EXPEDITED REPEAL
The Following Sections are Proposed for Expedited Repeal: WAC 317-21-130 Event reporting, 317-21-200 Operating procedures -- Watch practices, 317-21-205 Operating procedures -- Navigation, 317-21-210 Operating procedures -- Engineering, 317-21-215 Operating procedures -- Prearrival tests and inspections, 317-21-220 Operating procedures -- Emergency procedures, 317-21-225 Operating procedures -- Events, 317-21-230 Personnel policies -- Training, 317-21-235 Personnel policies -- Illicit drugs and alcohol use, 317-21-240 Personnel policies -- Personnel evaluation, 317-21-245 Personnel policies -- Work hours, 317-21-250 Personnel policies -- Language, 317-21-255 Personnel policies -- Record keeping, 317-21-260 Management, 317-21-265 Technology, and 317-21-540 Advance notice of entry and safety reports.
Rules Proposed for Expedited Repeal Meet the Following Criteria: Statute on which the rule was based has been declared unconstitutional by a court with jurisdiction; and rule is no longer necessary because of changed circumstances.
Any person who objects to the repeal of the rule must file a written objection to the repeal within thirty days after publication of this preproposal statement of inquiry.
Address Your Objection to: Jerry Thielen, Rules Coordinator, Department of Ecology, P.O. Box 47600, Olympia, WA 98504-7600.
Reason the Expedited Repeal of the Rule is Appropriate: In U.S. v. Locke, et al., __U.S.__, 120 S.Ct. 1135 (2000), a portion or all of WAC 317-21-130, 317-21-200, 317-21-230, and 317-21-250 were determined to be preempted by federal law. The rules that were specifically stricken by the supreme court attempted to regulate in areas reserved by the constitution and congress for the federal government. The remaining rules cited above were remanded for a determination as to whether those rules also operate in a reserved field or whether they are in conflict with an existing federal regulation. The supreme court acknowledged that states may regulate vessels based on the peculiarities of local waters that call for special precautionary measures and that do not conflict with existing federal rules. This holding in effect declared unconstitutional the authority granted under RCW 88.46.040 to the extent the statute authorizes or requires rules preempted under the United States Constitution and by congress. The remaining rules, as written, either fall within the reserved field or they are not directed specifically to local circumstances and problems.
June 6, 2000
Joe Stohr
Program Manager