[Federal Register: June 24, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 121)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 42512-42516]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr24jn02-22]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 66

[USCG-2000-7466]
RIN 2115-AF98

 
Allowing Alternatives to Incandescent Lights, and Establishing 
Standards for New Lights, in Private Aids to Navigation

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to remove the requirement to use only 
tungsten-incandescent-light sources for private aids to navigation 
(PATONs) and to establish more-specific performance standards for all 
lights in PATONs. These measures would enable private industry and 
owners of PATONs to take advantage of recent changes in lighting 
technology--specifically allow owners of PATONs to use lanterns based 
on the technology of light-emitting diodes (LEDs). They might reduce 
the consumption of power, simplify the maintenance of PATONs, and make 
the rules for PATONs equivalent to those for Federal aids to 
navigation.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Docket Management 
Facility on or before August 23, 2002.

ADDRESSES: To make sure that your comments and related material do not 
enter the docket [USCG-2000-7466] more than once, please submit them by 
only one of the following means:
    (1) By mail to the Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 
room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. 
Caution: Because of recent delays in the delivery of mail, your 
comments may reach the Facility more quickly if you choose one of the 
other means described below.
    (2) By delivery to 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.
    (3) By fax to the Facility at 202-493-2251.
    (4) Electronically through the Web Site for the Docket Management 
System at http://dms.dot.gov.
    The Facility maintains the public docket for this rulemaking. 
Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents 
mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, will 
become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or 
copying at 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. You may also find this docket 
on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed 
rule, call Dan Andrusiak, Office of Aids to Navigation, at Coast Guard 
Headquarters, telephone 202-267-0327. If you have questions on viewing 
or submitting material to the docket, call Dorothy Beard, Chief, 
Dockets, Department of Transportation, telephone 202-366-5149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting 
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name 
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking [USCG-2000-
7466], 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 mail, delivery, fax, or electronic means 
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. We may change this proposed rule in view of them.

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.

Regulatory Information

Background

    The Marine Safety Council (MSC) of the Coast Guard recommended this 
rulemaking to provide owners of PATONs with more options for selecting 
equipment. This rule might reduce lifecycle cost, reduce the 
consumption of power, and simplify the maintenance of PATONs by 
allowing the use of lighting technologies other than those based on 
tungsten-incandescent light sources.

History of Rulemaking

    On October 4, 2000, the Coast Guard published a direct final rule 
(DFR) [65 FR 59124] under the same docket number as the one borne by 
this NPRM: USCG-2000-7466. We published that rule as a DFR because we 
expected that the public would readily embrace it; however, we received 
an adverse comment. Because of this, we withdrew the DFR [66 FR 8 
(January 2, 2001)] so our engineers could analyze and respond to the 
comment. They did so. Not only did they follow the commenter's advice 
to make performance standards for LEDs more specific; they also 
recommended to the MSC the standardizing of all rules related to lights 
used as PATONs.

Response to Adverse Comment

    Our engineers have analyzed the adverse comment. We are publishing 
their responses to the several concerns in the order in which the 
commenter raised them.
    Concern (1) ``Absent the provision of standards for LED 
performance, the reliability of [PATONs] will decrease.''
    Our response: First, we agree that we should publish standards for 
the performance of LEDs. Second, we should make more explicit our 
performance standards for all lights used as PATONs: We propose to 
establish, in addition to the existing ones, specifications for range, 
effective intensity, uniformity in the horizontal plane 
(omnidirectionality), and divergence (beam spread). Third, we propose 
to require that each light feature

[[Page 42513]]

