003 that shows that the holder is a citizen of the U.S.;
(3) Certificate of Citizenship issued by the U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services or the Immigration and Naturalization Service;
(4) Certificate of Naturalization issued by the U.S. Citizenship
and Immigration Services or the Immigration and Naturalization Service;
or
(5) Unexpired U.S. State Department passport.
* * * * *

0
7. In Sec. 10.207, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec. 10.207 Requirements for raises of grades of licenses.

(a) General. Before any person is issued a raise of grade of
license, the applicant must present satisfactory documentary evidence
of eligibility with respect to the applicable requirements of
Sec. Sec. 10.201, 10.202, and this section. Each applicant must submit
an application as set forth in Sec. 10.105, and, unless exempted under
Sec. 10.112, submit the evaluation fee set out in table 10.109 in
Sec. 10.109.
* * * * *

0
8. In Sec. 10.209, revise paragraphs (a)(2) and (e)(3)(i) introductory
text to read as follows:

Sec. 10.209 Requirements for renewal of licenses, certificates of
registry, and STCW certificates and endorsements.

(a) * * *
(2) Although the written portion of the application may be
initiated by mail, fax, or other electronic means, no application for
renewal is complete until the applicant appears in person at a Regional
Examination Center (REC), is fingerprinted, and provides evidence of
his or her identity in accordance with the requirements of Sec.
10.105.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(3) Renewal by mail, fax, or other electronic means. (i) This
paragraph sets forth those required portions of the application that
may be submitted by mail, fax, or other electronic means. Although an
applicant may initiate, supplement, or complete a renewal by mail, fax,
or other electronic means, no application for renewal is complete until
the applicant appears in person at an REC, is fingerprinted, and
provides evidence of his or her identity in accordance with Sec.
10.205. The following documents must be submitted by the applicant, but
may be submitted by mail, fax, or other electronic means:
* * * * *

[[Page 2167]]

Dated: January 10, 2006.
Thomas H. Collins,
Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commandant.
[FR Doc. 06-369 Filed 1-11-06; 12:20 pm]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P