Country of Origin Codes and Revision of Regulations on Hull
Identification Numbers
[Federal Register: June 20, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 119)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 36957-36959]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr20jn03-38]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 181
[USCG-2003-14272]
RIN 1625-AA53
Country of Origin Codes and Revision of Regulations on Hull
Identification Numbers
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to allow U.S. manufacturers of
recreational boats to display a 2-character, country of origin code
before the 12-character Hull Identification Number (HIN) without
separating the 2-character code by means of borders or on a separate
label as is currently required by the HIN regulations. The current
prohibition adversely affects U.S. manufacturers who seek to export
some of their recreational boats. The removal of the current
restriction would allow U.S. manufacturers to comply with the
International Organization for Standardization (ISO) HIN standard,
without changing the information collected by States on undocumented
vessels they register.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Docket Management
Facility on or before September 18, 2003.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the Coast Guard docket
number USCG-2003-14272 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 Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call Mr. Alston Colihan, Office of Boating Safety, Coast Guard,
telephone 202-267-0984. If you have questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Ms. Dorothy Beard, Chief, Dockets,
Department of Transportation, telephone 202-366-5149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Participation and Access to Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted,
without change, to http://dms.dot.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. We have an agreement with the
Department of Transportation (DOT) to use the Docket Management Facility.
Please see the ``Privacy Act'' paragraph below.
Submitting comments. If you submit a comment, please include your
name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG-
2003-14272), 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
[[Page 36958]]
stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all
comments and material received during the comment period. We may change
this proposed rule in view of them.
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.). You may review the
Department of Transportation's Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit
http://dms.dot.gov.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one to the Docket Management Facility at the address under
ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that
one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place
announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
In 1995, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
issued a Hull Identification Number standard (ISO 10087:1995(E))
consisting of the same format as the existing Coast Guard 12-character
HIN (manufacturer's identification, serial number, month of
manufacture, year of manufacture, and model year) preceded by a 2-
character country code and a hyphen. Under the ISO HIN standard, a boat
made in the U.S. for export to a foreign country would bear a HIN such
as: US-ABC12345G303.
Boat manufacturers in the United States that export to Europe
started using the ISO HIN standard beginning with the 1996 model year.
According to ISO 10087:1995(E), paragraph (4), Composition of HIN, ``A
HIN shall consist of 14 consecutive characters plus a hyphen * * *.''
But our regulation for displaying information near the HIN, 33 CFR
181.27, states, ``If additional information is displayed on the boat
within two inches of the hull identification number, that information
must be separated from the hull identification number by means of
borders or must be on a separate label so that it will not be
interpreted as part of the hull identification number.'' While the ISO
HIN standard includes a paragraph with language that is nearly
identical to Sec. 181.27, these ISO requirements do not apply to the
country code and hyphen, which precede our 12-character HIN.
The American Boat and Yacht Council (ABYC) develops voluntary
consensus safety standards for the design, construction, equipage,
maintenance, and repair of small craft. An ABYC Technical Committee
studying the ISO HIN standard and our HIN standard concluded that the
differing requirements create a problem for U.S. builders exporting to
Europe. One large U.S. manufacturer that exports to Europe pointed out
that use of a separate tape to create the border required by our HIN
standard often results in misalignment and other flaws that may be
confused with attempts to alter an HIN. This proposal was discussed at
the October 29, 2001 meeting of the National Boating Safety Advisory
Council and there were no objections by State Boating Law
Administrators in attendance at the meeting. (66 FR 49445, September
27, 2001). The NBSAC unanimously passed a resolution requesting the
Coast Guard to immediately pursue rulemaking for an exception to
current regulations to allow the USA HIN system to conform to the ISO
HIN standard while still allowing the states to not require the
``Country Code'' in their registration process.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
This rule would relieve manufacturers of recreational boats who
sell both internationally and domestically of the burden of separating
the country of origin code for the United States, ``US-'', from the
other 12 characters in a HIN by means of borders or a separate label.
Any other information would still have to be separated from characters
in the HIN by means of borders or a separate label.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits
under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. It is not ``significant''
under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS).
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies
and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. Allowing manufacturers to
separate the Country of Origin Code without the use of borders or a
separate label would relieve a burden and thereby reduce the costs of
complying with the HIN display requirement.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed 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.
The Small Business Administration (SBA) has set up size standards
for each SIC code based on the number of employees or annual receipts.
The only type of small entity that this rule would affect would be
small businesses. There were 4,420 U.S. manufacturers of recreational
boats in 2002, an estimated 80 percent of which qualify as small
businesses by the size standards of the SBA. However, we have observed
that the businesses we have identified as small do not manufacture as
many boats as their larger competitors. In addition, most of the
businesses we have identified as small do not export to the European
market and therefore would not follow the ISO HIN format.
Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that
this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment to the Docket Management Facility at the
address under ADDRESSES. In your comment, explain why you think it
qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically
affect it.
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 proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effect on
[[Page 36959]]
them and participate in the rulemaking. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact Mr. Alston Colihan, Project Manager, Office of Boating Safety,
by telephone at (202) 267-0981 or by e-mail at acolihan@comdt.uscg.mil.
Collection of Information
This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule
under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications
for federalism.
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. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would 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.
Civil Justice Reform
This proposed 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.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. 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.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, 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, this rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1,
paragraph (34)(a) of the Instruction, from further environmental
documentation. The proposed rule to remove the requirement to separate
the 2-character country of origin code from the 12-character HIN by
means of borders or on a separate label relates to the documentation of
vessels and is not expected to have any environmental impact.
A draft ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a draft
``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' are available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES. Comments on this section will be
considered before we make the final decision on whether the rule should
be categorically excluded from further environmental review.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 181
Labeling, Marine safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 181 as follows:
PART 181--MANUFACTURER REQUIREMENTS
1. The authority citation for part 181 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 4302 and 4310; Pub. L. 103-206, 107 Stat.
2439; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.
2. Revise Sec. 181.27 to read as follows:
Sec. 181.27 Information displayed near hull identification number.
With the exception of the characters ``US-'', which constitute the
country of origin code for the United States, if information is
displayed on the boat within 2 inches of the hull identification number
(HIN), that information must be separated from the HIN by means of
borders or must be on a separate label, so that it will not be
interpreted as part of the hull identification number.
Dated: June 12, 2003.
David S. Belz,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Director of Operations.
[FR Doc. 03-15640 Filed 6-19-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}