a label attached to the PATON that meets the requirements of new 33 CFR 
Sec. 66.01-13 and indicates a recommended interval for replacement. 
And, fourth, we propose to require that any lantern using renewable 
energy must have autonomy of (the ability to maintain a charge for) at 
least 10 days.
    Concern (2) ``The color of many white LEDs and some green LEDs 
[does] not conform to current color standards'' for lights in aids to 
navigation.
    Our response: We agree that many white and some green LEDs may not 
conform to current color standards for lights in aids to navigation and 
may be inadequate for use in PATONs. Therefore, we are proposing to 
require that any source of light, of any color, used in a PATON conform 
to specific standards of color approved by the International 
Association of Lighthouse Authorities (IALA).
    Concern (3) ``There is no provision for a backup source, such as 
provided by a lampchanger.''
    Our response: While we agree this is an important issue to 
consider, we believe that because LEDs are so reliable--their mean time 
between failure (MTBF) often exceeds 100,000 hours--it is not necessary 
to require a backup source. However, as discussed in our response to 
concern 1, we are proposing to require that intervals for 
replacement of all lights be made explicit.
    Concern (4) ``Degradation of output over time must be addressed.''
    Our response: We have considered degradation of output over time 
and we feel confident that LEDs are safe, even safer than other lights 
on the market, for two primary reasons. First, as we stated in our 
response to concern (3), the lifespan of an LED is so long (100,000 
hours or more) that burnout risk is minimal. Second, most manufacturers 
indicate that the average LED does not degrade before 50,000 hours of 
life. One year contains about 8,000 hours, so an LED at continuous burn 
would not degrade until 6.25 years later--and the predicted reduction 
would not be discernible to the eye when comparing the LED to a new 
source of light of any kind.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    This proposed rule would remove the requirement to use only 
tungsten-incandescent-light sources for PATONs. As a result, it would 
enable industry and owners of PATONs to take advantage of recent 
changes in lighting technology--specifically, to use lanterns based on 
LEDs. This might reduce life cycle costs, reduce the consumption of 
power, simplify the maintenance of PATONs, and align the performance 
standards requirements for the light sources of PATONs with those for 
Federal aids to navigation.
    This rule would not preclude owners of PATONs from continuing to 
use any equipment that they are currently using until they modify or 
replace it. After a PATON was modified or replaced, however, it would 
have to meet the new performance standards.

What Specific Changes are we Proposing?

    We propose to revise Sec. 66.01-5, to add the terms ``range,'' and 
``effective intensity'' to help managers of Short Range Aids to 
Navigation determine whether equipment will meet the design 
requirements prescribed in Part 62.
    We propose to revise Sec. 66.01-10, to expand users' choices by 
allowing the use of LEDs and other lights that meet the requirements of 
part 66. Users would still be able to use tungsten-incandescent-light 
sources that meet the requirements of this rule.
    We propose to add Sec. 66.01.11, to establish the requirements for 
lights used as PATONs. These requirements would ensure that the 
equipment provides a useful and reliable signal to the mariner.
    We propose to add Sec. 66.01-12, which would explain that, if you 
modify, replace, or install any light that requires a new application 
as described in Sec. 66.01-5, you must comply with the rules in part 
62. However, if you do not modify, replace, or install your existing 
light, or do anything else to necessitate a new application, you can 
continue to use that light. This ``grandfather'' effect would allow the 
use of currently authorized equipment so that owners of existing PATONs 
might not incur financial burdens.
    We propose to add Sec. 66.01-13, to explain when manufacturers of 
PATONs must comply with this rule. They must do so by the effective 
date of this rule.
    We propose to add Sec. 66.01-14, to require labels on all PATONs so 
that the buyer or anyone who inspects the PATONs can certify that they 
meet all requirements of this part. ``Nominal range'' means the 
distance at which a light is visible with ten nautical miles of 
visibility.

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 
Transportation (DOT) [44 FR 11040 (February 26, 1979)].
    We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a 
full Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 10e of the regulatory 
policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary.

Cost of Rule

    This rule would not impose any costs on current owners of PATONs 
unless they change their PATONs. While it would permit, it would not 
require, the use of LEDs. It would simply allow owners to use LEDs and 
set the standards for all PATON equipment to comply with the rules on 
aids to navigation. Therefore, owners of current or new PATONs would 
incur no added costs.
    Under this rule, manufacturers of equipment used in PATONs would 
have to develop and affix labels on all PATONs they manufacture. Each 
label must contain the information listed in Sec. 66.01-14(a). This 
would impose an added cost for creating, printing and attaching the 
labels.
    The Coast Guard estimates that, in the first year following 
promulgation of this rule, manufacturers would spend 48 hours 
developing six labels, one label (each representing eight hours) for 
each of six newly designed PATONs; the cost would come to about $1940. 
We estimate that, in following years, each manufacturer would design 
one new PATON every two years; the cost would come to about $320. Costs 
incurred from attaching a label to each of the 500 PATONs made would 
come to about $262 a manufacturer a year, assuming that each company 
makes exactly half of all PATONs produced and that a label costs $1 to 
print.

Benefits of Rule

    This rule would let owners of PATONs choose from not only tungsten-
incandescent-light sources, which are currently permitted, but also a 
new technology-LEDS. These consume less power and have a longer 
lifespan than the sources currently permitted. Besides, because the 
replacement date would be printed on each light, maintenance would be 
simpler for owners (as inspection would be for the Coast Guard).
    Current rules do not allow manufacturers to sell LEDs for use in 
PATONs. This rule, however, would- and this could increase their sales.

[[Page 42514]]

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 Coast Guard conducted a survey of industry, and discovered that 
there are now two domestic manufacturers of tungsten-incandescent-
lighting sources used for aids to navigation. Only one of them 
qualifies as small according to the standards of the Small Business 
Administration. This rule, however, will allow the small company to 
continue selling tungsten-incandescent PATONs. Barring unforeseen 
changes in the market for PATONs, we do not expect that the 
legalization of PATONs with LEDs will have any significant impact on 
the sale of cheaper, and more widely available tungsten-incandescent 
products.
    Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that 
this 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 [Public Law 104-121], we want to assist small 
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better 
evaluate its effects on 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 call Dan Andrusiak, at the number given 
for him under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    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).

Collection of Information

    This proposed rule provides for a collection of information under 
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 [44 U.S.C. 3501-3520]. As defined 
in 5 CFR 1320.3(c), ``collection of information'' comprises reporting, 
recordkeeping, monitoring, posting, labeling, and other, similar 
actions. The title and description of the collection, a description of 
the respondents, and an estimate of the total annual burden follow. 
Each estimated burden in this analysis pertains only to the 
requirements proposed by this rule; we do not incorporate the estimates 
or burdens noted in previous rulemakings.

Summary of the Collection of Information

    This rule would require manufacturers that supply equipment for use 
in PATONs to develop and attach a label to each of these. The label 
would have to state the matter called for by this rule. And it would 
have to last the life of the equipment.

Need for Information

    This rule would contain burdens for manufacturers of equipment used 
as PATONs. Manufacturers would have to develop and attach a label to 
each of their PATONs to inform the owners and inspectors that the 
equipment meets our standards. (And all such equipment used in PATONs 
would have to meet the standards in this rule.)

Respondents

    The Coast Guard estimates that two manufacturers manufacture LEDs 
and tungsten-incandescent-light sources for use in PATONs.

Frequency of Response

    The rule would call for no regular reporting. But it would require 
labels on all equipment provided for sale in PATONs.

Estimate of Total Annual Burden

    The Coast Guard estimates that, in the first year following 
promulgation of this rule, manufacturers would spend 48 hours 
developing six labels, one label (each representing eight hours) for 
each of six newly designed PATONs; the cost would come to about $1940. 
We estimate that, in following years, each manufacturer would design 
one new PATON every two years; the cost would come to about $320. Costs 
incurred from attaching a label to each of the 500 PATONs made would 
come to about $262 a manufacturer a year, assuming that each company 
makes exactly half of all PATONs produced and that a label costs $1 to 
print.

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 acts. In particular, the Act addresses those 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. This proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure.

Taking of Private Property

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

Reform of Civil Justice

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in subsection 3(a) 
and paragraph 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 economically significant 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

[[Page 42515]]

more tribes of Indians (including Alaskan natives), on the relationship 
between the Federal Government and these tribes, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and these 
tribes.
    To help ourselves establish regular and meaningful consultation and 
collaboration with tribes of Indians, we published a notice in the 
Federal Register [66 FR 36361 (July 11, 2001)] requesting comments on 
how to best carry out the Order. We invite your comments on how this 
rule might affect tribal governments, even if any effect might not 
constitute a ``tribal implication'' under the Order.

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. It has not been designated by the Administrator of the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy 
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects 
under the more recent Order.

Environment

    The Coast Guard considered the environmental impact of this 
proposed rule and concluded that, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(i), 
of Commandant Instruction M16475.lC, this rule is categorically 
excluded from further environmental documentation. A Determination of 
Categorical Exclusion is available in the docket for inspection or 
copying where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 66

    Navigation (water).

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes 
to amend 33 CFR part 66 as follows:

PART 66--PRIVATE AIDS TO NAVIGATION

    1. Revise the citation of authority for part 66 to read as follows:

    Authority: 14 U.S.C. 83, 84, 85; 43 U.S.C. 1333; 49 CFR 1.46.

    2. Revise Sec. 66.01-5(f) to read as follows:


Sec. 66.01-5  Application Procedure.

* * * * *
    (f) For lights: The color, characteristic, range, effective 
intensity, height above water, and description of illuminating 
apparatus.
* * * * *
    3. Revise Sec. 66.01-10 to read as follows:


Sec. 66.01-10  Characteristics.

    The characteristics of a private aid to navigation must conform to 
those prescribed by the United States Aids to Navigation System set 
forth in subpart B of part 62 of this subchapter.
    4. Add Sec. 66.01-11 to read as follows:


Sec. 66.01-11  Lights.

    (a) Each light approved as a private aid to navigation must:
    (1) Have at least the effective intensity required by this subpart 
omnidirectionally in the horizontal plane, except at the seams of its 
lens-mold.
    (2) Have at least 50% of the effective intensity required by this 
subpart within 2 deg. of the horizontal plane.
    (3) Have an effective intensity of at least 1 candela for a nominal 
range of 1 nautical mile, 3 candelas for one of 2 nautical miles, and 
10 candelas for one of 3 nautical miles. For a flashing light this 
intensity is determined by the formula:


Ie = G/(0.2 + t2 - t1)


Where:
Ie = Effective intensity
G = The integral of the instantaneous intensity of the flashed light 
with respect to time
t1 = Time in seconds at the beginning of the flash
t2 = Time in seconds at the end of the flash
t2 - t1 is greater than or equal to 0.2 seconds.

    (4) Unless the light is a prefocused lantern, have a means of 
verifying that the source of the light is at the focal point of the 
lens.
    (5) Emit a color within the angle of 50% effective intensity with 
color coordinates lying within the boundaries defined by the corner 
coordinates of the General Region in Table 66.01-11(5) established by 
the International Association of Lighthouse Authorities when plotted on 
the Standard Observer Diagram of the International Commission on 
Illumination (CIE).

             Table 66.01-11(5).--Coordinates of Chromaticity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Coordinates of
                                                      Chromaticity
                     Color                     -------------------------
                                                   x axis       y axis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
White.........................................        0.500        0.382
                                                      0.440        0.382
                                                      0.285        0.264
                                                      0.285        0.332
                                                      0.453        0.440
                                                      0.500        0.440
Green.........................................        0.305        0.689
                                                      0.321        0.494
                                                      0.228        0.351
                                                      0.028        0.385
Red...........................................        0.735        0.265
                                                      0.721        0.259
                                                      0.645        0.335
                                                      0.665        0.335
Yellow........................................        0.600        0.400
                                                      0.596        0.396
                                                      0.555        0.435
                                                      0.560        0.440
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (6) Have a recommended interval for replacement of the source of 
light such as ensures that the lantern meets the minimal required 
intensity stated in paragraph (a)(3) of this section in case of 
degradation of either the source of light or the lens.
    (7) Have autonomy of at least 10 days if the light has a self-
contained power system. The literature concerning the light must 
clearly state the operating limits.
    (b) The manufacturer of each light approved as a private aid to 
navigation must certify compliance by means of an indelible plate or 
label affixed to the aid that meets the requirements of Sec. 66.01-13.
    5. Add Sec. 66.01-12 to read as follows:


Sec. 66.01-12  May I continue to use the Private Aids to Navigation 
(PATON) I am currently using?

    If, after [effective date of the final rule], you modify, replace, 
or install any light that requires a new application as described in 
Sec. 66.01-5, you must comply with the rules in this part.
    6. Add Sec. 66.01-13 to read as follows:


Sec. 66.01-13  When must my newly manufactured equipment comply with 
these rules?

    After [effective date of the final rule] equipment manufactured for 
use as a private aid to navigation must comply with the rules in this 
part.
    7. Add Sec. 66.01-14 to read as follows:


Sec. 66.01-14  Label affixed by manufacturer.

    (a) Each light, intended or used as a private aid to navigation 
authorized by this part, must bear a legible, indelible label affixed 
by the manufacturer and indicating the--
    (1) Name of the manufacturer;

[[Page 42516]]

    (2) Number of the model;
    (3) Nominal range;
    (4) Date placed in service;
    (5) Recommended service life based on the degradation of either the 
source of light or the lens;
    (6) Size of lamp (incandescent only);
    (7) Interval, in days or years, for replacement of dry-cell 
battery; and
    (8) Words to this effect: ``This equipment complies with 
requirements of the U.S. Coast Guard in 33 CFR part 66.''
    (b) This label must last the service life of the equipment.

    Dated: June 4, 2002.
Kenneth T. Venuto,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Assistant Commandant for 
Operations.
[FR Doc. 02-15794 Filed 6-21-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P